Metro Last Light dev: 'Wii U has horrible, slow CPU' [Up: DICE dev comments]

Gemüsepizza;44711864 said:
What. They developed for the 3DS, DS, Wii, Game Boy Advance and Color. And I would not really call their games "technically incredible".
Those games always pushed the hardware to its limits.

And no Nano Assault Neo is very far from pushing Wii U. Nano Assault Neo uses around 20% of Wii Us potential, according to Shin'en.

Source for the 20% claim: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=482009
 


60fps, 480p, dolby digital, physics, online, shaders everywhere...
Only Gran Turismo 4 came close.


I mean, you would be right if those 2 games weren't created. Even other powerhouses like RE4 can't compete with those.

Getting a GC and playing Rogue Leader was one of the most mindblowing graphics experiences on my gaming life. Then you play the rest of GC games....
I would put Metroid Prime up there.
 
"Despite what the person who knows more than me says..." <- that's what your post starts off with and that is the same mistake many people have made in this very thread.
That person gave an opinion. Factor 5 said GameCube was competitive with Xbox power wise. Personally I'm saying is the the proof is in the pudding, what matters is the performance of actual games.

Also the vast vast majority of multi-platform titles were ps2 ports, what kind of metric is that to go by? It's no coincidence that the two exceptions you made were designed for the xbox and not the ps2. I don't even remember anything about Metal Arms other than the best version was supposed to be the xbox version. I'd have to see proof to think otherwise and not just the word of someone on a forum who seems to have a devotion to one of these companies.
Metal Arms on the Xbox has v-sync and screen tear issues.



I want to ask how? However this is going way off topic over some people getting overly defensive over a 10 year old subject. So if you care to support this in PM, by all means. How do they outclass everything else in scope, complexity, effects, etc?
In terms of terms of complexity of effects and sheer amounts of geometry on screen. The Rogue Squadron games for example have per pixel effects, Dot3 bump/normal mapping unified lighting and self shadowing. Rebel Strike also has real time has atmospheric light scattering, an effect usually reserved for CGI, that we rarely seen even on current gen games. And to be fair even today self shadowing is rarely used on console games.

The Xbox games with extensive use of self shadowing and normal mapping were Riddick and Doom. These are the flag bearers for the Xbox. But these games have poor image quality, low quality normal maps and have dodgy frame rates.


Rebel Strike still has the best vegetation engine I've seen for that generation of consoles. It's far more impressive than Far Cry Instincts on the Xbox.




 
^ I'm ignoring your post because I already told you I didn't want to have this OT discussion in this thread. If you feel the need to support your wrong point, then copy and paste this post as a PM to me. I already know it's flawed just by reading the first line. Factor 5? Really? You pick an exclusive developer that never made an xbox game and believe their opinion while dismissing another developer who has had experience with all the consoles? Why am I not surprised...

Well ok then =) I haven't really seen your other posts, so can't comment there!
Trust me, as much as I'm giving Nintendo fans a hard time here, I have done my fair share of defending the Wii-U against the trolls.

I wouldn't use a low quality off screen gif as an example.
Agreed, never agreed with using gifs to prove a point.

this threaed has gotten so off topic it's not even funny.
Yeah, I'm starting think the poster who said this thread was past the expriation date is right.
 
You gotta admit Rogue Leader did look pretty sick considering it was a launch game... in 2001. An HD version of that might actually look passable next to current gen games.
 
^ I'm ignoring your post because I already told you I didn't want to have this OT discussion in this thread. If you feel the need to support your wrong point, then copy and paste this post as a PM to me. I already know it's flawed just by reading the first line. Factor 5? Really? You pick an exclusive developer that never made an xbox game and believe their opinion while dismissing another developer who has had experience with all the consoles? Why am I not surprised...
.
Factor 5 knew the Xbox very well. They wrote middleware for the Xbox. They also worked on a Xbox port of Rogue Squadron games that wasn't released.
 
That person gave an opinion. Factor 5 said GameCube was competitive with Xbox power wise. Personally I'm saying is the the proof is in the pudding, what matters is the performance of actual games.


Metal Arms on the Xbox has v-sync and screen tear issues.




In terms of terms of complexity of effects and sheer amounts of geometry on screen. The Rogue Squadron games for example have per pixel effects, Dot3 bump/normal mapping unified lighting and self shadowing. Rebel Strike also has real time has atmospheric light scattering, an effect usually reserved for CGI, that we rarely seen even on current gen games. And to be fair even today self shadowing is rarely used on console games.

