Viper1 said:
The major difference is the Wii U is very capable of texture streaming. This means you don't need nearly as much RAM. Say a stage or scene has 300 MB's of textures. That's a lot of RAM to eat up. But if you just stream the necessary textures that actually need rendering, you can reduce that load significantly. In other words, you can have a stage or scene that requires more texture capacity than the RAM you actually have and it won't matter. And don't forget the massive eDRAM. That also reduces the need for a lot of standard RAM. |
That still doesnt compensate for a loss of 7 gb ram compred to competiton. Lets say nextbox has 2 gb for system and games has 6 gb available. Thats still 5x the amount of ram. Not forgetting the same 5 rumours of Nextbox devkits have said 512 mb EDRam also.
I am worried for the Wii U for certain games from 3rd paties. For example I dont expect to see my fave RPG Elder Scrolls on it. Definately not Elder Scrolls 6 anyway. I believe the ram issue will bite it.
I hope Im wrong. But theres quite a few developers I feel will just not build a Wii U version due to the cuts it will need because of ram.
Another thing that caught my attention was how inferior the Nintendo Graphics demos were of Wii U compared to CryEngine 3 next gen demos and Unreal Engine 4. The latter 2 killed the Zelda demo and the wierd lake with bird demo Nintendo had. Not to mention the Samaritan demo running on realtime Unreal 4 development.
I am worried.







