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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - 720 will Decide if WiiU RAM is enough.

Mazty on 17 April 2013
happydolphin said:
hinch said:

The thing is.. a lot of people were impressed by the demonstation Sony did in February. Gamers were talking about it online and it made so much hype that it was on featured on a lot of newpapers around the world. The Wii U on the other hand did not impress a lot of gamers which is the probably why people don't really talk about how good the graphics are or how good the controller is for it.

If you took an average gamer, who is not so informed about the latest gaming news (like my brother for example). Who owns a PS3 or 360 and showed them a Wii U game.. they would probably would not be that impressed by it because it's nothing they haven't really seen before (from a technical standpoint). in fact, if you put the consoles side by side comparison  and didn't show them the controller, I'd bet they they wouldn't be able tell the difference between them.

But, if you showed them clips of of the stuff for the PS4 presentation. They'd absolutely be able to telll the difference. My brother was absolutely blown away by the PS4 and he's not really into graphics.

Do you truly believe that the amount of excitement from preople at the Sony conference is an indicator of the impressiveness of the graphics?

I am pretty sure people will be very impressed by TLoU, yet still the U is unimpressive.

I will tell you this, I watched the Sony conference, but I was mostly impressed because of Sony's emphasis on games. Yes, the Killzone video was impressive, but I would bet a lot of money that it could easily be downscaled to a WiiU, even a PS3, and still be impressive visually.

The draw-distances and colors were amazing, so was the detail, but I'm pretty sure that most of that would still be very impressive if downscaled.

In other words, diminishing returns is the key word here.

Lol no. Just no. 

TLoU is not next-gen graphics. Shadowfall clearly was and in no way could it be scaled down reasonably. The power in the PS4 is a league above the existing consoles according to the Digital Foundry guys, and that was quite clear at the conferance. 
Diminishing returns according to whom? Only if the game sells less, and then you may still make a profit so what's the problem? With how easy games are becoming to make, there is no reason why games have to be more expensive to look better, or take more time. 



Around the Network
happydolphin on 17 April 2013
Mazty said:

Lol no. Just no. 

TLoU is not next-gen graphics. Shadowfall clearly was and in no way could it be scaled down reasonably. The power in the PS4 is a league above the existing consoles according to the Digital Foundry guys, and that was quite clear at the conferance. 
Diminishing returns according to whom? Only if the game sells less, and then you may still make a profit so what's the problem? With how easy games are becoming to make, there is no reason why games have to be more expensive to look better, or take more time. 

Your word against mine, once again. You will see that by next gen we will not need next gen consoles, because the specs will yield little extra detail that is visible to the eye. Here is a great pic from RicardJulianti's article, and judge for yourself:



FrancisNobleman on 17 April 2013

PSvita ammount of ram decided if 3DS's was enough too...

oh wait.



hinch on 17 April 2013
happydolphin said:

Do you truly believe that the amount of excitement from preople at the Sony conference is an indicator of the impressiveness of the graphics?

I am pretty sure people will be very impressed by TLoU, yet still the U is unimpressive.

I will tell you this, I watched the Sony conference, but I was mostly impressed because of Sony's emphasis on games. Yes, the Killzone video was impressive, but I would bet a lot of money that it could easily be downscaled to a WiiU, even a PS3, and still be impressive visually.

The draw-distances and colors were amazing, so was the detail, but I'm pretty sure that most of that would still be very impressive if downscaled.

In other words, diminishing returns is the key word here. (You were talking about getting off a high-horse right?)

Pemalite comes into almost every PS4 thread and bashes the "low end CPU", when he hasn't even seen the console run a complete game on it and calls for console makers to make super high end pieces of tech.. its called being realistic. I am not trying to downplay the Wii U or anything, but at the same time you can't say that Wii U is a massive leap from current gen in terms of hardware.

