WiiU will do just fine. Nintendo will make money off it and release some great first party games. I am not interested in WiiU but I don't like this bashing, it reminds me of PS3 bashing. Give nintendo at least 2 years.
I don't think it will be as successful as Wii but it will make money for big N
Are you referring to Nintendo supposedly shitcanning EA's proposal to have Origin on Wii U?
Are you referring to Nintendo supposedly shitcanning EA's proposal to have Origin on Wii U?
I love the Wii U. I have many projects unannounced for it at my studio.
Two games is unprecedented support from a third party for Nintendo!
Announced, unreleased Wii U games published by EA:
-Need for Speed: Most Wanted
Announced, unreleased games published by EA that have platforms:
-Crysis 3
-Dead Space 3
-Army of Two: The Devil's Cartel
-Sim City
-Command & Conquer
-Overstrike
-Tiger Woods PGA Tour 14
Am I missing anything?
Two games is unprecedented support from a third party for Nintendo!
Unannounced Wii U game is my favorite game. Can't wait.
Announced, unreleased Wii U games published by EA:
-Need for Speed: Most Wanted
Announced, unreleased games published by EA that have platforms:
-Crysis 3
-Dead Space 3
-Army of Two: The Devil's Cartel
-Sim City
-Command & Conquer
-Overstrike
-Tiger Woods PGA Tour 14
Am I missing anything?
Quite possibly bickering in this thread is more fun than many will have playing WiiU!
Amirite?
Announced, unreleased Wii U games published by EA:
-Need for Speed: Most Wanted
Announced, unreleased games published by EA that have platforms:
Tiger Woods PGA Tour 14
Even Devs dont think WiiU is Next Gen.
Damn lol
Even Devs dont think WiiU is Next Gen.
Damn lol
Man...I just thinking about multiplatform games at this point between PS4, 720, PC and WiiU. Wondering how it will play out in the long run.
Lets be friends! I totally think the same way
Well to contribute to the topic, since I'm not terribly knowledgeable about development-processes and hardware itself I might appear very stupid with that question and I'm sure it has been asked before though from what I read the Wii U has much more "standardized technology" than the Wii even though it lacks raw power so wouldn't it be possible to port PS4/720 games in the same way I can still run BF3 on a Dual-Core CPU with a 4770 and it just wouldn't look pretty but would be playable?
I understand that DICE and the Metro people probably aren't happy with the Wii U since they might need to cut the numbers of players in multiplayer and have other shortcomings with their games and I also understand that porting games to the Wii was a sheer impossible task thanks to the vastly different architecture and setup though shouldn't Wii U (down)porting be a much smaller effort now compared to then and this time actually turn out profitable for publishers when they add Wii U game sales to the other two platforms?
I don't want to troll, these things just really make me curious
Announced, unreleased Wii U games published by EA:
-Need for Speed: Most Wanted
Announced, unreleased games published by EA that have platforms:
-Crysis 3
-Dead Space 3
-Army of Two: The Devil's Cartel
-Sim City
-Command & Conquer
-Overstrike
-Tiger Woods PGA Tour 14
Am I missing anything?
GPUs are terrible at running general purpose code, and it's only worth it for massively parallelizable problems like physics, video processing, or raster graphics.You're a good example to what I've been saying for awhile.
People appear to like comparing consoles to PCs and you just can't.
1) PCs have a lot of overhead. The OS, other applications, the API and etc. So, it takes beefier specs to get some serious visuals on a PC. Plus, not every PC is the same, so developers have to develop software that would work for most PCs and not just one universal piece of hardware.
2) Consoles are specifically designed for games. So, their architecture is slightly different than a PC. Plus, there isn't as much overhead. Also, since consoles are the same among everyone who buys one, developers can use tricks which are guaranteed to work with every console (See Halo 4 for example). Not only that, but developers have direct access to the hardware which could push out even better visuals.
Don't compare your desktop PC to a console. You'll just confuse yourself.
That's called BS.
The GPU is capable of instructions commonly done on the CPU. This alleviates a lot of work from the CPU. So, if you look at it, it's like running a quad core APU. So, taking players away from multiplayer or doing stupid stuff like that is unnecessary.
