Sammy Samusu
Member
http://twitter.com/#!/MarkRein/status/83671040521285632
All lovey and dovey, something is happening and I like where this is going.
Wii U Speculation Thread of Brains Beware: Wii U Re-Unveiling At E3 2012
- Thread starter bgassassin
- Start date
- Status
All lovey and dovey, something is happening and I like where this is going.
AceBandage
Banned
So when is Joystiq suppose to post the entire roundtable?
I'd like to see the context.
I'd like to see the context.
You'll never see a jump as drastic as ubiquitous normal mapping and self-shadowing like we got from PS2->PS3. You might want to checkout the differences between DX10 and DX9 in Lost Planet and Lost Planet 2 for a small example.bgassassin said:
Basically, a DX10.1 GPU would allow:
- More options for shadow filtering;
- Render some techniques that would require multiple passes in DX9 in a single pass (point light shadows, as example);
- Supports MSAA in situations that were impossible in DX9 (like deferred rendering);
- The geometry shader offers more flexibility for particles, grass, foliage, fur, rain splashes, depth of field, non-photorealistic rendering, object motion blur and etc. directly on the GPU;
- The ability to bind more than 16 texture maps at once and select which one(s) to use per pixel.
- Support for much larger and complex shaders with much better support for branching code.
- Support for "saving" the output of vertex and geometry shaders into memory, which opens more options for procedural geometry generation/deformation.
In general it's much easier to code most shaders with DX10.1 features than it is with DX9 features. The added flexibility allows things to be done with much less hoop jumping and lateral thinking (and you can do much crazier stuff if you start jumping hoops and thinking laterally).
bgassassin
Member
doomed1 said:
I thought that was 1st party only? Well if the rumor is true then it seems like they are really about to expand on that foundation.
bgassassin said:
The only significant additions (compared to Xenos) would be geometry shaders, 32-bit FP filtering, and updated buffer formats.
There's not much that isn't already supported tessellation-wise on 360. It just becomes a performance or implementation issue alongside dubious multi-platform priorities i.e. Content has to be authored with tessellation in mind (not trivial unless you want a gazillion polygon terrain ala DA2), so support would have been hindered by uptake of Vista/DX10, appropriate hardware by the masses. RSX/PS3 being the other major party isn't going to help make a case for developers to go wild with it just yet. It'll probably be skipped over entirely in favour of DX11's tessellation pipeline anyway.
M3d10n said:
It's worth noting that some of these are already possible on 360 due to fewer API restrictions (MSAA & multiple render targets, access to buffers). Xenos already has texture array support, and StreamOut is essentially MemExport. Then there are command buffers & multi-threaded rendering (though not nearly as extensive as dx11 of course).
bgassassin
Member
M3d10n said:
Starting with the latter first, that would explain why devs are having an easier time porting the games right? Or at least a part of it. This was what I was wanting to get a better understanding about. Thanks.
And like what MS did with their Xbox version of DX9, I would hope Nintendo creates at worst some kind of hybrid that would consist of maybe OpenGL 3.3 and 4.1.
AceBandage
Banned
bgassassin said:
If anything, it would be 4.1 with some features from 5.
Yes, many of DX10's features were actually bringing back to PC GPUs some of the new features MS implemented in the 360 (DX10.1 specifically adds supports for using the depth buffer as a textures - which both consoles can do due to lower level access).AlStrong said:
But there are stuff like running the fragment shaders at sub-pixel frequency and we might even get some kind of compute support (either OpenCL or AMD's proprietary stuff).
Also, while the R700 tesselation is not as flexible as DX11 tesselation, it is usable for displacement mapping (the most dramatic use for DX11 tesselation) and might even perform better in a system with lower level access to the GPU.
bgassassin
Member
Ace, are you talking about Shader Model or OpenGL? I was looking at OpenGL.
No wonder they didn't use it and are now willing to seemingly dive in head first on it.
doomed1 said:
No wonder they didn't use it and are now willing to seemingly dive in head first on it.
bgassassin
Member
AlStrong said:
But that is also comparing a stock R700 to the customizations of Xenos right? Considering what MS did I could see something being done with Wii U to achieve a pseudo-DX11 API. Would that then make more of a difference if we were to say 360 used "DX9.5" while Wii U used "DX10.5"?
