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

Forums - Nintendo - is Digital Foundry biased?

 

So is Digital Foundry biased?

Yes they are a bunch of anti-Nintendo fanboys 43 31.62%
 
Maybe a little bit but Ni... 13 9.56%
 
They don't prefer one ov... 12 8.82%
 
Maybe they like Sony more 14 10.29%
 
Maybe they like Microsoft more 37 27.21%
 
Of course Ninjablade secretly works for them 16 11.76%
 
Total:135
oni-link said:
Shinobi-san said:
oni-link said:
Barozi said:
Most of the time it was the case that the WiiU version looked the best but performed the worst.
Looking at Splinter Cell Blacklist, the same happened again.

It's really not hard to make a game look better, but if the performance suffers from it then it shouldn't be done.


Isn't the reason for the performance due to the fact that these games were optimized for the PS360 first and then ported to the Wii which had a diffrent set-up and needs to be re-optimized for the hardware.  In regards to SC:Blacklist loading time I think has to do with the mandatory (in the Wii U's case lack-of) install of the game which would give advantage to the system that had the install then the one that didn't.

It doesnt matter what the reason is for the performance differences. Doesnt change the fact that the WiiU version performs worst.

Well from what I interpreted they are blaming everything wrong due to the hardware.  Thus somewhat misleading to a notion that the Wii U is somehow deficient in terms of hardware; when in fact the GPU is quite strong (it's looking more akin to 5550 than the 4670) compared to the PS360 and it's Espresso CPU is overall comparable to the Xenos regardless of clock speed.


What? Not once did they mention hardware in the splinter cell face off.

The assumptions you are making are completely baseless.



Intel Core i7 3770K [3.5GHz]|MSI Big Bang Z77 Mpower|Corsair Vengeance DDR3-1866 2 x 4GB|MSI GeForce GTX 560 ti Twin Frozr 2|OCZ Vertex 4 128GB|Corsair HX750|Cooler Master CM 690II Advanced|

Around the Network

either you're right or this is a typical case of confirmation bias



It does seem a bit odd they play down every positive and from the article its PC/PS3/360 vs Wii U alone rather than all compared to each other.
They also try really hard to make a difference of 5 FPS to 10 FPS at most seem like the difference in 30 FPS and 60 FPS.
Wii U drops to 25 PS3 360 drop to 30. That's not exactly as bad as they try to make it out to be.

Clearly there is a bias in the review but they had to give props to Nintendo in some areas even though you can tell they didn't want to..

Truth is its popular to hate on anything Nintendo and a lot of sites know this and act accordingly.
Not really any different then Gameinformer which cant talk about a Nintendo or MS game without making sure there is a negative in the article or a comparison to Sony. Its what their user base demands but in the end it will be what causes them to shut down much like Gamepro who spent their last 4 years catering to only 1 of 3 console fanbases.



ListerOfSmeg said:
It does seem a bit odd they play down every positive and from the article its PC/PS3/360 vs Wii U alone rather than all compared to each other.
They also try really hard to make a difference of 5 FPS to 10 FPS at most seem like the difference in 30 FPS and 60 FPS.
Wii U drops to 25 PS3 360 drop to 30. That's not exactly as bad as they try to make it out to be.

Clearly there is a bias in the review but they had to give props to Nintendo in some areas even though you can tell they didn't want to..

Truth is its popular to hate on anything Nintendo and a lot of sites know this and act accordingly.
Not really any different then Gameinformer which cant talk about a Nintendo or MS game without making sure there is a negative in the article or a comparison to Sony. Its what their user base demands but in the end it will be what causes them to shut down much like Gamepro who spent their last 4 years catering to only 1 of 3 console fanbases.

Exactly, it's like they have writers who hates Nintendo but has to act as if they are un-prejudice because it's their job.  Plus I still think Ninja Blade is working for them especially how DF is still so stubborn on insisting the Wii U GPU is definitely a 4xxx based GPU instead of a totally diffrent GPU designed by Nintendo.



yes.and we all know it



Around the Network

So... you make a poll where you have to think they are biased. The thing to think of is that they are basically only interested in the graphics. If there is a tie, then they will recommend you play the platform which more of your friends have. Every article I have read from them has been perfectly fair

Anyway, just read through the who article to understand their conclusions.



Yes, they are.

You know far better, oni-link.



All you need to do is read their ridiculously inaccurate article they did on Latte after the die-shot was released to know that they all have some sort of weird agenda going on with the Wii U.



Weren't they banned from being mentioned on Neogaf because of what they said about the One having better specs than the PS4? Anyone recall this?



oni-link said:

I think Digital Foundry is a biased especially against Nintendo.  Their comparison's especially don't make sense (a tie for visuals on Trine 2?  NFS:MW write up was a lukewarm and was still kinda' downplaying the improvements of the port and now downplaying SC:Blacklist Wii U advantages) especially when looking at screens and having played diffrent versions of the games they compare. That's why I don't take their review/comparison as the only source of reference.  Why do you guys think?

Trine 2 wasn't a tie for visuals.

DF called the Wii U version "the pick of the crop on consoles" and pointed out its many improvements over the PS3 and 360.