CPU Wii U just as powerful as PS3, X360, GPU 1,5 times stronger
- Thread starter M°°nblade
- Start date
He's wearing different armor, isn't he?
googleplex
Member
yeah, kinda does.
nordique
Member
-_-'
(I love Thraktor in the most un-creepy/literal way a random internet poster can mean)
I don't disagree with you at all. 3 things I will say about this though, for discussion sake:
1) We must consider that Reggie and his team may have tried to do everything they could on their end, and that these decisions along with all available options including potential money hats etc... were discussed with NCL as well. The "onus" as they say is also with the other company they are dealing with, or whoever they are dealing with (- note that it is not Reggie himself directly who discusses or deals with these issues any more, its the Sales & Marketing team, and its the people who talk with the companies about bringing games over which also involves a bunch of lawyers; Reggie will go out and have fancy business dinners with other top executives though to maintain a strong relationship to give the other CEOs such as those at Ubisoft or EA or WB a warmer subconscious reason to give the "OK" or order with regards to developing Wii U games)
2) When X amount of business dollar is set aside for marketing, and the question is "what becomes the best method or way to sell the product", in their marketing room they likely compare who they target and how they obtain that. In the end clearly, due to design of the system including the final name and branding, they have chosen the "Wii philosophy" which was as you stated more of a lifestyle brand. That may end up being more effective than directly communicating to the core gamer in terms of selling units. Selling hardware units is the more important thing to show to other companies, to get games.
Remember Nintendo has to secure franchises not historically associated with their consoles or their branding. Thus they are stuck in a situation: "We want to sell our system the way we think will sell the most units, so we can secure more games from major publishers since our system is not the historically associated console and thus we must secure that install base for publisher confidence, but the primary way we sell our brand is not the most ideal for the core consumer...yet it will likely still work better to sell a greater % of units to people who would otherwise not own any of these games already..." etc... its a cycle so they have to choose a side, and they (being Nintendo) will go with their philosophy first. It worked with the Wii, DS, and now 3DS, so its what they will stick to.
They can't depend on third parties or the core gamers (who in a way abandoned them a long time ago) and the Nintendo fans will always buy their system no matter what. From that finite perspective, they have to pick the path that covers the most ground, so to speak.
3) I agree they will have a hard time drawing in core users from other consoles, but I think that they are counting on the controller to really affect simple things so much that one cannot go back to the old style to play games. For instance, a simple menu in Darksiders II to switch gear on the fly, in real time without pausing sounds like the laziest implementation in the world, but if random core gamer A tries it out and values this simple mechanic so much more than the "pause menu" way (i.o.w. they succumb to the laziness) and word of mouth gets around that this input makes the Wii U version the superior version, then Nintendo may in fact be banking on a similar word of mouth vibe that happened with the original Wii albeit on a different level (core buzz rather than casual buzz).
In addition, there are many Wii only gamers who don't own either a PS3 or 360 and they may be looking to upgrade their systems. We don't know exactly how many that is, but at almost 100 million userbase, there is a substantial difference between the Wii and 360/PS3. Even "30 million" units or so between each HD system, is a vast difference. That is like the whole population of Canada. To them, the Wii U will be a new experience. If there are some gamers who were primarily Wii gamers but also owned an HD system, a Wii U might convince them to only hold one system next gen. Everything depends on hardware sales and software sales, but in the ideal scenario you and I would agree that the Wii U would be capable of any game the PS4/Durango could run (given what we currently know) as long as developer effort is there. The 360 became the main development platform this generation from the PS2 (Sony) so it is entirely possible it could switch over again (much like the 3DS is now in Japan from the PSP)
Obviously this is an ideal scenario, but that is what Nintendo's aim is: The Ideal scenario.
We'll have to trust that, and if it does not work out, it can be scrutinized at a later date.
Oh closer inspection, you're right.
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Remember when Terminal Reality wouldn't shut up about how great the PS3 version of Ghostbusters was going to be? Lead platform and all that?
Yeah... that worked out well.
Oh sorry ... 1.0
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
Yeah, he's wearing different armour, but:
Look at the background detail; even though the camera is at a different angle, you can see the towers and skyline in the WiiU version are blurrier and lacking detail compared to the city visible in the background in the PS3 shot.
