Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wii U Architecture

copetti.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 160 posts

Re: Wii U Architecture

#111

Post by bityard »

criddell wrote: post #57
buildfocus wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got a steam deck - it makes a very decent attempt at transforming the former experience into the latter, but keeping access to all your existing PC games.

How well does it succeed? One reason I've only played games on consoles is that if I see a game that has PS5 on the box, I know it will run on my console. Do Steam games make a similar promise for the Steam Deck?

If a game works on Proton (http://protondb.com/), it will almost certainly run on the Steam Deck. And the Steam Deck UI does a pretty good job of highlighting games that run well on the Deck and telling you what the compatibility issues are, if anything.

Assuming the game itself runs fine, usually the main issue is mapping steam deck controls to the in-game keyboard and mouse config. I find the UX for doing this to be pretty confusing and terrible (doubly so when using an external controller), but this is helped some by the fact that you can apply controller mappings submitted by other Steam users.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#112

Post by bityard »

langsoul-com wrote: post #10

I reckon Nintendo has the best strategy almost game consoles. Not focusing on the power/realism and instead of other aspects. At some point, if someone buys a ps5 or xbox for power only. Then they just get a pc, those consoles takes years to design. By the time they're released, it's already outdated

I always saw it as: Sony and Microsoft seem to aim to be the "premium" gaming/set-top-box experience for pro-sumers and hardcore gamers.

Nintendo, on the other hand, tries to appeal to a much broader market. They learned from their success in the 80s, when pretty much every North American living room with kids in the household had an NES and a stack of games on top of the TV. Nintendo sees themselves as friendlier to casual gamers and families. They want to the "the safe choice" when grandma or grandpa whip out their checkbook at Walmart to buy a gaming system for their grandchildren.

Just being family-friendly doesn't quite guarantee success, which is why they've always been exploring new ways to interact with video games. Basically every new console they've introduced has had controllers markedly different from what came before. (Even if it turns out they were not necessarily _better_ than what came before.) In the case of the Wiimote, they pretty much hit a home run. It was not only a novel input method, it turned out to be loads of fun for casual gaming, social gatherings, and families.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#113

Post by brnt »

herbst wrote: post #55
ace2358 wrote: post #3

The Wii U was unfortunately not a very successful console, but I feel that it had plenty of power to make fantastic looking games and great experiences. It came out in a weird time for technology and Nintendo always uses slightly older hardware. As a homebrew device it is amazing. There are still exploits being found with a new, safe, simple method out now thanks to some crazy dedicated modders. There’s a whole homeb…

I bought a Wii U (my only console) just a few months ago. It's still amazing, you can download all available games for free directly from Nintendo. The controller is meh, however most games also let you play with a pro controller. The screen on the Wii U brick is barely used. And if you have a party or so just let them bring their Wii controllers, all the multiplayer games support them. If you are not a classic gamer…

Whoops, I should refresh pages more often!

Re: Wii U Architecture

#114

Post by aquova »

tiagod wrote: post #108
Bondi_Blue wrote: post #88

The Wii U had a rich feature set. Firsts for a Nintendo home console: - OTB web browser - OTB audio and video chat with friends, native support for 3rd party headsets - real-time direct messaging (via Miiverse) notifications and other friend notifications via the home button LED - Ability to view online status of friends - High definition graphics - 5+ player synchronous local multiplayer - built-in Nintendo TVii ser…

>full backwards compatibility with a prior console (Wii) Wasn't the Wii, at least initially, compatible with gamecube? Mine even has gamecube controller and memory card slots.

Yes, the Wii contained full GameCube components inside, so it was able to natively play GameCube games. I think the later Wii Mini model removed that capability, but the regular Wii model was backwards compatible.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#115

Post by morelisp »

amyjess wrote: post #98
bzzzt wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Switch is not competing with PS/Xbox, but with mobile phones, tablets and portable consoles (including Nintendo's DS line). It's not underpowered for a battery powered game machine and has a standardised controller setup and easy docking as differentiators to other mobile devices.

