Wii U base model 3GB usable and storage expansion discussion (*spawn*)

[Shifty Geezer]

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...ii-u-has-just-3gb-space-after-system-installs

Wii U 8GB model has only 3gb free space, so can't be used much for download content. You certainly can't store a library of games. Which leaves USB or HDD. Nintendo are saying USB isn't a good idea (though don't explain why) leaving HDD. And you need to use one with an external power supply. So that's a power cable for the Wii U, one for the tablet to charge, and one for the external HDD. Nintendo don't have an official HDD peripheral yet.

The more I learn, the more this thing sounds really poorly thought through, like a cheap Kickstarter project. It's unbelievable.

 

[Rangers]

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...ii-u-has-just-3gb-space-after-system-installs

Wii U 8GB model has only 3gb free space, so can't be used much for download content. You certainly can't store a library of games. Which leaves USB or HDD. Nintendo are saying USB isn't a good idea (though don't explain why) leaving HDD. And you need to use one with an external power supply. So that's a power cable for the Wii U, one for the tablet to charge, and one for the external HDD. Nintendo don't have an official HDD peripheral yet.

The more I learn, the more this thing sounds really poorly thought through, like a cheap Kickstarter project. It's unbelievable.

Hah, good to see another on the "Nintendo is crazy with Wii U" bandwagon

Funny, cause i was in Wal Mart and saw a big tub of 32 GB USB drives for $20. In the latest dash update you can now use up to 32GB USB sticks. So for $20, you can get a pretty decent amount of storage on 360.

Only caveat is I'm not sure you can always install to USB on 360 and the like, unclear on that but i thought there was an issue related to a Halo game on that.

 

[TheLump]

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...ii-u-has-just-3gb-space-after-system-installs

Wii U 8GB model has only 3gb free space, so can't be used much for download content. You certainly can't store a library of games. Which leaves USB or HDD. Nintendo are saying USB isn't a good idea (though don't explain why) leaving HDD. And you need to use one with an external power supply. So that's a power cable for the Wii U, one for the tablet to charge, and one for the external HDD. Nintendo don't have an official HDD peripheral yet.

The more I learn, the more this thing sounds really poorly thought through, like a cheap Kickstarter project. It's unbelievable.

Yeah my biggest worry was always storage space, but thats why its a "Basic" model, just llike PS3 slim 12GB. If you want D/L games then you'll need Premium and probably a hard drive/flash drive. Although the warning about HDD (all of which have to be connected by USB incidentally) needing a separate power supply seems to just be Nintendo being overly cautious /treating people like morons. You don't have to have one with a psu but anyone will tell you that a USB hard drive with its own power supplpy is the safer bet, technically. Although we all know that drives powered by USB are fine aslong as you don't skimp out and get a super-cheap one. Nintendo didnt need to mention that. It just makes people think they have to have one with a PSU now. You don't, Nintnedo are just covering their asses.

They've said from the start that USB flash drives, USB connected hard drives will work fine, and they will. Their latest ND has just confused people more. As always, the biggest problem with nintnedo product launches is their desire to treat people like idiots and explain everything r-e-a-l-l-y s-l-o-w-l-y.

Bottom line for me is I'm still much happier having the choice to upgrade my HDD rather than paying for it to be built in. The 25GB available in the premium is more than enough for me to get a couple of DL only games at launch, after that I'll buy a 128GB SSD as and when I need it.

And yet a big reason people got excited for Halo 4 was it's intra-gen graphical excellence and improvements.

So yeah, I'm pretty sure we have proof an actual generational jump will be a pretty big deal, because lowly intra-gen jumps are.

Hmmm, still not buying it. My point still stands if, like me, you dont think 1313 demo is that much of a leap over the best of this gen (Halo 4).

My view of it is (although we've seen nothing comparable to Halo 4 on it) WiiU's starting point is the end of this gen. There's room for improvement based on what we know about the GPU/RAM so we'll likely see games which surpass what we have now, especially from first/second party studios. They might hold up ok against PS4/720 launch titles (barring the odd first party extravaganza), but mid to late gen PS4/720 titles will show an obvious improvement and wont be possible on WiiU. Hopefully they'll be scalable though.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Funny, cause i was in Wal Mart and saw a big tub of 32 GB USB drives for $20. In the latest dash update you can now use up to 32GB USB sticks. So for $20, you can get a pretty decent amount of storage on 360.

