97 replies to this topic

[rob_shadows]

Well that's the thing...he didn't say they were the best graphics ever or anything. He said it was light years" of the bird demo...which is relative to the person who sees it...what he considers miles ahead may be different than what other people consider light years ahead.

If it can play Battlefield 3 as good as it looks on the PC, I'll officially be impressed:P

[Someone]

It can.

[rob_shadows]

You did NOT just reference what may be the biggest fail ever seen on the internet!

I'm disappointed in you! That machine they built is NOT representative of the Wii U AT ALL

[Jikayaki]

The "Hawk" statement comes from the complete version of the Japanese Garden tech demo. After the Japanese koi fish the demo continues with a hawk or falcon that then precedes to move around the garden as the seasons change ending with the falcon playing in the snow on one of the roofs. This tech demo is something you really needed to see in person at the event or through high quality video to get the full effect. It's actually quite impressive in my opinion certainly not something you can do on current consoles outside the PC. We don't yet have any real hard facts on the consoles specs, but from the IBM Watson statements we can determine its based on Power 7 architecture (honestly the only real choice Nintendo had anyway). It really is possible that Wii U's CPU could be a full generational leap over Xbox 360 and it wouldn't make sense if the GPU didn't match the CPU's capabilities. It still greatly depends on what exactly you expect from a generational leap and the specifics of the chipset. There likely will be a gab between Wii U and Xbox Next and PS4, but it likely isn't going to be as large as many think. Currently I'm thinking Dreamcast comparative to the GameCube or Xbox is about as bad as its going to get.

[Someone]

You did NOT just reference what may be the biggest fail ever seen on the internet!

I'm disappointed in you! That machine they built is NOT representative of the Wii U AT ALL

How do you know? They've been right before, so don't reject things unless they're proven wrong. I don't mind if you're disappointed in me, since it's kind of obvious you're heavily against Nintendo.

The video they released is proof of how powerful it is, too, since it looks really realistic!

[Biohazard]

How do you know? They've been right before, so don't reject things unless they're proven wrong. I don't mind if you're disappointed in me, since it's kind of obvious you're heavily against Nintendo.

The video they released is proof of how powerful it is, too, since it looks really realistic!

Console hardware isn't optimized the same way PCs are. They are solely for gaming, unlike PCs where it needs to run an operating. Try assembling a makeshift PC based off of Xbox 360's specs and see how many from its library can actually run on it.

[Someone]

By "the video", I meant the video Nintendo released (the one with the bird and cherry blossoms).

Biohazard, are you saying it could be more powerful or it's not really known?

[Waller]

He means that you can do much more on a console with certain specs than in a computer with the same specs. I doubt Crysis 2 would run on a computer with 360 specs.

[rob_shadows]

I'm sure it could but it would have to be with low settings, lol.

The video they released is proof of how powerful it is, too, since it looks really realistic!

I was impressed with the background but something about the bird just seemed off...idk what it is.

Anyways, that was a tech demo, not representative of graphics during actual gameplay.

Remember the Quantic Dream's tech demo for the PS3 that had everyone's jaws dropping to the floor? Well it took Quantic Dreams 4 years to actually to be able to make a game with those visuals (Heavy Rain) and even then it wasn't on par with that original tech demo...and to even get close to it, the entire game had to be done in QT events.

Other than Heavy Rain, no game has even come close to what they showed off in that Tech Demo for the PS3 and we're well into the systems life cycle...if games were going to be able to do it, they'd have done it already.

It's entirely possible (if not likely) that it'll be the same for the Wii U with it's tech demo's.

Not that it would be a bad thing, it's still a MAJOR step up from the original Wii and short of people who made the massive mistake of actually buying into all the b/s pre-reveal hype no one expected a modern day graphical powerhouse from Nintendo.

I don't mind if you're disappointed in me, since it's kind of obvious you're heavily against Nintendo.

I'm not against Nintendo, I love me some Zelda, Mario, DK and Kirby. I'm against people who try to irrationally overrate products or features of products.

Edited by rob_shadows, 09 June 2011 - 06:11 PM.

[Jikayaki]

I'm sure it could but it would have to be with low settings, lol.



I was impressed with the background but something about the bird just seemed off...idk what it is.

Anyways, that was a tech demo, not representative of graphics during actual gameplay.

