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

Forums - Nintendo - Could MK8, Bayo2 and X run on a PS3[60]

 

could they?

yes 280 32.52%
 
no 341 39.61%
 
maybe one of them could 124 14.40%
 
maybe two of them could 41 4.76%
 
see results 75 8.71%
 
Total:861
ninjablade on 25 June 2013
Player1x3 said:
curl-6 said:
Player1x3 said:
curl-6 said:
Player1x3 said:
curl-6 said:
Player1x3 said:

What the f does anything have to do with authority ? There are currently no U games that look better than the best of PS360. You can choose to believe whatever you want, that fact remains true.

That's an opinion, not a fact.

Go to GOW3 pics please 

I've seen them, I've played the game. It's still not a fact that "no U game looks better than the best of PS360", it's a subjective opinion. People prefer different things visually.

Graphics aren't subjective. Aesthetics are

If you want to talk pure tech, games like Need for Speed Most Wanted U, Nano Assault Neo, and Trine 2 Director's Cut have been confirmed by their developers to be beyond PS360 capabilities. Personally, I don't think they look  as good as, say, Uncharted 2 and 3, but hey, graphics aren't subjective, right?


Well I don't know how to compare a racing game and a 2D platformer to an action adventure, but GT6 utterly destroys Most Wanted on almost all fronts

I'm gonna repeat this again if those 3 games were on 360/ps3 nobody would claiming there the best looking games on those consoles, its just nintendo fans make claims about how there doing tech beyond 360/ps3 because the wiiu is a 2012 console.



Around the Network
curl-6 on 25 June 2013
ninjablade said:

I'm gonna repeat this again if those 3 games were on 360/ps3 nobody would claiming there the best looking games on those consoles, its just nintendo fans make claims about how there doing tech beyond 360/ps3 because the wiiu is a 2012 console.

What "looks better" is subjective. I don't think Wii U has a game that looks more visually impressive than Uncharted 2 or 3 yet, but I also recognize that what I find to look good doesn't necessarily correspond with what's technically at work. I may not think Most Wanted U looks better than everything on PS3/360, but I'm prepared to accept the word of technically competent developers referencing confirmed specs when they say the U's larger RAM meant they could push it beyond what PS360 are capable of.



oni-link on 26 June 2013
oni-link said:

 

oni-link said:
PS3:

vs. PS4 Infamous: Second Son.




how about this one:

PS4 Knack

 

vs

PS3 Puppeteer:

see a diffrence now bet PS3 and PS4?

For those using the GoW arguement it works the same for Second Son doesn't it? Knack especially looks "WEAK" when compared to PS3's Puppeteer.



oni-link on 26 June 2013

how about PS4 vs X360 game then?

X360

 

vs

PS4



ninjablade on 26 June 2013
oni-link said:
oni-link said:

 

oni-link said:
PS3:

vs. PS4 Infamous: Second Son.




how about this one:

PS4 Knack

 

vs

PS3 Puppeteer:

see a diffrence now bet PS3 and PS4?

For those using the GoW arguement it works the same for Second Son doesn't it? Knack especially looks "WEAK" when compared to PS3's Puppeteer.

it really doesn't work cause second son is running at 1080p and is open world and looks better then god of war 3, those pics are not fully hd by the way so they hide any flaws, the divison, the wichter 3 are also much better looking games running at 1080 and open world.



Around the Network
oni-link on 26 June 2013
ninjablade said:
oni-link said:
oni-link said:

 

oni-link said:
PS3:

vs. PS4 Infamous: Second Son.




how about this one:

PS4 Knack

 

vs

PS3 Puppeteer:

see a diffrence now bet PS3 and PS4?

For those using the GoW arguement it works the same for Second Son doesn't it? Knack especially looks "WEAK" when compared to PS3's Puppeteer.

it really doesn't work cause second son is running at 1080p and is open world and looks better then god of war 3, those pics are not fully hd by the way so they hide any flaws, the divison, the wichter 3 are also much better looking games running at 1080 and open world.


Excuses...excuses...show these pics to a normal joe and they say GoW murders those PS4 shots



ninjablade on 26 June 2013

oni-link said:
ninjablade said:
oni-link said:
oni-link said:

 

oni-link said:

this is how god of war 3 will look running on your set. please click open new tab to view in proper resolution, now these are open world games, and still look a good deal better then GOW3 which ihas the best graphics on any game this gen.



Player1x3 on 26 June 2013
oni-link said:

how about PS4 vs X360 game then?

X360

 

vs

PS4


Did you ignore my post on cartoonish graphics on purpose ?

 

Christ, you people are desperate...



