routerbad

In the PC world 8gb is currently the logical maximum, with anything more being overkill.

http://m.ca.ign.com/...em_Requirements

With this just being an example, 2GB is doable for such high end games, with 8gb being the reccomended for super high def.

But I don't think the xbox. One or the PS4's cpu and gpu can ceven compare to a super high end system, maybe the midrange. All it really means is that the ram won't be a bottleneck. It could be handy though, as you can load larger maps and not worry about loading screens as much once the game starts, but it depends on the developers.

Personally I'm waiting to see how.the games work on retail systems. It moght just not be worth it, especially with all of the unknowns such as how used games arer handeled.

That's basically the point.  They won't have access to all 8GB, and I seriously doubt they'll have access to 4GB, but we don't know for sure yet.  The GPU and CPU wouldn't allow "super high def" anyway, not equivelent to what is possible on the PC side.  The amount of memory is overkill from a cost to manufacture perspective, but I'm sure developers are happy for it.

RAM in pc's needs to be higher than on consoles because it runs more programs in the background. This doesn't go for X1 because of 3 OS' lol. But no way the next-gen games will use more than 6GB. 4 is a lot already. (I think Wii U should have had 4, 1 being for OS. 1GB for games is pretty low)

They'll free up more for games in the future, perhaps with the summer update, they are still ironing out the OS, but 1-1.5GB is actually plenty when you are able to stream from a disc to pull in assets.  Most games during actual gameplay don't actually use a whole lot of VRAM, even on PC, and even with the highest settings.  Crysis is the outlier here, because their engine has always been extremely RAM dependent, but the new engine is much more efficient.

I never claimed that they were exclusive. My point is it has support. The Xbox 360 managed to do well with a large lack of exclusive titles.

Yep, but the 360 was no where near as restrictive to owners.

Also, indies are getting more exposure now, and Microsoft has flatly stated they will not allow them to self publish, and that the same restrictive and profit draining policies will remain.

Similar on the surface maybe, but they also claimed to be adding a lot of polish to the PS4 version so it might "feel" different.

 

If they look too similar then its merely the limitations of porting to so many different consoles, they SHOULD look different.  Then again, people seem to underestimate how having more objects on and screen and a greater drawing distance makes a game feel and often play much better.

That was paid sony advertisement.  Sony paid them to do a dev diary to talk up the PS4 version, and any business that walks away from free money is stupid.

They won't be porting anything, Wii U version is being built side by side, by a different team.  It will look extremely close, and the "polish" they are adding won't change the visuals or the gameplay, they said that all next gen versions look the same, they will play differently on each console, however.

NONE of those games come close to taxing the Wii U hardware. None.

Sonic All Stars was another ported game that was ported on early hardware, and is only using two cores.  Most if not all of the ports so far are locked to two cores because they didn't have enough knowledge about the system to optimize it correctly.  They did say that the issues were resolved and that they are able to use all three cores now, but those games still do not.

So that's why it's not backwards compatible..


What happened yesterday?

Something was announced or revealed or something, I dont even know.

There has been no evidence so far that the wii u is anything other than current gen performance so far. Not exactly the same I grant you but in the ballpark area. So many fantasy figures have been conjured up but that's not evidence. Evidence is based on how a console performs, what fabrication process it uses, what developers have stated, how much power it consumes and most importantly the architecture which has been x-rayed. All this evidence points to current gen performance.

 

Watchdogs is not an example of what the wii u is capable of because we haven't seen it. It's quite possible it will be visually similar to current gen models with extra gamepad features. That would be the expected performance level based on past games. Assasin's Creed 3 is from the same actual developers and is weaker than the ps3 and 360 versions both visually and in frame rates.

 

http://www.eurogamer...-wii-u-face-off

 

It also made minimal use of the gamepad. This time around the wii u has to do a lot more work with the gamepad which may be to the detriment of the main game detail.

 

Surely the time to say the wii u is more powerful than current gen is when the evidence supports it. That surely means the majority of cross platform games outperforming ps3 and 360. Currently the reverse is true. Once we have passed that milestone we can then start comparing to ps4 and xbox one. 

There's been plenty of evidence, you've chosen to ignore it.  A few of us have spoonfed you information over and over, and over again, only for you to ignore it, and continue acting ignorant to avoid having to shed your confirmation bias.

