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

Forums - Nintendo - Wii U Can Do “1080p Without Breaking A Sweat”

lilbroex on 09 August 2012
Mohasus said:
lilbroex said:
Soundwave said:
Going to 1080p is not going to massively alter the development cost.

It's not like PC games cost way more because they support 5-6 different resolutions.

My guess is if you're using the TV screen + the Wii U display (which requires a second frame buffer), 720p is about the max you can get from the machine unless you are displaying very basic graphics.


Then I would llike to know how Arkham City: Armored Edtion runs at 1080p 60fps on both the tv and controller at once while the PS3 and 360 version ran at 720p 30fps.


It is kinda funny how you read so many WiiU news and yet you don't know the WiiU Pad's resolution.

You mean that is 480p? Everyone knows that. What is your point?



Around the Network
Mohasus on 09 August 2012
lilbroex said:
Mohasus said:
lilbroex said:
Soundwave said:
Going to 1080p is not going to massively alter the development cost.

It's not like PC games cost way more because they support 5-6 different resolutions.

My guess is if you're using the TV screen + the Wii U display (which requires a second frame buffer), 720p is about the max you can get from the machine unless you are displaying very basic graphics.


Then I would llike to know how Arkham City: Armored Edtion runs at 1080p 60fps on both the tv and controller at once while the PS3 and 360 version ran at 720p 30fps.


It is kinda funny how you read so many WiiU news and yet you don't know the WiiU Pad's resolution.

You mean that is 480p? Everyone knows that. What is your point?

"Arkham City: Armored Edtion runs at 1080p 60fps on both the tv and controller"

Oh, could you link me to where did you read about Batman AC @60 FPS? Thanks.



happydolphin on 09 August 2012
lilbroex said:
Scoobes said:

Was that running on WiiU? Obviously, based on current PC hardware, current gen games look and run significantly better, but when new tech comes out, everything will be pushed a bit further with new effects. It has to be noted that Arkham City is Unreal Engine 3 (albeit with some DX11 standard effects) whereas next gen games will almost certainly be using new engines designed to incorporate a wide array of modern techniques.

Anyway, the point still stands. If developers end up developing for more powerful hardware (e.g. PC or if the next MS/Sony consoles are significantly more powerful than WiiU) then "1080p without breaking a sweat" becomes "1080p with compromises" or even "720p with incredible effects". Being able to do 1080p doesn't mean much when other advances are taken into consideration.

Way to take things out of context to the extremes. Now tell me something I am not aware of.

I thought it was a very fair and relevant clarification. In other words "for how long?" and "for what applications?".

It's a valid question.



Scoobes on 09 August 2012
lilbroex said:
Scoobes said:
lilbroex said:
Scoobes said:
This doesn't really mean much. The PS3 and 360 are capable of 1080p, but it completely depends on how the games are developed and designed. 720p with lots of bump mapping, shader and lighting effects or 1080p with with minimal effects.


Refer to my comment abut Arkhym City. It means quite a bit.

Was that running on WiiU? Obviously, based on current PC hardware, current gen games look and run significantly better, but when new tech comes out, everything will be pushed a bit further with new effects. It has to be noted that Arkham City is Unreal Engine 3 (albeit with some DX11 standard effects) whereas next gen games will almost certainly be using new engines designed to incorporate a wide array of modern techniques.

Anyway, the point still stands. If developers end up developing for more powerful hardware (e.g. PC or if the next MS/Sony consoles are significantly more powerful than WiiU) then "1080p without breaking a sweat" becomes "1080p with compromises" or even "720p with incredible effects". Being able to do 1080p doesn't mean much when other advances are taken into consideration.

Way to take things out of context to the extremes. Now tell me something I am not aware of.

Well you obviously misunderstood my original comment, so I spelt it out in detail




Get your Portable ID!

lilbroex on 09 August 2012
Mohasus said:
lilbroex said:
Mohasus said:
lilbroex said:
Soundwave said:
Going to 1080p is not going to massively alter the development cost.

It's not like PC games cost way more because they support 5-6 different resolutions.

My guess is if you're using the TV screen + the Wii U display (which requires a second frame buffer), 720p is about the max you can get from the machine unless you are displaying very basic graphics.


