Support NeoGAF

[krizzx]

Even games tailored to the Wuu are running at 720p. Nobody is denying that a handful of them were running at 1080p at some point (Nano and Toki Tori). The system wasn't capable of running the final graphical effects the released 720p versions had, at 1080p.

EDIT: Just because the Wuu has enough memory bandwidth and processing power to run Wind Waker HD at 1080p, doesn't mean it can run Black Ops 2 at 1080p. Nobody is saying more than this but you are trying to beat people up as though they claim 1080p is impossible.

Once again, what are you talking about? I'm lost.

Have you actually read anything that I've written?

 

[MrPresident]

That doesn't suggest that at all.

Ports are the worst measurement of a consoles capability. As I've said a dozen times, with the exception of PC ports which have no restrictions usually, a port will never run better on a console than it does on the console that was the lead in development. The Wii U has never been the lead platform for development exception for with Rayman Legends.

They would have to pretty much reuild the game from scratch to get it to run at 1080p on the Wii U if it was made on the 360. The GPU architecture and memory structure are too different for straight ports to take full advantage of the hardware capability.

Nonsense. The Wii U architecture is highly similar to the 360 architecture in that both have a unified memory system connected to eDRAM that connects to the GPU.

The main reason that 'ports' have a bad name is because they've historically been from PowerPC to x86 or (in the case of 360 to PS3) a unified memory pool to a split memory pool. And that's not counting the differences between the Xenon and Cell architectures or the difference between close hardware access vs. DirectX and associated draw call issues.

Rendering resolution is wholly and completely independent of such CPU differences. The only thing that matters when it comes to rendering resolution is brute GPU force and bandwidth. Being a port changes absolutely nothing in that regard.

 

[atbigelow]

You seem to be claiming 720p is an "artistic" choice or a side effect of "learning the hardware." If Pikmin 3 really retains use of it's Wii assets (spoiler alert: looks nothing like a Wii game), it would be easier to run at 1080p.

Nobody will make their game run at 720p if 1080p gives equivalent performance. But as stated multiple times, it doesn't. Both Shinen and Two Tribes made statements to that.

EDIT: Also fun, is that ports can show you raw performance of hardware. Brute power is more powerful everywhere and is easily measured.

 

[krizzx]

You seem to be claiming 720p is an "artistic" choice or a side effect of "learning the hardware." If Pikmin 3 really retains use of it's Wii assets (spoiler alert: looks nothing like a Wii game), it would be easier to run at 1080p.

Nobody will make their game run at 720p if 1080p gives equivalent performance. But as stated multiple times, it doesn't. Both Shinen and Two Tribes made statements to that.

I've made no such claims or any of the claims you are inferring I've made.

Nonsense. The Wii U architecture is highly similar to the 360 architecture in that both have a unified memory system connected to eDRAM that connects to the GPU.

The main reason that 'ports' have a bad name is because they've historically been from PowerPC to x86 or (in the case of 360 to PS3) a unified memory pool to a split memory pool. And that's not counting the differences between the Xenon and Cell architectures or the difference between close hardware access vs. DirectX and associated draw call issues.

The architecture ijn the PS3/360 are nothing like the architecture in the Wii U.

The 360 doesn't use a PowerPC CPU. It uses a Power CPU. A Power5 to be precise. The Wii U CPU is basedon the the Wii's CPU, which was based on the GC's CPU, which was based on the PPC750CL. They hve nothing in common other than that they are both made by IBM.

The GPU in the Wii U is also entirely different than the one in the 360.


Rendering resolution is wholly and completely independent of such CPU differences. The only thing that matters when it comes to rendering resolution is brute GPU force and bandwidth. Being a port changes absolutely nothing in that regard.

Where are you and this dude coming form? Not once did I ever bring up the CPU. Why is this being debated? Why is this even coming up in this conversation?

 

[atbigelow]

Also, most of Pikmin 3's development life was during the period when even Nintendo was having trouble developing for the Wii U. That period is mostly over now though.

I believe this is why all launch games from Nintendo were 720p, but a lot more 1080p games have been showing up from them now.

What exact "trouble" with development would cause Pikmin 3 to not be 1080p?

 

[krizzx]

What exact "trouble" with development would cause Pikmin 3 to not be 1080p?

That is common knowledge...

Please go back and read through the thread and learn what we have found. I'm tired of reposting it over and over every time someone who doesn't like my hypothesis comes in to beg my statements to no end.

Sorry if this sounds harsh, but please, go learn something about the actual topics being discussed before you come in here trying to challenge what I'm saying with not a link or iota of documentation to your credit.

 

[megabytecr]

What exact "trouble" with development would cause Pikmin 3 to not be 1080p?

I think that what he is trying to say is that Nintendo chose 720p on early titles because that was easier to reach without optimizations, given they were new to HD. If you think about it it makes sense, IF this was indeed the case, to have a target resolution to get a game out quickly while focusing on other areas like gameplay. Like I said, makes sense if this was indeed the case. It makes even more sense if you consider NSMBU, which is 720p, but if you look at Rayman Legends, there is no way NSMBU could not have been a 1080p60 title, the decision was IMO taken to reduce development time, not because Wii U was not capable.

Let me put an example with XB1. Killer Instinct was recently revealed to be 720p60, it was supposed to be 1080p. If this same developer 2 years from now are set to release a sequel, is it fair to say that there are more probabilities of them releasing the game at 1080p? I would say yes, and why could this not apply to Wii U (is it already maxed out?) ? I am open to the possibility but I am less optimistic about it.

I take a less optimistic approach, but I would say Wii U is powerful enough to get 720p60 games, with advanced effects. Now lets wait and see what we get in the future. Wii U is IMO indeed more powerful than many think. That would be a nice surprise.

 

[atbigelow]

That is common knowledge...