The Xbox games with extensive use of self shadowing and normal mapping were Riddick and Doom. These are the flag bearers for the Xbox. But these games have poor image quality, low quality normal maps and have dodgy frame rates.


Rebel Strike still has the best vegetation engine I've seen for that generation of consoles. It's far more impressive than Far Cry Instincts on the Xbox.




Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory was 480p and Widescreen, with some actually sharp normal maps, and had a stable framerate compared to the first Splinter Cell.
 
You gotta admit Rogue Leader did look pretty sick considering it was a launch game... in 2001. An HD version of that might actually look passable next to current gen games.
9 months of development and they put into shame 99% of the other games released into the GC life (being the 1% the other Factor 5 game). Truly incredible.
 

teh_pwn

"Saturated fat causes heart disease as much as Brawndo is what plants crave."
There is something about Nintendo that brings out conspiracy level obsession type speculation. I stayed away from the countless spec speculation threads, and now that the hardware is out we're speculating what if x developer on console 10 years ago made a port so we could have a hypothetical apples/apples comparison. WHAT
 

TheSeks

Blinded by the luminous glory that is David Bowie's physical manifestation.
Only Gran Turismo 4 came close.
lmao, you serious?

Rebel Strike still has the best vegetation engine I've seen for that generation of consoles. It's far more impressive than Far Cry Instincts on the Xbox.
Yes, but is Rebel Strike open world and hitting the same framerate at the same resolution?

As for Gamecube being as powerful as X-box: That's completely subjective. I'd only count Biohazard 4 (and maybe MGS but that has framerate and performance issues when more than two enemies are on screen with you) as the only one that could give the X-box a run for it's money. And since we're already off topic what other console that gen allowed developers to support HD resolutions (at least 720p) before the HD standard was even a glimmer in most consumers eyes?

Edit: Also from what Gustav says, it seems the Wii U port of BF3 isn't going to up the player count. 24-players with a few more graphical effects tweaked in confirmed.
 
Maybe they just wanted to do a quick port of unoptimized code and blamed it on the hardware. Typical.

It does sound just like one of those "speculation thread" anonymous dev rumor "not enough shaders" shit.
Just as I suspected. Oh what a surprise

(new news about "WiiU has horrible slow CPU" comment)
http://mynintendonews.com/2012/12/1...ow-wii-u-cpu-comments-talks-metro-last-light/

&#8220;Take any of the comments you&#8217;ve seen attributed with a pinch of salt,&#8221; Benyon said. &#8220;It&#8217;s certainly not been based on any kind of analysis of final hardware.&#8221;

&#8220;Our look at the Wii U extended to a very early look at some very early kits. We&#8230; we did some work on it, but we made a decision fairly early on that we weren&#8217;t going to commit further resource to it. So yeah, we didn&#8217;t go too far.&#8221;
Here's what I said before this (but after THQ responded way more vaguely but hinted enough, now it directly confirmed it's BS)

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=45050777&postcount=80

And for a quick example which happend quite recently: http://www.computerandvideogames.com...ims-metro-dev/

This is one of those times when a developer spreads bullcrap but the media takes it seriously because "he must be right he's a developer".

It doesn't apply to you here, but the pre-installed day1 patch stuff does.

The problem is:

  • Metro devs haven't shipped any WiiU Game
  • From his statements it was clear they wanted to do just a quick port
  • They have multiple teams split, and only beginning with the PS3 one
  • They sould review their CPU algorithms before they bash it (what about OooE stupid)
  • That's why THQ responded, they know CPU claims are bullcrap
  • Metro dev probably didn't want to make another engine up specifically for WiiU hardware
  • It's easier to blame nintendo
  • Respected developers such as John Carmack don't talk about hardware until after they've done full research and actually created a working engine specifically designed for that hardware.

They were cheesy, they probably thought they can do a quick port, turns out it needs way more work to make it happen on different hardware than what PS3/360 have. It's obvious WiiU has just launched and developers don't have much experience yet, ofcourse some do more than others.
Maybe THQ saw my post, well thanks, I'm very pleased with the company going in the right direction, I definitely see potential in new restructuring as well as vision, ofcourse the mass public doesn't see them in good light, yet. This transparency counts significantly in company image and THQ is climbing up, regardless of doom&gloom articles with financial drama.


So 4AGames WiiU familiarity is full of:


Those hardware speculation mainstream article news smell like paid statements, platform analysis is something explained on some conference and discussed about in length, you cannot do it in this way, those are just PR hypes or for us experienced users, trolls.

Already looking forward to QuakeCon keynote when Carmack will discuss WiiU hardware, hopefully they make a project on it of some sort if not doom4 right away. But that would kind of be ridicolous, since Doom4 is for last gen as well, and I think it'll be made for this gen too but WiiU is in this middle where they could easily, especially if it's like 1.5 years away, possibly 2.
 
lmao, you serious?



Yes, but is Rebel Strike open world and hitting the same framerate at the same resolution?

As for Gamecube being as powerful as X-box: That's completely subjective. I'd only count Biohazard 4 (and maybe MGS but that has framerate and performance issues when more than two enemies are on screen with you) as the only one that could give the X-box a run for it's money. And since we're already off topic what other console that gen allowed developers to support HD resolutions (at least 720p) before the HD standard was even a glimmer in most consumers eyes?

Edit: Also from what Gustav says, it seems the Wii U port of BF3 isn't going to up the player count. 24-players with a few more graphical effects tweaked in confirmed.
GC is not as powerful as xbox in terms of pure power or certain features the hardware supports. Don't even know why someone would think that. In terms of utilization much different debate and that's where the devate gets fun. BTW MP games own the MGS games and if you don't know why they are high end cube games go study what retro did to max out the cube structure, mainly texture layers and polys.
 
Great to see them at least acknowledge that they saw early dev kits
Please REMIND yourself that THQ and 4AGames are separate, I suspect you probably know this but the way your statement sounds may indicate they're coming from same source.

Metro is NOT a THQ brand unlike COH and others, 4AGames is the Metro developer and owner, they just choosed THQ to publish the game so it's THQ's good heart they're correcting those comments, they don't have any obligation to do that.

Basically to be clear, 4AGames speaks for them self, as well as THQ.

EDIT: Don't that "studio representative of 4AGames" fool you, I have noticed it now and I think there's where the assumption could come, he's like a manager that has direct contact with 4AGames but it's up to the contract how much communication they have and what 4AGames lets them know. He is still THQ's employee and doesn't work for 4AGames. Publishers have their own employees on multiple external projects and this is normal, but it's not 4AGames saying this, to be sure.

EDIT2: Also ofcourse, "publisher's communication with customers" is often in the contract as a right, so publishers can market the games how they want, so THQ can override 4AGames comments, in this case it's nothing that would directly impact metro sales, but they realized it's not anyone's benefit bashing the console without reason.
 
Please REMIND yourself that THQ and 4AGames are separate, I suspect you probably know this but the way your statement sounds may indicate they're coming from same source.

Metro is NOT a THQ brand unlike COH and others, 4AGames is the Metro developer and owner, they just choosed THQ to publish the game so it's THQ's good heart they're correcting those comments, they don't have any obligation to do that.

Basically to be clear, 4AGames speaks for them self, as well as THQ.

EDIT: Don't that "studio representative of 4AGames" fool you, I have noticed it now and I think there's where the assumption could come, he's like a manager that has direct contact with 4AGames but it's up to the contract how much communication they have and what 4AGames lets them know. He is still THQ's employee and doesn't work for 4AGames. Publishers have their
own employees on multiple external projects and this is normal, but it's not 4AGames saying this, to be sure.




EDIT2: Also ofcourse, "publisher's
communication with customers" is often in the contract as a right, so publishers can market the games how they want, so THQ can override 4AGames comments, in this case it's nothing that would directly impact metro sales, but they realized it's not anyone's benefit bashing the console without reason.

So if Nintendo had chosen to use dimensions similar to current XBOX, increased CPU clock rate, though problematic considering it may have or have short pipelines. This dev and maybe others would port they're games without question. Nintendo should name they're next console BruteForce.
 
So how is the CPU "horribly slow" again? If it were running PS3/360 games with half the content on screen, that would be a cause for alarm but there isn't a single game to prove that (even the god awful rushed ports).

I understand the Wii U cpu may not be the best thing in the world but the way I see some paint it as some huge hindrance or "enabler" that the Wii U drastically falls short of PS3/360 standards is bizarre.

If anything, this just goes to show how shit the PS3/360 architectures are if an architecture as old as Wii U can keep up so well with little downgrades.
 
Just as I suspected. Oh what a surprise

(new news about "WiiU has horrible slow CPU" comment)
http://mynintendonews.com/2012/12/1...ow-wii-u-cpu-comments-talks-metro-last-light/



Here's what I said before this (but after THQ responded way more vaguely but hinted enough, now it directly confirmed it's BS)

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=45050777&postcount=80



Maybe THQ saw my post, well thanks, I'm very pleased with the company going in the right direction, I definitely see potential in new restructuring as well as vision, ofcourse the mass public doesn't see them in good light, yet. This transparency counts significantly in company image and THQ is climbing up, regardless of doom&gloom articles with financial drama.


So 4AGames WiiU familiarity is full of:


Those hardware speculation mainstream article news smell like paid statements, platform analysis is something explained on some conference and discussed about in length, you cannot do it in this way, those are just PR hypes or for us experienced users, trolls.

Already looking forward to QuakeCon keynote when Carmack will discuss WiiU hardware, hopefully they make a project on it of some sort if not doom4 right away. But that would kind of be ridicolous, since Doom4 is for last gen as well, and I think it'll be made for this gen too but WiiU is in this middle where they could easily, especially if it's like 1.5 years away, possibly 2.
Am I understand you correctly that you're saying 4A Games are clueless and don't know what they are talking about?

So how is the CPU "horribly slow" again? If it were running PS3/360 games with half the content on screen, that would be a cause for alarm but there isn't a single game to prove that (even the god awful rushed ports).

I understand the Wii U cpu may not be the best thing in the world but the way I see some paint it as some huge hindrance or "enabler" that the Wii U drastically falls short of PS3/360 standards is bizarre.

If anything, this just goes to show how shit the PS3/360 architectures are if an architecture as old as Wii U can keep up so well with little downgrades.
You don't actually believe any of this, do you? The last line especially is.....baffling to say the least.
 
The CPU is suppose to be an evolution of the PowerPC 7xx. That's older than Cell and Xenon are.
CELL and especially Xenon weren't designed from scratch, though. The PPE is also an "evolution" of a core designed more than a decade ago. Not to mention that evolution turned out to be a step in the wrong direction, so IBM threw it out of the window almost immediately.
 

Kai Dracon

Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
So if Nintendo had chosen to use dimensions similar to current XBOX, increased CPU clock rate, though problematic considering it may have or have short pipelines. This dev and maybe others would port they're games without question. Nintendo should name they're next console BruteForce.
Sorry for breaking in, but: I think the only way for Nintendo to make everyone happy, enthusiast and 3rd parties alike, would be to make a 20 pound box with a 1000 watt power supply, renders all games at 8k native, supports precognitive online play which joins friends games in progress before you decide to buy the game, and is called the Nintendo Fuck U.
 
Sorry for breaking in, but: I think the only way for Nintendo to make everyone happy, enthusiast and 3rd parties alike, would be to make a 20 pound box with a 1000 watt power supply, renders all games at 8k native, supports precognitive online play which joins friends games in progress before you decide to buy the game, and is called the Nintendo Fuck U.
Or they could make a console that isn't 5 years behind the rest hardware-wise.
 
Or they could make a console that isn't 5 years behind the rest hardware-wise.
Having beefy hardware isn't going to solve their third party dilemma. It's a multifaceted issue, it baffles me why people think third parties hop on whatever platform has the most power.

It's all about money. Nothing more.
 
Or they could make a console that isn't 5 years behind the rest hardware-wise.
Because that worked so well for the GameCube...

People need to accept even if Nintendo had identical specs, they still wouldn't get as much 3rd party support as the other 2 systems, the problem is a lot deeper than just power, always has been.
 
Sorry for breaking in, but: I think the only way for Nintendo to make everyone happy, enthusiast and 3rd parties alike, would be to make a 20 pound box with a 1000 watt power supply, renders all games at 8k native, supports precognitive online play which joins friends games in progress before you decide to buy the game, and is called the Nintendo Fuck U.
Not really.

Using a modern CPU, instead of an "evolution" of a CPU designed in the 90s, alongside a cheap, mid-tier, GPU would be enough.
 
Sorry for breaking in, but: I think the only way for Nintendo to make everyone happy, enthusiast and 3rd parties alike, would be to make a 20 pound box with a 1000 watt power supply, renders all games at 8k native, supports precognitive online play which joins friends games in progress before you decide to buy the game, and is called the Nintendo Fuck U.
I know you're joking, but yeah, I think Nintendo could have made a lot of people happier if they worried less about the console form factor and wattage and more about raw power.

I haven't seen any evidence the PS3 or 360 original were hurt by being beastly sized. Heck, the first Blu-Ray player I pulled up on Amazon has dimensions of 19 inches by 11 inches and weighs 4.4 pounds. (some rounding). The Wii U is 7 inches by 11 inches and weighs 3.5 pounds. Why does it have to be smaller than a Blu-Ray player? The way people talk you'd think Japanese people all live in the one-room-homes you see at Ikea.
 
People need to accept even if Nintendo had identical specs, they still wouldn't get as much 3rd party support as the other 2 systems, the problem is a lot deeper than just power, always has been.
Certainly true, but having an underpowered machine exacerbates the situation rather badly. Actually, though, the issue isn't support, the issue is quality support, or, more factually, actual same-game releases.

The Gamecube had a lot more same-game releases (vs. PS2) than the Wii did (vs. PS3/360), but the Wii had much more developer support (in number of game releases).

I hope that no one would actually argue that they'd prefer the Wii U be supported more like the Wii (ie. mostly shovelware) than the Gamecube (more parity game releases with a few exclusives thrown in), though I'm sure someone will.
 
Sorry for breaking in, but: I think the only way for Nintendo to make everyone happy, enthusiast and 3rd parties alike, would be to make a 20 pound box with a 1000 watt power supply, renders all games at 8k native, supports precognitive online play which joins friends games in progress before you decide to buy the game, and is called the Nintendo Fuck U.
Or they could just make a $350-399 box with modern specs like Sony and MS' next systems, instead of a last gen machine with an expensive tablet controller.

Oh, sorry, was I interrupting your fantasy?
 
Or they could just make a $350-399 box with modern specs like Sony and MS' next systems, instead of a last gen machine with an expensive tablet controller.

Oh, sorry, was I interrupting your fantasy?
Their a business they don't have too. It's a nice idea but buying a WiiU is not necessary. Don't like the specs don't buy the system. Seems you have your own fantasy going on because for two straight gens it hasn't happened despite topics like these.
 
Or they could just make a $350-399 box with modern specs like Sony and MS' next systems, instead of a last gen machine with an expensive tablet controller.

Oh, sorry, was I interrupting your fantasy?
Why the fuck would you want three similar consoles with similar specs?

How about 3 consoles: Sonybox, MSbox and Nintendobox. All with same specs and hw, but different colors and of course different logo on the side. How cool is that?!
 
Why the fuck would you want three similar consoles with similar specs?

How about 3 consoles: Sonybox, MSbox and Nintendobox. All with same specs and hw, but different colors and of course different logo on the side. How cool is that?!
Will my Nintendobox be subsidized like the Sonybox and MSbox also? As long as we're living in Kirby's Dream Land, I'd like that too.
 
Why the fuck would you want three similar consoles with similar specs?

How about 3 consoles: Sonybox, MSbox and Nintendobox. All with same specs and hw, but different colors and of course different logo on the side. How cool is that?!
HP wouldn't even touch a Nintendo console with similar specs and still bash it on gaf :p
 
Their a business they don't have too. It's a nice idea but buying a WiiU is not necessary. Don't like the specs don't buy the system. Seems you have your own fantasy going on because for two straight gens it hasn't happened despite topics like these.
I think you should have read the post I was quoting before typing that up.

Unless you actually agree with that poster that the only way for wii u to satisfy everyone was to be a $1000 PC, and that the wii u is not just a mountain of dumb, simple to correct design mistakes, and that everyone bashing it is just a "dudebro" idiot making clearly unreasonable complaints and demands that nintendo could never have possibly satisfied.

Why the fuck would you want three similar consoles with similar specs?

How about 3 consoles: Sonybox, MSbox and Nintendobox. All with same specs and hw, but different colors and of course different logo on the side. How cool is that?!
So let's see if I simplified the math correctly here:

Nintendobox with nintendo games > nintendobox with nintendo games + third party games