• 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 GPU base specs: 160 ALUs, 8 TMUs, 8 ROPs; Rumor: Wii U hardware was downgraded

Status
Not open for further replies.

OryoN

Member
Now imagine how they would look with a more significantly powerful hardware!

But we can play the 'imagine if' game with ANY hardware. It's multi-platform, lol... *cha-ching!*

When it's all said and done, the reality is that Wii U will have games that will not fail to impress people visually, regardless to what games exist on more powerful platforms.
 

AzaK

Member
People that expected Nintendo to go from the Wii to the PS4 power-wise weren't really being realistic, in my opinion. I don't know that any company's ever made THAT huge of a leap in a single generation.

Well, it's really 2 generations for them. The Wii was basically an OC'd GameCube with a little bit more RAM.

People seems to be missing the point. It's all about the price.

If you don't care about the performance of the Wii U, you should at least care about the how much it costs you. Keeping the Wii U artificially small made the Wii U far more expensive then it should have been.

We got ripped off on the Wii U because of Takeda fetish of small systems.

I agree with that. For $350 + the need to pay more if you want the HDD space for digital you're sitting at about PS4 pricing. And that's still with Wii U being sold at a bit of a loss.

The GamePad is great, but the pricing is insane and I also expect we're paying for BC (useless, I have a Wii) and the low power consumption.

Can you add MSRP bars?
As a gamer I don't care too much about that (Within reason) and the PS4 is basically the same cost as a Wii U once you add in the HDD you'd need if you want to use digital a lot.

I'd have paid $400 or $450 for a Wii U with GamePad and specs like the PS4. Man at this point I'd almost say Nintendo would have sold more that way.
 
History. Look at the GameCube, an engineering marvel. Look at the Wii and its motion controls and its small form factor. Look at the Wii U and its small form factor, lag-free GamePad use and the look of the titles I listed on a GPU that's rumoured to be 160:8:8.

All of the titles I listed look 'next gen' (ie beyond the capabilities of the PS3 and 360 to reproduce, not on a par with the PS4 or One), and Nintendo consoles have always been balanced systems.

Anyone that doesn't agree that Nintendo have the best hardware engineers in the business has an agenda.

This has to be the funniest post in this thread. The Wii didn't have a small form factor because Nintendo have the best hardware engineers in the business, it had it because it was an entire generation behind. You know, like the even smaller PS2 Slim.
 
The thing is most people only care about the graphics.

It is very simple. If you don´t like Nintendo games or the Gamepad, then Wii U is not for you and you will find it expensive. The gamepad is not cheap to make, plus they wanted a small form factor, that is what made the console. People that find it expensive are looking at just the specs and not considering the gamepad IMO.

As a personal note, graphics are getting to a point where it is easier to accept Wii U and even PS360 graphics. Don´t get me wrong PS4/XB1 games are looking amazing and I might end picking up a PC/SteamBox or PS4 in the future, but mostly for the games Wii U will miss :(, second reason is for the better graphics.

I think I am the only one, but if Wii U was to get all ports from next gen (sadly not looking to be the case), I think it would remain my main console longer, I think it could nail a sweet spot graphicswise.
 

KingSnake

The Birthday Skeleton
How is the rumoured downgrade in hardware in the first part of 2011 fitting to this report from June 2011? It seems that the declaration from Vigil is more linked to a downclock rather than a change in hardware,

Also, this report from April 2011.

Additionally, IGN has learned that the system will be based on a revamped version of AMD's R700 GPU architecture, not AMD's Fusion technology as previously believed, which will, as previously reported, out perform the PlayStation 3's NVIDIA 7800GTX-based processor. Like the Xbox 360, the system's CPU will be a custom-built triple-core IBM PowerPC chipset, but the clocking speeds will be faster.

provides quite a similar picture with the current configuration of Wii U, doesn't sound like a much powerful GPU.

Shin'en tweet dismisses practically 2012 as possible period for a downgrade (they had a game at launch so they had the dev kit early enough).

And having now a look back into articles about Wii U in 2010-2011, it was always supposed to be practically a 360+. Which it is.

There is no news or credible rumour before April 2011 about Project Cafe or Wii 2 that speculates about a very powerful console.
Actually, except the info you provided in the WUST threads, I don't seem to find something close to 640 ALU anywhere. Couldn't be the case that your source got it wrong about this rumour? Or that the first dev kits had some PC config that was not reflecting accurately the targeted specifications (as it seems to happen sometimes with the first dev kits)?
 

