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

61–70 of 160 posts

Re: Wii U Architecture

#61

Post by matsemann »

wodenokoto wrote: post #54
psychphysic wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It did? I never noticed performance issues with breath of the wild

I bought a Switch the other week (OLED version, but same powered hardware I guess?) and am playing BotW just now. Two things that create some lag I've noticed: the forest area with the master sword, and when blowing up lots of explosive crates.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#62

Post by danielheath »

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.

Main thing I used mine for was continuing to play a game when someone else wanted the TV; I could just switch to "display on controller" and keep going. Not such a big deal these days but back then it was pretty nice!

Re: Wii U Architecture

#63

Post by anotherman554 »

astura wrote: post #52
anotherman554 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 read that here, my memory was a little off - https://web.archive.org/web/20170302073322/http://www.ign.co... >"In doing our testing without the touch features we noticed looking back and forth between the Gamepad and the screen actually took a little something away from this type of Zelda game," he said. >"There was no hesitation or reluctance in removing those features because we felt the way it is now is the best…

Windwaker HD and Twilight Princess HD both let you have the map on the tablet while you play, and while I haven't tried it myself I'm told it's better than switching from one screen view to another.

On the Wii U only the tablet has motion controls, the pro controller does not, so at a minimum the game was designed to have you hold a tablet and make motions with it while Link holds his tablet and acts out that motion.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#64

Post by jollyllama »

Synaesthesia wrote: post #8
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 do think it led to the switch concept which has been very successful for Nintendo, my friend who had a wii U thought it was great, but just wanted the tablet to have better battery life.

Agreed, the Wii U tablet controller was a proof of concept for the same form factor that would become the extremely successful Switch.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#65

Post by anotherman554 »

mikepurvis wrote: post #58
anotherman554 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I felt like later in the Wii U's life, they were pushing it more as being for off-TV play, and that meant that that kind of stuff would have to be implemented anyway— Wind Waker HD certainly had the dual approach, where the default was to play on the TV with inventory on the gamepad, but if you played in off-TV mode, then the inventory was a pause menu popup. That extra development work to support both was probably i…

It's not just games that are played in off-TV mode, any game that supports the Wii U Pro controller needs to have a single screen option.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#66

Post by willis936 »

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #59

The concept of this machine was such a mess. You can truly tell something was rotten in the org chart when a bizarre console/tablet compromise is what they actually shipped with a straight face.

Not at all. Nintendo has been making experimental toys since before anyone here was alive. They've been making experimental electronic toys for as long as there have been electronic toys.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#67

Post by coldpie »

microtonal wrote: post #21
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 seriously considered a Wii U, but were totally put off by the Wii U controller, which seemed clunky, annoying, and expensive to replace in case it breaks.

You were right on all counts. It was a pretty terrible controller. Flimsy, heavy, way too big. And it was actually impossible to replace; they never offered replacement pads for sale, you had to buy a whole new console or find someone who fried their console and wanted to sell just a pad.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#68

Post by jrootabega »

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.

Batman: Arkham City. You could use it to tune your radio, hack stuff, remote control gadgets, probably some more stuff I'm forgetting.

Re: Wii U Architecture

#69

Post by astura »

anotherman554 wrote: post #63
astura wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read that here, my memory was a little off - https://web.archive.org/web/20170302073322/http://www.ign.co... >"In doing our testing without the touch features we noticed looking back and forth between the Gamepad and the screen actually took a little something away from this type of Zelda game," he said. >"There was no hesitation or reluctance in removing those features because we felt the way it is now is the best…

Windwaker HD and Twilight Princess HD both let you have the map on the tablet while you play, and while I haven't tried it myself I'm told it's better than switching from one screen view to another. On the Wii U only the tablet has motion controls, the pro controller does not, so at a minimum the game was designed to have you hold a tablet and make motions with it while Link holds his tablet and acts out that motion.

I played Windwaker HD and Pikman 3, which also put the map on the Gamepad. I didn't like the map being on a different screen at all! In practice it ends up being such an obnoxious gimmick. (To me)

Re: Wii U Architecture

#70

Post by derrikcurran »

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.

Huh. I had the complete opposite experience. My girlfriend and I used to joke that the U in Wii U stands for "update". Maybe it's just because we didn't play it frequently.
Post reply on HN