Naughty Dog Dev On Wii U: "I'm Not Completely Sold"
Come on. It must've been a coincidence that Nintendo's stock dropped after unveiling the Wii U at E3.
While we certainly remain skeptical, a great many Wii fans are excited. Aren't they? Developers and analysts have been weighing in as well, although most are reserved in their comments. Take Naughty Dog game director Justin Richmond, for example, who told NowGamer that he isn't "completely sold" on Nintendo's new console yet. That being said, he wasn't sold on the original Wii, either, and "look how that did." Added Richmond:
"To be honest with you, the idea of it is very, very cool. But there's nothing that the Wii U has that the Vita and PS3 doesn't. You know, it's an interesting piece of technology, and I'm interested to see how people use it."
He went on to say the Wii U has some "very strange holes in it" and the screen not being multi-touch is a "little weird." But even so, he's convinced that games made for the system could be amazing; after all, Nintendo has always fared well with their first-party gems. Personally, I couldn't possibly care less but Nintendo had me at hello. ...love my SNES.
Tags: naughty dog, wii u, playstation vita, ps3
7/14/2011 10:45:54 AM Ben Dutka
Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter
Comments (105 posts)
AcHiLLiA
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:44:08 PM
Qubex
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 8:57:49 PM
Before I judge them completely, I give them a chance to see what they do with it and how developers and the public react to the kit upon release.
As we all agree though, it is ALL ABOUT THE GAMES!
Q!
"play.experience.enjoy"
Mornelithe
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 1:37:51 AM
Cesar_ser_4
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:11:12 AM
Reply
BTNwarrior
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:56:29 AM
Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:25:17 PM
@BTN, umm....I find my iMac and iPhone quite useful for work and play. I'm typing this comment from my iPhone...see useful. Oh, I just got an email from a customer, to which I shall reply...again from my iPhone. Useful.
kevinater321
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 1:11:04 PM
Kiryu
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 1:38:02 PM
Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 1:39:56 PM
kevinater321
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 2:05:49 PM
Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 2:19:06 PM
http://www.amazon.ca/Nintendo-045496718763-DSi-Matte-Blue/dp/B001T8S62Q/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1310671046&sr=8-3
And if the Wii was over priced when it launched so was the PS2. C'mon Kevin. You're grasping for straws and you're missing every attempt.
Last edited by Jawknee on 7/14/2011 2:20:35 PM
tes37
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 2:55:47 PM
Last edited by tes37 on 7/14/2011 2:56:50 PM
Mornelithe
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 3:09:26 PM
Again, I'm not touching your personal preference, because...that's your choice. But, the intentionally provocative comments aside, they are overpriced.
@ Tes: Correct, however, the problem is, for the price of what they charge for a Mac, you can build an Windows based PC, that far exceeds the specs of a Mac. The other major difference is software support. Windows has it in droves, Mac doesn't. That doesn't mean there isn't support for all software, just...not as much as for Windows based machines.
It's like buying an alienware PC, versus, building one on your own. You end up with pretty much the same cost/value discrepancy.
Last edited by Mornelithe on 7/14/2011 3:12:01 PM
tes37
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 3:32:56 PM
When it comes to building your own pc, at least you know what your getting and not relying on exaggerated specs.
Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 3:38:08 PM
Besides, I never argued Apple stuff wasn't expensive. Only that Nintendo hardware is not. They cannot be compared. I have never paid more than a few hundred dollars for anything Nintendo.
@Indeed Tes. I bought a Vaio which is also a nice piece of hardware but the software performance(Windows 7) is no where near as good as Mac OS on our iMac.
Last edited by Jawknee on 7/14/2011 3:47:01 PM
Cesar_ser_4
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 4:02:23 PM
Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 4:43:32 PM
Mornelithe
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 5:13:51 PM
Again, this is simply what builds a Mac, and is no slant on your preferences. You can buy them to your hearts content, but it doesn't negate the fact that Mac's are overpriced and under-performing for that price premium.
What you're in fact paying for, is really a shiny box. As I said, like an alienware desktop. Glitz and glamour, and little else.
@ Tes: We're not talking a few hundred dollars difference, we're talking 500-1000 dollars difference. It is, in fact, quite a large markup for what you're actually getting in return.
And yes, building your own PC is by far, the best way to approach it. Yes, I understand not everyone wants to take the time...but really, given that it takes a couple hours with instructions, or an hour tops if you're experienced...that really is no excuse in my opinion. But, as I said, it's all about preference, real facts rarely mean anything to anyone these days. No, I don't mean that as a slam, simply, people demand satisfaction immediately, and will pay the price for it, one way or another.
And Jawknee, disagree or don't, but if you break down what makes a Nintendo Wii and add up the price, it isn't $150. To put it in perspective, by 2009, the Wii's production costs had been reduced by roughly %47, so, by 2009 the Wii cost Nintendo ~$132.50 to make. In 2 years, development costs for ages old tech doesn't increase.
Last edited by Mornelithe on 7/14/2011 5:26:22 PM
Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 6:02:08 PM
I believe you about your father and his findings. I have read your posts here and on other sites and you have never given me a reason not to believe what you say however those things just don't matter to most consumers. Macs serve my purposes greatly and that's what I am paying for. Not just a shiny box.
Also with the Wii, yea you're probably correct that it's not worth $150 when you break it down into to nuts and bolts but that's irrelevant. Nintendo is a business, a business needs to make a profit and in order to make a profit they have to sell what they produce for more than what it costs them to produce it. The Wii is less capable than the PS3 or the Xbox 360 but it's also the cheapest console on the market. $150 for a console that does what's intended to do is not a unfair asking price.
Last edited by Jawknee on 7/14/2011 6:05:47 PM
tes37
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:23:04 PM
I think the main difference in the two platforms lies more with code than hardware anyways. If you read the difference between ASCII and Binary code it seems to be in favor of Binary for faster processing because of a lack of error handling written into the code.
Mornelithe
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 1:39:16 AM
You're right, most consumers don't care. But, I do. And, I really hate seeing people being used without their knowledge. I know, you don't really look at it at that way, and that's ok. I just won't allow myself to be used in that fashion. To be fair though, I won't buy prebuilt PC's Mac or Windows based, anymore. They all have a price premium you pay, Apple simply has a higher premium, and no option of building your own.
As for the Wii, well, look, I'm not trying to deny a company their due profits. But how much is enough? In late 2006, the Wii cost $158.30 to manufacture. By April of 2009, that had been reduced by ~%45. I was off, by the way. Thinking that at launch the Wii probably cost around $250...it didn't. So, by 2009, the Wii cost under $100, around ~$88 to produce. That just doesn't jive with me. Which you could probably guess considering my issues with Apple =)
But, I also realize I'm kinda crazy at times, so I don't blame people for their choices. I really don't. Sometimes I feel compelled to clear the air on certain things, because I simply hate seeing the wrong information being tossed around in discussions. Yeah, it's part of my crazy. Can't stop it. Just see it...and have to say something. It's actually really wierd. hah. But, at least I'm getting better at explaining my position. I've had my moments in the past (lookin at you Highlander), where personal preference gets the better of simply the facts, and takes the entire discussion down the wrong path. So, thanks for talking about it with me. Appreciate the civil discourse.
@ Tes: Erm, no, I didn't say there's better performance from a Mac, I said the parts are underclocked in order to extend the life of substandard parts, bought on the cheap. And yes, it is a very brilliant strategy, as long as people are willing to turn a blind eye to it, or aren't aware. I'm just not willing to do that.
The other problem is, having lived in a house where building PC's is the norm, for as long as I did. I also demand that my PC's be customizable from top to bottom, because that's what I'm used to. Anything less, makes me angry lol. Hell, look at how much I go ape$hit when a game is announced without dedicated servers. If you've not noticed, I'm sure any number of folks here could corroborate that one. Heh. Yes, I'm a strange one ;)
Mornelithe
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 1:49:46 AM
Jawknee
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 1:34:29 PM
Simcoe
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 2:22:49 PM
Also, why make something (example an iPhone) that won't last more than two or three years when people always need to get the latest and greatest phone when their current contract expires. As I see it, why not have it programmed to fail when the contract expires, just gives that person a good excuse to buy the latest version!
Jawknee
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 10:01:28 PM
You cannot compare Apple products to the Xbox 360. I have never had to return a piece of Apple hardware 3 months after buying it and Apple's hardware failure rate is well within the normal % of technology hardware failures.
I never said most people don't care about build quality. I said knowing what each component costs and how much the company paid for vs what they are selling it for or how they clock in when being tested is what matters little to people as long as the given piece of hardware serves the intended purpose and people feel they are paying a fair price for what they are getting. I will take Morn's word for it about Apple's tactics but as I said, my experience with Apple products as of the last 15 years has been excellent. Their iMac's serve my wife's work purposes as well as my music editing purposes and serves those purposes little to no trouble.
And don't generalize about NA. If we really didn't care about build quality we wouldn't choose Honda's and Toyota's over GM's and Ford's or Gibson and Fender's over Ibanez and Yamaha, etc.
Last edited by Jawknee on 7/15/2011 10:08:59 PM
Mornelithe
Saturday, July 16, 2011 @ 12:12:20 PM
Can you even FATHOM, the fight that I was born into? Oh...my...god. It was even worse than you can imagine, mainly because they divorced when I was 3 months old, and not in the nice we went separate ways, kind of separation lol.
I used to use Mac's constantly at my mom's house, and PC at my dad's...so I'm definitely familiar with the brand. I just never caught the Apple craze like so many people have.
Definitely wasn't until around the time the iphone came out, that I learned as much about Mac's internal makeup as I did. (His IT buddy deconstructed it, so he could buy stock in the companies that supply Mac their internals...that worked well for him).
But, long story short, as long as it suits your purpose that's all that really matters in the end. Although, there's nothing wrong with learning about the competition in the process. =)
Jawknee
Monday, July 18, 2011 @ 3:23:08 PM
For me...if I want something do just do office work, Windows and a Vaio suites those needs well. Or as you said, building your own PC is a good option too.
For music and Art, I gotta go with Macs.
EDIT: I should make a correction. Apple has served me well for the last 10 years. Not 15. 15 is an exaggeration. HA
Last edited by Jawknee on 7/18/2011 3:25:58 PM
Lord carlos
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:12:58 AM
Reply
I'm sure nintendo will come up with a few good ways to make wii u stand apart from other consoles but i won't be buying one.
Now if nintendo brought out a game where the player could chainsaw his way through the mushroom kingdom and stomp on little kuppas then i'd be in!
Fabi
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:59:29 AM
I had a NES, but only because that's all that was out at the time.
I have owned every Sega and Sony system since then.
I'm sure Mario games are still a blast if you like rescuing the princess for the 1000th time and beating up Bowser again and again. But sorry, not for me.
I would rather play a Ratchet game. Platforming, awesome weapons, shooting, cool story, awesome characters and comedy!
SoulController
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 2:26:24 PM
Excelsior1
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:24:37 AM
Reply
nobody picked nintendo to have the impact they have had this generation so i think it would be unwise to underestimate them at this point. i have no doubt the wii u will be popular. i think nintendo is pretty smart company that had a great strategy for this gen that paid off in terms of marketshare vs say the massive uphill struggle sony has faced this gen. it's also interesting to note how both ms and sony are going after this part of the market as well.
the real question is what will the final specs of wii u be, and will nintendo make a serious attempt to pick up hardcore gamers. if it has good specs, and a decent online componet i'll definitely be interested.
Last edited by Excelsior1 on 7/14/2011 11:29:31 AM
Looking Glass
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:50:55 AM
Nintendo did get off to an awesome start this generation but there is a strong possibility that their good fortune may not last with the Kinect still riding high (for the time being anyway) on it's novelty, the PS3's strong and growing exclusive software library, and the PS Vita being widely applauded and having dozens of developers giving it their support.
And yes skepticism from someone at Sony (Naughty Dog to more specific) is not surprising. However Justin Richmond is far from alone in his skepticism. A lot of other people who are not from Sony are also expressing skepticism about the Wii U, and perhaps rightfully so.
Last edited by Looking Glass on 7/14/2011 11:51:18 AM
Looking Glass
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:00:52 PM
AcHiLLiA
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:48:47 PM
Looking Glass
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:53:57 PM
The Nintendo 64 was more technologically advanced than the PS1. However the N64 was also held back by a poor design choice: using cartridges as opposed to CDs. This caused capacity issues and limited the N64s ability to compete. And the fact that the cartridges were also expensive to produce didn't help either. So no matter which way you cut it the N64 does constitute a misstep by Nintendo.
Last edited by Looking Glass on 7/14/2011 7:58:13 PM
AcHiLLiA
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 1:46:42 PM
AcHiLLiA
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 1:55:39 PM
Looking Glass
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 6:19:26 PM
The manufacturing process for ROM cartridges was more complex and they were harder and more costly to develop for. This is in turn caused a lot of third party developers to turn away from Nintendo. Squaresoft was among them, who then proceeded to make Final Fantasy VII for the PS1 as opposed to the N64 as originally planned. And we all know how that played out. If you want more details you can look "Nintendo 64" up on wikipedia.
But you really seem to be missing the point. As I said, no matter which way you cut it the Nintendo 64 was one of Nintendo's missteps and it ended up being a rather damaging misstep for Nintendo. Being more technologically advanced than the PS1 does not change that.
AcHiLLiA
Saturday, July 16, 2011 @ 12:44:22 AM
Looking Glass
Saturday, July 16, 2011 @ 6:53:32 PM
jimmyhandsome
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:25:39 AM
Reply
BeezleDrop
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:37:34 AM
bigrailer19
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:57:44 AM
Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:30:34 PM
@Beezle, If you want to see what they are doing with some multiplatform titles, google their plans for Batman Arkhem City. Nintendo has also said they plan to invest in 3rd party games with the Wii U. It's something they didn't do with the Wii and they recognize that as a mistake.
I don't really care for multiplatform games on Nintendo platforms anyway. I buy Nintendo hardware to play Nintendo games just like I buy Sony hardware to play Sony published games. As many know already I am an absolute whore when it comes to the Zelda franchise. As long as Nintendo continues to make Zelda games and fun hardware to play them on, I will continue to support them. Some of their best Zelda games are on the DSi which incorporate stylus controls into the game play. I have complete faith Nintendo will do the same when it comes to the Wii U. Nintendo has never let me down. I know some of you hate the Wii, but I don't. I had my fun with it and come the end of the year I'll be dusting that sucker off with glee to play The Legend of Zelda Skyward Sword.
Last edited by Jawknee on 7/14/2011 12:35:34 PM
Nlayer
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 2:59:11 PM
Fane1024
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:27:56 PM
It will be good for the hardcore Nintendo fans finally to have first-party games in HD. It will be even better if those HD games are new productions rather than remakes, although the latter unfortunately seems more likely given recent history.
Last edited by Fane1024 on 7/14/2011 7:30:07 PM
SpikeSpiegel
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:52:59 AM
Reply
Zorigo
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:07:27 PM
frylock25
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:12:45 PM
Excelsior1
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:14:39 PM
Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:45:09 PM
Fane1024
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:34:45 PM
Zorigo
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:07:01 PM
Reply
mainly because sony is just the better consumer's company. I'd rather stick with them as they wont screw me over at every chance for every penny ive got.
Fabi
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:07:08 PM
Reply
I always told my Wii owning friend. Oh just you wait! When MGS4, Resident Evil and Final Fantasy hit the PS3 and X-Box, nobody is going to care about the Wii!
I just didn't realize at the time, that the people buying the Wii wouldn't care about those games not being on their console.
The Wii was different though. It was the first time that EVERYONE got in the action. From stay at home moms to grandparents. This time you're not going to have that.
Before it didn't have to compete with Sony and MS. This time, IT HAS TO. And I know a lot of people prefer killing s*it in Killzone, Uncharted, Gears of War, Fable and Infamous than they do running around as fat plumbers.
Last edited by Fabi on 7/14/2011 12:09:33 PM
Zorigo
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:09:41 PM
that said casual gaming is for the leymans of the world. the 'not-wierd' people RE bens earlier article this week. so i mean if MS or Sony do some good casual stuff aswell as hardcore, (and with move theyve got casual covered and with the potentially advanced tech of a ps4 theyve got the hardcore covered)
GuyverLT
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 3:48:34 PM
Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:50:41 PM
GuyverLT
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 3:54:36 PM
maxpontiac
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:19:24 PM
Reply
Highlander
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:39:15 PM
Reply
I don't know, but in this day and age that's positively primitive. I know that this isn't strictly PlayStation related, but good grief Nintendo, what *are* you thinking. You're talking about capturing hardcore gamers and you're just not even close to the target.
Interesting that Justin Richmond says that there's nothing the WiiU can do that the Vita plus PS3 can't. that more or less mirrors my own thoughts on the matter. In which case why not add a Vita to your PS3 rather than going for the WiiU if you already have or are considering a PS3? After all PS3 has a great library of games, Vita plays downloadable PSP titles plus it's own games, and Vita is a handheld console on the move in it's own right, and not merely a tethered device like the WiiU controller is.
Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:49:22 PM
Fabi
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:50:12 PM
Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:52:36 PM
Fabi
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:57:10 PM
Highlander
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 1:11:40 PM
I was reading comments from Nintendo themselves on this topic and although they made it clear that they were improving things and building something new for WiiU, it was equally clear from their statements that they would not be doing as PSN and XBL do. It was stated quite categorically that publishers would handle everything much in the same way as they have with the Wii.
Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 1:15:31 PM
GuyverLT
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 4:12:00 PM
Now I know the may not be a big deal for some,,,, but let's just say theoretically speaking your family or friends want to watch the game, now if they're like my family and homies they're gonna be extra loud watching a basketball or football etc, and you don't to be around all that noise while your playing the game, but you can't leave the room because the controller won't work if your not in the room with the console..... Hmmmm.... I get you could just take the entire system with you to another part of the house that has a t.v in it in which case I suppose this won't be a problem.
What are you guys thoughts about this feature of the Wii-U?
Fabi
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 4:19:38 PM
Sorta like how being able to have Linux on the PS3 was. I was never, ever going to need it. But it was nice knowing I could if I wanted to.
Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 5:07:39 PM
Luckely for me, no one in my house hold watched sports games so this won't be a problem for me.
Last edited by Jawknee on 7/14/2011 5:08:57 PM
GuyverLT
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 5:41:10 PM
Let me clarify, It's not really a concern of mine either, if I do decide to get one (depending on what exclusive titles it has), then it will be in MY room were I have to worry about anyone coming in asking if they can watch T.V. not in the family room in the 1st place. I'm sure it won't be that big a deal, It could be a problem for some, but not many.
Last edited by GuyverLT on 7/14/2011 5:44:16 PM
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:55:57 PM
Reply
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 1:07:13 PM
Reply
Claire C
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 3:20:32 PM
kevinater321
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 1:18:03 PM
amonte
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 1:47:22 PM
Reply
The whole use the Wii U controller screen for interactivity with the game on TV screen could sound nice on paper, but so far nothing has been developed that is worthwhile and that isn't just a gimmick and we're talking since Gamecube/GBA to PS3/PSP days, that's almost ten years exactly, and everything that has been shown so far using the Wii U screen for interactivity has been crap as well. There's also playing against a buddy, one uses the TV screen, the other the controller screen so you guys can't see each other screen, that is flawed and a straight out lie because the person with the controller can also see the TV screen. So, I can cross that feature/selling point out and it's one of the Wii U's two features/selling points.
The other is being able to continue playing your Wii U game on the controller's screen. That is nice, again only on paper because you have to be within range of the Wii U console.
And that's it for Wii U's selling points.
Quick negatives, Wii U can only use one Wii U controller and the only way to do multiplayer is using Wiimotes so we go from supposedly hardcore console for hardcore games and come back to casual waggle crapfest games. The controller is huge. Nintendo's online department has always sucked and it seems like it's not going to change for Wii U. It's getting multiplatform games a year later. I'm not sure if there's more but those are the ones that were from the top of my head.
For the Nintendo fanboys that will say the Wii U is more powerful and will have better graphics. I don't think it's been officially said that the Wii U is more powerful, I think it's just being speculated by some that it is because of the chip that is supposedly going to use. But I believe no official word has been said and the chip it uses isn't the only important part that determines what a console can do and how powerful it is or what graphics it can produce. Also, even if it's true it would make it barely more powerful than the PS3 and 360 so there wouldn't be any noticable difference.
Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 4:49:47 PM
Claire C
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 5:06:49 PM
Russell Burrows
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 5:35:48 PM
Reply
Crappy online?
Check!
No multitouch?
Check!
No analog triggers for shooters or raceing?
Check!
No blu ray playback?
Check!
No DVD playback?
Check!
No CD playback?
Check!
Battery life of the controller?
And most importantly is that those who started a game series on 360 or PS3 will tend to buy future iterations of that game series for that platform.
No purchase for the Fail U.
Buzz off! Failtendo!
Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:01:45 PM
GuyverLT
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:27:51 PM
I think you're seriously underestimating Nintendo here, it might not make sense to those of us who consider ourselves "hardcore gamers", but guess what the wii didn't make much sense b4 it came out and it still managed to be successful (to my surprise) they made motion gaming stuff work with the Wii remote thingy, knowing them they will figure out how to make game work with they're tablet controllers.
While the Wii-U isn't all that appealing to me.... YET, it would be downright foolish to count them out just because you don't know how they're tablet controller will work with games yet, again people were saying the same thing with the Wii remote and from my understanding it works well with games they made for it (I've tried the Wii a couple times, but it was just not for me).
I hope Nintendo doesn't put themselves in between a rock and a hard place by alienating that massive casual gaming group they accumulated over the past couple years, because if they give to much focus to trying to reclaim and recapture the hardcore audience they lost during and after the Gamecube, that's exactly what's going to happen.
Last edited by GuyverLT on 7/14/2011 7:32:03 PM
Fabi
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:35:36 PM
To me it just looks like a big Game Gear or a Nomad.
Last edited by Fabi on 7/14/2011 7:39:36 PM
IMLightning
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:30:42 PM
Reply
Fabi
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:36:54 PM
And aren't rumors leaning towards the whole Wii U setup to cost in the $400 range?
I bet were gonna see that on the Wii U as well. They might use the screen to do some pointless s*it if Nintendo forces them to. But in the end, it's not gonna add much to the game.
Last edited by Fabi on 7/14/2011 7:41:03 PM
Fane1024
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:50:10 PM
Fabi
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:55:02 PM
It's not technologically fresh as something like motion gaming was. It's not different enough for it to be gimmicky anymore.
If anything, they have to make it seem like it's the same thing as a Wii and that your Wii motes are going to still work with it, but now you can play these casual games with HD graphics!
Highlander
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 3:02:05 AM
If the WiiU looks halfway like it will sell well, if I were Sony a year after the Vita launch, I might bundle a WiFi Vita with a base model PS3 in a single box and sell the sucker for $399.99. That would really put the hurt on WiiU. Actually it would really put the hurt on most everybody in the market.
Fane1024
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 5:12:48 AM
Just batteries. ;D
Fabi
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 11:32:39 AM
FatherSun
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 3:24:05 PM
I agree with Highlander that Sony could essentially corner Nintendo with tactical pricing. I am sure Nintendo would not wish to engage in a price war when introducing new hardware. Sony has already exhibited this with the price of the Vita versus the 3DS. More bang for the buck.
A Vita/PS3 combo trumps the Wii-U. Simply for the fact that the VITA itself is a game system versus a satellite of system. And unless the Wii-U doubles the power and performance of current systems it is no competition. Nintendo will need to amaze me. I have no doubt that the system will sell. But if it sells as well or better than the Wii then Nintendo wins forever! lol... That would be a shocker.
Last edited by FatherSun on 7/15/2011 3:25:15 PM
Highlander
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 4:02:58 PM
But Yeah, the PS3/Vita combination would be unbeatable - especially if Sony were to bundle it in a single package released at the same time as the WiiU for the same (or similar) price.
monkeypunch
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 7:16:16 PM
Reply
I know it's all about the games but if they said that 30 years ago we'd all be playing "retro" games. It's a huge exaggeration but it's like giving an artist a crayon vs a pencil. Maybe it's more like sony and ms give you a .3mm pencil with 100 refills and nintendo's gives you .5mm with 20 refills. :P
Robochic
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 7:24:26 PM
Reply
@ jawknee did you get a 3ds yet?
PHOENIXZERO
Monday, July 18, 2011 @ 1:44:23 PM
Reply

See Full Image









bigrailer19
Reply
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:08:13 AM