or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Wii U - Page 21  

post #601 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by darklordjames View Post

"Since devs have said slightly slower, it may be closer to 3.0ghz than 2.0ghz."
You're forgetting two generations of PowerPC evolution. 2.0ghz of PPC7 is probably 2.6-2.8ghz worth of the 360's PPC5. 3.0ghz is pushing it in thermal terms in that tiny case, unless there are only two cores. There would just be too much heat on a 32nm process, especially when paired with a much beefer GPU than the 360 has. Again, educated guess, but clock speeds are more likely to be in the 2.0-2.5 range. With 3.0ghz of PPC7 we would be hearing that the CPU is noticeably quicker than a 360, not just on par, as it would be like having a 3.8-4.0ghz 360 CPU to work with.

Fair enough.

But we don't even know if it is a 32nm design, so that could be an issue for heat levels.

I think that 3 cores is the only thing we can count on, thanks to the early dev kit that leaked a while back.
post #602 of 1142
Well, I pre-ordered my WiiU Deluxe at Gamestop.com on announcement day. My big question is whether it will be able to do 1080p60Hz (60FPS) Frame Packing 3D to each eye (which HDMI can't handle right now), or if will limit 1080p 3D to 30FPS. Or drop to 720p 60FPS for 3D. Hmmm.... Wipeout HD on PS3 which I thought was 1080p60 is only that for 2D, and drops to 1080p30 for 3D probably due to this limitation. Not that I could really tell the difference, the 3D was jaw dropping.
Edited by Flavius - 9/22/12 at 11:21pm
post #603 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flavius View Post

Well, I pre-ordered my WiiU Deluxe at Gamestop.com on announcement day. My big question is whether it will be able to do 1080p60Hz (60FPS) Frame Packing 3D to each eye (which HDMI can't handle right now), or if will limit 1080p 3D to 30FPS. Or drop to 720p 60FPS for 3D. Hmmm.... Wipeout HD on PS3 which I thought was 1080p60 is only that for 2D, and drops to 1080p30 for 3D probably due to this limitation. Not that I could really tell the difference, the 3D was jaw dropping.

The Wii U isn't doing 3D.

Besides, the 3D fad is pretty much over already, even Sony has given up on 3D games for the most part.
post #604 of 1142
"The Wii U isn't doing 3D."

3D is software, not hardware. It has not yet been put forth by Nintendo as a selling point, but there is nothing stopping a dev from deciding to run some 3D on the Wii U. I would not be surprised if Batman gets 3D at some point, as those guys over at Rock Steady loves them some 3D.

"Or drop to 720p 60FPS for 3D"

720p/60 and 1080p/30 are all you can expect, with 720p/60 being the obvious better choice. Even if the Wii U ships with the ability to run 1080p/60 over HDMI, good luck finding a TV that will decode it. It may be an HDMI standard upgrade that happens entirely in software, but don't make a purchasing decision based on "hopefully, maybe".
post #605 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flavius View Post

Well, I pre-ordered my WiiU Deluxe at Gamestop.com on announcement day. My big question is whether it will be able to do 1080p60Hz (60FPS) Frame Packing 3D to each eye (which HDMI can't handle right now), or if will limit 1080p 3D to 30FPS. Or drop to 720p 60FPS for 3D. Hmmm.... Wipeout HD on PS3 which I thought was 1080p60 is only that for 2D, and drops to 1080p30 for 3D probably due to this limitation. Not that I could really tell the difference, the 3D was jaw dropping.

If its already struggling to do 1080p/60, its kind of wishful thinking to expect that in 3D. I'm sure it'll be able to technically match anything the current competition can do, perhaps even best them, if the GPU is more powerful.....but it doesnt seem like nintendo cares, despite having a portable system built around it.

Next year when the real next gen 1080p systems come out, we're going to see 3D make a huge resurgence, because we'll finally have systems able to do it justice, and there will be a decent installbase of the TVs. People dont want to give up HD to have 3D, and it'll end up the choice between 1080p/2D and 720p/3d. Both should look great. But until nintendo shows otherwise, It's safe to assume it can handle 3D no better than the 360/PS3.
post #606 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

