Chaz, on 02 Apr 2013 - 22:06, said:Perhaps it's time for college? Might help you out with that reading comprehension, or at the least teach you how to Google.

__________________________________________________



router bad: PS4 will not be licensing DirectX from Microsoft either. Both PS4 and Wii U will be using a modified form of Opengl, with engines that will utilize the same features found in DirectX. The only console that will be coded with the DirectX API is XBOX.

YOU: On top of everything else, I'm supposed to accept all of this at face value based on the secondhand opinions of a Neogaf user. Sorry, but to me it seems that the only disingenuous one here is you.


Oh. So you decided to be an @$$hole.

http://www.microsoft....aspx?q=directx

Now you're a stupid looking @$$hole.

Although you dont have to worry about believing random internet board members lying to you about microsoft owning direct x.

 

What are you babbling on about? 

 

Learn to Google

 

Funny thing is, my post was paraphrasing you from an earlier post. So I guess the real a$$hole is actually you. No argument there.

Its a common fact sony wont be licensing dx for their system.

Direct x is owned by microsoft. Sony would have to pay microsoft royalties for every ps4 sold.

 

Perhaps it's time for college? Might help you out with that reading comprehension, or at the least teach you how to Google.

No, actually, you haven't, and they've made no such comment at GDC.

Sure I did, right here:
http://thewiiu.com/t...ine-4/?p=189257

And yes, Capcom told anyone who asked at the conference that their Deep Down footage was running from PS4 hardware.

Stills don't make the non existent game any more tangible than the target render did. Why are you even arguing about this?

Because I commented on what I saw in the PS4 trailers and you told me that I was either lying or have no clue what I'm looking at.

I'm supposed to listen to you because you miraculously already know so many intimate details about the PS4...though I do have to question that when you post things like this:

PS4 will not be licensing DirectX from Microsoft either. Both PS4 and Wii U will be using a modified form of Opengl, with engines that will utilize the same features found in DirectX. The only console that will be coded with the DirectX API is XBOX.

On top of everything else, I'm supposed to accept all of this at face value based on the secondhand opinions of a Neogaf user. Sorry, but to me it seems that the only disingenuous one here is you.

CAPCOM stated themselves that the Phanta Rhei demo (Deep Down) was rendered in engine, not running live on PS4 hardware in engine, just running in engine. Have some common sense here and don't argue a point for the sake of arguing, its silly. We all know plenty of companies use target renders to hype their upcoming products, Sony does it more than others.

And I already told you that Capcom made statements at GDC claiming that the Deep Down renders are running on PS4 hardware, as well as a tweet from one of the developers showing a still from the game running on PS4. This is a hardware that's going to be launching in 6-7 months, it's not exactly making any big leaps to assume that the some of these renders are indicative of what the actual games are going to look like.

Check the e3 footage from 2011, at the booth where they were showing off the Zelda tech demo, they pointed out global illumination and color bleed being a central focus when designing the platform.

Again, I see no mention of this anywhere in the news stories surrounding the Wii U's reveal.

Also, a GAF member by the name of bgassassin has some great industry sources that were bound by NDA, so all they could reveal about what they knew is that there was "dedicated silicon" for things like GI, shadows, tessellation, and more that removed some of the burden on the main RAM pool.

Statements like this are exactly why I said your arguments are all one-sided. Capcom making informal statements at a developer conference has no bearing on the truth, yet you're more than happy to cite NeoGaf as a source??! Hell, why don't we just start compiling our facts from the VGChartz and Gamespot forums while we're at it...

But you'll call the Wii U specs terrible and refuse to accept any information on the PS4 specs, because they aren't in front of you?

You keep telling us that the trailers aren't to be believed, and aren't running on PS4 hardware, but nowhere do you back up your claims. You say that we know all these things about the PS4 hardware already based on just a simple spec sheet, and made judgements on the games' visual qualities before ever having seen a game running on it or even an E3 trailer. Hell, you're even benchmarking the PS4 CPU against the Wii U's. So yeah, I don't think I'm being unreasonable questioning your observations.

I'll accept any information you have on the PS4, provided you can substantiate it. Until then, I can only look at what Sony, Capcom and others have shown and speculate based on that.

