118 replies to this topic

[3Dude]

You must be some sort of imbecile. It's not trolling to have a different opinion than you. Can't you even work that out.

Why on earth would Ninja Gaiden be cpu intensive? Surely this is exactly the sort of game where the cpu is underused.

A troll is someone who basicallly can't really argue his case most of the time so just ends up being abusive in what he writes. Clearly that is YOU!

The amount of mis-judged, useless replies you have written and you dare to criticise others.

Why do you even bother?

Again I stand by my comments that the wii u is roughly speaking 2x overall performance of current gen. I said that a long time ago and I still stand by it today. I predicted the wii u would have fast embedded video memory of between 32-128megabytes. I think I've kept realism in the equation which is sadly something you are incapable of.

The wii u will be a great console which is why I pre-ordered one but I see little point pretending it is more powerful than it is.

WOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWW.

You heard him folks.

'Madden more cpu intensive than Ninja Gaiden 3.'

lmfao.

Aside from you being hilariously wrong, its an ABSOLUTE RIOT that you abandon your entire argument at the drop of a hat once it is no longer con enient for you, and you are so blinded by your ridiculous bias you dont even realize the 'safety' you ran too does nothing but support what ive been saying

'Madden more cpu intensive than Ninja Gaiden 3.'
Wow

Can a mod like, make that his title or something so no one ever makes the mistake of taking anything he says seriously again?

You must be some sort of imbecile. It's not trolling to have a different opinion than you. Can't you even work that out.

Why on earth would Ninja Gaiden be cpu intensive? Surely this is exactly the sort of game where the cpu is underused.

A troll is someone who basicallly can't really argue his case most of the time so just ends up being abusive in what he writes. Clearly that is YOU!

The amount of mis-judged, useless replies you have written and you dare to criticise others.

Why do you even bother?

Again I stand by my comments that the wii u is roughly speaking 2x overall performance of current gen. I said that a long time ago and I still stand by it today. I predicted the wii u would have fast embedded video memory of between 32-128megabytes. I think I've kept realism in the equation which is sadly something you are incapable of.

The wii u will be a great console which is why I pre-ordered one but I see little point pretending it is more powerful than it is.

WOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWW.

You heard him folks.

'Madden more cpu intensive than Ninja Gaiden 3.'

lmfao.

Aside from you being hilariously wrong, its an ABSOLUTE RIOT that you abandon your entire argument at the drop of a hat once it is no longer con enient for you, and you are so blinded by your ridiculous bias you dont even realize the 'safety' you ran too does nothing but support what ive been saying

'Madden more cpu intensive than Ninja Gaiden 3.'
Wow

Can a mod like, make that his title or something so no one ever makes the mistake of taking anything he says seriously again?

[Desert Punk]

Your status as imbecile has been confirmed.

Madden on 360 and PS3 has a physics engine, physics engines are very cpu intensive. It has been removed from the wii u version.

This is a very simple thing to work out, its not complicated at all.

Why is ninja gaiden on wii u cpu intensive?



Do you even understand how games have different requirements for gpu and the cpu?

If you can not work this stuff out why do you even dare comment on threads?

You started these abusive comments in threads but you simply have no ammunition. Who are you writing comments for, other idiots like yourself?

You don't have to do much googling to see comments about the wii u cpu being a bit weak. Its not the end of the world most games don't fully utilise their cpu anyway. It certainly didn't stop me pre-ordering.

What is the point of lying to yourself and other people?

Why are you fighting the information that is being released from developers and other sources about the wii u cpu?

Why can't you act like a rational normal person and just debate comments back and forth without being abusive?

[MOFO]

He does that a lot on other forums as well, don't agree with what he says and everything else in your post is wrong, he just takes things way to personally. Just avoid his posts like I do they make no sense anyway.

[Socalmuscle]

Actually, 3Dude is one of the more credible posters in this forum.

He gives insightful details and facts.

Many things are left up to interpretation by those who don't know any better about the wii u. But he at least hypothesizes whereas others simply guess, usually to the derision of the console compared to their favorite competitor.