If its already struggling to do 1080p/60, its kind of wishful thinking to expect that in 3D. I'm sure it'll be able to technically match anything the current competition can do, perhaps even best them, if the GPU is more powerful.....but it doesnt seem like nintendo cares, despite having a portable system built around it.
Next year when the real next gen 1080p systems come out, we're going to see 3D make a huge resurgence, because we'll finally have systems able to do it justice, and there will be a decent installbase of the TVs. People dont want to give up HD to have 3D, and it'll end up the choice between 1080p/2D and 720p/3d. Both should look great. But until nintendo shows otherwise, It's safe to assume it can handle 3D no better than the 360/PS3.
People don't want 3D. At least, not as it is currently. Even on the 3DS, it seems that most people turn it off. Next gen will have the capacity, but most devs won't bother with it in 3D's current state on large displays. And even glasses-free tech is still too limited on small screens (like 3DS). The tech is still too far away for widespread home use.
post #607 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by confidenceman View Post

People don't want 3D. At least, not as it is currently. Even on the 3DS, it seems that most people turn it off. Next gen will have the capacity, but most devs won't bother with it in 3D's current state on large displays. And even glasses-free tech is still too limited on small screens (like 3DS). The tech is still too far away for widespread home use.

That might be the case, but its easy enough to implement that it'll make it into most games anyway. Making a game in 3D isn't difficult, they're 3D already. It's just difficult to make one on current gen that doesn't look and/or perform like ass. That wont be a problem next gen. Consumers and tech will catch up eventually, the software needs to come first. Wouldn't be surprised if Sony even mandates it, like they did with HD.

I have a feeling one of the reasons Wii U isn't showing any 3D is because its basically incompatible with the gamepad. Its kind of rough to look at non-3D LCDs with polarized active glasses. It looks super dim and flickery, the colors get all crazy, they shift when you move your head. The GPU also already has to deal with two screen, adding a third view isn't going to help performance either.
Edited by bd2003 - 9/23/12 at 7:47am
post #608 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flavius View Post

Wipeout HD on PS3 which I thought was 1080p60 is only that for 2D, and drops to 1080p30 for 3D probably due to this limitation. Not that I could really tell the difference, the 3D was jaw dropping.

Has it been confirmed that Wipeout HD is native 1080p? Hardly any games out right now are actually rendered in 1080p, but are upconverted.
post #609 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

The Wii U isn't doing 3D.
Besides, the 3D fad is pretty much over already, even Sony has given up on 3D games for the most part.

Your statements are completely false. You're talking out of your rear. The Wii U is doing 3D, just not at launch (there's an article about it, just use Google). 3D is not a fad, and Sony is still releasing 3D compatible games. So get over yourself.

People who think they don't want 3D have obviously not seen a proper 3D BluRay at home and not played Wipeout HD and Halo CE in 3D like I have. Mind-blowing experiences.
post #610 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by WebEffect View Post

Has it been confirmed that Wipeout HD is native 1080p? Hardly any games out right now are actually rendered in 1080p, but are upconverted.

Yes, its confirmed.
post #611 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flavius View Post

Your statements are completely false. You're talking out of your rear. The Wii U is doing 3D, just not at launch (there's an article about it, just use Google). 3D is not a fad, and Sony is still releasing 3D compatible games. So get over yourself.
People who think they don't want 3D have obviously not seen a proper 3D BluRay at home and not played Wipeout HD and Halo CE in 3D like I have. Mind-blowing experiences.

From what I read, the Wii U could support 3D if Nintendo decides to add the functionality. Based on their feelings about 3D on the 3DS, that may never happen.

As for Sony, E3/TGS 2010/11 were non stop 3D complete with glasses required demo reels at all their shows. In 2012 3D was barely mentioned in any game demo or press event. I don't even know if The Last of Us will support 3D because of how little it has been mentioned. (I'll google it)

The hype behind 3D peaked with Avatar and has been falling steadily. I didn't even see 3D mentioned in the Avengers blu-ray ads on TV, just on the picture of the box art. If you can provide proof that 3D movie sales are still on the rise, then please do. Blu-ray has had a hard enough time gaining sales vs DVD, let alone 3D blu-ray.

I've seen proper 3D in both movies and games and not once have I been impressed. I usually find the effect distracting and turn it off.

All 3D ever was, was the next step in keeping HDTV prices up, just like dynamic contrast, and 120/240hz before it. We should be seeing the next price gimmick in a year or two since 3D hasn't proven to be as big as they had hoped.

