By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Wii U is really underpower ?

Tagged games:

 

What you think ?

Yes 79 47.59%
 
no 68 40.96%
 
see the results 19 11.45%
 
Total:166

i'm seeing this old video from digital foundry and games like mario 3d world is so beautiful on wii u and is constantly 60fps.. so i'm asking to myself wii u is really underpower ? some of my friends says the wii u is lower than ps3 and xbox 360 and i really disagree with that so PLEASE share your opinion with me i REALLY need to know your opinion about that.



     


(=^・ω・^=) Kuroneko S2 - Ore no Imouto - SteamMyAnimeList and Twitter - PSN: Gustavo_Valim - Switch FC: 6390-8693-0129 (=^・ω・^=)
Around the Network

It's never a simple comparison because different consoles can be stronger in different areas. wii u has inferior cpu performance to 360 and ps3 by a long way plus has less gflops in theory for the gpu. It also has memory bandwidth issues and has no hard drive to stream in data quickly but it does have later gpu architecture, a 32MB of fast memory for the gpu and 1GB of game memory instead of 512MB of the ps3 and 360. You give it a game that requires decent cpu performance and the wii u struggles but you can write a game for its new gpu feature set not available on ps3 or 360 and it can look better. You can only really do an average based on the games available. I have 360, ps3 and wii u and I'd say the wii u is the weakest but that doesn't mean at times it doesn't have better games sometimes that play to the strengths of the hardware. I'd personally put them on a similar performance level. I guess my favourite is the ps3 of the three consoles with the 360 close behind. Still love the wii u though and enjoying Zelda immensely not that I'm that great at it.



Yes it is.... Nintendo just spend alot of extra time & effort, getting alot out of little, and are masters at it.



It's definitely powerful enough for me.



Underpowered is a relative idea. I consider the Wii U underpowered because it was only marginally better off than systems that launched 6-7 years prior and missed out on the bulk of major games at least partly because of it.

So, to me it was underpowered because it wasn't powerful enough to be what it needed to be.



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

Around the Network

After some (many) years of gaming, I came to the conclusion that the software is what matters, and as long as it reaches a decent level of graphic quality, at least to make the game shine, it is enough.
Mind you that some games need 8 or 16bit pixels to shine (Shovel Knight) while others need great graphics, like Horizon Zero Dawn or Uncharted.

People just need to come to terms with the fact that not all companies aim for the same type of entertainment, and Nintendo aims for the gameplay and overall "fun".
It was never on the table to compete with other consoles in terms of raw hardware, except the Gamecube, and we all saw where that took them.



PS4: Tryklon  Steam: Tryklon

Switch: 0307-6588-7010 | New 2DS XL: 2037-2612-6964

MacBook Air (Mid 2017) | iPhone SE | Apple Watch Series 3

It is not underpowered in every aspect. The CPU is slower than X360/PS3 but the GPU is faster. If they are made well and with a lot of effort, games and ports can look better than anything on PS3.

Compared to PS4 and X1 however, the Wii-U is extremely underpowered.



It was powerful enough to make gorgeous games like 3DWorld or Mario kart 8 at 60fps. Damn it even runs a game as fucking epic as BoTW even if it falls to 20fps on the villages, but is still impressive.



Underpowered is a strange question to ask, as hell yeah, from a PS4 Pro standpoint or even an Xbone vanilla stand point yes.

As far as compared to Xbox 360, or PS3, no. It was easily on par with those systems if not a bit more powerful. A lot of this "Wii U was weaker" nonsense came from the issue of bad ports where Digital Foundry would compare a game that has had installs to the Wii U version that didn't. This has an effect on overall performance as does Wii U having vsync enabled for all of its games. The good part of vsync is no screen tearing, and no Wii U games seemed to have many (if any) dropped frames. The bad part seems to be lower fps at least in multiplats.

Basically, if Windwaker (which no one thought would be 1080p), Breath Of The Wild (huge open world with modern gaming effects), Xenoblade X (gigantic open world running at a fairly stable 30fps), Super Smash Bros (1080p, solid 60fs, 8 player fighting game) were all on the system there is simply no way you can make me believe the console was "weak" comparitively to PS3/Xbox 360.



Wii U was a bad decision in terms of power, switch it different, because its a handheld.
If we are honest even the XBox One is underpowered, and the PS4 barely holds 1080P.

Its never easy to release a console, but when the competition release consoles that barely manage to run today's pc games on decent resolutions and 30fps expecting anything else then a disaster when you release a console barely more powerfull then things that came out a decade ago, its bad.

Like I said, the Switch was different and the wii was also different because it wasn't made for third party games but for unique move-controller games. The Wii-U was supposed to be a return to form for their home console and third party confidence.

I'm quite sure it didn't even have a blue ray drive lol... come on ;( its one of the worst consoles I have ever owned, bad main controller, bad pro controller, almost no real games I really liked... maybe 10 in total, and yes they where excellent and worth playing but not worth owning this console for.

The Switch isn't made for me either but its a MUCH MUCH better device lol




Twitter @CyberMalistix