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

Forums - Gaming - Wii U to be more powerful then the PS4

freebs2 said:
Andrespetmonkey said:
freebs2 said:
Andrespetmonkey said:

Seriously? Look at BF3. It looks vastly better on PC, has much bigger maps and has almost 3 times as many people and vehicles online. Not to mention DX11. And with the next advancements of engines like frostbite 2 there will be even more things that consoles aren't capable of. Budget spending had nothing to do with this, it's all about the hardware. 

That's because your talking about a PC game ported (dumbed down) to be played on consoles, if look at games specifically developed for consoles, like MAG, you have already a lot of players online.

What I mean is if developers really focused on world interctivity and AI, we would have alredy seen some better enhancemts on actual consoles. Most likely on Ps4/X720 we will see better looking games and better looking cutscenes while AI and interactivity will remain more or less the same.

If a PC game needs to be dumbed down to the point where gameplay changes to be playable on a console, it is an issue worth fixing. MAG has incredibly limited interactivity whereas BF3 has a powerful destruction engine, vehicles, much better animations and it looks and sounds a lot better. So sure, if you dumb a game down so much you can get many people online, this isn't a good thing. 

Interactivity largely depends on what the hardware is capable of as seen in BF3. If you want fully destructible environments, bigger and more detailed worlds, better physics, smarter NPCs and better looking games you need better hardware. There really isn't any other way around it.

While I agree with the first part. Interactivity depends on game design about as much (or even more) as on hardware, interctivity is not only destructable enviroments, an example of interactivity may be you character going near rotten fish, than being spotted because you smell like fish in MGS, another example is in Monster Hunter being warned of a dangerous monster incoming because you see its prays running away. These kind of interactions are almost completely unrelated to the hardware.

Also I am a bit skeptical about IA since, while I've seen a lot of progress in graphics from the beginning of this generations to today, at the same time I have't seen a great progression in IA since NPCs in Assasin's Creed are about as much as dumb as in Brotherhood, Gears Of War 3, UC3, CODMW3 NPCs doesn't seem to me a really smarter than GeOW1, UC1, CODMW NPCs. This leads me to belive developers were not really willing to max out consoles on this front.

At the end, what you say is right, but if want more interactivity, bigger words, smarter NPCs what you need, more than the hardware, is the will of developers to create such things, rather than beautifully looking, shiny, corridor-like levels.

AI does depend on hardware though...I'm sure this is done on the CPU. 



Around the Network
VGKing said:
Soundwave said:

Honestly I think in the higher end market, Microsoft is going to drive Sony out in the next 5-6 years by creating a better piece of hardware, which in turn will make them the console of choice for "hardcore" players.

Sony can't afford to price match Microsoft anymore, and Microsoft knows this. A couple of years of losses upfront on the 720 and they can bury Sony for good. We're starting to hear some reports that seem to indicate MS is "going for it" at the urging of some developers (probably Epic and some others). So I could see a situation where the 720 has say 4GB of RAM + a beefier GPU versus a Sony Orbis that has 2GB RAM/weaker GPU.

Nintendo will retain a good portion of the lower end/"normal person" (lol) market, but MS will make inroads here too with Kinect.


Highly unlikely. Microsoft loves making profit. Want proof? There hasnt' been an Xbox 360 price cut since like 2008.

An Xbox 360 would easily bee sold at $150 with Microsoft still making decent profit. But why isn't it? Because Microsoft loves making profit. 


That's the 360 model -- to not have a ton of price drops but to absorb losses early on. The price remains static as time goes on, but of course the cost of production drops. The 720 could follow the same model ... Sony is the one that can't afford to repeat the PS3 model. Though in hindsight I think if MS knew Sony was going to shock everyone with the $599 thing, they probably would've started XBox 360 at a little bit more expensive of a price and not taken such a big loss upfront.

$299.99/$399.99 for the level of tech the 360 was bringing to the market (bleeding edge) in 2005 was a ridiculous bargain.

Microsoft can lose money on the 720 early on too, it's not a big deal for them, they likely view the 720 as a 7-8 year investment, so they lose money the first 2-3 years, but make it back in the final 5/6. Sony I don't think can afford to do that any more, Nintendo won't go there either. So it's a competetive advantage MS can use if they want to play that card.

As an entire company MS turns a hefty profit every year. Sony is swimming in debt and taking massive losses from every direction, they can't afford to price/feature match Microsoft any more. Sony has billions and billions of dollars in unpaid debt (so much so that their debt was recently downgraded, which is really, really bad).

If I'm Microsoft I'm looking at the game market and saying "why are we splitting half of our market with Sony? Lets take their share" this generation for sure.



Roma said:
It won't be more powerful than Orbis nor Durango and it won't be less powerful than PS3 and 360


but there won't be that big of a gap as Wii was to PS360 it will be more like PS2 was to GC


Wii U will be about 360-level give or take.

PS4 will be 4-8 times as powerful as the 360. Easily.

So no, this won't be a repeate of 6th gen. It will be a repeat of 7th gen.