Ubisoft themselves, in candid interviews (not the Sony paid advertising) have stated that all next gen versions of Watch_Dogs look "identical".

Assassins Creed 3 is not weaker than the other consoles in any area, the framerates are comparable, and they were given little time with non final hardware to port the game.  This is one of the games that is only using two of the Wii U CPU cores and the game is not optimized to use the SIMD available on the GPU, because the Nintendo tools weren't there at the time to help them get it done, and the GPU was foreign.  Also, linking an article with little journalistic integrity and a known bias against Nintendo doesn't really support your argument.

Doing more with the gamepad does not affect visuals or framerates or anything else.  The only situation that would affect anything is the introduction of an additional gamepad.

A Wii U game could feature a character popping OUT OF the gamepad to slap you in the face and you would still not consider it evidence enough.  You have an issue with not listening to anyone, and shaping every argument to fit your view regardless of the facts.

Everyone needs to remember that PowerISA is what has been the primary focus for game developers worldwide for the last seven years.  x86 has been the backseat man.  This will make x86 more popular but it doesn't diminish the Wii U prospects at all because all game developers are still tooled for PowerISA, and updating the dev environment to handle the newer instruction set isn't a huge investment.

Could have at least linked my article instead, lol.  I had it up before IGN.

I'm talking about PS4 5 years from now vs Wii U now with better engines and knowledge of hardware, which of coarse isn't a fair comparison.
But if you cut all the multitasking from PS4 it would be far above Wii U (but you could do the same for Wii U to compensate. I'm just talking hypnotically, not like they'll do any of this)

Or from what we have learned of them, for all we know the PS4/Xbox One specs sucks compared to Wii U and they only beat it in ram so they can pretend they are better ;P (Not saying it is like that, but we can't know for sure until someone opens the PS4/Xbox One)

It's not just an unfair comparison, there aren't any games that really showcase the WiiU potential at this point, other than perhaps NintendoLand, but in very small ways.

PS4 and WiiU will continue to have similar looking games throughout the generation, because they both support all of the same rendering technologies.  There will be minor limitations that Wii U brings to the table eventually I'm sure, but it won't be enough to change gameplay or even visuals in a substantive way.

I still blame the wii u's cpu for not getting unreal engine 4 when everyone else is.

Yeah, no.  You can blame shrewd business practice on EPIC's part.  They just finished porting UE3 to Wii U, there is no reason to port UE4, especially considering it has basically the exact same feature set sans the workflow, when they can let someone else do it, which will most likely be happening.

and with that said, regarding games, i think Nintendo will once again offer a better experience in gameplay and innovation with it's gamepad. Just my opinion though.

I agree.  Nintendo and Sony seem to be the most interested in games, Microsoft is trying to expand the userbase through massive media integration and accessibility.

full windows kernal? or did I mishear during the announcement? 

Yep

To be honest... I'd be surprised if we see a COD: Ghosts that looks like the other next-gen versions, or a Metroid game with graphics comparable to Killzone 4 (talking to next-gen in general, so not Xbox only). But it's not that one massive leap everyone was hoping for.

COD ghosts new engine should have been used on PS3 and 360, they could pull of the visuals shown, and have, with games with similar art styles like uncharted.

Aside from that, Wii U will have some very impressive looking games, and 3rd party games will look the same on all consoles by and large.

Nintendo got away with releasing a technically weak console with the wii and it was a huge success. They tried it again with the wii u and it failed. It's really an issue of greed with Nintendo, they want to sell low cost hardware at inflated prices. This time around they misjudged it. They really needed a spec somewhere between 360/PS3 and the next gen sony and microsoft models but instead they went for a very low cost design. What is impressive is how Nintendo have combined very low cost parts with very low power consumption to create console that is competitive with 360/PS3. What isn't impressive sadly is performance. It's weaker in some areas compared to 360/PS3 like the cpu and main memory bandwidth. 

 

If Nintendo had abandoned wii compatibility they could have achieved greater performance at a lower price. I personally would have prefered this route.

 

The gamepad is also not ideal It's over-sized and its highly likely a new wii u model will come out with a reduced size screen on the game pad.

 

Nintendo will fight back and they have a huge advantage in that their console is made of very low cost parts so they don't have to go head to head with ps4 and the new xbox price wise.