Most games these days have some physics going on. In the case of ninja gaiden, the wii u CPU can handle the requirements as enough time was devoted to understanding the new architecture, whereas the others could not while making ither improvements, despite a much greater familiarity.

In the case of madden, the developers simply didn't have enough TIME to code the new items for the new architecture. That's the end of that discussion. No speculation. That's the way it is. It is the same reason many features did not make it into the 360 launch version of madden.

And no named developer has said the wii u CPU is somehow "weaker" than 360. In at least 3 cases, the developer themselves actually contacted the blog that quoted them to force a retraction due to misrepresentation. That's a big deal and speaks to some of the guerilla warfare I mentioned months ago. The CPu in the wii u may be clocked less but do much more per cycle. That still poses a challenge for code that is written to do less per cycle, but requiring more cycles. It's actually extremely simple. But some people want to believe whatever they want. Despite retractions being made and corrected.

I don't know where the personal stuff started, but technically, 3dude has shown a much better fundamental understanding of "how things work" than those arguing with him.

Edited by Socalmuscle, 07 October 2012 - 11:36 AM.

[Dwarphkin]

My question is, Why do people say "1080p Graphics?" 1080p is a resolution, it has nothing to do with graphics. It just makes everything less pixelated.

[The Lonely Koopa]

My question is, Why do people say "1080p Graphics?" 1080p is a resolution, it has nothing to do with graphics. It just makes everything less pixelated.

Its a products of this Generation where higher resolution than 480p was a new thing for general public and it honestly wasn't presented good enough to a point that people assumed HD was talking about graphics in fact lots of people especially earlier this gen was playing xbox 360 and ps3 on SD Tv . Younger kids are also a reason HD is referred to graphics since most children likes to talk about how amazing so and so graphics are but didn't know any technical terms and just use the word HD.

Note: A certain time when HD is referring to graphics is with texture quality in which they are referring to resolution of the textures but that is most of the time a PC only term as general Consoles are really bad at textures .

Edited by The Lonely Koopa, 08 October 2012 - 11:37 AM.

[Socalmuscle]

My question is, Why do people say "1080p Graphics?" 1080p is a resolution, it has nothing to do with graphics. It just makes everything less pixelated.

It's just a fast and easy way of saying "graphics rendered in 1080P resolution."

The graphics will encompass items such as art direction, polygon count, textures, lighting, etc.

Meanwhile, resolution is the number of lines those graphics are displayed on. the higher the resolution, the crisper the graphics.

I understand the confusion.

Unfortunately, I don't think the term "1080P graphics" is going to die out.

Edited by Socalmuscle, 08 October 2012 - 12:41 PM.

[Dwarphkin]

It's just a fast and easy way of saying "graphics rendered in 1080P resolution."

The graphics will encompass items such as art direction, polygon count, textures, lighting, etc.

Meanwhile, resolution is the number of lines those graphics are displayed on. the higher the resolution, the crisper the graphics.

I understand the confusion.

Unfortunately, I don't think the term "1080P graphics" is going to die out.

I know, it just annoys me that majority of the planet don't know what they're talking about.

[loonie321]

this is the problem im trying to get at. " equivalent" to Dx11. wouldnt it be much simpler to have a Gpu that can handle Dx11? makes much more sense and easier architecturally for developers to make games. its the same scenario for the wii. based on different code, developers will have to put in the extra time/ effort to make a different wii u version of the same game theyd gladly port over to the console IF it could just run the same engines no problem. but if it cant, it might shy away companies from bothering with a wii u version because they dont want to waste time or money on making a different version just for that console when they have 2 others to worry about. taking more time to write more code would be considered a hassle or burden instead if the console was capable of the same engines.

Aside for the DX11 licencing. Nintendo chose to custom design their gpu that would be loosely based on any existing graphics technology from AMD. The reason, "It's Cheaper". While AMD would be providing (and possibly manufacturing) the GPU, AMD would not be able the one to control the price but Nintendo. Nintendo would only pay royalties and service(which is smaller) than paying for the whole tech itself. If Nintendo elected to put a full blown AMD Graphics chip, even if it's a several years old with hardly or no customization at all, we could see the console spike to a $600 price point.

