Chiggs
Gold Member
Seriously. It's completely lazy.
Rumor: Wii U final specs
- Thread starter EatChildren
- Start date
Seriously. It's completely lazy.
What were you expecting?
Fourth Storm
Member
Strange that they would complain about muddy textures and lack of AA, two things, which from the specs we do know (1 GB system RAM plus eDRAM on GPU), should have been easily addressed. Combine this with Harada's complaints, and I really don't know what's going on with this system/devs, that they are finding it so difficult to even match current gen systems. Neither title seems that intense graphically or computationally. So what gives?
The team created a piece of shit the first time around. The dev time was spent trying to fix fundamental issues of shitness not improve the other areas,
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Seriously, anyone expecting any port to have a dev team put in the time to upgrade the graphics is crazy.
H_Prestige
Banned
So I guess PC ports receive the utmost time and care? Considering how superior they turn out to the consoles.
The original NG2 system of blood and leaving bodies on the ground was very alpha intensive on the Xbox 360. Most of it was saved with the eDRAM set up on Xbox 360 with shared 512MB of memory. The framerate was mostly fine until it got really hectic.
Plus the game ran in Sub HD to accomplish this.
It should have easily performed better on the Wii U.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Not even sure what this has to do with what I said.
seems to have a bit of improved lighting at the very least, and less screen tearing for sure
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUC8Qe4FsL4
I'm interested to see more comparisons, but I doubt the difference is going to be all that noticeable. The game did look pretty great in the latest trailer though. Too bad the scores haven't really reflected that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUC8Qe4FsL4
I'm interested to see more comparisons, but I doubt the difference is going to be all that noticeable. The game did look pretty great in the latest trailer though. Too bad the scores haven't really reflected that.
His point is that if there is a significant power gap, not much effort is needed to produce a superior result.
Fourth Storm
Member
Well if they didn't have time or the higher resolution texture assets just laying around, that's understandable. I am, however, very curious as to what devs are using that eDRAM for if not AA. Are they using it at all? Is this part of a Nintendo conspiracy to save the graphical punch for when they really need it (next year)?
You havent been taking much notice of the systems launch games if you cant understand why people might want it. Nintendoland isnt the most promising game on the list..
As for Ninja Gaiden, I expect it to be just the same as the versions its being ported from graphically. So it wouldnt surprise me at all that some people will judge it as worse looking.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
I'm really not interested in the Wii U for its ports anyway... it's a bullet point to have those games to attract a mass audience... but I really think that hardcore gamers should continue to buy those games on PS360 and get the Wii U for Nintendo games/original games.
GhostTrick
Banned
While I find unacceptable that a new system has games that run worse, I also think that ports arent the best way to judge a system.
For exemple, Silent Hill HD collection looks better on PS2, same for ZOE HD, which ran better on PS2 than PS360.
Now, you're the best one to know that, lets talk about Dark Soul. Without patch, it runs at 30FPS max, and 720p on PC. Even a really good PC. Does it mean a 1200 dollars PC is just a bit more powerfull than PS360 ? No.
The lighting on the 360...wtf?
The game isn't that dark on neither console.
H_Prestige
Banned
How much time and money did Durante spend fixing Dark Souls? Was it something like 6 months and $100,000?
GhostTrick
Banned
Did I said something like this ? I said without Durante, the game would still be a 720p port, running at 30FPS even on a 1200 dollars PC. So, sometimes, even little efforts are not made from developpers.
GhostTrick
Banned
I'm not sure hardware manufacturers could say no to a game because it's bad or inferior looking.
Otherwise, a lot of shovelwares or bad game wouldn't have been sold on any console.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Who was talking about a power gap? I was making a statement about how dev teams tend to treat ports, that's all.
JordanN
Banned
Why? Nintendo must wield strong influence for their own platform no?
Actually, wasn't that the whole point of the NES? It was strict regulation that pulled gaming out of its previous cesspool.
I don't think Nintendo's has much choice in these matters. Either the developer/publisher is willing to put more effort/money into the game or not. Keep in mind that they don't have the luxury of time in the first place considering how long they had the final development kits. The only thing I think Nintendo could do is offer some incentives like publicities or lower royalties, but that is it.
Fourth Storm
Member
I think they just thought it would be cool to have a Ninja Gaiden at launch. Perhaps they figured it would give us NES old timers a wave of nostalgia. Also, it's obvious a fair bit of effort did go into making this game much more playable than the original. I'm still skeptical that the game actually looks worse than on the other consoles. Could be subjectivity speaking. In that comparison video, it looks about the same to me except brighter.
But that Nintendo is actually publishing this title in the US gives away their desperation to win back some hardcore players.
JordanN
Banned
I'm not ready to accept Nintendo is that powerless.
What's the point of being a manufacturer (or any top business position) if insubordinates rule you?
Edit: Even offering incentives is still some form of control and something they could totally do.
Yeah it looks like the GR guys just simply turned down/up the brightness.
Why?
Apophis2036
Banned
Apophis2036
Banned
Did you miss the score at the end ?, 7.6/10 instead of 3/10 for the PS360 versions, sounds like a far better game on WiiU to me
.The XBox360 has 512MB of GDDR3 on a 128-bit bus running at 700MHz. The PS3 has 256MB of XDR and 256MB of GDDR3, but I'm not sure of the bus width or speed on either.
Smurfman256
Member
The RAM inside the 360 is 512MB of GDDR3 clocked @700MHz. Not sure that the XDR RAM in the PS3 is clocked at, though...
EDIT: The VRAM in the PS3 is 256MB of GDDR3 @700MHz as well.
Apophis2036
Banned
Thanks for the fast reply mate.
If those stats are correct then WiiU should perform more than double the Ram for games then (an extra 600mhz of Ram speed compared to the 360) ?.
Enjoying the speculation, it sounds like you guys are getting very close to figuring this thing out, keep going !
.4 days to go, HYPE !.
TAS
Member
Umm..at least on par maybe?
Apophis2036
Banned
Chiggs
Gold Member
I've been taking plenty notice, actually. You have your opinion, I have mine. Stalemate.
TAS
Member
Oh..no doubt. I was referring to the graphics which IGN states are arguably worse.
Just checked out that Ninja Gaiden review, dont believe for a second that they've gone to the trouble of downgrading textures on a system with over twice as much RAM. If it was some other problem then I could have believed it but IMO this sounds like a clear case of rose tinted glasses for the original versions.
Smurfman256
Member
From the footage I've seen compairing the two games, the lighting looks better on the Wii U version, but the textures look the same. I dunno, maybe the guy was hopingthat the Wii U version would blow everyone away and he over-reacted and said that the PS360 versions look better? (On a semi-related note, could the framerate dips possibly be CPU-related?)
DonMigs85
Member
Apparently the RSX was originally clocked at 550 MHz along with 700 MHz GDDR3, but it seems the final console got them clocked down to 500 MHz RSX/ 650 MHz for the VRAM.
Frame dips are due to the amount of alphas appearing on screen.
Size of the ram doesnt matter if its too slow. System can only use so much at a time.
Smurfman256
Member
Sorry for asking this, but...what are alphas?
DonMigs85
Member
Transparencies and stuff like smoke I think.
It isnt about our opinions, its about everyones opinions and quite clearly there are games outside of Nintendoland that people in general are quite excited about, like ZombiU for instance. So I cant see how its hard to understand why other people might want the system even if you obviously dont. The way you are talking you'd think the system just has Nintendoland and a couple of crappy ports..
XDR is 3.2GHz
Smurfman256
Member
Thanks
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
If you're already getting a Wii U for Nintendo/original games, then sure, pick up CoD, AC3 or Arkham.
But I feel that anyone who is seriously into those types of games will be fooled if they think the Wii U is now the home for these games. Only in the next year will Wii U get on-par versions of these games... And they might not even be on-par. Bad online, no achievements... And being ports they won't likely do much that is meaningful with the screen. Plus if they are quick n dirty ports, they might even look worse (we'll see).
And when PS4/720 enter the picture, multiplatform parity will end.
This is why I say that smart gamers will not buy the machine for these ports. If these are their types of games, they should really stick with PS360 and wait for next year's consoles.
The reason to buy a Wii U is its original content. These ports are great for marketing.. It looks like a real core gamer machine on paper. But it won't be for very long.
Well yes obviously but you dont include 1GB of RAM with bandwidth that doesnt even let you take advantage of half of it. That would be a completely pointless thing to do and an utter waste of money.