Support NeoGAF

[Kai Dracon]

Most of the doomsaying over Wii U seems basically predicated on the notion that 3rd parties will completely abandon it after a year and stop porting any games. Because the hardware of the other next gen consoles will be too far beyond it to make downports feasible or profitable.

Which is rather speculative in itself; it's just being taken as gospel.

If that doesn't happen to at least a degree, and Wii U still ends up getting direct ports of a lot of major games, different ballgame. The average person doesn't count blades of grass or count the shaders being applied to textures. Wii U games that still look (at least) as good as high end PS360 games would look plenty impressive to most everyone outside of the nit picky inner circle of enthusiast gamers. Gamers don't want to believe in diminishing returns, but it's real.

Until PS4 and Xbox 720 show up and actually do surprise everyone with how powerful they are, there's still the 'danger' (danger from the perspective of the hardware enthusiast) that this gen will be like the sixth console generation: PS2, Gamecube, Xbox forming a rather uneven trio of hardware with disparate capabilities yet still capable of competing with one another.

 

[marc^o^]

wait... wut?

His point is, it is critically acclaimed while running on 6 years old hardware, not a current high end PC.

 

[BGBW]

It's a Nintendo fanboy site. I doubt they played either of the games.

Actually the magazine tends to feature pages on what is happening on the other systems. Also Future Publishing staff tend to jump from one magazine to the next so this month they may be writing on Nintendo, next month it's the 360.

 

[EDarkness]

If you have high expectations of third parties then I think it does matter, yes.

This would be an issue regardless of how powerful the system is.

 

[disap.ed]

I don't care if next gen titles will run at lower res or with worse textures, but I realized that for example Project CARS will have the advanced tire physics model only on the PC, because current consoles' CPUs aren't powerful enough. This is one point where Nintendo's decision to go with a relatively weak CPU could be either a) bad or by going with GPGPU and a relatively powerful GPU be b) pure genious.

We will see.

 

[LittleJohnny]

Can you make fun games with the Wii U? of course! but that's not the problem, the Wii is a LOT more powerful than the SNES, of course Zelda: A link to the past was and still is amazing, but did the Wii hurt from having inferior hardware? YES.

I predict it will be the same fate for Wii U when the big budget, graphics intensive titles skip Wii U in favor of PS4, 720 hardware, that's where the problem lies.

 

[mrklaw]

Most of the doomsaying over Wii U seems basically predicated on the notion that 3rd parties will completely abandon it after a year and stop porting any games. Because the hardware of the other next gen consoles will be too far beyond it to make downports feasible or profitable.

Which is rather speculative in itself; it's just being taken as gospel.

If that doesn't happen to at least a degree, and Wii U still ends up getting direct ports of a lot of major games, different ballgame. The average person doesn't count blades of grass or count the shaders being applied to textures. Wii U games that still look (at least) as good as high end PS360 games would look plenty impressive to most everyone outside of the nit picky inner circle of enthusiast gamers. Gamers don't want to believe in diminishing returns, but it's real.

Until PS4 and Xbox 720 show up and actually do surprise everyone with how powerful they are, there's still the 'danger' (danger from the perspective of the hardware enthusiast) that this gen will be like the sixth console generation: PS2, Gamecube, Xbox forming a rather uneven trio of hardware with disparate capabilities yet still capable of competing with one another.

Do any of us on here really care about 3rd party games though? I'm disappointed because I'm not convinced by the tablet. And will still buy it for pikmin etc.

For 3rd parties I think this is actually good news. WiiU will benefit from the extended life of PS3/360 which are still quite expensive so will continue to sell for a good few years. And vice versa - PS3 and 360 would normally devolve to licensed shovelware pretty quickly after new consoles come out. But with the WiiU maybe there is enough demand to keep mainstream titles coming on all three for longer than usual?

