i think for unreal 3 we will get 1080p with 60fps.
And for unreal 4 we will get 720p with 60fps.
Finally confirm
-
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.
Wii U Speculation Thread The Third: Casting Dreams in The Castle of Miyamoto
- Thread starter AceBandage
- Start date
Here's what bothers most people about the Wii U.
The reason people were cool with the Wii being underpowered was because the price was $250 while the 360 was $400-500 and the PS3 was $500-$600. And the Wii still had an innovative feature (wii remote).
So you got current gen hardware with innovative controller technology at an affordable price. That's why the Wii was successful.
But with the Wii U...you got current gen hardware (with extra ram) with an innovative controller technology at an much more rumored expensive price (unless Nintendo is willing to take a loss).
If the price of the controller technology is driving up the Wii U's cost, was doing this controller even worth it? For the cost that the controller technology adds to the Wii U, I would have rather had better graphics.
$350 (based on what you guys are predicting) for a slightly more powerful current gen console (sorry, IGN is the only one to say otherwise), + a $50-$60 game is $400 right there.
I only see loyal Nintendo fans like me biting on this console if Nintendo can't price it properly.
The reason people were cool with the Wii being underpowered was because the price was $250 while the 360 was $400-500 and the PS3 was $500-$600. And the Wii still had an innovative feature (wii remote).
So you got current gen hardware with innovative controller technology at an affordable price. That's why the Wii was successful.
But with the Wii U...you got current gen hardware (with extra ram) with an innovative controller technology at an much more rumored expensive price (unless Nintendo is willing to take a loss).
If the price of the controller technology is driving up the Wii U's cost, was doing this controller even worth it? For the cost that the controller technology adds to the Wii U, I would have rather had better graphics.
$350 (based on what you guys are predicting) for a slightly more powerful current gen console (sorry, IGN is the only one to say otherwise), + a $50-$60 game is $400 right there.
I only see loyal Nintendo fans like me biting on this console if Nintendo can't price it properly.
good lord. the last sentence, the last sentence. ideaman clearly states that streaming an environment + assets to the 480p screen while the main screen is displaying 720p with better post processing features than the 360/ps3 all at a stable frame rate is what's causing it to be a "bit better" than current gen. take the heavily taxing subscreen features away and you'll likely see a performance boost.
if the ps4/nextbox have all their games at 1080 I'll buy you a cookie.
I think we should start a new game here on the forum.. call it "Guess Which Hardware!" and put-up different screenshots.
Let's see how people would fare, and if they realize that we simply are not going to see the same dramatic jumps that we've seen in the past.
What'll be really interesting is if Sony or MS decide to copy the tablet controller. Say it happens but MS/Sony obviously put more muscle behind the machine. It'll be both a gain and a loss for wii u. Gain because it would further cement the idea of subscreen gameplay and undoubtedly spawn numerous multiplatform games that made good use of the controller. Loss because it might make the baseline for a lot of games more graphically intensive, thus hurting the chances of a wii u port. Conversely imagine if neither MS and Sony don't employ subscreens It was also help and hurt the wii u. It'd help because that means most ports wouldn't make extensive use of the subscreen anyway, most likely delegating it to simple tasks such as puzzles, menus, and inventory. This would allow more games to be ported while taking a smaller hit to graphical performance. It would also mean that games that do happen to use the subscreen extensively would be more likely built from the ground up for wii u, possibly even being exclusive to the system. However, fewer devs might be inclined to use the subscreen in meaningful ways if the installed base for such games isn't large enough. Nintendo would have a heavier burden making subscreen play an important feature in the next gen.
Deal XD
Glorified G
Member
Early adopters are hardcore gamers/loyal fans in the first place. Wouldn't be that stupid to have an "early adopter tax" from the start and drop the price when PS4/720 come out. Though I doubt it would be more than $299 anyway.
It would also mean that the graphical difference is lesser if they go with screened controllers, since a portion of processing power would have to be devoted to their own subscreens. Not too shabby.
I definitely think Nintendo announced the uPad well in advance on purpose, just to give that temptation.
I'll buy you a cookie if one Wii U game uses Unreal engine 4.
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
lol at the meltdowns here
can't wait for E3
No one will care about any of this when they see the first party games.
Mouthpiece of the Holy Truth
You mean what bothers you. Most people have no idea what Wii U is.
With all this crazy talk.. I wonder how closely Nintendo listened what third parties had to say about what they want, what they expect and the changes they would add to the system to make it future proof enough, compete against the other consoles and avoid being left in the dust again (only talking about third party support)
I got your "learn how to read" right here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCn1QP8EcKw&feature=related
I agree. I have both a 360 and a Wii, and despite the huge graphical difference between the two my Wii gets a lot more playtime because it has the games that I really want. For the last couple of years I've been mostly renting 360 games when I'm on breaks.
I'm fine with the speculations as long as the Nintendo games are in HD and the tablet is put into good use.
Not I. I think it'll be well enough. But then again, I'm pretty easily satisfied and still hold that old-fashioned "you-want-superpower?-Go-grab-a-damn-PC!" attitude.
But watching the dance is dizzying, frustrating, encouraging, and funny.. all at the same time.
Well it really does depend on how much more powerful PS4/XB3 are going to be than Wii U. Showing the upad so early really was an interesting tactical decision. Or maybe it's all a coincidence
Which is even worse lol. And if people (outside of hardcore gamers) hear Wii U, they just assume its a Wii 1.
Haha wow. Is this guy serious?
I wonder if they said, "hey.. here's our chance to bleed 'em to death a bit! Let's tell the Big N that we want power power power! Enough power to see the nits on a bokoblin's asshairs! muahahahaha!"
sorry for bringing that visual back..
All I know is that I'm very confident in my next-gen mario 1080p 60fps ban bet.
developers have always sacrificed framerate and resolution for eye candy. the subscreen is the new wow factor.
developers have always sacrificed framerate and resolution for eye candy. the subscreen is the new wow factor.
Grampa Simpson
Banned
Well it really does depend on how much more powerful PS4/XB3 are going to be than Wii U. Showing the upad so early really was an interesting tactical decision. Or maybe it's all a coincidence
I love how everyone assumes that PS4/720 are going to be more powerful than the Wii U.
I don't think it's a given.
I tend to think you're golden.
Again, that will depend on the developer more than the power/underpower thing.
Seeing how some of the big games are barely 720p and that with hardware that was "old" to them; most will probably try to get their games at 720p.
Even more power won't necessarily mean 1080p games.
Look at even on the Vita and how Uncharted and other games are not even full-res.
fabricated backlash
Member
Again, that is hardly impressive at all. If this is indicative of the hardware that is going to be in stores in 2012, it isn't impressive. It might be adequate at best, but hardly future proof.
If the PS4 and 720 aren't able to run games at 1080p in 2013-2014 then they're going for very, very cheap hardware.
Personally I have a hard time believing that Nintendo is going for such a cheap approach. If the rumoured spec increase in the newer dev kits is true, then I might reconsider my stance, but what Ideaman said is hardly encouraging that the WiiU will get more than 1 or 2 years worth of 3rd party games.
golden in general? thank you thats a nice compliment =P
I'm starting to think more and more as time goes on that what nintendo intends to target is the absolute baseline for what devs want next gen. They go to Epic and ask "how much ram?" and epic replies "4GB would be best." To which they reply "C'mon. Really? This next gen engine of yours can't possibly ever run on less?" Causing the Epic spokesman to cough a little and say "Well with optimization, 2GB might work out."
It'll be interesting to see if they can actually pull that off since it's likely a a very thin line between good enough and not quite there.
Glorified G
Member
Mii Mario?
Why not? You expect all 3 consoles to be part of the same ecosystem in power and tech and development? Again it depends on what engines each console can run. If Wii U can't run the engines that Xbox 720/PS4 can run, then yes, third parties will need to give Wii U versions their own seperate team. Just like Call of Duty on Wii was always made by a seperate team from the 360/PS3 call of Duty's.
You assuming that Sony/MS's consoles are not going to be a huge leap over Wii U is no different than me assuming it will be a huge leap. We're both assuming.
3D mario
I think so. To many "owww... please protect my delicate eyes from teh uglies" gamers, Nintendo hardware is an embarrassment. So imagine the PR problems, the teasing, the media ribbing, etc that MS or Sony would get for releasing a machine that's weaker than.. Nintendo's.
Could they be in the same league? Sure, I'd buy that. But even then, I suspect spoiled gamers (who like their console makers bleeding) would whine whine whine like Veruca Salt spotting a Golden Egg Hen.
my comment had less to do with specs than it did regarding developer arrogance.
I said that because I believe big name Developers will do next gen what they did this gen and push the tech so far that they'll have to sacrifice resolution for what they want to pull off visually
or we can just say this:
Like I said, it's all about what a developer targets
cyberheater
PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 Xbone PS4 PS4
I think the problem here is that currently, when we view a PC game next to it's console version. They are both running basically the same engine. The PC version may have higher textures and run it at a higher resolution with more AA but they both look essentially the same.
I think the next gen game engines will employ advanced graphical techniques that will just about run at an acceptable frame rate on PS4/720. If you've got a game that looks like the Samaritan demo and try to shoehorn that into current hardware, you're going to have to make a lot of graphical sacrifices.
I got what he wrote. Loud and clear.
I'm just enjoying the aftermath. And I suspect he is, too.
(thanks, again, IdeaMan!)
and this goes back to what we said before. the majority doesn't care/can't tell the difference between significant leaps in graphics technology. to them the 360 and nextbox may look the same.
you miss ideaman's post?
Stop twisting his words to fit your agenda. He said WiiU was producing a bit better looking versions of games than 360 while also rendering complex scenes to the controller and all on a dev kit that's less powerful than the next WiiU dev kit.
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
Nothing new, people caring more about the type of guitar rather than who is playing it.
E3 is going to rock.
SolidSnakex
Member
i think for unreal 3 we will get 1080p with 60fps.
And for unreal 4 we will get 720p with 60fps.
Finally confirm
60fps is dead on consoles outside of a handful of developers. The problem isn't with the engines, it's with the developers that no longer target that framerate. Instead they want fancier lighting effects, higher resolution textures, larger poly counts etc. And that's all at the expense of the framerate. I'd imagine that things are only going to get worse in that area as systems become more powerful
fabricated backlash
Member
This is what I'm talking about. If Nintendo intends to make the WiiU relevant for more than 2 years, they'll have to make sure that the next set of engines at least runs on the WiiU.
And this is why I find it highly unlikely that a machine that runs current gen games at 720p 30fps and adds another 480p display to it isn't going to cut it in that regard. Again, I doubt Nintendo is that short sighted, and if there is even a slice of truth to 3rd parties having significant input on Nintendo, then I highly doubt that what Ideaman said (which I don't doubt btw) is indicative of what we'll get in the final hardware.
Oh come on, what Agenda? If my Agenda is to sound off my honest dissapointement then whatever fine. But I find his report to be hardly impressive and I hope that it's not indicative of what the final hardware is capable of.
Similar threads
- Poll