-
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 Community Thread
- Thread starter Metroid Hunter
- Start date
- Status
So you finally played the Wii U? Impressions please!
EX Troopers! Or add online stuff to Dragon's Dogma?
They'll go where the money is if they don't have a choice. If they are that stubborn they'll stick to whatever consoles as long as they can, and if they fill a need for a dedicated base that can work out ok (i.e. the fans go where the dev goes).
So this is a lie than?, the Wii U is new hardware, it's like people forgot when this gen started, do people really expect amazing graphical launch games from last gen ports to next gen to be amazing or something?.
I just find it stupid to assume Nintendo will get all this amazing third party support from day 1, Nintendo needs to work to get to that step of great third party support, Nintendo already made the Pro Controller, they are using architecture that will be in the PS4 and 720, they now have achievements, they are focusing on an online system, and doing all of this to please third party's.
nckillthegrimace
Member
It took Ubisoft 4 games to make a PS3 version of Assassin's Creed that didn't tear all over the place and chug constantly, so I'm not surprised that it's struggling with the Wii U.
So this is a lie than?, the Wii U is new hardware, it's like people forgot when this gen started, do people really expect amazing graphical launch games from last gen ports to next gen to be amazing or something?.
I just find it stupid to assume Nintendo will get all this amazing third party support from day 1, Nintendo needs to work to get to that step of great third party support, Nintendo already made the Pro Controller, they are using architecture that will be in the PS4 and 720, they now have achievements, they are focusing on an online system, and doing all of this to please third party's.
So... was the Wii U screen a bullshot?
keep your head down and follow through, unless the wii u is relatively easy to work with (like, compared to the wii and ps360).
Here's my question, how do people know the PS4 and Xbox 720 will get great third party support?, I'm wondering, people shouldn't always assume just because they had good third party support last gen doesn't mean it will happen next gen, the SNES had great third party support, the N64 not really, the PS2 had great third party support, the first few years of the PS3 didn't and we still get gimped PS3 ports, everyone assumed the PSP would great amazing third party support because the PS2 got it and the PSP sold great but third party's still ran away from PSP, and Sony confirmed it them self's that they are struggling to get third party support on the Vita, Microsoft didn't have the best third party support on the Xbox but it got it on the Xbox 360.
Nobody should assume next gen, that's just my opinion though...
Of course I will get the PS4 or Xbox 720 (which ever one impresses me more), but that's just how I feel.
But the PS3 wasn't easy to develop for, developers confirmed the Wii U is easy to develop for and it doesn't cost much to port.
Got it from Digital Foundry.
Nobody should assume next gen, that's just my opinion though...
Of course I will get the PS4 or Xbox 720 (which ever one impresses me more), but that's just how I feel.
But the PS3 wasn't easy to develop for, developers confirmed the Wii U is easy to develop for and it doesn't cost much to port.
Got it from Digital Foundry.
web_slinger_62
Member
Framerate was fine for me, but yeah the textures sucked, I kept waiting for them to pop in...didn't happen, maybe us Canadians got an older build? lol
MadeInBeats
Banned
No, off Digital Foundry Eurogamer report. People say the textures are rough because UE3 has a problem streaming the textures in. I think some people said they waited 15 seconds for them to pop in, but there's no way they could ship the game with that issue so expect it to be corrected I would say.
For me, what makes it look a bit bad is the Armoured Batman model looks great, much greater than the original assets from the PS360 game, and that to me sort of makes everything else look worse. They need to make Armoured Batman look worse than he does now so he blends in better with everything else!
Other reports say they do pop in. It's just something that's still in development. If they don't fix it before shipping then harsh as it sounds, it doesn't deserve to sell. It sounds like such a pissy error to fix, on more advanced hardware too, you just can't imagine they won't fix it.
We've got back to the point I was trying to make earlier: The differing opinions on Wii U games (AC3 & Batman) graphical presentation points to one thing; People have different ideas of what looks good and bad. We've had two articles about AC3 from the same event, one saying it looked pants compared to ps3, one saying it shits on the ps3 build. To me this just confirms that graphics being good/bad is very subjective. And to that end it doesn't matter what wiiu ports look like. So far they're similar enough that noone has reached a consensus on whether they are an improvement or not.
