This topic is locked from further discussion.
Only a couple of months before Sheep board their fav *gameplay>graphics* train. Gonna be like in 06-07 all over again lmao. AC3 and the rest looks bad (by bad i mean like 7y old systems) because WiiU is weaksauce, a weaksauce that rely on a controller to sell lol a controller instead of next gen features.silversix_
How can we board a train most of us never got off of. I haven't really seen a Sheep thread bragging about the WiiUs graphical capabilities. The only threads I see are Sheep threads talking about how similar they are (case in point, this one), and Cow/Lem threads talking about how bad they are.
Only a couple of months before Sheep board their fav *gameplay>graphics* train. Gonna be like in 06-07 all over again lmao. AC3 and the rest looks bad (by bad i mean like 7y old systems) because WiiU is weaksauce, a weaksauce that rely on a controller to sell lol a controller instead of next gen features.silversix_Trolololololololololol
Nintendo is always 1 gen lag behind, only sheeps deny that. Whatever they say about "next gen", it's just a little bit over current gen.[QUOTE="rjdofu"][QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]
So for a next gen system it's only keeping up with current gen?
moistsandwich
Lvl 4 poster.... what a coincidence that you post like a 4 year old.
NES was 1 gen behind?
SNES was 1 gen behind?
N64 was 1 gen behind?
Gamecube was 1 gen behind?
sooo up until the Wii Nintendo stood toe to toe with its competitors in terms of pushing graphic fidelity... and now the story is "Nintendo is ALWAYS 1 gen behind"?
Grow up kid, you start gaming this gen or something?
On topic... I don't care if the Wii U is only slightly more powerful than the 360/PS3... getting some of my favorite franchises (Mario, Zelda, Metroid) in HD is more than worth the purchase of the system. But what do i know, I'm just a gamer, not a fanboy.
Why you so mad :(? Did i kick your dog? What does my lvl have anything to do with the discussion? I've been here long before you, and i probably a decade older than you. I worded it wrong, another poster reminded me about it and I fixed it while respond to him; it's not always, it's the trend. You jumped to the discussion & hissing just like a rabid fanboy. It seems you're the one who need to grow up, boy.[QUOTE="moistsandwich"][QUOTE="rjdofu"] Nintendo is always 1 gen lag behind, only sheeps deny that. Whatever they say about "next gen", it's just a little bit over current gen.rjdofu
Lvl 4 poster.... what a coincidence that you post like a 4 year old.
NES was 1 gen behind?
SNES was 1 gen behind?
N64 was 1 gen behind?
Gamecube was 1 gen behind?
sooo up until the Wii Nintendo stood toe to toe with its competitors in terms of pushing graphic fidelity... and now the story is "Nintendo is ALWAYS 1 gen behind"?
Grow up kid, you start gaming this gen or something?
On topic... I don't care if the Wii U is only slightly more powerful than the 360/PS3... getting some of my favorite franchises (Mario, Zelda, Metroid) in HD is more than worth the purchase of the system. But what do i know, I'm just a gamer, not a fanboy.
Why you so mad :(? Did i kick your dog? What does my lvl have anything to do with the discussion? I've been here long before you, and i probably a decade older than you. I worded it wrong, another poster reminded me about it and I fixed it while respond to him; it's not always, it's the trend. You jumped to the discussion & hissing just like a rabid fanboy. It seems you're the one who need to grow up, boy. Regardless of what you and many trolls believe(not calling you a troll, but this is a common uneducated belief), is generations have nothing to do with power, and you cannot be a little above current gen, the Wii U is next gen, because it the successor to the Wii, and for no other reason so, you can say that Nintendo has fallen behind graphically but that does not change the fact that the Wii U is next gen.We should never judge a new console's visual capabilities by the 1st wave of multiplat titles... Let devs get more familiar with the hardware, specially 1st party devs and we'll start seeing better games (visually)..