Which would be fine (for storing download titles or DLC) if Nintendo were saying, "go use dirt cheap USB memory." I'd have no complaint. But they're saying, "you can use USB flash, but we don't recommend it as it can affect gameplay. Get yourself an HDD. With an external PSU, because our USB ports can't provide enough juice to run them despite the fact we designed our console around the idea of using external HDDs."

Checking the Kotaku source, they say you can use a Y-cable, but Nintendo designed their console with the expectation an HDD will be used, and they decided to have that HDD external to the case. Instead of a single PSU to the console and a docking bay inside (with fast SATA connection), they prefer you to position a 2.5" caddy somewhere near your console with a cable sticking out the box and maybe another PSU. If the HDD was standard, games could rely on it for streaming. As it is, everyone will have an HDD attached to their Wii over a slow USB connection and devs will have to do everything from optical.

It's just mind-boggling engineering decisions. Like the plan was to make the console as small and cheap as possible regardless of everything else. Why didn't they take out the optical drive as well and ask users to provide their own external BRD drive?! I just don't get Nintendo. Which explains why I've never owned a Ninty console and likely never will.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Bottom line for me is I'm still much happier having the choice to upgrade my HDD rather than paying for it to be built in.

Add a docking bay in the Wii U and sell an empty console.

The 25GB available in the premium is more than enough for me to get a couple of DL only games at launch, after that I'll buy a 128GB SSD as and when I need it.

Which presumably won't improve things like iD Tech 5 megatexture streaming because it can't be used as a working store. Or developers will have to design that themselves, maybe.

 

[TheLump]

Add a docking bay in the Wii U and sell an empty console.

Not really in their ethos of making it as small as possible. Edit: And as economical as possible: Including the option to upgrade the HDD would mean the Power supply to the console would have to be sufficient to cope with a wide range of drives. Eco-friendliness seems to have been a major deciding factor in much of the console design (for better or worse )

The storage situation is pretty simple: stick a USB stick in the back or connect a USB HDD/SSD and you're away. It will work. It will read/write as fast as the optical drive (I thought we already established that a while ago in the spec thread??)The warnings are to cover their asses for when someone inevitably has a problem. They think they have to cover every angle, when you just can't. All it does is confuse people. You'll find the same warnings in the small print on other devices and thats where they should say. Hoenstly, their like those commercials for medicines, where they list every thing that can possibly go wrong. Except no ones telling Nintnedo to do it, they just feel they have to protect the lowliest consumer who might possibly one day have a problem and complain becuase "no one told me that HDDs can break!"

Which presumably won't improve things like iD Tech 5 megatexture streaming because it can't be used as a working store. Or developers will have to design that themselves, maybe.

Not too sure about this. But as far as I was aware, USB connected HDDs will be able read/write as fast as the Optical drive. It also has 8Gb flash memory doesn't it? Doesn't this and the eDRAM come into play here? Not my strong suit, but either way I dont see how reccomending HDDs with their own PSU (although not at any point saying others won't work) is related to this.

I just don't get Nintendo. Which explains why I've never owned a Ninty console and likely never will.

Fair enough, but its not like thats endemic of their hardware is it? Ok the Wii lacked HD output, that was the one thing Nintendo left out imo. And maybe 3DS could have had two analog sticks/pads (althought thats a matter of opinion; the hand cramp I get playing Vita has convinced me otherwise ) I can't think of any other incidents where thier hardware was missing something crucial that should have been there. Prior to the Iwata era (Wii, DS/3DS and now WiiU) their hardware has never given me the impression they cut corners: from N64's console and controller mounted expansions, 4 contoller ports, 480i resolution (which was never used I believe), to GC's miriad expansion ports, apparant 3D support (unused) and Xbox rivalling guts. They used to include too much if you ask me. So much went unused, it was like they were trying to cover every possible use down the line.

Even since, when they've stopped adding things they never use,I dont think the things they left out were down to bad design. The Wii wasn't considered "badly designed" at the time it just turned out not to be quite as future proof as Nintendo had hoped. In fact the 1st time I've ever considered them to be cutting corners was with 3DS. It just looked plain ugly; the sytlus was in a dumb place & the 3D slider is tacky. To me the XL is how it should have looked from the start.

