NintendoReport

Super Mario Sunshine
Metroid Prime
Luigi's Mansion
SSB Melee
TLoZ: Twilight Princess

etc.

**cough watchdogs cough**

I know right? I knew that would be coming to the Wii U.

Nice posts. Could one say that Wii U would acheive the highest percentage peak performance this time around? I really think Nintendo has built a deceptively powerful console and as Criterion said " punches above it's weight " .

It could, the gamecube hit within 90% of its theoretical peak (and thus likely the wii too).

but... That didnt stop ps360 from stomping wii raw powerwise.

Its just peices to consider when trying to view the whole picture.

I went against it and used my old setup. Thanks guys.

Not counting with the huge amount of fixed function logic present in the Wii U GPU, we're looking at a raw power of at least 325 GFLOPS.
The PS4 GPU has been confirmed to have a total of 1.84 TFLOPS of raw GPU power.
So, judging be the GPU alone we're looking at a relatively big difference, but it isn't by far, a "quantum leap" like Sony's advertising.
In a worst case scenario, the PS4 is 5x more powerful than the Wii U. This means that a PS4 game running in 1080p@60fps could equally run on a Wii U in 720p@30fps.
For comparison, the PS3 and Xbox360 were 20x more powerful than the original Wii, so we're definitely not looking at a last generation situation here.
Then again, none of this matters if there's no good games on either consoles. Because it all comes down to this, good games.

I wouldnt go so far as to say fixed functions yet. It probably doesnt have any. Just custom logic.

Also, like clock speeds or 'bits', flops cant be directly compared across architectures. Some architectures may take less floating point operations to solve the same problem because they can process it differently.

And also important to consider is how close realworld performance gets to theoretical peak performance. ps360 were around 65% of their theoretical peak performance.

Hmm, perhaps F-Zero GX. Trying not to pick a series that has had a recent entry.

Any particular titles people want to see from the GC on the Wii U's Virtual Console?

You don't have Trine 2 in your lists so i'd give that a go.

Yeah just trying to point out that the killzone shot is nothing new.  And the Killzone models do look very much like ACIII character models.

umm, Quantic Dream said that is what their future games will be using, so not "all the systems power". They said they could do better too.

And people have been comparing ''X'' to Ps4 games saying it not a noticeable difference, some even saying X is better...lmao:

"Wii U's X game, actually in this thread, looks just as amazing as anything else on PS4 so far. Oh, wait, is that surprising when both are next gen games?"


this guy breaks it down pretty well:  http://www.neogaf.co...5&postcount=836

Look, I have a wii u and I bet X,zelda,mario3d will have better gameplay than most games on the ps4 - BUT I see some posts in this place that make me laugh. Ps4 can handle more stuff, so its not just about better graphics, even though it does, it's better everything (physics, ai, etc). More things happening on screen. Subtle things that make the scene look better, perhaps make some gameplay better. Not "WiiU=ps4 graphics"

Regardless of what they "said" they only showed a face. And none of the ps4 games matched that. At all. When they had to draw more then a face. Period. And I don't care what some forum member says. You have "breakdowns" left and right. Lol

And is anyone seriously attacking what is admittedly an early development video? Oh noes! Asset pop-in at the alpha-beta stage!
Nintendo simply is honest in what they show. Not heavily edited/limited footage that is highly scripted. Sony also markets better. They sent out 4k resolution screens of ps4 games even though ps4 won't render genes that high. Where do you think those extra pixels cane from... Not anything honest... Lol

But the point is that it was plain stupid to compare a tech demo that only has to draw a very small portion (thus making it very detailed) versus an early in-game asset.

Doesn't get any more ridiculous.

I posted supposed in game ps4 assets. That's an apples to apples comparison. All of a sudden, things look a lot more normal don't they... Lol

I agree to some extent.  They (next gen consoles) should all look just like the PC version.

Oh and as for the face, this was done on a 6 year old (around there lol) engine.

Actually there is a character in halo 4 rendered better. And that's on the 369. Lol

Wii u and other next gen consoles will exceed that.

Lol

umm, Quantic Dream said that is what their future games will be using, so not "all the systems power". They said they could do better too.