How long would that take, 1-2 years? True next gen will be released and WiiU will be even more less impressive. The first year is the only year the system *could have* shined but nope, better luck in 6-7 years.We should never judge a new console's visual capabilities by the 1st wave of multiplat titles... Let devs get more familiar with the hardware, specially 1st party devs and we'll start seeing better games (visually)..
Malta_1980
Is this anything like how GUN a launch game for the 360 barely looked better than the PS2? Or is that ok since it was Microsoft?Nuck81The mere fact that Gun on the PS2 was sub HD while the 360 version was HD represented quite a noticeable jump. Being displayed in such a greater resolution was something the PS2 would never be able to accomplish, or come remotely close too. A jump were not seeing between games shared between the WII-U and the 360/PS3 version of games. At the very least, a lazy port should be 1080p, by standards set by previous generational growth.
[QUOTE="rjdofu"][QUOTE="moistsandwich"]Why you so mad :(? Did i kick your dog? What does my lvl have anything to do with the discussion? I've been here long before you, and i probably a decade older than you. I worded it wrong, another poster reminded me about it and I fixed it while respond to him; it's not always, it's the trend. You jumped to the discussion & hissing just like a rabid fanboy. It seems you're the one who need to grow up, boy. Regardless of what you and many trolls believe(not calling you a troll, but this is a common uneducated belief), is generations have nothing to do with power, and you cannot be a little above current gen, the Wii U is next gen, because it the successor to the Wii, and for no other reason so, you can say that Nintendo has fallen behind graphically but that does not change the fact that the Wii U is next gen. Except the fact that I said graphically wise in one of my previous comment, but i don't blame you for missing that.Lvl 4 poster.... what a coincidence that you post like a 4 year old.
NES was 1 gen behind?
SNES was 1 gen behind?
N64 was 1 gen behind?
Gamecube was 1 gen behind?
sooo up until the Wii Nintendo stood toe to toe with its competitors in terms of pushing graphic fidelity... and now the story is "Nintendo is ALWAYS 1 gen behind"?
Grow up kid, you start gaming this gen or something?
On topic... I don't care if the Wii U is only slightly more powerful than the 360/PS3... getting some of my favorite franchises (Mario, Zelda, Metroid) in HD is more than worth the purchase of the system. But what do i know, I'm just a gamer, not a fanboy.
layton2012
[QUOTE="rjdofu"][QUOTE="moistsandwich"]Why you so mad :(? Did i kick your dog? What does my lvl have anything to do with the discussion? I've been here long before you, and i probably a decade older than you. I worded it wrong, another poster reminded me about it and I fixed it while respond to him; it's not always, it's the trend. You jumped to the discussion & hissing just like a rabid fanboy. It seems you're the one who need to grow up, boy. Regardless of what you and many trolls believe(not calling you a troll, but this is a common uneducated belief), is generations have nothing to do with power, and you cannot be a little above current gen, the Wii U is next gen, because it the successor to the Wii, and for no other reason so, you can say that Nintendo has fallen behind graphically but that does not change the fact that the Wii U is next gen. Next gen for nintendo but not for the industry.Lvl 4 poster.... what a coincidence that you post like a 4 year old.
NES was 1 gen behind?
SNES was 1 gen behind?
N64 was 1 gen behind?
Gamecube was 1 gen behind?
sooo up until the Wii Nintendo stood toe to toe with its competitors in terms of pushing graphic fidelity... and now the story is "Nintendo is ALWAYS 1 gen behind"?
Grow up kid, you start gaming this gen or something?
On topic... I don't care if the Wii U is only slightly more powerful than the 360/PS3... getting some of my favorite franchises (Mario, Zelda, Metroid) in HD is more than worth the purchase of the system. But what do i know, I'm just a gamer, not a fanboy.
layton2012
Iff the wiiu was a powerhouse we would have seen it at e3. E3 2005 showed Gears of War and Oblivion for 360.We should never judge a new console's visual capabilities by the 1st wave of multiplat titles... Let devs get more familiar with the hardware, specially 1st party devs and we'll start seeing better games (visually)..