Time will tell whether they've cut corners with WiiU. To me at them moment it seems a lot of fuss over very little in the way of problems.

 

[Arwin]

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...ii-u-has-just-3gb-space-after-system-installs

Wii U 8GB model has only 3gb free space, so can't be used much for download content. You certainly can't store a library of games. Which leaves USB or HDD. Nintendo are saying USB isn't a good idea (though don't explain why) leaving HDD. And you need to use one with an external power supply. So that's a power cable for the Wii U, one for the tablet to charge, and one for the external HDD. Nintendo don't have an official HDD peripheral yet.

The more I learn, the more this thing sounds really poorly thought through, like a cheap Kickstarter project. It's unbelievable.

Just ask yourself, if the Wii U is a) targetted at the same audience as the Xbox 360 Arcade model and b) whether it is very similar to the Playstation 3 model that has 16GB built in. Sure, 8 is not much, but the Wii U should basically run whatever.

Do we know what the speed of the Wii U's optical drive is by the way? It could be quite a lot faster than the PS3 / 360 drives.

EDIT: yes it is: 22MB/s

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Not really in their ethos of making it as small as possible.

That's a silly ethos though. It's larger overall, and far messier, having an external HDD + Wii U than having a Wii U with a drive bay. How is Nintendo's choice really the best, or even a credible, engineering option?

Its pretty simple stick a USB stick in the back or connect a USB HDD/SSD and you're away.

Sure. I'm not complaining about complexity.

Not too sure about this. But as far as I was aware, USB connected HDDs will be able read/write as fast as the Optical drive.

But the attached storage may be flash, or not even present. You can't rely on it when developing. You can't design your engine around 20 MB/s from optical and 30 MB/s USB transfer, or whatever standard seek rate which is probably more important. The HDD has been reduced to a fraction of its potential.

It also has 8Gb flash memory doesn't it?

3 GBs available. Maybe some of that is cache which Nintendo haven't declared? That'd make some sense.

Doesn't this and the eDRAM come into play here?

eDRAM's working space. It's no substitute for persistent storage.

Fair enough, but its not like thats endemic of their hardware is it?

No, but certainly their philosophy. Wii was way, way underspec'd to what it could have been. DS friend codes?! I love Nintendo's original thinking at times, like Wiimotes as an idea for non-gamers to get involved, but they always couple it with odd other choices that make their hardware an awkward compromise IMO. It's like a pick-and-mix with a mix of all the worst and best sweets!

Time will tell whether they've cut corners with WiiU. To me at them moment it seems a lot of fuss over very little in the way of problems.

I don't think we need time to tell us. They've cut corners with Wii U, like they did Wii, compromising the end user experience (poor battery life in Wuublet, ugly external storage, lack of conviction in the HW). It may be good for Nintendo, like their corner cutting on Wii was so very good for their bank balance, but I can't see any argument that says Wii U is a carefully engineered product in the same way say that the PS3 was a beautifully expensive, lossy piece of engineering where more corners were added than necessary.

Just ask yourself, if the Wii U is a) targetted at the same audience as the Xbox 360 Arcade model and b) whether it is very similar to the Playstation 3 model that has 16GB built in. Sure, 8 is not much, but the Wii U should basically run whatever.

It has 3 GBs available. How much DLC and download titles is that going to fit? As per the EG article, you won't even be able to download Nintendo Land. Nintendo have made a game that many buyers of their new console won't be able to play without finding an external storage solution. It's just bizarre. Would 16 GBs really have broken the bank?

 

[TheLump]

That's a silly ethos though. It's larger overall, and far messier, having an external HDD + Wii U than having a Wii U with a drive bay. How is Nintendo's choice really the best, or even a credible, engineering option?

Sure. I'm not complaining about complexity.

Sorry, I added a bit in about eco friendliness. I suspect Iwata was concerned about keeping the power draw of their console low, so he could brag about its green credentials. Of course its messier, but its giving people the freedom to buy a drive themseleves, which is cheaper and more flexible than building it into the price. To a lot of prospective WiiU owners I know, this is actually a great selling point. Of course, its maybe at the cost of a neat living room set up, which wont be to everyones taste but you can hardly call it bad design. It was intentional to keep cost, size, heat and overall power draw down, while giving consumers the impression of freedom to choose what size suits them.

