Is the Wii U's specs holding it back from next gen type games?

#21Pharsti01Posted 7/23/2014 4:30:21 AM
Sure, i mean, for starters it is weaker than the systems the games are being made for, secondly, its architecture is different enough that porting it is much more work than simply porting from Ps4-Xbone or vice versa.
#22godplaysSNESPosted 7/23/2014 4:47:35 AM
Skill4Reel posted...
Eoin posted...
Have you even seen any of the recent tech-focused stuff Ubisoft have released?



godplaysSNES posted...
If one can't "quick port" games from a seven-year-old console and still get better results, the issue is with the hardware.


The difference in architecture, and the different approach developers take for making Wii U games as opposed to making them for the XB360/PS3 has been discussed several times on this board. The consoles aren't the same. So a port forced out on newer hardware by smaller dev teams in a few months of a game that was specifically designed to run on other consoles that been in development for them for years is supposed to run flawlessly, right?



Right, that's exactly how it has been before, and how it should be now. That's exactly how ports on the Xbox One and PS4 have turned out.

The architecture isn't that big of a problem. The CPU is PowerPC, and an evolution of the well-known GC/Wii CPU at that.
The GPU is one of AMD's older architectures with some customizations from Nintendo.

The Wii U is a quite conventional console. Nothing like the PS3.
---
Super Mario Kart is the single best Mario Kart ever!
#23tizzywilkillyouPosted 7/23/2014 5:03:29 AM(edited)
godplaysSNES posted...
Yep. The Wii U is too weak to handle ports from the PS4/Xbone.
It's in an even worse spot than the Wii was in terms of 3rd party support since it's selling very badly.


People always make statements like this, having zero relevant technical knowledge.

The Wii U could get PS4bone ports if the devs put in the effort. It'd be a much easier job than PS360 -> Wii down ports (which did get done on occasion with "okay" results). The architecture (despite being powerpc vs x86) is actually a lot closer, as are the GPU feature sets.

It's more the low sales of software and hardware that make it not worth their while.

EDIT: Your subsequent post is somewhat contradictory, and it shows you're not t total technical moron. Therefore why make blanket general statements like "it's too weak"? Makes you look ignorant. The weakness certainly isn't doing it any favors, but it's not an insurmountable hurdle. It's just not worth "surmounting" for hardly anybody at this point.
#24Skill4ReelPosted 7/23/2014 4:51:51 AM
Eoin posted...

At this point your argument dissolves into nonsense. You're claiming Ubisoft (and any other publishers skipping PS3/360 version of their games) are losing out on potentially millions of sales just to push someone else's consoles? So why didn't they do that last year then? Why aren't they doing that with Far Cry 4 then? If this new AC game could run on PS3 and Xbox 360, it'd be on it. Every AC game has appeared on every system that could run it, in some cases just barely, like ACIII: Liberation on Vita. Unity would be on PS3 and Xbox 360 if there was any way that was possible.


This is the same company that is holding back what it claims to have finished Wii U games that could be generating them profits right now. My argument isn't nonsense anymore than Ubisoft's own excuses. I'm sure this is the part where you explain to me how they would make more money on PS3/XB360 than they would ever make on Wii U. More money is more money though, right?

Ubisoft didn't sell considerably more copies of ACIV on four console platforms than they did with the previous game in the series on just two. That is why they are going current gen only. It has nothing to do with what they claim their engine can do.
#25ToozinPosted 7/23/2014 4:54:42 AM
The Wii U is a quite conventional console. Nothing like the PS3.


Except devs have been using the PS3 architecture for years now, and if they're going to downscale a game they'll do it for PS3 architecture because it will sell more and they can make a 360 version without breaking a sweat. Completely converting it to Wii U architecture where it will sell a fraction as much just isn't worth the cost.
#26FrozenSneakPosted 7/23/2014 4:56:04 AM
Basically, yes. It's good that Nintendo tried to be different from Sony/MS the past two gens, so we don't end up with all 3 three identical consoles. However, it's a huge double-edged sword that has bit Nintendo hard in the ass by screwing them out of any major 3rd party support from a majority of companies.
---
"The silent voice within one's heart whispers the most profound wisdom"-Nyx http://i.imgur.com/2HO4p8b.jpg
#27harold317Posted 7/23/2014 5:03:49 AM
Nintendo clearly isn't interested in getting the same game every other platform gets unless it's specifically made to take advantage of Nintendo's "difference". This unfortunately makes their platform port-unfriendly, but it forces developers to do original things for Wii U, which leaves them exposed as uncapable of creating generic "checklist" games (Guns? check. Explosions? check. Edgy character? check. As much pew pew pew as possible? check...you get the idea). No matter how much money you put behind it, "generic" just won't cut it for Nintendo platforms, let Sony and M$ fight over who gets the less-lacking PC port. It's not like you can't have a Wii U AND another console.
#28tizzywilkillyouPosted 7/23/2014 5:05:21 AM
Toozin posted...
The Wii U is a quite conventional console. Nothing like the PS3.


Except devs have been using the PS3 architecture for years now, and if they're going to downscale a game they'll do it for PS3 architecture because it will sell more and they can make a 360 version without breaking a sweat. Completely converting it to Wii U architecture where it will sell a fraction as much just isn't worth the cost.


This is an extremely ignorant post. In a vacuum, a game targeted at PS4bone should be much easier to port to Wii U than PS3. The reason some of these get ported to PS360 and not Wii U is that the former has a massive combined userbase, and the latter does not. That's it.
#29EoinPosted 7/23/2014 5:07:33 AM
Skill4Reel posted...
This is the same company that is holding back what it claims to have finished Wii U games that could be generating them profits right now.

Ubisoft aren't holding back "games", plural, they're holding back one game, singular, in the hope that sales of the hardware will improve and they can sell more by releasing it later. In other words, they are looking to maximise sales of that game. They know that more money later is better than less money now, so they're willing to wait. They're not throwing away the chance to make money.

With Unity, you're claiming that they really are consciously throwing away the chance to make money - that they could easily make the game on other platforms, but just couldn't be bothered.

Skill4Reel posted...
Ubisoft didn't sell considerably more copies of ACIV on four console platforms than they did with the previous game in the series on just two.

The PS4/Xbox One market is almost entirely a subset of the PS3/Xbox 360 market. There are many millions of people who own a PS3 and/or Xbox 360 who don't own a PS4 and/or Xbox One. The reverse is not true - nearly all PS4/Xbox One owners have a PS3 and/or Xbox 360.

Just about everyone who could have bought ACIV on a PS4 or Xbox One instead of a PS3 or Xbox 360 did so. If ACIV had released last year on just PS4 and Xbox One, almost all PS3 and Xbox 360 sales would have been lost. The same will hold true this year. Unity's sales will be lower than ACIV's sales (the heavily rumoured PS3/360 AC game is an attempt to stem those losses). If Ubisoft could have ported Unity, they absolutely would have, as has happened with every single Assassin's Creed game that they have ever made - yet you're still claiming that they just couldn't be bothered with money this one time.
#30bipots2Posted 7/23/2014 5:31:31 AM
kind of, but not entirely, on a count of its proven to run a whole bunch of engines and what not that most people claim it can't.
I think the biggest problem is developers don't want to take the extra time to make it on wii u when they could just focus 100% on making it look nice and effortlessly putting it on 2 other consoles.

Although it does annoy me when some of the big games come out on ps3 and 360 but not wii u.