ninjablade
Banned
Which is what I said in the first place.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Digital Foundry vs Watch Dogs on Wii U
- Thread starter mocoworm
- Start date
Which is what I said in the first place.
FreedomFighter
Member
Sure but you're moving the goalposts - that wasn't the original argument. And megabytecr pointed out why that is. Wii U is very capable, more than PS360.
EDIT: I don't know if we can even say "most". Quantify it.
I am still surprised Ubisoft bothered with releasing this on Wii U, where those type of games haven't sold well including the ones Ubisoft released. Having it half a year later than the other versions also doesn't help with the sales and from the technical side, it was also obvious that the version wouldn't be great in any way to entice people to buy it.
The first impressions in the OT weren't bad and I thought Ubisoft at least delivered on their last core retail game but that isn't true. While there is of course partly Ubisoft to blame, the weakness of the Wii U hardware just shows again.
The first impressions in the OT weren't bad and I thought Ubisoft at least delivered on their last core retail game but that isn't true. While there is of course partly Ubisoft to blame, the weakness of the Wii U hardware just shows again.
In limited scenario WiiU it's more capable. In other ps360 have different advantages. Maybe it's time to ask to yourself how many others platform can't handle better multiplat of the past generation?
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
I dunno, the 360 must be pretty shitty hardware compared to the PS2 and OG Xbox based on the Silent Hill collection, because there is no such thing as software talent or familiarity with hardware.
lyrick
Member
This actually happened last gen with the Silent Hill "HD" collection. Sometimes you need to just accept that shit ports are shit ports, and not try to pretend that they offer some evidence that proves some personal narrative.
thelastword
Banned
It's looking so, I imagine it will get even less third party software if this is the outlook it has. I mean if you can't compete with the PS3 in a PS4/Xbone era, something is very wrong indeed.
That's bad, very bad. It seems that the Wii-U is a console you buy just for the exclusives.
Windom Earle
Member
Why are people still in denial over the Wii U hardware? It's time to move on and be happy about the results Nintendo is able to get out of this hardware design.
MR ARCADE FOREVER
Member
How come Bayonetta 1 runs better on WiiU??
Dictator93
Member
Game isnt CPU limited probably.
Windom Earle
Member
It doesn't, DF phoned the comparison in and only tested very early stages. In later parts the U version goes to the dogs framerate wise. I was really looking forward to the definitive version, but it sucks.
It's not like anyone is going to buy it.
Not at full price 8 months after all of the other ones come out.
Clearly you do.
On Bayonetta 1 DF thread:
ninjablade said:
In the GTA V DF thread?
ninjablade said:
ninjablade said:
When it comes to another multiplatform game that fails to reach 30fps anywhere near consistently on your preferred platform? Like Unity DF thread:
ninjablade said:
When it comes to other consoles?
ninjablade said:
But when talking about DriveClub on PS4?
ninjablade said:
It does boggle the mind, doesn't it?
ninjablade said:
You are indeed, ninjablade.
FreedomFighter
Member
No one who has and loves their Wii U is in denial. Only the people who do not like the Wii U are denial - they can't seem to recognize that no one is saying the Wii U is more powerful than it is.
The real issue comes in when people are impressed by games on Wii U with great graphics. Then the Wii U haters tend to flock and talk about how ugly said screenshots of said game is - "so much aliasing", "no anti-aliasing", "low poly", etc, etc. ad nauseum.
These people get offended that people are actually enjoying their Wii U's and impressed with the visuals. Just look at the Smash thread about 1080p/60fps - Wii U detractors couldn't handle.
AkimbO_Arcana
Banned
ninjablade
Banned
Yea bad ports do happen but are rare, and with so many bad ports on wiiu suggesting the problem is shit ports and not the hardware is pretty delusional. even do the ones that are better ports have a very slight advantage, except for bayo vs ps3 version.