 

[BattleMonkey]

The biggest issue for WiiU will be third party support once again if the PS4/720 are the ones who get all the attention. Being behind power wise is going to have lot of third parties ignoring the WiiU or theres going to be lot of shitty ports probably. It will all depend on how big of a gap there is in the hardware power really, but even then we saw alot of it early on for the PS3 with all the awful ports from 360 games put on the system. Are third parties going to be actively supporting full dev support for 3 to 4 systems (including PC for the 4th), or is WiiU always going to get the shitty port job? PC gets shafted alot with ports but at least the hardware can usually force better performance out of the bad work.

What will matter most as usual for Nintendo is it's first party offerings either way

 

[DaSorcerer7]

Most of the doomsaying over Wii U seems basically predicated on the notion that 3rd parties will completely abandon it after a year and stop porting any games. Because the hardware of the other next gen consoles will be too far beyond it to make downports feasible or profitable.

Which is rather speculative in itself; it's just being taken as gospel.

If that doesn't happen to at least a degree, and Wii U still ends up getting direct ports of a lot of major games, different ballgame. The average person doesn't count blades of grass or count the shaders being applied to textures. Wii U games that still look (at least) as good as high end PS360 games would look plenty impressive to most everyone outside of the nit picky inner circle of enthusiast gamers. Gamers don't want to believe in diminishing returns, but it's real.

Until PS4 and Xbox 720 show up and actually do surprise everyone with how powerful they are, there's still the 'danger' (danger from the perspective of the hardware enthusiast) that this gen will be like the sixth console generation: PS2, Gamecube, Xbox forming a rather uneven trio of hardware with disparate capabilities yet still capable of competing with one another.

QFT

 

[Father_Brain]

wait... wut?

Just because Journey is beyond the capabilities of Wii doesn't mean its visual achievements aren't more artistic than technical.

 

[outunderthestars]

The biggest issue for WiiU will be third party support once again if the PS4/720 are the ones who get all the attention. Being behind power wise is going to have lot of third parties ignoring the WiiU or theres going to be lot of shitty ports probably.

It depends on how much more powerful the ps4/720 end up being. If there is a sizable gap, it may prove to be too expensive to port titles to the Wii-U. If MS and Sony decide to go for a more modest increase in power and instead focus on services, middleware solutions should allow for easy and cost-effective ports.

In the end we simply won't know until the other companies unveil their hardware next year.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Just because Journey is beyond the capabilities of Wii doesn't mean its visual achievements aren't more artistic than technical.

Like I said earlier, ND wasn't even able to implement Journey's sand tech into U3 because it was using 2-3 SPU's for its sand. It's certainly doing a lot technically speaking.

 

[RoadHazard]

Did it matter for the Wii compared to the PS360? Yes, it did, it got absolutely awful third party support because of it (perhaps not just because of that, but it sure was a major factor). The same will happen with the Wii U.

 

[Dali]

Most of the doomsaying over Wii U seems basically predicated on the notion that 3rd parties will completely abandon it after a year and stop porting any games. Because the hardware of the other next gen consoles will be too far beyond it to make downports feasible or profitable.

Which is rather speculative in itself; it's just being taken as gospel.

If that doesn't happen to at least a degree, and Wii U still ends up getting direct ports of a lot of major games, different ballgame. The average person doesn't count blades of grass or count the shaders being applied to textures. Wii U games that still look (at least) as good as high end PS360 games would look plenty impressive to most everyone outside of the nit picky inner circle of enthusiast gamers. Gamers don't want to believe in diminishing returns, but it's real.

Until PS4 and Xbox 720 show up and actually do surprise everyone with how powerful they are, there's still the 'danger' (danger from the perspective of the hardware enthusiast) that this gen will be like the sixth console generation: PS2, Gamecube, Xbox forming a rather uneven trio of hardware with disparate capabilities yet still capable of competing with one another.

Speculative, yes. But Nintendo's 3rd party support was questionable even when they had a machine comparable to its competitors in strength. The "doomsaying" isn't just because Nintendo is releasing what many believe will be an underpowered system, but because Nintendo is Nintendo and we've literally heard the PR they're peddling before.

