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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Digital Foundry Face-Off: Batman: Arkham City Armored Edition on Wii U

happydolphin on 27 November 2012
kitler53 said:

A) porting to wiiU isn't as straight forward as previously implied

B) optimization = $  and therefore not as cheap to port as previously implied

C) and finally...if wiiU's processor is slow compared to ps360 how will it compare to MSony's next gen?  you can only optimize so much before things aren't technically feasible anymore or too cost prohibative to do so.  bottom line: i expect a lot of "lazy dev" threads in our future.

A) Straight forward probably isn't the right term. It probably took them no time to make the straight port. Did you mean optimizing a port isn't straightforward? I think that goes without saying.

B) Obviously, but we didn't need the data to know that. What we do learn though is that the straight port doesn't yield parity like we expected.

C) The GPGPU should solve that problem. As for lazy devs, that is a very complex topic. Is it a good thing or a bad thing, if it is bad, who is to blame. That is more interesting that just posting "lazy dev" threads, as that would mean we would have a better idea as to who's doing a disfavor to the industry (devs and gamers) or to the platform owner (Nintendo).



Around the Network
Train wreck on 27 November 2012
happydolphin said:
Train wreck said:

Why are more players needed.  Did most nintendo fans laugh at online multiplayer during the golden era of the wii?  Why the change?

What are you going on about TW? Silly goose.

The Wii had online play, Brawl was touted as being the big online game for the Wii (despite underdelivering). I don't think anyone was laughing. More online players has always been desired by Nintendo fans.

I could have sworn that during 2008-2010 we would have threads about PS360 games and their main selling feature being online multiplayer and how the Wii crowd could belittle it; saying that local multiplayer was the perference of the many of Nintendo fans, evident by sales of games that focused heavily on local multiplayer compared to those that did not.



Chandler on 27 November 2012
ethomaz said:

Another bad port...

The memory and CPU speed issues on Wii U is showing your face... I just expect that first-party and exclusives games uses the eDRAM to try to avoid theses issues.

For now...

BOPS 2 = HD won
ME3 = HD won
B: AC = HD won


ME3 and BlOps 2 are overall better on Wii U than on PS3. I like how you conveniently mesh xbox and ps3 together as "HD" even though the PS3 versions are always way below what the xbox offers.

 

Arkham City is the only game so far that I would count as completely inferior to the other versions, which is a shame but luckily I chose Darksiders at Gamestop and not this turd.



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.

happydolphin on 27 November 2012
Train wreck said:

I could have sworn that during 2008-2010 we would have threads about PS360 games and their main selling feature being online multiplayer and how the Wii crowd could belittle it; saying that local multiplayer was the perference of the many of Nintendo fans, evident by sales of games that focused heavily on local multiplayer compared to those that did not.

If they did then that's their problem. Local multiplayers is very important, but so is online play. PCs have been doing it for much longer than consoles, so I don't see why it's become a console topic for them suddenly. Whether on consoles or not, online play is a good thing. As for comparing it to local multiplayer in terms of value to the customer or to them, that's a different story. But to belittle online play as a feature, that's just dumb.



kitler53 on 27 November 2012
happydolphin said:
kitler53 said:

A) porting to wiiU isn't as straight forward as previously implied

B) optimization = $  and therefore not as cheap to port as previously implied

C) and finally...if wiiU's processor is slow compared to ps360 how will it compare to MSony's next gen?  you can only optimize so much before things aren't technically feasible anymore or too cost prohibative to do so.  bottom line: i expect a lot of "lazy dev" threads in our future.

A) Straight forward probably isn't the right term. It probably took them no time to make the straight port. Did you mean optimizing a port isn't straightforward? I think that goes without saying.

B) Obviously, but we didn't need the data to know that. What we do learn though is that the straight port doesn't yield parity like we expected.

