kingkaiser
Member
About the gap between Dreamcast and the first Xbox
-
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.
WiiU "Latte" GPU Die Photo - GPU Feature Set And Power Analysis
- Thread starter Thraktor
- Start date
- Status
About the gap between Dreamcast and the first Xbox
I never said GC games, even early ones, didn't have high res textures. *insert obligatory Rogue Squadron II pic here*
But something like Twilight Princess, which has horrid grass textures, will no longer be an issue for the next console Zelda (TP did have other parts that were quite gorgeous, however).
Nah, I don't think it's that big. Yesterday I saw a 1080p screenshot of KillZone, posted here, on GAF, and it didn't look too hot. Doesn't touch some PC games.
Glorified G
Member
What I expected, a generational gap. The first party games (specifically Mario 3D/Kart) look like really clean ps360 games. I was impressed.
The best on ps2 (God of War 2 and GT 4) were not that far off from the best og xbox games. The gap is much wider than that
What exactly makes the gap larger than that?
Disorientator
Member
I've been wondering as well.
Thanks BG.
A bit more specific: (from devs)
Glorified G
Member
Have you seen games like The Division, Infamous SS, Forza 5, etc? While the xbox was more powerful than the ps2 it was still clearly in the same gen as most games showed that.
JordanN
Banned
There's IQ to consider. Both PS2 and Xbox did 480p for alot of their games.
PS4/XBO are [mostly] 1080p. Wii U is 720p (the games that are 1080p do not hold up as well) There's also differences in RAM. PS4 has 7GB available to it and XBO has 5GB. Wii U only has 1GB. Xbox only had roughly 1.5x more memory than PS2.
My personal belief is that the games look clearly in the same gen even though the PS/One games show obvious gains. An example of why I think the visual gap will be comparable to ps2/xbox is splinter cell
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkHoDEh0FWc
Do yourself a favour and discard much of what you saw at e3 and lower your expectations
(Yes, the division too). Don't you guys ever learn from ass creed/watch dogs/etc?
Because... PS4/XBone are much more powerful compared to WiiU than WiiU is compared to PS360. Is that too difficult to understand for you? Is that seriously still not clear? Is it still not clear that people are not claiming WiiU to be nearly as powerful as PS4, but rather that there is an actual gap between it and PS360?
I expect the gap between PS360 and WiiU to be like PS2 to Xbox. Realistically, that would mean the gap between WiiU and PS4 should be considerably larger than that. Also keep in mind Dreamcast was likely never maxed out, since it got canned early on. I'm sure WiiU games will look quite a bit better in 5 or 6 years, but i doubt they will look like the Division or Deep Down...
Most of the games shown were 1080p.
I think it's just as Shin'en had been saying. Their comments about the console's capabilities - which people had mocked - seems a lot more justified now. Looking at Mario Kart's lighting & texturing, and damn near CG-like models, or that jaw-dropping boss fight in Bayonetta 2 - both gmes at 60FPS btw - we're looking at a GPU a couple generations ahead of those in PS360, as far as advances that had been made since then.
As far as how it compares with PS4/XBO. I'd have to say that they fell below expectations, based on hands-on footage. Games don't look quite as good as they were hyped to be. They 're still not finished yet, of course, but after all the hype you'd think they'd have decent hands-on demos. Both consoles obviously outpower Wii U, but this E3 made some things clear... even things many in this thread had stated for a LONG time:
1) Wii U launch games were an incredibly poor indicator of the console's capabilities, for many reasons than normal.
2) The gap between Wii U and PS4/XBO is much narrower than with the Wii vs PS360.
3) Wii U is capable enough to wow people, even in light of what more powerful consoles bring to the table.
On the flip-side, the one thing that didn't quite pan out the way many of us expected was that Wii U would have seen more next-gen ports. I'm no longer sure if it's totally due to politics, or if the console's architecture too heavily caters to a ground-up design(to an unprecedented extent, I mean) to get these kind of results.
I still want to see those games running real-time on my living room before making an statement. I just don't trust publishers now. Nintendo is the only company who doesn't give a shit about releasing jagged screens.
Here's what I think.
Great looking PS4 games: The Division
Alright looking PS4 game: Killzone Shadow Fall (Is it just me or the game doesn't look as good as it used to be?)
Meh Looking PS4 game: Knact
Great looking Xbox One game: Forza
Alright looking Xbox One game: Killer Instinct
Meh looking Xbox One game: D3 or Ryse
Great looking Wii U game: Mario Kart 8
Alright looking Wii U game: Super Smash Bros. 4
Meh Looking Wii U game: Donkey Kong Country Tropical Freeze (DK and Diddy Kong character model looks good though)
Great looking PS4 games: The Division
Alright looking PS4 game: Killzone Shadow Fall (Is it just me or the game doesn't look as good as it used to be?)
Meh Looking PS4 game: Knact
Great looking Xbox One game: Forza
Alright looking Xbox One game: Killer Instinct
Meh looking Xbox One game: D3 or Ryse
Great looking Wii U game: Mario Kart 8
Alright looking Wii U game: Super Smash Bros. 4
Meh Looking Wii U game: Donkey Kong Country Tropical Freeze (DK and Diddy Kong character model looks good though)
lwilliams3
Member
Where did you get this quote from?
JordanN
Banned
Only 2 games were confirmed 1080p (Smash and Wind Waker).
Mario Kart, Wonderful 101 and Pikmin 3 are 720p. I'm also not holding my breath the other games are 1080p. So that's not most.
I really don't know why DK: TF looks so underwhelming considering this is Retro, but it does. :/
I'm still hoping Retro is making two Wii U games, DKC:TF being the lower budget, less focused project.
With the other one being much more focused budget wise and graphic wise.
I'm pretty sure mario kart was 1080p. I know it was 60fps.
