farlaff said:
Egann said:
The GPU is enough to render both the TV screen and the gamepad in 1080p 60 FPS without being optimized. This means the PS4 and XB1 are massive hardware overkill. Their biggest advantages over the Wii U isn't their power, but that no developer will ever have to optimize the game's code. My gut is that the PS4 and XB1 will see some horribly written code relying on the hardware's power to run it by brute force. Only third party developers with a gigantic reputation for optimizing to hardware will even bother.
Which basically means Square Enix and nobody else.
It's the old axiom "what Intel giveth, Microsoft taketh away" although in this case, Microsoft and Sony are doing the giving, and EA and Epic are doing the taking away.
The only question left on the table is if 2 GB of RAM is enough. We seem to have reasonably established the GPU and CPU are sufficient. Still, if the Wii U can manage with that meager GPU to run two screens at full power, chances are that 2 GB is also "enough." |
I like this post. It reflects many things I 've been wondering about. :) But talking memory issues, remember when the 64 got the Memory Pack that produced so good visuals in, say, Star Wars Pod Racer (great game with awful AI)? As you said, the greater difference in the 3 consoles seems to be RAM. Is there any possibility Nintendo can upgrade the U's memory?
|
Maybe, but why upgrade hardware when a firmware update can do the same thing? With a system as low power as the Wii U, you don't necessarily need a RAM chip to pretend you have additional memory. Just convert 2 or 4 GB of the Wii U flash memory into SWAP and suddenly the Wii U has as much "RAM" as the XBox One. Especially if there's CPU power to spare and you can dedicate a whole core to flipping memory between memory pools, and this article implies there's more than enough for that.
If Nintendo really gets into a memory pickle, that's what they'll do.
