Nintendo Explains Why Launch Games Will Run At 720p

During an interview, Nintendo’s Katsuya Eguchi revealed why Wii U launch games will run at 720p. Eguchi believes that games running at 720p are sufficient. He says that all developers have their reasons but Nintendo will choose Wii U’s resolution based on what they feel will deliver a great experience to the gamer. Eguchi says that if Nintendo wants games to run at 60 frames per second, during a particular stage of development, then 720p seems more realistic.

“As far as the resolution and framerates for any of the software goes, it’ll obviously depend on whatever the developer feels is the best way to get the best experience to the player.  I can’t personally speak for third-parties and their circumstances, but at Nintendo we have different teams working on different games that take into consideration the resolution… and if they think that by focusing on 720p and a certain framerate to get a certain experience, than that’s ultimately how they make their decisions.”

253 thoughts on “Nintendo Explains Why Launch Games Will Run At 720p”

    1. lol you must be joking…..right? xbox 360 runs at about 600p with horrible up scaling done to it. you are not the first to think this. you sometimes run into people who believe that 30 games were 720/1080p at 60fps since launch , or even now

      1. Well you cant get better than 1080. Which is what the Wii U can do. Even 10 years from now 1080 is the best every console will be able to do you can’t physically get any better. Now take a good look at the Wii U and read up about it in a couple articles and you will find it can do A LOT of things a 7 year old CrapBox(xbox :P) cant do…you made a good point. The Wii U SHOULD be a more advanced system than a 7 year old xbox….and it is..

        1. Dude, 1080 is nowhere near the best. It’s just the current standard for high definition. Superior definitions are already possible, just not financially viable.

        2. There are super high end tvs that display resolutions up to 4096×2160 or 4k. The problem is that the cheapest ones are a little under $5,000. Another is that nothing available to the consumer supports 4k resolutions.

        3. Then what do you call the UD-TVs coming out later this year? They will support display up to 4K, which is four times more than 1080p. Even in 10 years? Heck, we’re getting four times better THIS year.

          1. Those won’t be catching on any time soon. They are too expensive right now so until these become more affordable, they won’t be selling. At the moment 1080p is very logical.

    2. This is suppose to be a next gen console so comparing it to Xbox360 does not bold well for the WiiU. Developing games for WiiU should be able to be played at 1080p with 60fps easily. This is starting to look more and more that the WiiU is really just as capable as PS3. I for one hope not because the WiiU could not equal a 6+ year console.

      1. nintendo has said that the wii u does 1080p at 60fps with one gamepad, or pro controller. launch titles looking nice than ps3 games is great. compare the ps3 launch graphics to the graphics now. if wii u launches modern ps3 graphics, then it only goes up from there

        1. I’m sorry my friend but I have yet to see any Wii U games with the graphics fidelity of even Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune. And even less of Metal Gear Solid 4 even though it came out about 6 months after the ps3 release date. I hope you are right though, and maybe the only reason we have yet to see such quality is simply because Ubisoft seems to be launching the Wii U almost single handed. Nevertheless if Watch_Dogs ends up on Wii U, we might have our title that matches a true graphics fidelity start.

      1. One example is BF3, that run at 1280 x 704 in 30 FPS (when it’s not dropping…). Now, think in a REAL 720p game (1280 x 720) running at 60 FPS and tell me if it’s not a 2x better experience?

    1. A game like Grid 3 in 60 FPS is way better than 30 FPS, but a Zelda is fine with 30 FPS… depends of the game, I prefer 720p in 60 FPS than 1080p in 30 FPS.

      1. Zelda Skyward Sword was actually running at 60fps, Nintendo has a thing for 60fps recently, and I expect any titles that they produce or develop will automatically be given this don. And with the 480p resolution at 60 fps, I can honestly vouch that the game was more visually appealing than a lot of ps3/360 games.

    2. You cannot call your console next gen and cannot exceed current gen limitations. The standard moving forward should be full 1080p at 60fps. At no point in time did a reference anything that current HDTV cannot handle. 720p at 60fps is the current benchmark of excellence and should not be seen as the benchmark for future gaming consoles.

      Nintendo step your game up.

      1. No that is not what next generation has meant in gaming, that’s just what people assume it means. Nintendo Wii U is next gen, because its the next gen for Nintendo, why don’t you people understand this! If Sony and Microsoft sell their new systems and it is just as powerful as Wii U it will still be next gen, because it is their next generation of gaming.

        1. I agree, it’s so annoying when people don’t understand this simple logic. People assume consoles need much better graphics to be allowed to be called a next generation console, but it’s not like that at all.

    1. How so? “The Last of Us” on PS3 (and I’m more of an XBOX fan than a PS3 fan myself) looks better than anything that has been shown on the Wii U at this point. Other than maybe Assassins Creed 3, but the Wii U version was reportedly only “marginally” improved as far as graphics were concerned; most people wouldn’t be able to tell the difference.

      Pikimin looked good, but not revolutionary or better than anything that’s out on other consoles right now. ZombiU also looked great, but again, not “better” than the graphically impressive games on other consoles like The Last of Us or Crysis 3.

      1. You have to keep in mind that launch next-gen games and multi-plats never show off what a system can do and generally look about as good as high-graphical games on last-gen systems.

      2. Crisis 3 was running on a pc and the last of us looks good but it’s hard to tell exacly what it will look like until we see it on our TVs…the Zelda demo last year looked damn good. And pikmin I thought looked pretty good although I don’t think that game is really trying to have “realistic” graphics.

        1. Zelda demo looked good compared to other Zelda games, but compared to games we say at E3? It barely passes as a “next-gen” game. You have to really look at details to understand: link’s clothing/chainmail looks ridiculously flat and un-detailed, the spider’s “hair” looks like a matted texture, link’s face was flat and lacked a ridiculous amount of detail, etc.

          The lighting and building architecture were very impressive, but aside from that, it wasn’t too spectacular when compared to modern games.

          1. I thought it looked pretty amazing… Much better than some world renouned Xbox games like Call of Duty and Halo. Believe it or not the graphics of that demo were of much better quality than those two games…

      3. lol with so many brainless people on the internet it just cant be helped, u have to laugh (dude crysis is multi platform, not a ps3 exclusive, so stop talking about it until its actually out on Wii U)

    1. what they mean is there games will be that, but they did not mention 3rd parties because nintendo does not now that.(not in a bad way)


    1. they can still run 1080p. We don’t even know how much of a frame-rate drop it will be to run it. Further into the console’s life, the capabilities will be pushed and it’ll probably be standard.

    2. That is the worst prediction I have ever heard! They said it was with Nintendo Launch titles like Pikmin….I expect them to have a bunch of 1080 games out by Christmas at least.

      1. They spoke about THEIR launch titles. Nintendo themselves have never been much for graphics when they launch games. At least not the franchises released day 1 (Pikmin, Mario). I see no reason to play Mario in 1080.