Regiruler

Member
Yup, I agree Effect.

As I mentioned in my post above if there are indeed 160 ALUs, 8 TMUs and 8 ROPs then there's a fair amount of the silicone on there that's a complete mystery.

I'm still subscribing to the opinion that Nintendo have somehow evolved the TEV Unit so that fixed functions can be easily used by modern engines. The TEV Unit gave the Wii a nonstandard rendering pipeline so ports were pretty much impossible but if Nintendo have evolved it in some way to give it a standard rendering pipeline then it would give developers and engines 'free' use of commonly used functions such as depth of field, HDR lighting etc.

There's no way that a bog standard 160:8:8 GPU should be able to run something like the Bayonetta 2 demo the way I see it.

I don't completely understand your post, but what I'm getting at is that you theorize that there's hardware on here that gives easy access to certain graphics processes such as lighting and depth, and that would explain some of my observations with Sonic Lost World and some of the Mario screenshots.
 
First thanks to those who gave me a welcome back. Looks like my good intention was taken rather negatively by some. I guess my posting history in the WUST threads meant nothing.

There was plenty of debate about the GPU in the Latte thread about 320 vs 160 and the opportunity presented itself to get true confirmation so I did. To be clear I'm only saying the downgrade is the rumor. The other half is true. The SDK does not give those specific numbers, but what it does give along with the die shot confirms what I posted. Anyone who truly paid attention to my posts in the past know I have no reason to take joy in getting that confirmation of what was really the lowest common denominator.

Will I provide the actual SDK specs? No. Despite making this thread and having the die shot available, some are still treating it as rumor. I'm fine with that, but providing the SDK information wouldn't change things. It's still coming from me and not an actual developer allowing you to still write it off as a rumor.

To those who don't care, that's fine and I understand. But posting that here just gives more life to the thread instead of allowing it to die faster.

I'm glad Shinen responded, but I'd like to get them to talk confirm or deny it transition from between the first and second kits. That's around the time frame that this allegedly happened. We know improvements happened after the second kit.

So I've said my peace on this. If there are any other questions that I can answer I will try, but I'll do my part in letting the thread die and get back to other things.
 

v1oz

Member
People that expected Nintendo to go from the Wii to the PS4 power-wise weren't really being realistic, in my opinion. I don't know that any company's ever made THAT huge of a leap in a single generation.
They wanted something in between the PS4 and PS3/360. So a noticeable gap over current gen but also competitive with Xbone/PS4.
 

v1oz

Member
That's not true. The N64 had loads of problems compared to PS1 at the time.
Then they came back with the Gamecube which was super easy to program. Especially compared to PS2.

Nintendo's engineers aren't the best. They don't even make their own GPU/CPU's. AMD and IBM are the ones contracted to do it.
That's only part of the equation.They don't make the CPU/GPUs but they design the system and all the electronics to make the most out of those chips. Which is why Nintendo consoles are super reliable (low failure rate), they also tend to run relatively cool and quiet. Sony and Microsoft don't make their own CPU/GPUs either.
 
As I think the first person to suggest 8 TMUs, I am interested in how they are actually competing with Xenos in multiplats. Better texture cache? Or were the TMUs somehow otherwise bottlenecked on 360?
 
A

A More Normal Bird

Unconfirmed Member
1:1 ROPS to Texture units is not common at all and does not happen in the R730 , R770, Ceder, Caicos, Redwood, Juniper, or Turks designs. Unfortunately this probably only means people will try to make the assumption that there are only 4 ROPs.

And does anyone have any theories about why the ROPs and TMUs are the same amount..?

And again I'll bring up the weird ratio here, 1:1 TMU to ROP I have not heard of, you would normally have two TMUs to an ROP.

Just a guess, but the system is designed around outputting to multiple screens with multiple viewpoints. Could have something to do with it?
 

