Wii U

DemonDog666 posted...

Dynheart posted...

And you just proved why all of these threads about the Wii U are pretty much dumb.

We can talk clock speeds all day, and RAM/eDRAM (32mb) But that's the extent of our knowledge. Yet people are calling this console current gen off a a few tidbits we know (which, to be quite honest, isn't much at all), and a few rushed budget ports.

The only other certainties are that it wont be as powerful as the other two consoles. It also didn't peak with AC/ME3/BM:AC...That's just being plain ignorant to think that.

The levels of your delusions is just stunning. A dev trying to defend the wiiU just called it last gen performance wise in the link article. The tablet controller costs like 100 bucks and it sells for 300, ps3 is 250 and it's not a few shoddy ports every retail game has the same issue almost including ones that have gone out of their way to do a good job and add extras published by Nintendo.

I thought he/she was being rather generous actually.

From: DiscostewSM | #657

Rasputin77 posted...

SSJ4CHRIS posted...

This topic wouldn't be necessary if you were actually enjoying playing WiiU games. There's no need to defend something if you're too busy playing games on it.

This is the smartest post in the entire thread, which I will now demonstrate by doing a search to see how many people quoted in agreement, VS how many people continue to DRY HUMP the whole "fanboy? troll? wiiussurance?" angle.

**Does Control+F on 'no need to defend something'... finds one result - the original post...**

XD LMAO. No wonder so many of you ignore me (and posts like SSJ4CHRIS')... you can't STAND to have reality pointed out to you! They have a word for people like that...

... Kids. ;D

So why aren't trolls doing the same thing they suggest? Why aren't they ignoring other systems and just go play their favorite systems? Why the need to troll other systems? Why feel the need to attack that which you have no real need to?

No trolls responded to this because they have no argument. Hypocrites.
---
Fanboys are a cancer to gaming but Sony fanboys are a particularly aggressive and repulsive form.

DemonDog666 posted...

Running an engine and running a game designed on the engine for something with far more processing power are two very different things and yes wiiU will be lower then the min requirements to run ps4/360 games...

Directly from Epic on Unreal Engine 3's minimum specs:

Windows XP SP3 (32-bit only)
2.0+ GHz processor
2 GB system RAM
A graphics card with shader model 3.0 support.

The PS360 are both better than this. The 2.0+ GHZ processor is a single core simple processor, much weaker than that of Xenon or Cell. 2GB of RAM, well, it's a PC, you'll need enough RAM to keep your actual system running. And you need any graphics card that supports shader model 3.0, which include cards far weaker than Xenos or RSX. In other words, the bare minimum for UE3 is much weaker than PS360, but it's still run-able even at these incredibly low specs. I guess you're assuming that Wii U will be as weak to the PS4720 as Wii was to the PS360 (which kept Wii away from UE3 support). One thing we can do, is wait for the unveiling of the official minimum specs, then we can easier see how scalable it is. But I'll keep this in mind:

Mark Rein, Epic VP

...so if a customer decides they want to port an Unreal Engine 4 game to Wii U, they could

Notice how he says they "could PORT" due to the supposed "supreme scalability". Not game made, but PORT, likely regardless of whether the game's lead console was PS4720 or not.. He said it himself, unless you want to attempt to refute his statement. Which may lead me to believe the minimum requirement is weaker than Wii U itself,

It's more then the blu ray drive and the tablet alone makes it on par with ps3 cost even if it's selling at a 50 dollar loss. 200 towards everything but the tablet isn't about the same that ps3 has, so no it won't easily beat it....

The PS3 in 2010 cost 336.27$ to make (likely less now). The Bluray drive cost 66$ (with movie playback support), RSX is 45$, Cell is 37$. It's their faults for using such costly tech in there like RSX, where there are plenty of stronger (more modern) GPU's on the market for much less. In other words, the costliness of PS3 is mainly due to how it was designed, not power.

Let's see, a 4670 (since some are claiming it's the GPU base) goes for $39.99 in some places, but that's with some RAM with it, so we can remove the RAM itself and the cost would be lower (to about 25-ish). The RAM (2GB DDR3 Hynix / Samsung) would be about 20$, we've got roughly 40-50$ already and it already has 2 major components, with over at least 120$ left over for hard drive, flash memory, the dedicated silicon, CPU, usb ports, fan, heatsink, etc. One thing we can use as a reference is the Wii CPU (if it's Broadway based) because Broadway cost 13$ to make at launch for Wii. Recall that Wii was 160$ to manufacture at launch, and pricing it at 249.99 allowed for money gains from day one. Whatever Wii U must cost to develop must be obviously more than 160$ considering its price point and being sold at a loss. Also consider the design of the system, as stated by Nintendo themselves that many things were done in the design to keep costs down while not reducing performance (like the MCM for example), so the RAM and GPU (and all other components) could very well be much cheaper than you'd expect. The optical drive wouldn't be as expensive as you think because recall it doesn't support anything other than Wii and Wii U games (DVD / Bluray support would increase the cost. It's Bluray based maybe, but it isn't bluray). The RAM is sort of an off-shelf product, and the GPU is customized, though their prices would be lower due to being under mass production (same goes for the rest of the system). In the end, you can have a system stronger than PS3 (overall) with an equal or lower cost.

DemonDog666 posted...

aether17 posted...

Directly from Epic on Unreal Engine 3's minimum specs:

Windows XP SP3 (32-bit only)
2.0+ GHz processor
2 GB system RAM
A graphics card with shader model 3.0 support.

The PS360 are both better than this. The 2.0+ GHZ processor is a single core simple processor, much weaker than that of Xenon or Cell. 2GB of RAM, well, it's a PC, you'll need enough RAM to keep your actual system running. And you need any graphics card that supports shader model 3.0, which include cards far weaker than Xenos or RSX. In other words, the bare minimum for UE3 is much weaker than PS360, but it's still run-able even at these incredibly low specs. I guess you're assuming that Wii U will be as weak to the PS4720 as Wii was to the PS360 (which kept Wii away from UE3 support). One thing we can do, is wait for the unveiling of the official minimum specs, then we can easier see how scalable it is. But I'll keep this in mind:

I baffles me how you can't understand such a simple concept... Just because the engine will run doesn't mean every game built on the engine will run, especially when it's a scaled down version of the engine which wiiU will be and wiiU is in the league of ps3/360. If the games can run on wiiU they literally can run on ps3/360...

I don't know how to explain it any simpler, maybe get your volunteer to explain it to you, wiiU is as likely to get ps4/next multiplats as ps3 and 360 are.

Where does it say scaled down?
---
Sweet

That means even 3ds can run unreal engine 4. But we don't even see UE3 games on it.

Why? Hmmm...
---
NinNetID: ElectricMole, PSN: kronekodow7188