  1. I don’t see why everyone is okay with this… This is utter bullshit to me. This is supposed to be a next-generation console and it’s not even going to have it’s own first party games running in 1080p? I’m disappointed enough that this console is no more powerful than the PS3 or 360, so once again Nintendo will lag behind in the graphical department; causing a lot of their 3rd party support to wane again. Sorry but you don’t have a brand new console that doesn’t even run at 1080p in their own first party games, all the Sony first party games are 1080p and some third party like Final Fantasy XIII/XIII-2 both run at 1080p on the PS3. The only reason a few on the PS3 run at 720p is because they’re cross console – that I can understand, this I do not. I think this is a poor decision. I’m not a graphical whore but come on, it’s 2012 and you can’t get your first party games to run at the resolution that Sony had in 2006!? I’m all for innovation, just don’t get left behind in other areas.

    1. again, did you not read the entire article? they will be doing 720 at 60fps. that more than makes up for not using 1080 if at 1080 it would be 30fps (AS NEARLY ALL CURRENT GEN 360/PS3 GAMES RUN). you ever played a game on a nice pc, running 1080 at 60+ fps? it looks simply fantastic compared to any console game rigged to stay at 30fps (which is…most of them). sony was not running many games, if ANY, at 60fps in 2006. maybe you dont understand how graphics work, but DOUBLING the framerate is a bitch, and is a far greater increase in quality than going from 720 to 1080. not to mention the fact that unless you have a 50+ inch TV or are sitting WAY to close, *most* people cant tell the different between 720 and 1080

      1. His point being that 7 years after XBOX360 (which already does 720p at 30-40fps for many games), you’d think they’d have a console that AT LEAST does 1080p @ 60fps. I mean, 7 years after 720p @ 30fps is achieved, and Nintendo is now only doing 720p @ 60fps? Think about how fast technology improves (especially with regards to computers, etc.) and then think about that upgrade. Doesn’t make much sense, does it?

        And if you ask most “core” gamers if they’d sacrifice so much time & progress in technology just to have a single-touch tablet in the middle of their XBOX controller, or if they’d rather have improved graphics, physics, gameplay mechanics, and have 1080p @ 60fps with their current XBOX360/PS3 controllers… they’ll choose the latter option. Hands down.

        This will be very evident when Microsoft and Sony’s new consoles come out, provided they opt for more power (how much is still to be determined) rather than adding a second screen. The masses will gobble them up. Because nobody wants to watch all black & white movies when there are full-colour iMax theater movies, you know what I mean?

        1. black and white movie shave done just fine in theaters in the last handful of years… And again, DID YOU READ THE ARTICLE? the Wii-U CAN do 1080 at 60fps (as AC3 PROVES), the article is simply explaining why 1st party LAUNCH titles wont be in said res at said frame rate.

          1. You’re not listening. The problem we have is not that the Wii U can’t do 1080p (as if we needed you to remind us of that), the problem is that despite the Wii U’s ability to do 1080p, developers are just resigning themselves to do 720p instead. We’re not wrong in thinking that 1080p games aren’t going to appear very soon, because chances are most developers will adopt Eguchi’s mindset anyway. Besides, most developers wouldn’t even consider going back to 720p if the Wii U truly was capable of full, unadulterated 1080p. It seems the Wii U’s 1080p capability has a catch, which, ultimately does little to distinguish itself from current gen consoles.

          2. If it can do it, it should do it right away. I do not see any point in starting off weak. Why not start off with its true power? He talks about “delivering a great experience”… So, if 720p delivers those “great experiences”, wouldn’t it mean that 1080p would deliver even greater experiences? It just doesn’t make any sense to me to let the WiiU be only as strong as 6 years old systems from the beginning.

          3. And did you read MY post?

            I said I know they “confirmed” the Wii U can do 1080p @ 60fps. My point, then, is: why not adapt the first party games to do that, if it’s true?

            You people seem to think that “using early dev kits” means they’re stuck with whatever they started developing the game in. You REALLY think Nintendo would give developers underpowered dev kits, then upgrade them consistently (over 6 times, I’ve read) over the months, and not have it be easy to assimilate each upgraded kit when it comes out?

            It’s not like they start with DevKit 1.0, and then months later they’re at DevKit 6.0 which is much much more powerful, but it’s impossible or too much work to upgrade their game to use it.

            It’s more like upgrading from Photoshop CS4 to CS5. It’s a fairly quick upgrade, and you don’t have to keep working on your existing Photoshop projects in CS4 just because that’s what you started using; you can fully utilize CS5’s features for documents you created in CS4, and you don’t have to “re-do” anything.

            Upgrading the resolution in the XBOX game I was working on with a friend was a matter of 1 line of code. Literally.

            So I ask again: if the console is capable of 1080p @ 60fps, and Nintendo has 4 or 5 months before the console comes out… why not run their first-party games at that standard? If it’s not time, work, or console capability that is holding them back, what is? Laziness? Stupidity? What?

            1. It could also be the individual games having too much going on to use 1080 at 60fps. Like when you’re playing LoL, you’ll see frame-rate drops when huge team fights are happening if your computer can’t take the current settings.

              1. That’s the point: Pikimin, the Mario game they showed, etc. These are very simple-looking games compared to most modern games. There is no reason they shouldn’t do 1080p at 60fps and have power to spare. I bet the 360 could EASILY run the Wii U Mario game at 1080p at 60fps, and it’s a nearly 7 year old console. I mean it’s almost identical in graphics to the original Wii New Super Mario Bros. game! Come on now…

        2. I will put it very simple:
          360 games at launch looked like utter crap
          Wii U games at launch look like the best stuff we have seen on 360 and PS3.
          It takes years for developers to know all the tricks to get the best visuals possible from a console.
          And Nintendo already confirmed the Wii U will be capable of NATIVE 1080p, as in no garbage upscaled 600p from the 360.

        3. It does 1080 at 60fps. But I can’t see any of Nintendos launch titles in a need for that (Mario, Pikmin, Nintendoland) They’ll just save the eyecandy where it’s needed (Metroid).

    2. Jesus christ the resolution doesnt mean everything calm the hell down the graphics are far superior on wii u . If they want 720p then thats their decision im sure when needed they will use 1080p devs have said its very easy to do. Your being ignorant

    3. I am by no means a graphic whore, but I do believe graphics are equally as important to most games as gameplay, story, etc. And you’re right: 7 year old XBOX360 and PS3 are outputting 720p (and then upscaling to 1080p in most cases). To have a NEW Nintendo console only outputting in 720p is UTTERLY ridiculous. Especially considering that all the games we’ve seen are graphically comparable to current-generation XBOX360 and PS3 games.

      So they basically just used similar hardware to 7 year old consoles, bumped it up a little so as to support a 480p (reportedly) controller screen, and called it a day? That sounds like they’re phoning it in to me. Like “Hey, what can we do for next generation? Oh I know, let’s just make an XBOX360 with a screen in the controller. Done.”

      I mean yeah, it presents a lot of interesting ways to play games or enhance them (the controller does, I mean), but seriously? Outputting the same visuals as consoles that are 7 years old? Get real. They’re basically asking us to pony up $300 (or there about) so that we can have a touchscreen controller. And on top of that, they have the balls to also be asking us to pay, what, $50-$60 per game for some of games that have already come out (Batman, Ninja Gaiden, etc.) and calling that they’re attempt to “win back core gamers?”