Darryl

Banned
Now imagine how they would look with a more significantly powerful hardware!

nintendo probably designed their hardware around the maximum capabilities that they, as a software developer, would have been able to put out. i don't think you would have seen many improvements even if these games were on the ps4 or a high-end pc. there are other bottlenecks to gaming development besides horsepower
 
A

A More Normal Bird

Unconfirmed Member
nintendo probably designed their hardware around the maximum capabilities that they, as a software developer, would have been able to put out. i don't think you would have seen many improvements even if these games were on the ps4 or a high-end pc. there are other bottlenecks to gaming development besides horsepower
Nonsense. They could have made a machine capable of running their current output at 1080p with AA and 16xAF, for a start.
 

LCGeek

formerly sane
Nonsense. They could have made a machine capable of running their current output at 1080p with AA and 16xAF, for a start.

except them, ms, and sony didn't. We still have resolution and aa issues, quite frankly it's joke on consoles considering their current power level.
 
nintendo probably designed their hardware around the maximum capabilities that they, as a software developer, would have been able to put out. i don't think you would have seen many improvements even if these games were on the ps4 or a high-end pc. there are other bottlenecks to gaming development besides horsepower
i love the mental gymnastics people come up with to justify worse hardware. there is no excuse. it is what it is. if you are fine with worse hardware then cool, but don't try to make asinine arguments for Nintendos sake.
 

wsippel

Banned
Krizz comes back with the thread of shinen's response to the dowgrade rumor.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=710932

Is there a point for this thread to go on since there's no confirmation of 160/8/8 it's still speculated and the rumor of a downgrade countered by a dev that would know?
Maybe 160/8/8 is correct, Shin'en said nothing about that. They only said that there was no downgrade as far as they know, and they were one of the first studios to get a kit, so that rumor is probably wrong.
 

Darryl

Banned
i love the mental gymnastics people come up with to justify worse hardware. there is no excuse. it is what it is. if you are fine with worse hardware then cool, but don't try to make asinine arguments for Nintendos sake.

i'm not trying to justify anything. i really don't care either way. i could've lived with 5 more years on the wii. i'm trying to explain what is happening. nintendo consoles sell because of nitnendo games. that is not controversial. look up the software sales for all nintendo platforms. they're overwhelmingly nintendo products. i'm proposing that nintendo's internal video game talent wasn't ready to skip two generations of hardware improvement and the console could've been designed around the actual capabilities of their output. pre-facing your comment with an insult is childish as well.

I don't know what you mean. What other important stuff? You said that Nintendo designed the hardware to match the maximum output of their staff and that any more power would be unused, or used inefficiently, as a result of this labour/productivity shortfall. I think this is wrong for a variety of reasons, but the easiest way of pointing this out is that a more powerful machine could produce better looking games without requiring any significant extra effort by the developers.

i'm saying that i doubt nintendo was going to come into this gen swinging effects that looked like this:

1BpMnZD1.gif


therefore there would've been a lot of waste in capabilities if they beefed up the hardware but couldn't fully take advantage of that hardware. the other stuff is important. a +$100 price tag to add some AA is fucking ridiculous. that's such little bang for the buck. if they were going to increase the tech in the console by a lot, i expect more than just a few less jaggies. some games are already running in 1080p as well. wind waker hd and smash bros off the top of my head, so that's not such an obvious improvement.
 
A

A More Normal Bird

Unconfirmed Member
what about the other important stuff though?
I don't know what you mean. What other important stuff? You said that Nintendo designed the hardware to match the maximum output of their staff and that any more power would be unused, or used inefficiently, as a result of this labour/productivity shortfall. I think this is wrong for a variety of reasons, but the easiest way of pointing this out is that a more powerful machine could produce better looking games without requiring any significant extra effort by the developers.
 

EDarkness

Member
Maybe 160/8/8 is correct, Shin'en said nothing about that. They only said that there was no downgrade as far as they know, and they were one of the first studios to get a kit, so that rumor is probably wrong.

Is there any way anyone who has a dev kit could even confirm or deny such a thing? My problem with this thread and this information in general is that there's no real way to confirm anything and the OP didn't give any real sources, so if it's true or not is still up in the air. Not that it really matters ultimately, but I feel like no developer would even touch this, so really what did we gain?
 

wsippel

Banned
As I think the first person to suggest 8 TMUs, I am interested in how they are actually competing with Xenos in multiplats. Better texture cache? Or were the TMUs somehow otherwise bottlenecked on 360?
Crazy idea: Latte has no TMUs at all. Instead, it has multiple (eight?) TEV units. Wait, that actually kinda makes sense - the system needs to have at least one TEV either way, and a single TEV supports eight textures per pass. So eight TMUs + one TEV = 16 textures per pass. Eight TEVs = 64 textures per pass. Maybe it's just limited to eight simultaneous targets, but can apply up to eight textures/ maps to each target per pass?
 
