Zero999 said:
goopy20 said:
Zero999 said:
“The Wii U GPU is several generations ahead of the current gen. It allows many things that were not possible on consoles before. If you develop for Wii U you have to take advantage of these possibilities, otherwise your performance is of course limited. Also your engine layout needs to be different. You need to take advantage of the large shared memory of the Wii U, the huge and very fast EDRAM section and the big CPU caches in the cores. Especially the workings of the CPU caches are very important to master. Otherwise you can lose a magnitude of power for cache relevant parts of your code. In the end the Wii U specs fit perfectly together and make a very efficient console when used right.”
Shin'en multimidia.
|
Ok fine guys. The Wii U is a beast that will run something like Killzone 4 just fine. In 720p because, obviously, the console was designed as a 720p machine and has nothing to do with the lack of power that prevents it from running 1080p. All the AAA developers just don't know what the hell they are talking about. But listen to Shin'en multimedia who were able to pull of next gen graphics on the Wii-u with their 9,99 DLC title Nano Assault Neo and .... oh wait they only made that one game... Seriously now, It's a good game, but how is anyone supposed to take their tech advise seriously when their game could very likely run fine on a ps2?
Can't we just agree that people will buy a Wii U for it's exclusives, not for the graphics? What kind of next gen graphics do you guys seriously expect from a Mario kart and does it matter for games like that? You seem to forget that the Wii U already has a Mario game, which is actually pretty good and is sitting on a 84 Metacritic score. Those are the sort of games Nintendo needs more off and no Nintendo fan is going to care if it uses Tesselation, Dynamic GI or any other fancy DX11 rendering effects. What Nintendo doesn't need are weak sauce versions of core games because people who care about graphics will notice the difference between 720 and 1080p or dynamic vs pre-baked lighting.
|
bolded 1: EA and very few others talking shit out of their asses doesn't equal "All the AAA developers"
bolded 2: Apparently some people were blessed with a magical ps2.
bolded 3: people who cares about GAMES won't' give a shit to hard to notice resolution difference that just serves to make the games more expensive and inflate fanboys egos.
|
double bolded 1. We aren't talking about a few game developers here dude, we are talking about engine builders whose tech will power around 80% of all next gen games. Just because Frostbite 3 can't really work on the Wii U, all EA's major franchises like: Fifa, Mass Effect, Battlefield, NFS, Star Wars etc. won't be coming to the Wii U. Also explain to me why EA would make up things like that, or Insomniac, Epic, Capcom etc.
double bolded 2: Do you honestly count a 2d top down shooter as a next gen game?
double bolded 3: The problem is that you can't relate to other type of gamers. I can totally understand that people like the Wii U and it's franchises and that those sort of people don't give a rat's ass about graphics. However, you don't seem to understand that there are actually a shitload of gamers who do care about graphics. Call them core gamers, graphic whores or whatever you want, but those are the kind of people that would buy a $1000 gpu just so to get that extra bit of eyecandy. And yes they will see a difference between 720p and 1080p. Not everybody can afford a $1000 gpu but there are a ton of people who would sell their kidney just to own one. Those are the sort of gamers who are ignoring the Wii U while they wait for something that is actually an upgrade from the console they already own. They don't care about Mario Karts or Pikmin, they care about games like MW with graphics they never experienced before on their Xbox/ps3. And no, pretty graphics don't make the games more expensive lol. Hell the Wii U's inferior version of Black Ops2 actually costs more on the Wii U then on the other consoles.