Please go back and read through the thread and learn what we have found. I'm tired of reposting it over and over every time someone who doesn't like my hypothesis comes in to beg my statements to no end.

Sorry if this sounds harsh, but please, go learn something about the actual topics being discussed before you come in here trying to challenge what I'm saying with not a link or iota of documentation to your credit.

I've actually been following this thread since its inception, thanks.

I asked a pointed question because we're talking hardware specs and they don't lie. That doesn't mean you can't find a clever way to get a lot out of them. Check the demoscene for examples of this.

If you can easily change your resolution from 720p to 1080p with no performance problems, then you do. If you do have performance issues (as both Shinen and Two Tribes did), then you can either downgrade or spend time attempting to optimize. Sometimes things just aren't possible.

Not saying we won't see more 1080p games. But just because simpler games like Wind Waker and Duck Tales are rendering in 1080p now, doesn't mean a theoretical Nintendoland 2 will.

Fact of the matter in this thread, is that we are supposed to discuss the GPU. The GPU will not all of a sudden start processing polygons faster or unlock more shaders. The hardware is running at 100% capacity right out of the gate. How you decide to appropriate that capacity can change and evolve over the years.

 

[AzaK]

Of oucrse not all games will be 1080p. I'm just stating a fact. Over half of games that aren't ports or launch games are 1080p.

Nano Assault Neo*(was 1080p 60 FPS but downgraded in favor of more effets)
Might Switch Force HD(1080p)
Toki Tori 2*(Initially 1080p but downgraded for unknown reasons)
Chasing Aurora(1080p)
Mutant Mudds HD(1080p)
Pokemon Rumble U(1080p)
Transformers: Dark Rubbish(1080p)
Game & Wario(1080p)
Little Inferno(1080p)
Big Trip Runner 2(1080p)
Scribblenauts Unlimited(1080p)
Wind Waker HD(1080p)
The Cave(1080p)
Cloudberry Kingdom(1080p)
Monster Hunter Tri Ultimate(1080p)
Dragon Quest X(1080p)
Tank! Tank! Tank! (1080p)
Pure Chess will be 1080p
Disney's Planes(1080p)

Mario Kart 8, Smash U, Bayonetta 2 and Sonic Lost Worlds have been mostly mentioned as 1080p in most sources though not 100% confirmed.

All those 1080 games could be done on the The graphics process in my watch. They generally aren't high bandwidth games.

 

[MrPresident]

Where are you and this dude coming form? Not once did I ever bring up the CPU. Why is this being debated? Why is this even coming up in this conversation?

I've no idea what 'dude' that is you're adding to my comment but you're taking it completely out of context. He's talking about architectural differences between Power and PowerPC while I'm talking about system bus and memory setups. Yes, there are differences between Power and PowerPC but that has nothing to do with the discussion. If he's claiming that Wii U and 360 architectures on the whole are highly different then he's just flat out wrong. They're more similar than 360 is to PS3 and more similar than either of those is to PC.

The whole point is that it doesn't matter when it comes to rendering resolution. The point is that rendering resolution is completely and utterly independent of CPU performance. If it were simply a 'bad port' then Black Ops 2 would run at the exact same framerate at 1080p and 720p.

 

[Argyle]

I've made no such claims or any of the claims you are inferring I've made.

Where are you and this dude coming form? Not once did I ever bring up the CPU. Why is this being debated? Why is this even coming up in this conversation?

This is how conversations with krizzx seem to go:

krizzx: "Blah blah blah nonsense"

NeoGAF: "Dude, that is nonsense"

krizzx: "What? I never said that? Learn to read."

NeoGAF: "Well then, what did you mean, exactly?"

*crickets*

I've seen this pattern in this thread a million times already...

 

[JordanN]

So am I the only one who wouldn't particularly be phased if Bayo2 was 1080p? Not saying the game is shit but just having a high resolution is one piece of the pie.

I'd be more interested if the game was built around actual next gen lighting models, improved post processing, significantly better environment and character detail etc.

I mean, stuff like this screams it's using current gen pipelines on steroids just like the first 01net rumors described the console as such (a notch above 360).

Same deal with Mario Kart 8. At 1080p, it would offer a small bump over current gen but it no ways make Wii U look more powerful than it already is. Not when you have backgrounds that are so basic and low res. And the actual racers aren't that special from a tech point of view.

Of course, that's assuming if any of these games are 1080p. If they're not, it wouldn't change the other stuff I mentioned above.

 

[MrPresident]

I think that what he is trying to say is that Nintendo chose 720p on early titles because that was easier to reach without optimizations, given they were new to HD. If you think about it it makes sense, IF this was indeed the case, to have a target resolution to get a game out quickly while focusing on other areas like gameplay. Like I said, makes sense if this was indeed the case. It makes even more sense if you consider NSMBU, which is 720p, but if you look at Rayman Legends, there is no way NSMBU could not have been a 1080p60 title, the decision was IMO taken to reduce development time, not because Wii U was not capable.

You mean they were trying to play it safe? I guess that's possible. To a certain extent, anyway.

The thing is that GPUs don't really work that way. A GPU is either fast enough to handle X amount of content at 1080p/60 or it isn't. It's always possible to scale content back until 1080p/60 becomes viable but then you're still dropping content. There's no 'optimizing' for resolution other than dropping content or scaling back the effects. Mostly it just means they were overestimating GPU performance. If future games do end up being 1080p then they're either dropping content or inventing better ways of doing the same effects.

People do tend to forget that R&D is a way more important means of exploiting modern GPUs than it used to be. There's just a limit to what you can do.

 

[StevieP]

All those 1080 games could be done on the The graphics process in my watch. They generally aren't high bandwidth games.

No, not all of them. Some of them require more processing power than your watch has.

....uh, yup, they would. Both of the proper next gen consoles are pulling out far more impressive games at launch.

