Actually Guild's simply being unbiased. I wouldn't call what he has negativity but more of a theory based on past experience.KingVamp said:
Rumor: Wii U 50% More Powerful Than PS3
- Thread starter ManFranceGermany
- Start date
- Views 7,076
- Replies 84
Guys we reached a point when graphics almost can't get any better.
The Wii needed an update because when it was launched , there were still the majority of people with CRT TVs.
Shortly after that, the LCD HD TV prices came significantly down and almost everybody today has HD TV sets.
Now the problem that I have with my Wii, although for me graphics don't really matter ( heck I still play monocromatic spectrum games from 25 years ago ! ) is that the Wii doesn't take full advantage of my TV resolution, thus outputting a less then optimal picture quality, compared to what my TV can do. Also another problem with the Wii, is that is not powerful enough to handle CPU intensive games like BAtman AA or AC II, hence lack of third party development for the platform.
With the Wii U , those issues will be gone. Native 1080p output and resolution provided, and more horse power.
I think I'll be all set for the next 8 years or so, or until a new kind of TV will come out that will make my WiiU look terrible.
Do I really need to discuss at this point how many polygons can be processed or how really is the hardware's power ?
The WiiU will be able to play the games I wanna play, now if MS or Sony develop an even more powerful system, it still won't be able to look much better on my TV, does it ?
And rest assured, whatever the next iteration of Xbox or PS will be, they'll take a lot of inspiration from the WiiU features.
History proves me right.
The Wii needed an update because when it was launched , there were still the majority of people with CRT TVs.
Shortly after that, the LCD HD TV prices came significantly down and almost everybody today has HD TV sets.
Now the problem that I have with my Wii, although for me graphics don't really matter ( heck I still play monocromatic spectrum games from 25 years ago ! ) is that the Wii doesn't take full advantage of my TV resolution, thus outputting a less then optimal picture quality, compared to what my TV can do. Also another problem with the Wii, is that is not powerful enough to handle CPU intensive games like BAtman AA or AC II, hence lack of third party development for the platform.
With the Wii U , those issues will be gone. Native 1080p output and resolution provided, and more horse power.
I think I'll be all set for the next 8 years or so, or until a new kind of TV will come out that will make my WiiU look terrible.
Do I really need to discuss at this point how many polygons can be processed or how really is the hardware's power ?
The WiiU will be able to play the games I wanna play, now if MS or Sony develop an even more powerful system, it still won't be able to look much better on my TV, does it ?
And rest assured, whatever the next iteration of Xbox or PS will be, they'll take a lot of inspiration from the WiiU features.
History proves me right.
It's good to see there's a reason to buy the Wii U if you have an xbox or ps3. The reason why graphics are so important is because developers make them important to the gaming experience. Metal Gear with crap graphics would totally suck. Looks like Nintendo will be the best for a little while at least. As far as grapics not being able to get any better. They can get a hell of a lot better in my book. Just look at a new pc running dual video cards with 16gb of ram and tell me console graphics can't get any better.
Past experience tells me for the most part Nintendo has be successful and would most likely will with the wiiU.machomuu said:
....but if you say so....
Can it get better enough to effect game play and not just be more eye candy?
Hadrian said:
Successful in sales and successful with me are two completely different things.
You always act like games can't be pretty and be good. They usually go hand in hand. Crap games look like crap. Great games look great. There's a few exceptions to this rule but not a whole lot.
blackrider said:
You are right, but you have to consider that PC games are played merely inches away from the monitor , which can have by the way , up to 3840X2400 resolution. Now you need a lot of power to process that big of an image, and use much more memory to stream higher res textures and move everything around.
With home consoles we are talking of 1080i/p HDTV format , which is 1920 X 1080 pixels.
Computer games go higher and higher because the monitors get better and better ( roughly, I know that shaders, physics x and so on get also better and better ) , but how much better can they go on my 1080p LCD TV , sitting a few feet away ? Not that much IMO.
