Topic: Is the Wii U underpowered?

[pokepal148]

 There's a lot of fanboys out there with a power-fetish that believe that having as many cores as possible in a CPU clocked at insane speeds is inherently better. Which just isn't true anymore for today's CPUs.

the Xbone and PS4 may have this fancy 8 core CPU, but both companies made it clear that their consoles shift their focus beyond games alone, describing various multitasking type functions going in the background. This would mean that some precentage of those 8 cores are simply off-limits for actual games.

Also, Wii U is confirmed to run Yebis 2, which is the middleware used in Square-Enix's Luminous engine. Remember the Agni's Philosophy demo? The Wii U can run that too. There isn't a single engine running on PS4 and Xbone, that the Wii U can't handle.
So yeah, if all the raging fanboys (including some devs) can put the Wii U is underpowered thing to rest, that'd be great, because it's simply not true.

[broodwars]

*sees that Pokepal made this thread*

In the words of 1983's cult classic film War Games: "the only winning move is not to play". 

[Oblivion]

It is underpowered, dude. The question simply is, can/will the developers be able to port their next-gen games to the Wii U and have it still be function/comparable.

[Soren]

If all I'm going to be playing on it is "Yoshi"(which is insanely addictive!) then I'll venture to say it's overpowered. But I'm pretty sure anything developers can do with PS4Xbone they'll be able to adequately port their games to Wii U. If the price is right.


But seriously guys, play Yoshi. It's well worth the 30 cents.

[Adrock]

Compared to PS4/One, yes, it is. Then again, compared to high end PC, PS4/One are as well.

It sounds silly to call Wii U underpowered when you see what it's capable of.

[Ian Sane]

All that matters is if it is capable of handling multiplatform games for the PC/PS4/XB1.  If it is not then it is underpowered.  If it is, then it's fine.  The proof is in what happens, if we actually get those games or not.

That's all that matters.  Do I get the games or does the hardware prevent that from happening?  I didn't give a damn what was under the hood of the Wii.  All I noticed was that damn near every game that came out for the PS3 and Xbox 360 did NOT come to the Wii because the Wii couldn't handle it.  That's why it mattered, not because I get it up for clock speeds and bits.

[Agent-X-]

Technically, I suppose the answer is a simple yes. There is more processing power and memory for those systems. I'm not sure that it matters as far as the games are concerned. Those systems have a lot more load balancing to worry about due to the multi-threaded features running in the background.


Graphically, the Wii U is going to stand pretty close. Isn't that what matters? The GPU of the Wii U is apparently really good. Early on, the technical limitations were a concern because the Wii U SDK did not make full use of the dual core CPU. Frankly, nothing on the Wii U out of the box was utilizing both cores. The CPU is not some great bottleneck like it was feared to be. If you consider what that one core was doing, it was playing COD nearly on par with the Xbox 360. Now the performance benefits of full use of the CPU are coming to light and the Wii U's overall results are something really close to what PS4 is believed to be, strictly speaking as far as gaming is concerned.


Graphically, this system should be just fine as far as "next-gen" games are concerned. Where it matters most, the Wii U has memory and GPU to stand on.

[pokepal148]

All that matters is if it is capable of handling multiplatform games for the PC/PS4/XB1.  If it is not then it is underpowered.  If it is, then it's fine.  The proof is in what happens, if we actually get those games or not.

Then the PS Vita is underpowered i guess, by your logic.

[broodwars]

All that matters is if it is capable of handling multiplatform games for the PC/PS4/XB1.  If it is not then it is underpowered.  If it is, then it's fine.  The proof is in what happens, if we actually get those games or not.

Then the PS Vita is underpowered i guess, by your logic.

Handhelds are in a completely different technical category than consoles. The Vita is capable of handling multiplatform ports from 3DS, which is its primary competition.  It can also do its own far more technically impressive games as well, so if anything Vita is overpowered.

[Agent-X-]

This needs to be put out into the open. A single CPU core in the Wii U A much-limited Wii U CPU (thanks to the SDK) was adequate for Assassin's Creed III and COD: Black Ops 2. While both games were at times graphically "superior" (shaders + texture rendering) to their PS3/360 counterparts, it was shown that at times framerates were not always steady. Nevertheless, a game such as Black Ops 2 ran adequately on just one Wii U CPU core the Wii U's CPU in spite of the complications.

I've heard just about every sort of uninformed claim when it comes to the Wii U hardware. A sizable chunk of gamers actually believe the Wii U is not even fully on par with the PS3 and 360. It only has a Dual Core CPU. The 360 has a Triple Core CPU, doesn't it? When you do direct comparison of the launch games, it also seems pretty reasonable to conclude that the CPU might not be quite on par with the 360's. However, that thought is going to land square on its face with more of the CPU available for use now.