Malta_1980
[QUOTE="Capitan_Kid"]What does it mean when a next gen console game barely looks as good as its last gen counterpart?darkspineslayerWe didn't have time to do this and make launch =/= LOLZ WIIU IS TEH WEAK AND CAN'T DO IT PERIOD. the fact it's a brand new platform and we already have games matching the 360 is a good sign. The main concern is that the HD Twins utilise 2005 era hardare. The WiiU is launching in 2012. Despite the limited dev time for WiiU games people are questioning just how capable the machine is considering technology has moved on massively in 7 years.
[QUOTE="darkspineslayer"][QUOTE="Capitan_Kid"]What does it mean when a next gen console game barely looks as good as its last gen counterpart?CwlHeddwynWe didn't have time to do this and make launch =/= LOLZ WIIU IS TEH WEAK AND CAN'T DO IT PERIOD. the fact it's a brand new platform and we already have games matching the 360 is a good sign. The main concern is that the HD Twins utilise 2005 era hardare. The WiiU is launching in 2012. Despite the limited dev time for WiiU games people are questioning just how capable the machine is considering technology has moved on massively in 7 years. Agreed. I am sorry, but even if they had limited dev time and are new to the technology, it is absolutely PATHETIC that WiiU games look no better (and sometimes worse) than current gen games. Now many sheep here are saying give it time, its just launch games, and etc, but lets put this in perspective. When the Dreamcast came out, its games looked noticeable better than the games on the PS1 and N64. When the X360 came out, its games looked noticeable better than Xbox/PS2/GC games. When the PS1/N64 came out, their games looked much better than SNES games, and etc. But now we have the WiiU (and the Wii before it I guess) where the WiiU, a console that came out 7 years after the current gen started, has games that look no better than current gen games (in some cases worse, in some cases slightly better like the differences between a PS3 and X360 multiplat). Frankly that is sad. But what is pathetic, is how sheep are defending the WiiU saying that its ok, give it time, or how some sheep are saying we should not have overly powerful consoles because they increase dev. costs and decrease innovation, as a way to justify an overly weak console (like the Wii). Lets look at the PC and the Witcher 2, that looks amazing and had an $8m budget, but looks amazing (other great looking PC exclusives also have manageable budgets). Now lets look at the Wii (original) that had tacked on waggle controls in its games, and frankly I cant think of a single innovative game for the systems in terms of how the controller was used (or hell in general tbh). So uh yeah, kinda sad that the WiiU is $300 (or more) and so far seems barely more capable than current gen systems.
[QUOTE="darkspineslayer"][QUOTE="Capitan_Kid"]What does it mean when a next gen console game barely looks as good as its last gen counterpart?CwlHeddwynWe didn't have time to do this and make launch =/= LOLZ WIIU IS TEH WEAK AND CAN'T DO IT PERIOD. the fact it's a brand new platform and we already have games matching the 360 is a good sign. The main concern is that the HD Twins utilise 2005 era hardare. The WiiU is launching in 2012. Despite the limited dev time for WiiU games people are questioning just how capable the machine is considering technology has moved on massively in 7 years.
This. I fail to see why people keep forgetting the Xbox 360 came out in 2005 and the PS3 in 2007.
The year is 2012 people. If there isn't a clear difference yet, that's worrying
The main concern is that the HD Twins utilise 2005 era hardare. The WiiU is launching in 2012. Despite the limited dev time for WiiU games people are questioning just how capable the machine is considering technology has moved on massively in 7 years.[QUOTE="CwlHeddwyn"][QUOTE="darkspineslayer"] We didn't have time to do this and make launch =/= LOLZ WIIU IS TEH WEAK AND CAN'T DO IT PERIOD. the fact it's a brand new platform and we already have games matching the 360 is a good sign.OB-47
This. I fail to see why people keep forgetting the Xbox 360 came out in 2005 and the PS3 in 2007.
The year is 2012 people. If there isn't a clear difference yet, that's worrying
Maybe from a tech-junkies point of view, but from a Nintendo fan's point of view the system is a good jump forward. It seems like everyone who rants away about the lack of power are mainly concerned with multiplat titles.I don't think Nintendo cares much about pleasing Microsoft and Sony console fans/owners, but are focused on their own fanbase. The displeased can complain all they like but it'll make no difference to the fans and the company.
