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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Graphical progress on Wii U so far

PigPen on 16 May 2015

All of this trying to match the PS3 & PS4 with the Wii U is just nutz. Who cares with a console with mildly more power when the games you play on the Wii U looks gooood. I'm not into Bloodborne or the Order 1886 but would gladly pick up Xenoblade Chronicle X. If you don't care for Nintendo, it's fine and your right. There are rare others though that don't have any interest in playing Uncharted, but happy with playing Zelda, Metroid and Mario. Just except that Sony doesn't have that effect over all the world as you would like it to.



Around the Network
Zekkyou on 17 May 2015
curl-6 said:
Zekkyou said:

40 - 60 would be the standard range, but it dips in the 30's frequently enough during some of the big battles that i think referring to it as a 30 to 60 variable is accurate.

Checking Digital Foundry's fps tests, Bayo 2 not only looks better than the Wonderful 101, but performs better too, so that's another area where Platinum improved with more experience with the hardware.

I don't disagree (B2 is a significant step up from W101, both graphically and in performance), but i'm not sure what that has to do with what i said?



Norris2k on 17 May 2015
curl-6 said:

Bold: A physically based lighting and shading model, which is something usually seen on PS4/Xbone/PC, nice wood textures, bokeh depth of field, soft-shadows, dynamic water simulation. Also, while this particular screen doesn't show it, the game also employs subsurface scattering and god rays. All notable upgrades over its Wii U predecessor Nano Assault Neo, which was already confirmed by its devs to be using techniques not possible on last gen systems.

Italic: Comparing Platinum, a dev never known for its tech prowess, to Naughty Dog, one of the most technically talented devs on the planet, isn't exactly a level playing field. But that aside, The Last of Us on PS3, while it looks very nice overall, frequently fails to maintain even a 30fps target, and it has its ugly moments too:

 

That was not something I could see from your first screenshots, the next screenshots are way better and I understand the point.

But it's still a very simple game, way better but not very different from the duck tech demo on the PS3. Naughty Dog, is sure one of the best studios, and TLOU is not perfect graphically wise, but they shine and are awarded because they are doing better than other studios working on the same level of modern games, on the same outdated hardware : depth of view, complex bone animations, detailed textures, IA (it's not a toad), complex 3D models, realistic lighting, complex shaders, etc. But let's forget TLOU : Battlefield, GOW, GeOW, Killzone, AC and so many other games are also great, and are all on a complete different league than the games you are showing.

It depends what we are talking about. Graphics improved a little on the Wii U, that's a fact. Have we come quite a way, did developpers improved their effort on the hardware as you stated ? I'd say no for the reason I gave : they are not pushing this hardware that can do a lot better, they don't have large budget, and not doing games that requires it, and probably don't even have the technical ability to.

So, what's your point ? That a little studio, with a little budget, doing a little game, that cut most of the thing that requires effort... can make us feel it has come quite a way, that the hardware is slightly pushed ?



Goodnightmoon on 17 May 2015
Dusk said:


I wasn't a huge fan of the game, but I didn't notice any frame issues with the game when I played it through. I generaly notice when a game dips below 30, beyond that I don't really care cause it's stable. Although, games do feel more fluid when they are right near the 60fps. 

I play on PC and I feel when a game falls more than 5fps, however, IDK why, Bayo 2 feels very smooth even when it falls 15-20fps, I didn´t knew the game was actually falling to 40 (and even lower) until I saw a profesional analysis. It felt like the game was running at 60 and falling to 50 on stress moments. IDK why some games feels so smooth even falling at 40 fps while others feels clunky and makes you feel dizzy very easily.



Dusk on 17 May 2015
Goodnightmoon said:
Dusk said:


I wasn't a huge fan of the game, but I didn't notice any frame issues with the game when I played it through. I generaly notice when a game dips below 30, beyond that I don't really care cause it's stable. Although, games do feel more fluid when they are right near the 60fps. 

I play on PC and I feel when a game falls more than 5fps, however, IDK why, Bayo 2 feels very smooth even when it falls 15-20fps, I didn´t knew the game was actually falling to 40 (and even lower) until I saw a profesional analysis. It felt like the game was running at 60 and falling to 50 on stress moments. IDK why some games feels so smooth even falling at 40 fps while others feels clunky and makes you feel dizzy very easily.

I used to game on PC as wel as my main for gaming. I gave it up because I was spending too much time on it so I have fallen back on consoles and found that I am actually happier with it. I don't notice much for drops unless they are below 30 or so. Game dependant with genre of course.



Gotta figure out how to set these up lol.

Around the Network
curl-6 on 17 May 2015
Zekkyou said:
curl-6 said:

Checking Digital Foundry's fps tests, Bayo 2 not only looks better than the Wonderful 101, but performs better too, so that's another area where Platinum improved with more experience with the hardware.

I don't disagree (B2 is a significant step up from W101, both graphically and in performance), but i'm not sure what that has to do with what i said?

I was just extending your performance analysis to the topic; progress from one game to the next by the same dev on Wii U.



curl-6 on 17 May 2015
Norris2k said:

That was not something I could see from your first screenshots, the next screenshots are way better and I understand the point.

But it's still a very simple game, way better but not very different from the duck tech demo on the PS3. Naughty Dog, is sure one of the best studios, and TLOU is not perfect graphically wise, but they shine and are awarded because they are doing better than other studios working on the same level of modern games, on the same outdated hardware : depth of view, complex bone animations, detailed textures, IA (it's not a toad), complex 3D models, realistic lighting, complex shaders, etc. But let's forget TLOU : Battlefield, GOW, GeOW, Killzone, AC and so many other games are also great, and are all on a complete different league than the games you are showing.

It depends what we are talking about. Graphics improved a little on the Wii U, that's a fact. Have we come quite a way, did developpers improved their effort on the hardware as you stated ? I'd say no for the reason I gave : they are not pushing this hardware that can do a lot better, they don't have large budget, and not doing games that requires it, and probably don't even have the technical ability to.

So, what's your point ? That a little studio, with a little budget, doing a little game, that cut most of the thing that requires effort... can make us feel it has come quite a way, that the hardware is slightly pushed ?

I think you're overrating last gen's games, they all had their issues, be it inconsistent textures and framerate, screen tearing, sub-HD resolutions, etc.

You single out Wii U's games for limiting comlexity, yet that's what games like God of War did, jettisoning physics and enforcing strict camera control so that the system could focus it's rendering power.



Hynad on 17 May 2015
curl-6 said:
Norris2k said:

That was not something I could see from your first screenshots, the next screenshots are way better and I understand the point.

But it's still a very simple game, way better but not very different from the duck tech demo on the PS3. Naughty Dog, is sure one of the best studios, and TLOU is not perfect graphically wise, but they shine and are awarded because they are doing better than other studios working on the same level of modern games, on the same outdated hardware : depth of view, complex bone animations, detailed textures, IA (it's not a toad), complex 3D models, realistic lighting, complex shaders, etc. But let's forget TLOU : Battlefield, GOW, GeOW, Killzone, AC and so many other games are also great, and are all on a complete different league than the games you are showing.

It depends what we are talking about. Graphics improved a little on the Wii U, that's a fact. Have we come quite a way, did developpers improved their effort on the hardware as you stated ? I'd say no for the reason I gave : they are not pushing this hardware that can do a lot better, they don't have large budget, and not doing games that requires it, and probably don't even have the technical ability to.

So, what's your point ? That a little studio, with a little budget, doing a little game, that cut most of the thing that requires effort... can make us feel it has come quite a way, that the hardware is slightly pushed ?

I think you're overrating last gen's games, they all had their issues, be it inconsistent textures and framerate, screen tearing, sub-HD resolutions, etc.

You single out Wii U's games for limiting comlexity, yet that's what games like God of War did, jettisoning physics and enforcing strict camera control so that the system could focus it's rendering power.

You seem to be in quite the bad-faith mood right now, Curl.

You mention that games last gen all had their issues... But that has nothing to do with what he's saying. He's saying the leaps were bigger and bigger last gen. Not that the games didn't have any issues. Every generations, game had their issues. So that point is moot.

You are comparing the complexity of a game like God of War with that of Art of Balance... Like, seriously?

It's like comparing Tetris with Super Mario Bros. -___-



curl-6 on 17 May 2015
Hynad said:
curl-6 said:

I think you're overrating last gen's games, they all had their issues, be it inconsistent textures and framerate, screen tearing, sub-HD resolutions, etc.

You single out Wii U's games for limiting comlexity, yet that's what games like God of War did, jettisoning physics and enforcing strict camera control so that the system could focus it's rendering power.

You seem to be in quite the bad-faith mood right now, Curl.

You mention that games last gen all had their issues... But that has nothing to do with what he's saying. He's saying the leaps were bigger and bigger last gen. Not that the games didn't have any issues. Every generations, game had their issues. So that point is moot.

You are comparing the complexity of a game like God of War with that of Art of Balance... Like, seriously?

It's like comparing Tetris with Super Mario Bros. -___-

I've already said last gen was the biggest progression we'll ever see in a gen. That doesn't negate the progress made this gen, however.

And I made no such comparison, he did.



Hynad on 17 May 2015
curl-6 said:
Hynad said:

You seem to be in quite the bad-faith mood right now, Curl.

You mention that games last gen all had their issues... But that has nothing to do with what he's saying. He's saying the leaps were bigger and bigger last gen. Not that the games didn't have any issues. Every generations, game had their issues. So that point is moot.

You are comparing the complexity of a game like God of War with that of Art of Balance... Like, seriously?

It's like comparing Tetris with Super Mario Bros. -___-

I've already said last gen was the biggest progression we'll ever see in a gen. That doesn't negate the progress made this gen, however.

And I made no such comparison, he did.


No. He didn't compare them in the way you do. You are saying that God of War was limited in its complexity, and say it is comparable to Art of Balance. That's just... No word for such a comparison.

Really. I don't know what's up with you right now.