Remember the Quantic Dream's tech demo for the PS3 that had everyone's jaws dropping to the floor? Well it took Quantic Dreams 4 years to actually to be able to make a game with those visuals (Heavy Rain) and even then it wasn't on par with that original tech demo...and to even get close to it, the entire game had to be done in QT events.

Other than Heavy Rain, no game has even come close to what they showed off in that Tech Demo for the PS3 and we're well into the systems life cycle...if games were going to be able to do it, they'd have done it already.

It's entirely possible (if not likely) that it'll be the same for the Wii U with it's tech demo's.

Not that it would be a bad thing, it's still a MAJOR step up from the original Wii and short of people who made the massive mistake of actually buying into all the b/s pre-reveal hype no one expected a modern day graphical powerhouse from Nintendo.



I'm not against Nintendo, I love me some Zelda, Mario, DK and Kirby. I'm against people who try to irrationally overrate products or features of products.

You have to look at Nintendo's attitude regarding tech demos and general tech specs. Really the reason Nintendo stopped releasing technical specs regarding its systems is what happened with GameCube. Sony and Microsoft give the media fluffed specs regarding their consoles, which simply wasn't possible in a full game setting. Nintendo on the other hand were more honest and openly discussed the capabilities of the GameCube and the whole situation soured on them. This isn't Sony or Microsoft where consistently you can expect them to show case a tech demo simply not possible on the hardware in a game. Nintendo's tech demos for certain franchises for instance often end up not quite as impressive as the finished product and it wouldn't be like Nintendo to show case a demo that didn't represent what the console is truly capable of pulling off.

[Limelight788]

We'll have to see about this and see how much weaker the next console will be in comparison to the PS4 and 720. Either way, I'm not expecting it to be outdated until at least those two are out in the market.

[Tre]

Sony CFO Masaru Kato commented, "It is no longer thinkable to have a huge initial financial investment like that of the PS3."
If Microsoft is following this theme then I'll say it will still be outdated but not that outdated.

[rob_shadows]

Sony CFO Masaru Kato commented, "It is no longer thinkable to have a huge initial financial investment like that of the PS3."
If Microsoft is following this theme then I'll say it will still be outdated but not that outdated.

Storm said it best on another thread,"The PS4 and Xbox 720 can't have the kind of graphical jump of the last generation if they want to keep the price down." Because of that I don't think the Wii U will be that underpowered when compared to the other two's consoles.

It's one thing to say it but another to actually do it. Look at Vita, they spent a ton of money on that thing and are selling at a loss to the point where Sony have even said they don't expect to turn a profit on it for 3 years. On the other hand, it's still competitively priced with the 3DS despite costing significantly more to make because of Sony's business strategy of long-term lifecycles and patience with profit margins.

it's not likely we'll see a system that cost $800 to make again then selling at $600 but it's not out of the question to see a console selling for the 400-500 range that they lose a hundred or two per console on initially.

We also have to realize why the PS3 was so expensive to make in the first place, due to conversations like this I've looked up a lot of information and the real cost in the PS3 came from two things. Cell and Blu-Ray, both were brand new technologies so manufacturing costs on them we're incredibly high. Now it's different, just look at the price of a stand alone Blu Ray player in 2006 and compare it to now. And with Cell Sony now owns the manufacturing facility for the chip themselves after buying it from Toshiba, allowing for significant cuts in cost for the processor should they decide to use an upgraded version for the PS4, which I personally believe they should just because of the fact that they DO own the factory, it gives them the best way to dramatically improve the performance without costing too much because they won't have to subsidize manufacturing on the chip, and after additional research I'm fairly certain the 4PPE-32SPE cell chip is either in existence or near completion already given that back in 2008 IBM predicted it by 2011, IBM abandoned cell of course but Sony hasn't and likely continued the research. It's heavily speculated that they may use a 22NM 4PPE-32SPE cell processor with up to 4GB of joint XDR/GDDR5 RAM (whichever is cheaper for them) instead of having separated RAM like they did with the current Cell which makes development a lot easier from what I understand.

