:)

Good point, it could indeed be a matter of time constraints and hardware inexperience. The studio, Ubisoft Shanghai, had never worked with Wii U before.

For everyone that is saying they have the wiiu version, Add me on nintendo network (Cityofnoobs) and lets play spies vs mercs!

Errm.. the Wii U version is the one that runs in a higher resolution and has zero SCREEN TEARING!! also the Wii U version was the one that had the least development time, and still ended up the better version.My point being, that even a rushed Wii U port has managed to outperform current gen versions. Lets put this on par with current hardware to bed, Wii U is more powerful than currrent gen.

Trophies are not a selling point, and Nintendo not implementing an achievement system is not a valid argument to be held against its multiplats.

You're not wrong about offline co-op.

That's a silly argument, every difference is a selling point to someone.  I'm sure some people don't give a shit about the texture difference between WiiU and PS3 but of course that's thought of as a selling point.  I know some people that get the 360 version of games whenever possible for achievements as well as some who do the same for PS3 and trophies so obviously it's a selling point to some.  

Now I wouldn't hold a lack of achievement system against Nintendo because it would get boring and repetitive using the same point in every damn game, but acting like they aren't a selling point to some is just ridiculous.  

i think you need to get your facts right the wiiu version does not run at a higher resolution, they aslo say it has worst textures then the ps3 version, they go on to say  they think the wiiu version is best version because of no screen tearing, on par with each othere is perfect word for this comparsion they are very close to each othere and they excluded the 360 version cause they were to lazy to the install, i'm still waiting for DF for a much better comparison.

But why people still arguing about which version is the best., the most important thing here is that everyone has the opportunity to play the game and every version is good enough to give it a try.

Hey look ninjablade is here. Good thing you came back, this place was getting boring.

Not sure if anybody's going to double dip on the game to test this out, but I'll tell you that the load times still suck playing an eShop version. 

When I tested load times several months ago, the two fastest (Nintendo games) and two slowest (third parties, obviously) loaders were discs, while downloads stayed in the middle range. Not much difference between an install to internal flash and an install to external HD, either. That might have changed, since there have been a couple firmware updates in the meantime.

I suspect an eShop install might shave off a few seconds, but probably isn't more than 20% faster than disc.