      This is getting a little ridiculous. It looks to me like Nintendo let the Wii success get to their head and now they’re all just about trying to cut corners to save cost, and make more money. I realize that’s what ANY business is about: making money. But once upon a time, Nintendo used to be about giving gamers the best looking games, as well as the best gameplay for games, and pushing boundaries in ALL areas:

      SNES: best graphics of it’s generation, most power of it’s generation, best sound of it’s generation, biggest library of it’s generation, revolutionized the controller with introduction of shoulder buttons.

      Nintendo 64: revolutionized by introducing analogue stick, wowed gamers with legendary, technologically amazing games like Mario 64, Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, etc.

      …and now:

      Wii U: An XBOX360-comparable console with 7 year old capabilities… oh, but it has a touchscreen on the controller.

      Really, Nintendo?

        1. Games on the PS3, many of them, for example Final Fantasy XIII run at 60fps in 1080p. That’s a three and a half year old game. Adding an extra 30fps does not make it comparable as a next generation console!

          1. Nothing at all on the PS3 can run at 60fps in 1080p. The PS3 barely runs anything at 40fps in 1080p, which is why most games are run at 1080i, you seem to be mistaking the two.

          2. You might want to check your facts again. The ps3 can’t run even run native 1080p everything is upscaled from 720p. Also if it is upscaling something to 1080p it is usually running at 30fps. The wiiu can run native 1080p at 60fps the reason why nintendo’s games won’t be doing this is because it isn’t necessary for their games. NSMBU and nintendoland aren’t exactly going to benefit from 1080p. Pikmin might benefit a bit but it isn’t very necessary for it either.

            1. Who lied to you WipEout HD is Native 1080p @ 60fps. Don’t talk BS. & Everyone seems to forget Rayman Origins is 1080p @ 60fps. Also PS3 doesn’t upscale resolutions. If a game is suppose to be 720p then it plays as that. But I have a good amount of games that can run 1080p

        2. Yes, I did. First party games running at 720p @ 60fps. But why? Why not 1080p @ 60fps? Explain that to me? If the console COULD handle it, why not do it? There’s no reason not to.

          The only reason they would not do it is because the frame rate would drop if they moved to 1080p, and that is a laughable situation to be in for a console 7 years after consoles that do 720p @ 30fps.

          So after 7 years, their first party games only do 30fps better at the same resolution? Are you kidding me? If Microsoft wanted, they could have upgraded the graphics card in the 360 a year or two after it came out, keep the console price the same as it was, and achieved 720p @ 60fps. That’s 2008. It’s 2012 now and Nintendo is just NOW doing this? Second screen or not, it’s a joke.

          1. laughable? being able to run games at twice the better framerate is laughable? that’s pretty damn good for a console that has to output two displays AND strea, it wirelessly to the second display. if developers made a game that only supported the pro controller, they could do some amazing things with the console in terms of graphics.

            1. Yes, laughable. Seven years, man. That’s a fucking lifetime in computer hardware terms. The 360 could have been upgraded to do everything it was doing, but in 1080p and 60fps a couple of years after its launch and kept the same price point.

              Here it is 7 years later, and Nintendo is doing just a hair above that, plus 1 extra non-HD screen (it’s been speculated that it’s not an HD screen by almost all publications present at E3).

              Seven years and only a few small improvements over what could have been done 4 or 5 years ago.

              Yes… laughable.

              1. you’re not getting it. it’s able to perform at twice the framerate, with better graphics while also streaming to another display. when you consider everything that it is capable of, it’s pretty impressive. and no, i have no idea where you are getting that the 360 was suddenly able to do 60 fps at 1080p a couple years after launch, it can still only do 30 fps at 720.

                1. Actually, you are the one who doesn’t seem to get it. If it IS able to perform it, why doesn’t it just do it ? Why ? Probably because there is something Nintendo does not want to tell us.
                  And he didn’t say that the Xbox360 started handling 60fps at 1080p, he said it would have been able to do so.
                  Everything he said so far was nothing but the truth. Nintendo couldn’t manage to create a system which is able to significantly surpass 6-7 years old systems. That IS laughable. And I’m saying this being a big Nintendo-fan myself. And no, the GamePad is no excuse. If they do decide to use a tablet-like controller, then they do have to work even harder in order to surpass the others with a huge advantage. They can’t just use it as an excuse for not being able to create a console which is clearly stronger than 7 years old ones.

              2. I really can’t see why your getting upset. 720p at 60fps is good enough for me, actually It’s great.
                But i guess it has to do with personal opinion, judged by the way some of you are reacting. The Wii didn’t have the best graphics of its gen but didn’t it sell the most? That’s because of the whole motion control changing how we played games. The Wii U actually advances that, there’s allot of amazing possibilities that haven’t been touched upon so far.
                Anyway It’s not laughable, It’s at least an improvement. IT’S BEEN ANNOUNCED THAT IT CAN HANDLE 1080P AT 60FPS! And yes, i know you know that but It’s as if you keep for getting, They’ve given their reason why it’s at 720p above. There could be other reasons such as their are problems in actually making it 1080p, it could be price, it could be that they don’t think it actually matters, because some games on the Wii actually looked better than some games on the PS360. And they’re not asking you to buy the games, there an option if you want. Many people didn’t own a ps360 or didn’t buy a specific game when it came out.

          2. It’s only because the games were being developed years before the console will be released, so they didn’t have the final development kit to begin with. In order to have true 1080p, 60fps, they would have had to wait until they had the final kit, and either delay the game, making it no longer a launch title, or rush it and end up with a messy, buggy, incomplete, or less polished game. I don’t think it would be worth it for that small graphical difference. It has nothing to do with the console’s processing power.

        1. Yes, XBOX does native 720p. It also upscales to 1080p, just like the PS3. It can also do native 1080p, but most games don’t because it’s too tasking on the GPU, and allows for less visually/graphically impressive games if they want to keep at least 30fps.

          What “research” have you been doing? Asking the Apple Genius bar?

          1. Nope! Like I said down, FFXIII on PS3 is a native 720p game with upscale (it’s not real Full HD) in xbox 360 is worst, 576p, do your research before…

    4. You have to keep in mind that most games on that will be on the Wii-U at launch will be from older dev kits AND most of them are ports.

      1. Old dev kits doesn’t mean they can’t upgrade to using new dev kits. I really wish people who know NOTHING about game development use this stupid fucking excuse.


        Shut. Up.

        1. Geez, bro, calm down. I’m not saying they can’t upgrade but if the game is already far into development would they immediately make use of newer dev kits? Not to mention, I remember Ubisoft saying that Wii-U would only use one Wii-U Gamepad as they were developing Rayman Legends on the Wii-U on an older dev kit.

          Also, would it REALLY make sense to show off what the Wii-U can do very early on? If the competition knows what the Wii-U can do immediately, than they could just go and improve on it.

