lwilliams3
Member
I think the bolded is the most likely if the power does not quite match the info we previously had. That is similar to what wsippel and bgassassin theorized before in which Nintendo sacrificed GFLOPS for fixed functions.
Rumor: Wii U final specs
- Thread starter EatChildren
- Start date
I thought it was already established weeks ago that gflop doesn't directly correlate to system performance. We already have examples of GPU's, with much lower flops, out performing higher flop GPU's in benchmarks and actual game rendering speeds. It is the manner in which the overall architecture is designed and built that matters more than how many flops it can do.
So even when we do have a definitive answer of how many Gflops the WiiU can perform it still won't tell us the whole story of how powerful the WiiU hardware really is without comparative benchmarks.
So even when we do have a definitive answer of how many Gflops the WiiU can perform it still won't tell us the whole story of how powerful the WiiU hardware really is without comparative benchmarks.
KojiKnight
Member
Logic!! Godless heathen! Begone!
But this is where I am having a problem. I'm not judging by glfops, because none of us here really know what that is for the Wii U (or what it will be for the other 2). I am judging by what has been shown. When the Gamecube was released it was obvious by the games/demo's shown about where it stood in relation to the other consoles.
Yes I understand they are launch titles, but again, what is the point of only showing current gen quality (visually) titles if it capable of so much more? As mentioned, I don't really care as long as Nintendo puts out the same quality they always do, but sometime I feel like some people here are just making excuses.
Right now, i'd rather be content in knowing that the company that put out SM Galaxy and the Metroid Prime series are making games on hardware that is at the very least, slightly more powerful than current gen consoles. Later, when Nintendo works that magic, I be even happier.
It certainly will be interesting if developers have full access to the eDRam and with both CPU and GPU.
Should give some very nice possibilities.
I think it's going to take some time before we can judge the Wii U's real capabilities.
None of Nintendo's launch titles appear to be big budget, and many begun development for the original Wii.
A majority of the 3rd party launch games are multi platform titles ported from Xbox 360/PS3. There doesn't appear to have been significant time and resources invested in to a majority of these titles, but rather quick ports designed to get the games out as cheaply and fast as possible.
The big one or me is this. I strongly believe a majority of 3rd party publishers and developers are relucant to make Wii U versions of their multi platform titles clearly superior to Xbox 360 and PS3's. As doing this would risk alienating consumers who only own either of the two competing systems. These consumers wouldn't be happy knowing the version available to them is inferior to whats available on competing consoles. That could cost sales.
Nintendo don't have a Factor 5, Rare, Monolith, or Retro studio launch title.
I think over all though, the software launch line up is pretty solid. I can't recall any console launch with this many quality and popular titles.
Thats all i care about too
Great, but at the end of the day we know Wii U is going to be generally on par with current gen systems in regards to performance.
Zoramon089
Banned
But we don't...all we know is they put priority on the CPU and in terms of memory it has far more than current gen consoles. "Generally on par" is also incredibly vague and arbitrary
Look at the games and tell me how powerful it is.
Depending on what they used for early dev kits, some aspects of a system can be weaker. Some similar off the shelf parts can be better in certain areas than the custom part. Develepers are informed of what has changed when they recieve kits with early versions of final silicon. That's not to say it happened here, but it is possible.
Gamer @ Heart
Member
Powerful enough for fun.
Zoramon089
Banned
I like how launch games are never indicative of a systems power except, conveniently, for the Wii U
So you want to wait until the end of its lifespan to determine that? Because that's the only way your statement makes any sense.
Its van owen. the only way to deal with him is to just ignore his posts
Depends on how you're defining on par. I don't think the Wii U represents a big leap over the current generation but it's definitely a step or two above current generation you can tell by the lighting in ZombiU, Nintendo Land and that BLOP's 2 comparison video.
It's generally not a good indicator to look to ports as an example of capability. We know for example that EA has done next to nothing for their FIFA and Madden Wii U.
What on earth is a 'rigged opinion'?
They're always a noticeable leap except, inconveniently, for the Wii-U.
Oh, maybe. I thought some burly dude was slipping people brown envelopes to change their mind on stuff.
metalslimer
Member
Still going at it.
It is fairly obvious after having played Zombi U that the Wii U is a capable console. But is it more capable than current HD twins by a large margin? The answer is definitely no simply because nothing sticks out technically. Had the Wii U had the guts to produce something making good use of substantially beefier hardware (basically, more complex action on screen), it would have done so because it is an obvious contributor to the 'wow' factor. It would make no sense to abstain from that argument when you try to sell the console. Thus, you can reasonably defend the idea that the Wii U cannot significantly outpower the PS3 and the X360.
