artstyledev
Newcomer
this is for sure we will know a LOT more of what Wii U is capable of after E3.... things will be very clear. there will be no more excuses.
1 Million Tears or Why the Wii U is Weak *SPAWN*
- Thread starter artstyledev
- Start date
More waiting? "wait to E3 2012", "wait to Nintendo Direct", "Wait to launch", "wait to next E3"...
TheWretched
Regular
That's what they said about PS3, too, remember?
Maybe they pushed the headlines a little strongly, but Wii U is clearly, evidently, 100%, not a 'next-gen console' but a 'current-gen console'. Being able to take Tekken to your bedroom (debatable due to range issues) doesn't make it next gen, and Harada is clearly PR fire-fighting as best he can.
I can't believe this needs to be repeated, ad nauseum, because some are so unwilling to face facts. We have small chips and a 40 watt power consumption. Wii U cannot be as powerful as a 150+ watt next gen system. That defies the most basic laws of thermodynamics, unless Nintendo are using some new alien technology. This is, quite frankly, mind numbingly obvious. That Nintendo have got the performance of PS360 in a box using half the power shows us how they have used advancements in technology.
There is no need for 'wait and see'. We have as much info as we need to gauge general performance (RAM BW, die sizes, clocks and power draw, and early titles). It'll be interesting to see how games use the improved GPU features in upcoming games, but there's no massive improvement coming over PS360.
artstyledev
Newcomer
shifty i never once stated Wii U will be as powerful as the next xbox and sony console. when i say "wait and see" im just refering to A list devs. everyone is salivating to see what Naughty Dog does with ps4 probably sony best dev. everyone is salivating to see what 343 or Epic does on 720. all im asking is can we wait and see what Retro, Monolith Soft, and the EAD groups have been working on to better give us games to analyze what the console can do rather than a call of duty port? am i wrong in thinking they will have a better handle on the console and might be using a engine better suited for the Wii U?
SedentaryJourney
Regular
1st party titles may look worse than 3rd party depending on the developer. 3rd parties have been making HD titles for 6-7 years now, can't say the same for the developers you mentioned.
Ideally though a console exclusive should perform better than a multiplatform title. I still doubt Wii U exclusives are going to look better overall than PS360 exclusives.
You implied that with a quote saying "Speaking about the Wii U, many people are worried that it isn’t a next generation console..." and followed with, "Just websites looking for hits trying to make the whole wii u is not better than this gen claim. I wouldn't think the CPU is weak just clocked slower, shorter pipeline, ooOe, etc."
You're defending Wii U, saying that the CPU isn't weak, just clocked slower, has a shorter pipeline, is less capable, but no, not weak...
We can of course wait for evaluation of first party titles to see what the console is fully capable of, but with the recognition that everything else is just as valid and shouldn't be ignored. eg. Wii U's CPU is a tiny, low clocked, limited throughput, low power, weak CPU. Devs may make great games on Wuu, but the CPU sucks compared to what Nintendo could easily put in there and compared to what the other more power-consumptive consoles are doing. A dev told us that, which matches what we've learnt from the hardware, and that should be pretty easily accepted at this point.
artstyledev
Newcomer
So the fact that a dev(which I loosely use that term) said something about an early dev kit CPU. I didn't even have to hear someone put that claim on it it was almost a know fact. Any dev that uses that verbiage to describe a part of a console scream fanboyism or lack of skill. Like other skilled devs have said ALL new console takes time to tinker and find the best way to use its strenghts and cover its weaknesses. Is this not known by now. When is the last PERFECT. Home console we had. If you are a PC gamer you can go buy the ram, gpu, and cpu you want for your PC. When you buy a console you buy what the console maker wanted. Its the devs job to develop around that. Like the cell architecture and GPU being weaker than xbox 360. So multiplats on ps3 don't run or look as good as 360. Now let's look at 1st party ps3 titles compared to the multiplat games. This is simple stuff. You are trying to call the cpu weak when we don't know that. ALL we know is its clocked lower than this gen cpu not trying at all to insult your intelligence. But do we not know by now that clock speed isn't everything? We have to look at a console as a whole instead of picking apart a single feature that may not be up to everyones expectation of a next gen console and claiming it as weak.
Yes we do! We knew Cell was a monster because we had great detail on it. Then we knew devs weren't getting good utilisation from it because we knew it required a paradigm shift in game design, a whole new set of tools to be developed and perfected, and the difficulties of Cell to be addressed. That's why PS3 launch games weren't a patch on what the machine was ultimate capable of.
We know it's tiny. We know it's clocked at 1.2 GHz. We know it's a well understood PPC architecture meaning devs don't have to relearn anything unlike Cell. We know it's on a RAM bus with the BW of Samsung's Nexus 10 tablet. There are no mysteries where untapped CPU power can be hiding that devs will reveal to dramatic effect with later titles.
