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

Forums - Nintendo - Wii U's eDRAM stronger than given credit?

curl-6 on 02 March 2014
starworld said:
curl-6 said:
starworld said:

yes it does, i'm basically trying to explain to you the first 2-3 years of ps3/360 was uncharted waters for developers, they werent just trying to make just 360/ps3 garphics better, they were trying to make graphics better period, since they have never experianced such powerful hardware.

2005-2006 maybe, but Crysis launched in 2007 and was still never surpassed by PS3/360. What devs had to figure out was how to get the most out of the PS3/360 hardware, and they did this by intimately tailoring their engines to suit the quirks of the architecture.

I said games. one game doesn't chage the fact all games starting looking better, just because one game was able to look much better on several times more exoensive hardware  by the best graphics developer out there doesn't change my point. even ps4 will get the benfit of what developers learned in the past 6 years, graphics have gotten better period, regardless of hardware, new techinques to make lighting look more realistic, animation, new tech to make skin better,etc.

But improvement is mostly driven by familiarity with hardware in the case of consoles, and physically improving hardware with PCs. New techniques are introduced because a new graphics card supports it, or devs find a workaround to get it to run on console hardware.



Around the Network
TheLegendaryWolf on 02 March 2014
curl-6 said:
starworld said:

yes it does, i'm basically trying to explain to you the first 2-3 years of ps3/360 was uncharted waters for developers, they werent just trying to make just 360/ps3 garphics better, they were trying to make graphics better period, since they have never experianced such powerful hardware.

2005-2006 maybe, but Crysis launched in 2007 and was still never surpassed by PS3/360. What devs had to figure out was how to get the most out of the PS3/360 hardware, and they did this by intimately tailoring their engines to suit the quirks of the architecture.


If only more devs would try figuring out the WiiU's architecture, they might have better results with their ports. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening...



curl-6 on 02 March 2014
TheLegendaryWolf said:
curl-6 said:
starworld said:

yes it does, i'm basically trying to explain to you the first 2-3 years of ps3/360 was uncharted waters for developers, they werent just trying to make just 360/ps3 garphics better, they were trying to make graphics better period, since they have never experianced such powerful hardware.

2005-2006 maybe, but Crysis launched in 2007 and was still never surpassed by PS3/360. What devs had to figure out was how to get the most out of the PS3/360 hardware, and they did this by intimately tailoring their engines to suit the quirks of the architecture.


If only more devs would try figuring out the WiiU's architecture, they might have better results with their ports. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening...

Yeah, with the exception of Trine 2 and Need for Speed, its been cheap and nasty ports all around, sadly. Guess we'll just have to wait and see how FAST Racing Neo goes as the system's first ground-up graphics pusher. 



sc94597 on 02 March 2014
starworld said:
sc94597 said:
Kane1389 said:
sc94597 said:
Kane1389 said:
sc94597 said:
Kane1389 said:


Nice job comparing a 2008 game with 2014 game.

Both games were/will be released at comparable periods in their lifecycle. Two years after the release of the console. If the logic that I've seen in other threads in regards to the PS4 and XBOne holds, that they are not optimized enough to show vast improvements over the latest games of last generation, then the same should hold for the Wii U vs. last generation, which means that we should compare games that were released after similar periods of time in their life cycles. If you are to argue that there is software technique advancement, we can always remember that Nintendo games are made with their own proprietary engines and Nintendo didn't develop games with such graphical feats back then. The comparison is not only valid but optimal. 

Except that those games in Xbone/Ps4 threads are cross gen titles, never designed to take full advantage of next gen power. X is not a cross gen game. 

 

And WiiU as a supposed 8th gen system should have had better looking games than anything on the ps3 right at launch just like ps360 and their successors had.

 

And lets not pretend WKC was The best looking ps3 game in 2008. I dont see any 2014 wii u game looking better than MGS4, although Watch Dogs might prove me wrong

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=179145&page=1#42

^ That thread isn't about cross-gen titles. 