          1. Yes, it would make WORLDS of sense to show it off, because Nintendo has to win back the people that chose XBOX360/PS3 over the Wii. And doing the same thing (or close to it) as 7 year old tech is not going to impress anyone except former Wii fanboys.

            1. I think you misunderstood what I meant. I’m saying that there could perhaps be a reason why Nintendo is holding back the Wii-U, such as to throw off Sony or Microsoft. Again, it’s just how I view it so I don’t see why you’re getting all pissy.

        2. Just going to say, I remember the early graphics of the ps3 and 360 looking like total shit compared to now. And I mean, complete shit, like… worse than a lot of the great Gamecube titles. You also need to take into account individual games.

          1. ^ THIS! I find funny how funny are moaning over the launch WIi U titles having the same graphics as great PS3/360 yet the launch XBox 360 games looked as bad as a lot of the 2004/2005 Xbox games.

          2. Worse than Gamecube games? I don’t know where you’ve been living so far and what you’ve been playing, but you sure didn’t live on earth nor did you play Playstation 3 games.

            1. PS3 games are very good graphically, but the graphical popup and screen tearing in so many of the games is inexcusable! No where near as powerful as you believe

    5. Maybe this has been their plan all along. They knew the dangers of revealing a new console soon because Sony and M$- who are out to decimate them, would copy.

      They want people like me and you to think that the Wii-U is underpowered so Sony and M$ try to graphically outclass them only to find out they were holding back all along?

      1. THIS, here, is the only REASONABLE explanation.

        I’ve considered this myself a few times. Perhaps that’s why specifics as to which model GPU and which model CPU are being held back? Sure, we know it’s an IBM-based CPU, and we know it’s an HD-class Radeon graphics card… but which one? There are DOZENS!

    6. Facts are a little off….PS3 and Xbox 360 dont run games at 1080. Theirs are at 720(maximum.) Plus Nintendo is releasing a couple launch titles at 720 pixels(which still looks amazing) because they said it makes the game run smoother. Not EVERY single game is running on 720, just the first couple of Launch titles….and that only goes for Nintendo. Ubisoft launch titles will most likely be in 1080. Ex:) Assasin’s Creed, Rayman, ZombiU, etc. The Wii U will make full capability of it’s graphical capabilities.

    7. sorry but thats where your wrong Petros almost every game on the ps3 including the exclusives run at 720p only not 1080p. games like KZ2 , KZ3 , uncharted 1,2,3 , infamous , MGS4 , heavenly sword , heavy rain , mag , infamous 2 , and many more games that run at 720p not 1080p so thats where your wrong. most of ps3 exclusives run at 720p. dont believe me look it up

  2. Excuses excuses smh fucking fail garbage no wonder they never show consoles specs smh cheap cowards. Defend them after they turned their backs for casuals wheres earthbound tools

    1. Then sony and microdick are trash too ? Because they dont release specs and when they do they arent actual hardware specs they are made up . So technically nintendo is gold here compared to them . Haha

  3. I love Nintendo, and 720p is decent enough for most games Nintendo creates, but I have to say: this is just Nintendo’s roundabout way of saying, “The console isn’t quite powerful enough to default to 1080p if you want 60fps.”

    Which is disappointing. There’s NO reason to not do 1080p unless the console isn’t powerful enough to handle it and still deliver a good frame rate; no reason whatsoever. They don’t benefit in ANY way from staying at 720p, as a developer. It’s not harder to make games at 1080p in terms of technical skill or work hours, it’s not less engaging for the gamer to run at 1080p, etc. The ONLY reason would be that going to 1080p means a lag in frame rate.

    Ouch. Not good. I hope (and this is a long shot) that maybe they’re just too lazy to change the resolution on account of starting the games on earlier dev kits that weren’t capable of 1080p or something like that. It’s very highly unlikely that, if the did start at 720p, that it would be more than a day’s worth of work (if that) to bump it up to 1080p, but I’m hoping. For Nintendo’s sake.

    1. Pikmin three was started on an early dev kit more than a year ago and imsure other nintendo games for LAUNCH were too. Later in its life the games will run in 1080p 60 fps they even said it themselves and so have multiple developers . Ac3 runs in full 1080p 60fps and ubisoft said it was easy so STOP WORRYING people its a damn launch game plus ps3 and 360 games barely have a few games that run in full 720p so this is a huge jump on nintendos part

      1. You are COMPLETELY wrong on that last part. Nearly ALL XBOX360 games run at native 720p, and most upscale to 1080p after the fact. Only difference is the run at 30fps not 60.

        Everyone’s point here is that 7 years after XBOX360, there’s no reason why Nintendo shouldn’t have their first party games running at 1080p and still maintain that 60fps. Early dev kits or not: it’s not difficult to change a game’s resolution, code-wise. I’ve done it working on XBOX games before via XNA. It’s literally a 10 minute thing to change, if that. If Wii U is capable of 1080p @ 60fps like you (and Nintendo, apparently) claim, then there’s no reason why they can’t, in the next 4 or 5 months before the games come out, change the resolution. No reason at all.

        Dev kits aren’t programmed into games, they’re more a tool that runs the game. Upgrading to a newer dev kit isn’t that tough, either. Again, no reason why they can’t do that. It’s fairly easy, and they still have several months.

        1. Well let’s put it this way, don’t be upset that intendo does it for at least these types of games, I mean pikmin and Mario weren’t really renown for their graphics (when it comes to what looks real, like crisis). These games really more heavily on colour, level design and layout and gameplay.

          Two games Nintendo have that would be great to show in 1080p is metroid and Zelda (possibly super smash), I have a pc and couldn’t care less as long as it is hd but I would be a bit disappointed if they don’t at least make these two titles in 1080p.

        2. Have you thought that maybe the 3D models and the textures in pikimin 3 which to nintendo standards most likely have been in development for 3 years where made with 720p in mind, Because in 1080p there is more detail, they might appear some rough edges on the models, or some undesired effect, and some times just doubling the polygons after doing the bone assignment can be a bi”$%, with smoothing there might have not been a problem at all, on the other side could only be because of the textures resolution, maybe they didn’t like how they looked, and neither of them is something that can be done with just a line of code, maybe it could do the scaling to 1080p with one line(but not true 1080p). However on the other side Pikimin is a game that has to much thing happening, remember there could 100 pikimins(and all pikimin move independently) plus enemies in the screen, with light effects and water effects, wind, and the movement of plants, plus all the game code, etc etc. Final fantasy does not have nearly as much happening at the same time as Pikimin(to be honest i think only star craft or age of empires or some alike might, however they usually have smaller models which means not a lot of detail(model and texture wise) in them because they are not meant to be seen that close), and the fights are turn based style which gives all the power to graphics and animation, after all the damage calculation really don’t take that much from the system. And in the world again it can use all that power for graphics and animation after all the character actions are mainly talk, move, and enter battle mode plus you only see one of the characters in the world, also it doesn’t render or calculates a lot of the things that are not seeing in the screen(what i mean it does not have to keep track of 100 pikimin plus close enemies, if you have play pikimin 1 or 2 and you left some pikimin doing something, there was a high possibility that if you had not clean the area some enemy would eat them). Again is a first generation game, seems that you can’t remember how first generation games usually look, remember super mario 64, and how conker looked, besides do you think that the next ps4 and xbox will really be that different, i have seen the new Frostbyte and Unreal engines, and it doesn’t look like there is an abyssal difference, the only one was square enix engine. But well we know that square enix should quit making lame final fantasy games and just make the movies. Unless they are able to replicate the magic, of Terra, Cecil, sephiroth, Ivalice and the 4 warriors of light magic story they should do just movies.