There is no 'magic bullet' that will suddenly make people kneel before the graphical prowess of the Wii U. The best you can hope for is a dismissive acceptance that it is more powerful than the last generation of consoles. A pyrrhic victory, at best.

So now there's a "proper next gen" and, I guess, a non-proper next gen. Fantastic.

Krizzx - Bayo 2 is 720p/60. It is not 1080p/60 - at least from what we've seen of it. I doubt it will end up at 1080p/60 either. It's got too much going on per frame. And you've gotta stop with stuff like this:

Then there is still the facts that the performance of the console is no where near optimized on the lower levels. I think the next major performance update is next month. It may be later this month though.

 

[krizzx]

Well something definitely happened.
Especially when he (Iwata) had this whole spiel about the importance of momentum after launch. Iwata has taken a big risk apparently in postponing many games to the latter half of the year, leaving the WiiU with a big drought that has hurt its sales.

So lets hope there was a decision to give certain teams the opportunity to push for 1080p or 60fps, or even both, when they realized the hardware could handle it.

I believe Nintendo stated they want one unique franchise per console, so one 3D Mario bros, one Zelda, one Donkey Kong, etc. That means each title has to be made at a high standard so that they can re-release at a later date on a future console or hand held as a classic.

Actually, most of the higher profile games were pushed back to next year.

They are making games like Donkey Kong and Super Mario 3D World U in order to get more games out their in the market faster.

The high profile games aren't going to come out until 2014 at the earliest. There is no way around this other than cutting corners and releasing games with less content and lower quality assets.

Its either quality or speed. I would rather have quality. Most of the games coming out at the end of this year are made with "quantity" in mind, however. It seems that they are trying to end the drought moreso than show off the hardware capability at this point.

Then there is still the facts that the performance of the console is no where near optimized on the lower levels. I think the next major performance update is next month. It may be later this month though.

This is how conversations with krizzx seem to go:

krizzx: "Educated analysis, facts and details with links and media to back them"*fixed*

NeoGAF: "Dude, that is nonsense. My opinion on the matter is the absolute unquestionable fact of the matter that I know with no credible sources to back me up, and this rewritten version of what you said that I just made is absolutely wrong" *fixed*

krizzx: "What? I never said that? ////////////////////Learn to read."

NeoGAF: "Well then, what did you mean, exactly?"

*crickets*

I've seen this pattern in this thread a million times already...

No, actually most conversations are like what Argyle just posted. People don't like what I say and make up stuff to combat it, then I question "them" and they vanish like Argyle probably will after his reply.

Anything beyond the / is his own fabrication. They never try to clarify like in the post I'm responding to now. They behave just like this.

If people actually did ask for an explanation for once instead of pulling out opinions and assumptions with no backing or bases other than they dodn't lke what I said, then there wouldn't be any problem. Instead they assume and create their own preferable flawed version of what I say to attack the flaws they invented(this is known as making a strawman argument), and vanish when I call them out on it such as in this case.

And it is usually done by individuals who come to this thread for no other reason than to attack me, as opposed to actually having an on topic discussion, just like this post by Argyle that I'm responding to.

I'll back up anything I've said. I wont argue against starwmen and loaded question though.

 

[bomblord]

So am I the only one who wouldn't particularly be phased if Bayo2 was 1080p? Not saying the game is shit but just having a high resolution is one piece of the pie.

I'd be more interested if the game was built around actual next gen lighting models, improved post processing, significantly better environment and character detail etc.

I mean, stuff like this screams it's using current gen pipelines on steroids just like the first 01net rumors described the console as such (a notch above 360).


Same deal with Mario Kart 8. At 1080p, it would offer a small bump over current gen but it no ways make Wii U look more powerful than already it is. Not when you have backgrounds that are so basic and low res. And the actual racers aren't that special from a tech point of view.


Of course, that's assuming if any of these games are 1080p. If they're not, it wouldn't change the other stuff I mentioned above.

How on earth is that Mario Kart background basic or low res. All the textures look fairly high resolution and you have the equivelant of a small city back there.

 

[MrPresident]

What exact "trouble" with development would cause Pikmin 3 to not be 1080p?

If there were trouble with development then resolution would matter less and not more.

Otherwise, it just means that they overestimated GPU performance.

 

[JordanN]

How on earth is that Mario Kart background basic or low res. All the textures look fairly high resolution and you have the equivelant of a small city back there.

The grass and roof textures are low res and all the buildings look like boxes. The walls too are also pretty flat.

 

[Log4Girlz]

So now there's a "proper next gen" and, I guess, a non-proper next gen. Fantastic.

There has been every since we got an inkling of the Wii U's power.

 

[prag16]

Nonsense. The Wii U architecture is highly similar to the 360 architecture in that both have a unified memory system connected to eDRAM that connects to the GPU.

Gross and misleading oversimplification.

 

[krizzx]

Gross and misleading oversimplification.

It worse than that, but I've given up trying to explain all of this to those who never cared to have an actual logical/fact based discussion in the first place.

 

[MrPresident]

Gross and misleading oversimplification.

Care to elaborate? Near as I can tell, eDRAM exists primarily for the all-important bandwidth that the framebuffer needs. It's important to a discussion about GPU performance.

 

[Argyle]

No, actually most conversations are like what Argyle just posted. People don't like what I say and make up stuff to combat it, then I question "them" and they vanish like Argyle probably will after his reply.

Anything beyond the / is his own fabrication. They never try to clarify like in the post I'm responding to now. They behave just like this.

If people actually did ask for an explanation for once instead of pulling out opinions and assumptions with no backing or bases other than they dodn't lke what I said, then there wouldn't be any problem. Instead they assume and create their own preferable flawed version of what I say to attack the flaws they invented(this is known as making a strawman argument), and vanish when I call them out on it such as in this case.

I'll back up anything I've said.

