What, no thread about the official Wii U release date and prices?

[RancidLunchmeat]

I just wanted to point out that STAR WARS 1313 lists and indicates itself as a current gen game.
It even lists as being developed for XBOX 360 and PS3, akin to WATCH DOGS.

Just sayin.

Yes, this was interesting to me as well. Why was 1313 being held up as the end all be all of Next Generation capability and why was Halo being compared to it as a beacon of what this current hardware is capable of?

If you read the Halo 4 thread in the games forum, you'll see quite a lengthy discussion on the decisions that 343 made in terms of visuals over gameplay (disappearing weapons and vehicles, invisible walls, etc) you'll see that while the game does look great, a number of sacrifices were made to get it there.

So I think the entire argument is flawed on both fronts. 1313 isn't representative of next gen maximum capability and Halo 4, while visually impressive, actually shows the limitations of the current hardware. Comparing those two games doesn't show a small gap in what should be expected, it either shows quite a large gap or offers no useful information at all. (I'm of the mind that it's the later.)

 

[Rangers]

The fact that 1313 is current gen only highlights my point further:

1313 is not current gen in any realistic way. Maybe they will get a port, that does not look like the PC/next gen version. Similar to Crysis 2 console vs PC maxed. Watch Dogs is also supposedly running in a back room somewhere on current gen boxes, but it's obvious to anybody that it's not a current gen game.

This in 1080P will suffice for next gen for me. Yet I think it only scratches the surface.

There are other tells graphical improvement still reigns supreme. For example, that current gen games struggle along many not even at 720P or 30 FPS. If graphics were anywhere near maxed, 1080P and 60 FPS would be the norm.

And that was running on unobtanium

Yet Halo 4 running on a 2005 GPU doesn't look like ass running next to a PC game with 20X the raw power. Raw specs on PC are incredibly misleading. A console with only half the power of todays top PC's (EG, 10X the power of Xbox 360) is going to blow away the best looking PC games today.

 

[TheLump]

1313 is not current gen in any realistic way. Maybe they will get a port, that does not look like the PC/next gen version. Similar to Crysis 2 console vs PC maxed. Watch Dogs is also supposedly running in a back room somewhere on current gen boxes, but it's obvious to anybody that it's not a current gen game.

This in 1080P will suffice for next gen for me. Yet I think it only scratches the surface.

There are other tells graphical improvement still reigns supreme. For example, that current gen games struggle along many not even at 720P or 30 FPS. If graphics were anywhere near maxed, 1080P and 60 FPS would be the norm.



Yet Halo 4 running on a 2005 GPU doesn't look like ass running next to a PC game with 20X the raw power. Raw specs on PC are incredibly misleading. A console with only half the power of todays top PC's (EG, 10X the power of Xbox 360) is going to blow away the best looking PC games today.

Well that's because that PC game was probably built on a console/for a console

Srsly though, not sure how that relates to what I was saying (i'm quite tired though)


Oh & my point still stands re: halo 2 > halo 4 > 1313 whether 1313 is current or next gen.

 

[TheLump]

Hmm. Coincidentally given this debate over certain ganmes next gen-ness, a certain Frenchman in the know has just hinted that a 'next gen' game in development atm is also coming to WiiU. Given his past hinting its widely believed he's close to a source at Ubisoft.........


Although we were told Watchdogs is current gen/running on current gen I'm not buying that at all. Looks too purrty . Could this be the mystery game?

edit: actually, just seen that the demo was running on PC but it's supposedly coming to 360/PS4 too according to Ubi. Wouldn't be too much of a suprise to see it on WiiU then. I wonder in what form though?

 

[Rangers]

Hmm. Coincidentally given this debate over certain ganmes next gen-ness, a certain Frenchman in the know has just hinted that a 'next gen' game in development atm is also coming to WiiU. Given his past hinting its widely believed he's close to a source at Ubisoft.........


Although we were told Watchdogs is current gen/running on current gen I'm not buying that at all. Looks too purrty . Could this be the mystery game?