    2. Pikmin 3 started development on the wii which means it must have started development a long time ago. That’s probably the reason why it’s only running at 720p, becuase it’s already far into development. As for nintendo’s other launch games, look at NSMBU and nintendoland and tell me if either will really benefit at all from being in 1080p.

  4. I just have a feeling that Retro is going to be the Naughty Dog of Nintendo. They’ve got something cooking and I bet their games are going to be top notch, graphically. The Prime games were some of the best looking games during the GameCube days. Just can’t wait to see what they give us.

  5. I’m quite shocked. Developers are saying that the GPU within the Wii U is 1.5x that of Xbox 360/PS3, yet the Wii U cannot go 1080p and 60 frames per second? That is a bit disappointing. However, I suppose the Wii U does have to look after the controller as well…
    Anyway, I’m fine with 720p, doesn’t look too different to 1080p

        1. Because the games they showed off literally started development on really early dev kits for the Wii U. Please, give it time, and we will be looking at 1080p graphics running sixty frames per second in no time. Give it thought.

        2. Just look at BF3 on PS360 that run at 1280 x 704 (yes, it’s not real HD) in 30 FPS…. It’s not a big deal games at 1080p if they can run with lag.

  6. 720p is good enough for me. Just look at some HD Pikmin Wii U gameplay videos from E3 on YouTube , it looks stunning, and that’s just from off-screen footage.

  7. I play my video games on an home theater cinema. So I have a huge 3m screen, where you can see all the little blurs, distortions and stretches even in 720p. My screen is made for 1080p and I wish Nintendo would take advantage of the fact that it’s a “NEXT GENERATION CONSOLE” and just make all their games in 1080p from now on!

    1. So wait, do current generation games look bad on your screen? My tv screen is actually pretty small so graphics details I suppose are less prevalent to me.

  8. o man. I was hoping for “the development machine insides are less than the final machine” just to quell the haters who think resolution is be all and end all in gaming

  9. I love reading how many people complain about graphics on a console because if they cared so much about graphics just get a PC with triple 1440p Monitors and call it a day. People need to stop complaining the games look great I just want good games not another CoD. I’m tired of the series learn how to make a new game rather than rehashing a game that they just put a new skin over and slapped a new title on.

    1. ^This^ Although I do have a problem. I for one don’t play COD because it’s not my type of game i guess but lots of people do (ESP FOR THE MULTIPLAYER). Imagine playing on the same maps with the same looking things, over and over again while over games go through improvement. And many people don’t pay for DLCs so…

  10. ‘im fine with that’ smh this is why hardcore gamers hate nintendrones they support weak progress to none smh fanboys ya must support ninty abondoning ya for casuals or no earthbound oh well beg for them foreign games they region lock lol fucking tools

    1. By your logic, hardcore gamers only play on PCs, because apparently the definition of progress is: better graphics. And yes, region-locking did suck.

  11. The thing is. It’s rendering at 720p at 60fps, while also rendering a completely different image to the second screen – at the same time.

    So, while the PS3 can sometimes have 720p games, it can’t do that AND a second screen.

    720p + 480p screen =1080p.

    1. I don’t think that’s how it works…
      And yes, PS3 can even handle 1080p at 60fps. An example for that would be Final Fantasy XIII, if I’m not mistaken.

      1. Upscaling for ONE game. Whoopty freaking do. Like, seriously. Bring me MORE titles, and THEN you MAY have an argument at the table. Bitch.

      2. Why can’t all of the PS3 games do that. I may be wrong, but don’t graphics and framerates also depend on the game itself? Like, games with a lot of shit going on take more power than games where less shit is going on.

  12. Nothing worse IMO then framerate issues. For example, in The Last Story, when the game basically freezes up due to the shody framerate… this makes me want to throw the game out damn window… Well, not really, but you get my point. The game is amazing. “If only the framerate was better” is my only real gripe with it.

    60fps is essential, especially with online games, unless the game doesn’t have all that much rendered on-screen, then >60fps is ok I guess. The resolution should always be 1080p standard and any less in this day and age is a joke. Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn’t displaying a 720p resolution on a monitor set to 1080p then produce borders?

    I’m not hatin’. There is no way in hell I will not be buying Pikmin720. I am kinda disappointed in particular with this title that it is NOT 1080p, given that it is a first-party game that has been in development for years.

  13. I just don’t see any point in not using all of the power of the WiiU, if it even truly has it. I mean, what’s the reason in not running games at 1080p & 60fps if it CAN do it? Makes me wonder if it really is able to do it. And it doesn’t matter if we’re talking about launch games or regular games; if it would be able to run games at 1080p @ 60fps, it would do so right away. It would be a true shame if Nintendo seriously didn’t manage to significantly surpass 6 years old systems, really…

  14. 1080 why bother they cant even play bluray smh u copy ps3 and xbox ar tech, 2nd anolog,six axis,gyroscope.clickable buttons,l2,l3 ,r3,r4,and xbox design smh fuck u nintendo u thevies and fuck nintendrones

    1. Lmao, heard of Playstation Move by any chance? Ring any bells? Seems just a little too familiar to the Wii remote IMO . And not forgetting that Microsoft Smart Glass… also similar to yet another of Nintendo’s innovations.

    2. If I remember Sony took the whole PS from Nintendo that they worked on together.. Funny but sad story.. Sony has taken ALOT from Nintendo during the years. Nintendo was first with +pad and analog stick. Nintendo was first with making a game with background story. Nintendo is the father of modern gaming. Yet you sit here and say that they are thieves for basing their pro controler design on DS3 and 360 controller… Talk about ignorance.

  15. Do we really care about graphics so much when it comes to Nintendo? Nintendo are amazing with their first party and exclusive games. That’s why I like Nintendo, not because the graphics. I want a gaming system that I can PLAY and enjoy games, not to look around at a highly made rock. So honestly I could care less about graphics for Nintendo, maybe I would care for Xbox and playstation, since they don’t have nearly enough exclusive games to compare with Nintendo, and their games are generally just shooters, so I guess they’d have to have good graphics. But how many Nintendo games have aimed to be realistic? None.

    1. “[...] maybe I would care for Xbox and playstation, since they don’t have nearly enough exclusive games to compare with Nintendo, and their games are generally just shooters [...]”
      I laughed. Really.
      It’s sad that you think like that. But that just proves that you did not try anything else than Nintendo and that you do not know much about video games in general. But you still judge them, without knowing a single thing about them. Just Sad.

