routerbad

Actually, it appears the game was originally coded for high-end platforms. Looks like Wii U, PS3 and 360 will be downports. Hopefully, Ubisoft will pull a Criterion and put the Wii U's extra capabilities to good use and make it stand out quite nicely from the PS3/360 versions.

http://m.neogaf.com/....php?p=48028951

Not sure if serious.  They won't need to downport the Wii U version at all if it is built for this generation first.  If you mean they'll need to optimize it for the Wii U memory architecture then yes, but graphically, the PS4 is not the great leap ahead that you think it is.

the ps4 games wont look much better the only reason it has the specs it does is for the built in streaming and video capture. games will be forced to be able to play flawlessly while still being able to stream and capture gameplay not allowing to reach its full potential

Bingo,  I think people forget how intensive media encode is, considering is has to be able to encode for several different formats.  This is probably one big reason why they needed all the extra ram as well, so they could store all this rendered video in memory in case you need it.

nice the only interesting looking game from the ps4 announcement is coming to wiiu

Agreed

Really so the difference between a 250 pound wiiu or a 175 xbox is enough to explain the 57k sales in january.Yeah right and your calling what I say dumb!These consoles also sold more than wiiu to people who likely know they will soon be replaced by a newer model.

EDIT: In fact the premium 32gb wiiu can now be had in the uk for 229 pounds and the wiiu basic even cheaper

Urm, thats the standard price for the thing.  And, you overestimate the knowledge level of quite a few people who know very little about the industry.  I just sold someone on getting a Wii U yesterday because he had no idea it was a new console.  He knew a PS4 was coming out, but there is no release date, and he thought they were going to support it for 10 years before releasing a new console, as they promised.  People who bought a PS3 or X360 in the last two years will not be buying brand new hardware at $500+.  They have only recently started investing in the previous generation.  Sony and Microsoft aren't worried about that though, because they will still be part of the ecosystem for another couple of years with full priced titles coming out for both of the older systems.

Dude NONE of the games looked like Wii U, I haven't seen or heard of any Wii U game looking half as good what they showed. PS4 is like 10x more powerful than Wii U already and now on top of that they have even BETTER 3rd party support, I dont know man Nintendo is falling behind fast, Zelda and Mario isn't going to save them anymore. It seems like Nintendo is still the "little kids" console and not going after the hardcore/ more serious games. I dont know how you think it sucked it was literally a small taste of whats to come, Nintendo better get thier shi* together because as of now my wii u looks like its going to be sold to help me get a ps4..

Slow down bro, anything showed today that was live rendered, as in, running on the hardware as they were talking about it, isn't anything new or mindblowing, and PS4 is no where near 10x the Wii U.  The target renders looked great but real gameplay won't be all they claim it to be.  This is a hype conference, they are only going to speak positives about the console, and most of it is hyperbole.

I'm personally not interested in the PS4. If they think they can tell me what I can and can't do with my own games by locking them to the console, they won't be getting a penny from me. For example, I buy a game like Colonial Marines, turns out to be crap.....I'm stuck with it as it's locked to my console. So that game I've just dropped my hard earned money on this morning, may as well just get chucked in the bin as it's useless as I can't trade it in or take it back for a refund.

Sorry Sony, this is my first PlayStation I won't be owning!

As soon as he mentioned predicting what I want to play I was turned off completely for now.  I don't want a console predicting what I want and using my bandwidth to preload it.  I don't want my console tracking my behavior and my preferences to ensure everyone on the internet can see it.  I don't want people I add as friends looking over my shoulder creeper style watching me game.

I'

I'm not being negative . I think a good 80% of the PS4 games would be transferred quite easily to Wii U

Just that Sony do make a point at listening to game developers and giving theme exactly what they want. Whereas Nintendo listens to Nintendo and then expects developers to deal with it. I know Nintendo can't afford to be expensive and provide 1.21 Giawatts. However credit where credit is due. Sony gave devs what they wanted, then added their own spin on social gaming. Again something Nintendo started doing before however they have improved on the concept.

Nintendo actually have been listening.  Criterion devs said they got great support from Nintendo even though Nintendo don't exactly have a handle on the hardware yet, it wasn't finalized until 2H 2012.