 

[-Amon-]

Debate of the day, courtesy of GVG

Wrong IMO. Wthout power you're restricted in the things you can do. And you can be original and "artsy" on top of the line hardware too.

So having a machine much less powerful than the others only restrict what you can do, nothing else.

 

[Chû Totoro]

Like I said earlier, ND wasn't even able to implement Journey's sand tech into U3 because it was using 2-3 SPU's for its sand. It's certainly doing a lot technically speaking.

I don't see it the same way as you. He said more artistic than technical and I agree with him (though you can have your own point of view of course ).

To take the same example used a few posts before there is also Uncharted with great sands effects... and sorry for Naughty dog but the game still became boring for me and it will be difficult to keep it this way if they don't bring some freshness into the franchise.

Wrong IMO. Wthout power you're restricted in the things you can do. And you can be original and "artsy" on top of the line hardware too.

So having a machine much less powerful than the others only restrict what you can do, nothing else.

Of course but it concerns so few games... also if you have a big part of your budget allowed to graphics do you think most of devs won't end up going the safe way with me too games or sequels?

 

[lwilliams3]

Saw that coming from a mile away.

Firstly pretty much no games exclusive on the PC appeal to me, I also hate mouse and keyboard controls. On top of all that I’d rather play on my nice big T.V screen.

The difference between Wii to 360/PS3 is a much larger gap than what the 360/PS3 to PC gap is. The later doesn’t have a problem regarding ports too...the Wii U will.

If you are talking about high-end PCs, I think you have that the other way around if you're just talking about power. Wii's problem was that its CPU/GPU was designed in 1999/2000 and has a very different architecture, particularly its shader-system. As far as we know, the Wii U will not be as architecturally different compared to other PC/720/PS4.

I don't care if next gen titles will run at lower res or with worse textures, but I realized that for example Project CARS will have the advanced tire physics model only on the PC, because current consoles' CPUs aren't powerful enough. This is one point where Nintendo's decision to go with a relatively weak CPU could be either a) bad or by going with GPGPU and a relatively powerful GPU be b) pure genious.

We will see.

I have not been following project CARS. Can you provide of link to that info?

 

[Effect]

I think it depends what you want from the system.

If you're signing up for the next 5-6 years of Nintendo exclusives then no, I don't think it does matter. Nintendo are going to push the most out of the system and belie its limitations just like they did with the Wii.

If you have high expectations of third parties then I think it does matter, yes.

This. It's really as simple as that in the end.

Since I plan on keeping my PC somewhat up to date (not just for gaming but for work and life), at least enough to run the few 3rd party games (mainly RTS, MMORPGs, and the odd PC RPG) I do get on medium over time I don't care if the Wii U falls behind again. Nintendo and it's second party developers will make the most out of the system and they are the primary reason for why I'm buying the system. There will be the rare 3rd party developed but Nintendo published game and I'll happily give them a shot if they interest me. Wii U/3DS/PC is my setup going forward and I think that should cover things if the worse case happens. Better to be prepared and expect the worse.

For those that are Nintendo only console owners it will suck in the end to miss out on some of the bigger titles they might be interested in but by now (unless the Wii was the very first console then they'll learn going forward) they should know that if they are really interested in those titles they'll have to pick up a secondary console at some point.

 

[coughlanio]

As someone who is familiar with the CPU architecture in the Wii U, I can tell you that from a computational standpoint, it is a bit faster and far more efficient than what is in the current Playstation and XBOX. It all depends on what clocks Nintendo decide to run the CPU at.

I don't think CPU specifications will change much next gen, I can see them sticking with similar architectures, but will probably focus on throwing in a far superior GPU. I think people are expecting a far greater evolutionary leap than we're going to get, as I personally see the platform holders focusing on services over specifications.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Yes. Given the exact same game, the prettier the better. This is relatively unequivocal.

And, no. If it's still capable of downports without excessive effort and cost.

