Goodtwin

To note, most multi-plat games thus far have performed about the same across the consoles from BLOPS, AC3, Batman, however it's interesting that many are reporting Injustice of Gods Among Us has the best framerate on Wii U and PS3 the worst. I have read this on numerous forums and in reviews. The Wii U update came a week or so after the release of Injustice though I believe.

 

Anyways. just thought I'd throw that out there. 

 

Doesn't that make sense though, wii u has the strongest gpu, xbox 360 second and the ps3 last. Fighter games need low cpu resources and this seems a logical game to perform well on wii u. This follows the pattern most impartial people have predicted for wii u.

32MB of EDRAM can effectively pull all of the biggest beandwidth users off of main memory, to the point where main memory bandwidth is unimportant, developers have already said that when they run their benchmarks they are seeing much higher effective speeds than what the hardware should allow for.

 

That said, it is entirely plausible that they allow the clock to be manipulated to a point for games that need it, but I seriously doubt 3.2GHz, and the fact that the person who started this claims that Espresso is just a better PPC750 but out of the other side of his mouth says it is clocked over 3GHz makes the remark completely invalid.

 

32MB is video memory and is dwarfed by the 1GB of system memory which will be fully utilised with modern games. The 32MB is really just a frame buffer and texture cache, a more generous one than 360 (10MB) but  still most of the data is stored in the main 1GB of memory. 

 

All evidence points to the wii u cpu being very weak especially when you factor in the more modern gpu of the wii u actually performs some tasks that the 360 and PS3 require their cpu's to do. The wii u cpu is directly wii code compatible somehow, that means wii software sees a cpu identical to the original wii. That means even if the processor has extended instructions the bulk of it will be identical including how it handles memory etc and the memory bus to external memory. When Nintendo decided the wii u would be compatible with the wii a huge number of performance compromises had to be made to achieve that.

 

The fact is the wii u is struggling to outperform current gen consoles and is meant to be a very easy console to develop for. No one is doubting the wii u gpu is superior in many ways so something else is severely throttling the performance of the wii u.

Gary Busey told me EA stands for Epic A-Holes 

 

the wii u needs all third party games

No it doesn't. It only needs the quality ones which there really should be more of. Games like this have no place on any console as they just devalue it and end up giving it a bad reputation like all the rubbish shovelware games on the Wii.

Lol.

I mentioned before that canceling a complete wii u version would hurt them.

It has.

Most wii u owners would have bought the game, adding at least a couple million more sales.

Ea wants to play favorites.

That may not exactly be good business...

Sort of softly laughing at them right now. They are shooting themselves in the foot.

It wouldn't be a few million more, but it was a mistake to cancel a complete version. They put money into the Wii U version, and then canceled it out of spite. That's just an idiptic buisness plan, even for EA standards.

Here's what you should ask yourself, what is Crysis bringing to the table? It's another shooter, pretty much the most saturated genre on consoles right now. Is it some sort of innovative shooter that's bringing something new to the genre? No. Crysis is known for its pretty graphics and that's it. And people are really wondering why this game failed to meet their expectations? The shooter genre is simply over saturated right now and I honestly think a lot of gamers are getting fatigued by it. 

 

You shouldn't feel bad for the developer. They're releasing a game in a highly competitive market and their game isn't bringing anything to the table. It deserves to bomb. I hate CoD for a variety of reasons, but at the beginning of this gen they brought something new to their genre and it's stuck. I may not like CoD but I see that. Just because a genre is popular, doesn't mean you can put out a mediocre product and expect it to do well.

 

As for EA in general, they've yet to wow me with anything in the past several years. 

There is a reason EA had been ranked the worst company in America for 2 years in a row.

it seems strange that it hasn't put more time and effort into building out its WiiWare platform for indie developers looking to put out original titles. WiiWare started out promisingly enough in 2008, as the initial home to titles such as World of Goo and Mega Man 9, but since then it has mostly devolved into a den of cheap and generic mini-games. Since 2012, less than 25 titles have seen release through the platform.

