Wii-U thoughts so far

[EvilRyu2099]

Because it's only marginally [more] powerful than the other two consoles

it is only marginally more powerful than a PS3 or 360 on some counts while clearly less powerful on others. You are essentially paying for the pad and for the Nintendo "we don't sell hardware at a loss" markup.

Yes the CPU of the Wii U is weaker than the other two consoles but hardware is starting to rely more and more on GPUs.. The Wii U has a better Video Card than the other two console.. Hopefully developers realize that they have to code catering to that form of hardware..

[EvilRyu2099]

I'm not trying to diss Vita, as I hope it lives up to its potential, but saying the launch prices of Wii U and Vita are analogous just isn't true.

How is it not? Hell the 3DS launched at that price... It's not like the Vita was going for $350.. Now that would be ridiculous and similar to the joke $600 entry price of the ps3..

[crux]

I don't think Vita is massively overpriced anyway, but you don't see how $50 more for full console with a tablet controller is a better deal? It's not like hooking a Vita to a television is analogous to Wii U, so why do you claim that the price of the Wii U is analogous to the price of the Vita?

Besides which, a lot of the complaints about the investment for Vita also stem from their outlandishly priced proprietary memory cards. Otherwise Vita is pretty close in price to what the PSP was at launch.

[EvilRyu2099]

Well I honestly don't count the 3G version.. I see no reason to buy one even if it was the same price as the Wifi.. Now to release a version like that was a joke unless it didn't require a contract.. And I agree 100% about the memory cards as well.. But I still say the gap is more $100 between the two consoles, and for a lot of the options you can get a memory card and game already bundled with the Vita.. The bundled version of the Vita is $250 whilst the Deluxe Wii U is $350.. So I think both prices follow a very parallel format..

[crux]

I thought we were talking about launch prices. The bundle sweetens the deal, but the retail price of Vita still remains $250 with or without the bundle. Anyway, this is going in circles, so I'll leave it at that.

[Octopod]

Personally I don't care how powerful it is as long as it continues to get games I want to play. If I cared that much about power I would just stick to gaming on my PC. $350 for the system is not bad imo. I still would have bit at $400 even. $500, $600 I could never see myself paying for a console though.

[jay_red]

Has anyone gotten any accessories for their gamepad yet? I want to get one of the silicone skins that gamestop sells, but none of the ones around me have black, only red, blue, and pink. Same thing at Best Buy (which literally had a table full of deluxe Wii u's tonight, must have been 8-10 of them.

this is the one I am talking about:
http://www.gamestop.com/wii-u/accessori ... ect/104771

[Octopod]

^ I wanted to grab one of those too but I guess the black ones went quick. When I checked at BB again they had none at all so hopefully they will restock soon. The only accessory I have bought so far is the screen protector and stylus package.

[RyaNtheSlayA]

I'll pick up a screen protector soon. Turns out there's not much of a reason to buy a microphone anymore. At least in Black Ops II, if you just plug headphones into the gamepad, the built in mic works.

[Cronozilla]

The Vita is actually really cheap considering the hardware inside .... but it's still expensive for being a mobile gaming device.

Nintendo is actually selling Wii U at a loss. There's no markup on this hardware launch, it seems. The only way they're making anything out of it is if you buy the Deluxe set (I assume) or a Nintendo game with the Basic.

I find it difficult to fault Nintendo for not wanting to inherently lose money, though. That's just kind of strange.

Personal view on hardware subsidies:

Personally, I think when companies do that, they artificially change people's expectations for what happens next. And, it's a non-sustainable thing to do, so at some point, at some iteration, you won't be able to do it anymore as a company because you'd be risking the line's existence. It's all great until your fallback financing disappears. Then you're basically looking at releasing something that will be seen as disappointing in the specs, or you're practically writing your own death certificate by releasing something you're losing lots of money on. Your only salvation being people randomly change their game buying behavior.

It's just a generally stupid thing to do. It really deregulates how this stuff works and not in a good way. It's actually pretty unhealthy competition and if those brands stick around, historically, the consumer foots the bill in other ways to make up for it. I don't personally like the idea of being bent over a barrel, because someone was reckless with their budget.

I'd like a vita, though ... I just ... I'm not going to pay $250 for a handheld that has a couple OK games. If there was a huge line of stellar titles ... then it'd be different. But as it stands, the Vita just kind of has potential at this point and it's quickly losing that the longer it's out without any must have games.
It's got some good looking games that are probably fun ... but nothing that's just like "WOW, I have to get a Vita now". And that's the primary issue with that platform.


I've REALLY been considering getting a screen protector for the GamePad ... I imagine all this MiiVerse drawing posts I'm doing will catch up with me eventually.