All indications are that the PS4 has also placed less emphasis on the CPU and more emphasis on the GPU--they learned from a pretty hefty mistake they made with the PS3. Moreover, it will be interesting to see how much CPU is actually guaranteed for gaming in the PS4 and Xbox One. Considering how much behind-the-scenes features are being promised on Xbox, I doubt its gaming potential is greatly ahead of a dedicated gaming machine like the Wii U.

amiright?

[pokepal148]

also MGS3 never came to the PC(not even with HD Collection), by that same logic the PC is underpowered compared to a PS2

The issue is there are many reasons why a game might not come to the system. saying its underpowered just happens to look better for the company then saying, "we can't get this kind of game to sell to that system's audience so we won't even bother"

@agent-X- the version of the story i heard was there are 3 cores but that all 3 were underclocked(even compared to that 1.2-something benchmark that has since increased in the may update) and that almost all 3 could only get two of the cores working in time to meat their deadlines

[shingi_70]

The best looking game on the system is Super Metroid so.........




On a more serious note its not only underpowered but like the Wii it lacks the proper architecture to make porting an easy job in the first place. (going with Power PC instead of X86).


The lack of the multitasking features features make the One a worse system in my eyes. Hearing the podcast crew talk about the DLC buying experience for Zen Pinball 2 showed me as my last gen system doesn't have those problems at all.


Plus I really wish the Wii U was capable of doing this

[Agent-X-]

pokepal, you are right. I had to venture over to Neogaf for a refresher. There are three cores in Espresso CPU. The story I recall regarding launch window development was that one full core was unavailable for use through the SDK. I don't know why I kept thinking it was a dual core CPU, but I'm guess it's because initially Nintendo seemed to be indicating that one full core was intended for system use.

[pokepal148]

On a more serious note its not only underpowered

how? outside of ram it seems perfectly fine.

but like the Wii it lacks the proper architecture to make porting an easy job in the first place. (going with Power PC instead of X86).

the PS3 had cell, if what i'm hearing is correct cell is much more difficult to work with. however this is a fair issue but i feel it can be tackled by nintendo working with publishers to create some solution for this.

but even then just because its Power PC does not mean it is underpowered.

The lack of the multitasking features features make the One a worse system in my eyes.

wait.. what...? Did you typo here because that makes no sense. besides everything you would really need from a GAMING system is there. we have background downloads, we have a pretty nice web browser, i believe TVii can be run that way, you have miiverse(could be a little quicker booting up imo)

Hearing the podcast crew talk about the DLC buying experience for Zen Pinball 2 showed me as my last gen system doesn't have those problems at all.

You see kids, that is something called a software issue. it has nothing to do with how powerful the system is as much as how well the Wii U eshop is set up.not that it is perfectly well set up

[ymeegod]

Actually the WII U GPU is still limited to DX 10.1 (opengl 3.2ish).  Square Enix was just talking about it during KHIII and why the WII U was excluded from the multiplatform title.  Square stated the game was already 3+ years in the making and it was using DX11 as the base.

As for your statement, Yebis 2 is a post-processing effects tool (used for special lighting effects ect.) but the square engine itself is DX11 so no the wii u can't run it.

 

[shingi_70]

I'll admit calling the Wii U underpowered was Hyperbole, but it plays into a mindset and causes for a narrative which is arguably more dangerous than the actual reality.Also Ram would play a huge part of it right? I mean John Blow says the witness uses 5GB of RAM already and the One/PS4 dev kits used 4GB irrc Cell was hard to develop for which is why the system got late ports and inferior versions of games thus far.The problem with Power PC is less of being hard to develop for and more the other three platforms are so similar (X86 across the board) is it possible for developers to take time out for a Wii U version. Personally i' of the mind where as long as the PS3/360 exists this shouldn't be a fucking problem at all. In the case of One/PS4 it should be easy to farm a port out to another studio. I mean Titanfall is being made for PC/One, yet EA has another studio porting a 360 version of the game.


Sorry about the typo but I mean't the Wii U lacking those types of features makes it a poorer console in my eyes. While its true that the Wii U OS had the features you mention, alot of the implementation seems to be more reactive instead of an evolution. Probablt just first world problems complaining about the speed but microsoft and Sony showing how seamless the OS and application/Games software makes it look dated already. Also isn't it partly hardware since having 1-2's reserved for the OS software is why Sony/MS can get this type of stuff happening. A few of it is software and I guess I have to patient as Nintendo isn't a non game software company and this gen is its first big foray into this territory.

[Adrock]

From what little Square Enix showed of Kingdom Hearts III, I didn't get the impression that it was anything Wii U couldn't handle.

[ThePerm]

the direct x thing though....Wii U and Wii run their own version of OpenGL from what I understand, so the thing to do is port the features to the other console, which is going to take some work.