It's my understanding that a 4PPE-32SPE 22NM chip with 4GB of XDR or GDDR5 RAM would likely destroy whatever is in the WiiU, however my concern is that estimates place it as a console with a $599 price point with those specs (still selling at a loss of course), I could see 499 but not 599, so the question is would Sony sacrifice in other areas to achieve those specs or would they prefer to tone down the chip/RAM combo, they could easily cut costs allowing them to keep the power by shipping with smaller HDDs or none at all and just incorporate external usb drive support like WiiU (which since Nintendo has already done Microsoft and Sony may do just because they now can without facing too much backlash and it cuts costs), or they could also remove the physical disk drive (Blu-Ray drive) and use the same flash stick storage medium the Vita will use, while Vita will currently only offer 4-8GB flash sticks they go up to 256GB, while 256GB is out of the question due to cost (nearly $1000 for the drive) current drive prices in line with Blu-Ray game disk prices (59.99) offer the 32GB capacity, by 2014 (the speculated earliest time frame for the PS4 release) the range may be up to as high as 64GB allowing capacity to surpass even that of Blu-Ray while having the obvious advantages in quietness (no moving parts), scratching (no actual disk) and because of no moving parts, it also cuts heating in the system and allows for lower power output. Support to play Blu-Ray movies can still be added to the system for D/L them via virtual services or Sony could start offering copies of Blu-Ray movies on actual flash drives as well as Blu-Ray disks.

All that being said, while all of those options are easily possible, I don't actually see either happening for various reasons. So I really don't know what to expect, my guess is Sony will go with a lesser chip than the 22NM 4PPE-32SPE Cell but you never know.

It will be fun to see what Microsoft and Sony do though, that much is certain. The next 5 years or so should be an awesome time for gamers, it always is when we get new consoles and after as developers learn to fully utilize them.

Edited by rob_shadows, 14 June 2011 - 04:49 AM.

[nenoti]

Wii UEvery gadget gets outdated after few months of its launch as the manufacturers have next versions in their mind with Wii U. So i think WII 2 will not be an exception to it.

Edited by nenoti, 05 July 2011 - 07:11 AM.

[rob_shadows]

Well there is no question that in terms of what can be done with gaming comparing it to PCs it's already outdated, the question is mainly being asked as to whether or not the next Xbox and Playstations will be ahead of it (most have stated yes) and subsequently, by how much (this is where the debate comes in)

[raney150]

It's certainly possible that Nintendo will be surpassed by Microsoft and Sony in the next generation - in fact, I think it's inevitable with the 2-year gap between the releases. But really, I wouldn't worry too much about it - as Jikayaki made it clear on that other thread, the eighth generation really won't be so much about horsepower as it will be about delivering unique experiences and services.

In a way, the 3DS is already a sign of that - features like StreetPass, SpotPass, and dare I say, glassesless 3D visuals, have never been implemented on such a wide scale before. These killer features that can be listed as bullet points on the box are what will help the 3DS retain the upper hand in the handheld gaming race, even when the NGP and iPhone 5 surpass it in raw power.

Let's also think for a moment what a 2012 launch for Nintendo and a 2014 launch for Microsoft and Sony really means. Nintendo will have a 2-year head start on them, giving them plenty of time to build and market the Wii 2 into a commercially dominant product. Sony and Microsoft probably will come out with even more powerful consoles further on, but they won't get anywhere near Nintendo's success until they learn that it takes more than sheer muscle to sell consumer products these days.

Well, there will definitely be room for improvement for graphics. We are no where near any cap on how good graphics CAN look. As far as we know, Sony could be releasing the PS4 late next year or early next year. I wouldn't doubt it. Actually I doubt there will be a 2 year gap between Nintendo, and the other 2 consoles.

Plus look at the Xbox. Worldwide, it would be very doubtful if the PS3 doesn't outsell it by years end, and it had a full year to get ahead. A headstart means almost nothing. In fact it ruined the quality of the priduct because they rushed it to get it out faster.

[rob_shadows]

You also have to keep in mind that Microsoft has a very small install base in Japan though. That's the real reason the PS3 has performed so much better in it's lifecycle sales than the 360 (selling nearly as many with a full year less time on the market). If you look at only N/A and Europe the numbers shift heavily in favor of the 360.

While it's possible we could see a PS4 as early as next year, I in fact would heavily doubt it. Sony lives by the 10 year life cycle and there is no indication they will abandon it now. The PS3 still has a lot of life left in it so they can take their time, I think 2014 is the earliest we'll see a PS4, with Sony running PS3 and PS4 support concurrently for a couple years like they did with the PS2 and PS3. It makes sense for them for the lifecycle tendencies and it also allows a year or two more for higher tech capabilities to cheapen (and a year or two makes a huge difference when your talking about the price of technology).

