Is the Wii U the next TurboGrafx-16?

[JoostinOnline]

it's nintendo and their archaic ways that's the fault and why the wiiu is failing.

Well to be fair, they weren't "archaic" until Sony and Microsoft decided not to include backwards compatibility.

I say we group all these "What's wrong with the Wii U" threads together and throw them into the EoF or sun.

 

[Bladexdsl]

their archaic because their still using dated hardware, region codes (peeps who say these don't matter is BS) and won't meet the market. the days of doing whatever the fuck they want ARE OVER!

 

[[MLG]xX420NoScopeBlazeXx]

Nah the Wii U's problem isn't power, or marketing, or no games. It's because no one plays CoD on Wii U. I mean when was the last time someone bought a Wii U for CoD? Almost never. If not for CoD, what's the point of buying a Wii U at all?

So yeah, the Wii U is figuratively the new Wii. Why? Cause the Wii had no CoD that people want to play. You can't say that's it's the new turbografx cause CoD didn't exist back then. So you can't compare.

 

[JoostinOnline]

their archaic because their still using dated hardware, region codes (peeps who say these don't matter is BS) and won't meet the market. the days of doing whatever the fuck they want ARE OVER!

The hardware is only outdated to keep compatibility with Wii games. Wii games can't run natively on an up-to-date processor family.

@[MLG]xX440NoScopeBlazeXx I'm pretty sure you're joking, but the CoD audience is fine. At least it was last time I played. I got tired of Ghosts because I'd been playing it (or an equivalent of it ) for like a decade.

 

[Tom Bombadildo]

Nah the Wii U's problem isn't power, or marketing, or no games. It's because no one plays CoD on Wii U. I mean when was the last time someone bought a Wii U for CoD? Almost never. If not for CoD, what's the point of buying a Wii U at all?

So yeah, the Wii U is figuratively the new Wii. Why? Cause the Wii had no CoD that people want to play. You can't say that's it's the new turbografx cause CoD didn't exist back then. So you can't compare.

10/10, best post ever.

EDIT: To stay on topic sort of, the biggest problem with the Wii U is an amalgamation of most of the issues already mentioned. It was absolutely horridly marketed, Nintendo completely flip flopped on their intended market (when it was revealed, it was a system for hardcore gamers. Now it's back to the same old casual/Nintendo fanbase), their gimmick was horribly executed (the gamepad), they still haven't blown any third party developers to get more than Mario/Zelda on their system, etc etc. Nintendo have been doing pretty terribly home console-wise for years now, and so far they still haven't learned from their mistakes.

 

[Bladexdsl]

it's damn name by itself is about 50% of the problem peeps still think it's a wii!

 

[Ulieq]

it's damn name by itself is about 50% of the problem peeps still think it's a wii!

Na, that's just a myth. If it came with a pro controller and not a gamepad, it would have sold better.

What's wrong:

REQUIRES 2 AC ADAPTERS - why have a gamepad with a separate AC Adapter. Plus, if you need an external HD, you may need 3 AC adapters! That is mind blowing.

USB 2.0. If you require external HD, why in the world would you not use USB 3.0?

GAMEPAD: It's Heavy, it has a crap battery, it has a crap low def screen, the Analog buttons are stiff and short.

SYSTEM: Horrible black plastic that gets dusty after 5 minutes

OS: At launch, was the worst OS ever created. Startup was a pain in the ass.

GAMES: Decided to rerererererererelease NSMB instead of a new game.

NINTENDOLAND: What in the world is it, why cant you play multiplayer online when half the games require multiplayer? Why can't you use a gamepad and another procontroller? Why do you need Wiimotes when those were for the Wii??????????

 

[JoostinOnline]

it's damn name by itself is about 50% of the problem peeps still think it's a wii!

I called that the moment they announced the name. I still meet people who think it's just a new controller.

 

[wolf-snake]

I still think EA and somewhat Nintendo themself are to blame. EA wanted to force Origin on the Wii U which Nintendo said no to them they started to go apeshit and were the first ones to unleashe the Wii U hate bandwagon, people saw that a mayor studio was saying how bad the Wii U was and pretty much said the themself "Well if EA say it's true then it probably is" and more people started to jump on the EA Wii U hate Banwagon starting to hurt the brand. But still for a good while Nintendo didn't do anything to stop that from hapening and when they started to heavly market their stuff it was too late, the damage was allready done and the Wii U couldn't recover like everyone expected to recover. Does this mean the Wii U is doomed? No, not by a long shot. Does Nintendo need to change their tactics? Well i think it's safe to say that they have been trying to market the Wii U like never before and it seems to be working. People seems to start to raise interest on the Wii U after this past E3 and really right now is on second place in between the Xbox One and the Ps4 and it has earned that place.

 

[matpower]

Nah the Wii U's problem isn't power, or marketing, or no games. It's because no one plays CoD on Wii U. I mean when was the last time someone bought a Wii U for CoD? Almost never. If not for CoD, what's the point of buying a Wii U at all?

So yeah, the Wii U is figuratively the new Wii. Why? Cause the Wii had no CoD that people want to play. You can't say that's it's the new turbografx cause CoD didn't exist back then. So you can't compare.

There is CoD for the Wii and the Wii U, bro. 10/10 post btw.

Isn't model 3 mono sound only (unless you mod it)? I know it's got a lot of other issues.

Don't forget that the Model 1 was Mono only too, unless you use the headphone jack. Also most of Model 3 issues are fixable with mods.

