You're basically discrediting the anonymous source with no proof. Why exactly would they create such an article with lies? And no, if I know Nintendo right, we won't be getting tech specs come September.

And, like Scoobes said above, this is what the majority of articles and rumors has pointed at before. It's not like this is something of a new revelation. You can be in denial all you want, but I just hope you won't be in denial after we get the confirmation.

You're basically discrediting the anonymous source with no proof. Why exactly would they create such an article with lies? And no, if I know Nintendo right, we won't be getting tech specs come September.

And, like Scoobes said above, this is what the majority of articles and rumors has pointed at before. It's not like this is something of a new revelation. You can be in denial all you want, but I just hope you won't be in denial after we get the confirmation.

"Errr... what is your point? The article states in the first 2 paragraphs:

"How powerful is the Wii U really? Is it less powerful than the PS3 and Xbox 360? Is it as powerful? More powerful? And how will it compare to the next generation? What quality of graphics will we see from Wii U games?

Answering these questions is impossible, given how abstract the idea of console power is in the first place. Is X twice as powerful as Y? Is Y 10 times as powerful than Z? And what does power mean anyway?""

"And, crucially, developers Eurogamer spoke to as part of a wide-ranging investigation into the innards of the Wii U now have final specifications.

Here's what they told us."

Come on common reading ability will tell when some says Developers told us that means they are saying developers are telling them this is correct lol. They are saying  the following which were the the specs are correct based on developers who TOLD them.

"You have no evidence to show their sources are fake and as always you have to take this sort of information with a pinch of salt. It wouldn't be that surprising for Eurogamer to have some sources in the Games Industry. It also wouldn't be that surprising if some of those sources are great at bullshitting. It further wouldn't be surprising if those devs have differing viewpoints as developers have different skill levels when it comes to coding or adapting to new architecture."

Can't prove anonymous sources are fake?

The question is not what you feel but like you said basically there is no crediability with anonymous sources. Industrygames and  kotaku showed there is no creditability. Did anyone remember before the wii was out the anoymous sources telling us it would be stronger than xbox360 until it came out it was false.

"And who would mix up dev quotes with the article authors opinions?"

Pattern Developer -anoymous source to someone who isn't intelligent will think if an article quotes someone legit everything is legit. Look at Gameidustry for example. Look at kotaku. Both been exposed and caught lying using the same tactic.

"Anyway, that doesn't mean we can't use this article, coupled with previous articles from other sources to come to a logical ballpark for WiiU hardware specs."

Use it doesn't mean it's creditable lol. Rumors for systems have be constantly wrong over the years. rarely do we ever get it right. Rumors and anonymous sources are those who put there neck for sites that want to make cash in on a tread.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Pezus

"You're basically discrediting the anonymous source with no proof. Why exactly would they create such an article with lies? "

Damn you're right... there is no evidence of this ever happening.......

~cough~ Game Industry ~cough~

~cough~ Kotaku ~cough~

~cough~Sega says Wii-U on par with ps3~cough~

What about the quotes which I pointed out were directly lying to what the actual developers have said who are creating Batman and Ninja Garden for Wii-U? So we suppose to trust some anonymous person over a real life quotable person?  If one anonymous source is lying you shouldn't even consider the rest of anonymous sources unless your biased and want to hear bad news. They are already caught lying what's to stop from continuing?

"You can be in denial all you want, but I just hope you won't be in denial after we get the confirmation."

"Today, an inside source claims that the Wii U “is not up to the same level as the PS3 or the 360.” Another source from GamesIndustry, this one apparently from a major developer, reiterates:

“It doesn’t produce graphics as well as the PS3 or the 360. There aren’t as many shaders, it’s not as capable. Sure, some things are better, mostly as a result of it being a more modern design. But overall the Wii U just can’t quite keep up.”"

Pezus this sounds legit now with rumors of Wii-U being on par with 360/ps3?  Or maybe....anonymous sources are just the writers and people pick and choose which rumors are true and not. Hell you ignored when I quoted developers but you belived rumors. You are clearly bias and the perfect person to fall for this rumors from sites to get hits.