This situation happened to Microsoft with the original Xbox wherein they put an nvidia GPU with hardly any modifications. Microsoft ended up losing a lot of money as nvidia refuse to share the loss with MS. Since its nvidia tech(even if it was DX7 capable) overall and microsoft needs to pay it full. That's why microsoft custom designed the Xenos (for the 360) to avoid the financial loophole again( they didn't see the class suit coming though).

As for the Wii U GPU, it wont be a whole older gpu with some customization whatsoever. Nintendo only used the elements they need on the AMD gpu, optimize those parts, and add a number of functions(e.g. multi-texture rendering,S3TC and so on) as they built it around their own API that supports modern rendering methods and effects.

Edited by loonie321, 10 October 2012 - 12:36 AM.

[00stevo]

I think you guys are getting a bit carried away tbh. Ok,the physics engines on the games people have mentioned have been built using a completely different,and might i add old,inefficient cpu. So what if a few launch/post launch games have 'missing' physics?

All new consoles go through the same things.I clearly remember Fifa 07 (going back now lol) being rubbish compared to the xbox 1 version,purely because it was a quick,rushed port. Thats whats happening with the Wii U right now,devs are doing quick ports so they get more sales.

By next summer the Wii U will be making the 360 and PS3 look like crap. I cant wait to see what they do with the next Metroid and F-Zero games.

BTW i am no fanboy,i LOVE my 360,but the fact remains the Wii U has far more potential than a 7 year old cooker.

Oh and Ninja gaiden 3 looked worse than the first game on xbox 1 ffs,so how NJ3 could be stressing a cpu ill never know.Even with all the enhancements the wii version will be getting,it still wont come close to the masterpiece that is Ninja Gaiden Black,or even NG2.

Edited by 00stevo, 10 October 2012 - 11:54 AM.

[Nollog]

Here's a simple way of judging games CPU intensiveness.
1. how many folks does the cpu control on screen at a time?
2. what do those folks do? are they each independent of each other and have different movesets?
3. are there arithmetic calculations which take place? and if so, how often do they occur?

[NegaScott128]

For what it's worth, here's what the DirectX 11 features in Unity 4 are, since that's what started this whole thing:

[dragomix]

First off all, some guys here (Desert Punk) say that Wii U CPU is weak because Madden NFL 13 on Wii U is not using Player Impact Engine. But Fifa 13 on Wii U uses that same engine, and nobody is taking about that. So CPU is weak for Madden 13, but not for Fifa 13?

In modern games, GPU is computing AI, physics, and some other staff that were done by CPU in the past.

I have PC with 2 core CPU (AMD Athlon 250), and AMD Radeon HD6790. Nothing special, but all games work in 1080p, High details. So Wii U can, for surely do the same thing!

Edited by dragomix, 10 October 2012 - 01:01 PM.

[Socalmuscle]

Unity uses Direct X and OpenGL where applicable.

They use all DX11 features or none of them or some of them.

They can also implement OpenGL DX11 equivalent features.

Recently Valve mentioned that they find OpenGL to be faster than Direct X as well. However a year ago, John Carmack mentioned he was seeing DX become more daring, since MS wasn't worried about breaking compatibility with older versions, whereas the OpenGL leadership was.

I can only imagine the near non-issue translating DX feature over to OGL was for Rocksteady, Crytek, and others making multiplat games on all consoles. Seems the CryEngine doesn't whine about it (pun intended), the Unreal engine keeps it real using both, and the Unity engine will keep it together.

So you have a DX11 (Direct 3D) capable GPU that can be used to run either DX11 or Open GL (or custom API) with equivalent features. In addition to that, a huge company like Nintendo or apple can write their own equivalent (or day I say it ... better *gasp!*) APIs if they are so inclined (especially working closely with a single hardware GPU partner...). It's a stinking mountain of work though.

It's a bit of a challenge at first, but its actually somewhat commonplace.