    2. The ‘resolution’ and ‘framerate’ do not directly determine the quality of a games graphics as much as they determine how well the graphics are displayed.

  16. Funny shitendo abondon these virgin freaks for casuals & have money to take risk except earthbound or foreign games yet region lock it and these worthless nostolgia manfags defend them smh u fucking shit for brains crackers

  17. Boo. Last year, he said 1080p. I know it’s not a big deal to most, but I can tell the difference. Was super excited about 1080p…. :(

  18. man come on nintendo have to step it up because when next gen xbox/ps4 comes out running at 1080 p maby 30/60fps then that will mean that nintendo are selling underpowe games i understand that is for the confort of developers but not all ggames they make should run 720p besides iif the wii u is a HD system then it should run HD grafics..besides 720 p is not tru hd

  19. Update:
    “… If a developer want to run a game at 60fps then 720p sounds more plausible than 1080p. However some games may push the Wii U’s power like Ubisoft who’s making Assassin’s Creed 3 run on the Wii U in 1080p at 60fps while the PS3 and 360 versions will run at 60 fps in 720p.”

    Now that makes perfect sense to me and also explains why the WiiU version looks much better in the videos I have watch of the Demo.

    1. Yeah, me too. If that 60fps/720p game was then set to 1080p the fps would drop.

      It makes sense that a developer who is making a Tetris style puzzle game would prefer not to have to ‘push the power’ of the WiiU when the game displays perfectly for what it has to offer.

      The games that really benefit from 1080p/60fps are the games which will be stand-out and worth my interest. To those developers who skint on visual display to save cost and therefore release a product which suffers… well, it will be noticed and factored into the equation when considering purchase.

      1. 1080p costs nothing to do Vs. 720p, just fyi.

        And Tetris would benefit from 1080p, as things would be obviously sharper and clearer. And if the game doesn’t require any other sort of visual powerhousing, why not use 1080p? Like for New Super Mario Bros. U: the game looks almost identical to the Wii version. There is ABSOLUTELY no reason to not do 1080p, then. No reason at all. If the original Wii can handle it at 480p and run smoothly, then Wii U, with all it’s supposed power, should be EASILY able to run it at 1080p, even WITH the second controller screen.

  20. Brain can’t see more than 45 FPS anyway (45 would look exactly like 60 to our eyes at normal game speed)

    Just like you can’t tell the difference with 720 and 1080 unless you play on an large ass screen. (which is why the new 4K TVs are so large its like 1080 on a 32 inch tv except 4k is on a 70 inch or larger)

    1. The human brain doesn’t “see” anything, the human eye does. And the human eye doesn’t operate within the construct of “frames per second”. The human eye can visually interpret much more than 45 frames per second; even exceeding 200 frames per second.

      The brain’s ability to interpret the visual information is based only on the individual. Some people process information, be it visual or otherwise, much faster than most other people. But on average, the human brain can visually process more than 60+ frames per second.

      In other words… moot point.

      Also, I play on a 55″ LED Samsung 240 Hz (which is capable of 120 frames per second; you divide the Hz by 2 and that = capable frames per second). I definitely notice the difference between 720p and 1080p, and the difference between 30fps and 60fps. Hell, I notice the difference between 30fps and 40fps. Easily.

      I’m not a technology minority, either: many people who have high-definition consoles also have similar TVs. Maybe not quite as big or expensive (some even more expensive/big), but definitely in the same general realm.

      1. I love your explanation, truly. Not even trolling here, I couldn’t have said this any better myself.

      1. So, the xbox 360 games that run at 1280×720 (not the BS of 1280 x 704 like BF3) are always running at 60 FPS? I don’t think so…

  21. All new developments for the WiiU by Nintendo should be presented in 1080p with a minimum framerate determined by how smooth the graphics are, whatever that may be given the requirements of the game.

    1. Skyrim runs on 7 year old consoles.

      When Skyrim runs on PC, it runs at much higher than 720p.

      Your point is moot. I really love how 95% of the people who post on here and make excuses have ZERO idea what the hell they’re talking about.

      1. But this is at the end of the console life cycles, isn’t it? They didn’t use to be like that. Anyways, Nintendo said that what other developers do is up to them (I’m not even sure what that means, but it sounds like it’s perfectly possible to run 1080p). Also, doesn’t the game also matter. A game that has a lot of shit going on is going to have some problems in 1080p

      2. Hmm 720p at 30 FPS is different than 720p at 60 FPS, and don’t tell me that Skyrim runs on PC at much higher than 720p… what’s the point? First the comparation was between x360, now is a Wii U x PC? Ok…

      1. Who gives a crap! That game sucks ass anyway. I don’t care how good the graphics, the game is a piece of shit.

  22. THANK YOU NINTENDO. when it comes to performance, with pc gaming anyway, the first thing im willing to sacrifice is the resolution. and 720p looks fine anyway. if there main concern is getting games to run at 60 fps, than that’s awesome. believe it or not, the framerate really improves your gameplay experience. i just recently got a gtx 670 as a graduation present and the performance i get out of that thing REALLY makes playing games a lot better. just the fact that they have a console that CAN do 60fps at 720p on a game like pikmin 3 is awesome,

  23. Brain cant see more than 60fps…wow u have a brain ninty kissass problem is wii upad is 30fps with two pads besides things with say 80 fps will even out the textures when handling faster graphics & texture in short ninty sucks u cum bucket

    1. 72fps is considered to be around the maximum the eye can really detect. It can’t be proven, but it’s an educated guess.

  24. Thank u shitendo for abandoning me for casuals,for never addressing the 3ds design flaw,for putting up with shovelware u knew but lied just like calling wii next gen while hiding specs and thank u for region lock…ur truly weeaboo race tratior

  25. Graphics arent important really than stick with ur wii wii since ya claim is soooo amazing with great games yes stick with it reggie said wii will still get support…lol nah we all know it was gsrbage we quickly wanted to dispose of lol nintendrones

  26. It wasnt about graphics lol must be why they plasters 16bits and 64bits on their consoles back then smh damn when ya retards suck cock does it hit ya brain cavity

    1. You have to post 3 separate posts to say all this? Couldn’t have done it in one?

      We know it’s the same person: it’s the same icon, which is determined by e-mail address, and all three posts are minutes from each other.


  27. I think everyone here’s forgetting that these are just launch games. Like all consoles, the games will look better as the console progresses. Case in point (as other people are saying): PS3/360 launch games vs. current PS3/360 games.