Still with the xbox360 and PS3 a lot of games only go up to 720p, which leaves room for improvement, but beyond the 1080p natively of the WiiU I don't know how much better can it get on current technology TVs.
blackrider said:
You're also probably gonna pay well over $1000 for a high end PC rig if you're building it. EDIT: Consoles are usually like half that at least and in the end, they share a lot of multiplats. Plus it's a bit more streamlined in consoles. It may mean less freedom but you don't really need to do a whole lot to maintain it. You buy games, play them, maybe update the firmware occasionally (most systems require you to do this when you start up the system anyway), and that's all. You don't really need to worry about much.
Local multiplayer is also a huge draw for some (well, me at least).
50% more powerful, k. Multi-platform games will still be designed on the 360 first, and just basically ported over with minor improvements to the PS3, and later on, Wii U. Only first party games and exclusives even have a chance to utilize that power, and even then, you know that Nintendo isn't going to even try to use all of the power that might be there.
Being more powerful than a console as old as the PS3 isn't overly impressive though. Refer to what Rydian linked to for an idea of why.
Being more powerful than a console as old as the PS3 isn't overly impressive though. Refer to what Rydian linked to for an idea of why.
And to think, we could have had Mario Galaxy 1 and 2 in 1080p if Nintendo decided to do 1080p the first time
I think it's a very good looking game, anyway.ShadowSoldier said:And to think, we could have had Mario Galaxy 1 and 2 in 1080p if Nintendo decided to do 1080p the first time
The Wii was supposed to be 50% more powerful than the Gamecube and I didn't see any difference there.
Normally, a system needs to be orders of magnitude more powerful for there to be a noticeable difference in visual quality.
Normally, a system needs to be orders of magnitude more powerful for there to be a noticeable difference in visual quality.
of course it's going tobe 50% more powerful then last gen console.
what's the point of this?
The PS4 and Xbox insert number here is going to wipe the floor with the Wii U
it's a pointless battle.
nintendo always a few years behind the console war.
they says 50% more power I say the other systems will be 150-200% more powerful then the Wii U.
what's the point of this?
The PS4 and Xbox insert number here is going to wipe the floor with the Wii U
it's a pointless battle.
nintendo always a few years behind the console war.
they says 50% more power I say the other systems will be 150-200% more powerful then the Wii U.
I say that not going to happen. At less in such a crazy leap.
Even if it did I doubt that going take away support as they did to the wii.
I didn't want my game prices to shoot to the roof.
Even if it did I doubt that going take away support as they did to the wii.
I didn't want my game prices to shoot to the roof.
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2008
- Messages
- 1,095
- Trophies
- 0
- Age
- 31
- Location
- Your nearest supermarket
- Website
- Visit site
- XP
- 217
- Country
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2010
- Messages
- 356
- Trophies
- 0
- Location
- Austin, TX
- Website
- whalecakes.com
- XP
- 79
- Country
Fix'd.hksrb25s14 said:
Anyways, didn't IBM already confirm it was using those POWER7 processors? And considering it'll run the same kind of processor that badass Watson machine uses -- if not a miniscule piece of it -- it'll still kick ass for a while (and probably beat you at Jeporady)
Similar threads
-
-
-
-
-
@
Psionic Roshambo:
I wonder if they could get CPUs to run that hot then use the heat to power a steam turbine to power the CPUs.... -
-
@
Psionic Roshambo:
It's not the movies or games downloads that I would worry about, like breaking into networks, downloading encrypted things, spying on network traffic. I have seen so many "Top Secret" seals on files when I was a kid
-
@
Psionic Roshambo:
I was obsessed with finding UFOs, a surprising amount of US files where stashed on computers in other countries, China back in the early 90s omg sooo much
-
@
BigOnYa:
Yea that crazy, I've never tried hack into anything, I just pirate, and my ISP have send me 3-4 letters, so had to VPN it -
@
Psionic Roshambo:
Ship to ship communication software for the Navy although without access to the encrypting chips it was mostly useless
-
@
Psionic Roshambo:
I bet now a 4090 could probably crack it? Hmmm maybe not even back then I'm pretty sure they where using like 1024 bit encryption
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
@
Psionic Roshambo:
I remember one time I downloaded like a 500MB ISO file on 56K and that literally took like 2 days
-
-
-
-