Direct X 11 is not the holy grail. But its capabilities represent the standard for new games. So long as similar functionality is present in whatever API is being used, it's a win, whether that be a licensing of DX itself, an OpenGL equivalent, or another method...).

Edited by Socalmuscle, 10 October 2012 - 01:10 PM.

[milky105p]

First off all, some guys here (Desert Punk) say that Wii U CPU is weak because Madden NFL 13 on Wii U is not using Player Impact Engine. But Fifa 13 on Wii U uses that same engine, and nobody is taking about that. So CPU is weak for Madden 13, but not for Fifa 13?

In modern games, GPU is computing AI, physics, and some other staff that were done by CPU in the past.

I have PC with 2 core CPU (AMD Athlon 250), and AMD Radeon HD6790. Nothing special, but all games work in 1080p, High details. So Wii U can, for surely do the same thing!

I personally suspect that the wii u will only have a 4-5000 series gpu so the 6790 would be far superior to a card in that range

Unity uses Direct X and OpenGL where applicable.

They use all DX11 features or none of them or some of them.

They can also implement OpenGL DX11 equivalent features.

Recently Valve mentioned that they find OpenGL to be faster than Direct X as well. However a year ago, John Carmack mentioned he was seeing DX become more daring, since MS wasn't worried about breaking compatibility with older versions, whereas the OpenGL leadership was.

I can only imagine the near non-issue translating DX feature over to OGL was for Rocksteady, Crytek, and others making multiplat games on all consoles. Seems the CryEngine doesn't whine about it (pun intended), the Unreal engine keeps it real using both, and the Unity engine will keep it together.

So you have a DX11 (Direct 3D) capable GPU that can be used to run either DX11 or Open GL (or custom API) with equivalent features. In addition to that, a huge company like Nintendo or apple can write their own equivalent (or day I say it ... better *gasp!*) APIs if they are so inclined (especially working closely with a single hardware GPU partner...). It's a stinking mountain of work though.

It's a bit of a challenge at first, but its actually somewhat commonplace.

Direct X 11 is not the holy grail. But its capabilities represent the standard for new games. So long as similar functionality is present in whatever API is being used, it's a win, whether that be a licensing of DX itself, an OpenGL equivalent, or another method...).

maybe its a good thing it wont bother with dx11 anyway. I dont think a lot of titles for the wii u and highly probable that 1st party wont use the usual unreal engine etc for games anyway. This is honestly a good change of pace. Im SICK of the unreal 3 engine since 75% of games seem to use it as its reliable and a great engine but in the end too many games look the same with that overly gritty dark color palette, and the muscular look to it. I'd like to see other engines utilized heavily. At the same time, I just wonder if it can truly handle the even greater engines coming out like luminious engine

[3Dude]

Your status as imbecile has been confirmed.

Madden on 360 and PS3 has a physics engine, physics engines are very cpu intensive. It has been removed from the wii u version.

This is a very simple thing to work out, its not complicated at all.

Why is ninja gaiden on wii u cpu intensive?



Do you even understand how games have different requirements for gpu and the cpu?

If you can not work this stuff out why do you even dare comment on threads?

You started these abusive comments in threads but you simply have no ammunition. Who are you writing comments for, other idiots like yourself?

You don't have to do much googling to see comments about the wii u cpu being a bit weak. Its not the end of the world most games don't fully utilise their cpu anyway. It certainly didn't stop me pre-ordering.

What is the point of lying to yourself and other people?

Why are you fighting the information that is being released from developers and other sources about the wii u cpu?

Why can't you act like a rational normal person and just debate comments back and forth without being abusive?

You are done son. You just seriously implied ng3 doesnt have a physics engine? seriously?

unlike you, I KNOW both sides of the argument. The unity physics engine is for the FOOTBALL. Players have scripted movements with some soft body physics procedurally added to animations.

So basically, it intensively tracks ONE object.