[Tre]

It's one thing to say it but another to actually do it. Look at Vita, they spent a ton of money on that thing and are selling at a loss to the point where Sony have even said they don't expect to turn a profit on it for 3 years. On the other hand, it's still competitively priced with the 3DS despite costing significantly more to make because of Sony's business strategy of long-term lifecycles and patience with profit margins.

it's not likely we'll see a system that cost $800 to make again then selling at $600 but it's not out of the question to see a console selling for the 400-500 range that they lose a hundred or two per console on initially.

We also have to realize why the PS3 was so expensive to make in the first place, due to conversations like this I've looked up a lot of information and the real cost in the PS3 came from two things. Cell and Blu-Ray, both were brand new technologies so manufacturing costs on them we're incredibly high. Now it's different, just look at the price of a stand alone Blu Ray player in 2006 and compare it to now. And with Cell Sony now owns the manufacturing facility for the chip themselves after buying it from Toshiba, allowing for significant cuts in cost for the processor should they decide to use an upgraded version for the PS4, which I personally believe they should just because of the fact that they DO own the factory, it gives them the best way to dramatically improve the performance without costing too much because they won't have to subsidize manufacturing on the chip, and after additional research I'm fairly certain the 4PPE-32SPE cell chip is either in existence or near completion already given that back in 2008 IBM predicted it by 2011, IBM abandoned cell of course but Sony hasn't and likely continued the research. It's heavily speculated that they may use a 22NM 4PPE-32SPE cell processor with up to 4GB of joint XDR/GDDR5 RAM (whichever is cheaper for them) instead of having separated RAM like they did with the current Cell which makes development a lot easier from what I understand.

It's my understanding that a 4PPE-32SPE 22NM chip with 4GB of XDR or GDDR5 RAM would likely destroy whatever is in the WiiU, however my concern is that estimates place it as a console with a $599 price point with those specs (still selling at a loss of course), I could see 499 but not 599, so the question is would Sony sacrifice in other areas to achieve those specs or would they prefer to tone down the chip/RAM combo, they could easily cut costs allowing them to keep the power by shipping with smaller HDDs or none at all and just incorporate external usb drive support like WiiU (which since Nintendo has already done Microsoft and Sony may do just because they now can without facing too much backlash and it cuts costs), or they could also remove the physical disk drive (Blu-Ray drive) and use the same flash stick storage medium the Vita will use, while Vita will currently only offer 4-8GB flash sticks they go up to 256GB, while 256GB is out of the question due to cost (nearly $1000 for the drive) current drive prices in line with Blu-Ray game disk prices (59.99) offer the 32GB capacity, by 2014 (the speculated earliest time frame for the PS4 release) the range may be up to as high as 64GB allowing capacity to surpass even that of Blu-Ray while having the obvious advantages in quietness (no moving parts), scratching (no actual disk) and because of no moving parts, it also cuts heating in the system and allows for lower power output. Support to play Blu-Ray movies can still be added to the system for D/L them via virtual services or Sony could start offering copies of Blu-Ray movies on actual flash drives as well as Blu-Ray disks.

All that being said, while all of those options are easily possible, I don't actually see either happening for various reasons. So I really don't know what to expect, my guess is Sony will go with a lesser chip than the 22NM 4PPE-32SPE Cell but you never know.

It will be fun to see what Microsoft and Sony do though, that much is certain. The next 5 years or so should be an awesome time for gamers, it always is when we get new consoles and after as developers learn to fully utilize them.

In case you didn't know Sony took some tech out of the Vita to make it more competitively priced. Sony's divison of gaming must make profits. If other division have to keep supplying the capital then that is a problem. I expect Sony to make a powerful system but not that greater than the Wii U. Also they are looking at getting rid of the Cell processor as developers complained that it is difficult to work with.

Edited by Tre, 14 June 2011 - 08:11 AM.

[Camcam281]

It is truly possible, yes. But Nintendo will have the best home console for at least 2 years, which gives them time to rank in the cash. So yes, it may happen, but it will be worth it to Nintendo!