b....but I thought the Wii U was developer unfriendly....

but...oh god, my:

uh oh, specs talk. Here come the defense force and trolls to come through.

He actually said it performed slightly better than the 360 with their development, and it was almost completely unoptimised, so could end up producing alot more as developers get more used to the system.

summary

edram is very good to have and definitely better than x360 had to offer.

wiiu version had 1080p60fps (on two screens) all un-optimised shaders because they simply didn't need to even though they realized late in development that it could be substantially improved.

remarked that in 2005 you'd never of thought many of today's best visual games would be on x360, yet there they are. thus you won't believe what is on wiiu in a few years.

so X1 and PS4 cake is full of pupic hair? omg no thanks.

Good words to hear from developers who actually speak out. Obviously the 32MB eDRAM is plenty of memory to do all sorts of things. The surprising part, is that the game for the most part ran using the main CPU core (Core 01, with 2MB of L2 cache). Makes you wonder about the games launched with Wii U and how they handled the CPU.....

Don't worry, the girl looks shaved :P

someone summons ninjablade here because I want hear all sort of explanations how Wii U still weaker than 360

He is just explaining what they use the cache memory for. How 360 didnt have enough for him to do 1080p with, and nano assault wasnt optimized at all and it barely used more than 1 core to run the game.

I don't see any part where he implies its only slightly better than 360. I guess some people will see what they want out of this even if it was never suggested