Weedlab said:
Why does that make it a ‘bad example’? The game is on all platforms and the Wii U received the superior version in terms of content. Note I said content and not superior in the general sense. The PS3 version has less screen tearing compared to the 360 version while the 360 version has a slightly better framerate than the PS3 version. However, both versions are superior to their Wii U counterpart since it has the worst framerate, by far. Furthermore, they sport better textures and graphical effects too. Let's not forget Nintendo sent a team to Team Ninja to assist them with development.
As for Batman AC Look carefully at this video and you will see missing textures on the Wii U version. http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/jxkcvl/batman--arkham-city-armored-edition-wii-u-graphics-comparison Here is what Digital Foundry had to say about the Wii U ports.
“To kick off with, let's take a look at a triple-format gameplay comparison encompassing a range of combat scenarios along with some open-world traversal. Xbox 360 comes off best here, doggedly maintaining its 30FPS target with only minor screen-tear issues during Batman's tour of Arkham City. In those same sections we see PS3 significantly more affected by the increased rendering load. Wii U appears to be a fairly close match for the Sony platform, but with none of the tearing problems. However, in combat it's a completely different story - decent performance on the existing current-gen platforms but noticeably sub-par results on the Wii U. In common with Mass Effect 3 and Black Ops 2, once again Wii U has trouble processing multiple characters on-screen at any given point - more evidence that the CPU is simply not up to scratch for straight PS3/360 ports without some extensive optimisation” (Digital Foundry, 2012). http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-batman-arkham-city-wii-u-face-off
Here’s another from about Darksiders 2 “And so another Wii U launch title arrives that doesn't quite hold its own against the existing PS3 and 360 versions. In addition, with the poorer performance and reduced visual quality, it also means that there's little reason to pick up the Wii U version at full price when the PS3 and 360 versions can be purchased new for as little as £20 online (though obviously the DLC packs are not included). In the final analysis, the PS3 version remains the most impressive version of the game with higher-quality textures in places and superior performance, followed by the 360 release, while the Wii U sits in last place.” http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-darksiders-2-on-wii-u-face-off This is for Assassin’s Creed 3 “As an optional extra, the ability to remote play a blockbuster console release purely on a handheld does give the Wii U version a slight edge over the competition. It's only unfortunate that the frame-rate doesn't quite hold as steady compared to the 360 rendition, being more in the ballpark of the PS3 when chasing down the city streets, and marginally lower during some cut-scenes. This makes it the weakest of the trio in the crucial performance stakes, though they all have issues in achieving a sustained 30FPS where it's needed.” http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-assassins-creed-3-wii-u-face-off If you looked at videos of the Wii U version of Batman AC you will notice the frames are very unstable. It is higher than the PS3/360 versions by 2 to 4 frames when there’s not much going on, but during combat it dips as low as 18 frames per second. With that said I disagree with you on the Wii U version of those games playing more smoothly and better. The only games that are superior on Wii U are that Sonic racing game (marginally) and NFS: Most Wanted (because the devs had to hold it back and polish it for several months before releasing it). So that goes back to my original point. The PS3/360 played ports with ease and had superior graphics to the last generation systems at the time. Why is the Wii U struggling to play ports of 6 and 7 year old technology?
Here’s a quick run through of some of the launch games the Wii U had (ports) in comparison to their PS3/360 counterparts. But this video is more trolling than anything else. :D http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxvpKqWxLgE&list=UU6NhV2JOJr6pPGj1Q5m2eHg&index=76 Okay next
“To me Wii U is to PS4 what PS2 was to Gamecube.” My response … No way man. It is definitely larger than that. :D But I’ll let the games speak in the next gen. Watch Dogs will be the first test since it is the first multiplatform game between the Wii U and PS4. We will revisit this issue over the next few months. I will book this page and message you. Next Do I care about graphics? Not so much, but do I like realism? YES! And in order to get realism better hardware is needed, in my opinion. Apart from graphics I look for things like AI, physics, scope, scale, interaction, framerate consistency, characters that convey strong emotion and facial expressions, etc etc etc. All of these things expand with better hardware. The thing with Killzone, if it can deliver on those fronts I will be happy. Killzone 2 was a GREAT game for many reasons. It was quite challenging and the way they enemies interacted with the player was very believable. Even the way they responded to getting shot was well done for its time. If GG can go beyond that with the PS4 I will be very pleased. The visual fidelity will just be a bonus. PS ... As always I respect your opinion, and as we established before it is okay to disagree. |
“To me Wii U is to PS4 what PS2 was to Gamecube.”
My response … No way man. It is definitely larger than that. :D But I’ll let the games speak in the next gen. Watch Dogs will be the first test since it is the first multiplatform game between the Wii U and PS4. We will revisit this issue over the next few months. I will book this page and message you.
To me it is, I just don't see a big difference between X and Killzone. Yea games like Wonderful 101 are meh, but Wii U's best seem as good as PS4 to me.
-----
You care about realism? In all types of games? Are you big on FPS's and Racing games then? See I'm mostly an RPG fan, and except in Western RPG's where there is a lot of shooting mechanisms, there is no realism in RPG's. Especially JRPG's, you can't jump 30 feet and not break a foot, LOL. So for me it's mostly about ability to show beauty. Graphics can make games look more beautiful, but it's not always the case. XenoBlade was one of the best looking games for me next gen, and I know graphically it's nowhere nearly as good looking as FFXIII, but it looks a lot more inspired, and a lot more interesting then FFXIII.
Still good graphics are nice, I loved Lost Odyssey, Mass Effect, and FallOut.
----
Wii U - wow, that surprised me. I never read a hardcore comparision by digital foundry, but in graphical comparision videos I always felt the WiiU version looked the best. Guess Wii U isn't strong enough to play enhanced ports of PS3/360 games.
Either way, we won't see how powerful the Wii U is until the more powerful exclusives or MP games made specifically for Wii U release. I wonder if Watch Dogs looks better on WiiU then PS3/360.
What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database 
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results
