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

21–30 of 160 posts

Re: Wii U Architecture

#21

Post by microtonal »

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…

It came out in a weird time for technology and Nintendo always uses slightly older hardware.

I had a Playstation 2 and 3 before, but since we became parents, we wanted something family-friendly. We seriously considered a Wii U, but were totally put of by the Wii U controller, which seemed clunky, annoying, and expensive to replace in case it breaks. It was the primary reason we went for the XBox One that generation.

We got a Switch pretty soon after it was released and love it (our daughter also has a Switch Lite).

Re: Wii U Architecture

#22

Post by ThatPlayer »

mikepurvis wrote: post #4
meibo wrote: post #2

The Wii U was such a fun console with so many great games, it's a shame that it was relatively inaccessible due to horribly bodged marketing and weird choices - luckily they're porting most(but not all) of the gems. I actually think that the gamepad screen did contribute a lot to a lot of games, especially if there was a lot of action and you were able to use it as a map/for quick actions. It's good that they basical…

Which games really used the secondary screen in an interesting way? The main ones I can think of are: Splatoon— second player without split screen. New SMB U— gamepad player can spawn blocks to help you reach secrets. Wind Waker— map and inventory. But an awful lot of titles just mirrored the TV or had a button to enable off-TV play.

Nintendo Land was great for the asymmetrical multiplayer. Four players co-op on the big screen versus a fifth player on the GamePad. It's not impossible to do in other ways, but I haven't seen it done.

I think shared/split screen on the TV adds an additional social element to it. Otherwise it's just all of us playing on their phones/Switch.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#23

Post by buildfocus »

m_st wrote: post #19

My reason to buy a Wii U back then was that whenever I found the time to play a video game, I had to go through a session of Windows Update, Steam update and game update that I lost interest by the time it was ready. Compare that to the Wii U back then: Turn on and play. Nintendo even achieved to keep this mindset with the Switch: It will update in the background so usually you just turn it on and play.

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.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#24

Post by Narann »

pjmlp wrote: post #15
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

That is exactly why game studios prefer to target game consoles, there aren't a zillion of different ones to support.

Not the main reason, game studios target consoles because of established player base.

Actually, consoles are tricky to develops on because they are quiet restricted from hardware standpoint, so you have to invest a lot in hardware knowledge.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#25

Post by psychphysic »

actionfromafar wrote: post #16
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…

When it hit the stores, the reaction of most I know of was something like "I have a Wii already". So I think the naming was incredibly hampering. Especially considering a lot of Wii buyers were not exactly deep gamers, but very casual customers.

It also promoted the pad beyond the console. Many weren't sure if it was a new pad for the original Wii.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#26

Post by psychphysic »

chungy wrote: post #5
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 feel that it had plenty of power to make fantastic looking games and great experiences. It did, and it shows in that many of the top-selling games on Switch are ports of Wii U games.

Breath of the Wild ran poorly on both platforms on release. Which surprised me, and undermined the power of the Switch.

That said the Switch remains underpowered compared to contemporary game consoles.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#27

Post by quietbritishjim »

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

> 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 don't think that's really true. Hardware moves slowly enough nowadays that really good hardware from a couple of years ago is still very competitive with today's hardware. And if you tried to build a PC with comparable specs to, say xbox series x, you'd be paying a very substantially larger amount because MS have economies of scale and a strong negotiating position.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#28

Post by bzzzt »

psychphysic wrote: post #26
chungy wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I feel that it had plenty of power to make fantastic looking games and great experiences. It did, and it shows in that many of the top-selling games on Switch are ports of Wii U games.

Breath of the Wild ran poorly on both platforms on release. Which surprised me, and undermined the power of the Switch. That said the Switch remains underpowered compared to contemporary game consoles.

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.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#29

Post by majesticmerc »

m_st wrote: post #19

My reason to buy a Wii U back then was that whenever I found the time to play a video game, I had to go through a session of Windows Update, Steam update and game update that I lost interest by the time it was ready. Compare that to the Wii U back then: Turn on and play. Nintendo even achieved to keep this mindset with the Switch: It will update in the background so usually you just turn it on and play.

> Nintendo even achieved to keep this mindset with the Switch: It will update in the background so usually you just turn it on and play.

I don't agree. I play my switch maybe once every couple of weeks, and almost without fail there's a system or game update that it asks me to install.

Granted, _most_ updates can be put off for a while by hitting "update later", but I see very little difference between the consoles (and PCs) in terms of update behaviour these days, for better or worse.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#30

Post by DCKing »

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…

> Nintendo always uses slightly older hardware.

This is a bit of a meme, but it isn't generally true. The Nintendo 64 and GameCube were pretty cutting edge in their day. At the time the Nintendo Switch released, the Tegra X1 was still about as cutting edge as mobile GPUs came (in early 2016).

What Nintendo is about - to a fault, some would argue - is cost cutting. Sometimes that means they use older stuff, but using older stuff isn't always the best cost cutting balance to strike. The article even notes this:

> To be fair, it’s known that Nintendo’s choices are not always based on ‘cutting-edginess’ but on cost and supply.

Post reply on HN