Nice post but don't assume the 8gigs of ram is just left for gaming, it's not... the ram will be needed for other features including OS. It will still have more ram available for games yes, but not the full 8 gigs.

Its going to have a LOT of overhead.

The PS4 games are built from the ground up for it.  Therefore, they look "next gen."

And they are very far along.  Near launch ready.  Mostly optimization and such happening now. They are engine and asset complete.

The Wii U by contrast launched with literal last gen games.  even the exclusives were on last gen code from other consoles.  Like a port of a last gen game.

We won't see what early "from the ground up" games look like on Wii U until E3.  

Even comparing X to Killzone, KZ is probably farther along that X is.

And that is really saying something.  Also, X seems to be more true open world, whereas KZ is heavily segmented, relying on "on-rails" transport systems to take the player from segment to next.  KZ was also very texture-light, whereas X is texture heavy.

Interesting.  I was please by what was shown for PS4, but was also surprised that the Wii U seems to be able to compete very well when code and assets are created for it.

Nintendo always plays it smarter than the next guy.  I like that they always act like the little guy going in to beat on the big guys.  It forces them to go unconventional.  To defy logic and come out the better for it.

no one would have thought such heavy customization of the GPU would be what it is or that the memory structure would be so perfect that it allows performance far above what the specs detail.

PS4 adding 8GB of RAM just seems like a last minute decision to throw money at a problem.  it would have been wiser for them to manager their memory better and match various types at various cost.  They did it the expensive way.  Again. and it won't necessarily ever show up in games as a huge advantage.

sure, you can have 8GB of textures, geometry (actually very light footprint compared to textures), lighting, shading, etc. going on, but if you aren't careful, you're going to drown your GPU and CPU.  

I have a feeling the CPU is ok and the GPU is great.  but how they all work together isn't as smart as could be, nor nearly as efficient.

And that is where the light-heavyweight Wii U, which has specs that SEEM light in comparison, will start trading blows with the heavyweights and not only get knocked down a few times, but scoring knockdowns of its own as well.

The wii U is not as powerful as the PS4.  It's just not.  And we knew it wouldn't be.  but in terms of what you will see on screen and what you can do in-game, it is not far behind either.

This E3, it is going to be fun watching Sony fans have to apologize for why their games aren't blowing Wii U out of the water.



That is never in question with Sony.

They are a third party system primarily.

they make lame games.  so third parties have no fear of compeitition.

the one thing I did notice about the PS4 though is that there was no killer app.

Not one game that said "Oh my gosh! I HAVE to have that!!!"

Not one.

And for all the bluster and talk about the system, it seems to simply be another playstation with yet another dual shock controller.

As I was watching it, I really wanted watchdogs, aaaand now it's been confirmed for Wii U, so, now I won't need to bother, lol

I dunno why people would say even anything about graphics at the point crap the ps4 not even out yet and also im sure of it those games are not even half way done yet! When u check out the specs for ps4 and Wii U come on Ps4 does have more fire power lets be real about that!

More firepower yes, but enough to create a graphical schism, hardly.

PS4 is probably 8-10x more
Powerful than wii u, I think it's a little less than less gen, but it's not close by any means.

hahah, yeah, no.  keep dreaming.

im sick of this " the wii u hasnt shown us its full potential blah blah blah ps4 hasnt been RELEASED YET the wii u has been released for how long?? ps4 smashes it already killzone etc mite not be made of final hardware either so it could improve sorry but wii u loses this one

Killzone was not that impressive.  Also, Killzone 1 and 2 looked good for their time in trailers, but absolutely terrible when you actually played them.  I don't think that was live at any rate, I think they were showing a pre-made video.

If they announce legends....

will the WiiU version have all the released DLC included ?

I believe they mentioned it will have all of the car packs on disc.

Anyway seems you will say what you believe facts or not.Gaming since 1984 ?That makes you around the same age as me?33?I would have thought at that sort of age you would have a less romanticised view of anything gaming related.The wii u tech is fantastic but that is where it ends for me.Mismanagement springs to mind,not proper 3rd party support and a very sparse looking release schedule are to blame.Anyway each to their own I dont owe the system anything it owes me 400 pounds.

