230 replies to this topic

[thechamp80]

How scary is this game btw? I was freaked out for weeks by Bioshock and just the first 10 minutes years ago but this from the trailer looks so bright and happy lol

Haven't played it yet, but I have heard that it has its frightening moments. 

[Ashurii]

They're just grasping for straws now. It's actually quite funny to read their comments. Apparently every Mario game is the same simply because Mario's in it. Please.

Then we have people who claim we get too many Mario games even when 7% of those games are just Golf,Tennis or the Mario RPG games. When I think Mario I think of platforming. Even if the Mario Party series or Mario Tennis has Mario in the name I would not call it a Mario game. I mean it is but it is not if that makes sense 

[Pjsprojects]

Haven't played it yet, but I have heard that it has its frightening moments. 

Its a really odd game,up to now i don't get it! Victorian style with hi-tech clockwork stuff

[Zinix]

Seems like you guys have derailed the original purpose of this thread.

[Plutonas]

even if ue4 is used on ps4 and xbox720... it will be like ue3 on ps360.

 

ps360 can use ue3 potential by 20-30% (30% is very generous)

 

wii U can use UE3 by 80-85%...

 

I bet ps4 and 720 will use ue4 potential by 30-35%... no more than that.   PS4 is 1/3 or 2/4 of what a gtx680 can do... And UE4 runs smoothly in a gtx680 or gtx580 in sli x2... That means ps4 is not the monster they want to present u.  I saw lately an article, comparing ps4 with titan by nvidia!! they are soooo crazy man... sony fanboys.

 

Even though, we should pray our games to be on ue3 on wii U, ps4 and 720, because they will look much better than the cheesy version of ue4 versus PC edition of games.

 

A question... if ur game looks like and plays like samaritan demo... do u feel bad about it?

Edited by Plutonas, 31 March 2013 - 10:53 AM.

[routerbad]

I take it that you have not played New Super Mario Bros 2 on the 3DS.

 

What Nintendo need to do is spend some of their money & buy up some developer ti inject something fresh & new, someone that has a different idea to the Nintendo standard model, people criticize the CoD games that they are just the same thing over & over again, but so is Mario, if you ask someone to name the generic FPS game they will say CoD, if you ask someone to name the generic platform game they will say Mario, there is nothing really wrong with Mario, but can you not see my point ?

 

Every Nintendo system people always say that the next Mario, Zelda, Metroid game will save it would there be anything wrong with something new to add to that list, why not a action adventure game in the style of Tomb Raider or Uncharted, what Nintendo needs is games to grab peoples attention, everyone even most on here say how bad the Nintendo advertising is, yet when people see adverts for Uncharted or Tomb Raider people sit up,i remember being in a cinema & they had a Uncharted 2 trailer on before the film, now it may not be the best game in the world ever, it is better than the first game, but anyway it looked amazing, it grabbed peoples attention, it was something different, if you were not a fan of Nintendo game & you say a advert for NSMBU you would just say/think it's just another mario game that i have seen before.

 

I have had most of the Nintendo consoles over the years & i am just getting tired of the same thing, the PS & Xbox has a very wide range of games on offer, the Nintendo consoles do not, that is what i am getting at, people have said how good Batman, Mass Effect & NFS-MW are on the WiiU & this is because games like this have not been on a Nintendo console before, look how people still go on about Goldeneye on the N64 where are these games now for the WiiU Nintendo lost Rare yes but they never replaced them.

I have indeed.  Have you?  It is not like NSMBU, they are completely different games.  COD games are EXACTLY the same thing every year, down to the weapon attachments.  Nothing changes.  Every Mario game has a completely unique set of levels with 10s of hours of gameplay, along with new powerups, new platform types, new mechanics, new enemies, etc.  COD doesn't even have that level of change.  Same multiplayer, same zombies, same story elements. 

 

Uncharted 2 still didn't sell better than Super Mario Galaxy 1 or 2, and isn't even in the same ballpark as NSMBWii.  The trailers may catch attention, but when the game you are saying needs to change sells over 400% better than that one, there is something wrong with the premise of the argument.  Nintendo don't even need to advertise Mario games almost, because they all sell very well.  Just because you as a Nintendo fan want to see more advertisements for different types of games does not mean that is what will make them more money or help their platform.