That's not a very good comparison to this case because in that instance the Xbox 360 was receiving a port of a game that originated on a vastly weaker console. A better comparison would be the port of Call of Duty 2 from PC to 360 because the two hardware platforms were on roughly equal footing at that point.
Here, we have a console with performance that should be similar to PS3 and 360, taking a port from those versions, and falling flat on its face. If this were an isolated incident it'd be understandable, but this has occurred to one degree or another on pretty much every port other than Bayonetta, which isn't a third-party.
It seems like what we have is a console that's on roughly equal footing with PS360, but it may have a CPU bottleneck that requires some very specific optimizations that make it difficult to port an Xbox 360 game over to it. Meanwhile, its relatively strong GPU goes underutilized. With enough time and money, perhaps the Wii U version could be optimized to narrowly win out against its "last-gen" brethren; but poor third-party game sales on the platform guarantee that that will never happen.
Windom Earle
Member
Sorry man but this reads like a huge persecution complex. Sure, there are some trolls in this thread, but I find the narrative of the Nintendo faithful equally annoying. Silent Hill 2? Seriously? At least that game runs at a much higher resolution on PS360. There is no sugar-coation possible, Wii U is a trainwreck for the vast majority of 3rd party games.
Bashing Nintendo games is stupid though, they are mostly gorgeus and run well because they are actually optimized for the specs of the U (Which are undeniably weak, but can still produce pretty games)
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
Does it? I'm not even aware of how well it performs, because B2 trounces it so badly in colorful visuals that I can't bring myself to play the original.
FreedomFighter
Member
I didn't say anything about Silent Hill 2 so I don't know what you're talking about. But yeah, people really do hate that people enjoy Nintendo games. It's just true. Anybody can see it. You do too apparently since you've noticed the trolls yourself.
Windom Earle
Member
I don't know what this has to do with the topic at hand. You should take a step back if this dicussion bothers you and enjoy Smash instead!
FreedomFighter
Member
Now, you're just not making any sense. Moving on...
No one is appreciating this post here.
lyrick
Member
Shit ports happen.
One would be a fucking fool to suggest that the PS3 was excruciatingly under-powered compared to the 360 due to the quality of multiplatform ports given to it.
Although on the Wii U side of things that kind of logic seems to be fully embraced.
Erhm, those same parts run exactly the same on 360, plus screen tearing, sorry mate.
It shows clearer textures and overall runs in a more stable way on Wii U, though not by much, both version are almost the same, framerate-wise.
I'd like to see a comparison in those later sections of the game though.
FreedomFighter
Member
That's very true and a great point.
It runs about the same in terms of numbers *BUT* doesn't suffer from screen tearing.
Bayonetta 2 runs much worse than Bayonetta 1 on WiiU and 360. B2 runs pretty much like Metal Gear Rising - perhaps even worse. It looks great but performance is not particularly good.
IMO, it seems like Nintendo has perfected the art of extracting pleasing visuals out of relatively weak hardware. Their first-party games can take into account all of the potential hardware bottlenecks and they can design the entire game in such a way as to minimize the effect of those restrictions.
Third-party developers, however, can't justify spending the resources to make every port work on the Wii U. This was really an obviously foreseeable consequence of Nintendo's hardware architecture decisions. If they were focused on having strong third-party support, they would have gone x86 and aimed for some semblance of hardware parity. If they actually thought that third-party developers would be more apt to develop for the Wii U (perhaps they didn't actually think this) given their hardware choices, then their management was quite naive.
ninjablade
Banned
isn't the wiiu supposed to be more efficient, easier to develop for hardware, more edram, and more ram, while the ps3 was alien like tech, which was very difficult to develop for and far ahead of its time, developers have never seen nothing like it, when it first came out, while the wiiu is based off a old amd gpu.
BibiMaghoo
Member
Windom Earle
Member
Yes, because we know that the Wii U CPU is terrible. Those are the exact words from a technically extremely competent 3rd party developer. And others (DICE, etc.). PS3 just had a tricky arcitecture.