For the record, I don't think I ever said that the Wii U's specs were terrible.

I didn't claim anything about the Wii U hardware...

Well, you just claimed that the Wii U has dedicated hardware support for global illumination. Source?

Also, about GI being in the Wii U, that isn't speculation, the whole reason the Zelda demo existed was to show it off

I don't remember Nintendo or ATI ever saying that...so again, source?

I understand that you like to analyze what's in front of you, but that isn't what you are doing here, you are making assumptions based on an overhyped reveal reel with videos and renders running without any game code.

But who's to say that these trailers are inaccurate or this isn't running on PS4 hardware?

On bare metal, means that there is dedicated logic to handle global illumination, something they made a big deal out of with the Zelda demo.

They who?

Again, I'm having a hard time determining what's fact and fiction here. As near as I can tell, the global illumination seen in the Wind Waker demo is a diffuse colorbleeding pixel shader, and not at all the technique used in the UE4 demos. If you're making the assumption that the Wii U has secret hardware features that the PS4 doesn't, I'd have a really hard time believing that....unless someone from ATI or Nintendo has confirmed this feature.

EPIC have already made it clear that PS4 will not support much in the way of the new effects introduced with UE4, it will be scaled down just as all other versions other than PC will be.

Again, aside from global illumination not being in the console versions of UE4, what else has Epic confirmed to not be there?

I'm sorry, but I find your argument to be extremely one-sided. I'm perfectly willing to accept that the PS4 trailers might be fictional, but I also see no evidence to support any of your claims about the Wii U hardware being as full-featured as you claim.

We can deduce the capability from the hardware, because unlike the Wii U, we can know anything we want to about what Sony is including.

That's great for you, but I prefer to analyze what I can see in front of me rather than making assumptions.

They never claimed Deep Down was in game or even live rendered. What they did claim is that it was in engine. Pay attention to what they say. Take a look at the bird demo again, which shows even more detailed animations, shading, and volumetric effects.

Capcom's made statements at GDC claiming that Deep Down is being rendered on the PS4 hardware. I'd take that with a grain of salt... but if it's true, then there's really nothing more to discuss here.

You are referring to global illumination, which is something the Wii U GPU was built to handle on bare metal. Saying it can't be done on other systems just because CAPCOM showed an experimental engine doesn't really fly.

I didn't say a word about global illumination, nor did I say that it can't be done on the Wii U. I'm curious though, how are we deducing that the Wii U even supports GI?

Saying that the Wii U was built to handle GI "on bare metal" (whatever that means) isn't really an argument anyway: you can render pretty much anything on the Wii U if you're willing to wait long enough. The question is how much you can render and keep up am acceptable frame rate.

My point is simply that I've seen nothing running on the Wii U that shows anywhere near the amount of lighting and effects shown in the PS4 demos, and if Sony is indeed sincere about their first and second party titles running at 1080p, then I'm doubly impressed.

He isn't saying that the PS4 or 720 are "more" suited to UE4...

Well, he kind of *is* saying that... what else can you glean from him showcasing his new engine at the PS4 announcement...or his statement that the PS4 is "a really perfect gaming PC??" Snarky remarks about Nintendo aside, he's basically told us that for next-gen consoles and PC, UE4 is the best choice, for Wii U stick with UE3. I'm not sure why that's a bad thing anyway.

I've yet to hear of a theatrical CGI animated movie uprezzing their output. What's the point of making the movie look worse to save render time?


Portions of the Dark Knight and Dark Knight Rises were shot and rendered at 4K by Double Negative for IMAX.


Not really, usually it's simply a matter of matching whatever your output format is.

Actually 2K is the industry standard "max" for all CG, some is rendered at a lower resolution to save time, and yes, some of it is uprezzed. The only scenes rendered at higher than 2K are those that require much more minute detail that needs to come through to the final version.

I've yet to hear of a theatrical CGI animated movie uprezzing their output. What's the point of making the movie look worse to save render time?

Also, turns out Dark Knight wasn't rendered at 8k. They wanted to, but never did it. They did one scene specifically for the IMAX release at 5.6k but the rest of the movie was done at 2K and up rezzed to the IMAX resolution, like all other IMAX releases.

Portions of the Dark Knight and Dark Knight Rises were shot and rendered at 8K by Double Negative for IMAX.

Also, art direction plays a big part in how high the resolution is when they go to render.

Not really, usually it's simply a matter of matching whatever your output format is.

Really? A noticeable increase in polygon counts? Right there I can tell that you are either being completely disingenuous on purpose (lying to make a point) or you really have no idea what you're looking at. There was no noticeable increase in poly count in anything that was live rendered at the reveal...

I'm looking primarily at the Deep Down footage and the Killzone footage. Assuming that Capcom and Sony are to be believed and that is in-game footage, the character and environment models in Deep Down are quite a bit more detailed than the current generation console games - Wii U included. Killzone is showing a lot of nice effects and a pretty decent attempt at physically plausible shading.

...and "more subtle lighting and shadowing" or SSAO, can also be done on the Wii U.

Ambient occlusion is a self-shadowing hack. I was referring more to the use of soft shadows and realistic falloffs.

I'm afraid any supposed increase in fidelity won't show through as well as you think it will. The PS4 can't handle the main draw of UE4 anyway...

What is the "main draw" of UE4??

...and the only reason it won't be created for Wii U isn't for lack of power, they don't want to make an engine for the only Power ISA based console, that is all. They'll eventually bring it to Wii U, just not up front.

Lots of conclusions being drawn here. I'm more inclined the simplest explanation: Mark Rein is telling us - albeit in a rather snide way - that UE3 is more suited to the Wii U's GPU, and UE4 to the PC/PS4/720. The Wii U GPU is not optimized for DX11 and the other platforms are (I'm not saying that DX11 is required for UE4 by any means, but that that class of hardware is more suited to its capabilities.)

The PS4 is an impressive piece of kit, and it will do great things, but there are too many people overhyping and overstating it's capability rather than being realistic about what it will do, which is marginally better than the other consoles this generation.

I think that too little has been shown of the PS4's abilities yet to pass that kind of judgement....it's not even E3.

More parallel =/= more powerful, and the PS4 CPU will have much more in the way of background processing to handle that will make the extra parallelism moot in game. That aside, I agree that the PS4 will show much more in the way of draw distance later in the Gen, but not up front. As far as gameplay, all the extra power gives you is an indiscriminable boost in polygons, while all of the functions that make game look markedly better like ssao, hdr, bump and normal mapping, tessellation, etc are possible and expandable on both thanks to programmable sharers. Again later in the Gen there will be some obvious differences but not to the layman. Watchdogs will be a good example and ubi has already said all the versions currently running look the same. Hell the huge bump from ps3 to 4 will not be a huge leap on and of itself graphically speaking. It will do things PS3 is already doing but a little better. We will notice the difference but many won't. The most recent GPUs with half or less of the power of my 6870s at least match it in performance, because not every calculation is a floating point operation, there is much more to graphics logic than that.

So I agree and disagree with you. There is more power in the gpu, but we won't see the benefits of it until much later. Also, the 720 GPU is not going to be as powerful either, but we will see the same levels of performance out of both when games are coded for their strengths. Im still waiting to decide whether ps4 or 720 will be my secondary console.

 

I think you're severely downplaying the PS4 hardware and talking up the Wii U hardware just a bit there. The first PS4 demos are already showing a noticeable increase in polygon counts, effects as well as much more subtle lighting and shadowing...and the games that are about to be shown at E3 are also looking mighty impressive.

 

The increase in fidelity will likely be very apparent from the get go this generation because I think that a lot of UE4 PC development is going to scale nicely down to PS4/720 games while the Wii U will be getting UE3 games that look like prettier versions of current generation games.

 

I'll agree that the Wii U might not get a fair showing for a long time as it's looking like no third party is going to really push the hardware anytime soon, but that's no reason to not give the PS4 credit for being an impressive piece of kit.

Nintendo rarely sells hardware at a loss because it's much riskier for them compared to Microsoft or Sony, who have other businesses that can absorb the loss. 

It varies by movie but most Pixar movies are done at 2k at the most.  The most recent Dark Knight movie was done at 8k.  Most pure CGI films are actually rendered at a lower resolution then uprezzed to the release resolutions when output to film.  The home movie adaptation is a conversion back to digital from film.

 

All film CG is rendered at 2k (or higher) and reformatted from there. Nothing is ever "uprezzed".

It's certainly true that digital distribution is becoming more and more popular, there will always be a need for retail distribution for the foreseeable future. The question is whether Gamestop will change their sales strategy to keep up, or simply whine about it all the way into bankruptcy.

It's certainly true that digital distribution is becoming more and more popular, there will always be a need for retail distribution for the foreseeable future. The question is whether Gamestop will change their sales strategy to keep up, or simply whine about it all the way into bankruptcy.

Really?  That is not how I remember it at all.  When I was looking, Amazon was sold out online, Gamestop, sold out online and in store, Fry's, sold out, Best Buy, sold out and the employees were angry because they said they were only getting 3 per shipment. 

 

I agree this is a rabbit hole, I clarified my point in my last post, so I'm not sure why you are asking me to do it again.

 

Because you stated that there was absolutely no shortage of Xbox 360's at launch and then followed up with "acting like the Wii U wasn't also sold out everywhere throughout the holiday season is disingenuous", when the reverse is really more accurate.

That really doesnt change anything at the root of the point anyway.  Most console launches have some supply strain when they launch near the holidays, which is always.  The Wii U couldn't be found anywhere for the first two months either.  I called every electronics retailer in San Diego county, and in nearby Orange and LA counties, no one had them. 

 

You could buy a Wii U Deluxe in LA at any of the Best Buy or Target stores at Christmas (still got one left in my closet that I couldn't unload from the Pico store). If that didn't work, Amazon had them available online. Xbox had a more severe shortage because they had only built 500,000 consoles for the holiday season. In February 2006, Peter Moore was apologizing to the country for the shortages as MS ramped up production of the Xbox 360, but the only place to buy it online was ebay if the stores was sold out.

 

I'm not sure what's to be gained about comparing launch availability of the systems...the Wii U started stronger with over 2 millions systems shipped to retail, but then suffered as sales flatlined after the first month. The 360 started slow with less than a million trickling out in 2005, but sold strongly as production increased in 2006.

Nope, try again.

 

I worked next door to a gamestop in 2005 and was best friends with the manager.  They had issues initially getting them off store shelves, but shortly after the launch window sales picked up a little, though there was still always stock.  This was in North Carolina.  The Wii I had to hunt for, and ended up asking my friend to hold onto one for me when he got a shipment, which was difficult for him to do because he was still trying to fulfill preorders.  If the XBOX or PS3 was dealing with hardware shortages they would have had lower initial sales predictions and wouldn't have had to lower them as Nintendo has done now.  

 

The Wii U I spent two weeks looking for, because no one in San Diego County, Orange County, or LA County had them directly after launch until mid December.  They are well stocked now.  The 360, on the other hand, I walked into Gamestop the day after launch, with no preorder, and bought.  My wife (girlfriend at the time) bought one two months later without knowing I already had one, I returned that one.  There have never been stock shortages of the 360.  There have never been issues finding them on store shelves.  At the time I was an Xbox fan first, thanks to Halo.  I ended up getting all three systems.

 

He's not making it up: there were major Xbox 360 shortages for at least the first four months of availability in North America. I got one for my birthday in March 2006 and my wife was forced to get it on ebay because she couldn't get one anywhere else. Google "xbox shortage 2005" and you'll see a number of stories about it.

All of Sony's and Microsoft's current next-gen projects are currently 1080p, it's assumed that's going to be the baseline for third party games as well.

Raw screenshot was in 4K. Website probably just downscaled it because of file size problems.

 

The photo linked above is 2048x1152 - that's film resolution, not 4K.

No it won't.

Regardless of what third parties do, the Wii U is technically capable of putting up a great fight.

The Wii wasn't even in the same time zone compared to the PS3 and 360.  Even when Nintendo put together the absolute best graphical game for the Wii, it looked like a joke compared to what the 360 or PS3 could put out.  that's because the Wii was basically an overclocked GameCube.  It really wasn't technically competitive at all.  The PS3 and 360 stomped all over the Wii like the Incredible Hulk versus a newborn Smurf baby.  

The Wii U comes out swinging.  It is technically very capable and will be playing in the same ballpark as the PS4, though the PS4 is more powerful.  Many games will look very similar.  

There will inevitably be some PS4 games that outshine the Wii U, while other games will look similar if not identical on both systems.

It's more like Godzilla versus Mechagodzilla this time with the Wii U instead of Bambi versus Godzilla like it was with the Wii last time around.

Gotta love analogies...



I think there is a pretty major difference from that game and the PS3 games. Not only are the textures absolutely superb and the lighting splendid, but the polygon amount on the character is staggering.  On PS3 models, I can literally count the polygons in a rendered character.  But on this character, they really poured on the geometry.  The only places on the character where the geometry is more familiar is on the buttons/clips the character has on his sleeves and also where the straps curve. Then there is the low poly broken rebar behind him. Everything else is pretty seriously amazing.  

I do really hate the mask. It is pretty stupid looking.  Like you almost want to laugh looking at it.  But I imagine that's something they have to do anyway, since it would take a lot more polygons to render a realistic looking face.  this game may be pushing the geometry as it is. Remember, this is a game with a lot going on at once.  Plenty of characters to render and some decent environments too.

but that screenshot is also a bit of a farce.

...considering it is in 4k resolution - something we know the PS4 cannot render games at.

More than a little misleading...

Not only is it part of a cutscene and not gameplay, but it has its resolution artificially bumped up quite a bit.

Sure, they may be able to get that resolution on a development station...

but let's not pass those sony press shots off as actual PS4 screens.

they're not.

It's not 4K, it's just 2K film resolution, probably rendered for a trailer....nothing that the real PS4 couldn't produce.

There is NO TV to run more then 1080p

The guys making 4K TVs might not agree with this.

    In the end, when both systems are side by side and both are running in 1080p with their best looking games, you're going to have to squint to see the graphical differences this time around. Where as with Wii to PS3/360, the resolution made it much easier to notice the graphical difference, the fact that the Wii U has good texture quality and runs in 1080p is going to make it 10x harder to tell the difference.

 

The thing is, more demanding Wii U games (i.e. most retail games) won't be running at 1080p. The next-gen consoles will the first to truly be able to run all games @ 1080p.

Think the Wii U Ambassador Program is just a hoax.

 

Not surprised retailers are dropping the price though, it's hard to move a system with so few games available. I wound up with 2 Deluxe sets at launch and still can't get full price for the spare one on ebay...nobody's biting.

The reason why first party Wii games rivaled those of the PS360 was because Nintendo knew what they wanted to do with the system as soon as they designed it. They knew that Prime 3 would benefit from the pointer, and they knew that Zelda would benefit from motion controls. They knew what Su per Mario 3D Land was going to be when they showed off the 3DS, and they knew what the next 3D Mario would be like when they announced the Wii U. If they went out of the hardware industry, they wouldn't get to design their games based on what they want, and the quality would drop.

This doesn't necessarily mean that Nintendo has to stop building their controllers. Hypothetically speaking, if Nintendo sold the Wii U tablet controller as a USB peripheral that plugged into the next Playstation or Xbox, had all the Wii U games and access to the PSN/XBL online and stores, would that really be such a bad thing?

For the most part, I think this is likely to happen sooner or later (although I think Nintendo will always build handhelds since they've exceptionally well in that arena). The console market is getting more and more crowded, and with tablets and smartphones becoming viable as gaming machines, consumers will more and more start to question the value of a dedicated, $300+ gaming console.

If the PS4 and Xbox 720 see sales declines along the same lines that Nintendo has with the Wii U (and I think that they will), one of the three is likely to jump ship, and Nintendo would be smart to do it first. Nintendo has always dragged their feet developing their online platform and supporting digital downloads (with decent DRM), which ultimately hurts them. It stands to reason that unless they want to start spending more money in those areas, it might make more sense financially to simply sell software on another platform with better online features.

Think of Nintendo as apple.

People also said that Apple would never in a million years use Intel CPUs...look how that turned out.

YOu are kidding, the final game looked better then the trailers in the case of both Killzone 2 and 3.

In all fairness, I don't think any Killzone game has yet to live up to the original pre-rendered K2 trailer

Clock speed should never be used to gauge processing power; some CPUs can process more instructions per second than others, some fall flat on complex code where others don't....there are a lot of factors that figure into the equation.