To drive traffic to their site and increase ad revenues?

Have you ever noticed how there are always annonymous sources for ever rumor posted on major gaming sites, often with other sources collaborating, and yet 90% (or more) of these rumors still end up being false?

Depends somewhat on the website doesn't it?

Still not sure I understand what your point is.

 Note how the specs are still fairly vague and developer comments vary somewhat. They've not outright specified the full spec sheet in any detail other then there will be 1Gb of RAM available solely for games.

As for some of the other websites you've mentioned, Kotaku is a blog site and is the video gaming equivalent of a tabloid. EuroGamer and GamesIndustry.biz on the other hand are also used for networking by a wide range of professionals in the industry, so their sources are more likely to be credible. Not 100%, you can never gaurantee that, and as I mentioned before, some developers may be giving their honest opinion but they may just be poor coders and giving misinformation due to ignorance rather than outright lying. But the article is one predominantly based on developer opinion. What's wrong with that? They clearly state it and clearly show quotes. The fact that the author also puts in commentary and analysis is common in most articles. You'd have to be an idiot not to understand that when reading.

One other thing to remember is that specs can change before release. When information is leaked from sources, they may actually be true at the time of writing, so many of these rumour articles may actually have had more truth to them at one time or another.

Btw... who on Earth said Wii was more powerful than 360?

You're basically discrediting the anonymous source with no proof. Why exactly would they create such an article with lies? And no, if I know Nintendo right, we won't be getting tech specs come September.

And, like Scoobes said above, this is what the majority of articles and rumors has pointed at before. It's not like this is something of a new revelation. You can be in denial all you want, but I just hope you won't be in denial after we get the confirmation.

To me it looks like you want to believe the Wii U isn't powerful because it's the Wii U.

Read this article posted way back talking about the old days and some of the rumors of the day. 

http://www.wiinside.blogspot.com/2009/04/top-ten-things-wii-thought-wii-would.html

Yea, rumors were pretty out there.

We had people confirming bunch of bs. I suggest you go through the articles if you want to know some of the other rumors. 

"They're quoting developers and saying that according to these guys, this is what the WiiU specs should be. I'm not sure what's wrong with that or people using this as a preliminary specification until the WiiU comes out and someone actually has a peek at its innards. Note how the specs are still fairly vague and developer comments vary somewhat. They've not outright specified the full spec sheet in any detail other then there will be 1Gb of RAM available solely for games."

I believe you are reading inbetween the lines. The paragraph was to get the readers to read the rest of the article and build intrest.Kinda like this " How powerful is the Xbox 720? Well we ask the developer the questions and here is the answer!" The first sentence is just a pull in which isn't wrong because that's how you write an article say here is the answer or "Here's what they told us." that isn't saying we are guessing this still us facts. When they tell these developers told them there telling you this fact from the developer. Developers who have this aren't guess the specs if you have it that doesn't even make sense. Do you guess what the PC specs are once you get the BOX and manuel? No, if this was true this would be 100 percent fact not some guess. To say this is them just guessing is to outright ignore context clues and logic. It is either a fact or bs no inbetween.

Yep, I'm reading between the lines. That's pretty much what you have to do with articles like these; use previous information and combine it with the information in the article to come up with a more logical conclusion. The developers don't have to give all the information and all the specs and I strongly suspect that the specs are based off of a lot of roundabout questions that eventually give the vague specs above. If you outright ask a dev for the specs, they won't give them to you. There's only so much you can get away with under NDA even if you're an anonymous source.

"Here's what they told us."

Again no avoiding this statement one telling you this coming straight from a developer telling the facts. So they are either lying or telling the truth. Anonymous sources  are fake.

No, that's saying that these comments are based on the developers experiences. Considerring the architecture is new and fairly complex, developers experiences are going to differ. Like I said, I doubt any dev would outright give you the specs whilst under NDA as they probably like their job. Saying it has 3 usable cores, or an AMD 7 series GPU architecture or that games are currently using 1Gb of RAM are vague enough. They may even up the amount of RAM available; it could be a conservative cap set by Nintendo. Or it could be that other resources genuinely mean they can only use 1Gb RAM.

