By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
jake_the_fake1 on 26 May 2013
Edit Thread
curl-6 said:
Hynad said:
curl-6 said:
Hynad said:
Nem said:
TheJimbo1234 said:
Nem said:
Been saying this for a year now. No one listens.

Now that the xbox one is revealed and all stats known, do people still think that its the leap they thought it was? Its only a difference of texture detail and frame-rate. To the naked eye, the difference isnt much.


Not at all. Everyone who says such a thing simply has not seen what modern engines are capable of.


Of course. I'd like to see more examples and less faith leaping.

You mean... Like seeing something Shin'en have done for the Wii U that actually support their claims?

Nano Assault Neo.

That game certainly doesn't show the superiority of the Wii U compared to the HD twins. -__-

Nano Assault Neo does things PS3/360 cannot.
http://www.notenoughshaders.com/2012/11/03/shinen-mega-interview-harnessing-the-wii-u-power/

 

So Nano Assault neo runs in 720p @ 30fps, and your saying this games is an example of what cannot been done ont he 360/PS3, while Stardust HD a 2008 game on the PS3 runs in full 1080p @ 60fps. FYI Stardust has a tone of shit happening on screen in later stages both in particles and geometry.

I dunno, the article claims "Harnessing the power of the WiiU", you use it as an example of what the WiiU can do which the 360/PS3 can't do. I just figured that if the console had 'power' to harness that the same game should have come out in 1080p @ 60fps without breaking a sweat....so either this developer did a bad job harnessing the WiiU's power, or maybe they did their best, hit a limit and had to cut resolution and framerate to gain back performance to achieve the look and feel they wanted for their game, the latter seems the most convincing to me as this is what all developers seem do when faced with a compromise.

Just my opinion from a different perspective, take it as you will.