But the attached storage may be flash, or not even present. You can't rely on it when developing. You can't design your engine around 20 MB/s from optical and 30 MB/s USB transfer, or whatever standard seek rate which is probably more important. The HDD has been reduced to a fraction of its potential.

They'll use the lowest common denominator (likely HDD read/write speed). Won't it just be like running a PC game off an external hard drive? Untill someone tests it we dont know. But I'm not going to assume Nintendo just overlooked whether external storage would be fast enough, seeing as that's what they're reccomending you store D/L games on....

eDRAM's working space. It's no substitute for persistent storage.

I was referring to you comment on id tech 5 texture streaming rather than storage. I thought the eDRAM could be used like a scratch pad?

No, but certainly their philosophy. Wii was way, way underspec'd to what it could have been. DS friend codes?! I love Nintendo's original thinking at times, like Wiimotes as an idea for non-gamers to get involved, but they always couple it with odd other choices that make their hardware an awkward compromise IMO. It's like a pick-and-mix with a mix of all the worst and best sweets!

Yes but it was intentionally 'underspecced' because high spec/price wasn't their goal. You can hardly call something poorly designed just for not being cutting edge tech wise? Thats like saying an iPad mini is poorly deisnged becuase it has lower specs than its market rivals In fact Wii was pretty much perfectly designed for what it was meant to acheive....and thats why it achieved it! And friend codes weren't "cutting corners" (which is what I thought we were discussing) they were just a dumbass idea

I don't think we need time to tell us. They've cut corners with Wii U, like they did Wii, compromising the end user experience (poor battery life in Wuublet, ugly external storage, lack of conviction in the HW). It may be good for Nintendo, like their corner cutting on Wii was so very good for their bank balance, but I can't see any argument that says Wii U is a carefully engineered product in the same way say that the PS3 was a beautifully expensive, lossy piece of engineering where more corners were added than necessary. !

Ok I see your point. Maybe corner cutting isnt the right term though. That implies trying to rip people off. I think they've kept the battery life at a reasonable limit (5 hrs quoted, likely more considering how they underquoted the 3DS) whilst not make it so much that they had the make you pay more for it. The external storage I agree though might be unsightly for some - I personally wish they would just let you use SD cards to expand the storage - maybe someone will find a way .

Not sure I agree with the 'lack of conviction' on HW though. I think they are full of conviction as they are putting balls on the line & trying somthing different which has polarised the masses. Thats conviction right there...

It has 3 GBs available. How much DLC and download titles is that going to fit? As per the EG article, you won't even be able to download Nintendo Land. Nintendo have made a game that many buyers of their new console won't be able to play without finding an external storage solution. It's just bizarre. Would 16 GBs really have broken the bank?

...or they'll just have to buy the retail discs. The Basic pack is, for all intents and purposes, the casual pack. It's not for people who want to download games. But if you buy one and you do want to download games, you have the option of adding a USB flash drive/HDD later. It should have been called "WiiU Lite" imo as its a barebones system just like the new PS3 slim 12GB. Premium/Deluxe is for your average gamers who might try D/L software & they can also expand easily. I suspect there'll be an "Elite" style box in the next year or so which has an 64/80GB internal storage and/or they'll release propritary HDDs which aesthetically match the console.


Apologies for the massive post. Its a nice discussion and I didnt want to ignore anything you'd said!

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Sorry, I added a bit in about eco friendliness. I suspect Iwata was concerned about keeping the power draw of their console low, so he could brag about its green credentials.

The power draw of Wii U + external drive is no lower than Wii U and internal.

Of course its messier, but its giving people the freedom to buy a drive themseleves, which is cheaper and more flexible than building it into the price.

Adding a drive bay with a no HDD SKU gives exactly the same choice.

To a lot of prospective WiiU owners I know, this is actually a great selling point. Of course, its maybe at the cost of a neat living room set up, which wont be to everyones taste but you can hardly call it bad design. It was intentional to keep cost, size, heat and overall power draw down, while giving consumers the impression of freedom to choose what size suits them.

Again, a drive bay solves all those issues, in a smaller, smarter overall package, with a better performance from the HDD you do use. The HDD doesn't have to be compulsory, but as Nintendo are effectively saying, "you should get yourself an externally HDD to use with Wii U" if you want to use download conteont, it basically is. At which point why not just make it compulsory (adding $20 or so) and get behind the idea completely? For the cheap SKU, use the 32 GB flash model.

