Rumor: Wii U final specs

BDGAME said:
I agree, and in my example I compare the difference between 2010 games to today.



More or less. Wii U is expect to be something 2 to 4x the power of current gen, that is more o less the difference between Ps2 and XBOX.
Click to expand...
We're pretty much arguing in circles at this point. A 4X power increase would be apparent even with ports. The Xbox showed it day 1 while running PS2 ports and maintained superiority for the rest of the gen. I I think it's safe to assume the cpu isn't X times more powerful than Xenon and certainly not Cell. At this point I'm not seeing any reason to think it's that far ahead of the other two. It's certainly more powerful, but Nintendo insisting on day 1( or soon after ) profit, low power draw and a small form factor have probably limited their hardware choices.
 
specialguy said:
so far we have not seen it.

i'm back to being pretty pessimistic on wii u. until i see something (or some gpu specs) that prove otherwise.

the one thing we have that isn't speculation so far is the games, and so far i haven't seen one iota of a thing you couldn't do on 360.

i'm saying the burden of proof is on wii u right now to show it's even better than ps360 gpu-wise.
Click to expand...

Oh come on, it clearly has a better GPU its just how much better is the question, most multi plat games are at least a bit better looking
 
superchunk said:
More than likely just referring to IGN hands-on and reviews of Wii U games as they likely now have Wii U's and have been playing games.

I don't think he meant some new news or games. We already know all the launch games and I doubt Nintendo is ready to reveal games outside of the launch window yet.
Click to expand...

Probably. I really hope he's talking about ZombiU. I want that game to not suck so bad.
 
frankie_baby said:
Oh come on, it clearly has a better GPU its just how much better is the question, most multi plat games are at least a bit better looking
Click to expand...

i've seen no evidence of that.

i think there was some better textures in a batman screen, but iirc there was some other shortcomings vs 360 version so you could call it a wash? anyway we know wii u has more ram so it can sport some better textures in theory, not disputing that.

and i believe i've read a few reports of wii u multiplatforms having some framerate issues vs the ps3/360 version.

now once the games hit the streets and if df face offs shows any wii u multiplatform superiority then ok.
 
specialguy said:
i've seen no evidence of that.

i think there was some better textures in a batman screen, but iirc there was some other shortcomings vs 360 version so you could call it a wash? anyway we know wii u has more ram so it can sport some better textures in theory, not disputing that.

and i believe i've read a few reports of wii u multiplatforms having some framerate issues vs the ps3/360 version.

now once the games hit the streets and if df face offs shows any wii u multiplatform superiority then ok.
Click to expand...

We also know COD looks better and runs at a higher resolution
 
superchunk said:
More than likely just referring to IGN hands-on and reviews of Wii U games as they likely now have Wii U's and have been playing games.

I don't think he meant some new news or games. We already know all the launch games and I doubt Nintendo is ready to reveal games outside of the launch window yet.
Click to expand...

It makes sense.
Metacritic website has had its Wii U's own section for a couple days, so the first reviews could spring up any day soon.
 
JordanN said:
http://udn.epicgames.com/Three/DirectX11Rendering.html
or
http://blogs.amd.com/play/directx-11/
Click to expand...

You do realize that 4 of those 6 effects listed on Epic's page have been done on current gen consoles, right?

Linking us to PR sites does not answer what "DirectX like effects" are.

JordanN said:
Well if you put it that way your next question becomes null, no?
Click to expand...

Not at all, so I'm still curious how you would know.

JordanN said:
Wii U handles code better than the 360 would.
Click to expand...

This doesn't make any sense. What code specifically? Do you think it would run VMX code better?

KojiKnight said:
Maybe just saying that via the system being OoOE?
Click to expand...

Nah, he's talking out of his ass.
 
This circular arguing over whether or not Wii U is "any" more powerful than PS360...

... seems to not take into account the fact that Wii U is driving the gamepad with its independent screen view. Step back and consider most games on the current HD consoles that support any form of split screen gameplay. How do they achieve it? Lower resolution in each view. Dramatically reducing details, object pop-in, and turning off dynamic shadows and lighting effects. Most games with split screen views suffer, even with all that taken into account, from inconsistent to bad framerate.

Meanwhile, Wii U has to drive a game view at full resolution and full detail on one screen, while driving various kinds of windows and views on a second device. There are plenty of games in Nintendoland that have full gameplay views split 5 ways. We know there are games coming that let one player use the TV and another use the gamepad for "splitscreen". Sonic Racing can run a rear view of the game while the big display shows the uncut view.

I would say there's plenty of evidence that if nothing else, all that ram, and a much newer GPU are making a difference immediately. The problem, is that difference isn't being displayed by launch games that look better than the current generation's most expensive AAA productions and/or run at twice the framerate just because.

Aside from that, I think one valid critique of the cynicism is, aside from the framerate argument (even though that is based on judging launch ports handled by outside porting companies), superior assets and effects don't just make themselves because one piece of hardware is more powerful than another. I don't think it's rational to assume anything yet, one way or the other - aside from acknowledging that the console has a lot more ram, and the GPU is better. Logically, in the long run, that means some improvements over the current consoles should make themselves clear.

But really saying Wii U is exactly the same is just as bad as the exaggerated, overly optimistic claims that it's going to be almost like Durango and Orbis just a little worse.
 
KageMaru said:
You do realize that 4 of those 6 effects listed on Epic's page have been done on current gen consoles, right?

Linking us to PR sites does not answer what "DirectX like effects" are.
Click to expand...
That's being obtuse. Read the links and "Directx 11 like effect" (not "DirectX". I'm specifically referring to one API) gets covered.


KageMaru said:
Not at all, so I'm still curious how you would know.
Click to expand...
You said "there's nothing easy about game development" so for me to give an objective answer would be seen as contradicting or certainly not interest you.
 
Mastperf said:
We're pretty much arguing in circles at this point. A 4X power increase would be apparent even with ports. The Xbox showed it day 1 while running PS2 ports and maintained superiority for the rest of the gen. I I think it's safe to assume the cpu isn't X times more powerful than Xenon and certainly not Cell. At this point I'm not seeing any reason to think it's that far ahead of the other two. It's certainly more powerful, but Nintendo insisting on day 1( or soon after ) profit, low power draw and a small form factor have probably limited their hardware choices.
Click to expand...
Microsoft paid for better ports and extra content for every developer that took up their offer that gen.

GC represented (nearly) the same power increase and due to a variety of factors was mostly "blessed" with direct ports.

Without incentives developers really have no reason to go out of their way to make a platform triumph over other in a spectacular way.
 
lostinblue said:
Microsoft paid for better ports and extra content for every developer that took up their offer that gen.

GC represented (nearly) the same power increase and due to a variety of factors was mostly "blessed" with direct ports.

Without incentives developers really have no reason to go out of their way to make a platform triumph over other in a spectacular way.
Click to expand...
Nintendo and gamers would benefit tremendously from Nintendo doing just that to showcase the hardware. I personally would have been happy if the WiiU was just a place to get current gen games at 1080p and Nintendo franchises. They have probably 1 year or so as the most powerful console and really need to maximise it like MS did with the 360. I don't see the majority of the Wii crowd clamouring to buy the WiiU ( could be wrong ) as Apple seems to be scratching their itch for now, so Nintendo really needs the core gamer this time around and they're giving very little reason for people to switch.
 
Mastperf said:
Nintendo and gamers would benefit tremendously from Nintendo doing just that to showcase the hardware. I personally would have been happy if the WiiU was just a place to get current gen games at 1080p and Nintendo franchises. They have probably 1 year or so as the most powerful console and really need to maximise it like MS did with the 360. I don't see the majority of the Wii crowd clamouring to buy the WiiU ( could be wrong ) as Apple seems to be scratching their itch for now, so Nintendo really needs the core gamer this time around and they're giving very little reason for people to switch.
Click to expand...

Nintendo at least in the early going had/has a big issue that not even money could really solve.

Games were planned around set dev teams. That dev. team gets split to work on the machines etc. Nintendo comes knocking on the door 9 months in and says Hello here's another system to dev for. Studios look and say fuck we don't have the manpower. We pass or they do what EA did with ME3 and such and hire out but that kind of stuff is limited to the capabilities of the major publishers really.

It is possible with skilled people to get away with a 3-5 man port team but that team is not going to be a team that's super upgrading etc. They are a getting the job done and get it to work satisfactory wise team.
 
blu said:
Erm, I'm talking bog standard desktop tech circa the beginning of the century, and the corresponding know-how. Gamedevs don't live in caves. Their office workstations and/or home desktops were already hosting SMP and shader tech before 2005. Devs' non-cube/ps2 projects were most like requiring them to know this stuff. The notion that 360 (will return to ps3 shortly) introduced a sizable amount of tech the likes of which nobody had ever touched is as detached from reality as they come. That does not mean that every gamedev coder was brilliant at SMP code and was writing shaders day-in and day-out in 2005. But guess what - devs aren't even today, and that will remain so in the foreseeable future - there's a sound division of labor and responsibilities on every sizable game project. BTW, I'm talking from the POV of somebody who used to do PC-based game engines in that timeframe, and whose teams (on multiple projects) would include gamedevs of various backgrounds - consoles, pc, handhelds, university graduates. I'm not speaking hypothetically, I'm telling you how things were back then for a representative sample of the industry.


Let me guess, many console devs in your eyes means ps2-only devs? Because entirely disregarding any likely PC exposure of the gamedevs from that timeframe, cube's TEV was proto-PS1.3 tech, and Xbox was dx8 through and through. Basically, your entire argument is resting on the premise there was this exotic tribe in the Amazon forest known as 'console devs' whose exposure to technology was limited to only what their console vendor of choice dropped on them via parachutes once per hw generation. Which, again, is still not sufficient for you, because ps3's 'ultra exotic' CPU tech was precisely targeting seasoned ps2 devs, who were already versed in widely-asymmetric architectures where autonomous streaming processors were meant to (pre-)chew graphics workloads. Yes, the RSX was a castrated desktop part, so that did turn quite a bump in the learning porting curve for quite a few, but that was not because there was anything exotic in this tech.


No, it does not go 'hand in hand' - most graphics know-how in use today either originates from the academic/CGI/PC space, or finds its way there shortly, and from there on into the wild. Exception is Cell-targeted sw tech, which, let's face it, was a dead end. And how is 'learning how to properly use the new hw' implying that devs had no experience with SMP or shaders per se?


You're confused so let me help. You are mixing high production values (which is normally an asset thing) and use of advanced graphics algorithms (which is normally an R&D thing) - those are different things. Yes, high-production-value projects do tend to also have strong R&D, but a small indie title can be high-tech just as well.


And yet we get anecdotal accounts of devs who managed to increase the performance of their WiiU pipelines multi-fold in the span of the last devkit cycle. Again, let me restate that how much learning WiiU devs have to do to get the hang on the paltform is something which you have to get first-hand only.


Which devs? PDZ and Halo4 are both first-party. Are you suggesting Nintendo will neglect their own platform?
Click to expand...

Nomination and highly likely winner for the Post of The Week Award. Couldn't have put it better myself.
 
Kaijima said:
But really saying Wii U is exactly the same is just as bad as the exaggerated, overly optimistic claims that it's going to be almost like Durango and Orbis just a little worse.
Click to expand...

If you've got multi platform games that look the same on WiiU and PS360 then it doesn't matter if WiiU has to drive another screen. From a consumers point of view. They are the same.
 
Mastperf said:
We're pretty much arguing in circles at this point. A 4X power increase would be apparent even with ports. The Xbox showed it day 1 while running PS2 ports and maintained superiority for the rest of the gen. I I think it's safe to assume the cpu isn't X times more powerful than Xenon and certainly not Cell. At this point I'm not seeing any reason to think it's that far ahead of the other two. It's certainly more powerful, but Nintendo insisting on day 1( or soon after ) profit, low power draw and a small form factor have probably limited their hardware choices.
Click to expand...

There is a incentive to make XBOX games with a better look than Ps2 ones. And XBOX has shaders, what Ps2 don't.

Wii U has shaders like a direct X 10.x, but Ps360 make shaders like direct X 9.x.

In the end, Nintendo is not selling that Wii U is better because the bigger graphical power. There is no a big incentive to make ports looks better but some of that are.
 
Durante said:
Yes. He clearly saw that GPGPU was being used just by looking at NintendoLand. I think it's not worth it to continue having a technical argument after that.
Click to expand...
I was only confused on that matter, as I mentioned an example before where that was the case. As for whether I'm wrong, there's still a 33% but even then, I owed up and said it could be more than just the GPGPU.

BDGAME said:
There is a incentive to make XBOX games with a better look than Ps2 ones. And XBOX has shaders, what Ps2 don't.

Wii U has shaders like a direct X 10.x, but Ps360 make shaders like direct X 9.x.

In the end, Nintendo is not selling that Wii U is better because the bigger graphical power. There is no a big incentive to make ports looks better but some of that are.
Click to expand...
Wii U owners?

And if shaders is the incentive then no Vita game should look better than 3DS, or no PS4/720 game against Wii U. Yet we know one of them is not true.
 
Nintendo said today at an investor's meeting that the Wii U will be selling at a loss. Does this say more for the price of the console, gamepad, or both?
 
Smurfman256 said:
Nintendo said today at an investor's meeting that the Wii U will be selling at a loss. Does this say more for the price of the console, gamepad, or both?
Click to expand...

Probably gamepad. We saw the silicon it wasn't that big.

Pretty weird to me it's at a loss. I'm kinda skeptical. Maybe initially, quickly transitioning to break even then profit?
 
specialguy said:
Probably gamepad. We saw the silicon it wasn't that big.

Pretty weird to me it's at a loss. I'm kinda skeptical. Maybe initially, quickly transitioning to break even then profit?
Click to expand...

Maybe because it isn't so big it's a reason for the loss? As in, low yield small node or somesuch.
 
The most impressive technology in the Wii U will be the controller, simple as that. There's a lot of stuff going into it, and that 'stuff' costs money to R&D and manufacture. It should be a pretty impressive piece of technology, especially for the wireless video technology.

It's not really surprising this is where Nintendo's bigger investment lies. It's the staple of the Wii U much in the same way motion/pointer controls were the staple of the Wii. It's not just a controller. It's part of the Wii U hardware package, part of the philosophy, and thus part of all those years of technology R&D and now shipping.

As for the actual processing technology, I'm currently sitting on "expect the worst, hope for the best". Yes, it should outclass current generation consoles, even if such evidence isn't apparent right now. Yes, it might take some time for a developer to flex the Wii U's muscles. Whether or not that difference will be readily noticeable is impossible to say, but the potential is there.

I do feel it will be heavily outclassed by Sony and Microsoft's next generation console, to the point where games look noticeably better. I don't really have anything to back that up other than fragmented pieces of information on all three systems, a vague assessment, and a dash of cynicism. I do firmly believe people thinking the Wii U will manage to keep up admirably with the next generation of consoles will end up disappointed. I don't want to say it's the Wii all over again, and I don't believe it is, but the "PlayStation 2 of next generation" in terms of hardware doesn't sit well with me and I don't agree with it.

End of the day, I believe Nintendo's R&D and philosophy with the Wii U, both in terms of spending and manufacturing, is producing a system that is compact, low voltage, low heat, and thus very stable on the processing front. In addition to this, they've poured quite a bit of tech into the GamePad, which is a major factor of the system, especially the impressive wireless video feed. Both of these points will noticeably impact the raw processing capabilities.

And that's my 2c for now.
 
specialguy said:
Probably gamepad. We saw the silicon it wasn't that big.

Pretty weird to me it's at a loss. I'm kinda skeptical. Maybe initially, quickly transitioning to break even then profit?
Click to expand...

Iwata says it's because of “the yen's continued appreciation” and refers to the loss as “early in the Wii U's launch.”
 
MadeInBeats said:
Iwata says it's because of “the yen's continued appreciation” and refers to the loss as “early in the Wii U's launch.”
Click to expand...

yeah. i looked it up, nintendo gets as much yen for a wii u at 350 as they did for a wii at 250 back in 2006. in other words you could say the wii u is equivalently priced at 250.

the yen is a huge factor.
 
EatChildren said:
The most impressive technology in the Wii U will be the controller, simple as that. There's a lot of stuff going into it, and that 'stuff' costs money to R&D and manufacture. It should be a pretty impressive piece of technology, especially for the wireless video technology.

It's not really surprising this is where Nintendo's bigger investment lies. It's the staple of the Wii U much in the same way motion/pointer controls were the staple of the Wii. It's not just a controller. It's part of the Wii U hardware package, part of the philosophy, and thus part of all those years of technology R&D and now shipping.

As for the actual processing technology, I'm currently sitting on "expect the worst, hope for the best". Yes, it should outclass current generation consoles, even if such evidence isn't apparent right now. Yes, it might take some time for a developer to flex the Wii U's muscles. Whether or not that difference will be readily noticeable is impossible to say, but the potential is there.

I do feel it will be heavily outclassed by Sony and Microsoft's next generation console, to the point where games look noticeably better. I don't really have anything to back that up other than fragmented pieces of information on all three systems, a vague assessment, and a dash of cynicism. I do firmly believe people thinking the Wii U will manage to keep up admirably with the next generation of consoles will end up disappointed. I don't want to say it's the Wii all over again, and I don't believe it is, but the "PlayStation 2 of next generation" in terms of hardware doesn't sit well with me and I don't agree with it.

End of the day, I believe Nintendo's R&D and philosophy with the Wii U, both in terms of spending and manufacturing, is producing a system that is compact, low voltage, low heat, and thus very stable on the processing front. In addition to this, they've poured quite a bit of tech into the GamePad, which is a major factor of the system, especially the impressive wireless video feed. Both of these points will noticeably impact the raw processing capabilities.

And that's my 2c for now.
Click to expand...

I think what you say is generally sensible. Given what we know about the other systems, they will definitely outclass the Wii U. The only concern I have (and have had for some time) is that it gets third party support like the other consoles.

Hopefully developer engines and games can scale down the large amount they need to to fit within Wii U's specifications. This is, of course, based on what we "know" about the next SONY/MS consoles and their much improved raw speed, and RAM. With any luck Nintendo can get a lot of units out there (10-15 mill) before the next systems come and if publishers are smart they will not miss the "Wii U" boat like they did with Wii.
 
AzaK said:
I think what you say is generally sensible. Given what we know about the other systems, they will definitely outclass the Wii U. The only concern I have (and have had for some time) is that it gets third party support like the other consoles.
Click to expand...

I think in the long run if third party support is a high priority for those interested in the Wii U, they would be better off looking into a PC or putting money aside for also the new PlayStation/Xbox. I could of course be very wrong, but I do not predict a bright future of third party ports on the Wii U, for a multitude of reasons, some hardware related. We'll see.
 
Kaijima said:
This circular arguing over whether or not Wii U is "any" more powerful than PS360...

... seems to not take into account the fact that Wii U is driving the gamepad with its independent screen view. Step back and consider most games on the current HD consoles that support any form of split screen gameplay. How do they achieve it? Lower resolution in each view. Dramatically reducing details, object pop-in, and turning off dynamic shadows and lighting effects. Most games with split screen views suffer, even with all that taken into account, from inconsistent to bad framerate.

Meanwhile, Wii U has to drive a game view at full resolution and full detail on one screen, while driving various kinds of windows and views on a second device. There are plenty of games in Nintendoland that have full gameplay views split 5 ways. We know there are games coming that let one player use the TV and another use the gamepad for "splitscreen". Sonic Racing can run a rear view of the game while the big display shows the uncut view.

I would say there's plenty of evidence that if nothing else, all that ram, and a much newer GPU are making a difference immediately. The problem, is that difference isn't being displayed by launch games that look better than the current generation's most expensive AAA productions and/or run at twice the framerate just because.

Aside from that, I think one valid critique of the cynicism is, aside from the framerate argument (even though that is based on judging launch ports handled by outside porting companies), superior assets and effects don't just make themselves because one piece of hardware is more powerful than another. I don't think it's rational to assume anything yet, one way or the other - aside from acknowledging that the console has a lot more ram, and the GPU is better. Logically, in the long run, that means some improvements over the current consoles should make themselves clear.

But really saying Wii U is exactly the same is just as bad as the exaggerated, overly optimistic claims that it's going to be almost like Durango and Orbis just a little worse.
Click to expand...

This, This! THIS !

It has been said already... it's just simple logic : Wii-U have two output screens. This thing alone clearly is a sign of Wii-U superiority over PS3 and Xbox 360.

When Cod : Bops II will be out we'll just have to look at PS3 / 360 TV screen output characteristics and compare them to TV screen output from Wii-U combined to Gamepad output.

I personally think that Wii-U is at least twice the power of 360 /PS3 simply because I already played Black Ops split screen on PS3 and it's ugly compared to what Wii-U can achieve with its two screens (TV + Gamepad).
 
Has anybody else considered that the reason why ports aren't looking significantly better is becasue the devs have such strict development deadlines that they have neither the time nor the money and resources to make the ports look significantly better?
 
Smurfman256 said:
Has anybody else considered that the reason why ports aren't looking significantly better is becasue the devs have such strict development deadlines that they have neither the time nor the money and resources to make the ports look significantly better?
Click to expand...

Yep. I really doubt they've thrown large teams/budgets at these ports. For them to get them up and running so quickly/efficiently is probably a good sign for the "ground up" games to come.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Final Fantasy XV Remaster RUMOR
Rumor  2
56
4K
CyberCali replied
Alinea Analytics: Final Fantasy XVI sold 22,000 copies on Xbox
Rumor Sales-Age  2 3 4 5
230
231
MarV0 replied
Intel is planning to release the B770 in the final quarter of 2025
Rumor Hardware 
1
173
PeteBull replied
Final Fantasy 7 Remake for Switch 2 – New footage and Director praises the system specs
Trailer Hype Platform  2
79
1K
Go_Ly_Dow replied
Official PS5 PRO Specs (Finally)
5 6 7 8 9
418
42K
S0ULZB0URNE replied
Top Bottom