 

You might want to actually play some Nintendo games before complaining about "the same thing" because as I've already stated for pretty much every single Nintendo IP, the formula may stay the same but the game changes considerably every single time, which is something that cannot be said about your average FPS, 3PS, etc.

 

You may not have played any Nintendo consoles based on the way you are talking about how games like ME, Arkham, NFS, etc have never been on them.  I'm assuming you mean more mature styled games, which is the biggest fallacy ever, and NFS for its part has been on GC, Wii, and N64.  Not sure what you are trying to say here, you are splitting your argument between Nintendo first party IP's are not strong or varied enough, and mature 3rd party games are just now coming to Nintendo consoles.  Both are completely wrong.  Nintendo has the strongest lineup of IP's in the world, that appeal to people of literally all ages, and their have been Mature titles on Nintendo consoles since the SNES.

 

Nintendo release new IP's with every home console, they just aren't the shooters people like you are looking for.  And make no mistake, Uncharted and games like it (including the newest tomb raider) are shooters.  Tomb Raider is a pitiful shell of it's former self.  Nothing that made Tomb Raider games fun is there, just another 3PS that wants to make people think it's an adventure title.

[Gaymer]

Tomb Raider is a pitiful shell of it's former self.  Nothing that made Tomb Raider games fun is there, just another 3PS that wants to make people think it's an adventure title.

I agree with every single thing, but I didn't like this part. I've been playing Tomb Raider since the first one was released and I felt like this new one was a breath of fresh air. The only thing I felt lacking was the puzzles. They made TR games great. But I love this game. Anyway, it's your opinion, so I can respect it.

[routerbad]

I agree with every single thing, but I didn't like this part. I've been playing Tomb Raider since the first one was released and I felt like this new one was a breath of fresh air. The only thing I felt lacking was the puzzles. They made TR games great. But I love this game. Anyway, it's your opinion, so I can respect it.

Tomb Raider is a puzzle platformer, and it lacks both of those and adds guns, an overly involved storyline written by the hollywood flavor of the week, and useless mechanics supposed to give it a "survival" feel.  It isn't tomb raider, it's a 3PS in the tomb raider universe, but to call it tomb raider is an insult to the franchise.

 

It is a great game in its own right, for the elements where it excels, but the name tomb raider is only there to use the name recognition to generate buzz and sales. 

[alan123]

I have indeed.  Have you?  It is not like NSMBU, they are completely different games.  COD games are EXACTLY the same thing every year, down to the weapon attachments.  Nothing changes.  Every Mario game has a completely unique set of levels with 10s of hours of gameplay, along with new powerups, new platform types, new mechanics, new enemies, etc.  COD doesn't even have that level of change.  Same multiplayer, same zombies, same story elements. 

 

Uncharted 2 still didn't sell better than Super Mario Galaxy 1 or 2, and isn't even in the same ballpark as NSMBWii.  The trailers may catch attention, but when the game you are saying needs to change sells over 400% better than that one, there is something wrong with the premise of the argument.  Nintendo don't even need to advertise Mario games almost, because they all sell very well.  Just because you as a Nintendo fan want to see more advertisements for different types of games does not mean that is what will make them more money or help their platform.

 

You might want to actually play some Nintendo games before complaining about "the same thing" because as I've already stated for pretty much every single Nintendo IP, the formula may stay the same but the game changes considerably every single time, which is something that cannot be said about your average FPS, 3PS, etc.

 

You may not have played any Nintendo consoles based on the way you are talking about how games like ME, Arkham, NFS, etc have never been on them.  I'm assuming you mean more mature styled games, which is the biggest fallacy ever, and NFS for its part has been on GC, Wii, and N64.  Not sure what you are trying to say here, you are splitting your argument between Nintendo first party IP's are not strong or varied enough, and mature 3rd party games are just now coming to Nintendo consoles.  Both are completely wrong.  Nintendo has the strongest lineup of IP's in the world, that appeal to people of literally all ages, and their have been Mature titles on Nintendo consoles since the SNES.

 

Nintendo release new IP's with every home console, they just aren't the shooters people like you are looking for.  And make no mistake, Uncharted and games like it (including the newest tomb raider) are shooters.  Tomb Raider is a pitiful shell of it's former self.  Nothing that made Tomb Raider games fun is there, just another 3PS that wants to make people think it's an adventure title.

erm yes, you know i have, were are WiiU & 3DS friends i think ?

