What kinds of signatures?

Must admit even some of the better WiiU stuff does not look that much better than current Xbox stuff, i know its early days however. On Black ops 2 for example the graphics on Xbox look very good but then when you look at the blokes hand its clear they are not as detailed as first impression gives.

Again, BLOPS2 is a port, and no where near the "better stuff" the Wii U has out there.  They ported it from 360 with little to no time with the final hardware.  The fact that it can run BLOPS2 or any other 360 port for that matter on it's supposedly "weak" CPU and still pull off equal or better visuals than the source console is stunning actually, considering the game was coded to run on CPU centric systems.

What is Wii U's bandwidth now with this GPU info when not relying on eDram? Just wondering if the 12.8 GB from anandtech is correct or not.

12.8GB/s for the DDR3, Anandtech had no info on the 140GB/s EDRAM in the GPU. Wii U definitely has the most complicated, and the most tightly designed memory architecture out of all of the 8th gen consoles.

The wierd thing about reading this thread, is it reads like no one has actually seen wii u games in real life. The eurogamer article seems right on the money. The wii u is clearly current gen performance overall but with a higher performance gpu but lower performance cpu.

If you are reading this thread and considering a purchase of wii u I would check out real world performance first. I'm loving the wii u but this thread actually reads like people are expecting some massive improvement in wii u performance and that current wii u games aren't the real benchmark of what the wii u can achieve.

Some of that silicon will be the original wii gpu and 3 megabytes of memory. Maybe the 32 megabytes of fast video memory doubles as the 24megabytes of main wii memory.

Dare I mention the real world where some wii u games have reduced resolution, weaker frame rates, missing a.i, missing physics, reduced sound channels, missing 3D support, missing graphical effects and I'm sure other things I've forgotten.

Even Nintendo's own titles Nintendo World and Mario are technically weak.

The wii u is NIntendo's entry into the current gen with regard performance, in some ways its stronger and in some ways its weaker.

I'm sure a big part of the failure of the wii u so far is its weak specification. We all wish it had a stronger spec but it doesn't. The fact is, the wii u has absolutely no chance of competing with the new xbox and playstation on a technical level. It's only just competing with the current gen consoles.

I strongly suggest people who really want to understand the potential performance of the wii u look elsewhere on the internet to more balanced viewpoints and always factor in realworld performance of games.

Your argument applies to basically every console launch in the history of gaming save the first gen. That's why everyone is curious about what the system is capable of, because it will still take years for developers to realize and take advantage of its full potential. So no, current titles, built for older hardware or ported from older hardware with completely different performance characteristics is not a benchmark for what the system can and will do. You talk of potential performance like the conclusion was written before the start.

If you were reading this thread and think we are making a case for or against buying a wii u please reread, like, all of it. Can't some people just geek out a little without people taking the entire conversation too seriously from a sales perspective and making sweeping conclusions about the intentions of Nintendo or the fate of the console itself? Whether good or bad, learning about the deep level hardware characteristics and discussing them is fun and exciting for some people.

This is a fake news site, you guys are so gullible.

I'm glad someone else pointed it out. Obvious fake

I thank my lucky stars I married one of the few non psychotic women. This would have gone to small claims court if it were me. That looks to be several hundred dollars worth of games.

Thus adding to the overall cost of the console, where are those $400 rumors now?  I've always thought the PSEyeCam was a useless gimmick, and that won't change.  Interesting that when Nintendo does it VG media call it a gimmick, when Sony or MS do it, it's groundbreaking and innovative.

Sorry dude, didnt you know? your shenanigans finally ran out of time. Nintendo showed off monolithsofts project in alpha/beta, which is a large open world game which, even in beta/alpha makes open world games on ps360 look tiny, slow, and kinda crappy....

And thats just the tip of the iceberg, nintendo has buttloads of exclusive ground up projects they will be slowly unveiling from now to e3 via nintendo directs.

I was going to point this out as well, the game is no where near finished but makes other open world efforts feel closed in with flat backdrops. We haven't even scratched the surface of what this console can do obviously, and it seems Nintendo might not even know what the hell they put in there.

Thraktor and bgassassin are finally circling back around to the idea that the 6XXX series GPU's were referenced rather than the 4XXX series. they are thinking 6550HD because of some similarities on that GPU and Latte. we don't have die shots of e6760 but same chip series and probably uses the same SIMD architecture. I'm sticking with e6760 with two SIMD engines removed. e6760 has 6 SIMD engines (12 SIMD cores w/ 40ALU per core) and Latte looks to have 4 engines (8 cores with 40ALU per core) any other similar logic blocks on 6550 are probably also on e6760 but maybe in different numbers. Seems the fake leak might have been the right answer all along.

I liked the video, and I am also getting tired of the argument. 3 million is two months is nothing to scoff at, even if their sales did take a dip after the new year. I think they'll be fine and the games will be visually stunning and will offer great gameplay. I have no doubt in Nintendo's ability to perform in this market and they have my money and my attention.