Look at the shadowing in both; on the PS3 shot, there's clear self shadowing around the neck and between the arms and torso, where there isn't any on the WiiU shot.
Look at the texture work on both; the PS3 one has a lot of detail, like visible ridges on the cowl and cape shoulders that aren't there on the WiiU shot - the cape looks painted on in the WiiU one rather than as a seperate material.
Having said all that, that PS3 shot looks very bullshotty. I don't think the PS3 version looks that good ingame.
EDIT:
And for all that, if you've not played AC, it's a sweet game. I don't think anyone LTTP is going to mind minor graphical differences.
Is that really different from the pop in on ps360? They could have failed/slow texture loads as well:
http://images.eurogamer.net/2011/articles//a/1/4/1/4/7/2/0/360_014.bmp.jpg
http://images.eurogamer.net/2011/articles//a/1/4/1/4/7/2/0/PS3_014.bmp.jpg
I'm one of those Wii only (well, Wii and PS2/PC) owners.
Not exactly by choice, I've wanted a 360 for a while.
Just don't have the money to buy one.
I want a kinect-less version that's not bundled with games I don't want, and a big HD.
It's people like this guy who's tears will be the saltiest when all three consoles are out.
That's depth of field in the Wii U shot, not visible missing detail or resolution. The lighting conditions are different, but there's a self shadow under the arm on the left in the Wii U shot. The cape appears tighter because it's bulkier armour.
Eh, two different angles don't really do any justice showing off shadows and whatnot.
And it sorta looks like some sort of depth of field with the Wii U versions background maybe?
Saint Gregory
Member
Is this like last year when people said that but it was actually PS360 footage?
The main point is don't judge a systems pwer based on last gen ports (even when they look good/better). The Wii U may be an incremental upgrade over current gen but why would anyone use what little we've seen at this early stage as the metric to measure that?
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
It might be DoF, it might be LoD culling. It's hard to say.
The textures do seem lower resolution though, not just on the decreased detail on the armour itself compared to the regular batsuit (which might indeed just be that the WiiU exclusive suit looks worse than the vanilla one :s) but there is definite decreased detail on the cape, cowl and face, which should be the same.
as I say though, it's sort of moot, because I don't think that "PS3" shot is actually from a regular PS3 running the game.
nordique
Member
And you're not the only one.
I would imagine, for someone like you, the Wii U is a very attractive machine.
Out of my gamer friends crowd, around the country (I travel around the country and do business) They all own PS3 or 360s. Fewer own both. Very few own a Wii.
However most of the gamer people I meet own Wii's, and they are the casual gamers. These are people who download the popular iPhone games. Who still play Wii Fit to this day. Who break out Just Dance at a party. To them, the Wii is the only system they need because "it has Just Dance"
They don't care about deeper games other than say NSMB or Mario Kart. Some would love to play CoD or Madden. All are very interested in the Wii U (they've heard the buzz, it is featured in popular mainstream magazines and was features last year too) and many are considering upgrading their Wii's.
Point is, you're not alone in that regard. On GAF, you're probably the minority in being a Wii only gamer (as your current gen system) but in the real world (and I don't mean this with any negative connotation whatsoever to any core gamers at all on this site, I myself have a 360) you're likely part of the majority.
Core gamers I have noticed, or people who frequent EB Games or those types of stores or websites like GAF, are generally very out of tune with how popular the Wii still is. Software still sells on it. Just Dance 4 will sell tons this fall. The Wii U will be just the spark Nintendo needed, and I think it might sell well with that crowd who is looking to update their SD system to the HD world.
Talk to your average businessman on an airplane and if they are interested in games its always "oh yeah we own a Wii" or "my _____(child/wife/husband) owns a Wii"
It makes core gamers cringe, but the reality is, that's a large and viable market. Flimsy, not dedicated no, but it exists.
Nintendo faces many challenges though and I agree with Thraktor this is a huge uphill battle for them.
I mean, look at all these "Wii U = 360/PS3" statements and conclusion jumping...no leaping that is happening around the internet
soulassssns
Banned
A cam?
I refuse to use shat video like that.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
Can we get real?
If you put up a side by side shot of AC3 for PS3 and WiiU and said the WiiU one was on the left some people would say the right one looks a lot better, and find all sorts of justification for that, even if it turned out the WiiU one was on the right.
We all know this is true. Most of the people saying the PS3 version looks better have not seen either game.