You basically saying "learn to read":

Once again, what are you talking about? I'm lost.

Have you actually read anything that I've written?

That is common knowledge...

Please go back and read through the thread and learn what we have found. I'm tired of reposting it over and over every time someone who doesn't like my hypothesis comes in to beg my statements to no end.

Sorry if this sounds harsh, but please, go learn something about the actual topics being discussed before you come in here trying to challenge what I'm saying with not a link or iota of documentation to your credit.

But you know what, I'll bite. What DID you mean when you posted a list of download titles that generally have low-end graphics at 1080p to imply that Bayonetta 2 is going to be 1080p? I have no idea either way, but if I had to guess, I would guess they will shoot for 720p60 with nicer graphics.

Also, what DID you mean about Pikmin 3 development troubles? atbigelow asked, and the above was your response, not very productive for discussion. No need to type it all again, a link would be fine. I've read most of the thread and I have no idea what you are talking about.

Honestly your confrontational tone with the above two posters is kinda unfounded. In the case of MrPresident he was replying to a point you made directly and thus it was very much on-topic.

Maybe you should take aizu_itsuko's advice from a few hundred posts ago:

Honest question?

You did nothing special, other than give your opinion and ask questions, but you tend to use a more confrontational tone than others at times and resort to disregarding those disagreeing with you as "haters" instead of asking them to explain why the feel their opinion is accurate. If you feel that people are misrepresenting your opinion or your intentions, don't you think you could be doing that as well when it comes to other posters? Keep in mind that it seems that multiple people have expressed they have an issue with the way you are expressing yourself, while they seem to be ok with other people in the thread, regardless of their opinion on the hardware.

If you look at your own posts in this thread, you will realize you have spent a serious amount of time accusing other people of pretty negative things. While you likely feel that it's justified, what if you are interpreting other people's actions incorrectly? What if those posters are no different from you, except they have a different opinion? If you disagree with them at times, then give your opinion and move on.

In my experience, these more confrontational arguments are the result of low frustration tolerance and that has little to do with the actions of others. It's a perception problem. Not only it's ok if others disagree with you, it's actually a good thing, since they provide you with a different point of view and that will challenge your opinions and may lead you to a better understanding of the situation.

And just in case it helps you to understand where I'm coming from when it comes to Wii U's hardware, it has more advanced shading capabilities than PS3/360 due to more modern tech, the extra amount of memory is definitely helpful, it will likely show a performance advantage in the long run as well (even if it's not all that big) and it's well below PS4/XBone/Gaming PCs. I think most people here, even the ones that disagree with you, have a similar opinion, even if their expectations vary or are lower than yours and think most Wii U games shown so far don't really show much difference.

Edit: See, there you go again:

It worse than that, but I've given up trying to explain all of this to those who never cared to have an actual logical/fact based discussion in the first place.

C'mon man. Explain why you think he is wrong. If he's so incorrect it should be really quick to clear this up.

 

[StevieP]

There has been every since we got an inkling of the Wii U's power.

We can go on that same merry-go-round again, or we can accept that the underpowered Wii console belonged to the same generation as the PS360 and the underpowered Wii U belongs to the same generation as the PS4One.

Unless you wish to argue that Nintendo no longer makes game consoles and they were both lifestyle devices meant to take over the living room without gaming at their forefront or some such nonsense. Ironically, Nintendo is much less focused on stuff like that than certain other manufacturers.

 

[MrPresident]

It worse than that, but I've given up trying to explain all of this to those who never cared to have a real discussion in the first place.

Don't play that card. CPUs bottlenecking GPUs has existed for as long as GPUs have. Resolution is free under a CPU limited scenario, no matter how you try to spin it.

 

[Mihael Mello Keehl]

So am I the only one who wouldn't particularly be phased if Bayo2 was 1080p? Not saying the game is shit but just having a high resolution is one piece of the pie.

I'd be more interested if the game was built around actual next gen lighting models, improved post processing, significantly better environment and character detail etc.

I mean, stuff like this screams it's using current gen pipelines on steroids just like the first 01net rumors described the console as such (a notch above 360).


Same deal with Mario Kart 8. At 1080p, it would offer a small bump over current gen but it no ways make Wii U look more powerful than it already is. Not when you have backgrounds that are so basic and low res. And the actual racers aren't that special from a tech point of view.


Of course, that's assuming if any of these games are 1080p. If they're not, it wouldn't change the other stuff I mentioned above.

Who knows but the Wii U is not that powerful to do some of the stuff you said. If it is its developers choice or they were to lazy.

 

[krizzx]

You basically saying "learn to read":

No, you are basicially rephrasing my statement and making a strawman to attack.

But you know what, I'll bite. What DID you mean when you posted a list of download titles that generally have low-end graphics at 1080p to imply that Bayonetta 2 is going to be 1080p? I have no idea either way, but if I had to guess, I would guess they will shoot for 720p60 with nicer graphics.


Also, what DID you mean about Pikmin 3 development troubles? No need to type it all again, a link would be fine. I've read most of the thread and I have no idea what you are talking about.

Now "this" is a case of actually read what i wrote. I said "Wii U" development problems. Its it commonly known that the Wii U had a lot of problem with development even on Nintendo's end a first. They had no understanding of HD development and it turned out ot be more difficult than they thought.

Pikmin 3 was developed in that time period so these issues would be naturally inherent.


A simple search of this thread or Google will turn it up.

Honestly your confrontational tone with the above two posters is kinda unfounded. In the case of MrPresident he was replying to a point you made directly and thus it was very much on-topic.

Maybe you should take aizu_itsuko's advice from a few hundred posts ago:

I speak in one tone. Calm and logical. I am straight and to the point. If you see anything beyond that, then you are seeing your own wishful thinking.

"Replying" to my post, and actually trying to have a conversation are completely different things. He made huge unfounded judgements and provided absolutely "nothing" to support them.

Everything I say is based on known data. The entire reason that the 1080p Bayonetta claim was brought up was because it was stated by a credible, first hand source. There was an actual link to this and I based my assessment on that. I never said it "was" 1080p either which is another strawman argument all of you are making. I said it would be nice if it was true, as I don't know if it is. That didn't make for good arguing material, though, so that was twisted into me saying it as "absolutely" being 1080p when I did no such thing.

He outright dismissed the source in the statement to make a poorly correlated counter claim with absolutely nothing backing it. In other words, he is pulling things out of thin air. His statements come from nowhere and I'm not going to try to argue with him when what he says has no grounds, and he has shown himself to be completely dismiss of everything I post. It is pointless to keep an argument like that going as it will go nowhere and I have no interested in console wars or flame wars. Only facts, details, professional opinions, and analysis based on those things.

I discuss substantial material and sound reasonable logic. He provided neither. Just pure opinions and assumptions. I'm not here to debate opinions just for the heck of it. If he provides something credible such as dev statement that are relvent to what is being discussed, resource document ion or photos then I could analyze and discuss that, but he brought nothing to the table other than his dislike of what I have to say, same as you are doing.

I do no care if anyone agrees or disagrees with my opinion. I do not care if you like or dislike the Wii U. I'm not here for farting and pissing context about which console or game you like more. I'm here to learn and help forward the analysis where I can. I study electronic hardware as a hobby as I am a PC enthusiast. If what you are saying doesn't seem to contribute to that then I will probably not hold a discussion with you.

 

[Jrs3000]

If you can easily change your resolution from 720p to 1080p with no performance problems, then you do. If you do have performance issues (as both Shinen and Two Tribes did), then you can either downgrade or spend time attempting to optimize. Sometimes things just aren't possible.

At least be accurate, neither one said they had issues at 1080p. They chose to go with 720p as a design choice. They then added a lot of extra effects going with 720p.

 

[ab.aeterno]

Krizzx - Bayo 2 is 720p/60. It is not 1080p/60 - at least from what we've seen of it. I doubt it will end up at 1080p/60 either. It's got too much going on per frame. And you've gotta stop with stuff like this:

So that's the end of beating that drum for now, I guess? I've heard it so often in threads here I assumed that it must be the case; is there reasonable doubt that it's not?

Edit: never mind, was posted while I was.

 

[atbigelow]

At least be accurate, neither one said they had issues at 1080p. They chose to go with 720p as a design choice. They then added a lot of extra effects going with 720p.

You contradicted yourself. They were able to add those extra effects because of the resolution drop. If they could maintain those effects at 1080p, they would.

 

[StevieP]

So that's the end of beating that drum for now, I guess? I've heard it so often in threads here I asked tat it must be the case; is there reasonable doubt that it's not?

I notice krizzx hasn't responded to you yet in regards to it.

I mean, I'm not like an expert pixel counter like some people on this forum are (there are those much better equipped to tell such things that don't dare venture into these threads any longer since they are such as mess) but it looks to be 720p based on the way its aliasing looks in the released screenshots.

There's a possibility I'm wrong of course (my word is not gospel or bulletproof - everyone can be wrong), but... I mean I'm pretty confident that physics don't really lie in regards to what the Wii U is capable of. It's going to look nicer than a lot of previous gen work (incl Bayo 1), but not orders of magnitude better.

 

[MrPresident]

"Replying" to my post, and actually trying to have a conversation are completely different things. He made huge unfounded judgements and provided absolutely "nothing" to support them.

Everything I say is based on known data. The entire reason that the 1080p Bayonetta claim was brought up was because it was stated by a credible, first hand source. There was an actual link to this and I based my assessment on that. I never said it "was" 1080p either which is another strawman argument all of you are making. I said it would be nice if it was true, as I don't know if it is. That didn't make for good arguing material, though, so that was twisted into me saying it as "absolutely" being 1080p when I did no such thing.

He outright dismissed the source in the statement to make a poorly correlated counter claim with absolutely nothing backing it. In other words, he is pulling things out of thin air. His statements come from nowhere and I'm not going to try to argue with him when what he says has no grounds, and he has shown himself to be completely dismiss of everything I post. It is pointless to keep an argument like that going as it will go nowhere and I have no interested in console wars or flame wars. Only facts, details, professional opinions, and analysis based on those things.

I discuss substantial material. He provided neither. Just pure opinions and assumptions. I'm not here to debate opinions. If he provides something credible then I could analyze and discuss that but he brought nothing but to table other than his dislike of what I have to say, same you are doing.

At least have the courtesy of replying to me...

If you're trying to argue that my points are wrong then at least make the effort of proving me wrong. It's an absolute fundamental in computing that CPU and GPU performances are counter to each other. If one bottlenecks the other then the second one gets free performance. If the Wii U were not GPU limited then its ports would run at 1080p and not 720p. There are no ifs or buts here. It's what scaling means.

Edit:

As for 'unfounded', here's 1080p gameplay footage of Bayonetta 2 showing quite clearly that it's rendered at 720p and not 1080p:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyCW6HrSQj0&t=2m8s

 

[SmokyDave]

So now there's a "proper next gen" and, I guess, a non-proper next gen. Fantastic.

Indeed. Chronological =/= Technological. I won't elaborate further, but I'm certain you get my drift.

 

[krizzx]

At least have the courtesy of replying to me...

If you're trying to argue that my points are wrong then at least make the effort of proving me wrong. It's an absolute fundamental in computing that CPU and GPU performances are counter to each other. If one bottlenecks the other then the second one gets free performance. If the Wii U were not GPU limited then its ports would run at 1080p and not 720p.

I replied to you many times and you just kept begging the question and not providing anything to back your statement. Then on top of that you kept twisting what I was saying shifting the discussion.

