Too bad ninja blade keeps changing the rules to our bet. I would of won our bet already with need for speed.

Wow.....6 years later and this......what are we praising? the fact that the WiiU has caught up?

Congratz I guess :/

Judging by those screen shots, i would say the WiiU hasnt just caught up, its overtaken :/

Its a port that has been based on high end PC specs instead of inferior PS360 hardware..seems pretty next gen to me. Cant wait to see a game for WiiU thats been built from the ground up (X - Monolith soft)

If the framerate holds up, (and it probably will, according to Joystiq it actually played smoother than on PS360. Plus, Criterion have a pretty good rep when it comes to technical polish) then this will be the first real showcase for the Wii U's capabilities.

This is the difference between a sloppy rush-job port (like Black Ops 2, Arkham City, etc) and one with actual effort put in.

Don't let him. He's just trying to weasel out of a bet because he realizes he's made a dumb call. Put your foot down and make him admit he's wrong.

You know, every time I read about 'sloppy port' about Black Ops 2, I feel amazed... I have this game on a WiiU and X360 and I must say, that:
1. WiiU graphics is better. I don't trust 'Lens of tryth' reports, and for me WiiU version runs smoother (i think that is because of zero screen tearing).

2. Off-screen/split screen  play on WiiU tablet is awesome.

3. Wii Remote control is a big advantage for those who now how to deal with it...

4. No hackers yet on WiiU.

5. Not much of 'babies' online.

Only disadvantages i see on WiiU version is not so big quantity of players online and that we still heard nothing on Revolution DLC.
Also people who actually played AC3 and Batman like it more than x360/PS3 versions...

As a whole I actually consider Black Ops 2 Wii U superior to the PS3/360 versions thanks to Wiimote support (which obliterates dual analogue) and the Gamepad.

By "sloppy" I was referring to the fact that it doesn't seem to leaverage the Wii U's graphical muscle compared to Need for Speed.

1) The Wii U version looks considerably better if these screens are accurate.

2) If this is what devs can get out of the consoles after 3 months of dev time games will look really good in the future. Look at the latest Pikmin 3 video, that will be the first game to show the power of the console.

I guess most people didn't seriously expect a huge leap from current gen. That's not what Nintendo does. Since Gamecube times they've always developed their consoles to be efficient and low power and used highly optimized hardware. That's just the way Nintendo is: They won't give us huge specs but nice real world performance. Not on the level of Sony or Microsoft but the end results will look really good.

One thing we shouldn't forget is that most launch games were probably developed on work-in-progress dev kits, in a really short time and without much man power. Usually there's that one game that really shows the new console is more powerful than current hardware (Mario 64, Rogue Squadron, Soul Calibur, Kameo, etc.) just this time Nintendo decided to go with a non-effort 2D Mario game (which could've looked so much better, really).

Yeah, there hasn't been a single Wii U game so far that's been built from the ground up by a technically proficient team to be graphically intensive.

Once there is, we'll have a better idea of what the system can do.

What about Pikmin 3 makes it a graphical showcase? I mean, it's a pretty game, with some very attractive character shaders and a nicely vibrant art style, but it doesn't leap out at me as being more technically advanced than Need for Speed or Trine 2, or Halo 4 / Uncharted 3.

While it doesn't account for a vast amount of the difference, the second screenshot isn't really a good, or fair comparison, as the 360 version has a fixed DOF during the panning of that scene, where as the DOF 'snaps' in on the wiiu version, compare the moment between the DOF snap in :
It's worth noting the video for the 360 version uses a shorter clip of the alley pan, which unfortunately clips off the distance blur in favor of the distance focus, so essentially you're comparing two screenshots with different DOF parameters, hence why the 360 versions sharper in the distance.

I'm not disagreeing that the WiiU version is better graphically, since it's using higher resolution textures due to higher video memory availability, but I do feel it's a bit cheap to compare things with such drastic differences in game engine parameters, because it doesn't fairly represent the game properly.

tl;dr, WiiU version is better but that comparison is unfairly set up.