Also the comparison makes sense because they're both open-world games with similar art styles. 


I have no idea why you brought that thread up,am I supposed to agree with OP?

And if you wanna compare graphics, you use the best looking games. MGS4 was best looking on PS3 in 2008, X is on WiiU in 2014.

The replies in that thread stated that the reason why the OP doesn't see a large difference between the previous generation and this generation (in regards to exclusives) is because the new consoles have not been optimized for yet. The OP should compare early releases of the 7th generation with early releases of the 8th generation, and the same logic holds with the Wii U vs. last generation consoles, does it not? Metal Gear Solid IV was not an open world game. X will be an open world game. That is where the comparison fails. 


so the past 6 years of knowledge and experience of learning how to make games look better should be thrown of the window. this logic can apply to a machine atleast 10x more powerful, because they are probably not used to making games to take advantage of such hardware meaning this only applys to games that are blowing away currentgen. so its a very unfair comparison.

I already addressed that. But another critique of your point is that PC's did not remain stagnant hardware-wise. Developers were able to learn techniques through PC software. An example was tesselation (which neither previous generation console could do well.) By the time these new consoles were released, most developers were familiar with Tesselation techniques from PC gaming and software design. 



starworld on 02 March 2014
curl-6 said:
starworld said:
curl-6 said:
starworld said:

yes it does, i'm basically trying to explain to you the first 2-3 years of ps3/360 was uncharted waters for developers, they werent just trying to make just 360/ps3 garphics better, they were trying to make graphics better period, since they have never experianced such powerful hardware.

2005-2006 maybe, but Crysis launched in 2007 and was still never surpassed by PS3/360. What devs had to figure out was how to get the most out of the PS3/360 hardware, and they did this by intimately tailoring their engines to suit the quirks of the architecture.

I said games. one game doesn't chage the fact all games starting looking better, just because one game was able to look much better on several times more exoensive hardware  by the best graphics developer out there doesn't change my point. even ps4 will get the benfit of what developers learned in the past 6 years, graphics have gotten better period, regardless of hardware, new techinques to make lighting look more realistic, animation, new tech to make skin better,etc.

But improvement is mostly driven by familiarity with hardware in the case of consoles, and physically improving hardware with PCs. New techniques are introduced because a new graphics card supports it, or devs find a workaround to get it to run on console hardware.

so what are you saying the graphics techniques that they have learned in the past 8 years can't be applied to the wiiu. 



Around the Network
starworld on 02 March 2014
sc94597 said:
starworld said:
sc94597 said:
Kane1389 said:
sc94597 said:
Kane1389 said:
sc94597 said:
Kane1389 said:


Nice job comparing a 2008 game with 2014 game.

Both games were/will be released at comparable periods in their lifecycle. Two years after the release of the console. If the logic that I've seen in other threads in regards to the PS4 and XBOne holds, that they are not optimized enough to show vast improvements over the latest games of last generation, then the same should hold for the Wii U vs. last generation, which means that we should compare games that were released after similar periods of time in their life cycles. If you are to argue that there is software technique advancement, we can always remember that Nintendo games are made with their own proprietary engines and Nintendo didn't develop games with such graphical feats back then. The comparison is not only valid but optimal. 

Except that those games in Xbone/Ps4 threads are cross gen titles, never designed to take full advantage of next gen power. X is not a cross gen game. 

 

And WiiU as a supposed 8th gen system should have had better looking games than anything on the ps3 right at launch just like ps360 and their successors had.

 

And lets not pretend WKC was The best looking ps3 game in 2008. I dont see any 2014 wii u game looking better than MGS4, although Watch Dogs might prove me wrong

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=179145&page=1#42

^ That thread isn't about cross-gen titles. 

Also the comparison makes sense because they're both open-world games with similar art styles. 


I have no idea why you brought that thread up,am I supposed to agree with OP?

And if you wanna compare graphics, you use the best looking games. MGS4 was best looking on PS3 in 2008, X is on WiiU in 2014.

The replies in that thread stated that the reason why the OP doesn't see a large difference between the previous generation and this generation (in regards to exclusives) is because the new consoles have not been optimized for yet. The OP should compare early releases of the 7th generation with early releases of the 8th generation, and the same logic holds with the Wii U vs. last generation consoles, does it not? Metal Gear Solid IV was not an open world game. X will be an open world game. That is where the comparison fails. 


so the past 6 years of knowledge and experience of learning how to make games look better should be thrown of the window. this logic can apply to a machine atleast 10x more powerful, because they are probably not used to making games to take advantage of such hardware meaning this only applys to games that are blowing away currentgen. so its a very unfair comparison.

I already addressed that. But another critique of your point is that PC's did not remain stagnant hardware-wise. Developers were able to learn techniques through PC software. An example was tesselation (which neither previous generation console could do well.) By the time these new consoles were released, most developers were familiar with Tesselation techniques from PC gaming and software design. 

they why are you comparing early ps3/360 to wiiu.



curl-6 on 02 March 2014
starworld said:

so what are you saying the graphics techniques that they have learned in the past 8 years can't be applied to the wiiu. 

They can be applied to Wii U to degree. I'm simply saying that devs will still need to learn Wii U's hardware and develop from the ground up for it to show what it can really do, just like any console. A lot their experience over the past 8 years has been with PS3/360, and that will only get them so far on a system with very different architecture.



TheLegendaryWolf on 02 March 2014
curl-6 said:
TheLegendaryWolf said:
curl-6 said:
starworld said:

yes it does, i'm basically trying to explain to you the first 2-3 years of ps3/360 was uncharted waters for developers, they werent just trying to make just 360/ps3 garphics better, they were trying to make graphics better period, since they have never experianced such powerful hardware.

2005-2006 maybe, but Crysis launched in 2007 and was still never surpassed by PS3/360. What devs had to figure out was how to get the most out of the PS3/360 hardware, and they did this by intimately tailoring their engines to suit the quirks of the architecture.


If only more devs would try figuring out the WiiU's architecture, they might have better results with their ports. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening...

Yeah, with the exception of Trine 2 and Need for Speed, its been cheap and nasty ports all around, sadly. Guess we'll just have to wait and see how FAST Racing Neo goes as the system's first ground-up graphics pusher. 

On the bright side, Slightly Mad Studios actually put effort and time into figuring out the WiiU's architecture to get Project CARS working smoothly for it.



curl-6 on 02 March 2014
TheLegendaryWolf said:
curl-6 said:

Yeah, with the exception of Trine 2 and Need for Speed, its been cheap and nasty ports all around, sadly. Guess we'll just have to wait and see how FAST Racing Neo goes as the system's first ground-up graphics pusher. 

On the bright side, Slightly Mad Studios actually put effort and time into figuring out the WiiU's architecture to get Project CARS working smoothly for it.

That one does sound promising, now that they've dumped PS3 and 360 and hence won't be able to drag Wii U down with assets designed for systems with half its RAM. Still, its not really from the ground up since its ported from PS4/Xbone/PC, so while I'm looking forward to seeing how it turns out, my money's on FAST Racing Neo as Wii U's first proper showcase, even if it's made by only 5 guys.

X, Bayo 2, Mario Kart 8, and Art of Balance also look good.



starworld on 02 March 2014
curl-6 said:
starworld said:

so what are you saying the graphics techniques that they have learned in the past 8 years can't be applied to the wiiu. 

They can be applied to Wii U to degree. I'm simply saying that devs will still need to learn Wii U's hardware and develop from the ground up for it to show what it can really do, just like any console. A lot their experience over the past 8 years has been with PS3/360, and that will only get them so far on a system with very different architecture.


I really don'y undersstand what nintendo was thinking, they knew they needed to make a console that can at the very least run 360/ps3 with out effort, to get more developers to make games for it, instead they chose to put there money into making a smaller, more effeciante console, a gpu that does 360/ps3 games at 1080p would have cost them 30$.