It is possible that my memory is playing tricks on me, but the 360 version had less judder and input lag due to the lack of V-Sync. Which looks bad, but might actually be the right choice for an action game where timing is everything.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
So you're saying year one PS4 and Xbone games are the best the system will ever see, because they're using super-easymode x86 architecture and off the shelf AMD gpus?
There's plenty of interesting stuff coming to Wii U. For multi-plats, Project CARS is something we'd like to look at, but it's been delayed to March.
Astral Dog
Member
How are you sure Nintendos teams are not happy with it?
I mean, you are right,in that it was designed for low power consumption and that was not ideal, but their designers are working on the their most powerful system yet, its no different than Wii, DS or 3DS.
I havent read any of their designers complaining in some way of the system if anything it was made as an expansion of what they worked before, the Wii CPU.
lyrick
Member
Are you trying to tell me that the PS3 was excruciatingly under-powered?
Or are you trying to communicate that several variables may contribute to shit ports including but not limited to, a developers hardware understanding, time & budget, and developers skill level. And that essentially even a bunch of shit ports may not be indicative of the target platforms potential.
ninjablade
Banned
No because developers never really pushed those kinda of specs to the limit, while the wiiu specs are a AMD 176 gflops gpu which are very close to 360/ps3 specs have been pushed to the limits for years.
Yeah low end 2013 netbook CPUs and mid range 2011 Gpus are something developers have never worked with prior to the ps4 and xb1 gracing our world late last year.
^ Most games last gen were lead on 360 until later in the gen when it switched to PC dev for a certain amount of devs, so technically he's right. Your continuing false narrative doesn't work. Your as biased as he is in the opposite direction.
CPU is weaker then last gen, GPU only slightly stronger then last gen. This outcome makes sense for the hardware cause this is what we have seen so far in multiplats.
Nintendo just didn't design a console for third parties. Its time for people to own up to it. They made it for themselves like last time, like every time. And while their own games and games made only for the console are obviously going to look amazing with their art direction and optimization compared to Wii games, it doesn't say anything more about the console's power or lack thereof.
CPU is weaker then last gen, GPU only slightly stronger then last gen. This outcome makes sense for the hardware cause this is what we have seen so far in multiplats.
Nintendo just didn't design a console for third parties. Its time for people to own up to it. They made it for themselves like last time, like every time. And while their own games and games made only for the console are obviously going to look amazing with their art direction and optimization compared to Wii games, it doesn't say anything more about the console's power or lack thereof.
Astral Dog
Member
But thats not going to change, GPGPU is here to stay,for better or worse, i wish all consoles had a better CPU, but they dont.
Wii U could benefit if it was a stronger 360, instead of a much weaker Xbox One in terms of design.
ninjablade
Banned
Yea they did but they hardly ever pushed them, just look at the huge jump in graphics on pc ever since ps4/XB1 came out, AC:U, batman and witcher 3, just to name a few.
Windom Earle
Member
Yes, but if Nintendo actually banked on 3rd party devs making use of it... They were wrong. It did not help them at all.
Now I am actually excited if Sony or Nintendo can exploit this a bit more in their 1st party offerings.
Even that's not really true without additional qualifiers though (ie: only retail).
PS3 and 360 CPUs are far far more similar though and CPU heavy code was favored last gen due to how overengineered they were at the time.
But the Wii U GPU is probably too old and weak for proper GPGPU. I doubt it has many of the features the PS4/XB1 GPU have to make compute viable. And it is not like the GPU has so many ressources left to put into compute instead of graphics.
I think GPGPU for the Wii U is just a pipe dream. Still, we are talking about the Wii U not being able to hold up to last gen consoles, making excuses is quite laughable, like the whole discussion.
papersleeves
Member
DF did some VS tech analysis and hands on for the Wii U already.