 

whats wrong with games like uncharted, have you played them or tomb raider ?

 

i have batman on my x360, i also have nfs-wm on my wiiu, you may say people don't want this on a nintendo console, but do people really want platform games all the time ?

[routerbad]

erm yes, you know i have, were are WiiU & 3DS friends i think ?

 

whats wrong with games like uncharted, have you played them or tomb raider ?

 

i have batman on my x360, i also have nfs-wm on my wiiu, you may say people don't want this on a nintendo console, but do people really want platform games all the time ?

There's nothing wrong with Uncharted or Tomb Raider, other than they are shooters shamelessly disguised as adventure games.  The newest Tomb Raider is basically a third party Uncharted, and basically follows the same vein.  Low on gameplay, high on story.  That's what the casual gamers want, which is why we keep seeing more of it, games that spoonfeed story to you, and constantly tell you how to do the next interactive part.

 

I didn't say people don't want that on a console, sure they do.  They are popular games.  Again I'm not sure where your argument goes here, as I've never said no one wants games on a Nintendo console.  Any games. All I said was Nintendo has the strongest IPs in the world and that 3rd party developers have been releasing the types of games you referred to on Nintendo consoles since forever.  I gave the example NFS on N64, GCN, and Wii, Wii U because you said NFS has never been on a Nintendo console.

 

As far as platform games go, apparently so, at least Nintendo ones, because they sell like gangbusters every time they're released.  Platformers are fun.

[Alex Atkin UK]

Agreed.

No, not downscaled at all.  

 

Even a conservative guesstimate based on real examination of the Wii U GPU die has it at BEST being 1/3 the GPU power of the PS4, if Sony told the truth about the specs.  There is no doubt that it has only 1/4 the RAM however.  I would also guesstimate that at best the Wii U has 1/3 of the CPU power, likely even less.  So how would it run ports without being heavily down scaled exactly?

 

I still firmly believe there will be games on PS4/Xbox Next that utilise those consoles greater RAM, CPU and GPU power in such a way that makes it completely impractical to port to Wii U.  I mean sure, theoretically you can write any game for any console and CALL it the same game, but it doesn't necessarily make it the same game.  Even something as simple as the LEGO games on 3DS/Vita, they felt completely hobbled next to the home console versions due to poor frame rates and a huge reduction in the levels.  We saw the same thing with the Wii.   So while the gap isn't as big as last time, its still big enough to be a problem.

 

Just think about it for a second.  You are writing a game on PC where you can happily target 4GB of system RAM and 1-2GB for the GPU data, a completely reasonable expectation of PCs minimum specs for games in a year or two.  That game also will port easily onto PS4 or Xbox Next with the same or slightly scaled down assets (eg lower poly models).

 

The reason PC games port so readily today is that they are deliberately being conservative with the design to ensure they CAN be ported.  Once games stop being written with the intention of porting to PS3/Xbox 360, they will need a new target.  It seems clear that Wii U is unlikely to be that target, its more likely to be Xbox Next as its going to be so very similar to a Windows 8 PC this time around.

 

If you make a console exclusive multi-platform it gets even more doubtful as with GPGPU on PS4/Xbox Next, you could potentially write a game that uses more GPGPU power than the whole Wii U GPU is capable of, even BEFORE rendering the graphics.

 

The Wii U might still be using the same generation of GPU as the other consoles, but in PC terms its using a budget range low-end model compared to the PS4 which is using the lower of the high end GPUs.  Its a lot like the 3DS vs PS Vita,  both based on modern tech but their capabilities are vastly different.  The 3DS might be good in its own right, but you don't expect it to pull off games looking/playing like what the PS Vita can do.  The graphics, animation, controls and AI are just worlds apart.

[Socalmuscle]

Epic kinda sorts has a point about the sense it makes putting UE4 in wii u.


But only in the exact same way it doesn't make sense putting ue4 on ps4.

Ue4 is hardly an upgrade over ue3 except in a couple of areas which ultimately boil down to lighting and particles.

It was basically an engine company asking themselves what the next big thing was. They thought it was lighting and particles. In a sense, that's true.
But they way ue4 does it requires tons more power than your think for the minimal ultimate difference it makes.

