By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Naughty Dog : Ps3 and Vita Can Do Everything Wii U Can Do

cyberninja45 on 17 July 2011
osamanobama said:
cyberninja45 said:
osamanobama said:
cyberninja45 said:
dahuman said:
sigh..... PS3 is DLNA certified for down streaming HD videos, it's not an ideal device for up streaming HD videos unless you are running off the gigabit ethernet since you'd want the device to handle more than one stream, in which the memory print would become a problem due to the PS3 having shit for ram, the most it'd be able to do is acting like a file server in this case since coding it to encode videos to different devices via different profiles at the same time would be a pain in the ass for Sony.

 and im talking about upstreaming wireless here.

But Im just waiting for him when he realizes the ultimate Truth. PS3 is not design to run games  above(or any where near) 1560P. XD

Am just giving him the many other reason why this wont work. 

you do realize that the PSV is "only" qHD (960x540), so  why would we care if it streams 1560p (a resolution way higher than 1080p) it only has to stream qHD, as resolution thats still  higher than the wiiU controller

Are u joking or do I really have to explain here? Oh I said run not stream

it doesnt need to run games with that resolution, to stream games at qHD, yet alone at 1080p or lower. not to mention the Vita has its own cpu/gpu.

u clearly have no idea what you are talking about other than just making wild speculation. just wait for the PSV to come out.

youll be eating lot'O crow


OH boy. guess I got to explain.

Assuming some impossibilities can happen, and the game is processed in the ps3 and then  stream to the PSV and hdtv.

 1080p + 540p= 1620p >1560p>1080p.

 

Now if u now have to resort to  processing graphics in the PSV. Well like I said this thread is irrelevant.



My 3ds friendcode: 5413-0232-9676 (G-cyber)



Around the Network
Alby_da_Wolf on 17 July 2011
cyberninja45 said:
osamanobama said:
cyberninja45 said:
osamanobama said:
cyberninja45 said:
dahuman said:
sigh..... PS3 is DLNA certified for down streaming HD videos, it's not an ideal device for up streaming HD videos unless you are running off the gigabit ethernet since you'd want the device to handle more than one stream, in which the memory print would become a problem due to the PS3 having shit for ram, the most it'd be able to do is acting like a file server in this case since coding it to encode videos to different devices via different profiles at the same time would be a pain in the ass for Sony.

 and im talking about upstreaming wireless here.

But Im just waiting for him when he realizes the ultimate Truth. PS3 is not design to run games  above(or any where near) 1560P. XD

Am just giving him the many other reason why this wont work. 

you do realize that the PSV is "only" qHD (960x540), so  why would we care if it streams 1560p (a resolution way higher than 1080p) it only has to stream qHD, as resolution thats still  higher than the wiiU controller

Are u joking or do I really have to explain here? Oh I said run not stream

it doesnt need to run games with that resolution, to stream games at qHD, yet alone at 1080p or lower. not to mention the Vita has its own cpu/gpu.

u clearly have no idea what you are talking about other than just making wild speculation. just wait for the PSV to come out.

youll be eating lot'O crow


OH boy. guess I got to explain.

Assuming the game is processed in the ps3 and then  stream to the PSV and hdtv.

 1080p + 540p= 1620p >1560p>1080p.

Now if u now have to resort to  processing graphics in the PSV. Well like I said this thread is irrelevant.

Not. Data processed and sent, pixels, triangles, other polygons, etc, are proportional to the area, 540p needs 1/4 of the data needed for 1080p to be sent. 1080p+540p needs the same throughput of 1350p, 1080p+1080p needs the same of 1620p, actually.

 

Edit: Wrong maths, 1080p+540p requires the same throughput of (1080*sqrt(1.25))p~=1207p, while 1080p+1080p requires the same as (1080*sqrt(2))p~=1527p. Sorry, but it's even less, anyway.



Stwike him, Centuwion. Stwike him vewy wuffly! (Pontius Pilate, "Life of Brian")
A fart without stink is like a sky without stars.
TGS, Third Grade Shooter: brand new genre invented by Kevin Butler exclusively for Natal WiiToo Kinect. PEW! PEW-PEW-PEW!   


cyberninja45 on 17 July 2011
Alby_da_Wolf said:
cyberninja45 said:
osamanobama said:
cyberninja45 said:
osamanobama said:
cyberninja45 said:
dahuman said:
sigh..... PS3 is DLNA certified for down streaming HD videos, it's not an ideal device for up streaming HD videos unless you are running off the gigabit ethernet since you'd want the device to handle more than one stream, in which the memory print would become a problem due to the PS3 having shit for ram, the most it'd be able to do is acting like a file server in this case since coding it to encode videos to different devices via different profiles at the same time would be a pain in the ass for Sony.

 and im talking about upstreaming wireless here.

