Wii U launch games to only support 720p

[machomuu]

Techonology advances pretty quickly. 2010 is being very generous. The PS3 and 360 were released around 2006, that's how far Nintendo is behind.

Yes, but as has been said, neither of those systems play many games at full 1080p.

You forget that the WiiU is hooked up to a TV. so "it's not uncommon for various forms of media to go up to 720p" would only apply if this was a tablet or a handheld device.

No, not really. TVs are forms of media, too, and they are heavily dependent on what is being displayed on them.

"taking up less space"? I don't think space is an issue in this age of technology. Not to mention resolution doesn't impact on data size (if that's what you mean)

Actually, I'd say that in this "age of technology" space is even more of a problem. We haven't fully moved to digital downloads yet, and a 720p game most certainly will be smaller than a 1080p one. Discs can only hold so much, and HDDs can only hold so much before it becomes expensive for the publisher and for the consumer.

 

[BlueStar]

For some of these games you've got to say, why would they need 1080p? What are you hoping to see, Mario's individual moustache hairs?

Reminds me of watching South Park and The Simpsons in HD and thinking, "Uh, yeah, you're just doing this because you can."

 

[ashxu]

Modern TVs can handle 1080p fine. Unless there's some compatability issue between older TVs and 1080p, the only reason I can really see 720p being a viable choice is when the hardware can't handle it or for some reason the developers designed their game around 720p.

 

[machomuu]

Modern TVs can handle 1080p fine. Unless there's some compatability issue between older TVs and 1080p, the only reason I can really see 720p being a viable choice is when the hardware can't handle it or for some reason the developers designed their game around 720p.

Or if the game doesn't need it/wouldn't benefit from it or the company wants to save money, both of which do happen often.

 

[ashxu]

and a 720p game most certainly will be smaller than a 1080p one. Discs can only hold so much, and HDDs can only hold so much before it becomes expensive for the publisher and for the consumer.

The Wii U disks can hold over 25gb and possibly higher with multiple disk layers

and I don't think you understand what 720p and 1080p mean. They're just resolution sizes.

 

[heartgold]

Native 720p is pretty sick for launch games, most x360/ps3 games rendered at sub HD and scaled up to 720p or whatever.

 

[machomuu]

and a 720p game most certainly will be smaller than a 1080p one. Discs can only hold so much, and HDDs can only hold so much before it becomes expensive for the publisher and for the consumer.

The Wii U disks can hold over 25gb and possibly higher with multiple disk layers

and I don't think you understand what 720p and 1080p mean. They're just resolution sizes.

I know what resolution is and I know what 720 and 1080p are, I still stand by my point. Generally games that are of lower resolutions are smaller than games that are of higher resolutions.

 

[ashxu]

Show me a trustable source on where you got this information. Note: Some random guy on some obscure forum or gaming blog isn't a trustable source.

 

[Shano56]

Show me a trustable source on where you got this information. Note: Some random guy on some obscure forum or gaming blog isn't a trustable source.

I think that it is general knowledge that higher resolutions take up more disk space lol as long as theres a difference in bitrate. You wanting proof or a source of this just don't make sense.

 

[Fibrizo]

Spoiler

shiny ?

 

[nando]

and a 720p game most certainly will be smaller than a 1080p one. Discs can only hold so much, and HDDs can only hold so much before it becomes expensive for the publisher and for the consumer.

The Wii U disks can hold over 25gb and possibly higher with multiple disk layers

and I don't think you understand what 720p and 1080p mean. They're just resolution sizes.

I know what resolution is and I know what 720 and 1080p are, I still stand by my point. Generally games that are of lower resolutions are smaller than games that are of higher resolutions.

that's not how it works.

 

[machomuu]

and a 720p game most certainly will be smaller than a 1080p one. Discs can only hold so much, and HDDs can only hold so much before it becomes expensive for the publisher and for the consumer.

The Wii U disks can hold over 25gb and possibly higher with multiple disk layers

and I don't think you understand what 720p and 1080p mean. They're just resolution sizes.

I know what resolution is and I know what 720 and 1080p are, I still stand by my point. Generally games that are of lower resolutions are smaller than games that are of higher resolutions.

that's not how it works.

Then explain how it does. Remember, I didn't say "games with higher resolutions are bigger than games of lower resolutions", as that would be wrong. But I would like to know why you have to say that it's wrong.

 

[Satangel]

Not really caring a lot for this fact, launchgames says it all. 720p is a hell of an upgrade to 480p, nice work IMHO.

 

[nando]

Then explain how it does. Remember, I didn't say "games with higher resolutions are bigger than games of lower resolutions", as that would be wrong. But I would like to know why you have to say that it's wrong.

resolution is independent of game size. the same game with the same assets and same size can be rendered at any resolution. if anything a game running at 1080p may have to do with fewer or less intensive assets to make up for the taxing on the system at higher resolution. so a game with few or no textures therefore smaller, is more likely to be rendered at 1080p.