A

A More Normal Bird

Unconfirmed Member
Crazy idea: Latte has no TMUs at all. Instead, it has multiple (eight?) TEV units. Wait, that actually kinda makes sense - the system needs to have at least one TEV either way, and a single TEV supports eight textures per pass. So eight TMUs + one TEV = 16 textures per pass. Eight TEVs = 64 textures per pass. Maybe it's just limited to eight simultaneous targets, but can apply up to eight textures/ maps to each target per pass?
How does this gel with what's currently known about how the Wii-U runs Wii games?
 

wsippel

Banned
How does this gel with what's currently known about how the Wii-U runs Wii games?
We don't really know how backwards compatibility was implemented. But we do know that AMD designed the chip to be compatible from the ground up by reusing ArtX technology where it made sense, instead of bolting backwards compatibility on top of a new GPU. So I actually wouldn't be surprised if they did what I wrote: A straight up combination of a modern AMD GPU and an ArtX GPU, and replacing conventional TMUs with TEVs seems like an obvious choice. That would also put the low raw shader performance into perspective to some degree.
 

Nikodemos

Member
If the TEV unit hypothesis turns out true, it would add credence to the widely-held belief that the low number of cross-ports to the Wii U is caused by its architectural differences.

Edit: So, according to this hypothesis, the purported internal config of the Latte core would be 160 shaders : 8 TEV : 8 ROP?
 
I'm fine with the WiiU not being a powerhouse. What bothers me is how is it possible that they sell it 350 euros and take a loss?!? The gamepad is not bleeding high end tech for sure and don't tell me the streaming tech went through 4 years of research and development...
Is it the custom chip? So, where is the interest?
I am no techie so I really don't understand these choices...
 

Goodlife

Member
Will I provide the actual SDK specs? No. Despite making this thread and having the die shot available, some are still treating it as rumor. I'm fine with that, but providing the SDK information wouldn't change things. It's still coming from me and not an actual developer allowing you to still write it off as a rumor.

Probably a stupid question, but would Nintendo provide these specs to developers?

Or is your source just a developer who's looked at the die shots and come up with the same conclusion as people in the GPU thread?
 

Goodlife

Member
I'm fine with the WiiU not being a powerhouse. What bothers me is how is it possible that they sell it 350 euros and take a loss?!? The gamepad is not bleeding high end tech for sure and don't tell me the streaming tech went through 4 years of research and development...
Is it the custom chip? So, where is the interest?
I am no techie so I really don't understand these choices...

IIRC the person in chipworks (did I get that right, or have I made that name up?!) who provided the die shot of the GPU in the first place said something like it was a heavily customised chip, quite impressive and wouldn't be cheap to make.
 

Schnozberry

Member
If the TEV unit hypothesis turns out true, it would add credence to the widely-held belief that the low number of cross-ports to the Wii U is caused by its architectural differences.

Edit: So, according to this hypothesis, the purported internal config of the Latte core would be 160 shaders : 8 TEV : 8 ROP?

It's a wild idea, and somewhat plausible given that Nintendo has a history of putting it's own needs ahead of third parties when designing hardware. We really don't have any hard evidence, but we also have a lot of silicon that we don't have answers for as well.

It's fun to contemplate if nothing else.
 

Nikodemos

Member
it is more than a belief. No matter if it is true or not multiple developers have said the architecture is to blame. One developers actually said Wii U architecture is not like ps360 or bx1ps4.
Yes, sorry, that was somewhat poor phrasing on my part. The issue of heavy customisation impairing porting is a widely-known one.

What bothers me is how is it possible that they sell it 350 euros and take a loss?!? The gamepad is not bleeding high end tech for sure and don't tell me the streaming tech went through 4 years of research and development...
Is it the custom chip? So, where is the interest?
It's not a technology cost issue, it's a bulk economics isssue. Consumer electronics parts are contracted in vast batches, usually paid upfront (at least partly). Selling the devices built with those components amortises the volume-based BoM. Wii U doesn't sell. The result is easy to deduce.
 
