Yeah, I should know this. Don't know why I included the p (480p) at the end as well, that made zero sense lol. Regardless the same priciple applies, a 8192x8192 texture of pure black is no more demanding then a 2x2 texture of black.

"8192x8192 texture of pure black is no more demanding then a 2x2 texture of black."

?????????

Honestly, I find the argument about Project P-100 pointless on both sides ...

While I wouldn't say that it is (necessarily) any better than current HD console games, under the conditions people will be playing the game in there are no graphical artifacts that demonstrate limitations to the system. For the art style that they're using the Wii U is producing all of the detail that the developer (seems to) want.

Now, I could be wrong but I suspect that the developer used that art style to manage development costs. They had the choice between producing more detailed graphical assets or they could produce a greater variety of assets, but they probably could not afford to produce a lot of highly detailed assets. Even if the Wii U could handle "twice" the detail, I'm not certain the developer was interested in higher detail; because the lower variety would have had a bigger negative impact on the appearance of the game.

That's not what the "debate" about P-100 was about though, it stemmed from the one poster claiming P-100 represents some sort of massive leap over PS3/360, which is a laughable assertion (just for the record Project P-100 looks like the most interesting Wii U game for me and I'll be buying it day 1). 

P-100 is nowhere near to push the WiiU to its limits
and could be done on the others
still it is an impressive game, fuid and with a huge scale

Actually, no ...

The net result on the image may be the same, but the larger texture would eat up far more memory and have a dramatically higher impact on the bus than the smaller texture. To render the same image using both textures you would see a substantial downgrade in performance using the larger texture.

You're talking about PC system memory like DDR3 RAM. The memory a console generally has is something entirely different and far more expensive. It's the same as or comparable to graphics cards memory.

I expect the XBox 8 and the PS4 to have the same amount of memory as today's graphics cards. Maybe the same amount as the graphics cards that will become available in 2013. So 1.5 - 3, maybe 4 GB's but that will be the absolute limit. Anything above 4 GB's I think will be highly unlikely. That's custom (dual) GPU territory. 6 GB's cards today cost at least 600 dollars, there's no way MS or Sony will implement something that expensive into their next console. Just to give people an idea of what to expect, the GPU in the PS3 was based on a 449 dollar card (the GeForce 7800 GT).

MS and Sony could use a less expensive card with a lot of RAM but then the GPU will be the bottleneck. More than 2 GB's of RAM is only really necessary when gaming on resolutions at or above 2560x1440 or with multiple screens but for those resolutions you need a seriously powerful card.

If the consoles really will use 4-6 GB's then I suspect it will be something like 2 to 4 GB's system memory (DDR3 SDRAM) and 1 to 2 GB's video memory (GDDR5 or XDR 2 RAM).

Yeah, I think I confused myself.  I was thinking of smaller 2x2 sized image scaled/stretched to the size of that a higher res. Obviously being a block colour, when stetched it would look identical to the texture native to the higher resolution but still remain the same in file size. Just pretend the last few comments were never made : D

Errmmm.... yeah, ignore that.

hahahahahahha closed the topic! XD