All I'm saying is that people will see the difference for the PS4/720 (although less of a visual leap from last gen) people WILL be able to tell the difference. So no.. the point of dimishing returns is not here, yet.



happydolphin on 17 April 2013
hinch said:

Pemalite comes into almost every PS4 thread and bashes the "low end CPU", when he hasn't even seen a console run a complete game on it and calls for console maker to make super high end pieces of tech.. its called being realistic. I am not trying to downplay the Wii U or anything, but at the same time you can't say that Wii U is a massive leap from current gen in terms of hardware.

All I'm saying is that people will see the difference for the PS4/720 (although less of a visual leap from last gen) people WILL be able to tell the difference. So no.. the point of dimishing returns is not here, yet.

Then we agree, people will be able to tell the difference but it will not be a horrible difference like it was for Wii vs PS360 (SD vs HD).

The U is HD and will offer a lot of detail, though not as much as the PS4/720 it will still be reasonable due to diminishing returns. Even if the gap between Wii and PS360 is smaller than the gap between U and PS4/720, the point of diminishing returns is approaching and so the gap is reduced in its impact.

I agree this is speculative, but so are a lot of the posts here. We all saw the U's graphics, we all saw the Killzone demo, and I can tell you that I'm pretty sure it will be downscalable to U-like graphics without unplayable differences. In other words, it will still look very nice, just not nearly as nice as on the more powerful consoles (which come at their price).

You were talking about getting off a high-horse, so we're kind of debating diamonds versus diamonds here.



Around the Network
Mazty on 17 April 2013
happydolphin said:
Mazty said:

Lol no. Just no. 

TLoU is not next-gen graphics. Shadowfall clearly was and in no way could it be scaled down reasonably. The power in the PS4 is a league above the existing consoles according to the Digital Foundry guys, and that was quite clear at the conferance. 
Diminishing returns according to whom? Only if the game sells less, and then you may still make a profit so what's the problem? With how easy games are becoming to make, there is no reason why games have to be more expensive to look better, or take more time. 

Your word against mine, once again. You will see that by next gen we will not need next gen consoles, because the specs will yield little extra detail that is visible to the eye. Here is a great pic from RicardJulianti's article, and judge for yourself:

Lololol. Go play a high spec game on the PC and tell me you can't see the difference. Go on. Tell me Crysis 3 or Metro 2033 on PC look exactly the same as on consoles or that no one noticed the improved graphics for the Quantic Dreams demo. Lol didn't think so ;)



happydolphin on 17 April 2013
Mazty said:

Lololol. Go play a high spec game on the PC and tell me you can't see the difference. Go on. Tell me Crysis 3 or Metro 2033 on PC look exactly the same as on consoles or that no one noticed the improved graphics for the Quantic Dreams demo. Lol didn't think so ;)

The difference will be nice, but I am already impressed by Uncharted to be honest. Seriously the demands for high-end graphics is really taken out of proportion by the market.

However, the most I've seen of high-end PC grahpics are from the PC threads and such because I can't justify to pay for that. With the PC I have right now I'm enjoying games like Torchlight II and League of Legends, which look great in my eyes. 

If games looked like TLoU, TLG, Max Payne 3 from here on out I would have almost no problem with that. Until I see more I really am not convinced it is so important anymore (again diminishing returns).



Netyaroze on 17 April 2013
happydolphin said:

Your word against mine, once again. You will see that by next gen we will not need next gen consoles, because the specs will yield little extra detail that is visible to the eye. Here is a great pic from RicardJulianti's article, and judge for yourself:



 

You reduce the problem of diminishing returns to just 2 points and use polygons and this pointless resolution graph.

 

I am not going to argue that diminishing returns don't exist but we are still far away from the point where we can't see the difference.

 

Your first example with the polygon models might be right but graphics  today are not lacking because of the polygon count.  Lighting stuff like the UE4 once had (SVOGI) but now can't because the power is not there.physic models like Laras Hair. Graphics evolved long ago from just polygon complexity. See the old UE4 presentation and the new one where they took out SVOGI. The difference is massive despite Polycount not changing, I really see no diminishing returns overall being a factor yet. Polygone models show not much improvments nowadays but throw 10 times the power at other stuff not polygons and the graphical improvments are massive.