Kaizar on 26 June 2013
Daisuke72 said:
Kaizar said:
danasider said:
curl-6 said:

Because generations aren't defined by graphical boundaries anymore. That idea's been obsolete for nearly a decade now.

Ok, so maybe with consoles the generations are now more clearly defined by release window.  So maybe WiiU is considered nextgen by some regardless of which console it graphically competes with.  But if that's the case, and WiiU is truly nextgen doesn't that make it worse that is is producing barely better graphics than 7/8 year old consoles?  If posters in this thread are trying to make a point that these 3 games are beyond the scope of PS360 and using marginally better graphics screenshots as proof, doesn't that weaken the point that WiiU will be competitive in graphics with regards to other nextgen CONSOLES(caps for people who bring in the PC argument when PC tech is not released in the cycles that consoles are and don't direclty compete with consoles in the market but coexist)?

Its like bragging that XenoBlade Chronicles looks way better than Final Fantasy XII.  Sure its got greater scale, prettier vistas and sharper graphics, but it pales in comparison to something like FFXIII, Ni No Kuni or Skyrim (on a technical level as I'm sure Xenoblade can hold its own in terms of artistic merit).  And if we're going by the sentiment that generations are defined by release windows instead of graphics, in the present day I'll want the game that looks best (if the gameplay is comparable).  I'm pretty sure that's why a lot of 3rd party devs are skipping the WiiU altogether.  Sure Nintendo will always be around because their first party offers franchises that can't be replicated on other consoles, but I just think that these three games won't amount to much as a case for graphical prowess when compared to similar offerings on consoles released within WiiU's release timeframe.  And even if WiiU is nextgen by some new standard, it LOOKS lastgen in comparison to what will be available in the coming months, because its so comparable to PS360 rather than PS4/XB1.  Just look at the posts on this thread for evidence!

So what's the point of asking whether these games can be done on PS360?  Are they supposed to be impressive?  If I'm going to switch from my current generation of consoles, the ultimate motivation will be what the next box can do that mine doesn't and WiiU just doesn't offer much variation despite its improved tech compared to a PS4 or XB1 (the former which is only $50 more).


What you have said about the Wii U can also be said about the PS4 & ONE.

Neither the Wii U nor PS4 nor ONE has showed us any 8th gen graphics by your standards Literally.

I understand that since the GameCube, it has been hard to see any need to brag about graphics anymore, but you can't ignore that the PS4 & ONE are currently in the same position as the Wii U right now, but all 3 of these will do much better graphics later on with the PS4 on top.

Graphics are more dependent on the GPU then everything else. All 3 have 800 MHz GPU, and the Wii U GPU has 1 GB of RAM that clocks it at 800 MHz and when it is clocked at 800 MHz it drains somewhere from 2 Hz to 5 Hz of power.

We recently found out that the 3DS GPU ( PICA200 ) is 400 MHz max clock frequency and only drains 0.5 Hz to 1 Hz of power and does 160Mtriangle/s while the PS Vita GPU can only do 140Mtriangle/s which explains more about 3rd Party support on Handheld Consoles during the 8th Gen. Plus the 3DS CPU ( Nintendo ARM11 ) is a 4-core CPU target up to 1 GHz that can be underclock as low as 350 MHz a core at the lowest possible, so both 8th Gen handhelds have 4-core 1 GHz CPUs.

Anyways all 3 8th Gen Home Consoles have 800 MHz GPUs which makes the PS4 & ONE real adavantage being a lot more RAM as well as much more CPU processing, but the Wii U can already do such open world as Lego City Undercover, so the Wii U can still do as much open world as most 8th Gen games will have (but still varying depending on what 3rd Party Devs will want to do with new games).

The point is the Wii U is clearly 8th Gen and can do what most 3rd party Devs want to do with 8th gen Home Console games. There won't be as many 8th gen games requiring more tech then the Wii U as you seem to be claiming. Even the 3DS has more shader cores then the PS3 & 360 despite the PS3 & 360 having more better textures & more polygons & more CPU then the 3DS. Plus the 3DS seems to have more open world then the PS3 & 360 but the 3DS does 240p graphics with less polygons with its 128 MB FCRAM which would explain Lego City Undercover the Chase Begins (3DS exclusive). So clealry the Wii U has more shader cores then even the 3DS which has more shader cores then the PS3 & 360.

The Wii U is 8th Gen. Plus the Wii U has a GPGPU which does every different gameplay mechanic, which leaves more processing power for the Wii U CPU, while the PS4 & ONE seem to use a APU which means one core or so will be use as a GPU at 800 MHz while the the other cores will be use as a CPU to do all the gameplay mechanics, so the only real edge I see is the extra cores & extra RAM which won't make the visuals look as much greater as it actually is as you been pointing out about the Wii U vs. PS360, well same goes for PS4/ONE vs. Wii U where you won't be seeing the kind of gap you thought you would despite the specs and functions being greater.

