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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - "Wii U hardware is on par with current gen consoles"

 

Your reaction?

WHAT THE FUCK! 184 99.46%
 
Total:184
Mvp4eVa on 25 March 2012

The Wii U = Xbox 360 plus 1.5 gb of ram, thats one hell of a system.



My Trigger Happy Sixaxis controller

 


                            

Around the Network
Pemalite on 25 March 2012
Mr Khan said:
Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:
Pemalite said:
The amount of "you know's" almost made my head explode.

But it's no contest that the Wii U is far more powerful than the Xbox and PS3 from a graphical perspective, the GPU alone is 4 generations ahead with allot more programability and effects at hand.
Why there is even a debate on this I'll never know, technology stands still for no one.

Some of the low down that the WiiU can do and the other consoles can't.
* Tessellation. (Xbox's Tessellator is far inferior. PS3 doesn't have one.)
* Improved Z/stencil compression. (Better and cheaper shadows etc'.)
* Improved Texture Filtering.
* Improved Anti-Aliasing.
* Better High-Dynamic-Range.
* More advanced Video decoding with better filters.
* Longer and more complex Pixel Shader instructions.
* Longer and more complex Vertex Shader Instructions.
* 4x larger texture size support.
* Geometry Shaders.
* Compute. (Aka. - Hardware accelerated Physics?)

Then you have stuff like better z-culling, schedulers, larger; lower latency and faster caches, more bandwidth and better compression of textures, normal maps and such to drive up efficiency.
Plus you have more Pixel shader pipelines, Rops, TMU's for extra sheer grunt.

Yes the Wii U's GPU is still 3 generations behind the PC and it will only be a mid-range part at best, but it will still be significantly more powerful than the PS3 or Xbox 360's archaic hardware.

This will all lead to a fairly noticeable increase in graphical fidelity over the current consoles when developers start using the full capability of the system, I don't recall any past system where the first release of games really pushed the hardware at hand, it won't change this time around either.
It will probably take developers awhile to get used to the VLIW5 shader architecture in the Wii U and start using Tessellation to it's fullest extent.

Hopefully this translates well into the PC space.


Lol, the tessallator of the 360 is ancient.  

that's the only thing on that list that i have no clue what it is. What is it?


Basically... You take a Polygon and dice it into smaller pieces.
Basically it adds *real* depth to a surface and not fake depth like you see with bump mapping, where when you walk closer to it and it's actually 2D.

As an example with Tessellation off and on.


PC games have been using it for years now, the Xbox has the ability to do Tessellation, however it's Tessellator in the graphics chip is incredibly poor so it's used sparingly for things like water. (The PS3 cannot do it all.)
It can dramatically improve the graphics of a game just by increasing the complexity of the geometry.

The Wii U can technically do it fine. It's not actually up-to the levels of the Radeon 7000 or Geforce 600 series, but it should be rather noticeable and a dramatic increase over the Xbox 360.

To sum it up... The Dragon on the left would be what an Xbox 360 and PS3 would be capable of doing. (Basically nothing)
On the right... The PC would be capable of that (And more). And the Wii U will probably fall somewhere in the middle.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Alby_da_Wolf on 25 March 2012
Millenium said:
Hmm, hopefully he's just talking in relative terms, if nothing else, especially with the extra controller it's important that it has at least 1.5-2GB of ram.

If it just has 512mb-1GB, they're really shooting themselves in the foot.

Hopefully the final console build will be at least 3x4 as 'powerful' as the X360-PS3.

As for the controller, I'm not really a fan, but it does have potential for games such as RTS's.


This. If they are avaricious with RAM, Wii U could be able to receive ports of PS3/XB360 multiplats and of the least demanding future PC games, but ports of the most demanding PS4, XB720 and PC games could be impossible or require intensive and expensive rewriting. OTOH every 3rd party Wii U game that won't rely on the tablet in an unreplaceable way will be readily portable to the competitors. The end result will be that Wii U will end up in the same situation as Wii for what concerns 3rd party games.



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!   


famousringo on 25 March 2012
Argh_College said:
Wii U will be what Wii has been this gen... Poor graphics compared to True Next Gen.


