Hardware Wii U has “more RAM" than X360/PS3 & really great processor

[Foxi4]

*sigh* perhaps a better example would be...

[yt]-htyTk-Ij3M[/yt] VS [yt]pr7-cozo6kE[/yt]

 

[Midna]

Hey! Stop editing! I know you just tried to pass off a DS tech demo as a GBA one, mistakenly or not.

 

[Zarcon]

It'd probably be more fair to compare a tech demo and game made by the same company.

 

[Foxi4]

Hey! Stop editing! I know you just tried to pass off a DS tech demo as a GBA one, mistakenly or not.

Mistakenly indeed, I was convinced that was the Raylight GBA demo for a racing game I've read about back in the day, but it turned out to be a DS edition so I removed it and used the Resident Evil one which is also quite impressive considering the hardware. No shame in being wrong sometimes, I did swap the links to proper ones now though.

It'd probably be more fair to compare a tech demo and game made by the same company.

I don't think Raylight ever made any games at all - they only wanted to sell their 3D tech for mobile devices, so such a comparison is impossible. This is as close to Resident Evil as I could get.

 

[Deleted member 194275]

my dream for Wii U: New Super Mario World

does it need lots of "RAM"? not at all

 

[ZAFDeltaForce]

Tech demos are always better because you're creating a hypothetical demonstration of what the system could produce when put into full use. Actually developing an entire game like that is a completely different matter.

Remember the Final Fantasy VII tech demo from a few while back? Only a very small selection of games (if any) have managed to reach that level of detail in action, and the developers have had years to work with the system.

-snip-

Edit: The difference, @[member='Foxi4'], is that techo demos are often completed in a matter of months. Full games are completed in a matter of years.

Indeed. Also, after taking into account the fact that developers get more experienced and thus more familiar with the hardware, they are able to better optimize and push the limits of their games to produce better quality titles.

 

[Hyro-Sama]

Are those GBA tech demos real? I never remember GBA games on that scale.

 

[Gahars]

It's remembering that games are much larger and grander in scale than any tech demo. A tech demo is a tiny, focused demonstration of potential power, while full games can be large (with tons lot more elements to keep track of), so even the difference in development time can be negated.

When I used the word "always," I clearly misspoke. Foxi4 addressed that point pretty well, though.

 

[goldiex99]

..............sigh

 

[FireGrey]

Nintendo vs. Sony

Nintendo vs. Microsoft vs. Sony.

People don't do Microsoft fanboy fights on this site much.

Probably because it's pretty shitty to say Microsoft is bad when there's a 75% chance you're using a Windows OS.

EDIT: Also that's a lovely retelling in the title there. The article says it has a "great processor" but not "a greater processor than the Xbox 360/PS3". Lemme just fixed that since apparently everyone here hates biased news.

75%!?
Wow, I thought it would be more towards 99%.

 

[Just Another Gamer]

Nintendo vs. Sony

Nintendo vs. Microsoft vs. Sony.

People don't do Microsoft fanboy fights on this site much.

Probably because it's pretty shitty to say Microsoft is bad when there's a 75% chance you're using a Windows OS.

EDIT: Also that's a lovely retelling in the title there. The article says it has a "great processor" but not "a greater processor than the Xbox 360/PS3". Lemme just fixed that since apparently everyone here hates biased news.

75%!?
Wow, I thought it would be more towards 99%.

I think a poll would answer how much of GBATemp uses Windows OS.

 

[Veho]

I think a poll would answer how much of GBATemp uses Windows OS.

I think a poll would answer how much of people who took the poll uses Windows OS.

 

[Just Another Gamer]

I think a poll would answer how much of GBATemp uses Windows OS.

I think a poll would answer how much of people who took the poll uses Windows OS.

Yea that.

 

[Slowking]

The Gamecube demo remained unmached until literally the last breath of the Gamecube, that, and I'm conviced that Twilight screenshot is from the Wii version.

Well that's bullshit. You probably haven't seen it in years and thus remember it incorrectly. Here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBtAvX4Pkyk
We all thought it was incredible at the time, but in hindsight it was actually pretty crappy. Metroid Prime surpassed that one terms of graphics.

