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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Black Ops 2 Launch Guide (Wii U 720p 60fps, 360/ps3 SUB-HD)

Lusche said:
so pc>wiiu>ps3=360 ?

will get it for the pc, but if I was console only I would most likely get the wiiu one, just to test how good the 'online' (community) is


If graphics is the most important thing PC will always have the advantage.  Even versus 720 and PS4.  A console gamer's premium option is with Wiiu right now.



Around the Network
Squilliam said:
The Wii U is designed to run games at 60FPS given that is Nintendo's target and this game also targets 60FPS. The game itself is quite a good match to what the Wii U is capable of. In the end however this all doesn't matter given the fact that the next gen consoles from Sony and Microsoft are considerably more powerful again.


More powerfull but will have nowhere near the same type of advantage as they had over the original wii.  The main benifit will come from the ability to have brilliant graphics and stable performance in stereo 3d but he wiiu will hang in there in 2d performance for the majority of Nintendo's 6 year lifecylce.



Nsanity said:
Lusche said:
so pc>wiiu>ps3=360 ?

will get it for the pc, but if I was console only I would most likely get the wiiu one, just to test how good the 'online' (community) is

How did you come to that conslusion?


Just a guess of mine ... multiplats on those are the same most of the time or if there is a difference then I can't notice them.



cunger said:
Squilliam said:
The Wii U is designed to run games at 60FPS given that is Nintendo's target and this game also targets 60FPS. The game itself is quite a good match to what the Wii U is capable of. In the end however this all doesn't matter given the fact that the next gen consoles from Sony and Microsoft are considerably more powerful again.


More powerfull but will have nowhere near the same type of advantage as they had over the original wii.  The main benifit will come from the ability to have brilliant graphics and stable performance in stereo 3d but he wiiu will hang in there in 2d performance for the majority of Nintendo's 6 year lifecylce.

The Wii U is more efficient than current generation consoles yes; however it isn't outright a performance beast. Having modern shaders and 32MB of embedded memory makes it a good fit for a game which targets 60FPS as these are simply extensions of the advantages the Xbox 360 GPU bought to the table which allowed it great performance next to the PS3. When the next generation of consoles from Sony and Microsoft are out noone will care about how the Wii U outperforms the Xbox 360 and PS3 for the same reason that the idea that the Wii was more powerful than the Xbox gained little traction, if you wanted the performance you're already looking elsewhere.

When the developers finally have to start tapping the GPU to make up for the lack of performance in the CPU which is absolutely tiny to run next generation titles, people will start calling them lazy. The performance isn't free, if you take it from rendering then you won't have nearly as pretty a picture as you'd expect.





Tease.

Squilliam said:

When the next generation of consoles from Sony and Microsoft are out noone will care about how the Wii U outperforms the Xbox 360 and PS3 

And the people didn't care that Xbox1 and Gamecube outperforms PS2.

 

Squilliam said:

When the developers finally have to start tapping the GPU to make up for the lack of performance in the CPU which is absolutely tiny to run next generation titles, people will start calling them lazy. The performance isn't free, if you take it from rendering then you won't have nearly as pretty a picture as you'd expect.

The CPU outperforms the Xbox360-CPU easily. But on top of that it will be assisted by the DSP-Unit that does all the Sound and Music processing which could easily take one 1/3 of CPU-Power in XBox360 games. On top of that you don't now how much power the PS4 and XBox3 CPUs will have. The APU10-CPU in PS4 not seem to be much more powerful than Wii U PowerPC-CPU at all.

Could be that Sony make the same mistake again they made with the Vita. The Vita tech specs sounds great on paper, but reality the graphical complex games like Uncharted or Liberation only use half screen resolution, because the Vita lacks the power.

Something to think about:

When testing our first code on Wii U we were amazed how much we could throw at it without any slowdowns, at that time we even had zero optimizations. The performance problem of hardware nowadays is not clock speed but ram latency. Fortunately Nintendo took great efforts to ensure developers can really work around that typical bottleneck on Wii U. They put a lot of thought on how CPU, GPU, caches and memory controllers work together to amplify your code speed. For instance, with only some tiny changes we were able to optimize certain heavy load parts of the rendering pipeline to 6x of the original speed, and that was even without using any of the extra cores.