Yep. Marginally better graphics than the best of the previous gen. It's not worth chasing diminishing returns on processing power when you could be spending budget on real game improvements.



"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event."  — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.

Navane on 25 March 2012
Pemalite said:
The amount of "you know's" almost made my head explode.

But it's no contest that the Wii U is far more powerful than the Xbox and PS3 from a graphical perspective, the GPU alone is 4 generations ahead with allot more programability and effects at hand.
Why there is even a debate on this I'll never know, technology stands still for no one.

Some of the low down that the WiiU can do and the other consoles can't.
* Tessellation. (Xbox's Tessellator is far inferior. PS3 doesn't have one.)
* Improved Z/stencil compression. (Better and cheaper shadows etc'.)
* Improved Texture Filtering.
* Improved Anti-Aliasing.
* Better High-Dynamic-Range.
* More advanced Video decoding with better filters.
* Longer and more complex Pixel Shader instructions.
* Longer and more complex Vertex Shader Instructions.
* 4x larger texture size support.
* Geometry Shaders.
* Compute. (Aka. - Hardware accelerated Physics?)

Then you have stuff like better z-culling, schedulers, larger; lower latency and faster caches, more bandwidth and better compression of textures, normal maps and such to drive up efficiency.
Plus you have more Pixel shader pipelines, Rops, TMU's for extra sheer grunt.

Yes the Wii U's GPU is still 3 generations behind the PC and it will only be a mid-range part at best, but it will still be significantly more powerful than the PS3 or Xbox 360's archaic hardware.

This will all lead to a fairly noticeable increase in graphical fidelity over the current consoles when developers start using the full capability of the system, I don't recall any past system where the first release of games really pushed the hardware at hand, it won't change this time around either.
It will probably take developers awhile to get used to the VLIW5 shader architecture in the Wii U and start using Tessellation to it's fullest extent.

Hopefully this translates well into the PC space.


Something like that is what I was hoping and expecting the Wii U would be able to do. It'd be a few steps up and offer a somewhat noticable increase between PS360 games and Wii U games.

But what you said is only based on the rumored graphics card, and according to this developer, it's only gonna be on par with current-gen tech.



I don't know why people tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer, I have lots of lives!

Around the Network
Mr Khan on 25 March 2012
Navane said:
Pemalite said:
The amount of "you know's" almost made my head explode.

But it's no contest that the Wii U is far more powerful than the Xbox and PS3 from a graphical perspective, the GPU alone is 4 generations ahead with allot more programability and effects at hand.
Why there is even a debate on this I'll never know, technology stands still for no one.

Some of the low down that the WiiU can do and the other consoles can't.
* Tessellation. (Xbox's Tessellator is far inferior. PS3 doesn't have one.)
* Improved Z/stencil compression. (Better and cheaper shadows etc'.)
* Improved Texture Filtering.
* Improved Anti-Aliasing.
* Better High-Dynamic-Range.
* More advanced Video decoding with better filters.
* Longer and more complex Pixel Shader instructions.
* Longer and more complex Vertex Shader Instructions.
* 4x larger texture size support.
* Geometry Shaders.
* Compute. (Aka. - Hardware accelerated Physics?)

Then you have stuff like better z-culling, schedulers, larger; lower latency and faster caches, more bandwidth and better compression of textures, normal maps and such to drive up efficiency.
Plus you have more Pixel shader pipelines, Rops, TMU's for extra sheer grunt.

Yes the Wii U's GPU is still 3 generations behind the PC and it will only be a mid-range part at best, but it will still be significantly more powerful than the PS3 or Xbox 360's archaic hardware.

This will all lead to a fairly noticeable increase in graphical fidelity over the current consoles when developers start using the full capability of the system, I don't recall any past system where the first release of games really pushed the hardware at hand, it won't change this time around either.
It will probably take developers awhile to get used to the VLIW5 shader architecture in the Wii U and start using Tessellation to it's fullest extent.

Hopefully this translates well into the PC space.


Something like that is what I was hoping and expecting the Wii U would be able to do. It'd be a few steps up and offer a somewhat noticable increase between PS360 games and Wii U games.

But what you said is only based on the rumored graphics card, and according to this developer, it's only gonna be on par with current-gen tech.

But why pick what's essentially an off-the-shelf Xenon card (we know it'll be done by ATI/AMD)? Granted Nintendo picked only an optimized version of the Flipper to make the Hollywood, but when so much more can be done for comparatively little more in expenses, why undershoot in terms of expense?



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

IIIIITHE1IIIII on 25 March 2012
Troll_Whisperer said:
A journalist should, you know, get rid of irrelvant words when transcribing, you know?

Anyway, horrible transcription aside, we've heard a lot of different things from a lot of different sources, so annoying as it is we must wait to know what the specs really are.


Well, it's not a real journalist. Just the guy who runs the mynintendonews blog, you know :P



Zlejedi on 25 March 2012
morenoingrato said:
Soundwave said:

You're going to argue the developer support difference isn't factual? What's Epic working on for Wii today? Capcom? Konami? Sega? Any of the major Western developers?

Everyone ditched this platform over a year ago, the only "big" third party game still in development for it today is Epic Mickey 2 and Dragon Quest X (which is also coming to Wii U, thankfully). A lot of good that 100 million user base is if developers don't want to make any games for it. Well outside of Just Dance games.

The Wii certainly did not develop the software ecosystem previous market leaders did ... if you're going to seriously debate that you're in massive denial.

While it can't be denied that the current Wii support is abysmal, and that it will certainly influence the succesor's future, from a company's point of view, the winner is the one who profited the most and sold the most consoles in it's lifespan.

Are you a company who produces consoles or a gamer who buys their product ?



PROUD MEMBER OF THE PSP RPG FAN CLUB

DanneSandin on 25 March 2012
RolStoppable said:
DanneSandin said:
RolStoppable said:

The PS2 dominated the sixth generation, but the GameCube was profitable despite sales of only 21 million units.

In the seventh generation, the PS3 will sell in excess of 80 million units, but it won't be profitable for Sony.

Not profitable at all? How about the 360?

Before the PS3 launched, Sony's gaming division had racked up about $5.3 billion in profits. Right now it sits below $1 billion in cumulative profits which means the PS3 has wiped out the majority of Sony's profits in the video game business. Currently, the PS3 is gaining back some of the lost money, but at the rate it is going, it's not going to make all of it back.

The Xbox 360 put Microsoft in the hole by about $2.5-3 billion, but by now it should be past the break even point, thanks in large part due to Xbox Live subscriptions which provide a constant stream of revenue.

So, basically PS3 has LOST money? I thought it began being profitable a year or two ago...? But that perhaps only means it's not losing any more money?

I don't think I got that part about Xbox... At first it lost up to $3b, and is about to break even now? So they haven't made any money this generation?



I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!

Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.

DanneSandin on 25 March 2012
RolStoppable said:
DanneSandin said:
RolStoppable said:

Before the PS3 launched, Sony's gaming division had racked up about $5.3 billion in profits. Right now it sits below $1 billion in cumulative profits which means the PS3 has wiped out the majority of Sony's profits in the video game business. Currently, the PS3 is gaining back some of the lost money, but at the rate it is going, it's not going to make all of it back.

The Xbox 360 put Microsoft in the hole by about $2.5-3 billion, but by now it should be past the break even point, thanks in large part due to Xbox Live subscriptions which provide a constant stream of revenue.

So, basically PS3 has LOST money? I thought it began being profitable a year or two ago...? But that perhaps only means it's not losing any more money?

I don't think I got that part about Xbox... At first it lost up to $3b, and is about to break even now? So they haven't made any money this generation?

Yes, the PS3 lost billions. It stopped to lose even more money a while ago.

Microsoft hasn't made much or any money yet, but the Xbox 360 is going to sell for another couple of years, so once all is said and done it will have been profitable.

Where do you get all these numbers? It's not that I don't trust you, I'm just curious :)

What do you reckon would happen if both Sony and MS did very poorly next gen? Would anyone back out?



I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!

Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.