Backfoggen
Banned
Just look at the comparison vids
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-black-ops-2-wii-u-face-off
A game running at 48 fps avg. could theoretically still be a bad experience
-
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.
Rumor: Wii U final specs
- Thread starter EatChildren
- Start date
Just look at the comparison vids
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-black-ops-2-wii-u-face-off
A game running at 48 fps avg. could theoretically still be a bad experience
Someone linked me the Digital Foundry article and I've read it. The side by side comparison I saw was in person and was online, because that is mainly what my friends play. This is from the concluding paragraph of the DF article:
It seems 360 and Wii U are for the most part completely identical in multiplayer... Maybe I should change my avatar and some posters will take me more seriously?
Absolutely.
Alexios
Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
I would think the comparisons drive the point home by focusing on the bits that are more intensive. Also I have to say both sides of the first vid looked really choppy to me a lot of the time. Did they add slow motion to it or something? If so that doesn't let me judge it very well. Either way it's mostly nothing like the difference I immediately saw when seeing Soul Reaver running side by side on the PS1 and Dreamcast. As for it being a bad experience, well, that would make most console games such since most aren't over 30 most of the time as even the comparison vids show the WiiU version being with only certain dips even approaching it.
Edit: weird, night club scene looked right out of Goldeneye 007 on Wii, just with normal models instead of silhouettes, heh.
Edit: also worth noting Black Ops 1 performs worse than 2 on the platforms it favors here too (although apparently it "feels" 60fps, lol). Clearly optimizations specific to hardware play a big part since Black Ops II does more and does it smoother.
Backfoggen
Banned
I wasn't arguing for or against BLOPS 2 on Wii U, I was just pointing out that average frame rates don't mean much. I remember running benchmarks on my PC that went into 10fps mode for half a minute straight and in the end the result was still 40 fps avg.
Alexios
Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
I'm not arguing for any version either, just saying that I feel my point remains the same even after your suggestion of taking a look at the comparison vids, and don't really see why you suggested I do that as if it would change it.
I should also add that it going to half fps in certain gameplay scenes doesn't mean it's actually at half performance compared to the 360 since slightly different things occur every play even in such a scripted game, with slightly different view angles, different timing on the big firepower showcases the AI decides, different weapons used and hitting different things and causing different particles, etc. Maybe it'd be a bit less difference if they could have filmed it exactly the same in all versions, but it's impossible.
I've watched all 3.
I should also add that it going to half fps in certain gameplay scenes doesn't mean it's actually at half performance compared to the 360 since slightly different things occur every play even in such a scripted game, with slightly different view angles, different timing on the big firepower showcases the AI decides, different weapons used and hitting different things and causing different particles, etc. Maybe it'd be a bit less difference if they could have filmed it exactly the same in all versions, but it's impossible.
I've watched all 3.
Backfoggen
Banned
The second and third vids are the ones you want to watch, the first one is just a graphical comparison between 360 and Wii U.
SpoonyBard
Banned
Yeah, the third vid is the most interesting one, what the hell is going on there. Looks like multiplayer mode was optimized, and single player mode was rushed in order to get the game reasy for launch...
If you had to put money into optimizing something, multiplayer would be the way to go...
Necromanti
Member
So is the Wii U facing the same problem as the 3DS, in which compromises must be made to power a second screen?
Shadow of the BEAST
Banned
I was one of the biggest detractors. But even im disappointed.
Personally i dont understand nintendo. Why did they reuse the gc cpu architecture once again? Seems like such a stupid choice? And priorites all wrong. I doubt wii bc is an selling point at all. And even if it was why did they not include gc?
Just like with the wii. Nintendo could of bought random off the shelf parts at a much lower price with better performance.
Now they are sitting with a system that can barely hang with the current gen. What happens when next gen comes??
Personally i dont understand nintendo. Why did they reuse the gc cpu architecture once again? Seems like such a stupid choice? And priorites all wrong. I doubt wii bc is an selling point at all. And even if it was why did they not include gc?
Just like with the wii. Nintendo could of bought random off the shelf parts at a much lower price with better performance.
Now they are sitting with a system that can barely hang with the current gen. What happens when next gen comes??