 

[TheLump]

I just wanted to point out that STAR WARS 1313 lists and indicates itself as a current gen game.
It even lists as being developed for XBOX 360 and PS3, akin to WATCH DOGS.

Just sayin.

Right you are. In that case I have no basis for comparison/speculation! Do we have any examples of true "next gen" titles yet?

If 1313 is genuinely running on a 360, then although I dont think its a huge deal prettier than, say, Halo 4 visually - I'm impressed. As there are a lot of subtle details which when seen in motion make it look very nice indeed. I had assumed that was to be what the "AAA" early/launch games for 720 would look like....

The power draw of Wii U + external drive is no lower than Wii U and internal.

Adding a drive bay with a no HDD SKU gives exactly the same choice.

Again, a drive bay solves all those issues, in a smaller, smarter overall package, with a better performance from the HDD you do use. The HDD doesn't have to be compulsory, but as Nintendo are effectively saying, "you should get yourself an externally HDD to use with Wii U" if you want to use download conteont, it basically is. At which point why not just make it compulsory (adding $20 or so) and get behind the idea completely? For the cheap SKU, use the 32 GB flash model.

Not sure if it does. Internal HDD uses WiiU power, external one only uses WiiU power if its power is supplied by the USB port (which has a limit). That USB port is being supplied with power either way isnt it? I suppose its a negligable difference anyway, I was just trying to think of their reasoning.

I'll stick with the size/heat/power argument for the reason for no drive bay. Makes their console look neater and smaller (enabling them to show that off).

I fully agree that the 'basic' sku should have been 32GB. I expect, in time, that will become the case, just like when PS3 40GBs became obviously too small and Sony phased them out. I suspect the 8GB wiiU will be phased out fairly quickly. It will have fulfilled its purpose though, as a first rung on the ladder to WiiU usership

 

[Blazkowicz]

Doesn't Wii U have a SD port? just plug a small card in, done deal, no USB dongle hanging or something.
Eventually there will be a USB case matching the design of the Wii to put a hard drive in. Else, little stupid idea, allow me iSCSI over gigabit ethernet I guess it's no worse than dreadful USB 2.0 ..
BTW USB 2.0 really is terrible, but maybe the CPU overhead is handled by the ARM CPU.

 

[TheLump]

Doesn't Wii U have a SD port? just plug a small card in, done deal, no USB dongle hanging or something.
Eventually there will be a USB case matching the design of the Wii to put a hard drive in. Else, little stupid idea, allow me iSCSI over gigabit ethernet I guess it's no worse than dreadful USB 2.0 ..
BTW USB 2.0 really is terrible, but maybe the CPU overhead is handled by the ARM CPU.

Unfotunately it seems that right now the SD card slot is just for back compatiability with Wii (and for storing photos and the like) You can't put WiiU save data on there. Annoying as I was going to buy a 128GB SDXC card instead of an SSD

Lets hope they update that or someone finds a way through...

 

[Squilliam]

If they were going to design around external HDD's then why does the Wii U not have USB 3.0? The HDD performance cannot even be as good as the internal optical drive (though it'd be a shame if they stuck that on internal USB 2.0) because in real world I maxed out my USB 2.0 at around 18MB/S compared to over 100MB/S on USB 3.0.

 

[Blazkowicz]

If they were going to design around external HDD's then why does the Wii U not have USB 3.0? The HDD performance cannot even be as good as the internal optical drive (though it'd be a shame if they stuck that on internal USB 2.0) because in real world I maxed out my USB 2.0 at around 18MB/S compared to over 100MB/S on USB 3.0.

They would either have had to have USB 3.0 integrated, which is not that common yet, or have a singe PCIe lane and an ex ternal controller. They were too cheap for that.
an e-SATA port would make sense too.

USB 2 can max out at about 30MB/s though (on the side of 29 MB/s). Lower could mean a bad IDE or SATA to USB controller, or a bad USB host, or not pleasing one of the USB deities (they are called OHCI, EHCI and AHCI I believe)

 

[Shifty Geezer]

USB 2 can max out at about 30MB/s though (on the side of 29 MB/s). Lower could mean a bad IDE or SATA to USB controller, or a bad USB host, or not pleasing one of the USB deities (they are called OHCI, EHCI and AHCI I believe)

This is a concern for device performance. Clearly the HDD or flash is there to load a game, into RAM, to run from there. Devs have no way of knowing what the performance of the storage medium running their game will be.

