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

41–50 of 160 posts

Re: Wii U Architecture

#41

Post by actionfromafar »

mardifoufs wrote: post #34
psychphysic wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

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.

Screens were slightly less ubiquitous then. You could continue playing on the controller when dad switched the living room TV to some sports.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#42

Post by goosedragons »

majesticmerc wrote: post #29
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 (…

Sleep mode. And consoles are way better at respecting your choice not to update both in regards to games and the OS. I can put the Switch to sleep and leave the game there for a week or a month and then come back exactly where I was.

With Wii U games rarely received patches, everything was on the disc and ran off it too.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#43

Post by lvass »

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.

Wonderful 101 does it beautifully, entire game was designed to use it in many different ways.

The best overall use is the Nintendo DS emulator. Unfortunately only few games are available for purchase but with a bit of hacking the compatibility is great.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#44

Post by astura »

jrootabega wrote: post #36
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 think if they had released a Zelda game meant for that platform, like everyone who bought one expected them to, they would have had a better time.

Breath of the Wild was originally intended to be a Wii U exclusive, with a 2015 release date[1], but it didn't end up that way. The developers had some Wii U Gamepad features in early prototypes but found that looking between the gamepad and TV was distracting and axed them.

[1] https://www.polygon.com/2015/3/27/8303247/the-legend-of-zeld...

Re: Wii U Architecture

#45

Post by jrootabega »

astura wrote: post #44
jrootabega wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think if they had released a Zelda game meant for that platform, like everyone who bought one expected them to, they would have had a better time.

Breath of the Wild was originally intended to be a Wii U exclusive, with a 2015 release date[1], but it didn't end up that way. The developers had some Wii U Gamepad features in early prototypes but found that looking between the gamepad and TV was distracting and axed them. [1] https://www.polygon.com/2015/3/27/8303247/the-legend-of-zeld...

And I think that was a bad decision and a soft betrayal of Wii U owners.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#46

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

DCKing wrote: post #30
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…

I still wonder if the 4KiB texture cache in the N64 was a cost-cutting decision. It totally defined the look of N64 games.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#47

Post by anotherman554 »

astura wrote: post #44
jrootabega wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think if they had released a Zelda game meant for that platform, like everyone who bought one expected them to, they would have had a better time.

Breath of the Wild was originally intended to be a Wii U exclusive, with a 2015 release date[1], but it didn't end up that way. The developers had some Wii U Gamepad features in early prototypes but found that looking between the gamepad and TV was distracting and axed them. [1] https://www.polygon.com/2015/3/27/8303247/the-legend-of-zeld...

I feel pretty confident the Sheika slate was designed around the Wii U tablet and they only cut that aspect of the game to make the Nintendo Switch version look just as good as the Wii U version.

If a Nintendo employee claimed it was to avoid distraction I'm pretty confident they are lying.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#48

Post by m_st »

majesticmerc wrote: post #29
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 (…

That is happening for me only with games I didn't use recently.

However, we used play Fortnite quite often on both the Switch and the PS4. On the Switch it was ready immediately in most cases. If not, the update loaded and was installed rather quickly. Compare that to the PS4: It's updated in about 50% of the cases. If not, downloading takes very long and then it is applying the update so slow, that we usually just give up.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#49

Post by anotherman554 »

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.

In Tokyo Mirage Session you get text messages from the characters on the second screen so it's like you are glancing at your cell phone as you play. This worked very poorly when they ported it to Switch and you had to go into a menu when a party member texts you.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#50

Post by jrootabega »

anotherman554 wrote: post #47
astura wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Breath of the Wild was originally intended to be a Wii U exclusive, with a 2015 release date[1], but it didn't end up that way. The developers had some Wii U Gamepad features in early prototypes but found that looking between the gamepad and TV was distracting and axed them. [1] https://www.polygon.com/2015/3/27/8303247/the-legend-of-zeld...

I feel pretty confident the Sheika slate was designed around the Wii U tablet and they only cut that aspect of the game to make the Nintendo Switch version look just as good as the Wii U version. If a Nintendo employee claimed it was to avoid distraction I'm pretty confident they are lying.

i.e. "saving face".
Post reply on HN