That's hardly a respectable number for a brand new next gen launch console with no competition. It should have sold a lot more although the confusing marketing by Nintendo and a lack of a strong launch line up didn't help.

Historically its very respectable. The 360 launched with no competition and did not get those numbers. In fact, they revised their 90 launch window sales projections down from 3 million to 2.5 million. Historically launching with no competition in the generation has not been met with success and for Sega ended in failure.

I agree that with more and better marketing they would have sold more, and the launch lineup could have been better, but it seems like they didn't even finalize the hardware or the SDK until very close to launch (relatively, within the year I suppose) given they are just now starting to get a handle on the hardware information they are providing to devs as well as the SDKs.

I don't know because I haven't played any Ubi games on the Wii U yet, but I have downloaded the uplay app. Does uplay integrate with the games the same way it does on PC? Maybe the change ubi wants is more uplay integration for their games?

Its not going to happen. The simple reason is that it would cannibalise sales from the 3DS.

How so? One would assume the requirements for this to work are a 3DS, a Wii U, the accessory, and the 3DS game you want to play on the TV. if anything it would just create an additional revenue stream for people who already have both systems, with the possibility that people either buy the Wii U as their console of choice because they already have a 3DS and like the idea of integration, or decide to buy a 3DS because they liked the offering on the system but were unsure about buying into it.

I don't see how being able to play 3DS games on the TV using a 3DS would shave off 3DS sales, you have to have a 3DS to use it.

so devs dont even have info. supports working on the GPU/CPU desing all the way up to the last second. im beginning to wonder if nintendo is trying to make there games look bad, to set a low bar for early games next to other consuls, then all of a sudden BAM, we lied. there is some support but it is still a out-there theory.

no CPU die shots yet... how?

I wonder why no one else has thought of the obvious reasons they might have intentionally withheld serious specifications. To keep the competition in the dark! Durango leaked specs with 8GB of ram, then the rumor mill starts churning out claims that Sony is upping the RAM to stay competitive. No one can leak Nintendo info if very few people have it. I think the negative press it is getting is a result of not working with the videogaming media, they are peeved at Nintendo for keeping them in the dark because they feel entitled to every little detail.

Now that the competition's specs have been finalized (once they are confirmed to be so) I expect Nintendo to come out with all of the information they have on the hardware. If I were them, I would keep it away from VG media as much as possible, and let what the devs are able to do with the system provide all the evidence needed of it's potential.

The only other reason I can think of is they gave all the information they themselves had at the time, given the highly customized nature of the architecture and the lack of comparable chips or code to baseline performance on, I wouldn't doubt this either. It seems they only finalized the hardware within several months of the launch, and in that time their own dev groups had to figure out what they had to work with.

No CPU shots yet, they are forthcoming.

I wouldn't be so sure as that if I were you. Looking at Sony and Microsoft and what they've done in the past and what they expect from their hardware its very likely their new consoles will be significantly ahead of the Wii U in terms of features and quite likely performance.

As for a screen on Sony's controller where did you here that. The rumour has never been about a screen but a touch pad using similar technology to the back touch pad on the Vita. They are hardly one and the same.



Its not doing fine and the only reason Nintendo are getting away with it at all is because they have no competition. Once Sony and Microsoft's new consoles are released Nintendo is going to have to significantly up their game, improve their marketing and communication to gamers and sign up a lot more AAA third party games to compete against their competition.

Ahead, perhaps, singnificantly ahead, highly doubtful.

Maybe, maybe not. We shall see. The Wii U isn't significantly better performance wise then the PS3 and Xbox 360. I suspect Sony and Microsoft's new consoles will be. The PS3 and 360 already provide user experiences the Wii U doesn't.

That goes both ways, Wii and Wii U provide user experiences that neither of the other consoles did as well. It's just a matter of which experiences attract a larger demographic.

And they do have competition, just as Orbis and Durango will be competing for dollars against their own previous iterations for the first couple of years of availability, so is Wii U. Some of the most anticipated launches in the 7th generation happened just in the past year, many right as the Wii U launched. The launch, just based on the numbers, is a successful one, whether you'd like to believe it or not. The launch window isn't as successful as Nintendo hoped, for sure, though, and they do need to step up their game and start releasing or announcing some big time exclusives, 1st or third party doesn't matter.

Maybe, maybe not. We shall see. The Wii U isn't significantly better performance wise then the PS3 and Xbox 360. I suspect Sony and Microsoft's new consoles will be. The PS3 and 360 already provide user experiences the Wii U doesn't.

I have to say it's refreshing seeing someone play devils advocate without coming off as trollish.

I don't agree. The 360 and PS3 whilst maybe not as powerful as the Wii U provide overall a far better gaming experience. Apart from the Gamepad second screen the Wii U doesn't provide anything new. The online service on the Xbox is far more sophisticated. The PS3 has Playstation Plus. The online stores and account system as well as how content is tied to the account is far better on the PS3 and Xbox. Transferring content from one console to another is far easier on both platforms. The media playback capability is far better on both then the Wii U. The PS3 is region free. Do I need to go on. Nintendo has a lot to learn about the user experience.