Super Mario 3D World
Mario Kart 8
Wonderful 101
Bayonetta 2
Super Mario 3D World
Mario Kart 8
Wonderful 101
Bayonetta 2
Glorified G
Member
Which is making this thread quite entertaining. It's like watching republican and democrat talking heads on cable news duke it out.
Astral Dog
Member
Im not sure about too "old" its customized, but its weak of course compared to PS4/0ne, its more about the programing, using GPGPU features to learn HD development instead of the other way, thats the primary purpose i guess, not necessarily going against the new HD systems,im not making any excuse, im just saying it could had been a bit better for Wii U to create a true "last gen" system, instead of a weaker version, but then again, its likely GPGPU its here to stay,so in the future who knows what could happen.
You know, its true, the Wii U should had been something better, this has been discussed to death.
It can outperform 360/PS3 on certain areas, but its a seventh generation console in the end, it was designed that way, with a very costly controller.
But the system is capable of running some of the best and more ambitious Nintendo games to date,with the ocassional "second" party. some people are enjoying the games and consider them good looking,with sometimes a smooth framerate.
Its what it is,you can create good games on it, but Nintendo needs to be much more careful in the future.
Because no matter what the raving fanboys will say, lazy devs do exist.
People were fast to jump on Ubisoft for AC:U, and rightfully so, but when a shitty port for a shitty game happens on WiiU then it's the hardware's fault.
For your information, no, i don't believe that Ubisoft is a lazy dev in general. FC4 says a different story. So does ZombiU that, surprise, was on WiiU.
The WiiU is capable of running games that look gorgeous and perform great. Ubisoft is a very capable dev, no matter what.
AC:U and Watch Dogs are shit, plain and simple, and Watch Dogs, which is our topic currently, was never properly optimized for any platform.
Instead of following the, notorious by now, ninjablade hate train people should throw shit on Ubisoft for delaying the game for so long, only to deliver a shitty product (no surprise there tbh, they had clearly shown they don't care anyway). A shitty product that both Nintendo and Ubisoft would be better off if it never had happened. No one is gonna buy it anyway.
The Wii U is underpowered, and I say this as a Wii U owner. Smash does very little in terms of graphics which is why it is able to hit 1080p/60fps. Hell, I don't think I've seen a single dynamic light in the game. Smash U really is what you get if you take a Gamecube game and blow it up to 1080p and increase texture resolution. It is incredibly basic from a technical stand point.
It is incredibly clean looking and performs great, but that is a symptom of art direction and aiming for 1080p (1080p is fantastic for image quality). You could get very similar results from the 360 and PS3, minus texture quality because of the differences in RAM which the Wii U does have a very clear advantage in.
I feel like the 1080p/60fps target is really confusing a lot of people now, being 1080/60 doesn't necessarily mean the hardware is powerful. You could get 1080/60 on the PS3/360 easily, you just have to sacrifice a lot of advanced graphical techniques to do so.
I love my Wii U, it has the best exclusive out of the current gen games. But nothing has technically wowed me on the system because the hardware is old and underpowered in comparison to the Xbone and PS4, which are already fairly underpowered compared to current gaming PCs. Nintendo is just good at skirting the issue with incredibly great art direction and simple but good looking shaders for character lighting in games like Mario Kart.
Should third parties be able to get more out of the system compared to the PS3/360? Probably, but economically it makes zero sense to even try.
ninjablade
Banned
that's all you have on me to call me biased. That comment about DC was early on where most pics didn't look impressive, then a few people posted some amazing pics it was a hit or miss in screens but look great in videos, it was one of few games were the difference was huge for me, still the game has one of the most advanced lighting engines ever, that's why it really stick out in motion, even if it does have some ugly flaws.
The other comments was somebody saying XB1 is as powerful as ps4 cause AC:U ran better, or cpu was causing frame drops compared to the XB1 version, cause of the 10% increase in cpu speed, which was just dumb speculation, and proven false.