| the-pi-guy said: Who is doing that? I'd argue the Wii U won't appeal to everyone, but I don't see people saying it isn't the right thing to do. Depends what you mean by next gen AI, Ai has been considered stagnant for a while now. |
This threads whole purpose is for this simple reason. There are big flaws within those numbers:
- no real informations about the Wii U are available
- not taking ESRAM into account
- GDDR has more latency than DDR
- the usable amount GPU performance depends also on the software stack and the latency introduced by that (guess why Killzone MP is not real 1080p...)
Seeing that the PS4 has a lead above the XOne and both are way more capable than a Wii U - don't need those numbers for that...
AI has made BIG progresses within the last years. Just take a look at NVidias GPU conference presentations to get a clue whats possible if you have enough compute resources available.
WatchDogs is already CPU constrained as those people "are more" than objects avoiding collisions. The problem is: x86 is well known and it won't get any faster when it comes down to raw processing power. There might be advances over time in graphics fidelity - but AI wise those can be only made if put into the cloud...
And if AI runs in the cloud and consoles are "fat clients" - then a Wii U is sufficient enough given that there are people who don't care about "realistic" graphics that much.