So prepare to be almost as disappointed when you see PS4 & ONE games compare to PS3 & 360 games despite the big gap in the rendering of the games graphics compared to each other.

It is 8th Gen technology, you just have to wait a few years per Home Consoles (i.e. Wii U & PS4 & ONE) to see it be as much of a gap as it is, and it still won't look that much more better then it actually is for all 3 8th Gen Home Consoles, at least by your standards.


Just because they're all clocked at 80MHZ doesn't mean they're in the same class, PS4 and Xbox One both have many more cores in them than the Wii U's GPU, which translates to better power. MHZ doesn't measure power at all, it measures the cores speed and nothing more, and the PS4 has 7GB of more RAM than Wii U for games, and Xbox One has 5GB for games, Indie games and Killzone: Shadowfall both use multiple GB's of RAM for textures alone, look at the Shadowfall breakdown, and Blow pretty much made it apparent that the Witness would be IMPOSSIBLE for Wii U.

The PS4's GPU is capable of taking tasks the CPU normally would, so your GPGPU argument is pretty pointless. It seems you know alot about the Wii U's hardware but don't know shit about PS4's and Xbox One's, which is bullshit and quite frankly it angers me that you're spreading bullshit.

 

I've seen gameplay of Infamous and Killzone, I'm not in the least dissapointed by the visual gap. 

I admit I don't know about PS4 & ONE. I especially don't know anything about ONE.

But what I do know is that the PS4 has a APU from AMD and it's 8 cores, so they can use 1 core as a GPU and 7 cores as CPU which will definitely out do the Wii U and I didn't even mention the 6 extra GB of RAM to use in game and maybe some extra in OS then 1 GB, so down the world we will see the gap, but visually it won't be as big as a lot of people are expecting. Plus I did mention that they would process so much more despite any advantage the Wii U might have.

yes the APU cores can work as a CPU as well as a GPU, but any core you use as a GPU might not be able to do any CPU functions leaving 1 of the 7 remaining cores working as CPU to do game physics since we might not know enough about APUs. But as I said in the quote, they will still process so much more (as you can tell From the remaining cores vs. the Wii U 3 or 4 core CPU only having major firmware update advantage in advance, so the Wii U still gets crushed across the board no matter what advantage it might have).

Visually it won't look as different as a lot of people are hoping for, which will help the Wii u get taken seriously by people who don't know of the great gap between Wii U vs. others.

Plus right now we are only seeing the PS4 & ONE do graphics visually that currently look too similar to the PS3 & 360, and who knows how shortly long this might keep up.

Visually the gap will disappoint people after games like God of War since people are to busy in gaming constantly fighting or something else to pay enough attention unless it's a slow pace kind of game like Luigi's Mansion dark moon.

The gap in tech is big, the games currently aren't going to show off yet, and when they do, it still won't be a big leap visually. At least not the big leap that a lot of people are trying to claim for what you will see on a 40 inch TV from a distance.

Plus I think game developers might only use as much as 2 to 3 GB of RAM for open world after seeing Lego City, but either way, the systems are getting to the point where they are doing almost everything necessary to get rid of any limitations by the 9th Gen, but the PS4 & ONE seem to already be doing no limitations on what Devs need, but how many Devs will actually need more then what the Wii U can do is the real question, and how important will this be to a everyday consumer.

I guess the point I am trying to make is: Just how important is the gap between the Wii U vs. others going to be throughout this gen, and how necessary will it be to developers throughout the rest of this gen. Answers we will have to wait several years at most to find out for certain.

I just don't see a reason to complain about what the Wii U can do. Nor cry over the Wii Us competitors being greater monsters that the Wii U will never match. Especially when the 3DS has more shader cores then the PS3 & 360 and that the 3DS can do more open world then the PS3 & 360, so the Wii U clearly has even more shader cores then the 3DS and Wii U can do at least as much open world as 3DS, but with greater polygons and 1080p graphics and at 60 fps when doing 1080p, which the PS3 & 360 can't imagine with their great power in specs, and the Wii U has greater polygons & textures & shader abilities then the PS3 & 360.

People are trying to make it seem like the Wii U is under PS3 & 360, but the only thing the Wii U is under is the PS4 & ONE, and visually it won't be a big enough deal for people to bitch. The Wii U can do most of what the PS4 & ONE can do, at least to the extent that almost all developers will need if the Wii U does good in sales.

Right now the PS4 & ONE are only showing graphics that people can claim God of War on 7th gen looks better while once again ignoring the more open world and so fort.