Saying the CPU is weak is not the same as saying the console is weak. We're evaluating the component systems, and the CPU is definitely not as strong as Nintendo could have chosen.
He was a tech lead. Obviously Nintendo would have made specifications and performance targets known to developers.
Because ... ?
We know a lot more than that, and we know it's weak.
Transistor count and power consumption are far more damming than clock speed. But you never mention those. Why?
To be clear, the system as a whole is weak. It's just that the CPU is particularly weak. That's if you compare it to the progression of core gamers consoles (or PCs) over time of course. If you compare to smartphones then hey, Wii U kicks the asses!
artstyledev
Newcomer
Its still imo to early to say a system is "weak" as you guys put it. Now let talk Hypothetically about Wii U future. If at E3 2013 we see games that visually you would have said at this point wasn't possible on Wii U. Does that still make it weak. To me until we see the BEST of a system its hard to call it weak. Something better than ps360 is now considered weak. To me we haven't seen or know enough about the console in "final" form to say that. Serious if you guys were to tell me hey I myself have worked on Wii U and its weak no way around it we worked with the final dev kit and there is no optimization on this planet good enough to make games look great or better than ps360. I would say ok cool that's your experience and still willing to bet someone else would be able to disprove what you just said. Its funny to think every dev and engine is designed or has the same skill set. What one dev may see as a weak cpu another laughs and says all you have to do is this and that's not a problem. My next post is why I believe in Wii U to be enough if devs are willing to actually develop games for it. IMO nintendo are not PR puppets that talk to try and make consumers fill a certain way. Theyare as close to honest as you will get out the big 3 especiall y when it comes to tech talk. The next quotes are all from Iwata.
artstyledev
Newcomer
That has been our policy since the GameCube. No matter how great the numbers are that you can boast, can you only draw that out under certain conditions, or can you actually draw out its performance consistently when you use it? Insisting on the latter way of thinking has always been at the root of hardware and system development at Nintendo.
I’m not against beautiful graphics, but my thinking is that unless the play experience is really rich the wonderful graphics won’t really help. I’m really looking forward to beautiful games coming out on Wii U though, with graphics that we couldn’t have done on the Wii.
There’s definitely the chance for not only graphics, but also other features that our competitor’s consoles don’t have. But I think it will become increasingly difficult from now on to compete over graphics. This is because that no matter how much we increase the number of polygons we can display and improve the shading it will become increasingly difficult to tell the difference.
Obviously people who are experts in the field will see these things and will look at some details and be enthusiastic about improvements in that field, but I don’t think that will be enough from the general consumer’s point of view, so I think when we look at the design of a new games console we need a structure and concept that offers more than just good graphics.
I think that the Wii U will be powerful enough to run very high spec games but the architecture is obviously different than other consoles so there is a need to do some tuning if you really want to max out the performance.
We’re not going to deliver a system that has so much horsepower that no matter what you put on there it will run beautifully, and also, because we’re selling the system with the GamePad – which adds extra cost to the package – we don’t want to inflate the cost of each unit by putting in excessive CPU power.
Other companies might launch a next-generation console with more power, but we don't necessarily think that the difference between the Wii U and such console will be as drastic as what you felt it was between the Wii and the other consoles because there will be fewer and fewer differentiators in graphics," he added, mirroring a previous statement in which he said the next-generation leap won't be as significant as last-gen.
"Naturally some consumers are very sensitive about such a small difference in graphics so that we will make efforts to make the most of the performance of the Wii U to keep up with technological innovations and not to make the system out-of-date soon."
He stated out his own mouth the cpu wouldn't be this monster. But is it possible to be just a capable cpu that along with the other parts of the console as a "whole" will be ok to do what he just said they set out to do. I'm sure you guys will think the opposite. I just plan to stay around here until we get games that we can better judge what the console can do in hands of knowledgable devs and newer engines.
I’m not against beautiful graphics, but my thinking is that unless the play experience is really rich the wonderful graphics won’t really help. I’m really looking forward to beautiful games coming out on Wii U though, with graphics that we couldn’t have done on the Wii.
There’s definitely the chance for not only graphics, but also other features that our competitor’s consoles don’t have. But I think it will become increasingly difficult from now on to compete over graphics. This is because that no matter how much we increase the number of polygons we can display and improve the shading it will become increasingly difficult to tell the difference.
Obviously people who are experts in the field will see these things and will look at some details and be enthusiastic about improvements in that field, but I don’t think that will be enough from the general consumer’s point of view, so I think when we look at the design of a new games console we need a structure and concept that offers more than just good graphics.
I think that the Wii U will be powerful enough to run very high spec games but the architecture is obviously different than other consoles so there is a need to do some tuning if you really want to max out the performance.
We’re not going to deliver a system that has so much horsepower that no matter what you put on there it will run beautifully, and also, because we’re selling the system with the GamePad – which adds extra cost to the package – we don’t want to inflate the cost of each unit by putting in excessive CPU power.
