By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
curl-6 on 13 April 2013
Edit Thread
DietSoap said:
curl-6 said:
DietSoap said:
curl-6 said:
richardhutnik said:
curl-6 said:
Call of Duty Modern Warfare 1 & 3, Black Ops, and World at War ran on the Wii despite the Wii having 88MB of RAM to the PS3/360's 512MB.

So the PS3 and 360 wil also have no problem play next gen titles at all either, right?  So, then what is the extra RAM on the PS4 needed for if the Wii U is more than capable of doing everything you had mentioned?

However, assuming this review is valid, apparently MW3 didn't exactly hit the same levels that the 360 version did:

http://www.ign.com/articles/2011/11/15/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3-wii-review

PS3 and 360 have less than half as much RAM as Wii U.

PS4 has more RAM because they wanted higher resolution textures, bigger, more detailed worlds, etc. However, a lot of PS4 games won't use it all, and for many the core gameplay will be able to be scaled down to fit into 1GB with graphical detail concessions, just as PS3/360 COD's core gameplay can fit into the Wii's smaller RAM with detail concessions.

I've played MW3 on Wii, its actually a remarkably close replication. IGN gave World at War on Wii a good review for being further from the PS3/360 versions, so they're not very consistent.

It's half for games, the other gig is locked to OS.

Besides though, if you want to claim PS360 games were reasonably transitioned down to a system with 1/6th the amount of ram, I think they can manage 1/2 just fine... Not to mention faster CPUs (yes, I realize the idea is the Wii U CPU could possibly have better architecture, but we haven't proven that yet like we've proven the clock rates) and years of dev experience give the PS360 their own edge over the Wii U as well.

I'm aware the Wii U loses half its RAM to the OS. It still has more than double the RAM of the PS3 and 360.

Of course some PS4 games could theoretically be scaled to PS3/360, but the game would have to be chopped down further than on Wii U; reduced draw distance, lower resolution textures, less detail, etc.

The Wii U vs PS360 CPU debate is still up in the air.While the latter may be clocked faster, Criterion have said that:

"[The Wii U CPU] is a different kind of chip and it's not fair to look at its clock-speed and other consoles' clock-speed and compare them as numbers that are relevant. It's not a relevant comparison to make when you have processors that are so divergent. It's apples and oranges."

and

"while [the Wii U CPU] is a lower clock-speed, it punches above its weight in a lot of other areas."

The Wii U also has a GPGPU to handle tasks traditionally handled by the CPU.

At any rate, with 7GB vs 1GB/less than 500MB, memory will be the main problem, devs will hit that wall long before they have to worry about CPUs.

 

 

If they're willing to do the long drop from PS4/720 to Wii U, then the graphical drop from Wii U to PS360 will be negligible at most if not nonexistent.

As far as the CPU, right, it's just like I said, I realize the idea is the architecture should be better and all, just saying the simple reality is we haven't proven that yet like we've proven the lower clock rates. We've seen framerates in various multiplats suffer on the Wii U as a result of the CPU, so it's going to be a matter of developers proving moving forward it is indeed better.

The drop from 1GB to less than 500MB is certainly not nonexistant, even if its dropped from up to 7GB.

Clockspeed isn't a reliable indicator of a CPUs ability, (the Megahertz Myth) and launch ports (made on crappy devkits no less) aren't a reliable indicator of a system's ability.