That's one fact regarding the Wii U, arguably not the most important one. The real deal is to know if the control scheme will keep you playing the thing. And I must say, in that regard, the answer is no. I don't really like how you must always twist your wrist to reach for the bottom of the touch screen of the pad with your thumb when managing your inventory in Zombi U. Using the pad like a periscope in scanning mode feels dull when lift up down and on the side, and somehow out of place too. Finally, there is the software announced on the console so far. While they are indeed games that look appealing in the line-up, they will also be available on other consoles for the majority.
Thus, does the Wii U feel exciting enough for its price? The answer is, to me, no. Exclusive games look nothing particular, the novelty aspects don't take the world by storm and there is tons of things we do not know like online pricing model, what's ahead after the launch window when it comes to games and such. Nintendo has much work to do.
That's one fact regarding the Wii U, arguably not the most important one. The real deal is to know if the control scheme will keep you playing the thing. And I must say, in that regard, the answer is no. I don't really like how you must always twist your wrist to reach for the bottom of the touch screen of the pad with your thumb when managing your inventory in Zombi U. Using the pad like a periscope in scanning mode feels dull when lift up down and on the side, and somehow out of place too. Finally, there is the software announced on the console so far. While they are indeed games that look appealing in the line-up, they will also be available on other consoles for the majority.
Thus, does the Wii U feel exciting enough for its price? The answer is, to me, no. Exclusive games look nothing particular, the novelty aspects don't take the world by storm and there is tons of things we do not know like online pricing model, what's ahead after the launch window when it comes to games and such. Nintendo has much work to do.
I'm really totally fine with a 360-end level performance Nintendo machine. As long as they are pricing it like one, which they seem to be plus a crazy new controller, I'm fine with that offer on the market. Some damn fine Nintendo games will be done on a system like that.
My real question is, how well can Nintendo exploit it (and choose to in what fashion). Really interested based on past visual history how Nintendo plans to use a visual jump with the new controller.
My real question is, how well can Nintendo exploit it (and choose to in what fashion). Really interested based on past visual history how Nintendo plans to use a visual jump with the new controller.
Wii U is capable of producing graphics on par with PS360 and, on top of that, graphics on par with downscaled-to-480p-PS360, and streaming those second graphics wirelessly to the second display. All that at launch.
People complain about it not being next-gen enough.
And they are not even joking.
People complain about it not being next-gen enough.
And they are not even joking.
Paracelsus
Member
At the second year of the current generation we got Gears of War, at the second year of the new generation I expect playable Avatar.
What do you expect?
So, is the answer yes or no? Can't quite tell from your post.
http://youtu.be/CKc7UupWL_8
Dat noticeable power leap.
And who could forget WALLGUY muddying the waters prior to the 360 launch?
What is and isn't noticeable in terms of a graphical leap is entirely dependent on the games themselves and what they opt to showcase. Were it not for Rare and Condemned, the situation at the launch of the 360 would have looked even more dire. Much like most of the 360 lineup was accused of being just "uprezzed Xbox titles", WiiU's lineup is being accused of being "PS360 games with v-sync on".
This is not a new phenomenon and really shouldn't be considered as such in this scenario.
metalslimer
Member
Oh wow....some people might need to reign in their expectations.
Edit: CoD2 looked a good bit better than the previous gen versions. People pointing out the 360 launch games should really stop as it completely invalidates the argument because no Wii U game shows as much of a noticable improvment as some 360 launch games. Of course as said before a good part of this is due to lack of budgets being given to Wii U games and lack of time with the system, but previous gens certainly showed a sizable leap at launch.
The caveat I put to that is - how is a developer going to put more 'stuff' on the screen? Even on high end PCs, games still don't put tons of stuff on screen because they are limited by porting from consoles most of the time. In addition, deca are likely to be a little conservative with a new machine until they can properly judge the power and devkits are more mature.
You'd need significantly more power for that to show through on launch titles I think. Later on we'll see improvements.
My biggest disappointment is Nintendo not pushing something. Almost makes me think they weren't planning to release this year and were hoping to coast on the Wii for a bit longer, the drop in sales coming suddenly caught them off. With Wii ports it just feels like they haven't prepared for this launch very well at all.
There's nothing about those games you listed that show it to be a step or two above. There are games on the 360 and PS3 that are technically better than all of those. People keep listing "better lighting" as if it's some kind of technical benchmark. The BLOP's 2 video is a terrible comparison that also proves nothing. I do expect the system to be a step above the other 2, but the best on the 360 and PS3 are better than what we've seen from the WiiU.
From a historic perspective, that is a very small increase in horsepower. Next gen traditionally makes the previous gen look old and outdated.
It was not really reasonable to expect more from their offering in terms of power at this price since they had to pack in this second controller and that efforts to reduce the consumption of graphics cards are fairly recent. But they could have at least tried harder on the software side of things. Pikmin and Mario look meh to me and I can't help but be disappointed. And of course, again, they haven't been really talkative about the prices or the nature of the online services (I am looking at you Wii U eShop).
These elements stack up, they don't annihilate one another. So scepticisim invariably grows.
So close to launch, it is worrisome.
I don't expect playable Avatar anytime sooner than 2030, but that's just me being hilariously optimistic.
Anyway - at least half of the people here probably have PCs that already easily exceed anything we could possibly hope to come out of this coming generation, and I don't assume these people play on consoles because they "expect" anything from them graphically. If you do, well... enjoy
EDIT:
I'm a fan of Pikmin. The game looks very pretty and plays great. It's currently my most anticipated game on the console.
I'm also fan of Mario but I've never quite fallen for the whole New 2D thing, maybe I'll learn to love these games but at the moment I'm just waiting for the 3D effort.
metalslimer
Member
I expect playable Samaritan as something we can look forward to from the next generation. Avatar fucking ran on a server farm. They won't be a single device that can reproduce that for decades.
That's the big one I'm waiting to hear back on, really suspect that there's so little discussion and reassurance from Nintendo (considering their past reputation) about online play as well as transactions and footage of the interface. MiiVerse being the only defining factor won't amount to shit, they need more bait than that to convince people their online is relevant.
I expect Agni's Philosophy. Which is a fantastic leap from the current state of things IMHO.
Probably with rather shitty IQ though, so I hope there's a PC version.
Really?
I think the closest thing we'll get is something akin to a Final Fantasy FMV-esque graphical fidelity. Close enough to that engine they showed off.
metalslimer
Member
As long as it takes Square to make games? We'll be waiting till year 5 for that =p Can't wait to see what Eidos Montreal has cooking though.
lwilliams3
Member
Even the most optimistic "reasonable" person these days would place the Wii U to at most 4x the power of 360/PS3, and some of those resources will be used for rendering the second screen. That is a bit lower than a modern generational leap of over 10x the current generation, and diminishing returns will be a bit worse compared to before. It will be harder for first-gen Wii U games to show off the graphical ablities beyond current gen with raw power alone.
After more experience and optimizations by taking advantage of the extra RAM, eDRAM, more general purpose CPU, and more modern-featured GPU, we should see some very nice things, especially for Wii U exclusives.
That is one question I have wanted to ask for a long time: how feasible it is to port assets from CGs (like Agni's Philosophy) to a hardware that cannot handle them natively (like Wii U or iPhone?)
I think it's hard to judge at the moment, as 1st party games are clearly going to look the best, but other than a collection of mini games, a Wii game (pikmin) and a 2D Mario Nintendo haven't really shown anything, have they?
With the WiiU's seemingly straight forward architecture, a 4x increase in power would be pretty easy to demonstrate even with the second screen. I just don't buy the "4x current gen" claims. I'll gladly be proven wrong if/when they show it.
Canis lupus
Member
Are people really expecting Agni's Philosophy graphics in the years to come?
360 launch games didn't look like Xbox games.
Do you have any idea what sort of machines were needed to render Avatar?
Because there was a massive change in architecture and feature set. This gen won't really have that. Not to mention Nintendo is not making any graphical showcase titles.
Trevelyan9999
Banned
Wow COD2 hasn't aged as well as I thought. I remember thinking the game looked pretty good back in '05.
How many times more powerful is Xbox 360 over Xbox 1?
Halo 1 (Xbox launch title):
Halo 3 (Xbox 360 3rd year game):
Yeah, a summary of how I feel too.
This is misleading. Halo 3 really appeared like a Halo HD while there are better examples of next-gen leaps out there. Also, you didn't take pictures at native resolution which skews things further.
I don't know. You need pretty powerful hardware to render these images otherwise Square Pictures wouldn't have filled for bankruptcy. But S-E maintains this will be their "next-gen" hardware, whatever that means.
To be fair, they DID have a realtime version for their virtual camera - not sure how much worse it had to look so that they could have it in realtime, though.
And, of course, the idea that anything like that could be pulled off by a little machine that you'd put in your living room is just... almost like wanting Star Trek tech, honestly.
The general idea is GAF tends to compare Wii U efforts against 360/PS3 or "next gen". While Nintendo itself is comparing the jump in quality, assets and money to the Wii platform. So with that said, the jump from Wii to Wii U will be quite massive.
We really need to start approaching Nintendo hardware (and company decisions) on their own terms. Because more and more, gen after gen their beginning to play in their own ballpark and do their own things for hardware and software, not comparative to Sony/MS. So when I think about a new Nintendo system these days, I think of it and it's games relative to the predecessor, because that's what ultimately will be the foundation and marketing and game structure. This time built on the touchscreen controller.
Yet there was a significant number of voices at the time saying they did. Expectations were not met either way, and the second gen line-up was far more in-line with what people were hoping for. I'm thinking that's the real point here.