Unless you like JRPGs, in which case the Switch is a first-class console. Except for a few AAA-scale action RPGs that launch on PS4/5 (e.g. FF7R, upcoming FF16), the vast majority of JRPGs being released today come to Switch first. And when Switch exclusivity expires, many of them only get a PC release beyond that with PS4/5 and XB1/XSX releases simply never happening. For a good chunk of JRPG players, the question i…

The DS was also to JRPGs what the Switch is to them now! Contact, Dragon Quest IX, TWEWY, Strange Journey, Rune Factory - median and top 10 beats both the PSP and PS3.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#116

Post by philistine »

ace2358 wrote: post #3

The Wii U was unfortunately not a very successful console, but I feel that it had plenty of power to make fantastic looking games and great experiences. It came out in a weird time for technology and Nintendo always uses slightly older hardware. As a homebrew device it is amazing. There are still exploits being found with a new, safe, simple method out now thanks to some crazy dedicated modders. There’s a whole homeb…

For me, the only use was buying one for cheap right after the Switch came out. Everybody and heir mother was getting rid of their games, so everything could be had for cheap (Nintendo cheap).

Re: Wii U Architecture

#117

Post by philistine »

lynguist wrote: post #82

Another badly designed Nintendo console. Now hear me out: NES: Well designed. SNES: Well designed. N64: Hampered by the originally 12-24 MB cartridges as opposed to 650 MB CDs. GameCube: Well designed. A little hampered by the 1.4 GB mini DVDs as opposed to 7.8 GB DVDs. Wii: Underpowered, but a surprise smash hit capturing that era’s sensibilities (like the PS2). Wii U: Clunky and awkward, which however led to the Sw…

You’re missing the whole story here. Was the Game Boy well designed? It was a smash hit upon release, but everybody immediately complained about the screen quality. The thing sold and sold and sold because it was inexpensive and just plain fun, bad screen notwithstanding. By 1996 however, it was woefully old, and the Game Boy Pocket sales were soft when it came out. Pokémon saved Nintendo’s bacon and gave them leeway to develop the Game Boy Color, which was also old and criticized upon release, but it again had Pokémon.

It’s more complicated than a simple good or bad checkmark whether a thing is popular or not.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#118

Post by morelisp »

ThatPlayer wrote: post #18
djur wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really liked the Wii U pad and used it a lot. The Switch is a more fully realized version of the concept, but it has its downsides -- it's not as comfortable to hold and play for long periods, and the lack of a two-screen mode makes certain concepts less effective. Mario Maker, for instance, worked perfectly with the Wii U and feels compromised on the Switch in comparison. The battery life was completely irrelevant…

Another example of the two-screen mode I liked was asymmetrical local multiplayer like Nintendo Land. It's not that it's impossible now, with two switches, but I haven't seen any games do it (with 4 players on a single switch, and 1 on the other).

The Wii U's model doesn't really open up that many interesting asymmetrical multiplayer game designs, compared to multiple individual devices. There's a psychological effect of everyone being in the "same space" when most people are on one screen, but mechanically most of the time you'll want the opposite of what the Wii U can do - one person can see everything but everyone else can only see some limited view (c.f. Pac-Man Vs).

With individual devices, you can make a game where N people see something different, or N-1 people see the same thing and 1 sees something different, or where N people see the same thing (and maybe also something different, c.f. the Four Swords GBAs+GC model).

With the Wii U, you can make a game where everyone sees the same thing, or N-1 people see the same thing and 1 person sees that and something else. Even if you try to make the 1 person see something disjoint, it's too easy to cheat. And if you try to make everyone but one person see their own thing - too bad.

I always wondered why they never built something to render simple (or even complex, it can't be that costly) scenes out to multiple connected (3)DSs - relatively everyone with a Wii U must have had at least one...

Re: Wii U Architecture

#119

Post by Bondi_Blue »

tiagod wrote: post #108
Bondi_Blue wrote: post #88

The Wii U had a rich feature set. Firsts for a Nintendo home console: - OTB web browser - OTB audio and video chat with friends, native support for 3rd party headsets - real-time direct messaging (via Miiverse) notifications and other friend notifications via the home button LED - Ability to view online status of friends - High definition graphics - 5+ player synchronous local multiplayer - built-in Nintendo TVii ser…

>full backwards compatibility with a prior console (Wii) Wasn't the Wii, at least initially, compatible with gamecube? Mine even has gamecube controller and memory card slots.

Yes, my bad. Completely forgot.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#120

Post by TremendousJudge »

Sakos wrote: post #53
mardifoufs wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't know that until this post lol. And it was released when I was 12 and actually into gaming. Now I find it weird that the "controller" is so weak that it can't do anything but stream from the console, it kind of make the portability useless.

Asynchronous game design is something that holds a lot of promise. Traditionally, that was something reserved for online multiplayer in PC games. But suddenly it was possible to design local coop around one player interacting with the game in a different way than the others. The idea is still really cool, but I think most devs are unwilling to experiment with such a niche product.

I think you meant "Asymmetric" instead of "Asynchronous". I think Asynchronous games would be something like Travian
Post reply on HN