Wii U hardware discussion and investigation *rename

[creaks]

Your claim regarding Zelda vs. Assassin's Creed is of course completely unfounded. You have no credible way of knowing you're actually correct or not.

One might assume you're right, considering Zelda is still deep under development whereas AC4 has already been released months ago (and Nintendo being Nintendo having better understanding of their own system, and 3rd party devs have long cursed the poor documentation and development kit for the system so it's likely they weren't able to take full advantage of the wuu), but fundamentally you're still just assuming.

We should perhaps be a bit wary of making unfounded, unprovable claims in the technical forum?

That said, is there a list somewhere of confirmed 1080P games, as well as 1080P/60 wuu games?

Well, it wasnt a claim, it was a posit. Kinda the whole point of a posit. I am very much aware it is an unfounded assumption, with no current way to prove it. Im also not exactly pretending to be a phrophet, It was a very rigged in my favor wager. I am very comfortable it will be proven to be true in the future with incredible ease, with many of the the things you just brought up being factors I already considered, along with others, including a larger scale implementation of procedurally generated environment destruction/interaction than what wii sports (tennis target challenge) excite truck (Vehicle damage) sports resort (cutting stuff) and skyward sword (Cutting stuff, sand interaction) did. (Im going to assume they didnt create their own dmm system for the wii, only to forget about it and have completely static environments and objects or go back to premade asset swapping on the far more powerful wii u), things that Ubisoft has shown they still dont do, even with the power of ps4/xbone (Watchdogs is entirely old school asset swaps and finite state machines).

Im sure I could find a list of confirmed wii u 1080p games. Although it would be incredibly short.

Right now we have windwaker HD, rayman, 3ds ports,and some eshop games/wii ware ports. All the 1080p/60fps stuff for retail games floating around in the media was erroneous misinformation.

 

[Globalisateur]

Nintendo might have the artistic edge in some cartoony ways (but only if you like cell shaded stuff) but technically every first party Nintendo games could easily run on PS3 or X360. IMHO.

A lot of Nintendo (Wii and) Wii U games rely on what I would call, not in a negative way, cheap visual GPU tricks: lots of DOF/blur to hide low res/zero AFed textures and visible aliasing, cheap bloom to make the poor lighting "shine", saturated primary colors everywhere to hide low geometry, or to enhance the low details, particularly on backgrounds (which are anyway blurred by the obligatory Nintendo DOF).

Zelda U seems a bit more sophisticated, sure, but it is really Skyward Sword 2.0 HD in a lot of ways.

Realistic videogames need much more ressources IMO. Realitistic high resolution textures with decent AF, even at 4x, (and realitistic lighting with decently correct reflections etc.) for instance are probably more time consuming (for the GPU and the dev team) than cell shaded polygons with a simple cartoony light applied on them...

You want tons of moving grass? Just look at Far Cry 3 on PS360, and it's an open world game.

I am saying that having loved and finished Zelda Wind Waker like 3 times and I also particularly liked Mario Sunshine. But I also very much like realitistic games like FC3, TLOU or Gran turismo 5 and the realitistic immersion they give us.

 

[creaks]

Nintendo might have the artistic edge in some cartoony ways (but only if you like cell shaded stuff) but technically every first party Nintendo games could easily run on PS3 or X360. IMHO.

A lot of Nintendo (Wii and) Wii U games rely on what I would call, not in a negative way, cheap visual GPU tricks: lots of DOF/blur to hide low res/zero AFed textures and visible aliasing, cheap bloom to make the poor lighting "shine", saturated primary colors everywhere to hide low geometry, or to enhance the low details, particularly on backgrounds (which are anyway blurred by the obligatory Nintendo DOF).

Zelda U seems a bit more sophisticated, sure, but it is really Skyward Sword 2.0 HD in a lot of ways.

Realistic videogames need much more ressources IMO. Realitistic high resolution textures with decent AF, even at 4x, (and realitistic lighting with decently correct reflections etc.) for instance are probably more time consuming (for the GPU and the dev team) than cell shaded polygons with a simple cartoony light applied on them...

You want tons of moving grass? Just look at Far Cry 3 on PS360, and it's an open world game.

I am saying that having loved and finished Zelda Wind Waker like 3 times and I also particularly liked Mario Sunshine. But I also very much like realitistic games like FC3, TLOU or Gran turismo 5 and the realitistic immersion they give us.

I think Pixar and their buildings full of render farms to do cartoon graphics would disagree with you.

Also, you might want to watch the Zelda video again, and not just look at pictures of a close up of Link, or the feild thats so far away you cant see any detail and taken from a compressed web stream. There is quite a difference in style between the direction Link is depicted, and the direction the world around him is depicted.

As for the grass and 'cheap gpu tricks', Shell and fin grass is great, you can make it dense, it looks pretty good when you layer it right, you can have fins move to look like its in a generic non specific wind, or push it left, or right, or lay it flat when the player goes by.... But the problem is, they dont respond to interactivity individually, and would be unable to do what Zelda did, like respond to a localized event the way Zelda's grass did (Like Zelda's grass has always done since windwaker) like blowing in the wind created by the explosion blastwave, with the correct direction in relation to the epicenter of the event, or be destroyed by said explosion in a non scripted localized event, like the explosion that removed the grass in its area of effect like on the Zelda video. Since the fins are representing a strip of grass, instead of an individual blade, it would look really really akward.

And of course, because of how you make shell and fin grass density, you can not cut the grass like you can in, well, Zelda, you dhave to remove the whole fin, which would just look really akward as your sword only cut maybe five blades of grass, but a strip of four feet of grass dissapeared..... Its not really close to being the same thing.

And Im pretty sure both Zelda's 'cartoony' and not so cartoony textures are of a much higher resolution than far cry 3's realistic textures on ps360, I just had a look and its not pretty. I never really thought about how bad it would look on consoles. (Why would anyone play these multiplats on consoles instead of pc?) probably has something to do with the fact the Wii u has a Gb of uncontested ram just for the game, while ps360 has to share half of that between the game and the os and other system resources.

 

[Globalisateur]

Are we seriously comparing an E3 2014 non-playable demo with an open world fully playable and tested to death released game running on an 7 years older console?

And it's even my fault. Sorry!

 

[BRiT]

There seems to be nothing at all gained from keeping this thread open. All that's been done the last 50+ pages is comparing artistic impression. This has not been even remotely technical in a long time. So lets face it, we won't learn anything further about the hardware unless Nintendo releases non-piss poor detailed documentation.