Kaizar on 26 June 2013
HoloDust said:
Daisuke72 said:
Kaizar said:


What you have said about the Wii U can also be said about the PS4 & ONE.

Neither the Wii U nor PS4 nor ONE has showed us any 8th gen graphics by your standards Literally.

I understand that since the GameCube, it has been hard to see any need to brag about graphics anymore, but you can't ignore that the PS4 & ONE are currently in the same position as the Wii U right now, but all 3 of these will do much better graphics later on with the PS4 on top.

Graphics are more dependent on the GPU then everything else. All 3 have 800 MHz GPU, and the Wii U GPU has 1 GB of RAM that clocks it at 800 MHz and when it is clocked at 800 MHz it drains somewhere from 2 Hz to 5 Hz of power.

We recently found out that the 3DS GPU ( PICA200 ) is 400 MHz max clock frequency and only drains 0.5 Hz to 1 Hz of power and does 160Mtriangle/s while the PS Vita GPU can only do 140Mtriangle/s which explains more about 3rd Party support on Handheld Consoles during the 8th Gen. Plus the 3DS CPU ( Nintendo ARM11 ) is a 4-core CPU target up to 1 GHz that can be underclock as low as 350 MHz a core at the lowest possible, so both 8th Gen handhelds have 4-core 1 GHz CPUs.

Anyways all 3 8th Gen Home Consoles have 800 MHz GPUs which makes the PS4 & ONE real adavantage being a lot more RAM as well as much more CPU processing, but the Wii U can already do such open world as Lego City Undercover, so the Wii U can still do as much open world as most 8th Gen games will have (but still varying depending on what 3rd Party Devs will want to do with new games).

The point is the Wii U is clearly 8th Gen and can do what most 3rd party Devs want to do with 8th gen Home Console games. There won't be as many 8th gen games requiring more tech then the Wii U as you seem to be claiming. Even the 3DS has more shader cores then the PS3 & 360 despite the PS3 & 360 having more better textures & more polygons & more CPU then the 3DS. Plus the 3DS seems to have more open world then the PS3 & 360 but the 3DS does 240p graphics with less polygons with its 128 MB FCRAM which would explain Lego City Undercover the Chase Begins (3DS exclusive). So clealry the Wii U has more shader cores then even the 3DS which has more shader cores then the PS3 & 360.

The Wii U is 8th Gen. Plus the Wii U has a GPGPU which does every different gameplay mechanic, which leaves more processing power for the Wii U CPU, while the PS4 & ONE seem to use a APU which means one core or so will be use as a GPU at 800 MHz while the the other cores will be use as a CPU to do all the gameplay mechanics, so the only real edge I see is the extra cores & extra RAM which won't make the visuals look as much greater as it actually is as you been pointing out about the Wii U vs. PS360, well same goes for PS4/ONE vs. Wii U where you won't be seeing the kind of gap you thought you would despite the specs and functions being greater.

So prepare to be almost as disappointed when you see PS4 & ONE games compare to PS3 & 360 games despite the big gap in the rendering of the games graphics compared to each other.

It is 8th Gen technology, you just have to wait a few years per Home Consoles (i.e. Wii U & PS4 & ONE) to see it be as much of a gap as it is, and it still won't look that much more better then it actually is for all 3 8th Gen Home Consoles, at least by your standards.


Just because they're all clocked at 80MHZ doesn't mean they're in the same class, PS4 and Xbox One both have many more cores in them than the Wii U's GPU, which translates to better power. MHZ doesn't measure power at all, it measures the cores speed and nothing more, and the PS4 has 7GB of more RAM than Wii U for games, and Xbox One has 5GB for games, Indie games and Killzone: Shadowfall both use multiple GB's of RAM for textures alone, look at the Shadowfall breakdown, and Blow pretty much made it apparent that the Witness would be IMPOSSIBLE for Wii U.

The PS4's GPU is capable of taking tasks the CPU normally would, so your GPGPU argument is pretty pointless. It seems you know alot about the Wii U's hardware but don't know shit about PS4's and Xbox One's, which is bullshit and quite frankly it angers me that you're spreading bullshit.

 

I've seen gameplay of Infamous and Killzone, I'm not in the least dissapointed by the visual gap. 

They are not clocked at the same speed, for start, not that it matters much.

 


I know they are not clocked the same, but the Wii U is ahead in major firmware updates to process so much more, but the PS4 has more cores to neutralize any advantage the Wii U might of have.

And I said that there will still be much more processing on its competitors anyways. (read bold in quote)

The point is, that the gap isn't as big as a lot of you think it is, but there is still a big gap, just not as big as you currently think perhaps.