Typical reply from someone who is in denial of what is happening. Like OB-47 said, it is worrying that a system that came out 7 years after the X360 and 6 years after the PS3, has games that dont differentiate themselves visually from current gen titles. If you yourself dont think that is worrying, then you are either in denial, a huge fanboy, or both. Like I said, every new gen, the launch games looked significantly better than their last gen counterparts (hell look at GUN for X360 and Xbox, or Splinter Cell, or NBA, etc). Yet with the WiiU, launch games look terrible for a new console.Lol the wii u sux.
Shirokishi_
not next gen
herp derp hurrr.
There's not enough dev time, the console will pick up eventually. It's the same with any console, lauch games are rarely good, devs will get used to it 1-2 years later. rjdofu
But to be fair, there's always at least one game which show cases the potential of the hardware of other consoles at launch.
It's not a good sign that there is nothing show casing the WiiUs performance yet.
[QUOTE="Shirokishi_"]Typical reply from someone who is in denial of what is happening. Like OB-47 said, it is worrying that a system that came out 7 years after the X360 and 6 years after the PS3, has games that dont differentiate themselves visually from current gen titles. If you yourself dont think that is worrying, then you are either in denial, a huge fanboy, or both. Like I said, every new gen, the launch games looked significantly better than their last gen counterparts (hell look at GUN for X360 and Xbox, or Splinter Cell, or NBA, etc). Yet with the WiiU, launch games look terrible for a new console. Who's really being the fanboy here? You're judging them based off of your preferences, most of which are standards that are held on other systems' platforms that you prefer over what Nintendo does and is known for, exclusive titles and their own independence. They've survived and even thrived for several generations without having the Western multiplats, so why do they need to suddenly change their business strategy to suit other systems' fans and preferences? Your gripes and complaints are from a view that is not shared with the company, so you can either go along with them or avoid them because they have little to no intention of trying to please anyone with that position.Lol the wii u sux.
not next gen
herp derp hurrr.jonathant5
[QUOTE="Shirokishi_"]Typical reply from someone who is in denial of what is happening. Like OB-47 said, it is worrying that a system that came out 7 years after the X360 and 6 years after the PS3, has games that dont differentiate themselves visually from current gen titles. If you yourself dont think that is worrying, then you are either in denial, a huge fanboy, or both.Lol the wii u sux.
not next gen
herp derp hurrr.jonathant5
[QUOTE="rjdofu"]There's not enough dev time, the console will pick up eventually. It's the same with any console, lauch games are rarely good, devs will get used to it 1-2 years later. HalcyonScarlet
But to be fair, there's always at least one game which show cases the potential of the hardware of other consoles at launch.
It's not a good sign that there is nothing show casing the WiiUs performance yet.
Yep, Wii U launch titles are terrible. I'm just trying to say that no console can hit its peak in performance at launch; games with good graphics, sure, but O can't point out any game at launch that can match the performance of the later games. The WiiU is not that much above current HDtwins + devs don't have enough time to get used to the systems > understandable situation.It seems people are having false hope that next gen consoles will feature a big jump in graphics + performance like the jump from ps2>ps3.rjdofuWhy wouldn't they?
[QUOTE="rjdofu"]It seems people are having false hope that next gen consoles will feature a big jump in graphics + performance like the jump from ps2>ps3.parkurtommoWhy wouldn't they?Sad to see sheep are hoping the next consoles from MS and Sony are just as weak as wii-u.