Then there's the elephant in the room that nobody wants to acknowledge: smartphone gaming. Nintendo is adamant that it won't release its games for smartphones, despite the fact that they'd likely be instant top sellers.

 

So wait. They're complaining that there's a ton of cheap and generic minigames on WiiWare...yet they're advising Nintendo to put games om smartphones, the current king of cheap and generic minigames. And no friggin duh there've only been 25 titles released on WiiWare since 2012, Nintendo was focusing development on 3DSWare and Wii U titles.

 

So really, this is CNN saying "Well, Nintendo made a crapton of money with the DS, 3DS, and Wii, but since the Wii U is selling slowly and doesn't have as many games as the iPhone, Nintendo is doomed and should develop exclusively for smartphones."

 

More gl00000m and d00000m.

OMG bad graphics=bad game. No blood and guns=kiddy. Colorful=Nintendo and kiddy. PS4 will be 30x better than the Wii U.

 

^those who claim that are numerous. Those who claim that are stupid. There are tons of stupid people. Therefore, there are tons who claim the Wii U will fail. Is it true? No. Of course not.

I was watching a youtube video of IGN playing Resident Evil Revelations on PS3.  And guess what, the game has some performance issues.  A 3DS game ported to PS3 has some performance issues.  Thing about that for a minute.  Obviously the PS3 is far more powerful than the 3DS, and yes they did do some upgrades to the graphics but its still a 3DS game at its core, and it has some framerate issues on PS3.  This just goes to show that a highly optimized game for one console can actually hinder performance on another console.  So the fact that Wii U runs most multi plats better than PS3 on day one with lackluster dev tools, its very likely that we should see some significant improvements over the following 18 months.  Even when the guys broke down the GPU photo, the amount of the GPU they were able to figure out accounted for about the same amount of area that they couldnt figure out.  Nintendo is always about efficiency, and because they are a closed system, they can use custom hardware to handle task that typically would have to be done on the convenstional hardware. 

Exactly, just about 50% of the logic is still a mystery.

> takes 5 years to release a new main console game
> didn't release more than 2 DS/Wii games

There will never be too much Zelda.

Exactly, not only are they fresh, new, and interesting every single time, they don't come out very often and are always some of the most polished games in the entire industry.

Gamers are growing tired of the same experience over and over....

 

But 12 year olds certainly aren't, Just look at them CoD sales

I mean talk openly like sony recently did with the PS4.

You do realize sony wasn't being open because they care for you, the gamer.  They specifically chose the numbers that would generate the most buzz and the most hype, they actually revealed very little when you think about it.  It was a publicity stunt, not show and tell.  Sony knows they will have the most powerful system so they need to make it sound like the extra cost and the extra power is meaningful, that's marketing.  Nintendo can certainly counteract that type of marketing, but they need Sony and Microsoft to show theirs first, then they can say, "Yeah, they are powerful, but we can do the same things with less" and show some mindblowing games.

News flash Nintendo.... Gamers want to SEE it! The talk is getting very old from all the supporters. E3 is going to show the world what Wii U is capable of. So we will see if its a misunderstanding after all.

As above, the transition from PS360 to PS4Next should actually help the Wii U as they will need to continue developing games for both generations for some time yet.

 

If you are making a game for all those systems it may very well make more sense to have the Wii U as the primarily platform, because it fits right in the middle.  It has the shaders and other advanced GPU effects of the PS4Next, but in other ways comes closer to PS360.  So porting in either direction should be easier from Wii U.

 

However, far more importantly, why on earth are they still bothering to report a single word Michael Pachter says?  Has he ever been remotely right about anything?  He is the comic relief of the industry.

Some people are only going off what they see and I don't think they should be judged for that. The reality is there is games that so far have shown things that yes the Wii U is a more capable console than the PS360. But the average gamer are use to big jumps that are undeniable from what they could SEE. That isn't so evident right now with Wii U and that's just the truth. I believe once later this year we have multiple games on the market and in development that show a more noticeable jump then people will give it the respect the owners now want it to have.