And people have been comparing ''X'' to Ps4 games saying it not a noticeable difference, some even saying X is better...lmao:

"Wii U's X game, actually in this thread, looks just as amazing as anything else on PS4 so far. Oh, wait, is that surprising when both are next gen games?"


this guy breaks it down pretty well:  http://www.neogaf.co...5&postcount=836

Look, I have a wii u and I bet X,zelda,mario3d will have better gameplay than most games on the ps4 - BUT I see some posts in this place that make me laugh. Ps4 can handle more stuff, so its not just about better graphics, even though it does, it's better everything (physics, ai, etc). More things happening on screen. Subtle things that make the scene look better, perhaps make some gameplay better. Not "WiiU=ps4 graphics"

Quantic dream do make very detailed in game faces, it's kindof their specialty.  They may be able to put that detailed a model in a game at some point, but only during very specific scenes, a la heavy rain.

Quantic dream do make very detailed in game faces, it's kindof their specialty.  They may be able to put that detailed a model in a game at some point, but only during very specific scenes, a la heavy rain.  Keep in mind heavy rain offered very little in terms of gameplay, most of the game was quicktime events.  Also, the rest of the environment was underwhelming and not interactive.

Lol

You are seriously comparing an alpha (beta?) actual in-game asset (of necessary complexity to fit within a huge, character and background filled game world) used at the end of an early game trailer--- with a special, single Tech demo, using all the systems power to render a face? As a concept of the possibilities? Wow.

Wow.

Now compare that wii u face with this actual in game footage in ps4. In particular the face renderings.

http://www.nowgamer.com/siteimage/scale/0/0/354742.png


Or this...

http://www.destructoid.com//ul/246366-aaheader.jpg

The killzone models seem very similar to ac3.

Metacritic scores

-------------------------------wii u------ps3-------360

mass effect 3   87    93 93
batman    85 96 94
assasins creed    85 86 84
sonic transformed   78 82 82
tekken 83 82 83
fifa soccer 13 69 88 90
epic mickey 2 56 59 59
cod black ops 2   81 83    83
madden   75 83    81
nba 86 90    88
darksiders II 85 84    83
Average   79 84    84

But most of these are just bad, lazy ports. These scores dont reflect the Wii U's performance levels.

Why is anyone trying to argue this, the ps4 is obviously the more powerful system, I love Nintendo and the U, but there is nothing to argue about!its like comparing a hybrid car to a Ferrari, their both good for their own things but the Ferrari just has more horse power! And also use 20X the gas and will never be as fast as a customized racecar( PC). And it's f***ing expensive!

Its a little more complicated than that.  A hybrid that could do 150 on the highway maybe.  You should probably refrain from vehicle analogies.  If we are going there, how about the Red Sled (1400WHP Neon SRT-4) vs the same ferrari.  The ferrari has more cylinders and higher displacement, but lower HP/Liter of displacement.  The ferrari has a higher top speed, but will never reach it in a quarter mile.  It will even outpace the SRT off the line by a small margin, but once the SRT hits third gear, will catch up.  At the end, both are 9 second cars, but one of them did it will 6 fewer cylinders and 6.3 fewer liters of displacement.  Efficient airflow and compression generated by an exhaust driven turbine along with forged internal components allowed for a higher air/fuel ratio, creating larger and more violent EXPLOSIONS (nollog) that provided exceptional tangential force to the crank.

None of the PS4s power is used for streaming or video capture, it has dedicated hardware that does that.  The dedicated CPU used for background downloads may even offload the whole networking stack, it would make sense as that could lower latency for online gaming too.  Its sad as Nintendo came up with this idea first, but totally didn't deliver on it.  Remember how originally they said that the Wii in standby mode was supposed to automatically download the latest games for you, then they said it again for 3DS, yet neither has that feature!  On Wii U we don't even have Wii Connect24 for messsages never mind downloads.

They mentioned the dedicated assist chip would be used to help with background game downloading and streaming, not video encode or livestreaming, or any of the other social features.  I suspect they'll use it to push to the Vita as well.  People seem to be having common misconceptions about this, they ever mentioned it would be used to offload background processing in general.