Your points come from nowhere. They have no links to anything backing them. They can't be argued against. They can't be proved wrong without a base.

Its a general rule of mine that anyone who "outright dismiss" any actual resources while provided none of their own is not a wise choice to have a discussion with.

You keep stating miscellaneous information, but not how it is relevant to the immediate discussion. Not all CPU and GPU's are the same and neither are their relationships. You are making sweeping generalizations with no explicit correlations.

The CPU in the Wii U is actually capable of doing graphics calculation and the GPU is capable of running general purpose code as it is GPGPU. This is something that no last gen hardware possessed. It is completely different from any last gen architecture.

I'm not going to argue with that. Its like arguing which came first. The chick or the egg.

 

[Argyle]

No, you are basicially rephrasing my statement and making a strawman to attack.

Wow. Maybe you should review your own posts, maybe you are not coming off as calm and logical as you think.

Now "this" is a case of actually read what i wrote. I said "Wii U" development problems. Its it commonly known that the Wii U had a lot of problem with development even on Nintendo's end a first. They had no understanding of HD development and it turned out ot be more difficult than they thought.

Pikmin 3 was developed in that time period so these issues would be naturally inherent.

A simple search of this thread or Google will turn it up.

OK, so to clarify - you believe that Pikmin 3 would be running at 1080p if it weren't for these troubles?

I speak in one tone. Calm and logical. If you see anything beyond that, then you are seeing your own wishful thinking.

"Replying" to my post, and actually trying to have a conversation are completely different things. He made huge unfounded judgements and provided absolutely "nothing" to support them.

Everything I say is based on known data. The entire reason that the 1080p Bayonetta claim was brought up was because it was stated by a credible, first hand source. There was an actual link to this and I based my assessment on that. I never said it "was" 1080p either which is another strawman argument all of you are making. I said it would be nice if it was true, as I don't know if it is. That didn't make for good arguing material, though, so that was twisted into me saying it as "absolutely" being 1080p when I did no such thing.

He outright dismissed the source in the statement to make a poorly correlated counter claim with absolutely nothing backing it. In other words, he is pulling things out of thin air. His statements come from nowhere and I'm not going to try to argue with him when what he says has no grounds, and he has shown himself to be completely dismiss of everything I post. It is pointless to keep an argument like that going as it will go nowhere and I have no interested in console wars or flame wars. Only facts, details, professional opinions, and analysis based on those things.

I discuss substantial material. He provided neither. Just pure opinions and assumptions. I'm not here to debate opinions just for the heck of it. If he provides something credible such as dev statement that are relvent to what is being discussed, resource document ion or photos then I could analyze and discuss that, but he brought nothing to the table other than his dislike of what I have to say, same as you are doing.

I do no care if anyone agrees or disagrees with my opinion. I do not care if you like or dislike the Wii U. I'm not here for that. I'm here to learn and help forward the analysis where I can. If what you are saying doesn't seem to contribute to that then I will probably not hold a discussion with you.

I did not see a link to a source on that (Bayonetta 2 at 1080p). I saw a bunch of links about how Sonic Lost World might be 1080p because they are releasing 1080p screenshots (maybe, but press screenshots are often not in native resolution, it's not hard to make your renderer pump out a high res screen if you don't have to display it in motion) and a link to how Shinen said that 1080p is not a problem (sure, no one disputes the console can output 1080p, but that depends on what you are trying to do, just because you can output 1080p doesn't mean that all games will be able to output that resolution, depending on what they are trying to draw)

I'll give you a freebie though: Why no 1080i games? Because outputting 1080i generally has the same memory and performance requirements as 1080p. You might be able to get away with field rendering (1920x540 - think about how the early PS2 games looked, a lot of the early games were field rendered 480p) but you are more or less forced to render at 60Hz or you will lose your apparent vertical resolution.

So, let's have an actual discussion. Can you explain this for me?

They would have to pretty much reuild the game from scratch to get it to run at 1080p on the Wii U if it was made on the 360. The GPU architecture and memory structure are too different for straight ports to take full advantage of the hardware capability.

I'm not saying there aren't differences between say, the 360 and the Wii U GPU. Can you explain how you would have to rearchitect everything to take advantage of what the Wii U has?

From leaks, if they are accurate, it seems that developers do not have direct access to the GPU scratchpad/eDRAM. It's unclear how much access is exposed to developers - whether it is as simple as being able to map and copy data onto it for the GPU to see via the graphics API or if it's treated as a cache that is intended to be transparent to developers. Let's assume that devs do have some access to it, for the sake of argument, because that is more interesting. What would need to change from a typical 360 game and why?

Edit:

The CPU in the Wii U is actually capable of doing graphics calculation and the GPU is capable of running general purpose code as it is GPGPU. This is something that no last gen hardware was. It is completely different from any last gen system.

This is not true btw. I'm about to get some food but blu pointed it out earlier - you can pretty much make any GPU do "general purpose" stuff if you're clever about it (and I know current gen console games that do it), and there's nothing stopping a CPU from working on graphics calculation (what do you even mean by that btw? rasterization, transforming verts?)...

 

[Jrs3000]

You contradicted yourself. They were able to add those extra effects because of the resolution drop. If they could maintain those effects at 1080p, they would.

No contradiction. If you read what Shinen said, they dropped the resolution because the difference between 1080p vs 720p for Nano Assaust wasn't discernable. After going with 720p they added extra effects. It dosn't say hey we went with 1080p and then tried to add extra effects but performance suffered. There fore what you are saying is wrong. When I find the link I will post so you can read for yourself.

 

[StevieP]

Indeed. Chronological =/= Technological. I won't elaborate further, but I'm certain you get my drift.

And it's bunk, but that's a topic for another thread.