Talk of drms welll whatever you think, I dont have a problem enabling drm if it enables the companies involved to see a more plausible return for their money and spend more on the product as a result.Nothing to hide and after I sacked my ps over the psn hack I have learned how to take steps to better protect my details.These are the times we live in.

Actually the antipiracy techniques they often employ add to the complexity of the system and the R+D to create and implement those techniques incur costs that are passed on to the customer with the console sale and the game sale.  Companies lose money on antipiracy tech, they either eat it while their products are still pirated by some, or they pass the cost on to the customer who didn't pirate.  DRM is bad for people who pay for their products.  It does very little to prevent people with ill will from getting what they want.

Nintendo can only go so far to ensure third party support.  And by all accounts they have strong third party support, much of which has yet to be officially announced.  Big publishers are going to be reticent at first because they answer to stock holders, not Nintendo, and frankly not you or me.  Once they are satisfied that the install base will actually attach and buy games (the attach rate for the Wii was ridiculously low) they will jump on board and start talking about how they never had any doubt.

You talk about others not being realistic about gaming, but you are calling a system DOA after four months at market.  Again with the double standard.  I think it's safe to say that the PS4 will not be selling over 3M consoles after two months, but I'm sure third parties will be on board and people will hail it as a major success, irrespective of actual sales numbers.

Well I for one would be/am prepared for using something like this its just simple progression in the war on piracy.Anyone who seems against this really must pirate (kill the industry) a lot.The idea that someone would be one of these machines not knowing is well silly.Be like buying a laptop for your home with no internet and wondering why it no worky

That's a very ignorant attitude on Piracy.  Generally, when antipiracy measures are put in place, piracy rates go up.  Anti-piracy only offends the non-offenders, because the idea of a completely secure system is a myth.  Also, being against antipiracy measures does not make someone a pirate, we call that absolute thinking, and by extension a thinking error.  It's the same thing when people state that anyone who doesn't believe in Barack Obama's political objectives is racist.  

The idea that a parent would buy a system their child asked for without realizing it requires constant connection is silly to you?  Really?  How often do you get out? Most people couldn't care less what the differences between Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft are.  Gamers who give a damn about all that are the vast majority, which is why people with political agendas can make completely ignorant statements about the affects of gaming on young children and people buy it hook, line, and sinker.  They don't know, and they look to someone else to tell them what choices they should make, which in and of itself is a sad commentary on our current cultural trend.

Plenty of people buy laptops without internet at home, that's what aircards, and cell tethering were made for, and I have helped many people who had no idea why they couldn't get their computers to access the network from home.

It isn't simple progression in the war on piracy, it's war on people who actually pay money for their products.  The PS3 never had issues with pirated material, so why would they need progression here?  It's about the company's ability to see everything you do with what they believe is still their hardware and use the data they collect for targeted advertising, selling to partners, etc.  Considering Sony's recent troubles with network security, some people would rather not be tied into their network all the time, and would rather they didn't have so much of their information, including tastes, preferences, gaming habits, etc.

  FreddieW did the Mario version.

Sounds good, but I'll wait until it comes out before I believe all this.

Hopefully they release a playable demo before the game drops, but they won't need to, this just put everyone on notice.  It isn't too hard to see just from the youtube video the game looks stunning, smooth, crisp, etc.  That and a developer saying they were able to use the high end PC textures (like when you set texture res to high or ultra on PC), assets, better draw distance, gamepad functions (seriously the most flexible control options I've ever heard of in any game), etc etc ad nauseum.  I'm 100% sold, and will be rewarding Criterion for their efforts by voting with my dollars.

When one of the principle developers says it is the most visually appealing version of the game available and they have to look at it regularly, on all platforms, it destroys any skepticism I would have had about it.

Interesting he calls the Wii U version the most beautiful version of the game they have produced, assuming he meant console version.

With the increase of higher draw distance and PC textures does this not prove Wii U bandwidth dwarfs 360? Framerate looks silky too.

Awaits 3Dude and routerbad....

It definitely proves that it is in no way whatsoever bandwidth starved, he cites the memory architecture as a prime reason they went with PC assets, textures, etc.