I'm fine with the WiiU not being a powerhouse. What bothers me is how is it possible that they sell it 350 euros and take a loss?!? The gamepad is not bleeding high end tech for sure and don't tell me the streaming tech went through 4 years of research and development...
Is it the custom chip? So, where is the interest?
I am no techie so I really don't understand these choices...

Please understand.


seriously all the wii-u parts are custom designed and made. This might be the reason
 

QaaQer

Member
I'm fine with the WiiU not being a powerhouse. What bothers me is how is it possible that they sell it 350 euros and take a loss?!? The gamepad is not bleeding high end tech for sure and don't tell me the streaming tech went through 4 years of research and development...
Is it the custom chip? So, where is the interest?
I am no techie so I really don't understand these choices...

.

Zomb (a gaf poster who works at an investment bank) says that they must be losing a bit less than $300 per unit sold for the numbers to make sense. [note: that doesn't mean the wii u costs $600 to make, only that for every unit they've sold they have lost $300 for whatever reasons.] I hope if they have a management shake up it doesn't affect their philosophy on software development. It would be really sad to see in game purchases etc from Nintendo.


By the way Herb, the remasters your 1960s albums sound really good.
 

Log4Girlz

Member
Yes, sorry, that was somewhat poor phrasing on my part. The issue of heavy customisation impairing porting is a widely-known one.
yeah it is just sad how naysayers want to try and put down the console at any turn... Like look it is not native 720p on Ghost... CONSOLE MAXED OUT CONFIRMED ON SAME LEVEL AS 360. It take a great engine, developers, and artstyle to make a great looking game no matter what console. i remeber people talking so much crap about PS3 perfomance and then uncharted 2 came out and blew the gaming industry away. Give the Wii U time.

The Wii U is fundamentally not capable of generating graphics dramatically better than Uncharted 2. Better yes, but not drastically better.
 

Perkel

Banned
yeah it is just sad how naysayers want to try and put down the console at any turn... Like look it is not native 720p on Ghost... CONSOLE MAXED OUT CONFIRMED ON SAME LEVEL AS 360. It take a great engine, developers, and artstyle to make a great looking game no matter what console. i remeber people talking so much crap about PS3 perfomance and then uncharted 2 came out and blew the gaming industry away. Give the Wii U time.

Who will be the one ?

Nintendo ? They are yet to produce game on technical level of Gears of War.
All other devs abandoned WiiU
Even X which looks good isn't really anything special from PS3/X360 perspective.
 
Seems like there could be two decisions here working in parallel, not necessarily one as a result of the other. Solving two birds with one stone might have made sense.

What do you mean here specifically? They worked with IBM and AMD on components in the past. And agreed regarding the overheating.

Didn't Apple ditch IBM because they couldn't get CPUs that scaled well without getting hot? I know it's not the same, but still.
 

SmokyDave

Member
i remeber people talking so much crap about PS3 perfomance and then uncharted 2 came out and blew the gaming industry away. Give the Wii U time.
The only problem there is that the other consoles aren't going to be stagnant. The bar will be set higher than the Wii U can achieve, and only go up from there. When a game comes along that blows away everything that came before (like Gears / Uncharted / Killzone), it's going to be on a Sony or MS system.
 
The Wii U is fundamentally not capable of generating graphics dramatically better than Uncharted 2. Better yes, but not drastically better.
This starts into a slippery slope.

Nothing on PS4 looks dramatically better than Uncharted 2. Higher res, better texturing more pixel accurate effects. But nothing Earth shattering. Closest would be The Order and it's using a funky res and modest framerate to achieve the look.

Nice to see fairly impressive subsurface scattering going on in a console game though.
 

Hermii

Member
The only problem there is that the other consoles aren't going to be stagnant. The bar will be set higher than the Wii U can achieve, and only go up from there. When a game comes along that blows away everything that came before (like Gears / Uncharted / Killzone), it's going to be on a Sony or MS system.

Thes would have been true regardless of 160 or 320 alus.
 
The only problem there is that the other consoles aren't going to be stagnant. The bar will be set higher than the Wii U can achieve, and only go up from there. When a game comes along that blows away everything that came before (like Gears / Uncharted / Killzone), it's going to be on a Sony or MS system.