If you care that much about proper 3D support, a PC is your best bet, because 3D can be modded into any game.
post #612 of 1142
Wow, well let's agree to disagree. 120Hz/240Hz are a huge benefit to me in terms of reducing motion blur, I love frame interpolation to reduce judder in movies and 30FPS games (I bet you think all the AMP, MotionFlow, CMR stuff is a gimmck too, huh?), and I LOVE the 3D effect on Wipeout HD, Halo, Uncharted, as well as on BluRay movies, especially CGI ones.

3D is here to stay. No TV manufacturer in their right mind would drop support for it at this point. And 3D BluRays are never going away either, because 3D movies in the theater aren't. People still like going to them and studios and cinemas love them because they charge more.

You sound like a jaded antiquarian.
post #613 of 1142
Flav - 3D on the display side is free to do. There is no reason to drop it at this point. That doesn't mean it ever really gained any traction. There are far less 3D glasses out there than there are TVs that can physically do it. Hell, I have three sets sitting here for my 64" plasma, and have used them a total of twice.

On the other hand PEN, 3D is pretty much just assumed at this point. Sony didn't harp on it at E3 because all of the Sony games just do 3D by default now. The consumer already knows that. Same thing with Bluray. The fact that the movie is 3D isn't a primary selling point anymore, but the consumer still knows that the 3D version will be in stores too.

You guys are like two extremes to a pretty middle-of-the-road topic. The naysayers have been saying 3D is dead for like 5 years now, and the fans treat it as the second coming of Jebus. No. 3D is simply something that the public values just enough to keep around for a while longer, but nobody actively cares about it anymore. It's like caring about whether a video product is in color. It's just kind of assumed.
post #614 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flavius View Post

Wow, well let's agree to disagree. 120Hz/240Hz are a huge benefit to me in terms of reducing motion blur, I love frame interpolation to reduce judder in movies and 30FPS games (I bet you think all the AMP, MotionFlow, CMR stuff is a gimmck too, huh?), and I LOVE the 3D effect on Wipeout HD, Halo, Uncharted, as well as on BluRay movies, especially CGI ones.
3D is here to stay. No TV manufacturer in their right mind would drop support for it at this point. And 3D BluRays are never going away either, because 3D movies in the theater aren't. People still like going to them and studios and cinemas love them because they charge more.
You sound like a jaded antiquarian.

Motion enhancement is worthless for games, it adds lag and looks nothing like true 60fps. With movies it gives a 1.5x effect that isn't there with native high framerate content. It is a gimmick, one that served it's purpose and is now just kinda there. 3D has reached that point, it is just kinda there if you get a mid range or above TV.

There will always be a small niche that grabs hold of the latest gimmick to sell a TV, it happens every time and TV makers count on it to continue to offer "premium" tvs that don't actually perform better but have that one cheap to add feature that allows them to charge much more. Nothing antiquitated about knowing a fad when I see one. And until truly glasses free 3D for the whole room is ready to go, 3D will never be more than a fad, just as it was in the 80s.

The only way I see 3D gaming taking off before then is with a HMD, the early hacks I have seen PC users whip up have me interested. It looks to be a nice stop gap to virtual reality. (using a Sony HMD for a 3D display, head mounted motion tracking, kinect for body movement, Wii remote for weapons, it made me want to drop the $3,500 needed to make it all work)
post #615 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

Motion enhancement is worthless for games

You're insane. The lag is minimal and only matters for online FPS shooters. I play mostly RPGs, action/adventure, etc. And the increased visual quality due to the reduction in the ridiculous amount of judder is significant. I had to return a 64" Samsung plasma primarily due to the incredibly bad flashing judder with 30FPS titles since that TV had no motion interpolation. The flashing double image judder was so bad on this plasma when panning the camera in Assassin's Creed, Infamous 2, Skyrim, etc. etc., it literally made me want to puke. Sure, for 60FPS games like Rage there was no judder at all, but almost no console games support 60FPS. I much prefer gaming with Auto Motion Plus enabled on Low on my Samsung LCD, and have been gaming like this across 360, Wii, and PS3 for 4 years now. AMP is always on, and spares my eyeballs from judder hell. 120Hz helps with any motion blur for sure. Can't wait to get my 240Hz new HX950 and play with MotionFlow cranked up as high as possible. Screw the few ms extra lag if it makes things look so much better, IMHO.