As for how much more powerful is PS4 than Wii U?  I recon its about 4x if it indeed can manage 1.8TFLOPS on the GPU, the general opinion is the Wii U GPU at best does 352GFLOPS.  The CPU also is pretty much guaranteed to be significantly more powerful than Wii U as Sony have no qualms over pulling 200W from the mains, which is SIX times the power the Wii U currently uses, although obviously a chunk of that goes to the HDD, USB 3 ports, etc.  However people seem to forget just how important the CPU is to things like AI, stuff that makes a game more interesting or challenging.

More watts =/= more processing power.  Efficiency trumps gluttony.  They'll never get close to getting 1.8 TFLOPS during gameplay, the Wii U will likely do things not conceived as possible with 352 GFLOPS.  Remember 50% of the silicon is still unknown to everyone, it's already been stated that the GPU and CPU punch quite above their weight.  People also seem to forget that rendering an image, simultaneously encoding it to video, and simultaneously streaming that video over the network, and simultaneously maintaining a connection with PSN and social feeds, etc take CPU time, which developers are going to have to allow for when coding their games.

Another thing which people seem to keep missing is the reason PS4 was bumped up to 8GB RAM is because the Xbox supposedly has 8GB RAM.  The PS4 having half the RAM of the Xbox would have been a HUGE issue, and thus the Wii U having only 2GB is an enormous problem for multi-platform releases in the future.

I believe the PS4 was bumped to 8GB of RAM because it needed all it could get so at least the memory wouldn't get bogged down by all the background processing going on.  media encoding is extremely memory intensive as well.  I agree 2GB will become a burden at some point, but DDR3 is better general purpose RAM than GDDR5 (GDDR5 has very loose timings) and having to access GDDR5 through a northbridge is going to cause issues as well.  GPU's use GDDR5 and get away with loose timings because they are directly connected to the GPU on a very fast bus which relieves latency issues a lot and takes advantage of the pure speed advantage over DDR3.  Also, PS4 will not have the 32MB of edRAM (or is it 1S-TRAM, can't remember) not just on die but integrated directly into the GPU, which is a big shot in the arm, and will alleviate the need for massive amounts of RAM in the short term.

When designing a game you need to know how much RAM you will have, its not really possible to scale it backwards once you already have everything in place.  You develop on the machine with the least resources and then scale up the other versions, like Need for Speed Most Wanted on Wii U.  For that reason alone I think Wii U will lose a lot of multi-platform titles once 360/PS3 is no longer supported.  Its a few years away I expect, but its worth thinking about.

Check PC RAM usage during gameplay, not a single game save crysis need 2GB at this point.  That will change in the future, true, but given what devs have been able to pull of with 256MB on the PS3 I'm not worried.

You see for a game to run on Wii U and next-gen, they would have to write it for Wii U then port to PS4/Xbox (or write a separate version for Wii U exclusively, which is more expensive), not the other way around.  But it would be a huge waste of all that RAM and CPU power to do that, as it would effectively be holding back the PS4s potential, just like current consoles hold back PC games.  So unless the publishers see a good market for Wii U games, they just aren't going to do it.  Even if they did, they would be heavily watered down versions.

They'll have to develop the game side by side for Wii U the same way they develop 360 and PS3 versions side by side, both versions being specifically built for that console.  This isn't anything new.  

The Wii U is a good console, but if you think its going to get games that play remotely like the PS4/Xbox Next version (once they start developing specifically for those consoles), you will be sorely disappointed.

I think when people see what actual gameplay in a decently sized game world with all of the background processing going on PS4 they will be disappointed.  Not much, people got over it eventually with the PS3.  

Of course we should also take all the footage Sony showed us at the reveal with a piece of salt, the sheer fact the Killzone screenshots at 4K is proof enough to me that the game was NOT running on actual PS4 hardware.  Its already been admitted that the Watch Dogs footage was actually the PC version, which makes you wonder if they will actually pull off those graphics in time for launch.  We all know things went trying to rush Wii U games for launch.

All of the footage was shown on PC hardware.  Given that they just recently made the change to 8GB of RAM (last couple of months) they don't have hardware yet, which is why they didn't show it.  Similar situation for the Wii U.  Hardware specs were in flux and being changed during the reveal.  Also, most of what we saw was target renders, which is not a problem, but if you look at the Wii U launch, Reggie was very specific when he said "these are not finished products and not gameplay, just interactive demonstrations and prototypes", I think Sony did the same, but let everyone jump to their own conclusions.