  28. @myst i think everyones forgetting ninty abonding u disposable deuchbags for casual gamers and not bringing jap games on vc to minimize risk while region locking ya asses yep im a tool but ya worse ya are duchbags of nintendo tampon thdy replace 4 casual

  29. When a developer says that their game will be 60fps/720p this is good news. They are obviously not willing to produce a game which cannot correctly display and may lag at times. This choice is most satisfactory compared to having the same game 30fps/1080p given what they know the game requires to display correctly. Although, by now every gamer should have (or should be looking at getting) a FullHD TV (1080p) compared to an HD Ready TV (720p) given how cheap they now are. I get how Nintendo chose not to release the Wii as HD Ready (720p) since back then HD Ready TVs were still not in every household, plus considering the market Nintendo were targeting. Now, with the WiiU, being released at a time when FullHD TVs are everywhere, cheap and (hopefully) owned by most people, it would be silly not to move into 1080p as standard. If Nintendo believes that 1080p is currently not widely used by most people then I still believe that they should take the move into 1080p regardless, especially for the core titles (if not now, then a little later along WiiUs lifespan), just how PS3 & 360 took the move to 720p regardless of the apparently research at the time stating owners were not there yet – It proved to have paid off in the long-run for them. Well, if Pikmin 3 is running smoothly and if Assassins Creed 3 on WiiU is running at 60fps/1080p then we can count on the upcoming games being great. I would just love for 1080p to be standard in every game. I guess in time that would happen, but it that is what Orbis & Durango do as standard then I really hope that the WiiU versions of multi-platform games released then are not 720p when the other two consoles are both 1080p. But, yeah, for now, so long as the WiiU games aren’t laggy messes then we are fine.

  30. Its not about graphics? Really then why u numbnuts clamored and glorified the nes when half of its library consisted of ports from commodre and atari lol cuz graphics dont matter lol casuals>nintyfags accordibg 2 ninty lol ya is used duchbags aww :'(

    1. Because of Zelda and Mario perhaps? And back then graphics were a consern. You could not play in 3d which was a big limit for the gameplay. Now gameplay is seldom affected by graphics, just FPS noobs who really cares about that and those do I not consider real gamers.

  31. why do i have a feeling the reason these guys want 1080p this badly because so they can brag ps3 drones and Xbox fanboys.


    1. I want 1080p because it is not much to ask for, just as I want good online functionality. If WiiU games were not taking full advantage of the systems capabilities, purely because the developers feel that “the game is FINE without it” then of course I would feel a little hard-done-by. I am not complaining, as I know the WiiU CAN easily produce 60fps/1080p, I just want the belief that future WiiU games will not suffer when they don’t need to and that developers would take pride in producing the best experience possible with the tools available to them. Regarding this “bragging” thing: Not only do I own all three consoles (which I am not “bragging” about) but I currently don’t see anything to even “brag” about.

  32. @revolution yes i abondon myself cuz i hated shovelware…listen this might sound funny butvi loved the nes and super nes nothing not even sony can top that but lately they been dropping the ball

    1. and yet the NES is the console with the most shovelware… Ever. It’s the most unstable console when it comes to quality in it’s games. The Wii’s library is great, you just need to learn how to navigate through it. Same goes for the DS. It’s like music. The most famous games might not be the best ones.. And that’s really true for Wii and DS/3DS.

  33. LOL at the people trying to argue as if they can justify the Wii-U “needing” to run at 1080p at launch. What developer is going to put that much time into a launch title with a audience its not even sure will buy the game ( considering wii-u has no audience currently.) Dev’s will settle for True 720p until the Wii-U has sold a comfortable amounts of units- at that point dev’s will say to themselves ” ok it is worth putting the extra money and time in” You people for get gaming is a business first and pleasure second to these companies. Lasty for those trying to say PS-360 has been doing HD for 6 years, you are dead wrong. The “HD” done on those systems are with upscaling, very few games run at 720p natively at all and i would even place a bet that a handful even reaches 1080p *which ill remind you* Wii-U will also do without upscaling at possibly 30FPS. And given that the Wii-U has to deal with 2 extra screens thats a TON more than Ps360 could ever handle in this day and age, who are we kidding? Nintendo made the right call – Launch games should be True HD @ 60fps without upscaling and devs can be free to take it higher from there.

  34. I respect this position. And it makes perfect sense. If the game works best at 720p that is perfectly fine.

    In the aftermath of Nintendo’s E3 conference this week, I’ve come to realise that most of the people who are upset at Nintendo are the ones who wanted Nintendo to drop bombs at E3 just so they could take to the forums and say, “Suck it Sony/MS drones! Nintendo kicked all your asses.” Their upset Nintendo didn’t give them the bragging rights. Leave luck to heaven.

  35. 720p is fine, and I bet when we all see Mario Kart or Waverace or F-Zero running in HD we won’t give a crap if it’s 1080 or 720. At least as Nintendo fans we have HD 1st party games TO LOOK FORWARD TO. Something Sony & Microsoft lovers don’t have.

  36. I care for the games. I know graphics are important, but 720p with 60fps is good. Look at the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 graphics at launch. Comparable to Xbox and PlayStation 2. I don’t care how good it looks, or how HD it is. I care only how games play. And I don’t give two shits about Nintendo Land or casual Nintendo games. It’s their choice.

    1. Here’s the problem with that statement. the 360 and PS3 have been in HD for 5-6 years. Nintendo is now jumping on the train incredibly late and still doesn’t have the best capabilities in terms of graphics. While that may be fine for a Nintendo fan, its going to be hard to give fans of other consoles a reason to get the WiiU if the same games aren’t even in the best resolution

      1. Letat on June 10, 2012 at 3:45 am said:
        LOL at the people trying to argue as if they can justify the Wii-U “needing” to run at 1080p at launch. What developer is going to put that much time into a launch title with a audience its not even sure will buy the game ( considering wii-u has no audience currently.) Dev’s will settle for True 720p until the Wii-U has sold a comfortable amounts of units- at that point dev’s will say to themselves ” ok it is worth putting the extra money and time in” You people for get gaming is a business first and pleasure second to these companies. Lasty for those trying to say PS-360 has been doing HD for 6 years, you are dead wrong. The “HD” done on those systems are with upscaling, very few games run at 720p natively at all and i would even place a bet that a handful even reaches 1080p *which ill remind you* Wii-U will also do without upscaling at possibly 30FPS. And given that the Wii-U has to deal with 2 extra screens thats a TON more than Ps360 could ever handle in this day and age, who are we kidding? Nintendo made the right call – Launch games should be True HD @ 60fps without upscaling and devs can be free to take it higher from there.

      2. Even if the resolution is at its best, not sure if fans of other consoles will buy a WiiU just because it has the best resolution.

  37. This is slightly disappointing. It’s gonna be like buying a phone that can do 4G but only using 3G on it… Why wouldn’t the Wii U easily be able to do 1080p at 60fps? I would think with 2012 technology that would be standard!

  38. I think they should make games at 480p and then upscale them to 1080p. That’ll fool these motherfuckers!

    1. lol. That would be hilarious.

      Capcom should make Monster Hunter 4 on WiiU, 1080p compatible, but only VGA out of the box unless you pay an additional sums to unlock each resolution upgrade.

        1. I read that it was canned and moved over to PSVita.

          jk,jk… yeah I know about MH4 on 3DS, which they haven’t exactly “made” yet but I know what your saying.

  39. Most people have this misconceptions that Nintendo can’t do 1080p @ 60fps. Please comprehend what you read

    1. He’s right. The article says that Nintendo developers feel that 720p resolution and 60fps are more important for their games. Other developers can do as they want.