Blood Diamonds
Banned
Just like BioWare wouldn't put Mass Effect 3 on the Wii U because it's audience might not have played the first two- oh wait.....
Thunder Monkey
Banned
Regaring the texture pop in. UE3 has a flaw that is impossible to fix 100% that causes the problem. Hopefully they have solved the issue in the next generation of the engine but who knows. I am sure Batman will be fixed as much as it can be in that regard but never know.
In general Batman has been upgraded to be better visually overall but they need to fix the inherent flaws in UE3 as well as they can for it to matter
No, there are things about the Wii U screenshot that are worse than the PS3 screenshot. The building on the right in particular. They just included a few little graphical touches from the PC version that the PS360 versions do not support.
Looks like they had to make some sacrifices to get the game running on Wii U, then utilized superior memory to include some bells and whistles and hoped nobody noticed.
Smurfman256
Member
It was an unoptimized demo used to show the game off at E3.This happens all the time (hence why Capcom put a big fat "DEMO IS NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF THE FINAL PRODUCT" sticker before all of their demos).
Of course, but I thought his experience with the game happened today? Same demo?
Smurfman256
Member
methinks that he was at E3. I dunno. maybe they got lazy and used the same demo at the other events?
As far as I know most demos are the same E3 ones. A few exceptions here and there but mostly the same
Talking about demos and bullshots and all that...
I will just leave this video here
. Feel the vibe!!!
Zelda HD Full Tech Demo E3 2011
I will just leave this video here
. Feel the vibe!!!Zelda HD Full Tech Demo E3 2011
Trevelyan9999
Banned
Talking about demos and bullshots and all that...
I will just leave this video here
Zelda HD Full Tech Demo E3 2011
.....and done with pre-alpha dev kits.
It always goes back to the chicken and egg situation. Pubs/devs want money, and if they don't think they'll make money they won't go there. Unless Nintendo pays them or helps significnatly in some financial manner, they're not going to change the mind of anyone holding back for that. A new console starting with a zero user base doesn't help matters for anyone that doesn't want to take a chance.
And yes assuming the others will be all fine and dandy is a risk itself, but something they're willing to take a chance on. Or if they have the resources they might port to everything to spread the risk. If the Wii U does great, they're there, otherwise they're on the others too. Of course if this is their plan, you won't be seeing fancy new multiplat stuff on Wii U until the others are out too (that also goes back to the user base issue, waiting a year gives them a larger base to sell to).
...And made in only a few weeks.
Just imagine Zelda Wii U graphics when it's worked on for a few years
.Definitely, Nintendo said there main focus with Wii U was to get the third party support, and usually when Nintendo focuses on something it succeeds, with the Wii Nintendo said "third party's will come on their own", with the Wii U is seems like Nintendo knows that's not true and they have to be the ones to get them on their side, they already made Ninja Gaiden 3 the best version with all these things the PS3/360 version didn't have, they are helping indie devs which btw tons of indie devs are praising the Wii U eShop, Nintendo got less stubborn with the Wii U and did what the third party's asked, hopefully it succeeds in the end and we will see "Grand Theft Auto VI coming to WiiU/PS4/X720 (just in case GTAV doesn't come out for Wii U).
Trevelyan9999
Banned
I can't believe this article didn't create more of a noise around here after all the reports that the Wii U version of AC3 was not up to snuff to the other HD consoles:
http://thegamershub.net/2012/08/assassins-creed-iii-preview/
"I also was lucky enough to get shown some lovely footage of the Wii U build of Assassin’s Creed III behind closed doors. The Wii U demo was again naval based, but this time took place at a pivotal point in the Revolution set around three-quarters of the way through the main game.
I suppose that the biggest question everybody has about the Wii U version has to do with just how good the game looks. Honestly, it looks incredible on Wii U. So incredible, in fact, that it makes me wonder why the PS3 version looks as ropey as it does. This isn’t to say that the PS3 demo I played looked abysmal, far from it, but it definitely didn’t look as smooth and texture rich as the Wii U version does. Of course, as the Wii U version is actually a port, the most likely explanation for visual differences is that the PS3 version is an older build, perhaps an E3 demo, while the Wii U version is up to date."