If you put up a side by side shot of AC3 for PS3 and WiiU and said the WiiU one was on the left some people would say the right one looks a lot better, and find all sorts of justification for that, even if it turned out the WiiU one was on the right.
We all know this is true. Most of the people saying the PS3 version looks better have not seen either game.
Oh you.
PuppetSlave
Member
Christberg
Member
Trine 2 runs on Wii U with slightly better graphics than the PS360 versions, while simultaneously running the same game mirrored on the pad. If that isn't confirmation that it's a more powerful system I don't know what is.
OG_Original Gamer
Member
Is there anyone participating in this thread that understands game development, if so, is it possible to do a simple port without changing code and rebuilding textures at a higher resolution and still get a better looking game? What about AA, can it be turned on without optimizing code for a closed box system?
Arkham City has all the signs of a team being told to port it over as cheap as possible.
The pop in issues etc are abysmal when you consider the upgrades etc the Wii U has over the current gen should make pop in that existed basically gone. That said it is a known flaw in UE3 so who knows.
The pop in issues etc are abysmal when you consider the upgrades etc the Wii U has over the current gen should make pop in that existed basically gone. That said it is a known flaw in UE3 so who knows.
PdotMichael
Banned
because Trine 2 is a hardware benchmark?
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
If Wii U were really 3X more powerful than 360, then monkeys could do a port that reached parity. They wouldn't even have to be trained ones.
Wait, you mean there's not a magic "port to Wii U" button that does all the work?
Christberg
Member
Frankly I don't hold out much hope for Arkham City either. WB likely knows it's a super late port that won't sell well so they stuck a D team and minimal budget on it. They could get some decent sales if they put the work in regardless. They just need the right price, content and effort to make it happen.
I'd rather Nintendo spent that conference time on P-100 instead.
Oh no, not that darn UE3 textures not loading problem like most games that are using it on PS3? Hope this shit will get fixed ASAP for launch. I doubt it though...
Gamer @ Heart
Member
Christberg
Member
Do I really need to answer that question?
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
It's not even really WB who need to put the time and money in; if UE3 improves its WiiU compatibility and / or adds WiiU specific tweaks / optimisations, it basically rolls all those improvements into AC (and any other UE3 title) for free. Which also makes third party ports of upcoming UE3 games a no-brainer, as it would just be a compile flag and some QA time from there out.
I hope Nintendo are aware of this and have sent some engineers to Epic, or paid Epic to do some work themselves as Sony had to earlier in the gen for improved PS3 support in UE3 (which now means no real discernible difference between 360 and PS3 builds of UE3 games, which definitely wasn't always the case)
There are some issues that cant be fixed 100%. Texture Pop in issues are a flaw that exists in UE3. They can work to minimize but there isno 100% fix. That said middleware optimization has been ongoing and continues.
civilstrife
Member
I think it sucks that Wii U isn't much more powerful than current gen, but using launch games as an example of games looking worse than current gen is stupid.
Any unfamiliar architecture has a learning curve. Multiplat launch games may look worse. Sucks, but doesn't mean Wii U is worse than current gen.
Any unfamiliar architecture has a learning curve. Multiplat launch games may look worse. Sucks, but doesn't mean Wii U is worse than current gen.
You can't do a port without changing code, unless you have a cross platform engine that already runs on the target machine, and even then you are probably going to have to change at least a little code.
Turning on AA is relatively simple but depending on your rendering pipeline just flipping AA on may not be an option. If you have a lot of different render targets you are compositing then when and what to AA may not be readily apparent and can lead to errors. And if your game is not optimized just turning on something like MSAA can slow it down further or may require more memory than you have available.
If you are going to port a game to new hardware getting the game to run at all is pretty simple, getting the game to run well is a project, regardless of hardware.
From what I saw on the floor show Ninja Gaiden 3 for WiiU ran ok but had terrible image quality, AC3 and Batman had pretty good IQ but ran poorly and middling respectively. But they looked basically feature complete - they weren't obviously missing parts of the game or using placeholder shaders or something like that.
Given that the devs have months to work on just optimization and such I'm not too worried.
People really underestimate how much more you an do with hardware as your understanding and tools mature. When PS3 launched a lot of middleware didn't use the SPUs much and the SPU libraries were basically non-existent. Over time Sony improved the libraries, people used the SPUs much more, and middleware like physics made better use of them so even projects done by not technically advanced people starting performing better.