 

[mightymuffy]

It's hard to judge whether the TurboGrafx-16 was stronger or weaker than the competition based solely on the fact that the CPU was 8-bit, the length of the word does not equate processing power. You could still get comparable and often times superior results on the hardware, especially after connecting the numerous peripherals.

http://www.sega-16.com/2009/12/side-by-side-ys-iii-genesis-snes-tg-16/

Just a few side-by-sides to demonstrate my point.

Dear me I can't believe they chose that game! Or more to the point, just one game! Especially the SNES version of that game, which I can remember the reviews at the time (I was freelancing back then) was comparable to the PS3 port of Bayonetta...... it's like the official Xbox 360 site doing a comparison review of Bayonetta and saying "OMG just look, the 360 is clearly at least twice as powerful as the PS3!!!11!' Were the game developed with the SNES (or MD for that matter) in mind the result would've been far different - Y's 3 was designed for the TG, ported to MD, and quick-port-for-launch-period SNES....

Anyway OP, your first post claiming the TG was inferior due to less bits? I suspect you've already been corrected with that one, plus extra fact: the SNES cpu was a custom 8bit one.... yet the machine was technically a league above the Megadrive (which was 16bit)
Otherwise an interesting point... the TG did well in Japan, where the Wii U is performing better than in other regions - which is the SNES and which is the Gen/MD though ehh?! I think better comparisons can be made to a closer generation though - this looks like being a repeat of the PS2/Xbox/GC if you look at the 3 main regions, and Wii U is definitely the GC - if it's lucky.....

 

[Foxi4]

SNES cpu was a custom 8bit one.... yet the machine was technically a league above the Megadrive (which was 16bit)

The SNES is based on a 16-bit CPU, you must be getting your specs mixed up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WDC_65816/65802
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricoh_5A22

 

[Taleweaver]

(note: I'm skipping over the whole debate going on. I've read it a dozillion times already)

1st - The Wii U and TG16's hardware are weaker than their rivals:
...
2nd - They tried to innovate the VG market:
...
3rd - They stayed in the 3rd place on the sales and got a cult following:
...

Alright, so what do you think about this crazy idea? Do you think it is valid? I hope I can get some feedback on this idea!

While I agree with those 3 points, I think it's invalid to draw the conclusion.

1st is the easiest: since you can rank every console by their horsepower (compared to the competition in that generation), by the very definition there will always be a weakest console. However, that in itself isn't saying anything of popularity or sales.

2nd: that 'innovation' line is used with every console ever sold. Especially during E3-days. And while nintendo certainly does more than the competition with their wii and u, I really don't see how the turbografx was anything outside what is currently the norm.

3rd: can't argue much about this one. But draw a sales charts and there'll always be one in third place (assuming you're graphing more than 2, obviously).



Basically, what I'm saying is, is that I do see the similarities, but not what you're getting at. The similarities are true, but so broad that it's hard to draw anything from it. You can as well include things like "4th - they are both connected to the television" or "5th - they both have some good games and some not so good". It isn't that it's wrong, but it's true for the majority of the consoles on the market.

 

[TeamScriptKiddies]

The SNES is based on a 16-bit CPU, you must be getting your specs mixed up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WDC_65816/65802
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricoh_5A22

The GPU on the Genesis/Megadrive SNES and the Turbografx, this is entirely seperate from the CPU, get your facts straight

 

[Foxi4]

The GPU on the Genesis/Megadrive SNES and the Turbografx, this is entirely seperate from the CPU, get your facts straight

What are you on about? We weren't talking about the GPU's at all.

 

[TeamScriptKiddies]

What are you on about? We weren't talking about the GPU's at all.

Sorry didn't mean to sound snappy. Also I'm not entirely awake yet, so I didn't see those links you provided XD. I'm not too bright before I consume all my morning coffee, carry on

 

[Foxi4]

Sorry didn't mean to sound snappy. Also I'm not entirely awake yet, so I didn't see those links you provided XD. I'm not too bright before I consume all my morning coffee, carry on

Well, just to make things clear:

SNES CPU: 16-bit Ricoh 5A22 (65C816 core)
Mega Drive/Genesis CPU: 16-bit Motorola 68000 (16/32-bit) + 8-bit Zilog Z80 co-processor
Turbografx-16 CPU: 8-bit Hudson Soft HuC6280

Again, if we were to go by bits only, we'd have to crown the Mega Drive/Genesis as the beefiest of all three machines in terms of general processing since its main CPU can handle 32-bit operations (despite being on a 16-bit bus), but we all know that's not the case. "Bits" help with precision maths, but they do not directly translate to the performance of the chip.

 

[GameWinner]

The Wii U is dead. Time to move on. :/

 

[stanleyopar2000]

wow...after thinking about this more and more...I wholeheartedly agree with this

 

[[MLG]xX420NoScopeBlazeXx]

There is CoD for the Wii and the Wii U, bro. 10/10 post btw.

Yeah but it's an inferior port that no one actually plays. You hop onto CoD4 on Xbox or PC, there's still people who play. You hop onto CoD4 for Wii, technically MW Reflex, no one plays any more. Actually, I think Nintendo shut down internet services for the Wii.

See, this is the problem with Nintendo. The Wii came after the Xbox, yet it becomes irrelevant sooner. That's retarded. Games are still coming out for the Xbox, but the Wii has been abandoned completely.

But whatever, Nintendo's probably not going to put out another home console after the Wii U. I mean the CONCEPT of a home console in Nintendo's eyes is obsolete anyways. They're turning into set-top boxes and multimedia boxes. Probably all to be replaced with Steamboxes one day.