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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - WiiU Confirmed specs from SDK and GPU info: DirectX 11 features!

lilbroex on 06 July 2012
JEMC said:
lilbroex said:
JEMC said:

PS4 and the Nextbox don't need to double the performance of WiiU to be better. They can have "only" 50% more power AND a lot more RAM (4GB) to make bigger and better games (technically), and those games would be very hard to make or even imposible to port to WiiU.

Mind you, I think they will try to do the same as last gen and do another big jump in specs instead of a big step, but just because they don't want to be beaten by the other. It's like the cold war, but in consoles.

Oh, and just because the strongest console has never won until now, it doesn't mean that it won't change the next time.

They wouldn't. They would be no harder to make than a PS2 version of a GC or Xbox1 game was. They'd just have to cut down the polygon count a little and remove a few objects. Exept now, with the level of graphics possed by the Wii U, a downgrade games would still look extremely good which was Iwata means when he says people won't see that much of a diffence. Just buying GPU that increases the performance from another by 25% can rasie the prise by 3 fold.


For the next Sony and Microsoft consoles to create a gap in like the one between the Wii an the PS3/360 in pwoer, it would need hardware that ran near 1 grand if not more.  The only thing having a more powerful console will do is increase the cost and developement times all around for everyone. Nintendo knows what they are doing and they are doing it right.

If the difference in RAM is big, the example I said was 1.5GB vs 4GB, reducing the poly count and a few objects won't be enough in some games, specially in open world games like Western RPGs or GTA-style games. The difference is just too big. They will have to make other sacrifices (like horizon distance or lighting) that will be noticeable.

We don't know how much does the GFX chip of WiiU cost, but a 25% performance increase is pretty normal from 1 gen of cards to another, so the chip in the HD58xx cards would more than do that, and they are quite cheap nowadays. Will it cost 3 times more? Maybe, but that won't make the console much more expensive, it will just make their loss (because they will sell them at a loss) a bit bigger.

Your not using any logic. There is nothing that could be done with 4 GB that would limit a system with 1 GB from playing the game as there is nothing that "needs" that amount of ram when it comes to gaming aside from huge caches of uncompressed super HD textures. Simple compression would solve the problem of anything that did.

If Sony and Micrsoft actively choose to sell their next console at loss, then they deserve their fate because even then, more people will still on a Wii U and the Wii U will still be cheaper.

Truth be told, I really want them to make an astronomically more powerful consle. It will guarantee that they will lose the next gen again horribly. The fact that people still refer to Sony and Micrsoft in tandem like they are both one entity against Nintendo shows just how high Nintendo's standings are.



Around the Network
Ghutto on 06 July 2012

Why they need to "port" a game if they could make a "version", like Call of Duty for Wii?

Think about it.



BlkPaladin on 06 July 2012
lilbroex said:
JEMC said:
lilbroex said:
JEMC said:

PS4 and the Nextbox don't need to double the performance of WiiU to be better. They can have "only" 50% more power AND a lot more RAM (4GB) to make bigger and better games (technically), and those games would be very hard to make or even imposible to port to WiiU.

Mind you, I think they will try to do the same as last gen and do another big jump in specs instead of a big step, but just because they don't want to be beaten by the other. It's like the cold war, but in consoles.

Oh, and just because the strongest console has never won until now, it doesn't mean that it won't change the next time.

They wouldn't. They would be no harder to make than a PS2 version of a GC or Xbox1 game was. They'd just have to cut down the polygon count a little and remove a few objects. Exept now, with the level of graphics possed by the Wii U, a downgrade games would still look extremely good which was Iwata means when he says people won't see that much of a diffence. Just buying GPU that increases the performance from another by 25% can rasie the prise by 3 fold.


For the next Sony and Microsoft consoles to create a gap in like the one between the Wii an the PS3/360 in pwoer, it would need hardware that ran near 1 grand if not more.  The only thing having a more powerful console will do is increase the cost and developement times all around for everyone. Nintendo knows what they are doing and they are doing it right.

If the difference in RAM is big, the example I said was 1.5GB vs 4GB, reducing the poly count and a few objects won't be enough in some games, specially in open world games like Western RPGs or GTA-style games. The difference is just too big. They will have to make other sacrifices (like horizon distance or lighting) that will be noticeable.

We don't know how much does the GFX chip of WiiU cost, but a 25% performance increase is pretty normal from 1 gen of cards to another, so the chip in the HD58xx cards would more than do that, and they are quite cheap nowadays. Will it cost 3 times more? Maybe, but that won't make the console much more expensive, it will just make their loss (because they will sell them at a loss) a bit bigger.

Your not using any logic. There is nothing that could be done with 4 GB that would limit a system with 1 GB from playing the game as there is nothing that "needs" that amount of ram when it comes to gaming aside from huge caches of uncompressed super HD textures. Simple compression would solve the problem of anything that did.

If Sony and Micrsoft actively choose to sell their next console at loss, then they deserve their fate because even then, more people will still on a Wii U and the Wii U will still be cheaper.

Truth be told, I really want them to make an astronically more powerful consle. It will guarantee that they will lose the next gen again horribly. The fact that people still refer to Sony and Micrsoft in tandem like they are both one entity against Nintendo shows just how high Nintendo's standings are.

Yeah I have to agree. There is no why outside of really sloppy programming that you will need 4GB of RAM in a console. Even with the memory hog that is known as Windows most game's recommend 4GB of RAM. 1.5GB of RAM is more than enough for any game to run no console is going to be running a ton of API layers like Windows. And not to mention adding more RAM doesn't mean the games get better, you also have take in consideration the balence of the system or else you end up with bottle necks that will slow down the performance of the system.