Then I would llike to know how Arkham City: Armored Edtion runs at 1080p 60fps on both the tv and controller at once while the PS3 and 360 version ran at 720p 30fps.


It is kinda funny how you read so many WiiU news and yet you don't know the WiiU Pad's resolution.

You mean that is 480p? Everyone knows that. What is your point?

"Arkham City: Armored Edtion runs at 1080p 60fps on both the tv and controller"

Oh, could you link me to where did you read about Batman AC @60 FPS? Thanks.

Your welcome, and no. I'm tired supplying info to people who clearly just want to beg the question. Most either skew its meaning or ignore and jump to begging something else.


I didn't say it would run at 1080p on the controller. I said it would run at 1080p on both the tv and controller as in it will achieve that while outputing to 2 output devices. It was a response to the comment that the second controller would limit it to 720p. Sorry if you failed to understand that.



Around the Network
lilbroex on 09 August 2012
pezus said:
lilbroex said:
I agree. The games running on my screen 19 in. screen at 1280x1024 look far better than the same game running on my PS3 at 720p and 1080i.

The only thing making a game 1080p does in most cases is make the graphics bigger, not better. All that does it keep the quality from noticeably dropping on a larger screen if you have one. 480p was enough for me. 1080p is overkill in most situations.

That is just plain wrong. You're telling me changing the resolution of a PC game from 720p to 1080p does not improve the graphics? Wat

It "can" improve the graphics, but 99% of the time it doesn't. Its the same polygon count, same geometry, same lighting, same textures(only bigger variations of them).

Only with the added benefit of extra resources consumed that you could invest into more polygons with more completx gemetry if it wasn't output at that resolution.



happydolphin on 09 August 2012
lilbroex said:
Mohasus said:

"Arkham City: Armored Edtion runs at 1080p 60fps on both the tv and controller"

Oh, could you link me to where did you read about Batman AC @60 FPS? Thanks.

Your welcome, and no. I'm tired supplying info to people who clearly just want to beg the question. Most either skew its meaning or ignore and jump to begging something else.


I didn't say it would run at 1080p on the controller. I said it would run at 1080p on both the tv and controller as in it will achieve that while outputing to 2 output devices. It was a response to the comment that the second controller would limit it to 720p. Sorry if you failed to understand that.

Dude you were being unclear. Chill out.



Scoobes on 09 August 2012
lilbroex said:
pezus said:
lilbroex said:
I agree. The games running on my screen 19 in. screen at 1280x1024 look far better than the same game running on my PS3 at 720p and 1080i.

The only thing making a game 1080p does in most cases is make the graphics bigger, not better. All that does it keep the quality from noticeably dropping on a larger screen if you have one. 480p was enough for me. 1080p is overkill in most situations.

That is just plain wrong. You're telling me changing the resolution of a PC game from 720p to 1080p does not improve the graphics? Wat

It "can" improve the graphics, but 99% of the time it doesn't. Its the same polygon count, same geometry, same lighting, same textures(only bigger variations of them).

Not the same textures, but closer to how the artists would have intended them and usually at higher resolution allowing you to see more detail.




Get your Portable ID!

Soundwave on 09 August 2012

Confirmation that Arkham City on Wii U runs at 1080p? That would be the first I've heard of this. I'm pretty sure it's 720p only.



lilbroex on 09 August 2012
Scoobes said:
lilbroex said:
pezus said:
lilbroex said:
I agree. The games running on my screen 19 in. screen at 1280x1024 look far better than the same game running on my PS3 at 720p and 1080i.

The only thing making a game 1080p does in most cases is make the graphics bigger, not better. All that does it keep the quality from noticeably dropping on a larger screen if you have one. 480p was enough for me. 1080p is overkill in most situations.

That is just plain wrong. You're telling me changing the resolution of a PC game from 720p to 1080p does not improve the graphics? Wat

It "can" improve the graphics, but 99% of the time it doesn't. Its the same polygon count, same geometry, same lighting, same textures(only bigger variations of them).

Not the same textures, but closer to how the artists would have intended them and usually at higher resolution allowing you to see more detail.


No. Most of the time it isn't. I've personally yet to see a single game that had drastic alteration to the way the textures looked at higher resolutions other than them being bigger versions of the same textures.