[QUOTE="parkurtommo"][QUOTE="rjdofu"]It seems people are having false hope that next gen consoles will feature a big jump in graphics + performance like the jump from ps2>ps3.MFDOOM1983Why wouldn't they?Sad to see sheep are hoping the next consoles from MS and Sony are just as weak as wii-u. I'm a sheep? :lol: :lol: :lol:
Typical reply from someone who is in denial of what is happening. Like OB-47 said, it is worrying that a system that came out 7 years after the X360 and 6 years after the PS3, has games that dont differentiate themselves visually from current gen titles. If you yourself dont think that is worrying, then you are either in denial, a huge fanboy, or both. Like I said, every new gen, the launch games looked significantly better than their last gen counterparts (hell look at GUN for X360 and Xbox, or Splinter Cell, or NBA, etc). Yet with the WiiU, launch games look terrible for a new console. Who's really being the fanboy here? You're judging them based off of your preferences, most of which are standards that are held on other systems' platforms that you prefer over what Nintendo does and is known for, exclusive titles and their own independence. They've survived and even thrived for several generations without having the Western multiplats, so why do they need to suddenly change their business strategy to suit other systems' fans and preferences? Your gripes and complaints are from a view that is not shared with the company, so you can either go along with them or avoid them because they have little to no intention of trying to please anyone with that position. Trust me when I say that I was a fan of Nintendo before the Wii. Last gen, the GC was my only console (also had a gaming PC), and I feel like I did not miss out on anything significant. The GC was an amazing system, great games, great graphics, and it was just a very good system. I also had the N64 before it (did not have the PS1), and had the GBC and GBA SP (loved the Gameboy handhelds, and the DS to a lesser extent) and also had the DS Lite. Anyway I am far from a fanboy, although I will admit that if I would categorize myself, where manticore was not an option, I would say I am more of a hermit then anything else. Anyway, the Wii, to me, was disappointing. I went mainly after the casuals. Sure we had a few great Nintendo games like SMG1, 2, SSBB, and MP3, but really in terms of 3rd party support it was severely lacking. And even then, 1st and 2nd party support was not as strong as that on the GC and N64. On top of that, the Wii was way overpriced, hence me not getting it (although my room mate had it so played all the games I wanted to) based on principle. The damn thing was a $250 gamecube with waggle. Now I want to see progress, and sadly the Wii did not do that. Sure the motion control's seemed awesome at first, but developers did not really take advantage of them, so a lot of times it was flick wrist instead of button pressing, how is that innovative? Because the Wii was so woefully under powered, the system did not get too many large, innovative games, because frankly, the hardware did not permit it. I see a similar problem with the WiiU where since it is seems fairly under powered compared to current PC's, and potentially to the X720 and PS4, we wont get new, large and amazing experiences. The main reason, last gen, that I was a PC and GC gamer was because both systems provided amazing, innovative, and unique games. I would like the WiiU to be able to do that, but since Nintendo seems more interested in nickle and dimming the customer just like they did with the Wii, I feel like that wont happen. On top of it all, if the WiiU is significantly weaker than the other 3 platforms, it wont get great 3rd party support, and lets be honest, most of the great games of this gen on the consoles came from 3rd part dev's, and most of those games were not on the Wii. Another note, they need the Western multiplats now because the Japanese dev's this gen, especially the multiplat one's, have failed to release good games. Which is not to say they havent released any good games (SMG, MGS4, Dragon Soul, etc were good), but they have not released many of them, and certainly significantly less than those of the West. Do note though that I generally dislike Japanese games (imo poor storyline, graphics, and art style, hate the anime art style that many Japanese dev's use)[QUOTE="jonathant5"][QUOTE="Shirokishi_"]
Lol the wii u sux.
not next gen
herp derp hurrr.Bigboi500
I will continue to support Nintendo as long as they are the only console manufacturer who still places an emphasis on single player games, regardless of the power of the system. That said, it would be practically impossible for Nintendo to create a console in 2012 that wasn't at least a little bit more powerful than the 360/PS3. I have to wonder just how much power the screen on the controller sucks from the console's overall performance.PurpleMan5000
I will continue to support Nintendo as long as they are the only console manufacturer who still places an emphasis on single player games, regardless of the power of the system. That said, it would be practically impossible for Nintendo to create a console in 2012 that wasn't at least a little bit more powerful than the 360/PS3. I have to wonder just how much power the screen on the controller sucks from the console's overall performance.PurpleMan5000Not much, it's probably like running a flash game whilst running a fullfledged one.
Aside from a few rare exeptions, all multiplats are idential on PS3 and 360. I don't expect the Wii U to be any different. I don't know why people just can't accept this.
The PS3 version of AC3 though will be the superior one because it has well over an hour of extra content. So if you own all systems like I do, then the PS3 version is the one you should get.
All versions are going to be priced the same, so why not get more for your money? But aside from that they are the same, so if you only own a 360 AC3 will still be good.
It seems people are having false hope that next gen consoles will feature a big jump in graphics + performance like the jump from ps2>ps3.rjdofu
This is because the Wii U is not a next gen system, it is current gen one. Kind of like the Wii, it launched but it was really just a game cube with motion controls attached.
The Wii was not a next gen system, the Wii U probably won't be either. But I will still get it for Nintendo's 1st party.
What the OP just doesn't seem to get is the fact that the WiiU being able to play games that look "almost as good" as a 7 year old console is pathetic.
[QUOTE="rjdofu"]It seems people are having false hope that next gen consoles will feature a big jump in graphics + performance like the jump from ps2>ps3.ShadowMoses900
This is because the Wii U is not a next gen system, it is current gen one. Kind of like the Wii, it launched but it was really just a game cube with motion controls attached.
The Wii was not a next gen system, the Wii U probably won't be either. But I will still get it for Nintendo's 1st party.
No, i meant graphically wise the difference between ps4/nextxbox & current HDtwins won't be as impressive as Ps3 vs. ps2 or Ps2 vs. Ps1. By the same measure, WiiU is not next gen. However, by definition, it's next gen; same as the Wii being this gen.[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"][QUOTE="rjdofu"]It seems people are having false hope that next gen consoles will feature a big jump in graphics + performance like the jump from ps2>ps3.rjdofu
This is because the Wii U is not a next gen system, it is current gen one. Kind of like the Wii, it launched but it was really just a game cube with motion controls attached.
The Wii was not a next gen system, the Wii U probably won't be either. But I will still get it for Nintendo's 1st party.
No, i meant graphically wise the difference between ps4/nextxbox & current HDtwins won't be as impressive as Ps3 vs. ps2 or Ps2 vs. Ps1. By the same measure, WiiU is not next gen. However, by definition, it's next gen; same as the Wii being this gen.Sony said they do not care about being first, they only care about being the most powerful console with the best games. That is their game plan with PS4, it will over shadow the competition.
MS is more concerned with making Xbox a multi-media device first and a game system second. Nintendo is focused on just making their first party great and making cheap systems with new ideas, but not so much in power. This strategy seems to work very well for them.
I'm going with PS4 and Wii U, not interested in 720 for a number of reasons. Mainly not many exclusives I like and paying for online is just dumb.
Sony said they do not care about being first, they only care about being the most powerful console with the best games. ShadowMoses900Yeah.. but Sony says a lot of things.
Who is going to buy an inferior version of a game that has been out for like a year? Who doesn't already own a copy of Arkham City at this point?TimstuffI was under the impression that this thread was about AC 3
Isn't this about AC3? :PWho is going to buy an inferior version of a game that has been out for several months? Who doesn't already own a PS3, 360 or PC to play it on?
Timstuff
[QUOTE="Timstuff"]Isn't this about AC3? :P you would think, but the DC is so strong in this thread that it clouds the initial OP.Who is going to buy an inferior version of a game that has been out for several months? Who doesn't already own a PS3, 360 or PC to play it on?
parkurtommo
The mere fact that Gun on the PS2 was sub HD while the 360 version was HD represented quite a noticeable jump. Being displayed in such a greater resolution was something the PS2 would never be able to accomplish, or come remotely close too. A jump were not seeing between games shared between the WII-U and the 360/PS3 version of games. At the very least, a lazy port should be 1080p, by standards set by previous generational growth.[QUOTE="Nuck81"]Is this anything like how GUN a launch game for the 360 barely looked better than the PS2? Or is that ok since it was Microsoft?Shift05
Gun PS2
Gun Xbox 360
Yes, quite a leap :roll:
360 flop confirmed!! Am I Rite???
It seems people are having false hope that next gen consoles will feature a big jump in graphics + performance like the jump from ps2>ps3.rjdofuAnd what makes you think that? MS released a powerful system and they've made sh!tload of money with it... I'm sure they're working with EPIC right now that are suggesting them the hardware needed for UE4. Sure they're making lots of money with their waggle Kinect but that can be done on a powerful console so you get the money from Casuals, Brogamers and Core. MS won't release a weakass console i'm pretty sure about that.
The mere fact that Gun on the PS2 was sub HD while the 360 version was HD represented quite a noticeable jump. Being displayed in such a greater resolution was something the PS2 would never be able to accomplish, or come remotely close too. A jump were not seeing between games shared between the WII-U and the 360/PS3 version of games. At the very least, a lazy port should be 1080p, by standards set by previous generational growth., quite a leap :roll:[QUOTE="Shift05"]
[QUOTE="Nuck81"]Is this anything like how GUN a launch game for the 360 barely looked better than the PS2? Or is that ok since it was Microsoft?Nuck81
360 flop confirmed!! Am I Rite???
Guess you forgot about Cod2 dx9 at launch which required a high end pc to match and Kameo. E3 2005 also showcased Oblivion and Gears. Nintendo has shown nothing thats next gen level.-----pic----------------Yes More than double the resolution being displayed, with a greater frame rate is a large leap for a quick port, especially when compared to a game that has no changes occurring (AC3). The 360 also launched with other ports that included further changes beyond that of GUN's to show its increase in powerYes, quite a leap :roll:
360 flop confirmed!! Am I Rite???
Nuck81
Yes More than double the resolution being displayed, with a greater frame rate is a large leap for a quick port, especially when compared to a game that has no changes occurring (AC3). The 360 also launched with other ports that included further changes beyond that of GUN's to show its increase in power Yes and it still looked **** and barely better than a PS2 game.[QUOTE="Nuck81"] -----pic----------------
Yes, quite a leap :roll:
360 flop confirmed!! Am I Rite???
opex07
Good thing launch games aren't indicative of future quality of games.
You're arguing against yourself and you don't realize it. WiiU isn't a huge technological leap and it's launch games still manage to look as good or better than the current gen consoles which are in their prime. I think you'll find the that PS4 and the next Xbox will have the same marginal improvement over the WiiU
What does it mean when a next gen console game barely looks as good as its last gen counterpart?Capitan_Kid
Considering this went into production after the PS3/360 versions (there isn't even a release date, yet), what was expected? They'll largely be using the same assets and everything... With a little work in tweaking for the controller.
Wait until full-release games at least a little after the release. Heck, should we take the first games released for the 360/PS3 as indicators of their top-graphics? That's the dumbest sh*t ever.
Yes More than double the resolution being displayed, with a greater frame rate is a large leap for a quick port, especially when compared to a game that has no changes occurring (AC3). The 360 also launched with other ports that included further changes beyond that of GUN's to show its increase in power Yes and it still looked **** and barely better than a PS2 game.[QUOTE="opex07"]
[QUOTE="Nuck81"] -----pic----------------
Yes, quite a leap :roll:
360 flop confirmed!! Am I Rite???
Nuck81
Good thing launch games aren't indicative of future quality of games.
You're arguing against yourself and you don't realize it. WiiU isn't a huge technological leap and it's launch games still manage to look as good or better than the current gen consoles which are in their prime. I think you'll find the that PS4 and the next Xbox will have the same marginal improvement over the WiiU
I'm saving this quote for when real next gen consoles come out, lol.[QUOTE="Kaszilla"]Next Gen wont be as impressive as this Gen.mitu123You're kidding right?
He's not.I believe that to.I just don't see 2012 high end PC parts being affodable for MS and sony.I'm not expecting the PS4 and 720 to be 20X more powerful then their predecessor, but at least 10X more powerful then the predecessor.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment