'I never said the NX won't be as powerful as PS4'

@ianhh6: And thus lies the genius.

Nintendo is a wildcard. They're backwards and forwards at the same time. I wanna know the new CEOs plans, but that may take a while.

Per the underlined, that is known as "pushing the boundaries". Of course there is a natural expectation to further the medium in software in accordance with the advance in hardware, and you're right, that will entail higher developmental costs and delays. That is expected, and is the nature of the beast of game development. Nintendo is not immune from this.....they only attempt to delay it under the guise of "gameplay is all that matters" to save them money, otherwise they'd never release new hardware, right? It doesn't stem from any philosophical gameplay choices as much as it does fiscal business considerations. What you (and Nintendo) are advocating (despite what you may myopically believe) is the road to true stagnation. If you do not move the hardware bar, you eventually will come up against a brick wall no matter how much innovation is to be claimed in software. I understand the principle that Yokoi (and currently, Takeda's) touting, but weak hardware only affords so much before advancements need to be made.

Don't even start about playing it safe, Nintendo is the one who plays it most safe of all. They put out the same IPs they've been doing since the eighties, rarely taking major risks, or make games utilizing at least one main brand in many of their games (Mario Kart, Mario Tennis, Mario 3DW, he's in Smash, Mario and Luigi, etc), and if not, we get a few new IPs every few years in addition to e-shop games which apologists love to pull up a laundry list of if an argument arises that Nintendo doesn't make new IPs, as if it proves Nintendo's monumental ambitions past these paltry mobile caliber efforts and minuscule budgets they put into them, now of which is extending into and harming the perception of their mainline franchises (Starfox Zero looks like a early-mid 2000s game, Metroid Prime FF looks pathetic, even for a 3DS title). Why? Low budgets and minimal effort.

If you want to ask yourself something, ask this: could the U do MGS V as well as the platforms it current resides on? Or at all, for that matter? It doesn't matter if a game doesn't take full advantage, what matters is that it's possible and striven for. That drives progress, and no matter the consequences, it's still progress. Nintendo's philosophy wishes to remain in the past, and to claim they don't play it safe is aided by their position on the relevance of specs is disingenuous. Specs absolutely matter, because what better tech affords can a lot of times equate to more fun. I can have fun with Mario on the original Gameboy, and so what? Does that mean I should forsake and dismiss SM: 3DW (or invalidates its improvements due to better specs) on the U because of it? No.

Think about it.

@MirkoS77: Do you know that Metal gear solid V is on the PS3, and do you know that Wii U is more powerful than it? Wii U may have a weaker CPU but it wouldn't matter in a game like phantom pain. It would only matter in something like, red faction or banjo nuts and bolts.

There are examples of Ps3/360 games running worse on Wii U, but that's from a lack of optimization. Fairly small teams worked on the Wii U ports of Assassin's Creed and CoD.

And, if Nintendo using IP's from the eighties is such a big deal, did you know Metal gear was created in the 80's, and if so why are you bringing the Phantom Pain up as if it's an example of a new innovation?

Have some basic consistency in your argument and read up on the hardware you're discussing.

This is a non point because NIntendo DOES release new consoles, that are generational leaps above their prior consoles. But the way they do release new consoles let's them use incredibly efficient parts, and plenty of memory for the chipset. In other words, proven and mature technology.

And people act like Nintendo has to be on the bleeding edge, when neither Microsoft or Sony is now, in the first place. Why don't you harp on Sony for putting a tablet CPU in the PS4, that's limiting for games isn't it? But that would require some consistency in your argument.

Lastly which is something people don't bring up, is diminishing returns. Wind Waker HD is a MASSIVE improvement from the gamecube version, while the Ps4 remaster of GTA V isn't anywhere near a comparable jump. The cost and time of development keep going up, but the improvements are getting smaller.

@MirkoS77: To answer your question? Yes. Wii U could handle MGSV. Under the right circumstances, the PS2 and the Xbox and Gamecube could handle MGSV. See the thing you need to understand that Gunpei Yokoi did decades ago is that the same basic concepts applies to all of the MGS games. To all games really. Everything else is just expanding on the first concept. In its simplest form, MGSV can run on nearly any machine. All of these games boil down to a basic concept and this basic concept can be applied to nearly any machine. The talk your're talking about is the process of ornamentation he talked about in 1997.

This 'Pushing the boundaries' you discuss is really the process of ornamentation done on a higher level. Its just wrapping the basic concept in the prettiest wrapper possible. The resolution, fps, ai, and all this stuff that supposedly validates the hardware is just a means to apply a fancier wrapper. That's it. You can wrap a game in the prettiest wrapper possible, but if the gameplay is crap, then the game is crap. Look at The Order if you want a prime example. This Hardware Wall you speak of is just an illusion to hide the fact that outside of a couple of exceptions, gaming itself hasn't evolved much beyond the PS2/Xbox/GCN era. Otherwise PC and 4K gaming would have taken over the world of gaming and console gaming would have died. But you know why it hasn't? Its the same game at 4K and 480p. Its the same game at 60 fps and 30 fps. Because all games boil down to a basic concept.

As for Nintendo 'Playing it Safe'... Its hard to say they do, when they are the only ones willing to push gaming forward from the PS2/Xbox era. Its amusing to say that Nintendo is 'Playing it safe' when their innovations are the basic concepts for both of the twins. Or their IPs which are numerous and quite varied. Yet they still find ways to bring out gems you'd never think of like Splatoon.

In the end, Yokoi was right. Existing technology could easily handle gaming today. Because gaming itself hasn't evolved since Wii brought all of humanity together and 'core' gamers clutched to the same old thing so hard that they willed its demise. Yet even then it lives on in the hands of every PS4.

Think about it.

agreed gpu king told me ps4 is super powers

Still not satisfying news.

I don't want it to be "as powerful".

I want it to be MORE powerful than a console that came out late 2013.

Fair point about MGS V, I forgot it was coming on PS3, but that still doesn't negate my argument which apply to all games. Let's say the Wii then. I'll elaborate on this in my reply to bunch below, as he confronts me on this particular point.

If you want to talk to me about consistency, then it's best not to mention Nintendo bringing out new hardware as that is antithetical to the entire foundation of your position. No Nintendo fan should even be mentioning the fact they bring out new machines based on the rationale of their defense of Nintendo's hardware direction. I made that statement because the advocation of Nintendo's hardware decisions by fans is absolute: "any game can be done on any hardware, hardware doesn't matter, it's all about the games, yada yada yada". It's horseshit, the two are inextricably linked, and your rebuttal in context to the overall argument given such a reply is what's truly inconsistent here.

I don't harp on Sony or MS because they put out hardware that, while not the peak of what current technology can afford to gaming, is offered to the consumer in balance between adequate incremental power increase and affordability. Nintendo doesn't do this, as the amount they attempt to charge for their "proven and mature" machines is disproportionate to the value that that hardware gives to the buyer. When Sony and MS begin to use 8 year old specs from the day they release their next machine and yet still attempt to charge $300-350 for it (with a laughable amount of memory) contrasted to the competition that offers a significant jump in comparison, yet is only $50 more, you let me know.

As for diminishing returns, the only people that use this argument are those that can't see past the shiny veneer better tech gives. Higher visual fidelity is harder to discern the better tech gets I realize, but that doesn't account for improved A.I., larger worlds, better loading, or any of the other aspects I previously mentioned that help make games vastly more enjoyable and efficient. I don't understand why people seem to think 'better tech=only better graphics'. The reason people don't bring up diminishing returns is because we have gotten to the point where technological growth has allowed betterment to more in-depth elements of game design.

@speak_low: Ouch.

releasing this late it could easily and cheaply be 2x as powerful as current gen consoles

:P

Lol, PS4 is comparable to an entry-level gaming PC. It might just scrape the bottom of mid-level but just.

That was R4gn4r0k being sarcastic just so ya know. Your sarcasm detector is broken. :P

Seriously, I can't hype up 8GBs of GDDR5 anymore in 2015 ?

:(

lol Sorry but them the rules, checked SW survival guide just to make sure. :P

It's early. :)

Hahaha, you are kidding me. They mention that in the survivor guide ? xD

Oh. so now your sarcasm detector is broken as well, must be contagious. :P

If Nintendo is banking on another gimmick to sell the NX then they might as well just give up and either stick with handhelds, or go third party. It is so annoying that gamers have been telling Nintendo what they want in a Nintendo home console, yet Nintendo just ignores everyone, including their hardcore fan base.

Could be that it mentioned something along the lines of:

"Don't talk about GDDR5"

"Don't talk about jelly"

:p

The first rule about GDDR5 Club is we don't talk about GDDR5 Club. lol

All can be achieved on older tech, you continue to prove their point mate.

CPU: XBO is ~1.16X over PS4 or PS4 is ~86 percent of XBO. Current XBO DX11.X gimps render thread scaling.

Tessellation: XBO is ~1.07X over PS4 or PS4 is ~94 percent of XBO.

Shaders/TMU: PS4 is 1.4X over XBO or XBO is 71 percent of PS4.

Frame buffer memory write.

XBO (split target rendering method) = 54 GB/s + 108 GB/s = 162 GB/s (32bit FP format, or 48 TMU workaround for 16 ROPS for lesser data formats) with 68 GB/s + 108 GB/s = 176 GB/s theoretical. Split target rendering combines DDR3 and ESRAM into a frame buffer write space ie. DDR3 take the spill over from ESRAM (108 GB /4 channels= .27 GB/s per channel) . ESRAM has full duplex memory hence very small read and write context overhead cost.

PS4 = 140 GB/s practical with 176 GB/s theoretical. DDR memory channels are half duplex hence higher read and write context overhead cost.

TMU read and write will be memory bound.

At the end of the day both consoles are kinda under powered compared to previous generations.

No, 8800 GTX created a new GPU TDP class and this template TDP profile was reused for current PC flagship GPUs.

If AMD was running ATI between 2002 to 2005, we would have SIMD based Xenos PC GPU scaled up to >175 watts instead of VLIW5 based Radeon HD 2900XT.

AMD removed the VLIW5/VLIW4 vs SIMD/MIMD based GPU divided business model and replace it with the unified MIMD based GPU across consoles and PCs.

Low 100 watts GCN GPUs are no match against ~250 watts PC GCN GPUs.

Yeah that seems to be a thing for the Sony-club now.

Nobody ever mentions GDDR5 anymore.

I guess it's all up to me then 8-)

If Nintendo ignores everyone, why the hell do people still want them "around" as a sel... I mean "third party?" That hardly makes ANY sense when we put too many other companies (namely Activision, EA, Ubisoft, and most recently Konami) on full blast for doing the same crap (made worse when Nintendo would have less influence than the former three).

Is my username Bunchanumbers? I never said any game could be made on any hardware. He's right in that technically, you could scale down MGSV's ideas to fit on the PS2, but it would be totally different in execution. I understand the point but in practicality, it stunts vision and progress. But whatever, that's an extreme thing to say anyways because we're not on NES or Ps2 hardware, Nintendo has the Wii U.

Nintendo didn't just offer better specs, though. They offered an expensive new controller, while still having a box that had 4x the memory, plenty of eDRAM and a more advanced gpu. The amount of tech you get for the money is not overpriced, you may rather have better chipsets instead of the gamepad, but nevertheless Nintendo isn't over charging for what they're offering. Lastly, it wasn't 8 year old technology. The gpu was newer and more advanced, as was the memory solution and manufacturing process that let's the Wii U do more than 360 at less than half the electricity.

But where is this gameplay innovation though? It just isn't there. The Ps4 has prettier PS3 games, for the most part. That's also what Buncha was saying. I get what you're saying, but for example, even the upcoming Just cause 3 won't be any bigger than the previous game, just prettier. I'm not knocking that, but I am saying that diminishing returns is applying to game design as well.

And if we discuss pretty, i've actually been more wow'd by Nintendo's exclusives than PS4 games. Wind Waker HD and not just the art on these games either (1080p, high res textures though not complex, ambient occlusion shadows and advanced bloom), Mario Kart 8, Smash bros. 4, Donkey kong tropical freeze etc. etc. Game design hasn't jumped by leaps and bounds on Ps4, and the Wii U can also produce amazing looking games.

I'm not saying I *wouldn't* want better hardware, who wouldn't? But if you can't see the point to Nintendo's business model, that it lets them put out 20-30 watt machines as opposed to 200 watt ovens like the launch xbox 360 and Ps3, or 140 watts like Ps4, at a time when diminishing returns are taking place, there's nothing more I can say. The Super Nintendo was top of the line pretty much when it came out, and it certainly wasn't using 200 watts :P

---

As a Nintendo fan, i'm enjoying new experiences on Wii U, also satisfied with the visuals it produces now, and when the NX comes out with its Ps4 comparable specs (meaning not the same, still significantly better), i'll enjoy the new experiences allowed by that as well as the big visual jump. Also would I like NX to get most multiplats? I would love it, but whatever happens I have 3 other options for those.

The Playstation and Xbox already have the market on full. There is absolutely no room left for another competitor in the same space. Especially not for Nintendo, which is a very damaged brand at this point from a marketing perspective, that 3rd party developers will not touch with a 20 foot pole given their history.

The NX, whatever the Hell it is, will absolutely be completely different than the other two, now whether it'll be a gimmick or not remains to be seen.

Being different and unique doesn't mean it will be good. Nintendo's goal should be trying to kick out Microsoft or Sony out of the console race so there is no longer three competitors. Nintendo needs to do everything in their power to once again become the market leader without having to rely on stupid gimmicks that eventually lose their appeal. Its so easy.

- Make a relativity powerful console that is easy for developers to make games on.

- Keep 1st party droughts to a minimum.

- Spend a little money for once and acquire some timed exclusives, or straight up pay third parties for permanent exclusives.

- Any gimmicky controllers/peripherals should be optional, not mandatory.

- $299 price tag.

- Profit

The Wii U gamepad may have lost appeal but the Wii mote really did add a lot to games. I'd love it if they brought it back and updated it, though I agree it and any other non traditional controller should be optional, at least with the NX.

Yes, making sure there aren't any first partyy droughts should be their first priority. I can see Nintendo coming out with a console that has a Ps4 level gpu (but somewhat better), but a substantially better CPU (thus getting rid of the only valid complaint of Wii U's architecture), and more memory obviously so that would qualify as a capable console with 0 hindrances for 3rd party's as well.

They can do that at $299 no problem.

LOL @timed exclusive bullshit though.

Well, it wouldn't hurt. I'm sure a lot of people bought a Gamecube just to play RE4 thinking it was going to remain a Nintendo exclusive.

@emgesp: Most people who bought a GCN to buy RE4 probably bought it because it retailed for $99. I doubt the pull of timed exclusivity was the draw. At that price it was a pittance to pay.

Still, nobody assumed it was going to be a timed exclusive. Also, you had other exclusive third party games like Twin Snakes, RE0 and REmake.

The NX would benefit from exclusives outside Nintendo games. The NX needs some kind of edge to get our attention and I just don't think another controller gimmick is going to do it.

And that's just impossible, in my opinion. Microsoft and Sony are far more branched out, have infinitely more market awareness and a much better reputation in the eyes of gamers and developers.

- It doesn't matter what they make. There is no way to turn that tide around in one generation after almost 20 years of a downward spiral market-share wise. They're alone, and that's not going to change unless they completely change their imagine and perception into something that will entice developers to think that it's worth porting their games on Nintendo.

- As for Nintendo 1st party support - Take a look at Microsoft and Sony, strip away 3rd party developers and solely compare their 1st party output with Nintendo on these current consoles. They're laughably pathetic. Asking more of Nintendo wen they're already branched out on the 3DS and WiiU is ludicrous. It's a miracle what Nintendo alone is doing.

- I agree that they should acquire more, mainly other developers under their belt, like with Monolith Soft that produced an excellent IP with Xenoblade.

What i personally think Nintendo must do is launch a balls out, aggressive marketing campaign to raise mainstream consumer awareness alongside the launch of the NX and ride that wave for all its worth. Show what the system is, show its games and show why i would want to buy it, and plaster that shit everywhere with a coherent, on to the point message devoid of bullshit.

Lol, couldn't stop laughing at this wall of wank. Keep it up buddy!

Why did this person wait this long to come clean about it? I would like some of the baloney on my sandwich. I'll just wait until next year's E3.

If that's the case then Nintendo has no future in the home console market. They would be better off sticking with handhelds for as long as they can, but I don't see much of a future for dedicated gaming handhelds either. The 3DS isn't even going to sell half as many units as the DS and I'm betting the NX handheld will sell even less than the 3DS. They are a dying breed. People are more interested in tablets and smart phones.

I also find it funny that Nintendo aims their products at kids/teens when in fact the vast majority of people who purchase Nintendo products are in their 20's/30's.

Also, I agree that Nintendo needs to market the NX hard.

Made worse when the PS2 version was the version everybody else waited for.

Oh, I've thought about it long and hard and the more I do, the more I come to vehement disagreement with Nintendo and the defense of them. Yokoi's statement made decades ago (no, that does not make it more amazing) simply exemplifies outdated thinking. But it's wonderful idealism.