But Im just waiting for him when he realizes the ultimate Truth. PS3 is not design to run games  above(or any where near) 1560P. XD

Am just giving him the many other reason why this wont work. 

you do realize that the PSV is "only" qHD (960x540), so  why would we care if it streams 1560p (a resolution way higher than 1080p) it only has to stream qHD, as resolution thats still  higher than the wiiU controller

Are u joking or do I really have to explain here? Oh I said run not stream

it doesnt need to run games with that resolution, to stream games at qHD, yet alone at 1080p or lower. not to mention the Vita has its own cpu/gpu.

u clearly have no idea what you are talking about other than just making wild speculation. just wait for the PSV to come out.

youll be eating lot'O crow


OH boy. guess I got to explain.

Assuming the game is processed in the ps3 and then  stream to the PSV and hdtv.

 1080p + 540p= 1620p >1560p>1080p.

Now if u now have to resort to  processing graphics in the PSV. Well like I said this thread is irrelevant.

Not. Data processed and sent, pixels, triangles, other polygons, etc, are proportional to the area, 540p needs 1/4 of the data needed for 1080p to be sent. 1080p+540p needs the same throughput of 1350p, 1080p+1080p needs the same of 1620p, actually.

Ooooook buddy.(trying not to laugh here)

Well then u do realise that the whole point of the WiiU is to look at completely differnt viewpoints of the game and not spliting of the same viewpoint right. So your "nice" little solution there ( which doesnt even rectify the issue) doesnt even apply. LOL(sorry couldnt help it)



My 3ds friendcode: 5413-0232-9676 (G-cyber)



arcane_chaos on 17 July 2011

come on peeps, relax...*I got some hash....*



Alby_da_Wolf on 17 July 2011
cyberninja45 said:
Alby_da_Wolf said:
cyberninja45 said:
osamanobama said:
cyberninja45 said:
osamanobama said:
cyberninja45 said:
dahuman said:
sigh..... PS3 is DLNA certified for down streaming HD videos, it's not an ideal device for up streaming HD videos unless you are running off the gigabit ethernet since you'd want the device to handle more than one stream, in which the memory print would become a problem due to the PS3 having shit for ram, the most it'd be able to do is acting like a file server in this case since coding it to encode videos to different devices via different profiles at the same time would be a pain in the ass for Sony.

 and im talking about upstreaming wireless here.

But Im just waiting for him when he realizes the ultimate Truth. PS3 is not design to run games  above(or any where near) 1560P. XD

Am just giving him the many other reason why this wont work. 

you do realize that the PSV is "only" qHD (960x540), so  why would we care if it streams 1560p (a resolution way higher than 1080p) it only has to stream qHD, as resolution thats still  higher than the wiiU controller

Are u joking or do I really have to explain here? Oh I said run not stream

it doesnt need to run games with that resolution, to stream games at qHD, yet alone at 1080p or lower. not to mention the Vita has its own cpu/gpu.

u clearly have no idea what you are talking about other than just making wild speculation. just wait for the PSV to come out.

youll be eating lot'O crow


OH boy. guess I got to explain.

Assuming the game is processed in the ps3 and then  stream to the PSV and hdtv.

 1080p + 540p= 1620p >1560p>1080p.

Now if u now have to resort to  processing graphics in the PSV. Well like I said this thread is irrelevant.

Not. Data processed and sent, pixels, triangles, other polygons, etc, are proportional to the area, 540p needs 1/4 of the data needed for 1080p to be sent. 1080p+540p needs the same throughput of 1350p, 1080p+1080p needs the same of 1620p, actually.