So yeah Nintendo has a history of making crappy tech demos, that don't show the systems capabilitys by quite a big margin. Is it the same here? I don't know. But saying the Zelda demo wasn't matched for years is just plain wrong.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

75%!?
Wow, I thought it would be more towards 99%.

I was just referring to a chart of OS distribution. 75% of it was Windows OS (like Windows XP to Windows 7) and the other 25% was divided between Mac OSX and various Linux distros.

 

[Foxi4]

We all thought it was incredible at the time, but in hindsight it was actually pretty crappy. Metroid Prime surpassed that one terms of graphics.

Look at the complexity and polycount of the models used. Metroid Prime shows nothing of the sort. Don't be blinded by the aesthetic used. By the way:

[yt]Jez7h4l1qFQ[/yt]

This tech demo shows off all the embedded Gamecube effects and blows away anything you could see in a game. Watch the whole thing.

This is also relevant:

[yt]pOWZbydnlZE[/yt]

I should've probably underline that I only mean tech demos that are supposed to show off the top possible graphics quality on a system, not tech demos that are done in a few days/months to just show some of them or to show ideas for future games.

...
...
...

WE NEED A NEW UNITY! *headbangs*

 

[DiscostewSM]

The thing about tech demos for game systems is that many are missing that one element that makes a game. A game itself. You've got your tech demos that show off the graphical capabilities of a system. You've your tech demos that show off physics processing. So on and so forth. Take the FFVII PS3 tech demo. It's beautiful, no doubt about that, but what is it doing exactly? It is simply showing off the PS3's graphical power, and demonstrating elements associated with that like cloth manipulation using physics. However, the entire tech demo is one big scripted realtime movie. Nothing ever changes with each run-through of it except for maybe things like particle effects that are based off a simple random number generator.

The tech demos that actually could be considered interactive games (no, not like the Naked Snake demo, that is scripted too with a little freedom) aren't able to match up with those others that focus on a particular aspect because they have jobs to do in each department that makes a game.

 

[Foxi4]

The thing about tech demos for game systems is that many are missing that one element that makes a game. A game itself. You've got your tech demos that show off the graphical capabilities of a system. You've your tech demos that show off physics processing. So on and so forth. Take the FFVII PS3 tech demo. It's beautiful, no doubt about that, but what is it doing exactly? It is simply showing off the PS3's graphical power, and demonstrating elements associated with that like cloth manipulation using physics. However, the entire tech demo is one big scripted realtime movie. Nothing ever changes with each run-through of it except for maybe things like particle effects that are based off a simple random number generator.

The tech demos that actually could be considered interactive games (no, not like the Naked Snake demo, that is scripted too with a little freedom) aren't able to match up with those others that focus on a particular aspect because they have jobs to do in each department that makes a game.

This is the argument I am trying to convey - a tech demo or a benchmark may look much better then a game because it lacks numerous elements that make a game.

 

[DiscostewSM]

The thing about tech demos for game systems is that many are missing that one element that makes a game. A game itself. You've got your tech demos that show off the graphical capabilities of a system. You've your tech demos that show off physics processing. So on and so forth. Take the FFVII PS3 tech demo. It's beautiful, no doubt about that, but what is it doing exactly? It is simply showing off the PS3's graphical power, and demonstrating elements associated with that like cloth manipulation using physics. However, the entire tech demo is one big scripted realtime movie. Nothing ever changes with each run-through of it except for maybe things like particle effects that are based off a simple random number generator.

The tech demos that actually could be considered interactive games (no, not like the Naked Snake demo, that is scripted too with a little freedom) aren't able to match up with those others that focus on a particular aspect because they have jobs to do in each department that makes a game.

This is the argument I am trying to convey - a tech demo or a benchmark may look much better then a game because it lacks numerous elements that make a game.

Strength in numbers.

 

[Deleted_171835]

Probably because it's pretty shitty to say Microsoft is bad when there's a 75% chance you're using a Windows OS.

92% actually.

The tech demos that actually could be considered interactive games (no, not like the Naked Snake demo, that is scripted too with a little freedom)

The Naked Snake demo allowed for full camera-control and was rendered entirely on the 3DS. I would say that it was a pretty accurate gauge of the 3DS's abilities (even if RE: Revelations - an actual game - surpassed it).