Do people honestly still think the Wii U isnt more powerful than the PS3 and 360

#21LaManoNeraIIPosted 8/1/2013 3:52:38 AM
huckbeine posted...


In layman terms, in games, u would probably see sharper textures, more shader operations, but the framerate sucks.


That's a confusing statement considering the majority of first and second party games run at 60 FPS.
---
R.I.P LaManoNera
04-06-2009
#22FayeLadyPosted 8/1/2013 4:05:41 AM
I'm curious why no one uses Cerny's speech to state the 360 and One are more powerful than first thought. They use eDRAM the same way the Wii U does.
---
If I support the game company, then I won't be supporting the blank DVD business.
#23RobJ23IsExposedPosted 8/1/2013 4:29:53 AM
It's barely more powerful than the PS3 and 360, and is actually slower than the PS3 and 360. Like how the SNES was more powerful than the Genesis/MD overall but the SNES was slower than the Genesis/MD.
---
If the Wii brand was a person, he'd a deadbeat uncle who embarrasses everyone involved while living off of his one single moment of glory he had back in 2006.
#24jmichaelbpPosted 8/1/2013 4:57:53 AM
thefabregas22 posted...
lollolol have you guis not seen lower clock speed????!!11!!!11!11111!!!!11

PS360 trumps on wii puu


I nou manh, dese guis are sow sillie.
Teh PS360 alsow tromp teh PS Fail and teh Xboner. Deir clock speed iz only 1.6GHz.
lollololol, dese nest jen consoles are teh faylhurez.
---
http://images.wikia.com/fallout/images/d/da/Randy_Pitchford.jpg <------ Liar http://i.imgur.com/2z9p9L7.gif
#25NateRose89Posted 8/1/2013 5:32:52 AM
Its definitely more powerful, it just hasn't been used correctly yet. Nintendo need to flex some muscle and get a Rune Factory HD game going!
---
"I am no knight. I spit on them and their vows." Sandor Clegane, 1996.
#26huckbeinePosted 8/1/2013 5:46:56 AM
LaManoNeraII posted...
huckbeine posted...


In layman terms, in games, u would probably see sharper textures, more shader operations, but the framerate sucks.


That's a confusing statement considering the majority of first and second party games run at 60 FPS.



well because, lets face it, the first part and second party games like NSBU are not technological marvel compared to The Last of Us.

But if u want a real life example, look at Warriors Orochi 3 for WiiU and PS3 version, Kens Rage 2 for WiiU and PS3 and the NG 3 Razor Edge for WiiU and PS3.

the Wii U has a little more sharper graphics and a little better textures compared to PS3 but suffers from framerate dips and microstutter compared to PS3.
#27HayashiTakaraPosted 8/1/2013 7:15:05 AM
jmichaelbp posted...
thefabregas22 posted...
lollolol have you guis not seen lower clock speed????!!11!!!11!11111!!!!11

PS360 trumps on wii puu


I nou manh, dese guis are sow sillie.
Teh PS360 alsow tromp teh PS Fail and teh Xboner. Deir clock speed iz only 1.6GHz.
lollololol, dese nest jen consoles are teh faylhurez.


wUrD!!11! y0!1!
#28Neo_HeartlessPosted 8/1/2013 7:16:58 AM
huckbeine posted...
LaManoNeraII posted...
huckbeine posted...


In layman terms, in games, u would probably see sharper textures, more shader operations, but the framerate sucks.


That's a confusing statement considering the majority of first and second party games run at 60 FPS.



well because, lets face it, the first part and second party games like NSBU are not technological marvel compared to The Last of Us.

But if u want a real life example, look at Warriors Orochi 3 for WiiU and PS3 version, Kens Rage 2 for WiiU and PS3 and the NG 3 Razor Edge for WiiU and PS3.

the Wii U has a little more sharper graphics and a little better textures compared to PS3 but suffers from framerate dips and microstutter compared to PS3.


ITT: We compare games produced at the start of a console's life to games produced at the end of another console's life.
---
[Wubeth Intensifies]
#29CapnStankyPosted 8/1/2013 7:20:01 AM
What illustrates this power? The incredibly awful and slow OS? The terrible launch games?
#30FenderMasterPosted 8/1/2013 7:20:14 AM
The CPU is weaker anyway
---
http://www.jvp-boston.org