I'm not sure why you keep bringing up PC games in a thread about the Wii U? I have a gaming PC, was a PC game only fanatic for most of my life actually. But since 2005 I've played almost exclusively on consoles.
post #616 of 1142
The fake framerate makes me physically ill, it is so jarringly obvious that I can't watch any motion enhanced content for more than 10 minutes. It doesn't matter if it is a movie or a game, if it is fake motion enhancement, I can't stand it, I've tried several times over the years to the same effect every time. Even worse though, is games that drop below 30fps which is 90% of games today. Combine those terrible framerates with motion enhancement and you have a truly terrible effect that can make me ill in under a minute.
post #617 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

The fake framerate makes me physically ill, it is so jarringly obvious that I can't watch any motion enhanced content for more than 10 minutes. It doesn't matter if it is a movie or a game, if it is fake motion enhancement, I can't stand it, I've tried several times over the years to the same effect every time. Even worse though, is games that drop below 30fps which is 90% of games today. Combine those terrible framerates with motion enhancement and you have a truly terrible effect that can make me ill in under a minute.

Suit yourself. I see it as solid smooth realistic motion instead of flashing double image ghost judder which makes ME ill. I don't think you we could be any more different. As long as you realize that this is your opinion and personal experience, not globally applicable fact.
post #618 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

That might be the case, but its easy enough to implement that it'll make it into most games anyway. Making a game in 3D isn't difficult, they're 3D already.
Easy on the hardware side, yes. There's essentially nothing to do. But not so easy on the software end. Involves more resources, more QA, more optimization, etc., etc. All of that costs money and time. For a technology that has yet to gain traction in the home--despite the hardware that's been thrown at it--not many developers will want to (or be able to) bother. And with game development costs continuing to rise, no one's looking for ways to spend more money on development, especially in areas (like 3D) that consumers aren't interested in.

Without some major shift in consumer habits and in middleware technology/support, I don't see 3D gaming happening in a big way anytime soon. Sony was in the best position to push the technology, but even they have backed off.
post #619 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by confidenceman View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

That might be the case, but its easy enough to implement that it'll make it into most games anyway. Making a game in 3D isn't difficult, they're 3D already.
Easy on the hardware side, yes. There's essentially nothing to do. But not so easy on the software end. Involves more resources, more QA, more optimization, etc., etc. All of that costs money and time. For a technology that has yet to gain traction in the home--despite the hardware that's been thrown at it--not many developers will want to (or be able to) bother. And with game development costs continuing to rise, no one's looking for ways to spend more money on development, especially in areas (like 3D) that consumers aren't interested in.

Without some major shift in consumer habits and in middleware technology/support, I don't see 3D gaming happening in a big way anytime soon. Sony was in the best position to push the technology, but even they have backed off.

I think you're overestimating how difficult it is. Video card drivers can get 90% of the way there without the game even knowing about it. All it takes is a second camera view shifted a few inches over, not mind blowing new tech.

I don't think you'll hear anyone play up 3D in the way they did a year or two ago, cause its not a new thing. It's just the new normal, and just like HD, if you don't have the hardware, or simply don't care, you can ignore it entirely. The biggest issue on the game side has always been performance, when that issue goes away next gen, nothing stands in its way.
post #620 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

I think you're overestimating how difficult it is. Video card drivers can get 90% of the way there without the game even knowing about it. All it takes is a second camera view shifted a few inches over, not mind blowing new tech.
You'd think so, but there's a wide array of performance results. If it were truly that easy, fast, and cheap, more games would already be doing it, and those that are doing it would be getting equal results. But it's not happening.
Quote:
I don't think you'll hear anyone play up 3D in the way they did a year or two ago, cause its not a new thing. It's just the new normal, and just like HD, if you don't have the hardware, or simply don't care, you can ignore it entirely. The biggest issue on the game side has always been performance, when that issue goes away next gen, nothing stands in its way.
Far from the "new normal." It's a standard feature in many new displays, but broadcast isn't doing it (much), home video isn't doing it (much), and games aren't doing it (much). The technology is getting into more homes thanks to manufacturers, but there's still not much content after a solid couple of years on the market.

Point being, I don't think consoles are going to push it much next gen unless we get a whole new approach to the technology.
post #621 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by confidenceman 
don't see 3D gaming happening in a big way anytime soon. Sony was in the best position to push the technology, but even they have backed off.

There are TONS of 3D games available on the PS3, and more are still coming out with 3D support. Even Microsoft has started to include some very good 3D support as evident in the Halo CE Anniversary Edition.

