Treyarch were darn good to Nintendo gamers

[Rogerioandrade]

curl-6 said:

bonzobanana said:
I bought black ops 2 for wii u though after already playing it on 360 and it was massively inferior. Much worse frame rates, missing detail, slower load times and a less ideal controller to play it.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-black-ops-2-wii-u-face-off

It was games like this that really gave away just how poor the wii u spec was not even able to match consoles released 5-6 years before. At the time Nintendo fans were blaming lack of development experience and a cheap and nasty port as the explanation but now when you realise the wii u only has a 176 gflops gpu and 3 very weak 32bit PPC cores at 1.2ghz what they achieved seems pretty fantastic considering the game had fairly high cpu requirements.

Really it was only the motion controls on both wii and wii u that added something to the gamplay of their games.

Wii U has a slower CPU than PS3/360 but its hardware is more capable overall due to its more modern GPU and larger RAM.

BO2 is a game that frequently throws large numbers of NPCs into play at once, hence its core design is more suited to PS3/360, in the same way that more GPU/Memory bound games like Need for Speed and Trine 2 are a better fit for Wii U. It's also a game built on 6 years of optimization to PS3/360's hardware, but a launch title for Wii U.

Personally, I'll take the Wii U version of BO2 for the pointer controls alone. Hell, I bought MW1/W@W/BO/MW3 on Wii despite owning an Xbox 360, because I prefer the pointer that much.

Me too. I prefer to play BO2 (and Ghosts) on WiiU. Playing with the pointer is so much easier - and makes more sense to me- than playing with the control stick to aim. I´m not a huge fan of FPS and if I can´t have precision aiming (like when playing on PC with a mouse), I won´t get even near the game.