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
Instro said:This is a better version:
How many times better would you say???
bgassassin
Member
NSQuote said:
Definitely 50% more.
Also I think I'm going to agree with BurntPork's view about Gabe talking about the Wii and not PS360. Him talking about scalability seemed to be one of the consensus arguments of devs against bring certain games to Wii. Now the Wii U makes it into that range.
AceBandage
Banned
Instro said:
-Duct Tape
+Handles
bgassassin said:
Well, the difference is that MS has an agenda to push with the DirectX spec. A feature ends up only being good if it's going to be used anyway, so I don't see Nintendo straying too far from the hardware design itself or needing to add anything exotic.
That said, there are certainly things specific to AMD that are going to be in hardware that DirectX on PC hasn't exposed due to needing to maintain compatibility with nVidia. That's just the nature of low-level access, but it'll be up to Nintendo to come up with a competent SDK to facilitate that; I worry that folks seem to be taking the SDK for granted despite Nintendo only dealing with pre-shader & pre-multicore APIs for Wii.
Also keep in mind that low-level access and exotic features would be also ignoring the point of the hardware being easily portable between "PC and 360".
At first I read the quote as saying "a lot more powerful than the Wii." But now I notice that he said "Wii U seems to be a lot more powerful than the previous generation." I'm not familiar with his speaking style and it's possible that he is just very cautious in the way he phrases things, but the Wii U is so obviously more powerful than the Wii that it would be a strange way to phrase it.
herzogzwei1989
Banned
wsippel said:
GameCube: 10.5 GFLOPs (Gekko + Flipper)
Wii: 15.75 GFLOPs (Broadway + Hollywood) assumed since Wii is 50% (1.5x) faster than GameCube
I'm not sure now about Xbox 360's CPU Xenon, I thought it was ~115 GFLOPs but now I read on Wiki that it's 96 GFLOPs. I know the Xenos GPU is 240 GFLOPs.
He is probably cautious because Valve doesn't have a devkit yet and can't tell for sure. Judging by the E3 demonstration you can't say it is at least more powerful. He is clearly not speaking about PS360 as a previous generation. Valve just released Portal 2 on them, so for Newell they are pretty much current. More than that, why would everyone else say that it is only 50% more powerful? I don't think that Newell knows more than any other 3rd party developer.Trurl said:
AndyMoogle
Member
It could mean that it's not as restricted as XBL is. As in Nintendo will allow third party devs to do whatever they want with the online system. On XBL there are strict rules that has to be folllowed if you want to make games for Xbox 360.BlackNMild2k1 said:
I'm sure we will see Valve's games using Steamworks on Wii U, if they decide to release their games on it that is.
There are two questions related to that valve interview.
1) does the wiiU have enough power and the correct architecture to be included in modern scalable development? The answer seems to be fairly obviously yes. That's something Wii didn't have
2) Will it have enough power to stat in that development process after ps4/720 come out
1) does the wiiU have enough power and the correct architecture to be included in modern scalable development? The answer seems to be fairly obviously yes. That's something Wii didn't have
2) Will it have enough power to stat in that development process after ps4/720 come out
Napoleonthechimp
Member
The only measure of power I recognise is pikmin.
DaSorcerer7
Member
Napoleonthechimp said:
One..Million ..Pikmin
Well to be fair, that was a scripted, single room tech demo (which means it uses less resources then a game play scenario) though created by an team with no previous shader experience and not really known for pushing the boundaries on realtime cutscenes (which means it's probably not as optimised as it could be and possibly designed with gameplay limitations in mind). So therefore it doesn't really prove anything one way or the other. Is it undershooting, overshooting or get things just right? We really don't know at this stage.Terrell said:
test_account
XP-39C²
And 512bit graphicsMedalion said:
(i remember when i thought that Dolphin/Gamecube was going to be 128bit hehe).EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
Sammy Samusu said:
Eh, I'm still banking on all this attention from developers simply because there's power under the hood this time. The Wii would have got similar attention if it wasn't so significantly far behind in horsepower.
I guarenty that in an Xbox 360/PlayStation 3/Wii U market you will see a huuuge amount of third party titles coming to the Wii U, simply because there's really no point not porting them.
Wake me when the Wii U isn't significantly underpowered compared to the PlayStation 4 and XboxWhatever.
Napoleonthechimp
Member
A billion?! Oh... a million. Disappointment total.DaSorcerer7 said:
Shadow of the BEAST
Banned
I have yet to see anything that indicates anything beyond current consoles.
Imo the main reason to get this is the game pad and the interesting ways it might be used. Especially games made by nintendo.
If you want slightly better ports of current gen games, just get a pc. It has never been cheaper and easier to use than it is today.
Imo the main reason to get this is the game pad and the interesting ways it might be used. Especially games made by nintendo.
If you want slightly better ports of current gen games, just get a pc. It has never been cheaper and easier to use than it is today.
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
Shadow of the BEAST said:
Numerous developers have already stated that the Wii U is more powerful than the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. Its a fact.
radioheadrule83
Banned
Shadow of the BEAST said:
True, but the lay gamer doesn't want to be faffing about getting the right gaming rig, the right drivers and right settings ready, they just want to jump right in. Sometimes things are more consistent and optimised in a closed box environment too in some respects. It should be a great go-to console for multiplatform games in 2012/13.
Shadow of the BEAST
Banned
I have never doubted it is more powerful than xbox360 or ps3.
If its 50% or even twice as powerful. It wont matter much. An bystander wouldnt be able to tell the difference.
If its 50% or even twice as powerful. It wont matter much. An bystander wouldnt be able to tell the difference.
EatChildren said:
Ok, so lets say that the Wii U somehow is only 2x the power of the PS360, and that Sony didn't just say the other day that the PS4 won't be a huge leap in graphics over the PS3 and will instead go after casual gamers and women.
In this unrealistic view of the universe, the PS4 goes all out and is 10x as powerful as the PS3... but only 5x more powerful than Wii U, most realistic guesses put Wii U at 3x the power of PS360, leaving this PS4 that isn't coming at only 3x the Wii U in kind... Third parties will scale their ports to the Wii U next gen, and it will be fine... Sony and Microsoft know that Nintendo's position will never repeat within this next cycle, because Wii U uses MODERN Hardware, it has all the features you'll see on the PS4/720, unless those consoles don't come out till 2016, and if that happens, Wii U's successor will only be a year or two away.
Nintendo's Wii U looks modern, the PS360 are starting to show their age. Those tech demos show effects that maybe the PS360 can do, but it's a pick and choose affair for devs on those consoles, when Wii U can do it all at once.
Feel woken up yet? if not, than get ready for a rude awakening in 2 years when those consoles release with ports from Wii U.
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
z0m3le said:
No.
And yeah yeah yeah I've heard all this shit before a thousand times over and side with most of it, I'm simply not going to count my chickens before they hatch. My point was that the Wii U is already a shoe-in for current generation ports because the hardware accepts it. The attention on the Wii U over the Wii is not a big deal, because the Wii would have got such attention had the system been built with hardware closer to the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3.
Third party support will matter most of all when the next Sony and Microsoft systems roll out, which will be stronger than the current generation. Games will be made for those systems, and for Nintendo it will come down to how powerful the Wii U is relative to the competition. Either they'll have enough muscle to keep getting ports, or over time they'll get dicked into another Wii situation.
I dont necessarily believe in one scenario over the other, I'm simply not going to sing praise because third parties all of a sudden are interested in a Nintendo platform. Current gen support was a guarenty. Again, wake me up when the actual pressure is on.
PS3/360 will get ports of Wii U games. Its ease of development and greater power ensures this.
Wii U will get ports of PS4/720 games because it actually can, as opposed to the Wii w/the HD twins. Wii U is Shader Model 4.1 (possibly 5.0), whereas Wii wasn't Shader Model anything. It wasn't possible to scale down games to it without completely re-writing the engines and re-tooling the assets.
Wii U will get ports of PS4/720 games because it actually can, as opposed to the Wii w/the HD twins. Wii U is Shader Model 4.1 (possibly 5.0), whereas Wii wasn't Shader Model anything. It wasn't possible to scale down games to it without completely re-writing the engines and re-tooling the assets.
- Status