"As for some of the other websites you've mentioned, Kotaku is a blog site and is the video gaming equivalent of a tabloid. EuroGamer and GamesIndustry.biz on the other hand are also used for networking by a wide range of professionals in the industry, so their sources are more likely to be credible."

Nintendo's upcoming Wii U console may generate full HD graphics, but it's not up to the graphics power of the Xbox 360 or the PS3, [according to developers] familiar with the hardware who spoke on a condition of [anonymity] to [GamesIndustry International.] <- Sounds important and big adds legitness. ( probably 15 people who barely make a thousand a month)

"No, it's not up to the same level as the PS3 or the 360," said one developer who's been working with the Wii U. What does that mean? "The graphics are just not as powerful," reiterated the source.

This developer is not alone in their opinion. Another developer at a [major company] confirmed this point of view. "Yeah, that's true. It doesn't produce graphics as well as the PS3 or the 360," said the source. "There aren't as many shaders, it's not as capable. Sure, some things are better, mostly as a result of it being a more modern design. But overall the Wii U just can't quite keep up."

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-04-02-wii-u-less-powerful-than-ps3-xbox-360-developers-say

F*ck guess the Wii-U isn't even on the level of ps3 and xbox360. 

That's some creatiable sources right there! Let's not give news to WASHINGTON POST let's get it to a site which barely hit's 20,000 hits per day PROBABLY. Because we developers like to waste time on that site and so we could potenially fired over! 

They wouldn't get fired over their comments as they're not giving anything away, just an opinion (yes, it's an opinion, look at the thread about last gens consoles' power and Gamecube vs X-box fow how widely developers opinions on consoles can vary) and they're far more likely to accidentally spill to GamesIndustry.biz staff than Washington Post because it doubles as a networking site for industry professionals. For instance, I just clicked a random article with 15 comments: 8 from game developers (programmers, artists, mobil app devs), a couple of lecturers/university staff, a few from students, 1 consultant and 1 video games website guy. Must be pretty easy to accidentally spill info at a networking event (especially if these events have alcohol available... which is also a way exagerated info can leak out)

You're also ignoring the effect the SDK version may have on developers comments. Whilst the hardware is revised into its final form, the SDK versions can vary wildly. These comments could be based off of a much older SDK. Or they could be a developer struggling to get both the main screen and tablet to display as much as they want. It all depends on what the developer wants to acheive, the type of game they're programming and how intelligently their code written.

The article even mentions dev kits:

"The Wii U's true power has been shrouded in mystery ever since it was announced, with developers working on launch titles gagged by strict non-disclosure agreements and ever shifting development kits. Now, though, as we near launch, final kits are in the wild. And, crucially, developers Eurogamer spoke to as part of a wide-ranging investigation into the innards of the Wii U now have final specifications."

" Not 100%, you can never gaurantee that, and as I mentioned before, some developers may be giving their honest opinion but they may just be poor coders and giving misinformation due to ignorance rather than outright lying."

Forget the years of school this guys have. Forget the ability to read manual. Forget that all you need to do is just open it up and know everything in like hour. Forget that these people have nintendo number. Forget that these people could simply show someone that knows what everything in the system is. Come on. Poor coder buying a 10,000 develope kit?  Toko makes phone games basically and even they know everything but the controller.

I was talking specifically about the general comments mentioned in the article (and other articles like the GI one), not the specs. As I mentioned above, I very much doubt any dev gave outright specs. They're inferring based on a collections of interviews and comments hence the "wide-ranging investigation" and the very vague nature of the specs. And the controller is actually one of the most important factors. Porting a game to WiiU means utilising the WiiU screen in a meaningful way. Streaming and allocating resources (or rather, deciding what resources to allocate) to the second screen is likely the hardest aspect of creating or porting a WiiU game.

I think you give developers far too much credit. It doesn't matter how much money you can spend on a dev kit. Developers abilities vary greatly. For example, look at the Orange Box port on PS3 done by EA (arguably the biggest game company in the world). Lots of slowdown and didn't make any use of the extra SPEs on the Cell Processor. Or how about Bethesda (massive dev) with Skyrim on PS3? 