C) The GPGPU should solve that problem. As for lazy devs, that is a very complex topic. Is it a good thing or a bad thing, if it is bad, who is to blame. That is more interesting that just posting "lazy dev" threads, as that would mean we would have a better idea as to who's doing a disfavor to the industry (devs and gamers) or to the platform owner (Nintendo).

well to A) and B) i'm calling out the threads we had there about certain games getting up and running in like 2 days time with 2 developers being the sign that all third party game will come to nintendo because they'd be stupid not to make free money and obviously the only reason any game doesn't come or aren't vastly technically superiour in every way is that EA/Activision/Ect all hate nintendo are are trying sabatoge nintendo.  those threads are .. unrealistic.

nintendo made  their console budgeting a good amount of your $300 to the gamepad taking away money that could have been for raw power.  that's not a good or bad thing, that's just the reality.  wiiU is innovation via the controller not innovation via more complex software.  it is a pet peive of mine to see thread after thread insulting developers for having technical issues with hardware.  i had to suffer through bad ports or avoid entirely plenty of games for ps3 due to it's exotic cell structure.  that's not developers fault .. that's sony's.  nintendo shares the same blame/praise for the hardware that they develop too.



Around the Network
happydolphin on 27 November 2012
kitler53 said:

well to A) and B) i'm calling out the threads we had there about certain games getting up and running in like 2 days time with 2 developers being the sign that all third party game will come to nintendo because they'd be stupid not to make free money and obviously the only reason any game doesn't come or aren't vastly technically superiour in every way is that EA/Activision/Ect all hate nintendo are are trying sabatoge nintendo.  those threads are .. unrealistic.

As I said, I agree that "we learn that the straight port doesn't yield parity like we expected."

I agree that we were wrong to think that, it doesn't take an ace to figure that one out. I guess we were hoping it would be that way, and business-wise we made sense. It looks like the GPGPU solution, as clever as it may be, doesn't make that a reality.

nintendo made  their console budgeting a good amount of your $300 to the gamepad taking away money that could have been for raw power.  that's not a good or bad thing, that's just the reality.  wiiU is innovation via the controller not innovation via more complex software.  it is a pet peive of mine to see thread after thread insulting developers for having technical issues with hardware.  i had to suffer through bad ports or avoid entirely plenty of games for ps3 due to it's exotic cell structure.  that's not developers fault .. that's sony's.  nintendo shares the same blame/praise for the hardware that they develop too.

Okay, so like I said this is a complex topic on which I haven't stated my opinion yet.

It's true that 3rd parties can't be at fault for not achieving parity with minimal effort, that's on Nintendo. As for not optimizing at all, it's their choice, at least they put in budget to offer other value adds (like the B.A.T. mode for example).

You have to realize that not everyone is reasonable, but the onus is on you to find the way to explain it to them.



darkknightkryta on 27 November 2012
dahuman said:

They will have to, and they are prolly already doing it with Square's and Konami's new engines and there will be UE4 engine ports as well. Nintendo is pretty much dominating Japan, unless JP devs just don't want to make money in their own country. Not to mention this is not a Wii Situation where the architecture is just that far apart from the 360 and PS3 stand point regarding on the GPU situation. I don't know what the western publishers will do though, we have some really dumb people running those companies, but I'm pretty sure the devs are at least incorporating some Wii U support into their engines.

Also you are forgetting the Unity Engine and the type of Indie support that'd bring since the eShop is actually pretty good on top of possible retail release since that engine is constantly improving as well.

This has been the problem all gen long....



M.U.G.E.N on 27 November 2012

Can anyone remember when exactly they announced this game for the wiiu?



In-Kat-We-Trust Brigade!

"This world is Merciless, and it's also very beautiful"

For All News/Info related to the PlayStation Vita, Come and join us in the Official PSV Thread!

kitler53 on 27 November 2012
happydolphin said:
kitler53 said:

well to A) and B) i'm calling out the threads we had there about certain games getting up and running in like 2 days time with 2 developers being the sign that all third party game will come to nintendo because they'd be stupid not to make free money and obviously the only reason any game doesn't come or aren't vastly technically superiour in every way is that EA/Activision/Ect all hate nintendo are are trying sabatoge nintendo.  those threads are .. unrealistic.