 

[Deleted_171835]

What a shit news post

1. Since when is information taken from on-floor representatives taken as fact? They are the main source of confusion at E3. Most of the time, they know pretty much nothing. I highly doubt Nintendo would tell them whether a game would be running at 720p or 1080p.

2. Official screenshots don't mean much. There were screenshots of Assassins Creed Vita released that were at 1920x1080. Does that mean the Vita will run the game at 1080p?

3. For games such as New Super Mario Bros. U, it's practically a given that it'll run at 1080p. With the simplistic visuals, it would be really easy to run it at 1080p with some anti-aliasing.

4. Wii U Daily? Really p1ngpong?

 

[machomuu]

Then explain how it does. Remember, I didn't say "games with higher resolutions are bigger than games of lower resolutions", as that would be wrong. But I would like to know why you have to say that it's wrong.

resolution is independent of game size. the same game with the same assets and same size can be rendered at any resolution. if anything a game running at 1080p may have to do with fewer or less intensive assets to make up for the taxing on the system at higher resolution. so a game with few or no textures therefore smaller, is more likely to be rendered at 1080p.

I said that generally smaller resolution games are smaller than larger resolutions, meaning that on average, a game with lower resolutions will be a smaller size than that of a larger resolution, not "a game will be smaller than a game with a higher resolution because, due to its being of lower resolution, it is a smaller game". In other words, I'm not saying that a game's size is dependent on its resolution, but rather that in most cases, games of larger resolutions are larger than that of games of smaller resolutions (regardless of whether the resolution actually dictates the games size.

 

[VMM]

What are you talking about? That's great! They're not relying on heavy and pretty graphics. Nintendo has always been about creating better gameplay and experiences than graphics. Ever since they first started in the gaming business. Sega always had the more powerful consoles. The only time Nintendo had better hardware than someone was with the GameCube to the PS2. I'm more than ecstatic that they're not falling to all the crybabies this generation and trying to pump out the most awesome hardware.

You're completely wrong!
SNES was more powerful than Genesis, and it' proved with DKC.
N64 was much stronger than Playstation and Saturn!
Gamecube as you said was stronger than PS2!

Just recently they adopted that style!

 

[machomuu]

What are you talking about? That's great! They're not relying on heavy and pretty graphics. Nintendo has always been about creating better gameplay and experiences than graphics. Ever since they first started in the gaming business. Sega always had the more powerful consoles. The only time Nintendo had better hardware than someone was with the GameCube to the PS2. I'm more than ecstatic that they're not falling to all the crybabies this generation and trying to pump out the most awesome hardware.

You're completely wrong!
SNES was more powerful than Genesis, and it' proved with DKC.
N64 was much stronger than Playstation and Saturn!
Gamecube as you said was stronger than PS2!

I'm gonna have to agree, Nintendo has been a powerhouse up until the Wii, they've had the advantage of power and gameplay for generations.

 

[RchUncleSkeleton]

Doesn't really matter to me as I spend a lot of time playing older games and indie games. That being said I am happy that its at least in HD because skyward sword on my hdtv got stretched terribly and looked like shit

Uh, maybe you need to check the "Zoom" Settings on your TV? I played it on an HDTV and if you change the zoom method it looks normal and not stretched at all. I have a feeling you are one of those people who prefer "Cinemotion" or other Motion Enhancing settings while watching movies which all make them look cheap and soap opera like.

 

[RchUncleSkeleton]

What are you talking about? That's great! They're not relying on heavy and pretty graphics. Nintendo has always been about creating better gameplay and experiences than graphics. Ever since they first started in the gaming business. Sega always had the more powerful consoles. The only time Nintendo had better hardware than someone was with the GameCube to the PS2. I'm more than ecstatic that they're not falling to all the crybabies this generation and trying to pump out the most awesome hardware.

You're completely wrong!
SNES was more powerful than Genesis, and it' proved with DKC.
N64 was much stronger than Playstation and Saturn!
Gamecube as you said was stronger than PS2!

I'm gonna have to agree, Nintendo has been a powerhouse up until the Wii, they've had the advantage of power and gameplay for generations.

I'll agree that SNES was a better system....Yeah the Genesis had a faster processor but the SNES had more RAM a better Graphics Processing Unit and a better Sound Processor. Not to mention that the SNES had many many more good games compared to the paltry few that were produced for the Genesis. The downfall of the N64 compared to PS1 was the limited memory of cartridge based games which in turn limited the size of textures making many games look rather cheap in comparison. Don't get me wrong I love the N64 but it's easy to see that PS1 had an advantage in texture resolutions.