If Durangorbis are capable of games built on UE4, Luminous Engine, etc with things like global illumination. Will it be a bitch to get them working on the WiiU, for example.

 

[Derrick01]

I think it will only matter if Nintendo isn't as lucky at catching casuals like they did this gen. Because if the Wii didn't explode there they would have been last by far, simply because they didn't get any damn games this gen everything was 360/ps3/pc. They relied on the casual from day 1 and until a year ago it was paying off.

Since the power difference looks like it'll be similar they'll have to bank on that tablet thing taking off or else they will get pounded.

 

[outunderthestars]

Of course but it concerns so few games... also if you have a big part of your budget allowed to graphics do you think most of devs won't end up going the safe way with me too games or sequels?

If that is the case why didn't the wii see alot more innovative, new games developed by third parties as is was both less expensive to develop for and had the largest share of the market?

 

[LittleJohnny]

Wii U games that still look (at least) as good as high end PS360 games would look plenty impressive to most everyone outside of the nit picky inner circle of enthusiast gamers.

How do the popular titles like Call of Duty for Xbox/PS2 fair against the same series on 360 or PS3? and what about titles like Fight Night Round 3? You may not be counting blades of grass, but now that you're used to 360 and PS3, looking at this screenshot is painful:

This current gen brought a lot of new key graphical upgrades, HDR lighting, displacement maps, greatly detailed models, etc. and presented in HD with higher res textures. If we see similar key features that become a standard, looking back at Wii U may be just as painful as looking at those CoD and Fight Night 3 shots.

If that is the case why didn't the wii see alot more innovative, new games developed by third parties as is was both less expensive to develop for and had the largest share of the market?

Great question my friend, great *ing question which I don't think anyone is prepared to answer.

 

[marc^o^]

If that is the case why didn't the wii see alot more innovative, new games developed by third parties as is was both less expensive to develop for and had the largest share of the market?

Piracy was one of the factors.

 

[Cyborg]

If PS4 isnt more or as powerful as the next Xbox 720 I wont buy it. I want great graphics! I dont want that casual crap!

 

[outunderthestars]

Piracy was one of the factors.

Record high first party sales would lead one to believe that piracy wasn't the problem. People seemed willing to buy Nintendo's games.


It just seems like every one of these threads ends up the same way: Nintendo fans using one form of circular logic while Non-Nintendo fans use another equally circular logic to debate issues without enough information either way for their to be any conclusion.

 

[mclem]

If that is the case why didn't the wii see alot more innovative, new games developed by third parties as is was both less expensive to develop for and had the largest share of the market?

Many third parties had already made significant investments in HD consoles by this stage last gen. The burning question has to be: Do they regret that?

 

[linko9]

I for one am glad that there will be machines with different capabilities (both graphical and otherwise). If in this generation, if there were only machines with the power of 360 and PS3, we would have missed out on a lot of great games. Monolithsoft couldn't have made Xenoblade on the 360 with their team size, and it would be no fun playing Picross 3D on a PS3 with analog sticks. Monster Hunter probably wouldn't have existed either. I'm excited for this coming generation because no matter how graphically ambitious your game, there will be a platform that suits it's needs (3DS < Vita < Wii U < PS3/720). Now what's left to be seen is how much the PS3 and 720 will differentiate themselves. I'm guessing not much.

 

[Effect]

I think it will only matter if Nintendo isn't as lucky at catching casuals like they did this gen. Because if the Wii didn't explode there they would have been last by far, simply because they didn't get any damn games this gen everything was 360/ps3/pc. They relied on the casual from day 1 and until a year ago it was paying off.

Since the power difference looks like it'll be similar they'll have to bank on that tablet thing taking off or else they will get pounded.

They are betting on getting that audience back or at least keeping a significant number of them in order for the design for the Wii U to play out. It's why I think they are pushing local mulitplayer so hard. Especailly if the system isn't that much more powerful then the PS3/360 and the next entries into those consoles will be. Not a PS2/PS3 leap but still more of a leap then the PS3/360 to Wii U.