"Under the right circumstances"? MGS V most certainly could not be done on PS2, Xbox, and GCN in its current form. That's my point. You can't whittle down the concept of it to lesser hardware, because that concept lay contingent upon technical parameters that afford particular game dictates and systems that were considered in the context of that capability as development began and progressed. I don't know if you're playing V right now, but it is immense and very in-depth utilizing elaborate game structures, great A.I, base management, among many other things. Don't conflate a game's concept with its execution or use the former to try to invalidate or belittle the latter, as execution is where specs become pertinent to realize conceptualization and delineate that difference whilst also helping to dictate it. MGS V could not be MGS V unless it adheres to that concept accommodated by the tech it was designed for. Can you present to me the core concept of MGS V on a weaker system without giving in to game mechanic compromises that lesser technology would necessitate? If not, then the ornamentation argument falters.

The limits of technology largely determine the games that we get. It is ludicrous to claim they can be eroded to their most fundamental idea, dismissing everything else as superficial window dressings, so we can all play them on a calculator without sacrificing the core integrity of the overall experience in a medium so technologically driven as gaming is. Such a notion is utter nonsense.

And why is there a nagging feeling in the back of my head that I'm going to now be told that ornamentation somehow applies to ALL games in the industry except for Nintendo's? Because if so, then let me just preempt you and say that Nintendo is just as guilty as other developers in this respect. Nintendo's games are just prettier iterations upon the same basic concept taken from thirty years ago with a new mechanic thrown in here and there. Titles like Batman Arkham Knight do the same thing. What distinguishes Nintendo so much? Anti-gravity in Mario Kart? It's still Mario Kart. A catsuit and clear pipes in SM 3DW? It's still Mario. I'd love to hear how a game like Knight fits into the ornamentation criticism more so than Nintendo's efforts. Linear to open world, the Batmobile, new combat, gadgets, and predator improvements. These are significant gameplay inclusions that (dare I say) more advance gameplay than a catsuit and transparent pipes in SM3DW or anti-gravity in Mario Kart could ever accomplish.

But I have an example that I'd appreciate hearing you opinion on: MGS V has sandstorms that obscure visibility and completely changes the dynamic of enemy encounters as you can't see much past 10 feet in front of you, not to mention also affect support choppers and impede Fulton recovery extractions. Would you consider that ornamentation? Is that not a mechanic that's reliant on adequate technology to implement, and has now granted more innovation to sneaking in MGS games?

So no offense, but it's you who strikes me as the one who hasn't given it much thought, as you simply quote Yokoi, swallow his philosophy hook, line, and sinker, and leave it at that.

Apologies for the formatting, I can never get multi quote working. I've numbered your replies and my responses.

#1. I find it very hard to believe the Wii U is anywhere near a decent value proposition given its specs, even with the controller, not to mention its inclusion hasn't warranted the price in software utilization. I have a U; the Gamepad is the very definition of cheap. Not even a capacitive screen, which has been on the market for ages. That controller was dirt cheap to produce, the console, not much more. I don't buy it.

#2. Firstly, who cares about power? What benefit does that present to me or games? Why do you find it important? I'd like to believe they hold more pressing priorities when designing their machines than worrying about power consumption.

Secondly, the innovation IS there, it's just harder to see. A.I. is better, we have improved physics, particle effects and shaders that can introduce visual fx into games that can lend new mechanics (such as the MGS V sandstorms I used above being one example), better framerates, etc. They may be small, but they are there. Just because we don't have games arriving that are breaking barriers does not mean advancements aren't occurring. If anything, I would argue that we've reached a point where genres have been well established that older tech can realize, but that doesn't mean the intricacies of game design will not further improve with its betterment. Developers cry for it and praise new machines whenever they arrive, saying that they can finally realize visions that were unobtainable the previous generation.

Thirdly, of course you've been more wow'd by Nintendo exclusives......they have (relatively) recently entered HD gaming, 6 years after Sony and MS did. Moving from what was essentially a non HD GCN to a bit more powerful than 360/PS3 HD. You want to lay that to their credit now, much less hold to contrast Sony and MS's games under the principle of diminishing returns to deride them? Nintendo has lacked so far behind in their hardware that they have only just now entered that realm and HD, so obviously their current games contrasted to past ones will impress more than Sony and MS's current offerings to past ones (both of which who've been doing this shit for nine YEARS already as opposed to Nintendo's three). Nintendo games look so much better because they are finally entering the (semi) present, and I'm sorry, I struggle to give them credit for that especially above other companies that have taken these strides long, long ago.