The ps4 for example, while running ue4, has most of the ue4 specifics turned off. There are some working benefits over ue3, that's ptob why they aren't using 3 only. In the ps4 ue4 demo, the lighting difference is staggering in terms of how much it loses versus pc (ie: the appearance of distance, ambient particles in the air, etc. playing with how the lighting is rendered).
The ps4 version appears to have that completely turned off. Even the particle effects seem to be purely scripted, and much less dynamic. Even some reflections on the textures are gone on ps4. It actually loses quite a bit.

But the geometry and textures are similar. So it ends up looking trchnically (not speaking of art direction) not even as good as The Samaritan, which focused heavily on textures and geometry combined with precise, less dynamic, but very well chosen lighting.

Without those specific ue4 benefits, ue4 looks like... Ue3.

So Epic has a point.

But they are being hypocritical because that point very much applies to ps4 as well.

The unreal engine may actually be one of the technically lesser engines of this generation. But everyone is familiar with it.

Being that PC gaming looks poised for resurgence, it makes sense that developers will want ue4. That way they don't have to completely revamp their game to work on any of the consoles. They can simply rework features that can't be done the way epic envisioned with ue4 originally.

Ue4 on ps4 faces the same hurdles the wii u does. With one exception.

Mark rein likes Sony. But not so much Nintendo.

Seriously. That's all there is to it.

They make ue4 for x86. Ue4 for arm. Ue4 for the whacked out x86 stepchild the ps4 uses. But no Power? That's ridiculous.

Ue4 technically would run the same demo the ps4 did. (even though there were glimpses of frame rate issues in the ps4 version...)

But rein doesn't "like" Nintendo. Period. Never has.

And it seems that he's losing the tale t around him that actually made epic the monster it is now.

There's a saying about pride going before a fall. And given the rash and unprofessional nature on display last week, I'd say epic is cracking at the foundation.

[Kellychuna]

Wow that sucks..

[3Dude]

Kellychuna, on 31 Mar 2013 - 12:38, said:Wow that sucks..


And like a virus the misinformation continues to spread, unphased by the truth.

[routerbad]

Even a conservative guesstimate based on real examination of the Wii U GPU die has it at BEST being 1/3 the GPU power of the PS4, if Sony told the truth about the specs.  There is no doubt that it has only 1/4 the RAM however.  I would also guesstimate that at best the Wii U has 1/3 of the CPU power, likely even less.  So how would it run ports without being heavily down scaled exactly?

 

I still firmly believe there will be games on PS4/Xbox Next that utilise those consoles greater RAM, CPU and GPU power in such a way that makes it completely impractical to port to Wii U.  I mean sure, theoretically you can write any game for any console and CALL it the same game, but it doesn't necessarily make it the same game.  Even something as simple as the LEGO games on 3DS/Vita, they felt completely hobbled next to the home console versions due to poor frame rates and a huge reduction in the levels.  We saw the same thing with the Wii.   So while the gap isn't as big as last time, its still big enough to be a problem.

 

Just think about it for a second.  You are writing a game on PC where you can happily target 4GB of system RAM and 1-2GB for the GPU data, a completely reasonable expectation of PCs minimum specs for games in a year or two.  That game also will port easily onto PS4 or Xbox Next with the same or slightly scaled down assets (eg lower poly models).

 

The reason PC games port so readily today is that they are deliberately being conservative with the design to ensure they CAN be ported.  Once games stop being written with the intention of porting to PS3/Xbox 360, they will need a new target.  It seems clear that Wii U is unlikely to be that target, its more likely to be Xbox Next as its going to be so very similar to a Windows 8 PC this time around.

 

If you make a console exclusive multi-platform it gets even more doubtful as with GPGPU on PS4/Xbox Next, you could potentially write a game that uses more GPGPU power than the whole Wii U GPU is capable of, even BEFORE rendering the graphics.

 

The Wii U might still be using the same generation of GPU as the other consoles, but in PC terms its using a budget range low-end model compared to the PS4 which is using the lower of the high end GPUs.  Its a lot like the 3DS vs PS Vita,  both based on modern tech but their capabilities are vastly different.  The 3DS might be good in its own right, but you don't expect it to pull off games looking/playing like what the PS Vita can do.  The graphics, animation, controls and AI are just worlds apart.