I can only hope that reserved flash includes IO cache. That'd explain some of the design choices at least mitigating some of the IO variance that games could be exposed to. Otherwise I can only conclude that Nintendo decided in the last minute to want an HDD, after designs were finalised and the machines were being made, and now they are having to inform users that they want to get themselves an external HDD with PSU or Y-cable. Is that going to be documented in Nintendo's manual? "For additional storage, buy an external drive. If it comes with its own USB power cable and doesn't work with Wii U, buy a USB y-cable and use that in two USB ports on your console. We recommend placing the HDD on top of your Wii U to reduce space and clutter in your entertainment cabinet. If there aren't enough plugs available to attach your Wii U, Wii U Tablet charger, and HDD power supply, buy an adaptor, but do not attach multiple adaptors together. If you haven't enough room in your existing adaptor (eg. a four way adaptor connecting your old Wii console, your TV, your digital box and your amplifier) then you should replace it with a larger adaptor."

 

[TheLump]

This is a concern for device performance. Clearly the HDD or flash is there to load a game, into RAM, to run from there. Devs have no way of knowing what the performance of the storage medium running their game will be.

I can only hope that reserved flash includes IO cache. That'd explain some of the design choices at least mitigating some of the IO variance that games could be exposed to. Otherwise I can only conclude that Nintendo decided in the last minute to want an HDD, after designs were finalised and the machines were being made, and now they are having to inform users that they want to get themselves an external HDD with PSU or Y-cable. Is that going to be documented in Nintendo's manual? "For additional storage, buy an external drive. If it comes with its own USB power cable and doesn't work with Wii U, buy a USB y-cable and use that in two USB ports on your console. We recommend placing the HDD on top of your Wii U to reduce space and clutter in your entertainment cabinet. If there aren't enough plugs available to attach your Wii U, Wii U Tablet charger, and HDD power supply, buy an adaptor, but do not attach multiple adaptors together. If you haven't enough room in your existing adaptor (eg. a four way adaptor connecting your old Wii console, your TV, your digital box and your amplifier) then you should replace it with a larger adaptor."

HDD/external memory was mentioned in their first announcement about ther console - which is why I'm confident they havn't overlooked this. From what we've heard they had a lot of input from Devs, and listened. If something as simple as storage was an issue a dev would have piped up about it by now. As I said before - this talk of "powered HDDs and Y-cables" is Nintendo covering their asses. Nothing more. They haven't said "you have to have a HDD with a PSU or a Y-cable" they just said that's safer for reliability issues. Just like they gave people stupid lectures on how not to swing a wiimote at your TV in case you didn't know that force =mass x acceleration. They're pandering to fools. Ignore it.

USB 3.0 wouldn't have helped as devs would still have to allow for the lowest denominator (USB 2.0) as thats what most people will use and USB 3.0 is back compatible. Wouldn't have made a difference. Nintendo's reasoning is that "everyone has a USB thumb stick/external HDD, ergo everyone can upgrade their storage". Wasn't a problem when they announced it 18 months ago, isn't a problem now.

I think you're making this out to be more of an issue than it is. The console is tiny, external HDDs are tiny and USB sticks are tinier still. My WiiU will have 1 extra wire at most (depending on whether I get a USB stick or a small SSD/HDD via USB) and I will eat my Gamepad if I have any issues with my external storage as I never have up to now.

Yes, this was interesting to me as well. Why was 1313 being held up as the end all be all of Next Generation capability and why was Halo being compared to it as a beacon of what this current hardware is capable of?

If you read the Halo 4 thread in the games forum, you'll see quite a lengthy discussion on the decisions that 343 made in terms of visuals over gameplay (disappearing weapons and vehicles, invisible walls, etc) you'll see that while the game does look great, a number of sacrifices were made to get it there.

So I think the entire argument is flawed on both fronts. 1313 isn't representative of next gen maximum capability and Halo 4, while visually impressive, actually shows the limitations of the current hardware. Comparing those two games doesn't show a small gap in what should be expected, it either shows quite a large gap or offers no useful information at all. (I'm of the mind that it's the later.)