It's a big gamble. The Wii was one as well and it paid off for them but at the same time they lost people. It's why I think Mario Galaxy, Zelda, etc didn't do as high as their other games like 2D Mario and Wii Sports. Or simply higher in sales then they expected. I think they've even acknowledged this lost of not just the core gamer but specifically the core gamer that was mainly a Nintendo fan who's money ended up being split between Nintendo games and games on other systems with games on those systems winning the battle in the end. I think it's those gamers that Nintendo mainly wants to attract back as they know they aren't going to be pulling hardcore Xbox or Sony fans back.

I think the problem is they might not be able to do it and I don't think Nintendo knows how to do it while still trying to court the people that made the Wii such a success. They might not even want to do it on some level. As they likely made more money off those that enjoyed Wii Fit, Wii Sports, Just Dance, etc. However they can't run a business on that group alone. I think the power gap, if it's just large enough is going to bite them in the ass to some degree and they won't be able to get back all the people they lost. They're going to be in a really bad place if that happens and the casual market they are banking on doesn't take to the Wii U right away or at all do to moving on to new things.

Edit: Honestly I don't expect Nintendo to win those gamers back, not to any significant degree. Sony and especially Microsoft isn't going to allow that. Come next year I expect Microsoft to pull out all the stops. I think it's also largely a regional issue as well with Nintendo focusing so much on Japan in their decision making and designs they are leaving the US and Europe wide open and I do expect Microsoft to take advantage.

 

[USC-fan]

it does not matter. It only matter to the hardcore wii u fan boy that wants every third party game on that system because they refuse to buy another system.

For the wiiu I want games that use the screen. Not just put a map on it or stupid mini games.

 

[Tricky I Shadow]

So 1st party exclusives, a preference in controls, and the choice of where you could play your games made you prefer a lesser graphical powerhouse console than a high end PC... Do you see it coming again from a miles away? ;-)

You have a point, but that still doesn&#8217;t change the fact that I&#8217;m disappointed with the lack of horse power the Wii U has and that it will cause problems. It's as simple as that.

I want destruction even better then that seen in Red Faction Gorilla on a city the scale of GTA4.



Give me power!

That would be sex....

 

[Chû Totoro]

If that is the case why didn't the wii see alot more innovative, new games developed by third parties as is was both less expensive to develop for and had the largest share of the market?

Because most of the innovation tools Nintendo brought to devs with Wii was to enlarge the audience with casuals. So we saw a lot of games using this but in a very simple way.

The thing is that more traditional gamers didn't give the success it could have to Wii so business is business, casual audience equals more casual games.

If you keep buying FPS games just because they look better and better each generation all you'll have is new FPSs with better graphics...

 

[marc^o^]

it does not matter. It only matter to the hardcore wii u fan boy that wants every third party game on that system because they refuse to buy another system.

For the wiiu I want games that use the screen. Not just put a map on it or stupid mini games.

Exactly, the more Wii U will play on its strengths to differentiate itself and provide original games, the more people will like it.

 

[SmokedMeat]

If that doesn't happen to at least a degree, and Wii U still ends up getting direct ports of a lot of major games, different ballgame. The average person doesn't count blades of grass or count the shaders being applied to textures. Wii U games that still look (at least) as good as high end PS360 games would look plenty impressive to most everyone outside of the nit picky inner circle of enthusiast gamers. Gamers don't want to believe in diminishing returns, but it's real.

I think if the average person is spending the money, they want the better option, and in this case the better looking version. The person who does care; the senior citizen playing Wii Sports, or the person trying to lose weight via Wii Fit, are the people who most likely aren't going to be back for the U.

 

[shinobi602]

If PS4 isnt more or as powerful as the next Xbox 720 I wont buy it. I want great graphics! I dont want that casual crap!

Hmm the expectation of the next gen is to much. Look at the leaked document about Xbox 720........Only 4GB RAM......slow down guys.