 

Your second example well. The graph is pointless. Ever saw a 4k TV ? I already can't see the Pixels on a 720p TV from a distance but a 1080p TV just looks better and a 4k TV even better.The graph aims at the distance where you can't see the Pixels anymore but the picture still looks sharper even if you sit too far away.

 

Look at a Macbook with the 4k Display from a distance do the same with a 1080p Book and see for yourself if 4k doesn't make a difference.

 

The chart is really not accurate.

. 



happydolphin on 17 April 2013
Netyaroze said:

You simplify the problem of diminisging returns and use polygons and this pointless resolution graph.

 

I am not going to argue that diminishing returns don't exist but we are still far away from the point where we can't see the difference.

 

Your first example with the polygon models might be right but graphics  today are not lacking because of the polygon count.  Lighting stuff like the UE4 once had (SVOGI) but now can't because the power is not there.physic models like Laras Hair. Graphics evolved long ago from just polygon complexity. See the old UE4 presentation and the new one where they took out SVOGI. The difference is massive despite Polycount not changing, I really see no diminishing returns overall being a factor yet. Polygone models show not much improvments nowadays but throw 10 times the power at other stuff not polygons and the graphical improvments are massive.

 

Your second example well. The graph is pointless. Ever saw a 4k TV ? I already can't see the Pixels on a 720p TV from a distance but a 1080p TV just looks better and a 4k TV even better.The graph aims at the distance where you can't see the Pixels anymore but the picture still looks sharper even if you sit too far away.

 

Look at a Macbook with the 4k Display from a distance do the same with a 1080p Book and see for yourself if 4k doesn't make a difference.

 

The chart is really not accurate..

Who owns a 4k TV, and who will? Again, diminishing returns. Of course the retina display on the macbook looks great, and it is tantalizing, but it isn't something that I would pay for. It's eye candy, that's all.

When it comes to 1080p versus 720p, there is a difference but it isn't going to ruin the experience unless you're seeking that quality. And most people who buy games buy games for the games, and sometimes the eye candy but not something that would make you go "Damn, I wish I had this or that console it would look so much nicer". With COD Wii, yes it does feel like that. But now with the differences you're talking about "SVOGI" I don't even think I know what that is nor would I probably notice it.

It all boils down to how high expectations are. Also, were it not for subsidizing, this whole loss-leading approach would go nowhere because it would required low success early on (like for the PS3). Otherwise they would just lose too much money.

Also if people care this much about graphics, why not just become a high-end PC gamer? That's what confuses me about all this, so many double-standards.



S.T.A.G.E. on 17 April 2013
Pemalite said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:


 The PS4 is impressive....for a console. No one asked for anymore than for a well made console that could push tech in the next generation. I am not talking about a customizable PC, but rather a console that is powerful enoguh to enjoy great games that have high expectations.


No. The PS4 isn't impressive, to say otherwise is just being silly or bordering on fanaticism.
It's got a low-end processor to the point you can't get much slower in the x86 world and a mid-range graphics chip.

At-least when the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 launched they had high-end hardware relative to high-end PC's, this time around? Not so much, more or less mid-range or lower in components.
Mind you, we are yet to see what the Xbox 720 has to offer, might end up being a bit quicker than the PS4. (Although the reverse could be true.)

Don't care, as i said its impressive for consoles because the tech demos they showed at Sonys unveiling have not been at our reach all gen. Cannot wait for the games and to see what the 720 has to offer. As long as Rains at Epic is happy with it so am I have I know some well made games are going to be made. PC gaming is at a halt because of console gaming with major releases and third party need consoles to step it up because they need their sales. Sony has given them the specs they need for next gen consoles (enough to still be affordable and run highly scaled games compared to last gen).