Rafux said:
freebs2 said:
Rafux said:
Yep this makes sense, WiiU will be more powerful than a system that will be released a year later.

Actually, the X360 was more powerful than a system released an year later :P

@OP No WiiU won't probably be more powerfull than Ps4 and no a Radeon 400x is not better than a Radeon 700x.


More powerful? I think PS3 and 360 are tied but you do have a good point.

No, they're not.....
I won't get into this since its already been explained in other forums but long story shot, the Cell is an amazing piece of tech.



VGKing said:
Rafux said:
freebs2 said:
Rafux said:
Yep this makes sense, WiiU will be more powerful than a system that will be released a year later.

Actually, the X360 was more powerful than a system released an year later :P

@OP No WiiU won't probably be more powerfull than Ps4 and no a Radeon 400x is not better than a Radeon 700x.


More powerful? I think PS3 and 360 are tied but you do have a good point.

No, they're not.....
I won't get into this since its already been explained in other forums but long story shot, the Cell is an amazing piece of tech.


Relative to the market they're pretty damn close. You'd have to be a hardcore tech geek to really be able to notice huge differences from the two machines, MS actually seems to have won mindshare here because if you ask a lot of "average joes" they'll tell you the 360 is more powerful than the PS3 (lol). At least in North America that's the case.

But the days where you could pop in Street Fighter 2 on a Super NES and instantly notice a huge difference versus the Genesis version ... those days are pretty much past.

Sony should've gone with 1GB RAM for PS3 ... I mean the thing was already $600 ... what's another $20-$30, lol.



Around the Network

I can't wait until we get some official specifications on the next gen consoles. All these threads are getting out of hand.



Soundwave said:
VGKing said:
Soundwave said:

Honestly I think in the higher end market, Microsoft is going to drive Sony out in the next 5-6 years by creating a better piece of hardware, which in turn will make them the console of choice for "hardcore" players.

Sony can't afford to price match Microsoft anymore, and Microsoft knows this. A couple of years of losses upfront on the 720 and they can bury Sony for good. We're starting to hear some reports that seem to indicate MS is "going for it" at the urging of some developers (probably Epic and some others). So I could see a situation where the 720 has say 4GB of RAM + a beefier GPU versus a Sony Orbis that has 2GB RAM/weaker GPU.

Nintendo will retain a good portion of the lower end/"normal person" (lol) market, but MS will make inroads here too with Kinect.


Highly unlikely. Microsoft loves making profit. Want proof? There hasnt' been an Xbox 360 price cut since like 2008.

An Xbox 360 would easily bee sold at $150 with Microsoft still making decent profit. But why isn't it? Because Microsoft loves making profit. 


That's the 360 model -- to not have a ton of price drops but to absorb losses early on. The price remains static as time goes on, but of course the cost of production drops. The 720 could follow the same model ... Sony is the one that can't afford to repeat the PS3 model. Though in hindsight I think if MS knew Sony was going to shock everyone with the $599 thing, they probably would've started XBox 360 at a little bit more expensive of a price and not taken such a big loss upfront.

$299.99/$399.99 for the level of tech the 360 was bringing to the market (bleeding edge) in 2005 was a ridiculous bargain.

Microsoft can lose money on the 720 early on too, it's not a big deal for them, they likely view the 720 as a 7-8 year investment, so they lose money the first 2-3 years, but make it back in the final 5/6. Sony I don't think can afford to do that any more, Nintendo won't go there either. So it's a competetive advantage MS can use if they want to play that card.

As an entire company MS turns a hefty profit every year. Sony is swimming in debt and taking massive losses from every direction, they can't afford to price/feature match Microsoft any more. Sony has billions and billions of dollars in unpaid debt (so much so that their debt was recently downgraded, which is really, really bad).

If I'm Microsoft I'm looking at the game market and saying "why are we splitting half of our market with Sony? Lets take their share" this generation for sure.


Yes, Microsoft COULD launch a ridiculously over=powered console and price it chepaer than a less-powerful PS4....but they won't.

Microsoft WANTS to make profit. In the first few years they want to take as little a lost as possible.(or even profit from day 1). This is the way companies work. Anyway Sony WILL take a loss on each PS4 for at least hte first year. Their main competitor is the Xbox 720 and they have no intention of playing it safe.

BTW, if Sony were to leave the console business, it would be bad for the entire industry and it would also mean a lot more work for Microsoft.



Soundwave said:
VGKing said:
Rafux said:
freebs2 said:
Rafux said:
Yep this makes sense, WiiU will be more powerful than a system that will be released a year later.

Actually, the X360 was more powerful than a system released an year later :P

@OP No WiiU won't probably be more powerfull than Ps4 and no a Radeon 400x is not better than a Radeon 700x.


More powerful? I think PS3 and 360 are tied but you do have a good point.

No, they're not.....
I won't get into this since its already been explained in other forums but long story shot, the Cell is an amazing piece of tech.