All the stuff people do now on PS3 SPUs like AA and triangle culling and animation and various image-space effects and such - very little of that was being done in the first PS3 games. And most of the power of the PS3 is in the SPUs.
The 360 has 6 cores but some early games were written to have one game thread and one rendering thread, effectively using 1/3 to 1/2 of the power. And that's without even getting into stuff like developing new techniques and optimizations.
Christberg
Member
UE3 is only a piece of the picture though. Hard to say at this point what is causing the issues, could be audio middleware, physics etc etc etc
Might also just be that the demo they're showing is really old unoptimized code from a Q&D UE3 port they did themselves.
I don't want to point fingers 100% but the simplest most obvious answer is that they haven't been given the budget or time they need to put out a quality product. If they're planning on selling the game at launch, full price they can't have high expectations for it. It's a year old port with some added tweaks and an armor suit at this point.
If they had both games and all the DLC with enhanced graphics and controls for say $40-50 it'd be a tempting purchase. Even for those of us who already own both games. With all the craptacular DLC packs and other artificial price inflation they have I severely doubt it happens tough.
Thanks bg. I guess that analyst is Pachter.
Again, if they really think he will affect their share price by talking down the system's hardware, they just need to get out there and talk it up and show that he's wrong.......that is.....unless he's not.
PdotMichael
Banned
Christberg
Member
It's obviously not a big open world game but yes. Go download the demo on PC and check it out, the game is absolutely gorgeous.
walking fiend
Member
Yes, because now he has armor? Why do you think the game is called Armored Edition?
There was that AC3 comparison to PS3 too; I really doubt multiplat games not look at least on Par to 360/PS3 version bar maybe problems such as textures not loading, etc.; and for colonial marines, it is confirmed to be better
Gouty
Bloodborne is shit
I remember back when people would argue the Wii U had to be several times more powerful than anything currently on the market.
Their reasoning was that Nintendo would have to go out of their way in order to create hardware on par with the PS3 and 360 this many years after the fact.
Their reasoning was that Nintendo would have to go out of their way in order to create hardware on par with the PS3 and 360 this many years after the fact.
^^ I don't think that's a false assumption. Maybe Nintendo have gone out of their way 
, but why all of a sudden are the rumored specs thrown out the window because what Nintendo and everyone showed was middling at best? The machine rumoured specs are still looking like its more powerful. If the games don't show that, that's not necessarily the hardware's fault.
We should know in 6 months
, but why all of a sudden are the rumored specs thrown out the window because what Nintendo and everyone showed was middling at best? The machine rumoured specs are still looking like its more powerful. If the games don't show that, that's not necessarily the hardware's fault. We should know in 6 months
They have. With Wii, Nintendo specifically went for GameCube hardware. Now they designed the thing with hardware completely new to them, but somehow cut their performance targets to the level "Xbox 360 and up".
I'm absolutely convinced that if Nintendo had not looked at other consoles and would have let IBM and AMD maximize what they could, the Wii U would have blown away last gen. Even in that small box for a marketable price.
Unfortunately however, that is strategy that doesn't work well for Nintendo.
I definitely agree with all your points. I just believe that when Reggie comes up with an idea to possibly address the "core" gamers, Iwata ends up rejecting his ideas and Reggie would default to Iwata's ideas...Maybe it isn't just Iwata rejecting his ideas, but some other suits in NoA or NCL who disagree with Reggie's approach. I don't know how the innards of Nintendo works, but Iwata probably sets the final decision in all regions. I don't blame Reggie entirely for the situation Nintendo is in, but he could try harder to convince NCL.
I'm hoping they do pull it off. My impression from E3 is that Nintendo hasn't convinced third parties to publish their bigger titles on the Wii U. We'll probably see the same big titles we've been seeing on the Wii such as EA Sport games and CoD.
Agreed, but I do see a lot more Japanese third party support than with the Wii.
I think it will depend on consumers and there purses. World economy doesn't seem to be ready for 400$+ consoles. Even the US games market gone to shits these days. I'm not sure a next generation of games will change that, especially if they are expensive. So maybe Nintendo has a opportunity there. If lots of customers see value in the WiiU and gets a nice headstart, the situation will be different. But it's too early to tell.