Halo 4 was brought up initially as I was comparing Halo 2 > Halo 4 (last to current gen) and Halo 4 > 1313 (current to next - although I now know 1313 is apparently coming out on current gen...) to try and quantify the 'leap' from current to next generation visuals.

The fact that 1313 is current gen only highlights my point further: If that's possible on what we have now, then next gen stuff really isn't going to impress in the same way this gen did over the last. It'll be noticable, but the wow factor will not be there. Think of the UE4 demo: who actually sat with their jaw dropped watching that? Sure its was pretty and you could see which effects were new/cutting edge. But the overall impression didn't exactly make me shit the bed. And that was running on unobtanium.

 

[Brad Grenz]

Did they? You got a link cos I'm pretty sure it was a translation error (NOM came put and said it was a mistranslation didn't they?)


Oh I only want SSD cos it's silent

Did they? I must have missed the correct. Looking back at the thread on GAF it looks like Nintendo just doesn't recommend USB flash based storage.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

They haven't said "you have to have a HDD with a PSU or a Y-cable" they just said that's safer for reliability issues.

I'll drop this after this post, but I want to be clear about this point that Nintendo's position was unclear right until a few days before the console releases. You will be able to pop to town, buy an 8GB Wii U (maybe only if you preordered one), get home, see Nintendo Land for sale on their store as 3.2 GBs, and be unable to use it. No-one was expecting that. You will then need to get external storage, and Nintendo have just said that you shouldn't use USB memory and should get a USB HDD. That's Nintendo's advice. And they don't provide their own official HDD solution for Joe Consumer to feel safe about using. Is that really demonstrating intelligent planning?

If they added more flash (16GB minimum), which is very cheap and will get cheaper and cheaper, this wouldn't be an issue. Everyone buying a Wii U will be able to use it as the want the moment they get home, with the option to expand when they want later. If they let you use SD cards as everyone expected, it'd be a non-issue. If they added an internal HDD bay, they could sell HDD- and no HDD- SKUs and Joe Consumer could just plug an HDD in. Nintendo's choice is workable, but not the ideal and without merit to it. The only benefits their choices have made is to save them a few dollars per SKU. No? It's an annoying choice like Sony's to use a new memcard in Vita instead of al the SD cards we already have, except worse because at least Sony's choice had some dubious technical merits.

 

[TheLump]

I'll drop this after this post, but I want to be clear about this point that Nintendo's position was unclear right until a few days before the console releases. You will be able to pop to town, buy an 8GB Wii U (maybe only if you preordered one), get home, see Nintendo Land for sale on their store as 3.2 GBs, and be unable to use it. No-one was expecting that. You will then need to get external storage, and Nintendo have just said that you shouldn't use USB memory and should get a USB HDD. That's Nintendo's advice. And they don't provide their own official HDD solution for Joe Consumer to feel safe about using. Is that really demonstrating intelligent planning?

If they added more flash (16GB minimum), which is very cheap and will get cheaper and cheaper, this wouldn't be an issue. Everyone buying a Wii U will be able to use it as the want the moment they get home, with the option to expand when they want later. If they let you use SD cards as everyone expected, it'd be a non-issue. If they added an internal HDD bay, they could sell HDD- and no HDD- SKUs and Joe Consumer could just plug an HDD in. Nintendo's choice is workable, but not the ideal and without merit to it. The only benefits their choices have made is to save them a few dollars per SKU. No? It's an annoying choice like Sony's to use a new memcard in Vita instead of al the SD cards we already have, except worse because at least Sony's choice had some dubious technical merits.

I see your point. I thought you were saying that they only just annouced you'd be able to used USB drives. I also wasn't aware that they said you "shouldn't use USB memory", I thought they only said "HDDs with psus are ideal and safer than those without". I could be wrong, but thats what I thought they had said hence my posts. And for what its worth, every decision in every peice of hardware is "to save a few dollars" (or make a few) but i get your point. It seems a bit cheap. But then the SKU is cheap to buy so thats the pay off I guess.

Still, I fully agree the base SKU is evidently too small. To have only 3GB usable when you're advertised 8GB is plain wrong. I'm annoyed enough when I lose 10% of my drive space to pre-installed software/system cr*p and the like but to loose 5GB out of 8GB seems silly. Its akin to Microsoft Surface tablet (paying for 16GB, getting 8GB) but even worse, really.