The problem is that even the top of the line Sony ES receivers just released, and top of the line Sony TV just released (HX950), still only support 1080p30 Frame Packed and not 1080p60 Frame Packed. So either next gen consoles won't support it either, or they will support it, but then everyone needs to run out and by new TVs and receivers again if they want it!
post #622 of 1142
The wii u is five year old tech. Whats to get excited about? Wast of money if there ever was one.

Menace
post #623 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by menace2society View Post

The wii u is five year old tech. Whats to get excited about? Wast of money if there ever was one.
Menace
And home PCs are 5-10 years behind industry tech. Television show special effects are 5 years behind film tech. New economy-class vehicles are 5-10 years behind luxury vehicle tech. And so on. What's your point? It's a fruitless and pointless argument. Hell, my 5-year-old display still can't faithfully reproduce the film quality of a movie from almost a hundred years ago. Guess I should toss it in the trash.

No consumer technology is ever truly "new."
Edited by confidenceman - 9/24/12 at 8:16pm
post #624 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by confidenceman View Post

And home PCs are 5-10 years behind industry tech. Television show special effects are 5 years behind film tech. New economy-class vehicles are 5-10 years behind luxury vehicle tech. And so on. What's your point? It's a fruitless and pointless argument. Hell, my 5-year-old display still can't faithfully reproduce the film quality of a movie from almost a hundred years ago. Guess I should toss it in the trash.
No consumer technology is ever truly "new."

And it can simultaneously power 1080p 60 FPS games while driving a second independent screen. Console-wise it is NOT 5 year old tech. And if based on Radeon 7000 series, it is technically DirectX 11.1 which is CURRENT technology. (ok late last year, oh no, so old!)
post #625 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

The fake framerate makes me physically ill, it is so jarringly obvious that I can't watch any motion enhanced content for more than 10 minutes. It doesn't matter if it is a movie or a game, if it is fake motion enhancement, I can't stand it, I've tried several times over the years to the same effect every time. Even worse though, is games that drop below 30fps which is 90% of games today. Combine those terrible framerates with motion enhancement and you have a truly terrible effect that can make me ill in under a minute.

I agree 1000% with this.. Motion enhanced contect is such crap and I can not watch it for more then a few minutes. I will never understand how people like this stuff. I know a lot of people that just truly hate this. To each their own but not for me..
post #626 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by grif32 View Post

I agree 1000% with this.. Motion enhanced contect is such crap and I can not watch it for more then a few minutes. I will never understand how people like this stuff. I know a lot of people that just truly hate this. To each their own but not for me..
Wow. Yeah. I'm surprised to see someone in here who actually likes motion interpolation. I just assumed it was a display setting for people who didn't know any better. biggrin.gif

Even my wife, who generally doesn't care at all about anything tech-wise, can't stand it. In her words, it makes everything "look like a soap opera." Her dad is the only one I know who uses it, mostly because it was the default setting on his display, and he just assumed that's what HD content looked like.

As for using it in games, that's just nuts.
post #627 of 1142
Last year my parents bought a $5000 (!!!) Bose TV without my knowledge that has motion smoothing that you cannot turn off. It drives me insane every time I visit home. My brother recently watched some LOTR on it and described it as looking like a History Channel recreation of Middle-Earth. And the Wii certainly doesn't feel right on it either.
post #628 of 1142
Bose makes TVs? Anyway, I love motion smoothing when done right and on Low. I watch everything with it, including BluRays, and play games with it too because it tones down the 30FPS at 60Hz judder.
post #629 of 1142
I too don't like the motion enhancement, it sort of makes it unrealistic. I think to people also known as the soap opera effect. Turned that off pretty much all the motion enhancing stuff on the Sony XBR 5 set and it works great at the games I've played besides regular movie/tv watching.
post #630 of 1142
Back before the Wii launched, it seemed everyone was declaring it a failure before it hit store shelves. Nintendo's different approached to console design had the 'hard core' critics in hysterics over its incapable hardware. Things turned out ok for Nintendo. Microsoft and Sony should really learn from their mistake and focus on making their console experience fun and unique. If all you do increase hardware capabilities, you are stuck with something that a PC will run circles around before you even make it to market.
The Wii U seems to be taking less heat this time around in comparison to its predecessor, and I think it will be just as successful as the wii. What you get with Nintendo is all their first party titles. It doesn't matter if third party support is better or worse, there are other consoles for that. I would be shocked if Microsoft and Sony don't double the capabilities of the Wii U in terms of GPU and CPU, and I don't care. I pre-ordered my Wii U and I can't wait for Pikmin 3.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Nintendo
This thread is locked