Relative to the market they're pretty damn close. You'd have to be a hardcore tech geek to really be able to notice huge differences from the two machines, MS actually seems to have won mindshare here because if you ask a lot of "average joes" they'll tell you the 360 is more powerful than the PS3 (lol). At least in North America that's the case.

But the days where you could pop in Street Fighter 2 on a Super NES and instantly notice a huge difference versus the Genesis version ... those days are pretty much past.

Sony should've gone with 1GB RAM for PS3 ... I mean the thing was already $600 ... what's another $20-$30, lol.

....you can't be that ignorant.

$20 * 65 million = Way too much in losses.

Or are you saying they should have priced the PS3 at $630? That's not a very good idea and makes marketing difficult.



VGKing said:
Soundwave said:
VGKing said:
Soundwave said:

Honestly I think in the higher end market, Microsoft is going to drive Sony out in the next 5-6 years by creating a better piece of hardware, which in turn will make them the console of choice for "hardcore" players.

Sony can't afford to price match Microsoft anymore, and Microsoft knows this. A couple of years of losses upfront on the 720 and they can bury Sony for good. We're starting to hear some reports that seem to indicate MS is "going for it" at the urging of some developers (probably Epic and some others). So I could see a situation where the 720 has say 4GB of RAM + a beefier GPU versus a Sony Orbis that has 2GB RAM/weaker GPU.

Nintendo will retain a good portion of the lower end/"normal person" (lol) market, but MS will make inroads here too with Kinect.


Highly unlikely. Microsoft loves making profit. Want proof? There hasnt' been an Xbox 360 price cut since like 2008.

An Xbox 360 would easily bee sold at $150 with Microsoft still making decent profit. But why isn't it? Because Microsoft loves making profit. 


That's the 360 model -- to not have a ton of price drops but to absorb losses early on. The price remains static as time goes on, but of course the cost of production drops. The 720 could follow the same model ... Sony is the one that can't afford to repeat the PS3 model. Though in hindsight I think if MS knew Sony was going to shock everyone with the $599 thing, they probably would've started XBox 360 at a little bit more expensive of a price and not taken such a big loss upfront.

$299.99/$399.99 for the level of tech the 360 was bringing to the market (bleeding edge) in 2005 was a ridiculous bargain.

Microsoft can lose money on the 720 early on too, it's not a big deal for them, they likely view the 720 as a 7-8 year investment, so they lose money the first 2-3 years, but make it back in the final 5/6. Sony I don't think can afford to do that any more, Nintendo won't go there either. So it's a competetive advantage MS can use if they want to play that card.

As an entire company MS turns a hefty profit every year. Sony is swimming in debt and taking massive losses from every direction, they can't afford to price/feature match Microsoft any more. Sony has billions and billions of dollars in unpaid debt (so much so that their debt was recently downgraded, which is really, really bad).

If I'm Microsoft I'm looking at the game market and saying "why are we splitting half of our market with Sony? Lets take their share" this generation for sure.


Yes, Microsoft COULD launch a ridiculously over=powered console and price it chepaer than a less-powerful PS4....but they won't.

Microsoft WANTS to make profit. In the first few years they want to take as little a lost as possible.(or even profit from day 1). This is the way companies work. Anyway Sony WILL take a loss on each PS4 for at least hte first year. Their main competitor is the Xbox 720 and they have no intention of playing it safe.

BTW, if Sony were to leave the console business, it would be bad for the entire industry and it would also mean a lot more work for Microsoft.


I think you're confusing what you want with what Microsoft wants. Microsoft would love to rule the game industry.

It would be a nice feather in their cap especially after getting thumped badly by Apple in the media distribution race/tablet/cell phone market etc.

They can tell their stockholders "OK, ok, Apple, Apple, Apple, Google ... but hey look at what we're doing in the game business, look at Kinect, look at our dominance here ...". It's something they can point to especially if Windows Phone never takes off. It's kinda like when you got a report card with one subject that was a D and another was an A ... well you could always kinda assuage your parents by pointing out you're doing great in this one subject and maybe you'll even come around in that other subject.

If I'm Microsoft I bait Sony into fighting the race like this ... it's a race that favors Microsoft. Sony isn't the same company they used to be 10 years ago, their brand (Playstation and Sony in general) has diminished considerably. This is where smart corporations if they have a killer mentality go for the kill.

If I was working at MS I'd also push to secure exclusivity deals on certain key franchises. If Nintendo can take Monster Hunter away from Sony (and I don't for a second believe Nintendo wasn't involved in that), MS should go at Sony on the console side too.

Microsoft loves to pick fights they know they can win. Right now they're in tough with Apple and Google with the smart phone thing, they probably are too late in coming to the market. But Sony? In the game business? I mean if you're Microsoft you gotta be feeling pretty damn confident about that. Any profit the game division makes for Microsoft is just peanuts compared to their other businesses, always has been, always will be. XBOX as a brand is a vanity project for MS, something to get them into the living room first and foremost.



trololololoooo, this topic is full of FAIL!