 

[Log4Girlz]

No contradiction. If you read what Shinen said, they dropped the resolution because the difference between 1080p vs 720p for Nano Assaust wasn't discernable. After going with 720p they added extra effects. It dosn't say hey we went with 1080p and then tried to add extra effects but performance suffered. There fore what you are saying is wrong. When I find the link I will post so you can read for yourself.

Wait, I thought Nano-assault was 1080p?

 

[Jrs3000]

Wait, I thought Nano-assault was 1080p?

No, it's running at 720p.

 

[krizzx]

Wow. Maybe you should review your own posts, maybe you are not coming off as calm and logical as you think.

I know what I stated. Whether you understand it or how you choose to interpret it is your business.

OK, so to clarify - you believe that Pikmin 3 would be running at 1080p if it weren't for these troubles?

Loaded question. I inferred no such thing.

I did not see a link to a source on that (Bayonetta 2 at 1080p).

Then you did not look. It was posted at least 3 times in the last 2 pages.

I saw a bunch of links about how Sonic Lost World might be 1080p because they are releasing 1080p screenshots (maybe, but press screenshots are often not in native resolution, it's not hard to make your renderer pump out a high res screen if you don't have to display it in motion) and a link to how Shinen said that 1080p is not a problem (sure, no one disputes the console can output 1080p, but that depends on what you are trying to do, just because you can output 1080p doesn't mean that all games will be able to output that resolution, depending on what they are trying to draw)

I'll give you a freebie though: Why no 1080i games? Because outputting 1080i generally has the same memory and performance requirements as 1080p. You might be able to get away with field rendering (1920x540 - think about how the early PS2 games looked, a lot of the early games were field rendered 480p) but you are more or less forced to render at 60Hz or you will lose your apparent vertical resolution.

So, let's have an actual discussion. Can you explain this for me?



I'm not saying there aren't differences between say, the 360 and the Wii U GPU. Can you explain how you would have to rearchitect everything to take advantage of what the Wii U has?

From leaks, if they are accurate, it seems that developers do not have direct access to the GPU scratchpad/eDRAM. It's unclear how much access is exposed to developers - whether it is as simple as being able to map and copy data onto it for the GPU to see via the graphics API or if it's treated as a cache that is intended to be transparent to developers. Let's assume that devs do have some access to it, for the sake of argument, because that is more interesting. What would need to change from a typical 360 game and why?

As for how they are different. They are simply different.

Have you ever programmed in assembly before? If you haven't then there is no way you could really understand this in full detail.

The instructions sets and what not are different for different architecture. The pipelines are different. The balance and distribution of data through the memory is different. The API's are different. You can put code that was meant for one architecture on another and expect 100% portability even amongst hardware in the same family sometimes. Heck, you can't even expect it to actually run.

Its like taking a program that was made to make use of SSSE3 on an Intel CPU and running it on an AMD CPU that is the same clock and specification. It will not run anywhere near as well. It may even crash.

Take the PS3 CPU vs the 360 CPU. They both have the same clock, but one has 1 core with 8 SPE, and the other has 3 cores with hyper threading. The way tasks are delegated and put through are completely different. Those are just problems for porting code at the door.

I'll get back to this later, i need to take care of some business for the moment.

 

[MrPresident]

I replied to you many times and you just kept begging the question and not providing anything to back your statement. Then on top of that you kept twisting what I was saying shifting the discussion.

Your points come from nowhere. They have no links to anything backing them. They can't be argued against. They can't be proved wrong without a base.

Its a general rule of mine that anyone who "outright dismiss" any actual resources while provided none of their own is not a wise choice to have a discussion with.

You keep stating miscellaneous information, but not how it is relevant to the immediate discussion. Not all CPU and GPU's are the same and neither are their relationships. You are making sweeping generalizations with no explicit correlations.

The CPU in the Wii U is actually capable of doing graphics calculation and the GPU is capable of running general purpose code as it is GPGPU. This is something that no last gen hardware possessed. It is completely different from any last gen architecture.

I'm not going to argue with that. Its like arguing which came first. The chick or the egg.

Fair enough. Here's how scaling works across different GPUs on one CPU: Link

And, no, the Wii U CPU doesn't do rendering because then we'd be talking about a hybrid hardware and software rendering solution which simply doesn't exist in consumer space. Intel spent years trying to come up with something similar during their Larrabee experiment which was promptly abandoned.

Edit: And almost every single GPU released since 2008 has been an OpenCL capable GPGPU. The Wii U has nothing special in that regard. OpenCL was made out to be a huge thing on OSX 10.6 back in 2009 with very little to show for it so far. Being able to offload CPU tasks to the GPU can be useful but it also needs to be meaningful and not just possible.

 

[Log4Girlz]

No, it's running at 720p.

I'm flabbergasted.

 

[Jrs3000]

Fair enough. Here's how scaling works across different GPUs on one CPU: Link

And, no, the Wii U CPU doesn't do graphics work because then we'd be talking about a hybrid hardware and software rendering solution which simply doesn't exist in consumer space. Intel spent years trying to come up with something similar during their Larrabee experiment which was promptly abandoned.

1. Bro, we are talking about gaming consoles. With that said you have to let go of what applies to a PC as everything doesn't work that way with a console. The console is made around 1 set of hardware specs designed to work together.

2. The CPU in a console can assist and do graphic work. This isn't nothing new, Ps3 has been doing this the majority of this Gen to make up for having a lesser GPU than the 360.

 

[krizzx]

Fair enough. Here's how scaling works across different GPUs on one CPU: Link

And, no, the Wii U CPU doesn't do graphics work because then we'd be talking about a hybrid hardware and software rendering solution which simply doesn't exist in consumer space. Intel spent years trying to come up with something similar during their Larrabee experiment which was promptly abandoned.

You are new to this hardware apparently. It is an inherent feature from the GC.

The GC CPU had customization made to be able to be used in conjunction with the GPU. It was used to produce texture effects and calculate geometry in a way completely different from the PS2 and Xbox1.

