Vigilant Walrus
Member
Seeing the e3 trailer it's obvious to me that games scope exceeded what those consoles were capable off.
How big is the power gap between Wii U and PS3/360?
- Thread starter Zee-Row
- Start date
Seeing the e3 trailer it's obvious to me that games scope exceeded what those consoles were capable off.
No game of ps3 or xbox 360 came close to :
I guess you never played Blue Dragon (2006!).
Or Ni no Kuni (PS3)
I guess you never played Blue Dragon (2006!).
Or Ni no Kuni (PS3)
Ni no Kuni I'll give you, because that has amazing graphics, but Blue Dragon...are you serious???
BeforeU
Oft hope is born when all is forlorn.
This.
People might say TLOU and Halo 4 are one of the best looking games on 360/PS3 but GTA 5 is for me. Truly a masterpiece. And Zelda doesnt look that great. Colors are vibrant but I dont think it will run any higher than sub HD resolution.
Markitron
Is currently staging a hunger strike outside Gearbox HQ while trying to hate them to death
I don't think you should draw any conclusions from a minute of non-gameplay footage, even if it is being generated in real time. Actually has that been confirmed?
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
The whole thing was in game
Blue Dragon doesn't quite do it for me, maybe there are better screenshots out there.
And how exactly such a comparison would work since we don't have a game on the Wii U with a similar art style?
Also lol at you focusing on Xeno's character faces only...why didn't you include some of the environments of Xeno and compare it to Star Ocean on PS3?
GhostTrick
Banned
My answer would be: is there even a gap ? Some aspects are better (newer/better gpu, more ram) while some are worse (CPU mainly) and others are equal (gpu horsepower ?)
Basically, Wii U is taking PS360 horsepower and put it inside a 32 watts small console. More ram and newer GPU allows for fancier effects and better textures. Also, best looking games are mainly relying on artstyle.
Basically, Wii U is taking PS360 horsepower and put it inside a 32 watts small console. More ram and newer GPU allows for fancier effects and better textures. Also, best looking games are mainly relying on artstyle.
No game of ps3 or xbox 360 came close to :
or
or
or
mario kart 8
And so on...
The gap is bigger then expected.
However if we looking it at a global scale, both 3 next gen consoles did not blow me away with next gen gfx. The gap between the wii and wii u is large. but the gap between xbox 360 and ps3 to xbox one and ps4 is verry small.
I have to completely agree. And I've played a ton on both 360, PS3, Wii U and PS4.
Wii U looks like a significant step up from PS3/360 based on the best software. You can show shots of Pikmin 3 as well that are extremely impressive.
Whatever the reason, Nintendo definitely knows exactly how to use their hardware.
Markitron
Is currently staging a hunger strike outside Gearbox HQ while trying to hate them to death
Nice, I hope the actual game looks like that. Personally I don't like it when people refer to these types of trailers as 'in-game' or 'gameplay'. We can only really see what a game really looks like when there's someone actually playing it. It's the same situation as the Uncharted 4 trailer, it's very pretty but it is not in-game
Chû Totoro
Member
I don't think that this is possible to have a consensus around these type of topics while we all are trying to argue with games examples.
I think that all these "graphics / power" threads are useless in NeoGAF so OP is clearly misleading himself if he hopes to have a solid well written and constructive post about this.
And I'm not even sure 1% of GAF posters could understand this detailed post even if we had the chance to have a post from an hardware specialist. So why asking this here? You should ask this question in a Hardware / Graphics forum.
I, for example, would never ask for the better TV choice in a TV shows or Movie forum (not even here on GAF, sorry).
Now discussion is always welcome so having other people advice is still good. Just don't take the posts too seriously.
I think that all these "graphics / power" threads are useless in NeoGAF so OP is clearly misleading himself if he hopes to have a solid well written and constructive post about this.
And I'm not even sure 1% of GAF posters could understand this detailed post even if we had the chance to have a post from an hardware specialist. So why asking this here? You should ask this question in a Hardware / Graphics forum.
I, for example, would never ask for the better TV choice in a TV shows or Movie forum (not even here on GAF, sorry).
Now discussion is always welcome so having other people advice is still good. Just don't take the posts too seriously.
umm
I have Puppeteer. It was not as impressive as many of the Wii U games I've seen.
WWHD blows away Ni No Kuni. I actually played them back to back to compare them.
frankie_baby
Member
For all the talk of the Wii CPU being less powerful its also important to note that the Wii u has dedicated audio hardware where as the ps360 have to use a proportion of their CPU (and in some cases a significant proportion) just for sound
Man... even Xenosaga's models looked much better than the ones in X.
The Wii U clearly is more powerful than the PS360, but not by that much from what I've seen.
InFamousRaiden
Banned
Would you elaborate on these Wii U games Iwata and Miyamoto are exclusively showing you ?
I don't understand all these numbers, someone post DBZ power levels if DBZ characters were all made of duct taped Gamecubes.
There doesn't seem to be that huge a difference between the best looking PS3 titles and the best looking WiiU titles, but Nintendo have a certain polish and flair to their games in presentation as well as art direction/visual fidelity. Going from 420 to 720/1080 Nintendo really hit the ground running, as you'd expect from a company quite late to the party.
WiiU still consumes far less wattage than PS3 or 360 right? Nintendo's tech is difficult to compare, it's really built for specific purposes and even more so now with the video streaming to the gamepad all the time.
There doesn't seem to be that huge a difference between the best looking PS3 titles and the best looking WiiU titles, but Nintendo have a certain polish and flair to their games in presentation as well as art direction/visual fidelity. Going from 420 to 720/1080 Nintendo really hit the ground running, as you'd expect from a company quite late to the party.
WiiU still consumes far less wattage than PS3 or 360 right? Nintendo's tech is difficult to compare, it's really built for specific purposes and even more so now with the video streaming to the gamepad all the time.
Captain Europe
Member
I guess you never played Blue Dragon (2006!).
I did, loved the game even though it was 15fps.
Actually GAFers had a good discussion about it: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=513471Chû Totoro;116784704 said:
Eventually though even Beyond3D guys can't get a decent ballpark on the Expresso and Latte performance budget after die photo and hacker analysis. A developer testimony on Reddit also doesn't reveal anything other than their early devtools were poor.
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
Well it was in game only a trailer till the cutscene. It was like in "idle" mode.
a lot of the visual appealability of Wii-U games comes from the art style imo. but technically they're no better then PS3/360. i'm yet to see a game on Wii you that matches or exceeds uncharted 3 for instance, not technically at least. and the fact the Wii-U version of the few multiplat titles end up looking or running worse says to me, in like for like situations, the console simply can't keep up. but then when has nintendo been about raw technical horsepower? it's always a case of style over tech.
OminoMichelin
Member
The biggest difference I see between old gen consoles and wii U is the quality of lighting and the absence of tearing in most games. Compared to blue dragon and ni no kuni, TTT's (toad treasure tracker, in case it wasn't clear) lighting is on a whole different league, and it runs a 60 fps, which neither BD or NNK do, as far as I know.
Later ps360 games attained a respectable texture resolution by streaming resources from the HDDs pretty much constantly. The wii U can attain the same quality without needing to do that just because it has more RAM.
The grass in zelda U is really something else, though.
Later ps360 games attained a respectable texture resolution by streaming resources from the HDDs pretty much constantly. The wii U can attain the same quality without needing to do that just because it has more RAM.
The grass in zelda U is really something else, though.
Markitron
Is currently staging a hunger strike outside Gearbox HQ while trying to hate them to death
The SNES, N64 and Gamecube were all very powerful machines for their time. Graphically speaking, Mario was the biggest generational leap I have ever seen.
zackmorris
Member
I don't think the power difference is that big. I don't think there is a game on the Wii U that flat out would not be able to run on a PS3 or X360. I also don't think we've YET to see a game that would look worse or run poorly on a PS3/X360 compared to how it would run on a Wii U. But the Wii U is what six years newer? So we still have plenty of time to see what it is capable of. But considering the Wii U is in the next generation of consoles than the x360 and PS3, I would hope it would be able to pull away in the graphics department.
Canis lupus
Member
Not much, though some Wii U games seem to have better details that likely is due to having 512MB more ram available to games. Multiplatform games often have the same graphical fidelity. Nintendo does have the artistic edge, but then again, there are also games with colorful art styles on those consoles as well like Ninokuni and Puppeteer, nothing that truly stands out as being impossible on PS360.
I'd say the overall difference is 10-20 percent or so, negligible.
I'd say the overall difference is 10-20 percent or so, negligible.
Captain Europe
Member
I strongly disagree, Puppeteer is also 30fps, while Nintendo games on the Wii U have been consistently 60fps. That is a gigantic difference.
Canis lupus
Member
youre joking with the inclusion of Xenoblade Chronicles X right? You really dont believe that there are no games on PS3 or 360 that come close to that... ?
Here lets play a game! its called Xenoblade Chronicles X or PS2 game! ready?!
I even leveled the playing field by using a game made by the same developer!
Heres a comparison (ill even use a TERRIBLE PS3 game) of character models from PS3 version of Star Ocean
and heres Xenoblade Chronicles X
Id say the GAP between the PS3 and Wii U isnt as big as you make it out to be...
Thats not to say that XCX wont be an awesome game (its one of the Wii U games that im waiting to buy a Wii U for...) but the difference in PS3, 360 and Wii U isnt a very big one.
fixed the last pic
Truly lol at those X character models.
Chû Totoro
Member
Ah yeas I forgot about this thread... very interesting reading but I can't understand a lot of things. And I don't want to sound condescending but I'm not sure the majority of gaffers do. That's why I think that it's going to be difficult to have something interesting coming out of these types of threads.
Going back to Wii U CPU thread so I can learn things
Puppeter was 30FPS, Toad is 60fps.umm
Disagree. Compared to captain toad, this is clearly one generation behind.
I'm talking about the lightning effects and etc...
Also yoshi looks much better than that 2d gameplay gif.
Just quoting myself.
Besides tools and documentation was horrible when those first games came out. The launch crossgen games of xbox one and ps4 are also nowhere near displaying what those consoles are capable of.
Nicktendo86
Member
Lol I never even knew Wii U used bluray till this post!
Learn something new everyday
Yep, a proprietary form of blu-ray like the Wii used a propriety form of DVD.
One odd thing is the disks are rounded on the edges which feels really nice on fingers. Not sure what the point of it is but lovely attention to detail.
fixed the last pic
Truly lol at those X character models.
The XCX character models suck, but it's also create a character, unlike both the other games shown.
The impressive parts of XCX are definitely in the environment design mostly. It's a pretty gorgeous, and expansive world. And with those vehicles, you seem like you can travel through quite a lot of it at a decent speed without any loading.
Yoshi is also 60fps too, so most videos and gifs can't even show that to people unless the player supports it.
thewhitehawk
Member
I think the Wii U hardware is more than capable for most software produced for it. Sure, I'd prefer if more games were 1080p, but I wouldn't exchange the visual quality or smooth gameplay for it.
I think artistic vision trumps technical performance and Nintendo's games have, at least that, in spades.
I think artistic vision trumps technical performance and Nintendo's games have, at least that, in spades.
Neff
Member
I see it as a Gamecube to PS2 comparison, if PS3 was a PS2, and 360 was a slightly more powerful PS2.
What's more, Wii U is able to throw out superior bloom, DOF and radiosity with seemingly little effort, which leads me to believe it has a much better equipped GPU.
Not a huge difference, but definitely noticeable.
What's more, Wii U is able to throw out superior bloom, DOF and radiosity with seemingly little effort, which leads me to believe it has a much better equipped GPU.
Not a huge difference, but definitely noticeable.
Star Falcon
Member
I've not seen anything on Wii U that looks more impressive than God of War 3.
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
The character models actually look good. The create a character in the begining of the game they show during the treehouse shows alot of options you can choose and theres much better designs. Those ones do look funny though lolfixed the last pic
Truly lol at those X character models.
fixed the last pic
Truly lol at those X character models.
And I truly lol at your post. You don't like the artstyle, but the character models have more polygons than those other games, with way less polygon edges and more layers of hair. And the game has a huge open world, which you can't say about any of those games.
Nikodemos
Member
What I find interesting is that, despite the architecture being PPC-based, instead of x86, it still conforms to the overall design principles favoured by AMD. A CPU 'good enough' to get out of its own way, while preserving low-level hardware backwards compatibility, coupled to a reasonably powerful GPU that knows quite a few advanced tricks.