I can't think of a reason why they would lie, and it's not a Nintendo fan site........sounds good to me.
http://thegamershub.net/2012/08/assassins-creed-iii-preview/
"I also was lucky enough to get shown some lovely footage of the Wii U build of Assassin’s Creed III behind closed doors. The Wii U demo was again naval based, but this time took place at a pivotal point in the Revolution set around three-quarters of the way through the main game.
I suppose that the biggest question everybody has about the Wii U version has to do with just how good the game looks. Honestly, it looks incredible on Wii U. So incredible, in fact, that it makes me wonder why the PS3 version looks as ropey as it does. This isn’t to say that the PS3 demo I played looked abysmal, far from it, but it definitely didn’t look as smooth and texture rich as the Wii U version does. Of course, as the Wii U version is actually a port, the most likely explanation for visual differences is that the PS3 version is an older build, perhaps an E3 demo, while the Wii U version is up to date."
I can't think of a reason why they would lie, and it's not a Nintendo fan site........sounds good to me.
GiantEnemyGoomba
Member
I think we both know why this didn't get more attention here.
chertipros
Member
Lmao haha. But even if this was posted i think people would trust joystiq as a more credible source. I know i do
http://www.dsogaming.com/news/this-is-what-a-pokemon-game-would-look-like-in-unreal-engine-3/
Pokemon RPG on Wii U Nintendo. RIGHT NOW! NO EXCUSES!
Pokemon RPG on Wii U Nintendo. RIGHT NOW! NO EXCUSES!
I think the point was that a lot of people kept talking about the Games Radar article which was negative but nobody talked about this which was positive.
shinra-bansho
Member
Because by what we know the PS4 and 720 will be comparable in nature and engine makers appear to be targeting these platforms for their middleware, as well as in-house engines.
Because, as such, PC/PS4/720 development as standard shouldn't be unexpected, in the same way that PC/PS360 development became standard this generation.
Because from my understanding Nintendo didn't only lose publisher support because of hardware decisions but because of behaviors during their dominance - such that when alternative viable platforms came along third parties jumped at the chance. While afaik Sony and Microsoft haven't gone out of their way to alienate third parties.
Because Sony and Microsoft have spent generations cultivating ecosystems on their lines of hardware conducive to the nature of third parties' "core" development.
Because, Microsoft in particular, has shown a willingness to play ball when it comes to third party hardware desires as well as moneyhats.
Because there are plentiful reasons for third parties to continue developing for said platform lines, and the only reason not to is their commercial failure.
There's something of a contradiction in claiming the ease to which the console is to develop for and port to, while simultaneously decrying the comparison of launch software between the platforms...
At any rate, developers have thus far, afaict, referred to the ease of porting from current gen systems.
I asked in another thread, but never got an answer; if for example the full featured UE4 that for example allows real-time global illumination becomes standard for example, while the Wii U isn't likely to run that specific build of the engine, how difficult is it to translate a game over.
http://www.dsogaming.com/news/this-is-what-a-pokemon-game-would-look-like-in-unreal-engine-3/
Pokemon RPG on Wii U Nintendo. RIGHT NOW! NO EXCUSES!
That's just... terrifying.
bgassassin
Member
it's a simple yes-or-no question.
Sega didn't have tons of third party support when it was just Nintendo and Sega.
Nintendo wanting to do it their own way got Nintendo karma for sure but Nintendo doesn't do that anymore, they have the pro controller for developers that don't want to use the Gamepad, forever now they allow blood, Nintendo doesn't put restrictions in the games like they used too.
But this is Microsoft second generation, like I said Microsoft got the massive third party support with the Xbox 360, not the Xbox, and lets say Microsoft focuses next gen to get the casual audience, and lets say their is no audience for core games will third party's still bring the core games or will they say "their is no audience for it"?, even if Microsoft tries to money hat them.
Nintendo said they are definitely willing to pay for third party support.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=436426
They are even supporting F2P.
The PS3 didn't get all the third party support the Xbox 360 got, it also got Oblivion and Bioshock and other games a year after the Xbox 360 release, and doesn't the PS3 versions sell have as less than the Xbox 360 versions?.
When that comes the Wii U version might get a little gimped down, but the PS4 and Xbox 720 versions will also be gimped if it's a multiplat with the PC.
GameplayWhore
Member
No it isn't. It's a simple yes-or-no sentence.
No, its not.
bgassassin
Member
So the answer is chicken?
shinra-bansho
Member
That's nice. But is relatively irrelevant. Your query wasn't whether Nintendo would get third party support, but why the assumption that Microsoft and Sony would.
There's not much doubt that Sony and MS will receive third party support, because there's not much reason to doubt. The real question at hand is, will Nintendo get it too.
That's just ludicrous wishful thinking.
Porting to the PS3 became a regularity when it became cost and time-effective. It generally wasn't so for the Wii.
It's yet to be answered whether it will be with engines like UE4 or the Luminous Engine.
Are you just commenting on my poor sentence structure there?
....
Will it be possible to down-port with engines like UE4 and Luminous from the PS4/720/PC to the Wii U? And if so, will it be time- and cost- effective?
With for example real-time global illumination as part of the workflow on the former, will that translate easily.
bgassassin
Member
You need to redo your question.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
I actually understand what is meant.
You can fake Global Illumination in a prebaked fashion shinra. Now whether or not devs will want to waste the resources doing so just on WiiU? That's up to them. But nothing will stop WiiU from faking a whole range of Orbis/Durango lighting effects other than time and money allotted to the project.
bgassassin
Member
Thunder Monkey
Banned
That's why they use me as a translator for stroke victims!
Yeah that was my question but I answered your comment about Nintendo
Their isn't that much doubt but it can always happen though, like I said before I will definitely get the PS4 or Xbox 720 but we can't assume they will gets tons of amazing third party support because the brand is PlayStation and Xbox, Sony currently isn't getting the third party support for their handhelds while they get the third party support for the consoles, and that's the opposite for Nintendo.
And that's not wishful thinking, for the past three E3's Microsoft been focusing on Kinect and the media, Microsoft won't let Rare make core titles instead they want them to make Kinect titles, I'm just stating what could happen not what will happen.
Porting to PS3 became easy in about 2009, and PS3 owners (including me) still don't even have a playable version of Skyrim.
porting to Wii was a whole other story since it was weak and didn't have the architecture similar to the PS3/360 unlike what we are hearing with the Wii U which is heavily rumored that all of them will have similar architecture.
The Wii U can support both UE4 and Luminous Engine.
bgassassin
Member
Thunder Monkey
Banned
I just always thought everyone else could understand them...
I wasn't making a joke assassin!
*cries*
I wasn't making a joke assassin!
*cries*
shinra-bansho
Member
Thanks, (in retrospect it wasn't worded particularly well.) How iterative do you imagine the process is likely to be? Can one create a scene using GI and then use that to immediately get the desired result with prebaked lighting?
That leads to the question of whether publishers/developers will consider it time- and cost-effective.
On the one hand they'll have an extra platform to sell to, and will be developing an audience. On the other hand it may require resources they're unwilling to provide and/or would prefer to devote elsewhere.
Handhelds and home consoles are very different situations. Nintendo has had essentially a monopoly on handhelds for as long as one can remember. They never lost third party support in that realm to begin with.
As for your Microsoft will abandon Halo, Gears, Fable and Forza "possibility." Yeah, it's not remotely a plausibility.
The core consideration is it worthwhile from a cost-benefit situation.
Presumably one can strip down a game to make it work on a less powerful platform (to the extent that it may not even resemble the original game) - but whether it's done is a matter of bottom lines.
Wait, what?
I've read that there's a UE4 Lite and that Luminous is "scalable." But that's being deliberately obtuse to the actual question at hand regarding how easily one translates between platforms that can run UE4 Full and whether doing so is worthwhile from a cost-benefit perspective.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
I haven't used UE4 or CryEngine 3. So it'd just be guessing at this point. Given most hardware out there won't have the power to achieve realtime GI I'd wager they have some solution or another to streamline the baking process.
bgassassin
Member
Talking about demos and bullshots and all that...
I will just leave this video here
Zelda HD Full Tech Demo E3 2011
Thank you for reminding me that this existed.
- Status