Other companies might launch a next-generation console with more power, but we don't necessarily think that the difference between the Wii U and such console will be as drastic as what you felt it was between the Wii and the other consoles because there will be fewer and fewer differentiators in graphics," he added, mirroring a previous statement in which he said the next-generation leap won't be as significant as last-gen.
"Naturally some consumers are very sensitive about such a small difference in graphics so that we will make efforts to make the most of the performance of the Wii U to keep up with technological innovations and not to make the system out-of-date soon."
He stated out his own mouth the cpu wouldn't be this monster. But is it possible to be just a capable cpu that along with the other parts of the console as a "whole" will be ok to do what he just said they set out to do. I'm sure you guys will think the opposite. I just plan to stay around here until we get games that we can better judge what the console can do in hands of knowledgable devs and newer engines.
Last edited by a moderator:
Inuhanyou
Veteran
The Wii U's GPGPU EDRAM and "DX11 featureset" desperation are today's "cube mapping" like the Wii.
http://nintendo-revolution.blogspot.com/2005/12/is-cube-mapping-last-secret.html
Scroll down that page, the tears are basically coming out of the screen before the console was even launched.
Unreasonable expectations are nothing new, but at some point one has to face facts.
We have not seen anything that surpasses current gen visuals. You'd be more likely to see more weaknesses in Wii U's design in comparison to the current gen consoles today. PS3 has a ton of issues, but atleast it actually does have a secret magic tech that makes games look way better when used. Wii U does not, its a relatively normal set up.
http://nintendo-revolution.blogspot.com/2005/12/is-cube-mapping-last-secret.html
Scroll down that page, the tears are basically coming out of the screen before the console was even launched.
Unreasonable expectations are nothing new, but at some point one has to face facts.
We have not seen anything that surpasses current gen visuals. You'd be more likely to see more weaknesses in Wii U's design in comparison to the current gen consoles today. PS3 has a ton of issues, but atleast it actually does have a secret magic tech that makes games look way better when used. Wii U does not, its a relatively normal set up.
Last edited by a moderator:
artstyledev
Newcomer
Quotes from frozenbyte developer of Trine 2
“None whatsoever,” they said, when asked whether Wii U’s slower clock speed had an effect on porting. “The whole architecture is running very well and we were able to ramp the Trine 2 art to a higher degree than with the other consoles.
“So for porting no issues at all and there is a nice base for future original development too. Maybe some were looking for a larger leap in terms of pure power, but in the end I believe most developers will be quite comfortable with the system.”
“None whatsoever,” they said, when asked whether Wii U’s slower clock speed had an effect on porting. “The whole architecture is running very well and we were able to ramp the Trine 2 art to a higher degree than with the other consoles.
“So for porting no issues at all and there is a nice base for future original development too. Maybe some were looking for a larger leap in terms of pure power, but in the end I believe most developers will be quite comfortable with the system.”
Inuhanyou
Veteran
Listen....when we get back to the brass taxing and what we know of the true core of the Wii U's insides, w know that there is a CPU deficiency and a bandwidth deficiency. That's just how it is from people who have cracked the console. The GPU itself is probably very weak too although maybe just slightly stronger than the current generation's of consoles GPU's seeing as how we see no performance advantage even with the much greater amount of EDRAM.
We can draw no other common sense conclusions besides the fact that the Wii U is weak and barely on par with current generation consoles let alone anything coming next generation.
Posting those useless quotes does nothing to help your argument to the contrary.
We can draw no other common sense conclusions besides the fact that the Wii U is weak and barely on par with current generation consoles let alone anything coming next generation.
Posting those useless quotes does nothing to help your argument to the contrary.
artstyledev
Newcomer
Yes it doesn't because they don't benefit yor argument. I'm ok with people having their own opinions. I'm ok with people wanting to see games that look better than ps360. What I'm not ok with is people trying to say they know the peak of what the console can do a month after its release. Fact of the manner is the doubters can quote devs who said EARLY dev kit had weak cpu as gospel. We don't know as a whole on final dev kits what the Wii U can do and that we will know this year and I will be around to discuss games that give a more accurate picture for the discussion.
Until I read this thread I REALLY thought the Wii U was going over like the original Wii was, I was actually shocked to hear that they're widely available!
Damn, I have been falling behind...time to change that.
Damn, I have been falling behind...time to change that.
Something about the same as the PS360 certainly is. Something about the same but with a gimpy CPU ... yeah, that's weak alright.
In computing there's this general idea that as time goes by things in the same market segment get more powerful. If a lot of time goes by and something new comes out and it's about as powerful as some really old things, that's not actually considered "powerful". Especially if it costs a lot more.
Nintendo don't "do" tech talk. MS and Sony have released loads of data on the PS360. How can they be the "most honest?" This does not make sense. This does not make any sense, at all.