Ng3 has simultaneous soft/rigid body physics for all characters on screen, standard scripted animations mixed with procedural animation so they lie at the correct angle when they hit the ground and what have you, objects that get knocked around/blowed up/destroyed, +Dynamically providing physics for each body part of each body that can get chopped off and must be animated to the ground. Thats why sometimes legs that get cut off land standing up, or teeter over, or a head that lands on that rock rolls down it before being culled. This is a standard feature in every licensed and custom engine on the market for ps360, its so commonplace its harder to find a game that DOESNT have a physics engine. Plus, each body part that gets cut off and needs to be animated before its called is additional cpu power that must be spent, as each new object added has to be calculated animated individually. Each one of those characters on screen also has far more demanding ai than anything in madden, which goes by a script selected by a player, and is completely billboarded aside from characters within a certain proximity to the ball.



And lets face it, you can post a video of a demo, permaset on easy mode (as all demo stations always are) to funnel people through in an express amount of time, we can all loiok at the retail version of ng3 to see the stupid smash your face into a wall difficulty the game actually has, and the stupid amount of crap ng throws at the player, its almost like its what the series is known for, and the number of body parts that equates to that the cpu must deal with should the player cut all the characters up in super duper ninja combo.

And on TOP of that, dont think I forgot you changed the subject, as it doesnt matter HOW demanding it is, the ps3/360 games DIDNT DO IT. I simply let you run this tangent until you completely destroyed your point and proved mine. Your ENTIRE argument is because of ONE system the ps360 did that wii u didnt? While I threw out one system a wii u game has that its ps3/360 counterpart doesnt. Sound familiar? A little samey? Thats because its the same damn logic you are using. For the past however many posts, you have been debating, and refuting, and fighting, YOUR OWN ARGUMENT THROWN BACK IN YOUR FACE. The merest fact that you disagreed with this argument, and took measures to counter it, defeats your argument, as they are one and the same.

THis crap isnt a measure of system power at all, simply a measure of the time put into the game. NG3 on ps360 didnt have the removable limb system. Is this a cpu intensive system? Yes it is. Is it a sign the ps3/360 cpu is weaker than the wii u's? No its not, NG 2 on both systems DID have the limb removal system, the 3rd game didnt because it was a rushed hack job AND TEAM NINJA DIDNT PUT THE SYSTEM IN BECAUSE OF TIME RESTRAINTS.

Just like Madden isnt using the unity engine in THIS installment, but ea said its coming in the NEXT installment, because the game is a rushed hackjob for the system launch and they didnt have time to incorporate everything, so they decided to implement gamepad features instead of the unity engine.

Youre done son. I left the street open and you willingly walked in front of a speeding bus. Do your homework next time.

Edited by 3Dude, 11 October 2012 - 12:52 PM.

[TheUltimateWaddleDee]

Assasin's Creed is meant to be missing the particle effects on the wii u but I'm sure it will compensate in other areas. However as already pointed out the development software is in early form and the gpu has ways to assist the cpu which might mean later on the wii u will improve in this regard. Does seem like the wii u is not a great cpu powerhouse. I would really like to see games like Skyrim on the wii u but it might be difficult at least at the beginning with the wii u.

Those missing effects have been fixed. There Is a topic about it with the info in the Games section. Funny how they said they weren't in there at the moment because of time restraints yet they fix them before the other versions are released.

[stupidvillager]

NCAA football '13 doesnt have the physics engine either, and its on the 360 and PS3. Does that mean they cant do it. Obviously it doesnt mean that, it means they didnt have enough time, just as in the case of Madden on the Wii U.

Edited by stupidvillager, 23 October 2012 - 06:58 PM.

[dragomix]

Here is why there are missing features from Fifa 13 on Wii U:
http://www.ign.com/a...e-game-on-wii-u

"Some of the later improvements on 13 we weren't able to get into the game," said Prior. "So we've got version one. They've got version two."

So what's the reason behind the disparity? Ultimately it came down to time constraints. The team only had 14 months to work on the game, and most of that time (around 80%) was spent just getting the game running properly on the Wii U's engine. The remaining time was used in creating unique features for the game utilising the GamePad.