Source: http://www.notenoughshaders.com/2012/11/03/shinen-mega-interview-harnessing-the-wii-u-power/



Around the Network
zarx said:
Viper1 said:

Actually, the rep said "Full HD".

The problem is he could have been using the word "full" simply as an adverb to emphasize the game would be in HD.  However, the term "Full HD" is the accepted marketing and industry terminology for 1920 x 1080 resolution.    If he meant the former, it was a poor choice of words due the the conflict with the industry term.

ah my my mistake. If you watch it back he kinda seems a bit flustered at tht point like he missed his prompt or something IMO. The fact that they later confirmed it was not 1080p pretty much confirms that his usage of "full HD" was not used in relation too native resolution, and was just refering to the fact that the game was outputting in HD for the first time on a Nintendo system.

Agreed.  I've not watched it again to look for any facial reactions during his speech but the admission of it not being native 1920 x 1080 confirms his intended use fo the world "full" prior to the word "HD".   But I wonder if he wrote his own segment or not.   If he did cringe when he said it, was it because someone else wrote it, he knew the terminology and how the statement would be perceived?

Either way, it was poorly worded.   Whether written that way or he adlibbed the moment.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Squilliam said:
cunger said:
Squilliam said:
The Wii U is designed to run games at 60FPS given that is Nintendo's target and this game also targets 60FPS. The game itself is quite a good match to what the Wii U is capable of. In the end however this all doesn't matter given the fact that the next gen consoles from Sony and Microsoft are considerably more powerful again.


More powerfull but will have nowhere near the same type of advantage as they had over the original wii.  The main benifit will come from the ability to have brilliant graphics and stable performance in stereo 3d but he wiiu will hang in there in 2d performance for the majority of Nintendo's 6 year lifecylce.

The Wii U is more efficient than current generation consoles yes; however it isn't outright a performance beast. Having modern shaders and 32MB of embedded memory makes it a good fit for a game which targets 60FPS as these are simply extensions of the advantages the Xbox 360 GPU bought to the table which allowed it great performance next to the PS3. When the next generation of consoles from Sony and Microsoft are out noone will care about how the Wii U outperforms the Xbox 360 and PS3 for the same reason that the idea that the Wii was more powerful than the Xbox gained little traction, if you wanted the performance you're already looking elsewhere.

When the developers finally have to start tapping the GPU to make up for the lack of performance in the CPU which is absolutely tiny to run next generation titles, people will start calling them lazy. The performance isn't free, if you take it from rendering then you won't have nearly as pretty a picture as you'd expect.

You may be overestimating the PS4 and X3ox.

The leap from PS3 to PS4 and 360 to X3ox will most likely be much smaller than the leap from PS2 to PS3 and the original Xbox to the 360, so the Wii U may not be left far behind.



o_O.Q said:
never in my life did i think that i'd start seeing graphics debates... over Call of Duty lol

Every new day brings new debates. Muahaha. 

Why is someone here comparing Call of Duty 2 sales to crappy Cally of Duty: Big Red One. 



curl-6 said:

You may be overestimating the PS4 and X3ox.

The leap from PS3 to PS4 and 360 to X3ox will most likely be much smaller than the leap from PS2 to PS3 and the original Xbox to the 360, so the Wii U may not be left far behind.

What's really funny is that many gamers assume that the Wii U will get destroyed/left behind/ignored...take your pick, by those other consoles a year or two from now when they launch yet would completely flip the tables if you stated that 2-3 years after that, Nintendo could very well launch a new console that blows them away.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

pezus said:
curl-6 said:
720p still beats sub-HD. (Not to mention the Wii U is also streaming a second screen at 480x854)
Also, the Wii U version isn't capped at 60fps like the 360/PS3 version.

That would be a negative point, not a positive one. And yes, I'd bet money on the Wii U version being capped at 60. Unless you think it's going to be capped at 30. 


I think you misunderstood him or he used the wrong words.

I think he meant ps360 capped = running at 0-60fps and no more than 60fps
And wiiu constant 60fps (not 59 and lower at any given time)