That's another thing that's always funny too me. Basically, you get excited when a graphically impressive game is rumored to come to Wii U. Why? If graphics dont matter/reaching diminishing returns etc...

and didnt you just get through arguing with me games like 1313 and watch dogs arent much better than current gen? now it's way too purrty to be current gen, suddenly, when it might be headed for wii u?

and wii u has not yet demonstrated with software that it has capabilities more than 360/ps3. this is not to say they cant exist, but they have not been proven, as such, wii u is current gen, more or less, so saying watch dogs is too purty for current gen makes it too purty for wii u.

For whatever it's worth some ubisoft employee or insider that posts on GAF was the one who said Watch Dogs was supposedly up and running on current gen consoles in a back room. Of course this states nothing if it will visually come close to the public version from e3, or whether it will actually release on current gen, etc. just saying it could explain a wii u port.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Microsoft was planning and had XBOX 2 under way well before 2005.
In fact, Microsoft had acknowledged XBOX 2 as early as 2003.

Here a link from 2003.

ATI wins bid for next Xbox


It takes years to plan, design, fab, and market, and mass produce a successful console.....not months.

Most of it is planning and design, they did not have working consoles for the 360 before 2005. So the rumors of fabrication problems are nonsense, because they wouldn't be building consoles yet for a holiday 2013 launch.

 

[Brad Grenz]

I think you're making this out to be more of an issue than it is. The console is tiny, external HDDs are tiny and USB sticks are tinier still. My WiiU will have 1 extra wire at most (depending on whether I get a USB stick or a small SSD/HDD via USB) and I will eat my Gamepad if I have any issues with my external storage as I never have up to now.

Nintendo just confirmed you can't run games from USB flash or SD cards. Only USB hard drives. So external hard drives are the only practical solution (powered or otherwise). An SSD would be absurd overkill, though. There'd be no performance advantage with the USB bus being the limiting factor.

 

[TheLump]

That's another thing that's always funny too me. Basically, you get excited when a graphically impressive game is rumored to come to Wii U. Why? If graphics dont matter/reaching diminishing returns etc...

and didnt you just get through arguing with me games like 1313 and watch dogs arent much better than current gen? now it's way too purrty to be current gen, suddenly, when it might be headed for wii u?

and wii u has not yet demonstrated with software that it has capabilities more than 360/ps3. this is not to say they cant exist, but they have not been proven, as such, wii u is current gen, more or less, so saying watch dogs is too purty for current gen makes it too purty for wii u.

For whatever it's worth some ubisoft employee or insider that posts on GAF was the one who said Watch Dogs was supposedly up and running on current gen consoles in a back room. Of course this states nothing if it will visually come close to the public version from e3, or whether it will actually release on current gen, etc. just saying it could explain a wii u port.

Errr, where did that come from? I haven't been arguing with anyone and I haven't mentioned Watchdogs up to now. I also never said 1313 wasnt 'purrty' I said its not the same leap over current gen as with last gen (to me). Neither is Watchdogs. Still too nice for current gen imo (the demo anyways) and probably for WiiU too for all I know.

Not sure how this is "always funny to you" when this is the first conversation we've had on the subject. I'm not part of some amorphous wiiu-loving blob who has an overriding unwavering defence of Nintendo, dude. I also never said graphics doesn't matter or that I'm excited that a game is coming to WiiU (although I am, as I'm buying one....and this is a WiiU thread)

For what its worth, and not that you care but roughly 60% of my gaming is done on my PC (4th one I've built), 30% PS3 and 10% 3DS.

 

[TheLump]

Nintendo just confirmed you can't run games from USB flash or SD cards. Only USB hard drives. So external hard drives are the only practical solution (powered or otherwise). An SSD would be absurd overkill, though. There'd be no performance advantage with the USB bus being the limiting factor.

Did they? You got a link cos I'm pretty sure it was a translation error (NOM came put and said it was a mistranslation didn't they?)


Oh I only want SSD cos it's silent

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

Not sure how this is "always funny to you" when this is the first conversation we've had on the subject.

Probably because the "diminishing returns" argument has been had many times, and almost the same points you're making now were made by (shockingly) other Nintendo fans at the start of this generation. The 360 couldn't really supply graphics that were far enough superior to the Xbox that anybody would make major purchasing decisions based upon them.

Sounds hysterical now, and I've got to say, the same argument will sound hysterical once the WiiU and the 720/PS4 are all sharing the same shelves.