Ooooook buddy.(trying not to laugh here)

Well then u do realise that the whole point of the WiiU is to look at completely differnt viewpoints of the game and not spliting of same viewpoint right. So your "nice" little solution there ( which doesnt even rectify the issue) doesnt apply. LOL(sorry couldnt help it)

I corrected my maths, they were wrong (actual results are even lower) after you quoted my post, but anyway, looking at two different viewpoints implies more calculations in different stages, before rendering, it loads more the CPU, while projecting different scenes from different points of view actually implies sending different data and different matrices for the projections, so more internal throughput, with some overhead to replace the transformation matrices too instead of just sending extra data but the same load on raw GPU computing power and the same end result throughput. If they were the same scenes from the same point of view there would actually be a huge saving in calculations, as the lower res scene could just be made downscaling the high res one. Anyway, I wrote data PROCESSED and sent, so I never assumed there were the simplification allowed by the easy case of the same scene at two different res, don't put different words and meanings in what I wrote. It's just matter to know whether 1207p (the correct value) + the overhead for using different matrices exceeds or not the max power needed for a 1560p single scene with one point of view. Oh, I forgot, as GPUs have multiple shaders, actually the work could be split quite easily in theory, it all depends on how much independently they can work, but the fact that stereoscopic 3D is supported implies that the GPU can handle two different sets of transformation matrices at a time.



Stwike him, Centuwion. Stwike him vewy wuffly! (Pontius Pilate, "Life of Brian")
A fart without stink is like a sky without stars.
TGS, Third Grade Shooter: brand new genre invented by Kevin Butler exclusively for Natal WiiToo Kinect. PEW! PEW-PEW-PEW!   


Around the Network
nitekrawler1285 on 17 July 2011
archbrix said:

1&2.  Doubting Nintendo is your prerogative.  But the reason there's more PS3/V seen so far is because, well, Nintendo hasn't shown any games yet that will be on the Wii U, just demos.

3.  Comparing the capabilities of the Wii U and the GC/GBA is flawed.  The Wii U is far more capable and interactive than the GC/GBA could ever hope to be.  Do you really believe that the GC/GBA could stream a full console game onto the screen or get multiple views of games from above, behind, etc.  And something like that ninja-star demo from the Wii U trailer?  So no, Wii U offers far more than just graphical power over Wii.

5.  They are concerned about price when considering buying three additional controllers, but clearly it can support more than one for at least some games.  They've even mentioned the fact that friends bringing their controllers over is likely.  I'm sure you couldn't stream Crysis 2 flawlessly to three or more controllers and the TV at once, but do you think Madden wouldn't support two screen-based controllers when all it would require is streaming play-calling?  Doubtful.

6.  No, from what I understand some companies complain about annoying restrictions on Xbox Live, for example, and would prefer more freedom.

http://www.eurogamer.net/forum_thread_posts.php?thread_id=195119

1&2 NSMBM is a Wii U game that was shown was it not? 

3. It is not flawed.  The GBA even had motion control on some games and a camera. Were they 2D or not so processing intensive games I think it could have.The comparison is apt because if they let you use multiple controllers then you face the same issues faced with GC/GBA connection sans 20 bucks for the wires.

5. I concede to your point.  I just lack the imagination to see it put to compelling use.  Maybe good board games.

6.  I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE DEVELOPERS AND PUBLISHERS.  I'm talking about to the customers online experience and what that may mean for it.  They are already raising the price of that despite LIVE.



cyberninja45 on 17 July 2011
Alby_da_Wolf said:
cyberninja45 said:
Alby_da_Wolf said:
cyberninja45 said:
osamanobama said:
cyberninja45 said:
osamanobama said:
cyberninja45 said:
dahuman said:
sigh..... PS3 is DLNA certified for down streaming HD videos, it's not an ideal device for up streaming HD videos unless you are running off the gigabit ethernet since you'd want the device to handle more than one stream, in which the memory print would become a problem due to the PS3 having shit for ram, the most it'd be able to do is acting like a file server in this case since coding it to encode videos to different devices via different profiles at the same time would be a pain in the ass for Sony.

 and im talking about upstreaming wireless here.

But Im just waiting for him when he realizes the ultimate Truth. PS3 is not design to run games  above(or any where near) 1560P. XD

Am just giving him the many other reason why this wont work. 

you do realize that the PSV is "only" qHD (960x540), so  why would we care if it streams 1560p (a resolution way higher than 1080p) it only has to stream qHD, as resolution thats still  higher than the wiiU controller

Are u joking or do I really have to explain here? Oh I said run not stream

it doesnt need to run games with that resolution, to stream games at qHD, yet alone at 1080p or lower. not to mention the Vita has its own cpu/gpu.

u clearly have no idea what you are talking about other than just making wild speculation. just wait for the PSV to come out.

youll be eating lot'O crow


OH boy. guess I got to explain.

Assuming the game is processed in the ps3 and then  stream to the PSV and hdtv.

 1080p + 540p= 1620p >1560p>1080p.

Now if u now have to resort to  processing graphics in the PSV. Well like I said this thread is irrelevant.

Not. Data processed and sent, pixels, triangles, other polygons, etc, are proportional to the area, 540p needs 1/4 of the data needed for 1080p to be sent. 1080p+540p needs the same throughput of 1350p, 1080p+1080p needs the same of 1620p, actually.

Ooooook buddy.(trying not to laugh here)

Well then u do realise that the whole point of the WiiU is to look at completely differnt viewpoints of the game and not spliting of same viewpoint right. So your "nice" little solution there ( which doesnt even rectify the issue) doesnt apply. LOL(sorry couldnt help it)

I corrected my maths, they were wrong (actual results are even lower) after you quoted my post, but anyway, looking at two different viewpoints implies more calculations in different stages, before rendering, it loads more the CPU, while projecting different scenes from different points of view actually implies sending different data and different matrices for the projections, so more internal throughput, with some overhead to replace the transformation matrices too instead of just sending extra data but the same load on raw GPU computing power and the same end result throughput. If they were the same scenes from the same point of view there would actually be a huge saving in calculations, as the lower res scene could just be made downscaling the high res one. Anyway, I wrote data PROCESSED and sent, so I never assumed there were the simplification allowed by the easy case of the same scene at two different res, don't put different words and meanings in what I wrote. It's just matter to know whether 1207p (the correct value) + the overhead for using different matrices exceeds or not the max power needed for a 1560p single scene with one point of view. Oh, I forgot, as GPUs have multiple shaders, actually the work could be split quite easily in theory, it all depends on how much independently they can work, but the fact that stereoscopic 3D is supported implies that the GPU can handle two different sets of transformation matrices at a time.

*sigh*...



My 3ds friendcode: 5413-0232-9676 (G-cyber)



Troll_Whisperer on 17 July 2011

In theory, he's right. In practice, we all know it's not gonna work like that, because not everyone will have both PS3 and Vita, and most games will not take advantage of the possibilities, whereas with the WiiU it's designed to do that from the beginning and games will have to take advantage of it.



No troll is too much for me to handle. I rehabilitate trolls, I train people. I am the Troll Whisperer.

Jay520 on 17 July 2011
KylieDog said:
ethomaz said:
Yes. The PS3 and Vita integration could do all the things Wii U do.

The problem is the games to support it... in Wii U every game will support it... but every game will support PS3 and Vita integration? I guess not.


It isn't possible for every game to support the gameplay switching, for example any game that requires the TV and Wii U controller screen used at the same time.


Naw, developers are lazy.

Just look at the number of multiplayer PS3 games that lack Multi-Psn login on the same console.



o_O.Q on 17 July 2011
cyberninja45 said:
dahuman said:
sigh..... PS3 is DLNA certified for down streaming HD videos, it's not an ideal device for up streaming HD videos unless you are running off the gigabit ethernet since you'd want the device to handle more than one stream, in which the memory print would become a problem due to the PS3 having shit for ram, the most it'd be able to do is acting like a file server in this case since coding it to encode videos to different devices via different profiles at the same time would be a pain in the ass for Sony.

 and im talking about upstreaming wireless here.

But Im just waiting for when he realizes the ultimate Truth. PS3 is not design to run games  above(or any where near) 1560P. XD

Am just giving him the many other reason why this wont work. 

lol you don't get anymore ironic than this, claims you've made :

 

the wii u streams HD to the controller

wrong 

devs are already developing for two or more wii u controllers 

wrong

nintendo confirmed that support for two controllers had already been announced

wrong

the ps3 can't stream wirelessly 

wrong

 

etc, etc, etc please clarify which of us really needs to wake up? at this point how would i know if what you're saying is valid? to be honest imo you lost all credibility from the beginning of this discussion and i only continued it to see how wild your claims would get and i must say you didn't disappoint...

but with regards to the whole ps3 streaming issue yes the ps3 can stream to vita at high resolutions which is the basis of the experience nintendo is going for with the wii u  and the reason naughty dog a developer with a higher understanding of these devices than either of us ( even though you think otherwise ) has made the claims they've made