JEMC on 06 July 2012
lilbroex said:
JEMC said:

If the difference in RAM is big, the example I said was 1.5GB vs 4GB, reducing the poly count and a few objects won't be enough in some games, specially in open world games like Western RPGs or GTA-style games. The difference is just too big. They will have to make other sacrifices (like horizon distance or lighting) that will be noticeable.

We don't know how much does the GFX chip of WiiU cost, but a 25% performance increase is pretty normal from 1 gen of cards to another, so the chip in the HD58xx cards would more than do that, and they are quite cheap nowadays. Will it cost 3 times more? Maybe, but that won't make the console much more expensive, it will just make their loss (because they will sell them at a loss) a bit bigger.

Your not using any logic. There is nothing that could be done with 4 GB that would limit a system with 1 GB from playing the game as there is nothing that "needs" that amount of ram when it comes to gaming aside from huge caches of uncompressed super HD textures. Simple compression would solve the problem of anything that did.

The amount of RAM matters. A lot. That's why in the last few years GFX cards have gone from 512Mb to 2-3GB with another 2 for the system. It's not just bigger textures but also the amount of them, the poly count, the nº of objects, lighting + other effects, etc.

Just to make it clear, DICE has said that they will go 64bit only in PC. Why? To make fully use of the RAM available. And since consoles have to split their RAM between the CPU and GPU needs, the amount of it matters.

 

lilbroex said:

If Sony and Micrsoft actively choose to sell their next console at loss, then they deserve their fate because even then, more people will still on a Wii U and the Wii U will still be cheaper.

Truth be told, I really want them to make an astronically more powerful consle. It will guarantee that they will lose the next gen again horribly. The fact that people still refer to Sony and Micrsoft in tandem like they are both one entity against Nintendo shows just how high Nintendo's standings are.

As I said, they see each other as their main competitor and don't want to look weaker than their rival, so they will go with the most powerful machine possible.

Microsoft won't have a problem taking loses with the nextbox as they make more than enough money from other divisions to compensate. And since it has worked well with the 360, they will repeat.

Sony is the one in trouble as their other divisions are also losing money, but all the signs point that they will go the same route. Well, it's up to them. PS1 and PS2 weren't the most powerful console and they succeed, they could learn from that.



Please excuse my bad English.

Currently gaming on a PC with an i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.

JEMC on 06 July 2012
Ghutto said:
Why they need to "port" a game if they could make a "version", like Call of Duty for Wii?

Think about it.

Maybe making a port is cheaper.



Please excuse my bad English.

Currently gaming on a PC with an i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.

Around the Network
Aielyn on 06 July 2012
lilbroex said:
They have those already. ZombiU and P-100. Especially P-100. I almost thought I was looking at CG for a moment. The graphics are just that good.

Oh, I mostly agree with you - I just couched it in hypotheticals in order to cover any case where someone thinks that any particular game isn't pushing the graphical quality.

I say "mostly" only because we haven't seen final products, yet. I expect the games to look even better at launch than they look in the trailers and gameplay demos we've seen.



Aielyn on 06 July 2012

I actually have a question, now.

As far as most rumours go, including this one, and based on the graphical qualities of some of the exclusive Wii U games on the way, it seems that the GPU of the Wii U is quite powerful. Specifically, it seems that the CPU is mostly comparable to PS3/360, but the GPU is well beyond that.

Now, quite a lot of PS3/360 titles lack any sort of offline multiplayer, but have a reasonably-well-developed online multiplayer. And it's likely that games developed for 360/PS3/WiiU will have assets designed for the weaker systems, graphically speaking. Which leads me to this question: would the Wii U's increased graphical power make it possible to have local multiplayer on these games, without requiring a reduction in graphical quality? Or would the system need a significant boost to CPU to accommodate this?



JEMC on 06 July 2012
Aielyn said:
I actually have a question, now.

As far as most rumours go, including this one, and based on the graphical qualities of some of the exclusive Wii U games on the way, it seems that the GPU of the Wii U is quite powerful. Specifically, it seems that the CPU is mostly comparable to PS3/360, but the GPU is well beyond that.

Now, quite a lot of PS3/360 titles lack any sort of offline multiplayer, but have a reasonably-well-developed online multiplayer. And it's likely that games developed for 360/PS3/WiiU will have assets designed for the weaker systems, graphically speaking. Which leads me to this question: would the Wii U's increased graphical power make it possible to have local multiplayer on these games, without requiring a reduction in graphical quality? Or would the system need a significant boost to CPU to accommodate this?

Honestly?

I think the problem will be developers wanting to do local/spliscreen multiplayer rather than the console being able to do it.

And while the CPU may not be a huge jump from last gen, it still is much better than the ones found in the HD twins. By how much? Until we know the speed it is unknown.



Please excuse my bad English.

Currently gaming on a PC with an i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.

IamAwsome on 06 July 2012
Ghutto said:
Why they need to "port" a game if they could make a "version", like Call of Duty for Wii?

Think about it.


In the case of Call of Duty, cheap-ass Activision wouln't care. If people want a unique version for the Wii U, it would be up to Treyarch ti make it. 

When it comes to other developers, it just depends on the game. ACIII got a unique version, but games like Madden probably wouldn't because it'll sell either way. 



Moonhero on 06 July 2012

So is this thing a Gamecube and 360 Duct tapped together?



Ask stefl1504 for a sig, even if you don't need one.