Why are people comparing Wii U to 360 and PS3?

#1badmanneilPosted 1/13/2013 3:08:35 PM
Wii U is a next-gen console. Xbox and PS3 are in their last year. There isn't another next gen console to compare the Wii U to. I would rather wait and see what the other companies have before running my mouth about something that makes no logical sense.
---
Gamertag: Krazzy Bananas
#2SPDShadowRangerPosted 1/13/2013 3:09:31 PM
Popcorn...check
chair...check


Ok I'm ready to see a show!
#3Not_King_BooPosted 1/13/2013 3:13:08 PM
The same reason people compared the Xbox 360 to the PS2, GameCube, Xbox, and Dreamcast, the same reason people compared the Dreamcast to the PS1, Nintendo 64, and Saturn, the same reason people compared the Saturn to the SNES and Genesis, and the same reason people compared the Genesis to the NES - we have nothing else to compare it to right now.
#4silverbulltPosted 1/13/2013 3:14:07 PM
badmanneil posted...
Wii U is a next-gen console. Xbox and PS3 are in their last year. There isn't another next gen console to compare the Wii U to. I would rather wait and see what the other companies have before running my mouth about something that makes no logical sense.


You missed the part where Nintendo skipped a generation with the Wii.

Wii U is Nintendo's answer to the X360 and PS3 so they're all happily in the same gen now.
---
XBOX360 - It only does everything.
Nintendo FIX the Wii U FFS: http://youtu.be/gl5_qODv-gQ
#5Not_King_BooPosted 1/13/2013 3:15:07 PM
silverbullt posted...
badmanneil posted...
Wii U is a next-gen console. Xbox and PS3 are in their last year. There isn't another next gen console to compare the Wii U to. I would rather wait and see what the other companies have before running my mouth about something that makes no logical sense.


You missed the part where Nintendo skipped a generation with the Wii.

Wii U is Nintendo's answer to the X360 and PS3 so they're all happily in the same gen now.


I remember seeing something on here about how basing generations on power was stupid. Let me see if I can find that.
#6Wiiplayer111Posted 1/13/2013 3:19:52 PM
silverbullt posted...
badmanneil posted...
Wii U is a next-gen console. Xbox and PS3 are in their last year. There isn't another next gen console to compare the Wii U to. I would rather wait and see what the other companies have before running my mouth about something that makes no logical sense.


You missed the part where Nintendo skipped a generation with the Wii.

Wii U is Nintendo's answer to the X360 and PS3 so they're all happily in the same gen now.


Generations are based off of time.
---
Look a you.... sticking to the plan.
didyouknowgaming.com
#7Not_King_BooPosted 1/13/2013 3:20:57 PM
Found it!

http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/631516-wii-u/64919648?page=3
Enigma149 posted...
I don't think they waited a particularly long time. Most companies launch with a handheld in this day-and-age, and then wait a year-or-so to release their next-generation console. Nintendo and Sony both did it during the 7th, so why shouldn't Nintendo do it in the 8th?

Oh - I get it. You're talking about power. Well, the Wii U is stronger than the Xbox 360 and PS3 - numerous developers have said as much, and most of the comments stating to the contrary have been disproven.

But perhaps it's not powerful enough? Maybe there's some barrier, and if a next-generation system isn't, say, 4x as powerful as a current-generation system, it doesn't count? What do you measure, anyway? Is it the number of FLOPS the GPU is capable of, as Mark Rein believes? Well, the Wii U passes that - the 360 is capable of 240, while the Wii U is capable of 960 (if the tech breakdown revealing it as an RV770-based GPU are correct). Maybe it's RAM? Well, 2 GiB is 4x 512 MiB, so the Wii U passes. Perhaps its CPU clock speed? Well, the Wii U certainty fails there - it's CPU is only 1.2 GHz, while the 360's CPU is 3.2 GHz. Then again, 4x 3.2 is 12.8 GHz, which seems pretty ridiculous for a CPU.

Perhaps you should stop clinging to this absurd notion that generations are based upon power and turn your attention to what I had to say on the subject in a previous topic:

I posted...
But back to the power-based generation system. Here's a question: where do you place the TurboGrafx-16? It's obviously inferior to the Genesis and other 4th Generation systems, so it goes in the 3rd Generation, right? Yet no 3rd Generation system comes close. Does that put it in a generation of its own? Do we have to bump everything else up one, so that we have 9 Generations instead of 8?

And let's not forget that the Dreamcast is arguably closer in power to the Nintendo 64 than to the Wii. Perhaps we should bump it down to the 5th Generation, then. Yet it is clearly closer to the Wii than to the PlayStation 1, and even closer to the Wii than other, lesser 5th Generation systems. Perhaps we ought to create a new generation with the Nintendo 64 and Dreamcast, and have 10 generations now. Yet what do we do with the PS2? It's closer to the Dreamcast than the GameCube, yet also closer to the Wii than the Nintendo 64. Maybe we should put the Nintendo 64 in its own generation, and have another generation for the Dreamcast and PS2, and yet another generation for the GameCube, Xbox, and Wii?

Oh, but I forgot handhelds. Let's see...well, the GameBoy is considerably inferior to the GameGear and Lynx. Heck, it can't even do color graphics! Let's put it into Generation 2. It is, after all, weaker than the NES. The GameBoy Color can do color graphics, but it's still weaker than the NES, so we'll also put that into Generation 2.

But wait! What about the GameBoy Advance? That system is theoretically more powerful than a SNES, though it's not capable of as high a resolution (naturally). But, being more powerful, it seems unfair to put it into Generation 4, so we have to put it into Generation 5. Oh, but silly me - it's considerably weaker than the Saturn and PS1! Well, I guess we'd better create a new generation. How many are we up to now? 12? The DS and PSP aren't really problems - just slide the DS into the Saturn/PS1 generation and the PSP into the Nintendo64 generation, or perhaps the bottom of the Dreamcast/PS2 generation, and we're good. I suppose we could put the 3DS in with the GameCube, Xbox, and Wii, and that only leaves...the Vita. Well, it's considerably weaker than the Xbox 360 and PS3, yet also stronger than the Wii. I guess it gets its own generation.

There - a 13 Generation model based on power...or, we could just use the actual, correct model, based on time. Whichever you prefer.
#8ReyMilansteryoPosted 1/13/2013 3:22:03 PM
SPDShadowRanger posted...
Popcorn...check
chair...check


Ok I'm ready to see a show!


i take care for the nacho's
---
PSN: DGray_Squally
Now playing: Dishonored (PC), MGS 3 HD, Mass Effect 3, AC 3, The Walking Dead the Game
#9Not_King_BooPosted 1/13/2013 3:22:24 PM
PS - For extra fun, read that in the voice of Vizzini from The Princess Bride.
#10silverbulltPosted 1/13/2013 3:23:42 PM
Wiiplayer111 posted...
silverbullt posted...
badmanneil posted...
Wii U is a next-gen console. Xbox and PS3 are in their last year. There isn't another next gen console to compare the Wii U to. I would rather wait and see what the other companies have before running my mouth about something that makes no logical sense.


You missed the part where Nintendo skipped a generation with the Wii.

Wii U is Nintendo's answer to the X360 and PS3 so they're all happily in the same gen now.


Generations are based off of time.


pfft, that's only a techinicality.
---
XBOX360 - It only does everything.
Nintendo FIX the Wii U FFS: http://youtu.be/gl5_qODv-gQ