That Wii U GPU article was a truly terrible piece of journalism, making sweeping assumptions without the evidence to back it up, but I wouldn't put it down to bias, just stupidity.

If that article was a one-off then I'd agree. But there are several instances that point to an agenda regarding the console.

and why do you think so? their article is pretty much build on facts and their conclusion is also not too bad since they even say that wii u version could improve with a patch.

but seriously, just because they think that the worst frame drops of all versions and almost unacceptable loading times are worse as screen tearing and stuff like that means that they are biased in your opinion?

maybe they just really think that more frames and less loading times are better for the experience as the advantages the wii u version has? maybe performance is king for them? 

and i think we read different articles about trine 2. the article i read clearly stated that the wii u version has many advantages and stuff only the pc version has.

I thought it was because it performed worse?

If they were biased they would have blamed Splinter Cell's performance on the Wii U hardware, instead they said the U version felt "rushed to market" and in previous face-offs they have acknowledged Wii U's superior graphical hardware.

They are occasionally shitty journalists, but I don't think they have a biased agenda.

I would generally agree, however I do find them biased. Especially with the example given of NFS for Wii U. I'll be the first to admit that I am a Nintendo/PC gamer, but if you watch the videos posted between the latest comparisons, the tearing of the screens is brutal! Even if the Wii U had slightly lower average FPS (odd considering Lens of Truth had is in the middle of the pack) it didn't have any tearing and a higher resolution than the other two. The real question is when a patch is released to fix the freezing issues, if they change their opinions or not. Also, they should attempt a download from the eshop comparison to see if it makes any difference. 

This is what I was thinking. Downloading from the eShop might as well improve load times.

As for their bias, I think they are a bit. But more importantly, I think that, despite their nifty tools for measuring framerates and what not, most of the time it seems like they don't know what they're talking about, throwing some "opinions" as "facts", and the people that go to their site, themselves not knowing much, take those "facts" as their bible.

It's funny I have seen claims of bias from them come from MS, Sony and now Nintendo fans lol.

When you piss off everyone you know you're doing something right. ;)

"Visually, Blacklist is a close match between all platform, except that the Wii U game lacks the high resolution texture pack available to all of the other versions."

This part of the article is a gigantic side snippet, but it does not comment upon the resolution where Wii U does have an advantage.

"Curiously, in terms of sheer playability, Sony's hardware achieves the most consistent frame-rates during combat, with 360 taking middle ground here, and the Wii U suffering from more regular dips to the low 20s, perhaps explaining the omission of split-screen gameplay."

Seems Wii U has the best resolution, worst textures, and worst performance.