1 game purchase = profit on hardware.
Sometimes these threads feel a bit like US politics in the media, where there is apparently a need to present "both sides" of an issue even if only one is viable.
1) For what you said to stand, the Wii U version would have to be equivalent or better than both the PS3 and 360 versions, not just one of them.
2) It is in fact worse than the PS3 version in terms of framerate, though not quite as dramatically.
This argumentation is wrong for not just 1 but 2 reasons:
1) For what you said to stand, the Wii U version would have to be equivalent or better than both the PS3 and 360 versions, not just one of them.
2) It is in fact worse than the PS3 version in terms of framerate, though not quite as dramatically.
There are no "weird blurring effects" on the 360. Wii U renders the exact same resolution with the exact same anti-aliasing method. At a lower framerate.
At the time of the statement, I was unaware DF had done a review, so keep that in mind please.
1. I said Wii U and 360 were identical (this was again based off first hand impressions as I saw them running side by side in multiplayer, because that is what my friends and I play.)
According to DF, PS3's version is inferior, though it's framerate is higher, while Wii U and 360 are visually identical.
2. I think the average framerate is a few frames less than PS3's, and ~8 less than the 360's, here is the thing though, I was basing what I said off of multiplayer.
The multiplayer game is for all intents and purposes the same game, from this review, it's clear that Wii U has an inferior port to the 360, however, if all you were to play was multiplayer, as I had, you would figure that Wii U is identical, and you would think that co op was pretty good.
Considering they took the 360 code and implanted it into the Wii U (paraphrased from the DF article) it's not a bad start for a launch console, but yes Wii U isn't going to match up with PS4/XB3 which would play 360 code likely without a single drop in frame rate and would improve visuals with likely at the very least resolution and maybe a solid 3D effect (since those devices don't exist though, it's impossible to say to what extent they could simply take 360 code and improve upon the game, seeing as how PCs don't look drastically better with their ports of console games either)
I don't think we disagree on the Wii U either, I'm just more optimistic maybe.
Wow, are you serious? Defensive much? It was an honest question.
And yet here we are, and Medal of Honor was not released on Wii U. Neither was Battlefield 3. Doesn't sound very confirmed to me. Was footage of either game running on Wii U released?
The multiplayer is much less demanding. The single player problems are caused by transparencies filling the screen and many NPCs in one spot, which doesn't happen in MP (or less often when a lot of people get killstreaks).
darkistheway
Member
ColdBlooder
Banned
grimshawish
Banned
fluffydelusions
Member
This. They more or less saved gaming way back in the 80s. I would be lying if I said they didn't need to rethink some things as of late but I would never want them to fail.
drkOne
Member
We have no idea how much better <insert console here> will eventually look.
Does that mean we can't judge based on the present?
fixed.
zombie u and mario wii u are not ports
ColdBlooder
Banned
ZombiU started as Killer Rabbids in 2010 as a PS360 game
Became Killer Freaks From Outer Space for E3 2011
And then ZombiU in 2012
So yeah technically a PS360 game originally
NSMBU is 1. low budget and 2. propably started development on Wii before moving onto Wii U as a tech demo for E3 2011.
Not probably but definitely. They flat out say so in the Iwata Asks. They started building levels with the tools from the Wii game and then just brought it over and added all the extra stuff.
The only real game that was made from the ground up is Nintendo Land.
ColdBlooder
Banned
I wouldn´t be sure about that either.
They could have experimented with the minigames on Wii already. Nintendos 1st gen software often starts development on previous gen hardware!
EDIT: Nano Assault Neo is propably the only game thats tailored to Wii U. They modified their engine to fitt the Wii U architecture.
Both games also used last gen assets, and they are far from graphical show pieces.
My problem isn't that we are looking at the graphics of these games and judging the various ports, it's that we are treating them like they are graphical show pieces for the console. I think reality is that the Wii U could of done these ports better as native content than what you see on 360, even if they are launch software.
But a lot of people here just want to call out the Wii U's hardware based on the little information we know, you can guess that it is stronger or weaker than it will really end up being, but no one really knows yet.
Right, good point.
AdventureRacing
Member
You certainly can. When the 360 and PS3 released did you think there would be games that ended up looking as good as halo 4, uncharted 2 or killzone 2?
My opinion is we will probably see games on wii U that look a decent bit better than current gen games but outside of nintendo very few if any will actually utilize this.
H_Prestige
Banned
My opinion is that Mario and Zelda Wii U will look fantastic but not unlike anything Nintendo could have achieved on 360 or ps3 hardware.
It went Attack of the Killer Rabbids from Outer Space (PS3/360) -> Killer Freaks from Outer Space (Wii U) -> ZombiU (Wii U)
You should take into consideration that (As far as I can find) there was never any conformation that the PS3/360 game ever made it past the art and concept stage before becoming a Wii U game.
Shiggy's posts on the matter when it was announced originally as Freaks on the Wii U.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=32614553&postcount=410
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=33861504&postcount=426
Seems like it only made it to pre-production before heading to the Wii U. Though, that second link makes it a bit confusing.
I thought it was confirmed to use 360 assets during the 2011 E3?
AdventureRacing
Member
I don't think it will look a great deal better and it's not like we will know for a while anyway.
ColdBlooder
Banned
I think there were even xbox 360 button prompts in the E3 2011 demo.
Let me check
EDIT: Indeed. Blue X button to reload: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p99ghcy450E (Check 3:23)
So it most likely used alot from the xbox 360, considering devs got dev kits weeks before E3 11
I don't want the company to fail, I just personally wish for the Wii U to fail.
I don't think the direction is helping them at all, and the Wii U will need to fail for them to realise this. It's overpriced, essentially old tech. I do appreciate certain aspects however, but it will be another Wii in terms of support.
Thanks for the link. The timeline was kind of confusing so this at least shows they made some in game progress before starting development on Wii U.
ColdBlooder
Banned
ColdBlooder
Banned
I think they may used an engine already optimised for 360 when they started development and then had to port it over to Wii U.
As i already said, the only game wich i think is tailored to Wii Us hardware is Nano Assault Neo.
And that one basically leapfroged over nearly all, if not all downloadable indy games on other platforms in terms of visuals. And is a mere 50mb, lol
I'm not talking about AA, the frames are blurred somehow. Watch the side by side, it's pretty clear. Others have pointed it out too. I've no idea what the technique is or what its there for. Just looks odd to me.Almost like motion blur or somthing.
*edit: unless it's just the stream, buy its not present on the WiiU one? Either way I'm not saying its a bad thing, just that it looks sharper to me without it.
**Edit 2: nope, not the feed, here's the quote from DF about the blur thing:
Also highlights the murky water surrounding the whole "wiiu version is worse than ps3" claim. I'd take the above over an average drop of 8fps....
AdventureRacing
Member
I disagree with this and i'm not sure what you're basing it on. 3rd parties have legitimate reasons now to want to develop for nintendo consoles and hardware is one of them. If nintendo had released a console that was a genuine stop up and actually minimized their practices which were unfriendly to 3rd parties they would jump on board.
Hell we have even seen with the DS and now the 3DS that nintendo can get 3rd party support.
H_Prestige
Banned
Lol but after the gamecube fiasco, they released the Wii.
H_Prestige
Banned
And hopefully after the wii/wii u fiasco they will go back to focusing on hardware instead of controller gimmicks.
Because if rumors are correct about PS4, other Next gen consoles won't be using big and fast CPUs either, there is a change here in hardware, to something much faster. Running code that exists for the GPU and leaving the CPU with only code that is ideal for the CPU. You might have missed the jaguar cores I talked about yesterday, but the reality is these next wave of consoles won't be bigger and better in every way, they will be completely new and different, moving most stuff out of the CPU into dedicated silicon.
I was informed on here yesterday about a DSP for the PS4, in this very thread, so those consoles ability to run current gen ports might be in question too... However it all comes down to user base really. People made games for the PS2 and PS3 not because they were the easiest to design games for, no one in their right mind would say that... They made games for those consoles because developers had built a userbase with the previous Playstation hardware.
lol, this word is used so wrong...Nintendo serves up "gimmicks" while everyone else "innovates"