The CPU isn't 1/3 the power, Wii U CPU is more powerful core for core, but there aren't 8 of them.  So the PS4 CPU isn't more powerful, just more parallel.  The GPU is weaker, but punches above it's weight.  I seem to keep repeating myself with some of these things on here, but as I've said countless times before, early on in the gen there will be no difference between the games on either platform.  Not until much later (last year or two) in the gen will we see the PS4 start to do things the Wii U can't do.  It will come, but it will not happen early on. 

[alan123]

There's nothing wrong with Uncharted or Tomb Raider, other than they are shooters shamelessly disguised as adventure games.  The newest Tomb Raider is basically a third party Uncharted, and basically follows the same vein.  Low on gameplay, high on story.  That's what the casual gamers want, which is why we keep seeing more of it, games that spoonfeed story to you, and constantly tell you how to do the next interactive part.

 

I didn't say people don't want that on a console, sure they do.  They are popular games.  Again I'm not sure where your argument goes here, as I've never said no one wants games on a Nintendo console.  Any games. All I said was Nintendo has the strongest IPs in the world and that 3rd party developers have been releasing the types of games you referred to on Nintendo consoles since forever.  I gave the example NFS on N64, GCN, and Wii, Wii U because you said NFS has never been on a Nintendo console.

 

As far as platform games go, apparently so, at least Nintendo ones, because they sell like gangbusters every time they're released.  Platformers are fun.

 

I think you will find that Uncharted copied Tomb Raider

[routerbad]

I think you will find that Uncharted copied Tomb Raider

Agreed wholeheartedly.  Uncharted was an answer to tomb raider but with less exploration and a more linear story.  It was popular, so the new tomb raider moved in the same direction.

[Alex Atkin UK]

The CPU isn't 1/3 the power, Wii U CPU is more powerful core for core, but there aren't 8 of them.  So the PS4 CPU isn't more powerful, just more parallel.  The GPU is weaker, but punches above it's weight.  I seem to keep repeating myself with some of these things on here, but as I've said countless times before, early on in the gen there will be no difference between the games on either platform.  Not until much later (last year or two) in the gen will we see the PS4 start to do things the Wii U can't do.  It will come, but it will not happen early on. 

 

But that was the point, I wasn't referring to per-core but the aggregate CPU power of all combined. 

 

Granted, the end result depends entirely on how multi-threaded the game code can be made, likely being that early games will only utilise some but not all of those cores as they only just got to grips with the Xbox 360s three cores and there are plenty of games not utilising quad core very well on PC.

 

I was also waiting for someone to mention the Wii U GPU punching above its weight because guess what, so will the PS4 GPU.  Both are based on Radeon low power cores with tweaks by Nintendo/Sony respectively.  They will perform considerably better than a similar spec on PC, that is pretty much guaranteed.

 

A lot of the comments about the Wii U being impressive is about what it does with such a low power draw.  That is moot when comparing to PS4 which I would not be surprised to see using five times as much electricity as the Wii U.

 

I also would argue that your point about early games looking the same is narrow minded.  Some people WILL think that, but I am the kind of person who looks at all the details and even the simple bump up from 720p to 1080p is a HUGE deal IMO.  It improves the ability to see things further in the distance (if the drawing distance is any good) and can have a huge effect on gameplay, when you can see key elements in the game world that you might be looking for to solve or puzzle or figure out where to go next. 

 

I already have seen this LAST generation when going from Burnout Revenge on Xbox to the Xbox 360 version.  The reviews seemed to dismiss it as a small upgrade, but personally I found the game played MUCH better as the drawing distance was improved, as well as the details and increasing the resolution to 720p.  A lot of people seem to miss those sorts of things, it becomes more apparent when you try to go back to the older version after getting used to the new one. 

 

In other words, the biggest improvement in graphics are not what you actually notice consciously, its improvements that subconsciously improve how the game plays, pull you deeper into the game world, improve your reaction times, etc.  Reviewers do not always see these things because their job is to quickly play through a game and move on to the next.  However as an end user who fell in love with a game, then switched to the HD port, I notice this stuff.

 

Personally I am planning to get a PS4 with Watch Dogs.  This will be interesting to see how it compares to Xbox 360 and Wii U, but I'm pretty sure there will be some night/day differences in the graphics, number of people/vehicles in the game world, things which on the surface seem minor but make the whole game more believable.