"But the article is one predominantly based on developer opinion. What's wrong with that? They clearly state it and clearly show quotes. The fact that the author also puts in commentary and analysis is common in most articles. You'd have to be an idiot not to understand that when reading."

Now the quotes!

"The Wii U versions of multi-platform games shown to the public have done little to fill Nintendo fans with confidence. The Wii U version of Batman: Arkham City looks poor in comparison to the PS3 and Xbox 360 versions, and the less said about Ninja Gaiden 3 on Wii U the better."

Oh yea competely stated as an opinion.

That wasn't in quotes and therefore wasn't a developers opinion, nor was it presented in that way. This is, therefore the article's author putting their own spin. Break this down and it actually does represent the author's opinions too. How is Batman Arkham City poor in comparison to the other versions? It looking poor is the author's opinion. Digital Foundry (same website group ironically) have their own analysis and have shown its... different; better in many ways (higher res textures), worse in some (middle draw distance for instance).

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-wiiu-e3-2012

Another thing to point out is the demo used FXAA which can blur textures. This can result in it looking worse even though you have more complex textures and effects in place. For instance, on PC, the default AA mode of Mass Effect 3 blurs the textures making it look worse in texture resolution and details then ME2. Force a different mode of AA and the textures resolve perfectly. So yes, if you actually read the quote instead of taking it purely at face value, this sounds completely like the author's opinion (and not developer opinion).

"The Wii U's graphics processing unit [is] a custom AMD 7 series GPU. Clock speed and pipelines were not disclosed, but [we do know] it supports DirectX 10 and shader 4 type features. We also [know] that eDRAM is embedded in the GPU custom chip in a similar way to the Wii."

As I said, it's still very vague and the article presents this as being inferred from multiple developer comments. It's very much a case of "here's what we think we've learnt from talking to some devs who have the final SDK".

Stated as opinons!

Want more quotes or did I rest the issue?

"One other thing to remember is that specs can change before release. When information is leaked from sources, they may actually be true at the time of writing, so many of these rumour articles may actually have had more truth to them at one time or another."

To tell you truth I believe they are just guessing and random hoping they come close. They do this everytime a console comes out with no specs reveals. Wrong 90 perecent of the time.

April: Weaker than Ps3 and Xbox360 confirmed. Quad core

Early SDK? Everything I've heard suggests the SDKs varied wildly.

June: Ram will be 2 gb for retail. THe Wii-U gamepad  power  will be on a core. Quad Core (on par with 360/ps3)

Possibly a case of early SDK again. If I remember rightly though, these were inferred from the dev kit specs rather than devs.

July: Ram is 1.5 gb. Wii-U Gamepad power will be on GPU and CPU shared. Three Core (WAY MORE POWERFUL)

The 1.5Gb RAM is what I've been reading since June, again, inferred from dev kits. I don't remember any dev actually stating RAM usage.

Augest: Ram 1. Gamepad will power will be on the ram. Three Core. (barely stronger)

They say 1Gb available purely for games (so it seems likely to be higher overall) and as for the CPU they only say its clocked slower than PS3 and 360 CPUs. This doesn't necssarily mean it's overall slower as other posters have pointed out and this close to release, we can assume the SDK is the final version.

There is no constantly unless you think they weaken it some months and higher others.

Every month someone has revealed the specs. Which contradict another reveal.

Every month some anonymous person is stating the opposite of a real developer.

Every month the ram has gone down and people keep lower the specs or adding stuff that makes no sense.

http://www.nintengen.com/2012/07/wii-u-confirmed-specs-from-sdk-gpu-info.html

We went from Direct 11 to Direct 10

In one month picture that in one months rumors are telling us direct 11 is going to happen to 10.1x?  Yup shows how these rumors are totally close to get other.

Wewent from Direct 11x being CONFIRMED to Direct 10x being confirmed. So, we are to believe Nintendo downgraded there system in one month but has a better GPU then previously? Dafaq?

These guys where caught with their pants down just two weeks ago

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=146610