      The problem is if the console is based on what Nintendo decided, but I don’t think so, since developers keep saying that “Wii U is a powerful, powerful machine”
      Believe or not, I’m a harcore PC gamer :D

  40. Purely a business decision because there’s no point of making games at 1080 when your current competition is mainly at 720 and the customers seem satisfied at 720.

  41. Anything is fine, I don’t really care, as long as I play awesome games, I’m fine. It does lead a clue that games could run 1080p on the Wii-U.

  42. I don’t want to sound stupid here, but what happens after games get to 1080p standard. How do you improve after that?

    1. By then we would be old pappys, quietly laughing to ourselves about when we said that “we would game forever”.

    2. You can either just improve GPU for better graphics running at 1080p or you can continue on by supporting higher resolutions such as 4k as it becomes more available.

  43. All these dumb ppl commenting about 1080p. If you guys don’t want to play them then don’t buy the console and that’s all go buy ps4 or next box and that’s it. Stop complaining about everything the console doesn’t have you guys sound like little girls nagging and nagging. There will be plenty of ppl buying the wii u trust me you will not be missed. I am buying mines day one no matter what so I can get my dose of all the titles I love like Mario,Zelda,metroid,donkey kong,starfox etc. And no matter what none of the other consoles will ever have these titles and will always be, in my eyes, inferior to nintendo

  44. Nintendo loves their glassy-smooth frame rates. Not the resolution. In time, we will see 1080p resolution with maybe around 40-50 frames per second.

  45. ^if you care about the gameplay than by all means get yourself an xbox you cant beat the price plus even nintendo think the controllers are great. Xbox has no gimmicks just pure gaming community experiance

    1. Okay then, I always wanted a paper weight… seriously though, xbox 360 may have some good stuff inside it but it DOES have gimmicks such as the Kinect and now Smartglass. Don’t say that Microsoft has no gimmicks in their console even though its true that they do have gimmicks for their system.

    2. Nintendo says so because they are so sure on their own systems so they feel no need to rack down on the other companies. That also proves that they guys working on Nintendo are gamers on their own and know what gamers wants/needs.

  46. @IcyDeadPeople You know what you’re the only one in this site I truly respect even when you corrected me. Ive just read your post and im glad someone has brain thats not biased. I hope to see you here more sir your not a faggot youre a man…hats 2 u

  47. Thing is, 1080p its JUST getting to be standard on homes, i doubt the new Xbox & PS would choose a higher resolution than what its now just being the norm… Back in 2006 till 2010 or so, most homes didnt even had a HDTV, let alone a FullHD one, in fact the real push for HDTV (not even fullHD) was FIFA World Cup 2010 AND NOT GAMES, so choosing 720/1080p resolution its quite obvious and The perfect choice imo, im pretty we wont be getting a new resolution (or at least one that goes massive like this) for quite some time… Not less than 6 years…

    So i believe Nintendo its right on track with this, i would love some 1080p, but only if you can do it with 60fps, otherwise than im happy with 720p (anyway, most 360/PS3 games arent even 720, they are just upscalled from, i believe, 540p)

  48. All lauch games are on the OLD dev kits. That means that they’re nowhere near the full potentional of the Wii U. Even 720p/60fps is pretty good during those circumstances. No game of the current gen did even push the limit of the PS3 and that system is by far weaker. And no game did real 720/60fps. 2 other things to take in is that Nintendos 2 biggest release games will be Pikmin 3 and NSMBu. In Pikmin you have so many things on the screen all the time so it’s a really big thing to be able to play in 720p/60fps and considering that Nintendo has more to come with… This is by far next gen. How many of you guys have ever played NSMB in 4 player multiplayer? Do you know how much there can be on the screen at the same time? There’s a whole lot I can tell you. It might not seem like it, but those games take alot because of how they’re made.

    Nintendo is able to pull this of at the same time as the Wii U supports a second screen on the controller. Sure, xbox 720 and PS4 will probably beat it at resolution. But they will be at least 2 years later considering that they’ve not yet revealed their systems. And even then, they can’t beat Wii U when it comes to game play and exclusives. No one has ever beaten Nintendo when it comes to exclusives. And there’s where it really counts for me.

  49. As a PC gamer and developer, I actually know about hardware and software.. Now, lets everyone smoke a big bag of weed and calm the fuck down while I explain some things.

    First of all, graphics really don’t matter, unless the game literally gives you a migraine or makes you vomit like some of the old virtual boy and shovelware Atari games. They matter even less when there a less than 200 pixel difference. It disgusts me these days how kids these days call themselves core games when they do nothing but play repetitive, brain cell killing video games where they shout swears at their tv screen. A core gamer is someone who plays games with more value in them such as Zelda, Elder Scrolls, MOTHER, and others. Lastly in terms of graphics, Pikmin 3 has been in development for eight fucking years! First for GC, then for Wii, and finally pulled to Wii U. I’m honestly surprised that the game looks this freaking good, considering that.. Also, all xbox 360 games ran in 576p, occasionally 600p and the highest 704p. 90% of all these games ran 30fps without AntiAliasing, which the Wii U is capable of 4xAA in 720p and doubtlessly 1080p considering the specs which I’m about to explain.

    A while back, it was leaked that an early CATDEV system was opened up and included what seemed to be a modified Radeon HD 4890. Several months later, AMD Radeon announced the Wii U to be using a modified Evergreen series GPU. Judging by the similar and slight increase in performance, it can be assume they had upgraded to Radeon HD 5870 – adding Shader Model 5.0 and DirectX11. The xbox 360’s GPU has similar specs to that of a Geforce 8300GS (in fact its even a bit worse its the lower this comparison site had) Here’s a comparison of their GPU’s – now you be the judge but as far as specs go its pretty damn obvious the U is much, much better. Let’s not even bother with the benchmarks.

    1. Actually, the 8300GS is a pretty bad reference. I’d say more of a Radeon HD 4250 – the specs are about exactly the same. (Except that the 360 doesn’t support the newer Shader Models and DirectX that most HD Radeons do. Microsoft’s next console has been rumored to use a Radeon HD 6670. Although it is a newer generation , its still not a more powerful GPU. Like I said, I don’t really care about graphics – Its great for eye candy but in the end I mostly play 2D or older games. Honestly at this point graphics really have nowhere to go but down, or just stay the same. Indie games, 2D games and sidescrollers are really becoming huge as developers play on us gamers’ nostalgia. Not to mention, people are starting to realize that saving a princess is much more fun then shooting and killing people, especially when an actual story is involved. I’ll be – Battlefield 3 gives me migraines because of the excessive amount of filters AMD lighting effects. If theres Amy game whose graphics should be called bad, its BF3.

  50. I’m a little funny about this, but maybe this means it will be 720p up-converted to 1080p like the 360. I just hope at some point they will start running at true 1080p like the PS3

  51. I’m a little funny about this considering the system should be running true 1080p since it’s 6 years ahead of the game but I understand WiiU as a system is pretty behind and Nintendo kinda filled a gap with the Wii that everyone else skipped. I just hope it will at least up-convert to 1080p like the 360 and eventually start running at true 1080p like the PS3.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s