 

As another example, Need for Speed Most Wanted on the PS Vita has been reviewed as being comparable to the PS3 version by some people.  Its impressive for what it is, but it doesn't feel like the same game to me and it CERTAINLY looks vastly different.  Those are things you can forgive when trying to get the same home console game on a portable device, but when you get that kind of difference when going from one home console to another, its not good at all.  So I can understand why developers might be reluctant to make huge sacrifices to their game to squeeze it onto Wii U, as it didn't go so well for the developers who tried to do the exact same thing on Wii. 

 

There is no denying the truth, a game ported from PS4 to Wii U is going to be a watered down port, it has to be.  Scaling the graphics load down by 1/3 is not going to be invisible, where GPGPU has extensively used it may even be impossible.

 

I didn't buy my Wii U to play ports, it was obvious it wouldn't be powerful enough for that and I think all this "we won't bother to port our engine to Wii U" just shows that the engine developers are also well aware that games developers aren't likely to bother.  If they want to develop a game natively for Wii U, they can always use UE3 and still port it to other consoles.  But a game written natively for PS4, nobody is going to want to port it to Wii U.  The problem is some people DID have that expectation and are going to be very disappointed.

Edited by Alex Atkin UK, 01 April 2013 - 07:30 AM.

[routerbad]

But that was the point, I wasn't referring to per-core but the aggregate CPU power of all combined.

Granted, the end result depends entirely on how multi-threaded the game code can be made, likely being that early games will only utilise some but not all of those cores as they only just got to grips with the Xbox 360s three cores and there are plenty of games not utilising quad core very well on PC.

I was also waiting for someone to mention the Wii U GPU punching above its weight because guess what, so will the PS4 GPU. Both are based on Radeon low power cores with tweaks by Nintendo/Sony respectively. They will perform considerably better than a similar spec on PC, that is pretty much guaranteed.

A lot of the comments about the Wii U being impressive is about what it does with such a low power draw. That is moot when comparing to PS4 which I would not be surprised to see using five times as much electricity as the Wii U.

I also would argue that your point about early games looking the same is narrow minded. Some people WILL think that, but I am the kind of person who looks at all the details and even the simple bump up from 720p to 1080p is a HUGE deal IMO. It improves the ability to see things further in the distance (if the drawing distance is any good) and can have a huge effect on gameplay, when you can see key elements in the game world that you might be looking for to solve or puzzle or figure out where to go next.

I already have seen this LAST generation when going from Burnout Revenge on Xbox to the Xbox 360 version. The reviews seemed to dismiss it as a small upgrade, but personally I found the game played MUCH better as the drawing distance was improved, as well as the details and increasing the resolution to 720p. A lot of people seem to miss those sorts of things, it becomes more apparent when you try to go back to the older version after getting used to the new one.

In other words, the biggest improvement in graphics are not what you actually notice consciously, its improvements that subconsciously improve how the game plays, pull you deeper into the game world, improve your reaction times, etc. Reviewers do not always see these things because their job is to quickly play through a game and move on to the next. However as an end user who fell in love with a game, then switched to the HD port, I notice this stuff.

Personally I am planning to get a PS4 with Watch Dogs. This will be interesting to see how it compares to Xbox 360 and Wii U, but I'm pretty sure there will be some night/day differences in the graphics, number of people/vehicles in the game world, things which on the surface seem minor but make the whole game more believable.

As another example, Need for Speed Most Wanted on the PS Vita has been reviewed as being comparable to the PS3 version by some people. Its impressive for what it is, but it doesn't feel like the same game to me and it CERTAINLY looks vastly different. Those are things you can forgive when trying to get the same home console game on a portable device, but when you get that kind of difference when going from one home console to another, its not good at all. So I can understand why developers might be reluctant to make huge sacrifices to their game to squeeze it onto Wii U, as it didn't go so well for the developers who tried to do the exact same thing on Wii.

There is no denying the truth, a game ported from PS4 to Wii U is going to be a watered down port, it has to be. Scaling the graphics load down by 1/3 is not going to be invisible, where GPGPU has extensively used it may even be impossible.

I didn't buy my Wii U to play ports, it was obvious it wouldn't be powerful enough for that and I think all this "we won't bother to port our engine to Wii U" just shows that the engine developers are also well aware that games developers aren't likely to bother. If they want to develop a game natively for Wii U, they can always use UE3 and still port it to other consoles. But a game written natively for PS4, nobody is going to want to port it to Wii U. The problem is some people DID have that expectation and are going to be very disappointed.

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.

[Chaz]

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.