When you look at all the sacrifices the current games have to make in order to push those graphics, you get your own answer to just how important graphical improvements actually are. If games designers are making conscious decisions to sacrifice game play for graphics on current generation consoles, you know what consumers are spending their money on.

I think discussions about the WiiU being able to compete visually with the 720/PS4 are built on puppy dog tails, rainbows and fairy dust. I'll be surprised if you can visually tell the difference between a WiiU game and a 360/PS3 game.

The WiiU will live or die by the same things as the Wii: 1) Nostalgia 2) Controller 3) IP catalog

It is not going to compete with the next generation CoDs and MWs and Maddens in graphics, physics, scale, or online capabilities.

It just won't, we already know it.

I don't know why a certain segment of the population continues to hold out this belief that Nintendo cares about them or will cater towards them. If you're a fan of Nintendo, you should be one because you embrace the products that they give you. Which are continually based upon Nostalgia, Controller interface and IP catalog. Not graphical prowess or cutting edge technology.

 

[Rangers]

A little taste of a cross platform compare by IGN (from their Ninja Gaiden Razors Edge review). Beware though, IGN are technical dunces. Still, not good.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/11/13/ninja-gaiden-3-razors-edge-review

Visually, Ninja Gaiden 3 is hardly going to make your PS3 and Xbox-owning friends envious. In fact, Razor’s Edge is arguably uglier than its cousins, with bland textures and a bad case of the “jaggies” combining to create a muddy look that would’ve been called out seven years ago during the Xbox 360’s launch. Still, the framerate stays (mostly) smooth, which is crucial for a game like this. Plus, at this stage it’s nice – if admittedly a novelty – to be playing a Nintendo game in high-definition.

Edit: I guess this is kinda old news LOL, dated Nov 13. Still, new to me.

 

[TheLump]

Probably because the "diminishing returns" argument has been had many times, and almost the same points you're making now were made by (shockingly) other Nintendo fans at the start of this generation. The 360 couldn't really supply graphics that were far enough superior to the Xbox that anybody would make major purchasing decisions based upon them.

Sounds hysterical now, and I've got to say, the same argument will sound hysterical once the WiiU and the 720/PS4 are all sharing the same shelves.

When you look at all the sacrifices the current games have to make in order to push those graphics, you get your own answer to just how important graphical improvements actually are. If games designers are making conscious decisions to sacrifice game play for graphics on current generation consoles, you know what consumers are spending their money on.

I think discussions about the WiiU being able to compete visually with the 720/PS4 are built on puppy dog tails, rainbows and fairy dust. I'll be surprised if you can visually tell the difference between a WiiU game and a 360/PS3 game.

The WiiU will live or die by the same things as the Wii: 1) Nostalgia 2) Controller 3) IP catalog

It is not going to compete with the next generation CoDs and MWs and Maddens in graphics, physics, scale, or online capabilities.

It just won't, we already know it.

I don't know why a certain segment of the population continues to hold out this belief that Nintendo cares about them or will cater towards them. If you're a fan of Nintendo, you should be one because you embrace the products that they give you. Which are continually based upon Nostalgia, Controller interface and IP catalog. Not graphical prowess or cutting edge technology.

Again; Straw man argument. I haven't said this at all - read all my posts and see how the convo got to this point.

I see I'm being "accused" of being a Nintendo fan and ypu make it into a derogatory comment. FWIW I'm a gaming fan, I share no allegiance to a corporation.

 

[Rangers]

Again; Straw man argument. I haven't said this at all - read all my posts and see how the convo got to this point.

I see I'm being "accused" of being a Nintendo fan and ypu make it into a derogatory comment. FWIW I'm a gaming fan, I share no allegiance to a corporation.

You said for example, this:

Halo 4 was brought up initially as I was comparing Halo 2 > Halo 4 (last to current gen) and Halo 4 > 1313 (current to next - although I now know 1313 is apparently coming out on current gen...) to try and quantify the 'leap' from current to next generation visuals.

The fact that 1313 is current gen only highlights my point further: If that's possible on what we have now, then next gen stuff really isn't going to impress in the same way this gen did over the last. It'll be noticable, but the wow factor will not be there. Think of the UE4 demo: who actually sat with their jaw dropped watching that? Sure its was pretty and you could see which effects were new/cutting edge. But the overall impression didn't exactly make me shit the bed. And that was running on unobtanium.