 

It's great news for consumers as Nintendo are now forced to lower prices and bundle more software to sell wii u consoles.

Again with the misinformative, disingenuous posts.

The WiiU is not usng low cost parts, at all.  We know from expert analysis (the people who actually did the die shots and do them for a living) that the GPU is somewhere in the ballpark of $100 per chip (at wholesale).  The rest of the parts are similar, the CPU is a great custom chip using a creative blend of new tech and old ideas.

There is no reason to believe, at all, that a "reduced screen size" gamepad will ever be released, the ergonomics are well thought out and implemented.

Here is the real meat that you don't seem to understand.  Wii U announced in 2011, and even on very early prototype hardware looked amazing.  Nintendo took advice from developers in creating the spec sheet for the console.  Programmable shaders, plenty of RAM, high density and high speed disk drive, online capability, social integration.  The console is actually a very nice piece of hardware, as is the gamepad.  Sony and MS have had two years since the WiiU reveal to make sure that their systems were slightly more powerful than WiiU.

The point is that if nintendo comunicated and listened to the developers making the games they wanted to see on wii u we wouldnt be in this mess. If anybody says but need for speed as pc textures again ill scream! i play it on ps3 as well as wii u and there is bearly any difference at all. They claim the controler is the next gen part but i have a tablet, thats not next gen! Has any body seen microsoft illumiroom? look it up on youtube, thats inovation. I feel like i may come accross as troll but im not, i run a business of my own and businesses should keep evolving or risk being left behind.
If it was possible id like nintendo offer full refunds to its customers, take back the consoles, salvage any parts, sell them or reuse them and start again. I cant understand why console makers cant make there machines upgradable like pcs, that way insuring customers have the choice to make machines as powerful as they want them.

It isn't the fact that it is using PC textures that makes it a feat.  It's the fact that it was ported in under three months, on foreign hardware to the developers, running on an engine designed for a very different architecture.  The fact that they were able to "flip a switch" to include higher resolution textures and more robust assets as well as implement novel gamepad features and a completely overhauled lighting system is very impressive, and speaks to what can be done with little time but decent support from Nintendo.

I have never heard that. For the Wii, yes they had to. That's why the Wii wasn't HD. But Nintendo, while I am sure budget constraints led to some trouble, wouldn't make the Wii U less powerful than the 360.

Nintendo actually had another console that would have been more powerful in 2006 but shoveled it in favor of using motion controls to expand the market, rather than to appeal to the smallest segment.

 Well all the excuses in the world can be made for each game that doesn't get released on the Wii U.  It was the same throughout the life cycle of the Wii.  I missed out on all the major triple A games because of the same excuses.

Nope, you missed out on the AAA games because Wii was simply (and very obviously at the time) not able to compete visually.  Now, since for most AAA games released by third parties the budget is 30% marketing, 50% visuals, and 20% gameplay, most of the investment spent on those games was lost on Wii.  When games rely most heavily on visuals because the gameplay isn't good enough to compensate sales will suffer.

Who cares about N64 and GC guys, that argument is no longer relevant, im glad theres a lot of us nintendo fans who feel the same way at this time.
When nintendo were developing the wii u they must have looked at ways to win back there old customers who have gone over to PS and XBOX, im sure there list looked a bit like this,
1. Games, NOT first party but 3rd party, if these customers were truly in love with mario n zelda, they wouldnt have bought xbox's.
2. Internet and online play, obviously.
3. Power, most people have HD tvs now so nintendo should make use of that. And after all, no developer creating new and existing i.ps for next gen consoles ( supposedly like ours ) wants to be restricted by lack of power and the inability to run the newest graphics engine.
4. Make it seem more adult, if they keep slapping a picture of mario next to a nintendo logo nobody will believe nintendo are evolving.
They did well with the zombie u ad campaign, but it was hardly a ground breaker.
5. BIG BIG BIG Marketing campaign.
Its a fairly simple list but if they were serious about winning back gamers thats what was needed.
Heres another example of there failure with this console.
Unreal 4 we all new it was in development last year, and you my not like the games using unreal but for christ sake ps3 n xbox users do, the wii u cant use it, what ever anybody says, unreal said that unreal 3 is what the wii u will use. WHY THE F*#K WOULD YOU NOT MAKE A CONSOLE POWERFUL ENOUGH TO USE AN ENGINE HUNDREDS OF DEVS ARE CURRENTLY PRODUCING GAMES WITH FOR NEXT GEN CONSOLES! WE WILL MISS OUT AGAIN!!!!!
NINTENDO LISTEN , MAKE A FREEKIN CONSOLE POWERFUL ENOUGH TO RUN YOUR GAMES AND BIG 3RD PARTY GAMES AND YOU WIN THE CONSOLE WAR! ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH SO SO SO SIMPLE !

