Quantcast
Mass Effect 3 on 360 > Wii U. Eurogamer Face-Off

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Mass Effect 3 on 360 > Wii U. Eurogamer Face-Off

Aquietguy said:
ethomaz said:

Aquietguy said:

Many have prased the system as a whole. A console is more than just the CPU. If the U is able to produce the same graphics as the Zelda and Japanesse Garden demo's from 2011 E3, it will more than hold its own.

As for the memory speed, what was saying is that a 4.3 is better than a 5.3 in a 40 yard dash. 4.3 means a person runs 40 yards in 4.3 seconds. 5.3 means it was done in 5.3 second which is slower than 4.3. The goal is to have a smaller time. That's what my understanding of the speed claim that was made. Feel free to correct my understanding if it is wrong.

The whole system is better than PS360... that's a fact but disappointment is deu that fact it it just better than PS360... not next gen or way better than PS360... it's like "Welcome Wii to this generation"... Wii U hardware delivery what the others consoles develered six years ago.

The memory speed of Wii U is almost half the speed of the memory in PS360... 22.4GB/s vs 12.8GB/s.


Ok! So those E3 demo's were a lie then? They were more than just better than what saw from the PS360.

Short answer: yes.

Long answer: tech demos are intended to showcase hardware strength without the constraints of having to compute stuff like AI, gameplay input and the myriad of factors that need to be updated real time into the RAM like position of assets etc.

It's like dolus bonus; the so-called good deceit on commercial transactions. Meaning the use of cunning and sagacity to make a product look and feel better than it is.

Both the PS3 and the X360 also had their fair share of wow-ing tech demos; and that with 7-year old graphical technology... every new GPU series have those too.



 

 

 

 

 

Around the Network

Mass Effect 3 wasn't well optimised for the PS3 hence the crappy frame rate. It's definitely a GPU intensive and bandwidth heavy game both of which are the PS3's weak points. If you look at the alpha effects they are the same full resolution as on the 360, difference being the 360 has a 256GB/s embedded ram + 21.6GB/s to system RAM while the PS3 only has 22.4GB/s video memory bandwidth. A neat trick to keep the frame rate up on PS3 games with heavy use of alpha is simply to use quarter resolution. Unless someone points it out, you won't notice the difference and it's something Bioware could've done but I guess graphical bling was more important to them than frame rate which imo is the wrong choice at least during game play. All PS3 exclusives either ditch alpha altogether or downgrade to quarter res including Killzone 2 & 3, Resistance trilogy and the two Infamous games. In the Uncharted trilogy ND simply replaced alpha explosions with explosions and fire effects that are not transparent but do feature complex speed and density physics which I imagine is afforded by power of the Cell CPU.

The Wii U has more edram than the 360 and a stronger GPU but slower system RAM (though twice as much) and possibly a weaker CPU (it has to be backwards compatible with the Wii afterall) so taking these factors into account I'm not surprised at the 360>Wii U>PS3 result.



When the PS1 launched, its launch titles didnt vastly over power the SNES' best titles. I mean Mario RPG and Chrono Trigger looked better than games like Gex and Alundra. Riddick, Doom 3, RE4, Rebel Strike, they looked just as good as some launch 360 games. Now if your judging end era ps1 to SNES then yes its no comparison, as well as current era ps360 titles to to end era xbox/gc, there is no comparison, but in the beginning it is never a massive leap. I've been gaming since the end of the NES era, this is how things usually go. 2nd gen WiiU games will crap all over the current 360 PS3 line up. Im sure of that.

And on a sidenote, everybody talking about how Sony is some power monster in the console department, you are aware that the PS3 is the 3rd playstation home console right? The first 2 were the weakest in there generations. Sony tried the power move once and it was 600 dollar mess at launch.



Games are fun.

Just a lazy port like Madden on Wii U. This is EA we are talking about.



itsyounghavok said:
When the PS1 launched, its launch titles didnt vastly over power the SNES' best titles. I mean Mario RPG and Chrono Trigger looked better than games like Gex and Alundra. Riddick, Doom 3, RE4, Rebel Strike, they looked just as good as some launch 360 games. Now if your judging end era ps1 to SNES then yes its no comparison, as well as current era ps360 titles to to end era xbox/gc, there is no comparison, but in the beginning it is never a massive leap. I've been gaming since the end of the NES era, this is how things usually go. 2nd gen WiiU games will crap all over the current 360 PS3 line up. Im sure of that.

And on a sidenote, everybody talking about how Sony is some power monster in the console department, you are aware that the PS3 is the 3rd playstation home console right? The first 2 were the weakest in there generations. Sony tried the power move once and it was 600 dollar mess at launch.


That's not quite true. PSOne launch games Ridge Racer, Wipeout, Tekken and Battle Arena Toshinden destroyed SNES FX Racing, and Killer Instinct in the technical department. Same goes with N64, Mario 64 was technically far superior to anything on the 16bit consoles and they were all launch games.

A better comparison would be comparing Half Life 2 or Burnout Revenege on last gen Xbox/PS2 to this gen 360 versions of which they were first or second gen games for the latter. The differece is clear.

In fact until the Wii and Wii U came along, next gen was always vastly more powerful then the gen before it. 



Around the Network

Aquietguy said:

Ok! So those E3 demo's were a lie then? They were more than just better than what saw from the PS360.

The ME3 demo in E3 was the PC version running in 1080p... even DF exposed that.



The PS3 has gotten the short end of the stick quite a few times lately. Skyrim must be the worst case though.



End of 2016 hardware sales:

Wii U: 15 million. PS4: 54 million. One: 30 million. 3DS: 64.8 million. PSVita: 15.2 million.

Badassbab said:
itsyounghavok said:
When the PS1 launched, its launch titles didnt vastly over power the SNES' best titles. I mean Mario RPG and Chrono Trigger looked better than games like Gex and Alundra. Riddick, Doom 3, RE4, Rebel Strike, they looked just as good as some launch 360 games. Now if your judging end era ps1 to SNES then yes its no comparison, as well as current era ps360 titles to to end era xbox/gc, there is no comparison, but in the beginning it is never a massive leap. I've been gaming since the end of the NES era, this is how things usually go. 2nd gen WiiU games will crap all over the current 360 PS3 line up. Im sure of that.

And on a sidenote, everybody talking about how Sony is some power monster in the console department, you are aware that the PS3 is the 3rd playstation home console right? The first 2 were the weakest in there generations. Sony tried the power move once and it was 600 dollar mess at launch.


That's not quite true. PSOne launch games Ridge Racer, Wipeout, Tekken and Battle Arena Toshinden destroyed SNES FX Racing, and Killer Instinct in the technical department. Same goes with N64, Mario 64 was technically far superior to anything on the 16bit consoles and they were all launch games.

A better comparison would be comparing Half Life 2 or Burnout Revenege on last gen Xbox/PS2 to this gen 360 versions of which they were first or second gen games for the latter. The differece is clear.

In fact until the Wii and Wii U came along, next gen was always vastly more powerful then the gen before it. 

I bought both versions of Burnout Revenge (first on Xbox, then when I got my 360 that version) and the difference was huge for a port. The HD resolution alone made it so much better looking, while keeping it at 60FPS at the same time.
But okay that port got released 5 months after the 360 launch.

Now Project Gotham Racing 3 (a launch title) totally killed every other racing game at that time on a technical level.
PGR 2: http://i2.listal.com/image/794505/936full-pgr2%3A-project-gotham-racing-2-screenshot.jpg
PGR 3 (off screen): http://worldofstuart.excellentcontent.com/pgr3/box1.jpg

Fact is almost (if not) all PS2/Xbox ports looked better on the 360 while all WiiU ports so far seem to be inferior to the 360 versions.
Only Treyarch could actually improve something from the other versions and up the resolution to 720p while at the same time getting into framerate problems....
As for the other games. No bigger draw distance ? Not even some higher resolution textures ?



sethnintendo said:
Just a lazy port like Madden on Wii U. This is EA we are talking about.

It's not a lazy port. Did you not read the article? This is probably the best port on Wii U right now.



mass effect 3 is my GOTY and i played it on ps3 if the game is better on wii U why are you all bitching?