JordanN
Banned
ArchangelWest
Member
^This. I would say though that the Wii U not receiving ports has more to do with the Wii U audience still being undefined, and Nintendo's audience being a difficult one to decipher well in the first place. I think that CoD Ghosts Wii U being the same version as the PS4 and XBone version says a lot. Those two platforms are superior to Wii U specs-wise, but the Wii U is powerful enough to receive the version completely based on 'Next gen' capability if the developer wants to put in the effort. That being said, CoD Ghosts is no Division graphically, but it also looks a hell of a lot better than last gen CoD games.
Screenshots really don't do this game justice, we seen what it looks like when it's in motion, it looks amazing.
I'm not sure what this response has to do with his post.
I don't consider this to be the Wii U's second wave of games. The games at E3 from Nintendo are the first games shown that are built from the ground up for Wii U. They already look good enough for me, so I can't wait to see what they can do with it later in the cycle.
ArchangelWest
Member
No Anti Aliasing doesn't seem to matter when the game is in motion because it looks smooth. So mentioning it isn't really a knock against the game unless all you plan to do is pine over screen shots of the game rather than play it.
Most of the smash screens were 720p but the game was apparently confirmed 1080p.
I won't believe this until I hear Nintendo confirms it with their own mouth.
Fair enough.
JordanN
Banned
I think it was mentioned those are downscaled. There's no proof Mario Kart is doing the same.
Smash is 1080p. There are 1080p screens.
kingkaiser
Member
Well, PS2 had only tiny 4MB VRam + 32MB RDRAM and no hardware texture compression,
Xbox had 64MB DDR SDRAM + texture compression and it showed the difference in a lot of games, even the multiplatform ones which were developed specifically for PS2.
Most of the exclusives for the og Xbox looked like a generational leap compared to PS2 games
Refreshment.01
Member
What can i tell you ozfunghi, in order to proceed with the disscusion please be kind enough to properly adress my points. You are putting words in my mouth, in simple terms what i say is that Wii U is comparable to the 360/PS3 with slightly better features and more RAM.
Anyways basically you are agreing with me, we aren't seen significant upgrades in Wii U ports because the machine doesn't have suficient extra horse power to go substantially beyond this generation of hardware. The experience stuff applies to every transition betwen hardware generations, so you can pile that up with the other excuses.
And i don't know why you constantly bring "the games will improve with time" statement, that's natural in console development and i haven't seen anyone here say otherwise.
In serious terms, why is the above statement so outrageous to some here? Leaving the argument of what constitute a console generation aside, we are infact seen certain amount of common effects in the new consoles that are absent in the Wii U. Soft body and cloth simulation, physical driven particle effects and the fact that most games are targetting 1080p. Wii U targets 720p like the present generation. So the gap could be considered a generational one.
Iwata confirmed it himself.
prag16
Banned
We can't safely draw that conclusion at this point. Hell, its very existence hasn't even been officially confirmed.
We're not. I'm just saying that Nintendo doesn't give a shit, and that's the reasons why many games on other platforms look so clean on screens, but not Nintendo's.
I was confirmed already.
lwilliams3
Member
I'm unsure of the resolution, but it was mentioned that MK is trying to achieve 60fps for two players. That would be a nice accomplishment.
As for DK, it may be the later levels to watch for.
Smurfman256
Member
Where the hell did you find this? All that I've heard about the Wii U version is that it's (most likely) going to be launched along side the other next-gen versions.
ArchangelWest
Member
http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2013/06/call_of_duty_ghosts_confirmed_for_wii_u
During a stage show on GameSpot yesterday, Infinity Ward executive producer Mark Rubin confirmed that there is indeed a Wii U version of Call of Duty: Ghosts, but PR wanted to "keep it mysterious".
It was said that the game will launch on the console alongside next-gen versions of the game for Xbox One and PS4.
Smurfman256
Member
it IS 60FPS for two players.
Because current/launch window WiiU games have to compete with current/late PS360 games, which is the reason for people here to conclude WiiU is simply on par with PS360. Which is an unfair comparison to use as a basis for hardware analysis.
And i think i have shown you the proper respect and addressed all your points. So i don't understand that statement. Which is more than i can say for your behaviour in a discussion we had last year.
Shin Johnpv
Member
I could have sworn I've specifically replied to you about this very same thing before. DX11 added 3 main features to the DX standard over DX10.1. The big main 2 were tesselation, and compute shaders. The 3rd addition was better support for multi-core processors. The only things we need to be looking at here are Tesselation and Compute Shaders. DirectCompute can be run on AMD 10.1 hardware. DX11's flavor of tesselation couldn't directly be run on the tesselators found in AMD's chips do to not supporting certain function calls of DX11. That said though other API's could absolutely make use of the Tesselators. Now it is a given that the Tesselators that followed were much more efficient, than the ones found in AMD's 7xx line of chips.
We know from the leaked specs that were confirmed by multiple insiders that the Wii U GPU supports Compute Shaders, and we know from Shin'en confirming that it supports a tesselator.
So the two main features added by DX11 over DX10.1 are there, though yes the Wii U hardware is not as powerful as the XO/PS4, but were talking feature set not power. Also yes DX11 spec parts are going to be more efficient, and also support shader model 5.0 but the main feature set is there.
lwilliams3
Member
That is only if you look at the clockspeed of the CPUs. The difference in computation is more significant, and N64's CPU was infamously bottlenecked due to RAM issues and each sound channel requiring 1% of its power. If we look at the GPU, there is roughly 10 orders of magnitude (100x difference) in real world polygon rendering, and the Gamecube could do alot more graphical features.
Looking at what I wrote, it is amazing on how much more powerful the 2nd-gen 3D machines were compared to the 1st-gen.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll