Hi guys i'm new here, but i've read since 1 year your comments. As many of you i'm too interessted in WiiU specs, but nobody knows about it (besides developers with a devkit) But there is one thing, that i can post here. Maybe it can give us some insight. Its nothing groundbreaking, or really new, but it shows that this system has enough power, and isnt only on par with PS360
Here is a post from a guy in eurogamer, who claims to be a developer. He sounds reasonable in my opinion. So the following posts are quotes from him
"It's interesting to see the Wii U's CPU being called "weak" all the time without qualification. There is a significant difference to developing for PowerPC hardware which is most likely the issue Ubisoft deal with here. You can do pretty stellar things on the Wii U hardware as a whole, and its design is strongly in favor of a kind of pseudo-PS3-SPU approach using 3 hardware threads plus compute shaders with the totally capable GPU, but it's still not port friendly without a lot of specific attention. TBH I've been impressed Ubi have put out the kind of port quality they have been.
There are things you can do on Wii U that carry far lighter footprints in certain settings, the lowest hanging fruit being SIMD ops for certain math. 2D vector math is stupid fast on the U, for instance. But overall it's pretty far from a "preconfigured PC" like the PS4 or the One.
Sidenote: I think it's interesting to see how far the PS3 has come. Remember the early days when games attempted to use the RSX "traditionally" and hit the brick wall of alpha blending time and time again? The amount of ludicrous slowdown on early PS3 games whenever something transparent appears make the more recent, SPU-tricksy games look like they arrived from the far flung future.
Regardless I think it's pretty uninteresting whether or not they'd shove a "next gen" game onto the Wii U. It's just not that system. I'd rather play a "next gen", heavyweight, grunty muscly game onto my PS4, and leave the Wii U to oddities and smaller things. Plenty of room for both."
"Nintendo counts on developers to know how compute shaders and parallelism work to alleviate the CPU issues (which are real). The GPU is, relatively speaking, a powerhouse and if you use it without care you are completely missing out on the intended design.
The thing that has bothered me the most with Wii U dev isn't "power" but simply that it's a weird idiosyncratic system that makes it hard to do things in traditional ways."
"As a developer, now having some (admittedly recent) insight into how the system is architected, anyone who complains its underpowered have very specific expectations of what a games system should be doing. I think it's, in one way, fair to expect every system under the sun to be designed to do the same things, I mean, they are in direct competition, but in this case there are going to be things that system A is built to do that system B will have a tougher time at and vice versa. The horrible Silent Hill 2 HD update Konami did for the PS3 struggles with rendering fog like the PS2 did, for instance, because of both the higher resolution render target and the basic fact that the PS3 is basically worse than the PS2 at rendering alpha blended surfaces. Think about that.
I can't get into more detail, but I for one, being an indie with a pretty small team and some specific ideas, have more than enough legroom to spare on the system, and I'm just plain excited to be working with a touchscreen with so little latency (wtf are you talking about, last gen touchscreen, TRY doing art on a capacitive screen) and such a potent legacy."
So these are the quotes. The username is Sunjammer on eurogamer, if you want to search him. As i said, he sounds reasonable and i would like to read your thoughts about this statements^^
Edited by Chronos21, 23 January 2015 - 08:49 PM.