Danger Close used FB2 for MoH:WF and the Command & Conquer game has been under way for a while. Isn't Army of 2 using it as well?
Wii U hardware discussion and investigation *rename
- Thread starter AlNom
- Start date
- Status
Danger Close used FB2 for MoH:WF and the Command & Conquer game has been under way for a while. Isn't Army of 2 using it as well?
Why are we discussing EA game engines in the wuu hardware thread, does this have any relevance to the topic at hand at all or have you guys just gotten hopelessly sidetracked? 
Maybe we could juke the sidetrack into some kind of "wuu can't do X engine" type discussion (replace X with FB, cryengine 3, unreal engine 3 etc.)
Maybe we could juke the sidetrack into some kind of "wuu can't do X engine" type discussion (replace X with FB, cryengine 3, unreal engine 3 etc.)
Yes, and Need for Speed: Run and some atm unannounced Need for Speed game, too.
I know that this can sound like a silly idea but what if the OpenGL interpreter available for the system is slower than counterpart for PS3?
I know that currently for PS3 developers use libgcm but I am sure that for the multiplatform engines they continue having an OGL renderer, AnvilNext is a multiplatform engine, Unreal Engine 3 too. I don't know really if this possibility ican be true but for me is the most logical explanation about what's happening.
I know that currently for PS3 developers use libgcm but I am sure that for the multiplatform engines they continue having an OGL renderer, AnvilNext is a multiplatform engine, Unreal Engine 3 too. I don't know really if this possibility ican be true but for me is the most logical explanation about what's happening.
OpenGL is not used on PS3 games.
I know that they used initially a variation named PSGL but later moved to libgcm.
What I am trying to ask is if it`s possible that a bad interpreter between the API an the GPU could add a burden to the the system to the point that even with a better GPU the results could be worse.
Sometime ago I heard that the OpenGL implementation that Nintendo uses in their consoles is very slow, to the point that in comparison with systems of similar performance in hardware the Nintendo version ever loses in game performance.
Sure, just like PC drivers can hamper code, or even N64's default microcode limiting what devs could do. However, we should be looking at AMD development code working on modern AMD hardware, so the likelihood of poor performance seems remote to me.
A version is available for use, but most games use libgcm as told us by devs and Sony insiders on this board.I'm pretty sure Sony said it uses OpenGL-ES
If I remember correctly, PSGL was made using libgcm.
Libgcm has been said to be very good.
Last edited by a moderator:
PSGL is the PlayStation variant of OpenGL. PSSG (now PhyreEngine), Sony's own engine, is probably what you're thinking of.
I remember reading that they build their version of opengl using libgcm.
Sadly many of the sources about libgcm and opengl on ps3 have been vanished from the webs.
Scribblenauts, Mighty Switch Force, Puddle, Monster Hunter 3 and Dragon Quest X all run at 1080p.
some other web site just posted another testing results regarding the power consumption.
I am not surprise that it's a lots efficient compared to ps3 and xbox 360.
but the point is that they tested all available games and the power usage is the same around 33 w.
Do u think it's already the maximum usage or developers still won't push too much on the hardware even we found that there are frame rates, graphic issues in some ported games?
I am not surprise that it's a lots efficient compared to ps3 and xbox 360.
but the point is that they tested all available games and the power usage is the same around 33 w.
Do u think it's already the maximum usage or developers still won't push too much on the hardware even we found that there are frame rates, graphic issues in some ported games?
If it's consuming the same thing while idling vs running games then obviously the power consumption isn't scaling with load. Or the menu is very poorly programmed.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
I'm very critical about the Wii U's hardware too, as I was about the 3DS' as well, but that's a bit too harsh.
I don't think the people who designed the hardware are a bunch of morons. I think the people who came up with the BoM limits are the true morons.
In some product management 101 classes they teach that, at least during the 80s and early 90s, the westerners designed for purpose first, while the japanese designed for manufacturing cost first, and if they couldn't make the product within the cost limits, the project would be shelved even if it surpassed it for a hundred yen.
This different mentality allowed lots of japanese brands to invade the western markets with much more cost-effective solutions in electronics before the turn of the century.
Of course, that was 20 years ago and now we live in an era where the most successful consumer electronics company in the world are the guys who make people pay 2x more than the competition for having screens with subjectively prettier colors, rounder corners and 1% faster scrolling.
The top guys at Sony have obviously got the message that we're not in the 80s anymore. The morons over at Nintendo didn't get this, yet.
We can guess, from looking at die sizes and BoMs from graphics cards, that having a 3x more powerful GPU and a CPU that runs twice as fast, along with 2/3x the memory bandwidth probably wouldn't cost them much more per unit, while making the console ready for true next-gen ports. The same goes to a capacitive screen, a larger gamepad battery and a higher-resolution panel.
I can't see how a group of engineers that reach the position of leading hardware design at AMD and/or Nintendo wouldn't prefer to have a larger hardware budget and make a blast of its system for showing-off.
I think these guys simply had their hands tied the moment Nintendo established their budget limit, and this was simply the best they could do with a budget of 4 Happy Meals from McDonald's.
Nonetheless, with that kind of power consumption and heat dissipation in a system that's constantly plugged in, it's not like they'd need to implement power saving features.
That would cost time and money to implement, and we all know how Nintendo feels about spending money on hardware.
Blazkowicz
Legend
you can probably switch it off from the wiipad so here's some minimal power management.
Pretty sure I did read something in a Linkedin profile that would hint at power management support, so this might be yet another firmware issue.
Yet the "morons" are vastly more successful. Think about that for a minute. Then think about all the corners Micosoft had to cut to bring the Xbox360 BoM down, and what consequences favoring raw performance over build quality had in the end.
Last edited by a moderator:
Pretty sure I did read something in a Linkedin profile that would hint at power management support, so this might be yet another firmware issue.
Yet the "morons" are vastly more successful. Think about that for a minute. Then think about all the corners Micosoft had to cut to bring the Xbox360 BoM down, and what consequences favoring raw performance over build quality had in the end.
So what happened in the end? Xbox 360 went down in production costs and the thing makes a profit now. Nintendo has just entered the market in a desperate attempt to continue the success of the Wii and now they are having an uphill battle. Favoring raw performance in a Cadillac is different than favoring build quality in a tricycle. They will be morons if the WiiU is a flop like it should be.
- Status