You make a valid point, but IMO MiiVerse is innovative and fresh as far as Online gaming communities go. The control options with the Wii U are far better, but game dependent in many situations.

As far as digital downloads and content management, they haven't done too bad for themselves, and I expect they'll continue to grow the offerings and let the platform evolve like Microsoft has. I subbed to PS+ for two years, and it was worthless. Still worthless IMO. Live is great but developing, nurturing, and evolving an online community takes time and resources, I don't see any evidence to suggest Nintendo isn't making an effort to make things better.

You may consider your arguments realistic but I don't see them as such. You are, in fact, holding Nintendo to a different standard. A strong launch isn't strong if it's Nintendo, innovative controls and experiences aren't innovative if it is Nintendo. Nintendo has three months to do something many journalists and fanboys will happily give Sony or Microsoft years to accomplish. Complete rubbish. You keep saying that Wii U "may" be "slightly" more powerful than PS360 but that conversation isn't anywhere near concluded. Most developers still don't have the foggiest idea of what this hardware is capable of. All we know for sure is that with little to no time with final hardware and running code optimized for a completely different hardware environment, the Wii U can handle unoptimized X360 code. We can see from recent announcements game environments that absolutely murder the best of what the 360 was able to offer, but only time with final code on games built for this system will tell.

Also, Live, even for subscribers is littered with advertisements, which to me kills any user experience I might have had. The only thing I've ever found Live useful for was multiplayer. Their social features have gone completely unused except for trying it out after they released. PS+ was even more useless for me, because it wasn't necessary for online play and the only reason I subscribed was for the free games initially. I've used MiiVerse more in the first two months of owning the Wii U than I did in 6 years of Live as far as social features are concerned.

NNID's are new and I expect that system to evolve as well.

That is a breath of fresh air!

The more I hear about the 720 it's the Wii U that sounds more "hardcore" to me. Just the fact that Wii U is a dedicated games console makes the 720 sound like it's focusing way too much on crappy Kinect.

WOW, the 720 is using motion detection, Bluetooth wireless controllers and a Blu Ray drive. Welcome to 2006 Microsoft.

Oh no, but Microsoft did it, so it's a hardcore feature now. You have to understand, when Nintendo does something, it's gimmicky and intended for kids. When Microsoft or Sony do it, it creates a more immersive hardcore gaming experience. Testify!

They need to do better then F1 Race Stars as that game is very poor. If that all they can muster on the Wii U then their words don't mean anything. They need to bring games like the real F1 game and Dirt.

So you're saying they aren't allowed to be excited for the platform because you don't think their games were up to standard?  Seems a little counterintuitive to me.  They are excited about the possibilities of asymmetric gameplay is what I read from it.

I suspect the OP is referring to the Wii's remotes and not the Xbox 360 Kinect.

Answer would still be no, you've never had to jump around with Wii remotes

I never said that. I suggest you read again what I said. You obviously haven't played F1 Race Stars. If they were that excited and confident in the Wii U they should bring their top franchises to it not a rubbish game like that.

. I read it just fine.  Do you know that they don't intend to?  They along with every other dev team out there has had little time with the hardware, how do you know they didn't release race stars to bide time until they can put forward a proper non ported release?

You obviously didn't play games that required that then. Of course there were times when you had to jump around with the Wii remotes. With some games it was neccessary.

Even in games that wanted you to jump around you could get away with just simulating the motion from your armchair.

You're the one who started the argument because you don't want me to express my opinion because you think its wrong. I would say if anyone's being immature its you. As for hissy fit its you who had a hissy fit at what I said originally which wasn't even directed at you. Its pretty much a double standard on your part when you criticise me but ignore all the other threads and comments along the same lines on these forums.

I think he was just pointing out that your posts in this thread are contrary to the spirit of the discussion. If you had said something along the lines of "I'm not tired of it because they have a point" you'd have gotten less flak. As it is you went into a discussion about being tired of hearing people spreading FUD and recycled the same arguments the OP was referring to in the first place. It's obvious you're very passionate about your opinion on the matter and far be it from anyone here to take that away from you, but there is little to gain from deriding individuals for asking you to be mindful of the spirit in which the topic was created.

How's about we get back on topic gents.

Not if it works like the Gameboy player on the GameCube which didn't require an actual Gameboy. Not to mention you would need a 3D TV as well and not a lot of people have those. Otherwise the games would just be in 2D.

If the rumor was about releasing 3DS games on VC for Wii U I would get it, but that isn't what it says. Also, You don't NEED a 3DTV to do it, 3DS games play well without the auto stereoscopic effect as well. That's a to each his own argument though. I can understand where you're coming from with it though.

I'm aware they do but that's a bit pointless as the main idea behind the 3DS is to play games in 3D. I can understand them doing this for DS games but then they can just be put on the e-shop. I only play games in 3D on my 3DS and have never done or wanted to play them in regular 2D.

Totally understandable. I take it you wouldn't be sold, lol.