Also, it's not impossible to port games from 7-6 year old hardware to something more modern. It's just that developers have been so used to offloading a ton of crap to the CPU and are totally new to programming to a GPGPU. Now, I believe the CPU in the WiiU is slow. However, I believe it was intentional to get developers to program for the much superior GPGPU. However, developers get lazy and don't want to do it. They want to simply ignore the GPGPU and simply copy and paste their games to the WiiU for a quick buck.
Yep. Stream processors and CUDA cores still aren't anywhere near as good as running general purpose code like CPU's can.GPUs are terrible at running general purpose code, and it's only worth it for massively parallelizable problems like physics, video processing, or raster graphics.
Chronologically it is definitely 'next-gen'.
In terms of hardware I frankly have no idea if it's sub-current gen, current gen or current gen+. It's a weird piece of hardware like that.
That's one of the theories. I don't know what happened, but going from "unprecedented support" to one launch game with one game in the pipeline... i think it's safe to assume something happened. Maybe they just got wind of the horribly slow CPU, lol.
It's next iteration hardware. I never thought time alone defined a hardware generation. I thought it was more about a generation leap in tech as in a gap. The WiiU doesn't have a tech gap on anything right now.
Occam's Razor:
The "unprecedented support" remark was a bit of premature marketing buzz, John Riccitiello being on stage didn't mean shit
The Origin stuff is totally bogus and based on hysterical fan wishes and ambiguities in how Nintendo mentioned "flexibility for third parties to implement online services" and "working with third parties to meet online needs"
Surprised we haven't heard anything about Tiger Woods on the Wii U since it worked so well on the Wii. Hopefully EA will announce something at next e3.
GPUs are terrible at running general purpose code, and it's only worth it for massively parallelizable problems like physics, video processing, or raster graphics.
With all this talks about how underpowered the wii u is, I thought of something interesting. Will the fact that the wii u is cheap and underpowered put nintendo in best position for cloud gaming?
You're a good example to what I've been saying for awhile.
People appear to like comparing consoles to PCs and you just can't.
1) PCs have a lot of overhead. The OS, other applications, the API and etc. So, it takes beefier specs to get some serious visuals on a PC.
That's called BS.
The GPU is capable of instructions commonly done on the CPU. This alleviates a lot of work from the CPU. So, if you look at it, it's like running a quad core APU. So, taking players away from multiplayer or doing stupid stuff like that is unnecessary.
Also, it's not impossible to port games from 7-6 year old hardware to something more modern. It's just that developers have been so used to offloading a ton of crap to the CPU and are totally new to programming to a GPGPU. Now, I believe the CPU in the WiiU is slow. However, I believe it was intentional to get developers to program for the much superior GPGPU. However, developers get lazy and don't want to do it. They want to simply ignore the GPGPU and simply copy and paste their games to the WiiU for a quick buck.
Occam's Razor:
The "unprecedented support" remark was a bit of premature marketing buzz, John Riccitiello being on stage didn't mean shit
The Origin stuff is totally bogus and based on hysterical fan wishes and ambiguities in how Nintendo mentioned "flexibility for third parties to implement online services" and "working with third parties to meet online needs"
Outside of the first year Wii U won't be part of this ecosystem.Man...I just thinking about multiplatform games at this point between PS4, 720, PC and WiiU. Wondering how it will play out in the long run.
You kind of can.
That is not completely true, sure the DX API can take up more CPU time than it should and yes you can not program to the metal on PC GPUs, but OSs take up just about nothing other than RAM, same with other programs unless they have been told to do something.
No, what you just stated is the BS.
GPUs are only good at a small subset of code .
A lot of devs are not new to GPGPU programming.
In both the PC space and the 360 (due to it also having a GPGPU) (and Cell is also not far removed from the idea), it is just that it is not good for anything that is not easily parallelizable code.
No matter what, slow CPU = cutdowns or poor performance
Devs are not lazy!
You should just stop talking about things you do not understand.
Wii U doesn't have a weird architecture... It basically uses the equivalent of parts you can buy at new egg sans their controller. It just has a weak GPU and CPU compared to what's out today on the PC market. I don't know if anyone has seen actual gameplay of Metro: Last Light, but to get that game to run on 360 and PS3 is a miracle enough and Far Cry 3 is suffering from low frame rate and screen tearing. These systems are on their last leg. When their new iterations are released and everyone is using DirectX 11 and whatever Sony's equivalent to that is going to be, then, unless the Wii U is the basis for development, you're going to see some horrible downports or no ports on the console. Developers shouldn't have to be forced to downgrade their game just because a company decided to release a product that's targeted to families who are just looking for a fun experience and not so much a graphical tour de force.
Some of the comments on here are so ignorant that I don't know if people are being sarcastic or if they are really that low on the intelligence scale or that naive about technology.
This argument should be used to describe why consoles are allowed to achieve superior visuals to PCs with identical specs. It has no relevance to the Wii U, which, while is of an uncertain composition, certainly does not contain anything resembling modern PC specs.People appear to like comparing consoles to PCs and you just can't.
This is an incredible leap of logic. You're saying that they intentionally gimped parts of their hardware to steer development in a certain direction?That's called BS.
The GPU is capable of instructions commonly done on the CPU. This alleviates a lot of work from the CPU. So, if you look at it, it's like running a quad core APU. So, taking players away from multiplayer or doing stupid stuff like that is unnecessary.
Also, it's not impossible to port games from 7-6 year old hardware to something more modern. It's just that developers have been so used to offloading a ton of crap to the CPU and are totally new to programming to a GPGPU. Now, I believe the CPU in the WiiU is slow. However, I believe it was intentional to get developers to program for the much superior GPGPU. However, developers get lazy and don't want to do it. They want to simply ignore the GPGPU and simply copy and paste their games to the WiiU for a quick buck.
In the case of the Wii U's CPU, though, one of its strength may actually be its ability to run general code efficient if its an upgrade of Broadway. The 360/PS3's CPU are apparently bad at running general code, and Broadway was only a little slower than a single core of the other systems in some things despite the significant clock frequency difference.GPUs are terrible at running general purpose code, and it's only worth it for massively parallelizable problems like physics, video processing, or raster graphics.
Unannounced Wii U game is my favorite game. Can't wait.
This argument should be used to describe why consoles are allowed to achieve superior visuals to PCs with identical specs. It has no relevance to the Wii U, which, while is of an uncertain composition, certainly does not contain anything resembling modern PC specs.
This is an incredible leap of logic. You're saying that they intentionally gimped parts of their hardware to steer development in a certain direction?
This isn't true.
The OS takes up more resources than just RAM and a few cycles from the CPU. It's one of the reasons why several games run faster in Windows XP than in Windows 7 (outside of drivers).
That small subset of code extends further than you think. I'm not saying the GPGPU is a complete replacement of the CPU.
I'm saying it can take off a lot of stress from the CPU. I've said this already.
The GPU inside the Xbox 360 is an R520 based on the ATI Radeon X1800. AMD didn't start adapting GPGPU coding until a few years after the Xbox 360 was released. Therefore, the GPU inside the Xbox 360 wasn't designed from the ground up to support general purpose processing. To imply that developers are suddenly gurus at GPGPU is a bit silly. It's fairly new to all of us. Some developers _ARE_ lazy.
Don't quit your day job.
Good lord. The GPU will be a customized chip, only based off of R700 line. What does this mean? It could be a customized R700 that is made to handle compute shading better than the actual R700 line. Or the whole point of Nintendo touting GPGPU is pointless.
Good lord. The GPU will be a customized chip, only based off of R700 line. What does this mean? It could be a customized R700 that is made to handle compute shading better than the actual R700 line. Or the whole point of Nintendo touting GPGPU is pointless.
A GPU is designed to take in a huge data set and run one instruction on each piece of data in the set. The amount of speed up that can be gained by running an algorithm on a GPU is a function of the size of the data set and how parallelizable the algorithm is. For example, UE4 uses the GPU to render over a million of particles without impacting game performance. That is a typical example of offloading work to the GPU. But if the CPU is clocked too slow to run the main game thread fast enough then the GPU won't help in that case.That small subset of code extends further than you think. I'm not saying the GPGPU is a complete replacement of the CPU.
I'm saying it can take off a lot of stress from the CPU. I've said this already.
The GPU inside the Xbox 360 is an R520 based on the ATI Radeon X1800. AMD didn't start adapting GPGPU coding until a few years after the Xbox 360 was released. Therefore, the GPU inside the Xbox 360 wasn't designed from the ground up to support general purpose processing. To imply that developers are suddenly gurus at GPGPU is a bit silly. It's fairly new to all of us. Some developers _ARE_ lazy.