Keep the quality posts comin.

 

[Jigsaw]

it does matter even for nintendo titles,zelda or metroid don't deserve to be always a generation behind

do you really want zelda in 2015/16 to look like dark souls today?or do you want it to look like agni's philosophy?

 

[marc^o^]

do you really want zelda in 2015/16 to look like dark souls today?or do you want it to look like agni's philosophy?

A Wind Waker art style with Wii U graphics would certainly look fabulous. I'd vote for this.

 

[Replicant]

Yes for me. I don't see the point of buying a new console that is only capable of what PS360 more or less are capable of. If I want that, I can continue playing with my PS3 and my friend's X360.

 

[TAS]

More is not better. Better is better.

 

[outunderthestars]

A Wind Waker art style with Wii U graphics would certainly look fabulous. I'd vote for this.

I support this.

 

[Kai Dracon]

How do the popular titles like Call of Duty for Xbox/PS2 fair against the same series on 360 or PS3? and what about titles like Fight Night Round 3? You may not be counting blades of grass, but now that you're used to 360 and PS3, looking at this screenshot is painful:

*shots*

This current gen brought a lot of new key graphical upgrades, HDR lighting, displacement maps, greatly detailed models, etc. and presented in HD with higher res textures. If we see similar key features that become a standard, looking back at Wii U may be just as painful as looking at those CoD and Fight Night 3 shots.

This brought up every generation really, but the truth is also: work backwards and you should find that each generation previous generation of 3D game ages better than the generation before it. In other words, from our perspective now, PS1 games look far worse than PS2 games, and PS2 games look worse than 360 games... but much less so.

That is the point of diminishing returns. So no... Uncharted 3 isn't going to look like an Xbox 1 game suddenly, magically, compared to next gen. We already have "next gen". High end PC games. Uncharted 3 (and equivalent) doesn't look like crap compared to the UE4 tech demo.

This doesn't take visual style into account ether; traditionally, the kind of game that suffers most are games that attempt unvarnished photorealism. Those games age the most for two reasons: 1. more powerful hardware has the most immediate visible impact in filling in yet more details missing from 'real life' and 2. such games have a bad tendency to not really HAVE a 'style'. Their art direction is too focused on trying to appear purely photographic. So after the initial novelty wears off, they end up looking bland and uninteresting even within their current technological generation.

As has been pointed out already in this thread, we are seeing a greater diversity in games right now, as the Photorealism Devil is being beaten back by the desire (finally) to experiment with a wider variety of styles. A game like Journey isn't going to look like shit, well, ever. (In the same way that Yoshi's Island or The Wind Waker will never look bad.)

I think if the average person is spending the money, they want the better option, and in this case the better looking version. The person who does care; the senior citizen playing Wii Sports, or the person trying to lose weight via Wii Fit, are the people who most likely aren't going to be back for the U.

This is a factor. Though I wonder if the bigger point is that people who buy a Wii U for other general features (like Nintendo 1st party games) are more apt to be happier and purchase more software when, you know, it's actually available. That's more what I'm getting at... someone who isn't a hardcore enthusiast that always owns every platform, probably wouldn't bother to go buy a PS4 to play slightly better (to them) looking versions of the same games they could buy on Wii U.

Really, we are probably facing an unknown. Seems to be an assumption that an audience comprised strictly of "grandmothers" has moved on, now plays angry birds on their iPads, and there's nobody left to buy a Nintendo console. Going to find out whether that's really true. And who else is still in the audience for the genuine middle ground. It can be an automatic enthusiast assumption that everyone worth counting just goes and buys the most powerful thing for the sake of power. One of the reasons the Wii was successful wasn't just the 'fad' of Wii Sports. It was reasonably priced. Another reason 3rd parties threw away so much potential by trying their best to ignore the Wii despite how much it was selling.

