Quantcast
Interesting Quote About the GameCube's Design

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Interesting Quote About the GameCube's Design

bonzobanana said:

That gpgpu argument is incredibly weak, for a start the radeon in the wii u is no more than 352 gflops, more likely 176 gflops so there isn't going to be much spare capacity but more importantly it can only assist minor functions of the cpu its no substitute for a more powerful cpu. Surely we have reached the stage where not one cpu intensive game works well on the wii u that we can stop using that ridiculous fanboy defence. The radeon gpu area of the wii u is shared with the original wii gpu, the main 32MB of eRAM etc. Anyway the point is we know the cpu is weak, weaker than 360 and PS3 by a long way, there is no technical or honest defence of this so whatever the gpu situation we know the wii u performs below 360 and PS3 for cpu performance and this is verified easily anyway by looking at game performance. Any fair minded person would never simply claim the wii u is more powerful when the evidence absolutely destroys their argument for many genres of games which require higher cpu resources. It seems you can never be too surprised how low Nintendo will go in performance nowadays and I think that is the issue for many defenders of the wii u they are in denial about the wii u. However if they really believe they have a defence it needs to be focused on why they think 3 old 32bit ppc cpu's designed in the last century running at 1.25ghz is competitive in performance with more modern cpu designs and also explain how this performance works when the cpu has to work with very low 12.8gb/s bandwidth memory in combination with the gpu. It will be interesting to read if nothing else. 

No a slower speed doesn't mean a CPU is weaker otherwise the Wii U wouldn't be able to run the games it has now in a straight up comparison looking at the games we can flat out see that the whole notion that Wii U is weaker then the 360 is laughable as is the claim it performs below the last gen consoles as looking at performance of the games that's simply not true I think you're a bit out of your league here reading noth your posts tbh as you've posted a wall of text that says nothing other then the Wii U is weaker then the 360 and PS3 with nothing concrete to back it up. Here's a comparison that simply shoots down what you claim, XCX is much bigger then GTAV, is native HD unlike the PS3/360 versions of GTAV, better graphically then them, has a more complex world with giant freeroaming creatures and runs at 60fps so how does a console which you say doesn't perform as well and has weaker hardware pull that off and it's not the only comparison that can be made either looking at game performance actually verifies the opposite of what you're saying.



Around the Network
IkePoR said:
Jon-Erich said:

That's not true. THe NES and SNES had the best thrid party support, although even back then, Nintendo treated third parties like shit.

Indeed you are correct.  I was referring to the S/NES when I said held hostage.  

"Do what we say or no seal of approval!" - 1989 Nintendo, probably.

They didn't have to do that. The licensing agreements that third parties signed already did most of that. With Nintendo of America's quality control measures however, a game would get rejected if it were anything like Action 52 (which was rejected) or if it violated the content policies NOA had at the time (usage of drugs and alcohol, usage of religious symbols or themes, sexual content). 

However, I do kind of wish the Seal of Quality would make a return. I'm not going to exaggerate and say that Nintendo's quality control elimainated the possibility of low quality content. After all, if that were true then James Rolfe would't have an internet show. If Nintendo had the same policies during the 2000's that they had during the 80's, much of the shovelware for the Wii and DS would not have been approved. Had Sony and Microsoft adopted quality control measures like that, we would have broken games at launch like we do now.

A lot of people could call Nintendo oppressive for their actions but they were right all along. If a third party could get away with releasing a shoddy product, then they most likely will. We saw that before Nintendo's dominance and we're seeing it again today.



Check out my art blog: http://jon-erich-art.blogspot.com

bonzobanana said:

That gpgpu argument is incredibly weak, for a start the radeon in the wii u is no more than 352 gflops, more likely 176 gflops so there isn't going to be much spare capacity but more importantly it can only assist minor functions of the cpu its no substitute for a more powerful cpu. Surely we have reached the stage where not one cpu intensive game works well on the wii u that we can stop using that ridiculous fanboy defence. The radeon gpu area of the wii u is shared with the original wii gpu, the main 32MB of eRAM etc. Anyway the point is we know the cpu is weak, weaker than 360 and PS3 by a long way, there is no technical or honest defence of this so whatever the gpu situation we know the wii u performs below 360 and PS3 for cpu performance and this is verified easily anyway by looking at game performance. Any fair minded person would never simply claim the wii u is more powerful when the evidence absolutely destroys their argument for many genres of games which require higher cpu resources. It seems you can never be too surprised how low Nintendo will go in performance nowadays and I think that is the issue for many defenders of the wii u they are in denial about the wii u. However if they really believe they have a defence it needs to be focused on why they think 3 old 32bit ppc cpu's designed in the last century running at 1.25ghz is competitive in performance with more modern cpu designs and also explain how this performance works when the cpu has to work with very low 12.8gb/s bandwidth memory in combination with the gpu. It will be interesting to read if nothing else. 

What is dishonest is comparing multiplats which are not optimized for the WiiU at all and are afterthoughts, then claiming that the U is weaker.

That's dishonest.

Wyrdness already beat me to it. The U has exclusives which are designed to take full advantage of the U's architecture. This is what should be used to gauge the U's capabilities, not multiplat ports.