E3 2012 | Nintendo Talk Wii U Graphics - 720p Native and Dual GamePads

By Jorge Ba-oh 08.06.2012 20

E3 2012 | Nintendo Talk Wii U Graphics - 720p Native and Dual GamePads on Nintendo gaming news, videos and discussion

Nintendo have been sharing tidbits on how the Wii U will perform graphically, and how using 2 GamePads will affect performance.

This week at E3, the focus has been heavily on the solo "leader" experience, where one person would be in charge of a single Wii U GamePad and the others would use Wii Remotes or Pro controllers. Nintendo did confirm that players would be able to use two GamePads in certain titles in the future, however because the Wii U would have to output to an extra device, this would mean for some compromise.

According to IGN, it isn't a simple process and will take a creative ideas to minimise any latency when using 2 GamePads - perhaps trimming down what's shown/constantly being fed to the screen. It's been advised that framerate would be cut to 30fps from 60fps in certain situations.

Another question that arose from fans was whether Nintendo's first party games will support full, glorious 1080p resolution. For now, the initial Wii U titles from Nintendo themselves will run in an acceptable 720p native resolution, most in at least a solid 60fps - including Nintendo Land and Pikmin 3.

Comment on this article

You can comment as a guest or join the Cubed3 community below: Sign Up for Free Account Login

Preview PostPreview Post Your Name:
Validate your comment
  Enter the letters in the image to validate your comment.
Submit Post

Comments

Sonic_13 is offline. Sonic_13 08.06.2012#1

It shouldn't come as a surprise that performance would take a slight hit with two Game Pads. Afterall, the system processes and renders everything and sends it to the Game Pad.

 
PMD is offline. PMD 08.06.2012#2

If they can't get Nintendo Land running at 1080p, I don't think we can count on the majority of the games running at that resolution. Still, a solid 60fps is great, and perhaps some devs might trade off for 1080p and 30fps.

 
Sonic_13 is offline. Sonic_13 08.06.2012#3

PMD said:
If they can't get Nintendo Land running at 1080p...

They didn't say they couldn't, just that they weren't.
They implied that they could though.

 
FlyingKickPunch is offline. FlyingKickPunch 08.06.2012#4

Wii U is more than adequate graphically.

3DS Friend Code: 163342003583
NNID: FlyingKickPunch
Add me!
 
meeto_0 is offline. meeto_0 08.06.2012#5

Nintendo is a weird company. Its obvious by the fact that they want a specific price point and that they wont disclose detailed internal components that this machine isnt that powerful.

Why not just say so and stop messing people around. Be up front.

Are they not going to have a similar problem when the new consoles arrive (be it not so extreme) when parts of these new engines dont scale down nicely for the wii U.

 
Darkflame (guest) 08.06.2012#6

UT4 doesnt look that impressive to be. Its the assets that make stuff look good.

"project offset" is still the last engine to really impress me, and that was unreleased a decade ago -sigh-
Hundreds of enemys, each unique, procedral textures, per-object motion blur. *That* was impressive.
*sniff*

darkflame (guest) 08.06.2012#7

Most people with 360s and PS3s think they are getting 1080p when they are only getting 720p anyway.
Hell, a lot of "HD" tv channels also fudge it and arnt proper 1080p.
1080p is surprising rare - and many people cant tell the difference.

J4K is offline. J4K 08.06.2012#8

Most people with 360s and PS3s think they are getting 1080p when they are only getting 720p anyway

I wager most of us here aren't most people. I can see plenty of jagged edges and scaling artifacts from 720p. A clean 1080p is one of the things I'm looking forward to from the next generation consoles.

It's understandable that Nintendo -- considering their use of aging tech in combo with having to stream to the Wii U Pad -- are sticking to 720p. It makes sense, but don't pretend like no one's going to be able to "tell the difference". It's very apparent.

UT4 doesnt look that impressive to be. Its the assets that make stuff look good.

A lot of people are saying that the UE4 demonstrations haven't blown them away, but I think a lot of them are missing the point. Dynamic Global illumination really is a big deal. Lighting has a profound impact on the look and feel of a game -- and this is simply a massively better way to do it. It'll make a big difference in just about every title that uses it.

Similarly, the workflow optimizations they've made are huge for licensees. As these systems get more complex and powerful, the ability to minimize the time it takes to iterate is a big deal. Time is money, and UE4 promises to help cut time.

Of course, these are big promises. We'll see if they can actually deliver.

 
crackedthesky is offline. crackedthesky 09.06.2012#9

Jacob4000 said:

I wager most of us here aren't most people. I can see plenty of jagged edges and scaling artifacts from 720p. A clean 1080p is one of the things I'm looking forward to from the next generation consoles.

It's understandable that Nintendo -- considering their use of aging tech in combo with having to stream to the Wii U Pad -- are sticking to 720p. It makes sense, but don't pretend like no one's going to be able to "tell the difference". It's very apparent.

Actually 1080 will give you more jagged edges than 720 because aliasing and motion are less consistent with 1080. Source: http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6029_7-6301006-1.html

NNID: crackedthesky
My blog, mostly about writing: http://www.davidjlovato.com
 
J4K is offline. J4K 10.06.2012#10

You're comparing 1080i with 720p. Interlaced and progressive are two different ballgames. 720p does indeed have some advantage there.

1080p, is what people are talking about when they want "full" HD. And it's a superior standard in every way. I specifically stated I was looking forward to 1080p.

( Edited 10.06.2012 01:12 by Jacob4000 )

 
J Tangle is offline. J Tangle 10.06.2012#11

So what screen is affected by the frame drop, is it whats shown on the tv or is it whats streamed to the pads? No one has really made this clear enough for me to understandSmilie

 
Canyarion is offline. Canyarion 10.06.2012#12

I figure it's the framerate of the Upads. I think the wireless connection is the limiting factor here, so they have to halve the fps to stream to 2 Pads.

I wouldn't worry too much about the main screen. When you're playing with 2 Upads, I bet you're not playing for the pretty graphics on the TV.

 
crackedthesky is offline. crackedthesky 11.06.2012#13

Jacob4000 said:
You're comparing 1080i with 720p. Interlaced and progressive are two different ballgames. 720p does indeed have some advantage there.

1080p, is what people are talking about when they want "full" HD. And it's a superior standard in every way. I specifically stated I was looking forward to 1080p.

My bad, haha.

In any case, I'd rather have 720p than 1080i or p. 1080p would add a few hundred dollars to the cost of the console (and subsequently the games to recover lost profits) as well as suggest that you buy a 1080p tv, which are currently expensive as hell, and all for a bump in definition you can't really see unless you're right up against the TV. It's just not worth it in my opinion, I'm more than happy with 720p.

NNID: crackedthesky
My blog, mostly about writing: http://www.davidjlovato.com
 
J4K is offline. J4K 11.06.2012#14

justonesp00lturn said:
Jacob4000 said:
You're comparing 1080i with 720p. Interlaced and progressive are two different ballgames. 720p does indeed have some advantage there.

1080p, is what people are talking about when they want "full" HD. And it's a superior standard in every way. I specifically stated I was looking forward to 1080p.

My bad, haha.

In any case, I'd rather have 720p than 1080i or p. 1080p would add a few hundred dollars to the cost of the console (and subsequently the games to recover lost profits) as well as suggest that you buy a 1080p tv, which are currently expensive as hell, and all for a bump in definition you can't really see unless you're right up against the TV. It's just not worth it in my opinion, I'm more than happy with 720p.

It wouldn't make the games cost anymore, I don't think. Developers already build their assets for high resolution, and then scale them down as needed. So I don't think development costs would go up much at all. The console would definitely be more expensive to make, but I'd also definitely pay a bit more for a system that will be technologically relevant longer.

I mean, the Wii U is going to launch for probably around $300 and be outdated on day one. I'm guessing a year later we'll see XBox 720/PS4 packing grossly superior hardware and probably costing at most $400. Each person has to determine for themselves what constitutes a good value for the money, but right now I'm thinking it's the other guys.

Also -- and again, everyone has to determine for themselves what is too expensive -- but 1080p TVs have seriously come down in price over the last five years or so. It's about the standard these days if you buy a decent TV. I bought one a year and a half ago: LED, 26 in, 1080p, N wifi built in for integrated Netflix/Hulu/Amazon widgets, two HDMIs, one component, and a VGA input for less than $300. I wouldn't call spending $300 on anything cheap, but I wouldn't call that "expensive as hell" either.

If you're still gaming on the ol' CRT, then yeah, 1080p will be meaningless to you. But if you've got HD tech, it's nice to have games that actually take advantage of it. But again, to each his own. If you have no use for 1080p I can see why you wouldn't want to be forced to pay for it.

I figure it's the framerate of the Upads. I think the wireless connection is the limiting factor here, so they have to halve the fps to stream to 2 Pads.

From what we've heard about the hardware, I don't think it's the wireless. I think its the extra resolution of adding another Wii U pad.

Which in that case likely means that a framerate dip anywhere will hit both controllers and the TV equally. A framerate drop is caused when a scene is over budget. I don't see how they could isolate the effects of that to just one screen.


( Edited 11.06.2012 23:03 by Jacob4000 )

 
crackedthesky is offline. crackedthesky 12.06.2012#15

Jacob4000 said:

It wouldn't make the games cost anymore, I don't think. Developers already build their assets for high resolution, and then scale them down as needed. So I don't think development costs would go up much at all. The console would definitely be more expensive to make, but I'd also definitely pay a bit more for a system that will be technologically relevant longer.

I mean, the Wii U is going to launch for probably around $300 and be outdated on day one. I'm guessing a year later we'll see XBox 720/PS4 packing grossly superior hardware and probably costing at most $400. Each person has to determine for themselves what constitutes a good value for the money, but right now I'm thinking it's the other guys.

Also -- and again, everyone has to determine for themselves what is too expensive -- but 1080p TVs have seriously come down in price over the last five years or so. It's about the standard these days if you buy a decent TV. I bought one a year and a half ago: LED, 26 in, 1080p, N wifi built in for integrated Netflix/Hulu/Amazon widgets, two HDMIs, one component, and a VGA input for less than $300. I wouldn't call spending $300 on anything cheap, but I wouldn't call that "expensive as hell" either.

If you're still gaming on the ol' CRT, then yeah, 1080p will be meaningless to you. But if you've got HD tech, it's nice to have games that actually take advantage of it. But again, to each his own. If you have no use for 1080p I can see why you wouldn't want to be forced to pay for it.

I mean the system would cost more in order to implement it well (I know current-gen systems technically can but not without a huge hit in other areas). Cost of games would then rise because for most game companies part of the msrp of games is to cover selling the console at a loss (which would surely happen with full-scale 1080p support.

But I can see where you're coming from. It would be nice if consoles came with the option, that way those of us more willing to shell out the extra money for the extra resolution could pay for a version of the console with some kind of upscaling and those of us who don't care so much don't have to, that way everyone can be happy (though I don't really know the specifics of what would have to happen for companies to make two largely different versions of the same console.)

Also the Wii U can run at 1080p, it just probably won't lol. And it won't be outdated from year one, it'll be outdated after the first year or so. Which is why I hope the Wii U is just a stepping stone and Nintendo is hard at work on a real next-gen console to compete with ps4 and xbox 3.

NNID: crackedthesky
My blog, mostly about writing: http://www.davidjlovato.com
 
J4K is offline. J4K 12.06.2012#16

I mean the system would cost more in order to implement it well (I know current-gen systems technically can but not without a huge hit in other areas). Cost of games would then rise because for most game companies part of the msrp of games is to cover selling the console at a loss (which would surely happen with full-scale 1080p support.

That isn't necessarily a given. There's no guarantee that Nintendo would pass the cost of a better console onto developers by charging a higher license fee. Nintendo didn't raise the license fee for 3DS development after the price drop, despite how heavily they were into the red.

It's all just conjecture anyhow though, considering Nintendo is committed to making a less expensive console and won't take a loss on the hardware.

Also the Wii U can run at 1080p, it just probably won't lol.

Oh absolutely. The PS3 and the 360 are capable of 1080p as well. There's actually even a handful of PS2 games that ouput 1080i. It's just a matter of whether or not the hardware can actually handle outputting a quality looking game at that a high a resolution. Nintendo have basically told us the Wii U isn't up to it for its first party games. Not surprising given that most rumors say the system is roughly on-par with the current generation.

And it won't be outdated from year one, it'll be outdated after the first year or so.

Kinda arguing semantics here -- I say current gen hardware is already several years out of date. You can buy a midrange PC these days that outclasses current consoles rather easily. The Wii U appears to be roughly on the same level as the current consoles. Hence, in my opinion from day one you're buying out-dated technology with the Wii U.

Which is why I hope the Wii U is just a stepping stone and Nintendo is hard at work on a real next-gen console to compete with ps4 and xbox 3.

I wouldn't get my hopes up. Smilie

 
Sonic_13 is offline. Sonic_13 12.06.2012#17

Jacob4000 said:
Nintendo have basically told us the Wii U isn't up to it for its first party games. Not surprising given that most rumors say the system is roughly on-par with the current generation.

1) Nintendo said no such thing. Yes, their launch title games are 720p, but that in no way implies the system is incapable of fully supporting 1080p games.

2) While there are, of course, rumors that say pretty much everything, most of the "rumors" I've heard (coming from news sites, developers, other places) is that Wii U is definitely more powerful than (and not just "on par" with) the current generation. How it will compare to the PS4 and next Xbox obviously remains to be seen (they will likely be more powerful), but to state Wii U is simply "on-par" with current generation systems is selling the system short.

 
J4K is offline. J4K 12.06.2012#18

1) Nintendo said no such thing. Yes, their launch title games are 720p, but that in no way implies the system is incapable of fully supporting 1080p games.

If pikmin could be 1080p, it would be. All the 3rd party titles have been shown in 720p as well. It's going to be the same thing that happened this generation -- 1080p will be an option, not the standard. An option with significant tradeoffs.

2) While there are, of course, rumors that say pretty much everything, most of the "rumors" I've heard (coming from news sites, developers, other places) is that Wii U is definitely more powerful than (and not just "on par" with) the current generation. How it will compare to the PS4 and next Xbox obviously remains to be seen (they will likely be more powerful), but to state Wii U is simply "on-par" with current generation systems is selling the system short.

If you honestly still think the Wii U is significantly more powerful than the current gen systems after all the media we've seen you're deluding yourself. Plain and simple.

 
JoshSL is offline. JoshSL 12.06.2012#19

Most PS360 games do not run at 1080p native either; only a handful really.
This isn't really shocking, I'm sure like with other systems WiiU will have a handful of 1080p native games.

It's nothing to jump to conclusions about.

Twitter | C3 Writer/Moderator | Backloggery
 
J4K is offline. J4K 12.06.2012#20

I'm well aware of that, Superlink. That's why I said "It's going to be the same thing that happened this generation -- 1080p will be an option, not the standard. An option with significant tradeoffs."

Most games don't run in 1080p because it's too taxing for 7 year old technology. The Wii U appears to suffer the same limitations as the 7 year old technology.

It's nothing to jump to conclusions about.

This alone? No. This combined with everything else we've seen? Yes yes. It's not a jump or a leap of logic at all -- it's pretty much plain as day fact at this point.

Is the system more powerful than the current gen? Yes, but it looks like Nintendo built it to be just powerful enough to handle a significantly more robust OS in conjunction with the added resolution of the Wii U Pad, while delivering roughly the same visuals of the current generation systems.

In other words, the system is more powerful, sure, but Nintendo is also weighting it down with additional demands. Thus the end result you see on screen doesn't push too far beyond the current generation. Roughly equivalent, even.

I said this a while ago -- prepare yourself for the reality that this system isn't going to blow you away visually. This is still true. And still okay, if Nintendo brings the games.

 

Subscribe to this topic Subscribe to this topic

If you are a registered member and logged in, you can also subscribe to topics by email.
Sign up today for blogs, games collections, reader reviews and much more
Site Feed
Who's Online?
jesusraz

There are 1 members online at the moment.