Polygon makes it very easy to hate with all of their arrogance and self-important talk.
Listen, I don't know about you, but I felt that "No one is getting code until tomorrow." was a bullshit response to a simple "Any impressions out there?" question. It's pretty much implying that the OP shouldn't look for impressions unless they come from a dedicated games site of the kind that would receive review code. It's also implying that no one in the games journalism world will (nor should) provide coverage for the game until they receive a free copy from the PR department. It's just ludicrous, especially when it comes from a site that claims they're going to shake things up in games journalism or whatever.
The website took the WiiU gameplay from an user and the Ps3 version from other.
Not even the same capture conditions, bullshit.
He said hey guyz none of the press is getting this til tomorrow.
thats it. yal went and acted like little shits for no reason
You are heavily inferring: What Arthur wrote implies that most reviewers won't provide impressions for a while, as review copies haven't been sent out pre-release.
But even if what you are claiming was his intention: Reading posts in this thread, it is very easy to see why Arthur Gies would think that only gaming journalist will be able to provide reasonable and thought out criticism.
Videos seem to make it look great:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0ybjvwkKQs&feature=plcp
This is not split screen mode like the video mentioned further up in the thread.
Poster is on gaf so hopefully Hellish can give us a better idea of the FPS here.
Looks pretty matched to the 360 here.
Ofc it is! Video above is with pad. Pointer controls can be used. Pro controller too.
There is life beyond Polygon.
Dark10x's comments in the other thread mention the game runs pretty poorly (30 fps in the first level). And it's missing details and has worse lighting.
wiiu
360
pretty disappointing
No, I'm talking about BLOPS2.Isn't that Mass Effect 3?
thread
Dark10x's comments in the other thread mention the game runs pretty poorly (30 fps in the first level). And it's missing details and has worse lighting.
pretty disappointing
Damn... I guess it's hard to say if this is a launch thing or a Wii U thing?
Haven't played online, but the framerate was very smooth in botmatch. From the two maps I played it held a near perfect 60 fps. It's pretty neat being able to play the game on the gamepad, I have to admit. Looks fantastic there as it seems downsampled from 720p.Wow - not only is that disappointing, that's downright atrocious. I'll wait for a few more opinions (I'm getting the Wii U on the 30th - European launch), but if future impressions don't seem much better (I'm especially interested in multiplayer framerate) I'm going to buy the 360 edition.
Haven't played online, but the framerate was very smooth in botmatch. From the two maps I played it held a near perfect 60 fps. It's pretty neat being able to play the game on the gamepad, I have to admit. Looks fantastic there as it seems downsampled from 720p.
The sub-30 fps bit takes place during the first mission of the campaign. When you jump back on the large vehicle after the initial battle, the framerate dips to 30 fps or less. It's a scripted sequence, but it looked really choppy. Also the fire death right at the start was pretty choppy as was the framerate when looking out over the battlefield.Wait. What is the 30fps from and those images?
That top image was snapped with my iPhone 5. It shows that the dynamic shadows ARE in the game but, unless viewed from extremely close proximity, they are very pixelated (as you see). In splitscreen those shadows are not even present.
No, that's wrong. There was another shot that was taken from splitscreen, but the shot posted there is what you get in single screen mode. It has real shadows, but they are super pixelated from most distances.I just read the other thread (http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=44472958&postcount=1115): Apparently, the picture above was taken in co-op (player on TV, another player on GamePad) mode and is therefore not representative of regular multiplayer performance and display quality (most games degrade graphics for performance reasons in co-op modes).
I took it in single screen botmatch.Did you take the picture above in regular online-multiplayer?
No, that's wrong. There was another shot that was taken from splitscreen, but the shot posted there is what you get in single screen mode. It has real shadows, but they are super pixelated from most distances.
I took it in single screen botmatch.
The sub-30 fps bit takes place during the first mission of the campaign. When you jump back on the large vehicle after the initial battle, the framerate dips to 30 fps or less. It's a scripted sequence, but it looked really choppy. Also the fire death right at the start was pretty choppy as was the framerate when looking out over the battlefield.
The framerate is very unstable, basically.
In multiplayer with bots, however, the game runs just fine from what I've played.
That top image was snapped with my iPhone 5. It shows that the dynamic shadows ARE in the game but, unless viewed from extremely close proximity, they are very pixelated (as you see). In splitscreen those shadows are not even present.
Dark10x's comments in the other thread mention the game runs pretty poorly (30 fps in the first level). And it's missing details and has worse lighting.
wiiu
360
pretty disappointing
What I'm seeing is a much sharper image overall for WiiU, better textures and better modeling in some cases, WiiU's shadows are worse though (nothing to do with lighting).
yeah, wii u has brighter colour
x360 lighter beige colours but more textures and art
What I'm seeing is a much sharper image overall for WiiU, better textures and better modeling in some cases, WiiU's shadows are certainly worse though (nothing to do with lighting).
Uhh, no. The image quality is about on par with 360 but the textures and models are exactly the same while the shadows are worse.What I'm seeing is a much sharper image overall for WiiU, better textures and better modeling in some cases, WiiU's shadows are certainly worse though (nothing to do with lighting).
yeah, wii u has brighter colour
x360 lighter beige colours but more textures and art
What I'm seeing is a much sharper image overall for WiiU, better textures and better modeling in some cases, WiiU's shadows are certainly worse though (nothing to do with lighting).
some guy said:What you think may be a "sharper" image is probably just the fact that it is an off-screen picture.
Uhh, no. The image quality is about on par with 360 but the textures and models are exactly the same while the shadows are worse.
Not that I'm saying some of you other posters are wrong, but Dark has a pretty damn good proven track record with calling out details, fps, ect... In a game. I will take stock in what he sees over most of you.
Not just colour, texture clarity and resolution. Look at the floor texture in the 360 version, very aliased, look at the seat, dull texture and more aliasing, the WiiU version looks much sharper with less aliasing.
Also where do you see more textures in the 360 version?
Not just colour, texture clarity and resolution. Look at the floor texture in the 360 version, very aliased, look at the seat, dull texture and more aliasing, the WiiU version looks much sharper with less aliasing.
Also where do you see more textures in the 360 version?
Not that I'm saying some of you other posters are wrong, but Dark has a pretty damn good proven track record with calling out details, fps, ect... In a game. I will take stock in what he sees over most of you.
Looks good enough for me, really. :/ Didn't even notice the framerate drops in the first mission.
Looks good enough for me, really. :/ Didn't even notice the framerate drops in the first mission.
Honestly, we should all chip in a dollar or two for dark10x for saving us money and preventing activision from fucking us in the ass
Forgive me but I really don't see the logic in posting comparison screenshots, claiming the 360 version looks better, then when people point out that the Wii U version looks better claiming it's an unfair comparison.
Seems more like performance art than honest critical analysis.
Honestly, we should all chip in a dollar or two for dark10x for saving us money and preventing activision from fucking us in the ass
I have about 5 hours in the multiplayer so far. Currently #8 on the highest level leaderboard (lvl 27). It plays just fine with the Wii U pro controller and I often end up in #1-3 at the end of the round. I don't get any lag, and no frame drops, and graphics look just fine. I mean none of the platforms have like Crysis or Battlefield 3 graphics so no real need to compare it to 360 since it pretty much looks the same.
And it is just like playing it on any other console, and doesn't have any sense of a watered down port at all. If anything you get the additional Wii Mote support plus can play it on the Gamepad around the house. I just play on the Wii U pro controller since it's lighter (even lighter than the 360 controller) and I do just fine on it.
And I can hop into a game super quick as well and don't have any issues once I'm in the game. If you like CoD, you'll find the same experience here that you'll find anywhere else
The second pic was taken from a very low res video feed on YouTube while the WiiU shot was taken from my iPhone camera. Big difference.But that's not what the pictures show, that's all I'm commenting on. If there's a problem with the pics then ok, but they don't show equal textures and detail.
Dark10x's comments in the other thread mention the game runs pretty poorly (30 fps in the first level). And it's missing details and has worse lighting.
wiiu
360
pretty disappointing
Dark10x's comments in the other thread mention the game runs pretty poorly (30 fps in the first level). And it's missing details and has worse lighting.
wiiu
pretty disappointing