The system is not underpowered. If it can run Mass Effect 3 and Assassins Creed, and the Crysis Engine then it is perfectly capable. Mass Effect 3 and Assassins Creed are last generation, however I'm goign to say they are the threshhold between last generation and this generation.

was looking for a watchdogs video, and this guy covers it realistically.

[broodwars]

Here's my problem with all this talk about the Wii U having "secret cores" that aren't "unlocked yet" for use in games: I've been hearing talk about the secret technical power hidden within Nintendo hardware for decades, and it never results in anything noteworthy.  The closest we got was on the N64 when Nintendo did a hardware patch with the Expansion Pak, and that resulted in what...a half dozen games that actually took advantage of it (and some of those were worse with the pak, like Konami's Castlevania games)? 

Let's say for a moment that the Wii U does SOMEHOW have the power of a PS4 or Xbone inside it, locked away for reasons only known to Iwata: no one will ever make a game on the Wii U that actually uses it, because the damn thing doesn't sell and Nintendo is never interested in making technically impressive games on their consoles.  You'll occasionally get your Retro Studios or Monoliths that have more than utter disinterest in showing off console specs, but Nintendo overall just wants to make the same, assembly line cartoony games that look pretty much the same on any console.  So unless Nintendo starts selling consoles and starts getting 3rd parties involved, you will never see a game on the Wii U that looks as good as what the PS4 is launching with right now, even if all this talk about Nintendo's "Secret Plan to Fight Irrelevance" is true.

The Wii U has some good-looking games. The Wii U will have some good-looking games in the future because Nintendo is skilled at using strong art to cover-up bad technical specs, but you're only lying to yourself if you actually believe that the Wii U is going to be able to keep up with the next-generation consoles on a technical level.

[Adrock]

It's a sad world we live in when a console as powerful as Wii U is considered to have "bad technical specs." It's only underpowered when you compare it to more powerful hardware and there will ALWAYS be something better. Like I said earlier PS4/One are already outclassed by the best PC has to offer today. It'll be even worse in five months. This race to the top is so F-ing silly. What do you get out of it?

Empty pockets.

[broodwars]

It's a sad world we live in when a console as powerful as Wii U is considered to have "bad technical specs." It's only underpowered when you compare it to more powerful hardware and there will ALWAYS be something better. Like I said earlier PS4/One are already outclassed by the best PC has to offer today. It'll be even worse in five months. This race to the top is so F-ing silly. What do you get out of it?

Empty pockets.

For all intents and purposes, Nintendo has yet to show anything on the Wii U that can't be done on the 360 and PS3, hardware that is 8 years old now. So yeah, until Nintendo shows differently, all appearances show the Wii U tech to be pretty terrible. You can point to this or that number from the spec sheet, but the software is what gives that meaning. Right now, the software makes it look on part with 8 year old consoles.

[Adrock]

I don't think you understood that post at all.

[broodwars]

I don't think you understood that post at all.

You were complaining that people like me were calling the Wii U's specs "bad", and then went on a rant about the mad race for the top of the spec charts, which consoles will never do against PCs. Here's the thing, though: 8 year old specs are bad. It would be nice to live in a world where technical progress can just stagnate for 2 decades and everyone's happy, but that's not how our civilization works. When my computer is 7-8 years old, I generally replace it because it's starting to not be able to do what I need it do to.

And PC gaming can go **** itself.

[lolmonade]

The real question is really "should it matter that the Wii U is Underpowered compared to PS4/Xbox One?", which the answer to is "not really".  While the PS4 & Xbox One E3 conferences made the Wii U seem antiquated, it's clear that the 3rd party developers are still supporting the PS3 & Xbox 360, which you can assume the Wii U is at least as powerful as, and yet several publishers are abandoning ship on the Wii U.

I think at this point, it's an obvious case of a business not being able to justify the investment in a port of these games simply because there isn't a large enough install base to take a risk in making one only for it to not even recoup the cost of making it.  People like to play the game of blaming publishers for screwing over the Wii U, but if Nintendo can't make a compelling case for owning one yet, why the hell should it be their responsibility to do so while taking on that risk?

[Adrock]

You were complaining that people like me were calling the Wii U's specs "bad", and then went on a rant about the mad race for the top of the spec charts, which consoles will never do against PCs. Here's the thing, though: 8 year old specs are bad. It would be nice to live in a world where technical progress can just stagnate for 2 decades and everyone's happy, but that's not how our civilization works. When my computer is 7-8 years old, I generally replace it because it's starting to not be able to do what I need it do to.

It was hardly a rant.

Technical progress may not stagnate, but game design certainly seems to. That's not necessarily a bad thing. There's only so much you can do with basics of a racing game, for example. I don't understand why people are so hung up on specs when games aren't taking advantage of them outside of graphics and even then, they don't leagues better like they used to due to diminishing returns.