If I misinterpreted you and you were just referring to current Nintendo games compared to current PS4/One games....eh. Some are impressive I'll admit (Pikmin 3's a beauty), but for me, no Nintendo game approaches MGS V from a technical standpoint. Nintendo hides technical inadequacy behind art style.

Here's a question.

If the NX is mainly just going to be a Nintendo delivery system, then what is the point in making the console a little more powerful than the PS4? It isn't like Nintendo is gonna take full advantage of a 2+ T-Flop GPU with their own games. Unless they can get third parties on board all that power is just gonna go to waste.

I'd be surprised if the NX's GPU even hits 1 T-flop. You have to figure Nintendo will still want the NX to be energy efficient, so don't expect the console to be consuming 100+ watts.

1. You're going to have to prove that. Nintendo lost money on the Wii U hardware in the beginning, and they haven't had a die shrink with the chipset so I don't see how they could vastly reduce the cost of the hardware at this point. They're not selling at a loss but they're making no where near Wii profit.

I'll say this - it costs Nintendo a lot more to make a Wii U than these 8 and 9 year old HD twins that still cost $250. Lower power consumption means less electricity which is always a plus, but also it means a more reliable console. It's not going to overheat and doesn't have to work hard at cooling itself. Nintendo seeks to make a reliable console first and foremost, it's why they didn't even put a hard drive in it - less moving parts to fail. Would you rather have another 200 watt time bomb like a launch Ps3/360, or a reliable 30 watt console?

I'm not seeing better A.I, I bet Killzone 2 has as good A.I. as any next gen game. Don't forget the CPU's aren't that hot this gen. Particle effects are a visual thing and doesn't mean anything to core game design. MGS is on the Ps3 so I don't know why you keep using that example. It's sub HD and barely runs at 20fps on those consoles.

Sorry but extra shaders aren't going to lead to gameplay innovation this gen. In terms of size in all these next gen games, there's nothing that couldn't be done on Ps3, it's just that some developers are making bigger games than they did in the past because they can have good visuals with such a big world, and why the just cause 3 developers aren't going any bigger - they made a world as big as it would ever need to be in Just cause 2, sacrificing graphics for size.

You're right that one reason i'm more impressed with Nintendo's games is that the jump from Wii to Wii U is so much bigger than Ps3 to Ps4, but yes I was also saying that actually comparing the best Wii U visuals to the typical post processed mess on Ps4, i'm more impressed with the Wii U games. And again it's not just art, but just because Nintendo isn't working with as good of hardware as Ps4 doesn't mean they aren't some of if not the most technically competent developers in the business. I'll never get over how good Mario Galaxy looked on the puny Wii hardware and the gamecube had the best looking games that gen.

With Wii U i'm impressed all the same.

Respectfully, I will read your reply if you have one but I think we've said all we can say on this matter so this is my last 10 cents.

Why's that? They get the most out of what they're working with right now, why would that change?

More Nintendo NX Rumours Emerge

No Nintendo developed game is pushing the Wii U's hardware to its limits. Show me one game on the Wii U that looks like Killzone 2/3, or TLOU.

Show me a kart racing game on Ps3 that looks *as good as* (not like) Mario Kart 8. How about the sub HD 30fps with dips sonic racing?

But actually, Black flag looks better than all 3 of those games, and it's also on Wii U. And it isn't pushing Wii U at all :] And don't come back at me with framerate, those games aren't locked 30fps (quite a lot of dips in fact) and something like 10 guys worked on the Wii U port.

I'm not playing this game. You don't have to have a "realistic" art style to push hardware to the limit.

- Sony never made a Kart Racer for the PS3, so why even bring it up? Though, there are racing games on the PS3 that destroy Mario Kart 8 visually.

- Only you and maybe 5 other people think Black Flag for the Wii U looks better than TLOU and Killzone 2-3.

- Having a cartoony art style allows you to achieve decent looking visuals without having to push as many polygons.

- Modnation racers, LBP karting (both of which are less impressive than Sonic racing on Ps3)

- I guess you did a case study on that one? lol Black flag looks great. Awesome water, and some nice detail in an open world setting.

Killzone is a post processed mess and tlou looks and runs worse than Uncharted 3. Really don't like how TLOU looks actually, It's muddled and over saturated.