This.

When your platform is not only considerably weaker but also more exotic, you've got problems.

Apple ditched PowerPC in favor of x86.

I know they did. It's the reasoning I'm talking about.
 

Mithos

Member
Crazy idea: Latte has no TMUs at all. Instead, it has multiple (eight?) TEV units. Wait, that actually kinda makes sense - the system needs to have at least one TEV either way, and a single TEV supports eight textures per pass. So eight TMUs + one TEV = 16 textures per pass. Eight TEVs = 64 textures per pass. Maybe it's just limited to eight simultaneous targets, but can apply up to eight textures/ maps to each target per pass?

This crazy idea sounds like something that could be confirmable by "any" developers by actually testing how many textures per pass they can add/do, doesn't it?
 
This.

When your platform is not only considerably weaker but also more exotic, you've got problems.
Given realities of the WiiU ecosystem I don't think this is much of a problem anymore.

It's firmly a "Nintendo" system. You buy one if 3D World or Zelda tickle your fancy. It was likely never to be a 3rd party system. Even with a substantive capability upgrade. Publishers have had an aversion to funding projects on Nintendo hardware for generations. Nintendo in the past two have just given them firm reasons.

Nintendo design imperatives are antithetical to the modern industry.
 

Log4Girlz

Member
This starts into a slippery slope.

Nothing on PS4 looks dramatically better than Uncharted 2. Higher res, better texturing more pixel accurate effects. But nothing Earth shattering. Closest would be The Order and it's using a funky res and modest framerate to achieve the look.

Nice to see fairly impressive subsurface scattering going on in a console game though.

PS4 is quite a bit more powerful than X1 and yet Ryse looks amazing. Wii U can't even blow the doors off ports from older machines, while these new systems are coming out of the gate with some pretty impressive looking games that blow it away in terms of technical ability. Looking closely at specs one can readily assume it has only started. Same cannot be said for the Wii U.
 

SmokyDave

Member
PS4 is quite a bit more powerful than X1 and yet Ryse looks amazing. Wii U can't even blow the doors off ports from older machines, while these new systems are coming out of the gate with some pretty impressive looking games that blow it away in terms of technical ability. Looking closely at specs one can readily assume it has only started. Same cannot be said for the Wii U.
I think one thing that can be said for the Wii U is that the games at the end of the gen will look better than the launch games by a larger amount than the other two consoles. There's more room to improve there due to the complex architecture and lack of documentation that was rumoured when launch titles were being developed.
 
PS4 is quite a bit more powerful than X1 and yet Ryse looks amazing. Wii U can't even blow the doors off ports from older machines, while these new systems are coming out of the gate with some pretty impressive looking games that blow it away in terms of technical ability. Looking closely at specs one can readily assume it has only started. Same cannot be said for the Wii U.
Personally I think 3D World is the best looking cartoon stylized game of any hardware to date. It's achieving it through meager means but I think it's a lot prettier than Knack. Which is visually trying too hard to be many different games. Certain assets almost looking like dumped assets from Uncharted.

WiiU doesn't really have it's own Second Son to make the comparison stark.

edit: I mean I see where you're coming from.

But you're still talking about something theoretically weaker (through efficiency gains though more powerful) with an exotic architecture and limited development focus.

I think it's safe to say we haven't seen a fraction of what's capable while also knowing not to expect miracles.
 

Log4Girlz

Member
Personally I think 3D World is the best looking cartoon stylized game of any hardware to date. It's achieving it through meager means but I think it's a lot prettier than Knack. Which is visually trying too hard to be many different games. Certain assets almost looking like dumped assets from Uncharted.

WiiU doesn't really have it's own Second Son to make the comparison stark.

edit: I mean I see where you're coming from.

But you're still talking about something theoretically weaker (through efficiency gains though more powerful) with an exotic architecture and limited development focus.

I think it's safe to say we haven't seen a fraction of what's capable while also knowing not to expect miracles.

I don't see huge gains coming. Engines which maxed out the 7th gen will already be close to maxing the Wii U. It has double the RAM and so far from what I can see the ability to generate prettier lighting...and that's it. Sure, put in some real budget into a game and picture GOW 3 but with better textures and lighting. Hey that right there looks nice. But by the time such a game appears the Naughty Dog proper shows what they have up their sleeve.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom