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

Forums - Nintendo - Developers optimize Wii U for higher frame rates

Slimebeast on 29 August 2012
lilbroex said:
Slimebeast said:
Chandler said:
Slimebeast said:
There's no concrete information here, just wishful fantasies.

Batman Armored Edition will not run in 60 fps. It's too hard to get that stability from the Wii U hardware when you're only a third party developer porting a one year old game with a limited budget.


Source?

 

To be fair, the thread itself is not really built on stable source, it's just another IdeaMan/NeoGAF post. It could go either way. I see no reason why Arkham City could not run @ 60 FPS. But it's third party. The bottom line is WE DON'T KNOW. So there is no point in guaranteeing one way or asuming like its a done deal the other way.

No direct source, but what we do know is:

1). all these reports of Wii U being very roughly on par with the PS360 (although I don't take those rumors and statements literally, but still it hints us that the Wii U is definitely not a power-house)

2). all games displayed so far including the ones who were analyzed by the Eurogamer guy show (among them Batman Armored Edition) that graphics and performance of the launch period Wii U games will be on par with PS360.

I've never heard a "real" report that said the Wii U was "just" on par with the current console, only the games. They've all said the Wii U was more capable exept for AC3 which is clear that the developers don't want to be better than the 360/PS3. They are intentionally making it on par.

Depends on what you mean by "real". I assume you mean the legitimacy of different reports and statements. Those are hard to value and so far they've all been quite vague, which honestly would make me as an Xbox fan very worried if they were about the Nextbox.



Around the Network
lilbroex on 29 August 2012
Slimebeast said:

Depends on what you mean by "real". I assume you mean the legitimacy of different reports and statements. Those are hard to value and so far they've all been quite vague, which honestly would make me as an Xbox fan very worried if they were about the Nextbox.

No, all of them haven't. Most of them have been quite clear as most of them are made by real people with names who speak with no ambiguity. Only the negative rumors were unclear and that is because they were entirely made up by people pretending to be devs just so they could have their hatred reported by reputable sources.

People speak negatively about Nitnendo because they don't like Nintendo. Nothing about that would make a Nintendo fan worry. Its the same old same old.



Chandler on 29 August 2012
Slimebeast said:
Chandler said:
Slimebeast said:
There's no concrete information here, just wishful fantasies.

Batman Armored Edition will not run in 60 fps. It's too hard to get that stability from the Wii U hardware when you're only a third party developer porting a one year old game with a limited budget.


Source?

 

To be fair, the thread itself is not really built on stable source, it's just another IdeaMan/NeoGAF post. It could go either way. I see no reason why Arkham City could not run @ 60 FPS. But it's third party. The bottom line is WE DON'T KNOW. So there is no point in guaranteeing one way or asuming like its a done deal the other way.

No direct source, but what we do know is:

1). all these reports of Wii U being very roughly on par with the PS360 (although I don't take those rumors and statements literally, but still it hints us that the Wii U is definitely not a power-house)

2). all games displayed so far including the ones who were analyzed by the Eurogamer guy show (among them Batman Armored Edition) that graphics and performance of the launch period Wii U games will be on par with PS360.

And Batman being 60fps would require nearly twice the rendering power of a X360 that ran Batman in an unstable 25-40fps. On top of that you got the power needed for the Wii U controller plus the visual enhancements to Batman Armored Ed. All in all this will not happen so early in a gen by a lazy third party dev doing a late port.

But the Wii U has OoO CPU and a GPGPU and the other 2 consoles don't so I can see how the Wii U is considered "weak" for direct ports when the current engines and multiplat games don't make use of those features. Arkham City being a late port could be a good thing because the game is not developed for all 3 systems at the same time so they don't have to work towards the lowest common denominator so to speak. They had a whole year exclusively for the Wii U (up)port and it's possible imho that they fiddled with the engine to make use of the special features and get extra juice out of the Wii U. The GPGPU for example takes a lot of strain from the CPU when properly used.

 

I stand by my opinion that we just don't know either way yet.



Ongoing bet with think-man: He wins if MH4 releases in any shape or form on PSV in 2013, I win if it doesn't.

Slimebeast on 29 August 2012
Chandler said:
Slimebeast said:
Chandler said:
Slimebeast said:
There's no concrete information here, just wishful fantasies.

Batman Armored Edition will not run in 60 fps. It's too hard to get that stability from the Wii U hardware when you're only a third party developer porting a one year old game with a limited budget.


Source?

 

To be fair, the thread itself is not really built on stable source, it's just another IdeaMan/NeoGAF post. It could go either way. I see no reason why Arkham City could not run @ 60 FPS. But it's third party. The bottom line is WE DON'T KNOW. So there is no point in guaranteeing one way or asuming like its a done deal the other way.

No direct source, but what we do know is:

1). all these reports of Wii U being very roughly on par with the PS360 (although I don't take those rumors and statements literally, but still it hints us that the Wii U is definitely not a power-house)

2). all games displayed so far including the ones who were analyzed by the Eurogamer guy show (among them Batman Armored Edition) that graphics and performance of the launch period Wii U games will be on par with PS360.

And Batman being 60fps would require nearly twice the rendering power of a X360 that ran Batman in an unstable 25-40fps. On top of that you got the power needed for the Wii U controller plus the visual enhancements to Batman Armored Ed. All in all this will not happen so early in a gen by a lazy third party dev doing a late port.

But the Wii U has OoO CPU and a GPGPU and the other 2 consoles don't so I can see how the Wii U is considered "weak" for direct ports when the current engines and multiplat games don't make use of those features. Arkham City being a late port could be a good thing because the game is not developed for all 3 systems at the same time so they don't have to work towards the lowest common denominator so to speak. They had a whole year exclusively for the Wii U (up)port and it's possible imho that they fiddled with the engine to make use of the special features and get extra juice out of the Wii U. The GPGPU for example takes a lot of strain from the CPU when properly used.

 

I stand by my opinion that we just don't know either way yet.

All right, let's agree that we don't know yet. We can only hope. I truly hope the Wii U is strong as an oxe.

 Btw, remember that it wasn't me who started being cocky. It was lilbroex who said in the 2nd post "60 fps guaranteed".



snowdog on 29 August 2012

Actually some parts of Assassins Creed 3 will be superior to the other console SKUs due to v-synch, which for me personally is a very big deal - I'm always frustrated by the vast majority of PS3 and 360 titles looking fantastic until you turn it to screen tearing shite whenever you move the bloody camera. And the same goes for Arkham City too.