As I said, I agree that "we learn that the straight port doesn't yield parity like we expected."

I agree that we were wrong to think that, it doesn't take an ace to figure that one out. I guess we were hoping it would be that way, and business-wise we made sense. It looks like the GPGPU solution, as clever as it may be, doesn't make that a reality.

nintendo made  their console budgeting a good amount of your $300 to the gamepad taking away money that could have been for raw power.  that's not a good or bad thing, that's just the reality.  wiiU is innovation via the controller not innovation via more complex software.  it is a pet peive of mine to see thread after thread insulting developers for having technical issues with hardware.  i had to suffer through bad ports or avoid entirely plenty of games for ps3 due to it's exotic cell structure.  that's not developers fault .. that's sony's.  nintendo shares the same blame/praise for the hardware that they develop too.

Okay, so like I said this is a complex topic on which I haven't stated my opinion yet.

It's true that 3rd parties can't be at fault for not achieving parity with minimal effort, that's on Nintendo. As for not optimizing at all, it's their choice, at least they put in budget to offer other value adds (like the B.A.T. mode for example).

You have to realize that not everyone is reasonable, but the onus is on you to find the way to explain it to them.

well then i'll just have to agree to agree with you. ...because everything you said makes perfect sense; which makes it hard to argue.  :P



Asriel on 27 November 2012
keroncoward said:
Asriel said:
These performance checks are very useful for some people, but as an actual gage of what the Wii U can potentially do they're obviously off the ball. As an analysis of what it is currently being achieved in multi-format games (handed out to smaller, inexperienced developers) it tells us quite clearly the Wii U versions at launch aren't up to scratch.

Given we've 'known' for months that Wii U was in the same ballpark as current HD systems, given the historically weak third party support for Nintendo, the historical poor track record of third party ports in the launch window of consoles, I have to wonder why anyone is acting surprised or outraged at this point. Any developer struggles to optimise their game for day and date release on a new console, even if that console has similar architecture to existing consoles. They'll only find it more difficult to optimise when they're taking code they didn't even make themselves, as is the case with this game, and shifting it to a system they have no experience of developing for.

I'm more interested in Assassin's Creed 3 and Colonial Marines when it comes to a DF analysis, because those games come from companies that have very publicly, very often announced their support and positive experience with Wii U hardware. Gearbox love the Wii U hardware and Ubisoft have invested massively in the system, so we should expect strong results from those games. All the signs are that Ubisoft and Gearbox are actually optimising their multi-platform games for Wii U, meaning we should have a better picture of how Wii U can perform relative to 360 and PS3.

As it is, these comparisons and the outrage associated with them shouldn't matter too much in the long run. The real test of Wii U's capabilities, and the real test of its mass market potential, will lie in the exclusive software and services, which to all intents and purposes, are so far pretty decent. Like I said, these articles are useful for some people, but they aren't really indicative of what the Wii U can genuinely do, and I doubt they're going to change the opinion of anyone whose already dismissed or bought into Wii U--they're indicative of what third parties can do with late, low-priority ports in time for the launch window, and I have to ask, was anyone actually expecting a good result?


Im assuming you dont mean the Wii U is only as powerful as the PS3 and Xbox360. The Wii U has one attribute that everyone assume is weaker than current gen. Even if the CPU really is weaker than current gen CPU's its still superior. Dont get me wrong it will bottleneck if its true but it will still be a hell of a lot more capable.

Correct. By same ballpark I mean Wii U's baseline is current HD games after 6 years of optimisation on other formats, which isn't a bad baseline at all. It's still too soon to call how far beyond that Wii U can go, but I don't doubt it can go beyond that and I don't believe for one second this game is a good indication of how capable Wii U really is.