It's a reasonable position, but I think it's wrong.

BTW, there is a thread on neogaf now, from websites that have the final game, that the Wii U port of ME3 is looking crap too and sufffering "technical issues" compared to the the 360 version.

More and more I must hold fast to my recent position, at this point the Wii U has absolutely not proved itself more powerful than the PS3 or 360.

 

[TheLump]

You said for example, this:


It's a reasonable position, but I think it's wrong. .

Ok, then your opinion differs than mine on what will and wion't impress me . Thats fine but it doesnt have anythign to do with me saying WiiU will compete graphically with the other two. I havn't said that have I? I've said countless times that WiiU will be comfortably outclassed by the other next gen consoles. At best, I said I think 720/PS4 launch games from 3rd parties won't be all that different to the cream of the WiiU crop (not to the layman anyway) but that 1st/2nd party launch games and mid-gen games onwards will start to show their muscle and be in a different class to what WiiU can produce.

I still dont think the leap will be as big as with the last gen, becuase the gap in hardware simply isn't as big (while it is still sizeable).

Honestly, some of you seem to want to put words in peoples mouth or try and relate what I'm saying to some kind of "official club WiiU stance" on the subject. All people who might buy a WiiU dont think the same.....

As I said, I'm primarily a PC gamer/builder and will remain unimpressed with the hardware going into consoles (although slightly impressed by the thermal design if they manage to make whats apparently in durango small enough to fit under my TV ). Once again they'll be providing a baseline for gaming graphics, and PC will be pushing the limits

BTW, there is a thread on neogaf now, from websites that have the final game, that the Wii U port of ME3 is looking crap too and sufffering "technical issues" compared to the the 360 version.

More and more I must hold fast to my recent position, at this point the Wii U has absolutely not proved itself more powerful than the PS3 or 360.

Nope, it hasn't. I personally think it eventually will (although not by much), but not with ports from 360 games. I'm excited to see what Nintendo/Retro can get out of this box. We know the GPU is fairly capable and there's plenty o' RAM so they should be able to squeeze somthing out of it...

In fact the only cross platform game whihc has impressed is (gulp) from EA. FIFA13 features everything in the other versions (except first touch control and "Ultimate Team" which aren't graphics related and were left out due to time constraints/the fact they were still being worked on when WiiU development started) plus slightly upgraded graphics. Its not a big difference but coupled with the stuff going on on the second screen it's quite cool I suppose.

 

[Rangers]

Honestly, some of you seem towant to put words in peoples mouth or try and relate what I'm saying to some kind of official stance on the subject. All people who might buy a WiiU dont think the same As I said, I'm primarily a PC gamer/builder and will remain unimpressed with the hardware going into consoles. oOnce again theyll be providing a baseline for gaming graphics, and PC will be pushing the limits

Well, that's why I actually went back and quoted you, and only addressed the quote. The part about Mass Effect was more of an aside.

People may be using you as some sort of Wii U fanboy strawman punching bag, I dont know. I dont feel like rereading a bunch of posts to find out LOL.

 

[TheLump]

Well, that's why I actually went back and quoted you, and only addressed the quote. The part about Mass Effect was more of an aside.

People may be using you as some sort of Wii U fanboy strawman punching bag, I dont know. I dont feel like rereading a bunch of posts to find out LOL.

Lol, I wouldn't go that far. Just some jumping to conclusions. no harm done though.

Not good news about Mass Effect if true. The demo's looked promising

 

[ninzel]

I wonder if Nintendo advertised read speed for it's optical drive would be peak or typical?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Almost certainly peak at 22 MBps.

 

[TheLump]

Almost certainly peak at 22 MBps.

Yeah for sure. Although interestingly Nintendo are famed for quoting realistic/real world numbers rather than theoretical/peak (Iwata seems obsessed with it infact) so I'd expect it to be close to that. Do we have any comparable drives that we can make an educated guess at real world speed from?

Might be mistaken but I heard its a 4x Bluray drive, effectively. if that helps?

 

[Arwin]

Almost certainly peak at 22 MBps.

Afaik there's not that much difference for BluRay between peak and non-peak. There's not even really a layer penalty, although the Wii U only supports single layer BluRay at the moment, so that point is moot anyway.