When the GC launched, devs said it was incapable of doing things like bump mapping, normal mapping and bloom, but it actually did not at launch. The thing is that the architecture was radically different than what they were familiar with. The way you produced them on the GC was completely different than the Xbox1 which used modern shaders. It was harder to do but used less resources than the Xbox1 shader did. You could pretty much produce texture effects for free in the GC.

These features are still present in the Wii U CPU.

The Wii U GPU is custom made with components that seem to range from the HD4000 to the HD6000. It also has its own proprietary API known is GX2.

The 360 has none of this functionality. You can't port code from it and expect it to run on the Wii U perfectly. Things will simply not work out the same way.

I will go more in depth into it later.

 

[Log4Girlz]

You are new to this hardware apparently. It is an inherent feature from the GC.

The GC CPU had customization made to be able to be used in conjunction with the GPU. It was used to produce texture effects and calculate geometry in a way completely different from the PS2 and Xbox1.

When the GC launched, devs said it was incapable of doing things like bump mapping, normal mapping and bloom, but it actually did not at launch. The thing is that the architecture was radically different than what they were familiar with. The way you produced them on the GC was completely different than the Xbox1 which used modern shaders. It was harder to do but used less resources than the Xbox1 shader did. You could pretty much produce texture effects for free in the GC.

These features are still present in the Wii U CPU.

The Wii U GPU is custom made with components that seem to range from the HD4000 to the HD6000. It also has its own proprietary API known is GX2.

The 360 has none of this functionality. You can't port code from it and expect it to run on the Wii U perfectly. Things will simply not work out the same way.

I will go more in depth into it later.

The real problem is the lack of horse power. If it had some serious grunt, you can brute force ports in 1080 p, 60 fps no problem.

 

[Apophis2036]

So am I the only one who wouldn't particularly be phased if Bayo2 was 1080p? Not saying the game is shit but just having a high resolution is one piece of the pie.

I'd be more interested if the game was built around actual next gen lighting models, improved post processing, significantly better environment and character detail etc.

I mean, stuff like this screams it's using current gen pipelines on steroids just like the first 01net rumors described the console as such (a notch above 360).


Same deal with Mario Kart 8. At 1080p, it would offer a small bump over current gen but it no ways make Wii U look more powerful than it already is. Not when you have backgrounds that are so basic and low res. And the actual racers aren't that special from a tech point of view.


Of course, that's assuming if any of these games are 1080p. If they're not, it wouldn't change the other stuff I mentioned above.

I agree with you, exclusive WiiU games look like current gen ++ to me (720p native / locked frame rate / v-sync / some 60fps / better lighting, fire ect effects) which is exactly what the legend that is Ideaman always said it was from the start.

I expect Super Mario 3D World, Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze, Mario Kart 8, Bayonetta 2 and X to be 720p / 60fps in their final released form (30fps for X). I'm far from convinced Sonic or Smash will release at 1080p / 60fps either although it could be possible because of their artstyle.

MH3U is a Wii game and doesn't do 1080p / 60fps, Pikmin 3 started as a Wii game and doesn't do 1080p / 30fps, even Wind Waker HD (a 10+ year old game with a very simple artstyle) can only manage 1080p / 30fps.

Those expecting 1080p / 30fps WiiU games will be disappointed and those expecting 1080p / 60fps WiiU games are dreaming imo.

Please try to remember everything points to this GPU being 176GFLOPs and the soon to be released consoles (one with a close to 2 TFLOP GPU, 4x as much, much faster RAM and a much faster CPU) are struggling to hit 1080p / 30fps games...

 

[MrPresident]

1. Bro, we are talking about gaming consoles. With that said you have to let go of what applies to a PC as everything doesn't work that way with a console. The console is made around 1 set of hardware specs designed to work together.

2. The CPU in a console can assist and do graphic work. This isn't nothing new, Ps3 has been doing this the majority of this Gen to make up for having a lesser GPU than the 360.

1. Hardware is hardware is hardware. What applies to the PC applies just as much to the consoles despite any architectural differences. We already know the basic architecture of the Wii U CPU and it doesn't have any more GPU core logic than the Wii did.

2. You're talking about the Cell SPUs. Those were supposed to be the only GPU in the PS3 so of course it's possible to offload GPU tasks to them. Because they aren't general purpose CPUs.

 

[StevieP]

I'm far from convinced Sonic or Smash will release at 1080p / 60fps either although it could be possible because of their artstyle.

Smash looks to be 1080p.

even Wind Waker HD (a 10+ year old game with a very simple artstyle) can only manage 1080p / 30fps.

Wind Waker is 30 because the original game was 30. Animations are 30.

Those expecting 1080p / 30fps WiiU games will be disappointed and those expecting 1080p / 60fps WiiU games are dreaming imo.

Depends on what's being rendered and the priorities of the developer. Just like all consoles (past and future).

 

[Apophis2036]

Apart from a few screenshots being 1080p (which could be 720p upscaled couldn't they ?), has Sakurai ever mentioned resolution ?.

It seems really strange to me that something like Mario 3D World would be running at 720p and Smash which looks much more graphically impressive to me would be pushing the GPU over twice as much by pumping out the game at 1080p / 60fps.

If Sonic, Bayo 2 and MK8 in particular end up running at 1080p / 60fps then I will turn up here ready to eat a massive plate of GAFCROW served by Krizz .

 

[ab.aeterno]

Depends on what's being rendered and the priorities of the developer. Just like all consoles (past and future).

Indeed. This is why many launch titles on the HD twins ran at 720p or higher, and graphically demanding games late in the gen didn't. Resolution, and sometimes frame rate, can be sacrificed for fidelity or effects. CoD in consoles runs at sub-HD, AFAIK, to keep a locked 60FPS frame rate.