In a sense, it's funny having these debates while, all around us, gaming seems to be marching towards "content and price matters more than technological whizz-bang". Games with humble audiovisuals are being played more than 100 million dollar technological and production value marvels. F2P games are coming and hardcore games are going F2P. Some of the biggest game makers, like Valve and Blizzard, focus on great content and pleasing presentation, and art style, over technological superiority, and try to insure as many people as possible can play their games on X hardware rather than shoot to capture the elite power player.

 

[RamzaIsCool]

Just because Journey is beyond the capabilities of Wii doesn't mean its visual achievements aren't more artistic than technical.

Those artistic achievements are a product of the technical capabilities of the PS3. For better or worse this game would not be the same game if it appeared on for example the Wii.

The big question is if the graphical capabilities of the current gen systems are enough to get us thru the next 6 or 7 years. For some gamers it might be enough, for some it simply isn't. Fact remains the PS3 can run any Wii game! The same can't be said if you switch those consoles. So power does indeed matter. To what extent this is the case for the next generation is anybody's guess at the moment.

 

[Raide]

If I am going to drop 300+ on a new console, I want it to be better than what I currently have. Sure 720p at 60fps will AA would be really nice, as long as all games support it. I would rather them push for 1080p but until they show off some games using the new tech, guessing how much better they will be is a bit pointless.

 

[SolidSnakex]

I don't see it the same way as you. He said more artistic than technical and I agree with him (though you can have your own point of view of course ).

Yes, the art is what you'd think of first when someone mentions Journey's graphics, but that doesn't take away from how technically impressive it is. People will mention the art in Team ICO's games first, but ICO and SoTC were two of the most technically impressive games on the PS2.

 

[Seanspeed]

Everything else being equal - more power is always better.

 

[mclem]

it does matter even for nintendo titles,zelda or metroid don't deserve to be always a generation behind

do you really want zelda in 2015/16 to look like dark souls today?or do you want it to look like agni's philosophy?

If both games had the same budget, just how much more expansive would the version that looked like Dark Souls be?

 

[bachikarn]

I'm not a graphics whore, but I would have definitely preferred Nintendo to have made the machine more powerful. If graphics didn't matter at all, Nintendo should have just made the graphics Wii level, but in HD like Dolphin.

 

[Metal B]

Everything else being equal - more power is always better.

Not really. There is always a price to pay and often you have to calculate, if its worth it. More power could mean higher price, which people don't want to pay, heating problems you have to solve, it is hard to get the parts, you don't get the system/developers to efficiently use the power, people want you to use the extra power on every game or they don't buy it and much more problems.

Customers always want more, because it looks nicer on the box or if you show it to other people. But it doesn't make the games better and it could be unhealthily for the business. People are so spoiled used to get better graphics with every generation, that changing the form make people angry. Even so they don't know why or a change could be a better direction for everybody. I would love for more Mid-Tier developers to return, but they can't all pay to stay in the graphic war.

 

[krypt0nian]

The wii's gameplay>>>graphics has morphed into wiiU's art style>>>graphic power.

Which is still funny as the NextBox/PS4 will again have both with no settling for last gen power.

 

[LittleJohnny]

That is the point of diminishing returns. So no... Uncharted 3 isn't going to look like an Xbox 1 game suddenly, magically, compared to next gen. We already have "next gen". High end PC games. Uncharted 3 (and equivalent) doesn't look like crap compared to the UE4 tech demo.

UE4 is not a game, if Naughty created Uncharted 4 using UE4 tools, it would certainly make Uncharted 3 look a generation behind.

We've been at the point of diminishing returns since the PS1 to PS2 transition but with every new generation, only after being in the generation for some time is when we realize how much better games get with every new generation. People thought the transition from PS2/Xbox to 360/PS3 was a lot less significant than PS1 to PS2 but now that we're nearing the end of 360's life, we're really seeing what an amazing leap it has been, and not just visual fidelity but massive interactive worlds in games like Skyrim which experience would never have been possible on PS2, likewise we should expect a leap in not just visuals, but physics and other elements like we're already seeing in Watch Dogs.