I have heard about Batman having horrible frame rate issues. I have Black Ops 2 and theres a few hiccups here and there but AC3 plays fine to me. Its as smooth as botox balls.....not sure if its "exactly" 60fps but i have not experienced any frame drops yet.

I'll give you this ridiculous example. You have two individuals, both have the same personalities, one however is objectively more physically attractive than the other. Chances are that more men/women would prefer the physically attractive one in such an instance.

The issue here though is, not only is the individual in question uglier, but their personality has unappealing differences in relation to the personality of the physically attractive individual.

Most of the games have been rushed and are lazy ports. Its just that simple. Expect Black Ops 2. What a great game on the Wii U. It happens to all the systems. Its not fair to the customers. When these games dont sell well, we know what they are going to say. See our games cant sell on a Nintendo System. Same bullshit.

These performance checks are very useful for some people, but as an actual gage of what the Wii U can potentially do they're obviously off the ball. As an analysis of what it is currently being achieved in multi-format games (handed out to smaller, inexperienced developers) it tells us quite clearly the Wii U versions at launch aren't up to scratch.

Given we've 'known' for months that Wii U was in the same ballpark as current HD systems, given the historically weak third party support for Nintendo, the historical poor track record of third party ports in the launch window of consoles, I have to wonder why anyone is acting surprised or outraged at this point. Any developer struggles to optimise their game for day and date release on a new console, even if that console has similar architecture to existing consoles. They'll only find it more difficult to optimise when they're taking code they didn't even make themselves, as is the case with this game, and shifting it to a system they have no experience of developing for.

I'm more interested in Assassin's Creed 3 and Colonial Marines when it comes to a DF analysis, because those games come from companies that have very publicly, very often announced their support and positive experience with Wii U hardware. Gearbox love the Wii U hardware and Ubisoft have invested massively in the system, so we should expect strong results from those games. All the signs are that Ubisoft and Gearbox are actually optimising their multi-platform games for Wii U, meaning we should have a better picture of how Wii U can perform relative to 360 and PS3.

As it is, these comparisons and the outrage associated with them shouldn't matter too much in the long run. The real test of Wii U's capabilities, and the real test of its mass market potential, will lie in the exclusive software and services, which to all intents and purposes, are so far pretty decent. Like I said, these articles are useful for some people, but they aren't really indicative of what the Wii U can genuinely do, and I doubt they're going to change the opinion of anyone whose already dismissed or bought into Wii U--they're indicative of what third parties can do with late, low-priority ports in time for the launch window, and I have to ask, was anyone actually expecting a good result?

So, what's the conclusion?

If the WiiU version is graphically sub-par (which I don't disagree about), what do we take out of that?

My personal opinion is that those games were quickly ported from a performance vantage point, with extra features being the bulk of the budget, is that a statement you would agree with?

I agree the reason the games play like that are because some of them were rushed. Im not sure if Nintendo put things in place to enable patches to fix those issues and im hoping they did. Next year's E3 should determine what the Wii U is really capable of. Nintendo always seem to bave back up plans and a few more tricks up their sleeves.

Technically, Black Ops 2 is possibly the best version.  In practice, though....we need more players!  Yesterday, there was 140 people online and they were all playing Core Team Death Match.  There were probably more people online playing Call of Duty 2 from 2006!

Im assuming you dont mean the Wii U is only as powerful as the PS3 and Xbox360. The Wii U has one attribute that everyone assume is weaker than current gen. Even if the CPU really is weaker than current gen CPU's its still superior. Dont get me wrong it will bottleneck if its true but it will still be a hell of a lot more capable.

BOPS 2 have the same problems in Wii U.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-black-ops-2-face-off

The 360 version is technically the best (in a world without PC of course).

Yes I would definitely agree with that. In addition however part of the problem might lie with the hardware itself but it's too early to call that since we don't have all the information of the system. But porting an year old game shouldn't be that hard. Some of the comments on gaf suggested that the gamepad might also be a reason for the outcome. I think the biggest issue here is they are asking full price for this game. It's absolutely insane. On BlackFriday I got the goty edition for $20 new. On steam you can get this game for like $8 now.