I guess I'm the only one who doesn't think this thing looks half-bad. It's like a Wii on steroids. I think it's funny that everybody cried their eyes out about the Wii's inferior graphical capabilities (lower resolution, lack of true HD), yet here we have the Wii U, which is HD-capable. Everyone just glosses right over that fact. Indeed, some people's only argument against the Wii has been its inferior graphical capabilities and now that that has been addressed, people just find something else to complain about.
The Wii's generation-behind graphics haven't been addressed, Nintendo has instead entered a new generation with last generation graphics. Again.
The 360 and PS3 getting motion controls addresses and surpasses the Wii's only strength in comparison. The equivalent for the Wii would be if the Wii U was a $50 plug-in with optional tablet pads for the current system.
At least this time it isn't essentially the exact same Nintendo hardware as the previous generation and instead looks more like the
competition's last gen hardware. The Wii was hard to swallow as an entire console purchase instead of as a Gamecube sensor bar/remote. Sony and Microsoft did
exactly that instead of working over their customers who supported them the previous generation. If you take that Wii U tablet-pad and plug it into the PS3 or 360, the competition already has Nintendo beat with the exact same level of hardware, only with more features, including the most important one of all going forward: proper online game support.
Considering that Sony and Microsoft finally learned that it was worthwhile to neutralize Nintendo by selling a similar gimmick as an add-on, they're probably both already designing superior tablet-pads that could be out by the time the Wii U launches. Imagine how cheap the PS3 and 360 motion bundles will be by then? They could both have tablet-pad bundles on shelves the day the Wii U launches, only at a lower price.
Nintendo hardware has always excelled in certain areas while lagging behind (the contemporary competition) in others, it should be no shock to anyone at this point. It's been the norm since the NES days... With the NES you had a fast CPU and poor graphical hardware. With the SNES you had the slowest CPU of the 16-bit era alongside a comparatively overpowered graphical chipset. With the N64 you had no optical drive, insufficient RAM, the worst controllers in history and...... graphics that were slightly better than the competition. GameCube featured a goofy proprietary disc format and no DVD playback support, and the Wii.... Inferior graphics, with a focus on revolutionizing how people play video games.
Take any of those consoles before the Wii and insert the previous gen's Nintendo hardware inside. A top loader NES with "Super Nintendo" written on it is not the same as the SNES we actually got having a slow cpu.
I agree (for the first time in history) with Keranu when he says the Wiimote has yet to realize its full potential. I think the concept is fantastic, and yet continues to go underutilized. I think more people tend to side with people like Mathius who prefer more traditional controls and as a result developers haven't really explored all the possibilities with the Wiimote. The biggest problem with the Wii as it is now isn't the graphics or anything alone those lines, it's the fact that since the Wii is so easy to develop for there is just tons and tons of shovelware available for it. Shovelware tends to not make very good use of the hardware and be not very good in general, which reflects poorly on the platform.
I totally agree. I think that console companies should never have bothered releasing motion controls, or any other gimmicks, without first figuring out how to utilize it enough with software. The Power Glove, Activator, U-Force, etc could have all been fantastic with fantastic dedicated software. Instead, like too many of the better Wii games, they only offered inferior ways of controlling traditional games. The biggest and easiest way to transform the Wii into being worthwhile is to make regular controller support mandatory, while keeping the option for arm flailing controls.
Back to the U, I think the name is awful, but the thing looks like a decent concept. Depending on reliability of this touchscreen controller, I may even end up trading in the Wii for one of these if it's retaining backwards compatibility.
The Wii name was bad enough, but this isn't much worse, only boring and not differentiating enough. I also hate "Vita". Hopefully the PS4 and Xbox 720 keep their naming patterns.
Even if I never get into what ever is current "gaming" at any given time again, I'll probably continue to buy each new console. Although I have yet to make use of my PS3 as a PS3 game player. I like the look of the Wii U much more than the Wii. It looks like the bare bones, plastic door Arcade 360 and more like a real console.
I can't get worked up over current gen video games anymore and it's not really a big deal to me. It just sucks that Nintendo's last ditch attempt to regain hardcore players is a further step in the opposite direction. It is however much better than I expected.
It seems like a terrible business decision overall, but then so did the DS, Wii and 3DS... so who knows anymore. We're living in an age when people drop billions on essentially renting Apple products and software.
It really smacks of a board room meeting a week ago where an executive said "Hey, iPads are popular with young people, lets stick one (without the computer inside) on a pad and call it a day!" And they just showed up at E3 with a tablet taped into a hollowed out
Gamecube keyboard controller and alternated between it syncing up to a Wii and a 360 behind the curtain.