Im beggining to believe that because people and devs bang on at nintendo about making there machines more powerful, the old guys still running nintendo have said, "we no best, look at our track record, which is fair enough, but please please please, dont leave nintendo on a bad note, step down guys while your still seen as legends, i dont want to read an article headlined "the rise and fall of nintendo" with pictures of we all no who underneith.

1. Third party games DO NOT SELL SYSTEMS

2. They've done this, and continue to improve it

3. It has plenty of "power" to run anything PS4 can run, you are still operating under the assumption that WiiU being less powerful than PS4 will somehow make a huge difference in visuals or in gameplay, it won't, for reasons that myself and others have constantly showed and proved.

4. This is just a ridiculous strawman argument, and has no place here.  Videogame systems aren't "adult" or "not adult" or "kiddy" (exception for Leapster!) and for the first time ever Nintendo is not requiring concept approval on games published for their hardware, meaning 3rd parties can make literally whatever they want.  Hell the most marketed game for the WiiU BY NINTENDO was ZombiU leading up to launch.

5. I agree, they do need a big marketing campaign, but I seriously think that Nintendo themselves felt they had to launch too early, and that the system wasn't stable enough for their liking, so they decided to let the early adopters get in on it, an audience in which ad dollars would have been completely wasted.  Once the system is more stable and feature rich (Summer update, anyone?) they will go on an ad blitz.  They've already said as much.

Also, UE4 can and will run on WiiU, but EPIC will not be doing the legwork.  EPIC ported UE3 to WiiU, they haven't seen a good return on that investment yet, it makes no sense for them to port another engine with THE EXACT SAME FEATURE SET as UE3 save the workflow.  By the way, Thief 4 is console exclusive to PS4 and is developed using Unreal3.  "Hundreds of game developers" aren't using unreal 4 yet and no software has been released on it.  Check your arguments better.

Nintendo will not win the console war with hardware, no manufacturer ever has, in fact.  They will win it with compelling software. Period, end of story.

Please stop griping and moaning about things which you obviously don't understand very well.  You've shown that you don't understand the business side of the video game industry, and that you don't understand how hardware works, as you are simply parroting the same trite arguments that are brought forward either by people with a vested interest in Nintendo's failure, or the drones that parrot them because they are unable to think for themselves.

lol fair points but wrong mate, apart from the epic bit, unreal 4 might run but devs will use 3 on wii u to make there games run better, im looking for source on that.
Number 5 was nothing about power it clearly says BIG MARKETING CAMPAIGN.
Look im a nintendo fan too ( lol hard to believe from recent posts ) i do like the wii u, but im just anoyed at nintendos sheer ignorance towards developers needs, meaning this great console will be snubbed for big new titles i will want to play. I see it like this.........
imagine you ask me to build wall, you say to me, "what do you need", i say "bricks, cement, a shovel, and spirit level, and it will be perfect". You bring me everything i need except the cement, "the wall aint gonna last" i tell you.... do you see my point lol

Sorry, you're wrong again.  EPIC never made such a comment, so you'll be looking for a long time for that source, I'm afraid.

You say Nintendo is ignorant but every console generation sees Nintendo do something completely different that is aped either partially or entirely by their competitors.  The problem isn't that Nintendo is ignorant, no Nintendo has a very good read on the industry and on the market, they do things differently because if things keep along the same path for very long we have another industry crash to deal with.  Every industry has their bubble, and the video game industry is not immune.  When the bubble bursts, and it will sooner rather than later, Nintendo will once again provide the framework for recovery, good, creative software.  They've already made an investment in this with the unity partnership, meaning the easiest console for indies to develop for, despite not being x86, is WiiU.

Do you think that Nintendo could have brokered a 3 game exclusivity deal with SEGA of all companies if they didn't have a strong sales strategy lined up?  Do you really think that?

This video fails to identify which is which, how can I comment on it if I won't know which one I'm commenting on?

They are both the same, both are the WiiU version, check the followup video from Shokio.  He was setting a trap for fanboys.

8GB DDR5 mayne. It can't be stopped.

There is no ddr5 yet.

He's trolling.  Regardless, GDDR5 won't make any difference with regard to game visuals.

The wii u is definitely capable of producing graphics slightly above 360/PS3, it has a superior feature set and where ever you look for technical analysis including neogaf its at least as powerful with regard gflops. It's always been the wii'u's cpu performance and main memory bandwidth that has been criticised. Its a gpu-centric console and gpu-centric games will perform very well on it.

 

Lets not also forget cartoon graphics need far less gpu resources. Anything Mario or Zelda is not going for a realistic looking game world.

 

What I want is fantastic games and the wii u is more than capable of this.

 

It will not compete with the ps4 and new xbox graphically for major fps games etc and lets face it, it not getting them anyway as the wii u is not supported for the required game engines.

 

Dare I mention again that a console based on a low cost basic 40nm fabrication process, using low bandwidth memory chips and drawing less power than a 360 and PS3 is not going to compete with these new sony and microsoft consoles. The miracle is that Nintendo have manufactured a console with such low end components drawing so little power that it is actually competitive with the 360 and PS3 in performance and exceeds them in some ways. This is nothing new, when Nintendo launched the wii it was less powerful than the outgoing original xbox but performed at a similar level with very low cost components and used much less power in comparison. Again the one thing it had more than the xbox was memory, which helped slightly as it had no hard drive (same issue with the wii u).

 

The gaming experience performance difference between wii u and ps4/xbox 720 is relatively the same difference as wii compared to ps3/360. However lets not forget the gamepad offers a whole new avenue of gaming ideas not possible on ps4/xbox 720. Also wii u fully supports the motion controllers of wii and the wii u is such a huge massive jump in performance compared to the original wii. The gamecube offered 8 gflops gpu performance, the wii offered 12glfops (same gpu as gamecube just 50% faster) and the wii u is estimated to be about 350 gflops (300-400 range). However this is not competitive with ps4 (1800gflops) or xbox 720 (1400 gflops) but its still a huge upgrade for Nintendo programmers to create their magic.

Nothing you said is correct, just none of it.  "GPU-Centric games" all next gen games will be GPU centric because all next gen systems are GPU centric. 

The main memory bandwidth is not understood, and only criticized by sites that are willing to forgo journalistic integrity for hits. When any real analysis or discussion is done, with people who actually develop for the system, there are never any of these criticisms.  No criticism of the GPU, no criticism of the memory architecture, and yes, not even any criticism of the CPU.

40nm is not a cheap process, it is just common at the moment.  They are not using "low bandwifth" RAM chips, they are using DDR3, the current general purpose processing memory standard.  Their memory architecture is actually much more robust and efficient than PS4's.

Wii U isn't "competitive" with PS3 and 360, it wallops them, The weak point of the WiiU (the CPU) is more powerful than both of the PPE based CPU's with regards to IPC.  The only area where it is weaker is SIMD, which is not necessary on a GPU centric system.  Still, the SIMD on the CPU is enough to get equivalent if not better performance on games that are ported and running on two of the CPU cores (using CPU SIMD still, rather than GPU).  It was revealed recently that all of the ports for the WiiU only had access to two of the CPU cores because the tools were very immature, it still was able to run CPU-centric games.

Again you are arguing GLFOPs when they mean so very little.  When will some of you people realize that FLOPS is the new GHz, its the big number that can be used to market chips.  WiiU has fewer FLOPS from fully programmable shaders, yes, but 50% of the GPU logic is not accounted for.  PS4 will be pretty much all unified shaders, no custom logic.  WiiU is not the same, and while it is still a weaker GPU, it is not as weak as you think.

For reference, RSX (PS3 GPU) was marketed by Sony as having 1.8TFLOPs.

Your arguments are tired, and you apparently refuse to read anything that isn't in agreement with your confirmation bias.  Learn something before responding again with nonsense.