Skip to content

Digital Foundry Says Batman Wii U Is A “Disappointing Current-Gen Port”

Those technical wizards over at Digital Foundry have taken a look at Batman: Arkham City Armored Edition and the results aren’t entirely perfect. The team says that the Wii U version of the critically acclaimed game is a disappointing current-gen port, that is unpolished and less enjoyable to play than Rocksteady’s original. Here’s the summary of the interesting article:

“What looked like graphical tweaks from the press materials failed to materialise – FXAA apart – but thankfully some of the more alarming reports about Wii U graphical deficiencies turned out to be of little consequence to the final product. However, what we have here is a disappointing current-gen port with some bundled DLC and some interesting – if not totally convincing – touch-screen upgrades.

The overall takeaway is that the Wii U version of this classic title is unpolished and less enjoyable to play than Rocksteady’s original. On top of the variable frame-rate, we were also disappointed to see the odd moment of more noticeable LOD popping and jerky FMV sequences suggesting that this version has some streaming issues. Unreal Engine titles background load data concurrently with streaming video, and you can hear the drive head zooming about, almost as if it is struggling to maintain both tasks – the halting playback adds further to the impression that this is a rougher, jerkier, more lacklustre rendition of the original.

It’s Arkham City, and by default a good game, but the basic reality is that we’d take any of the older – and now cheaper – versions of this excellent title ahead of the underwhelming Wii U port.”

177 thoughts on “Digital Foundry Says Batman Wii U Is A “Disappointing Current-Gen Port””

    1. Here is the problem with Nintendo’s “We’re gonna do our own thing/power isn’t important” philosiphy: it contradics everything that made them successful in their early years, software/games wise. Let’s look at history briefly:

      NES: Massively successful because it was more powerful than Atari and thus, more developers made games for it. Bigger libary = more diversity = more variety = more competition amongs developers = better games for users.

      SNES: Was more powerful than the Genesis and thus, had better graphics, better sound, and thus more developers made AAA titles for it (Squaresoft alone was huge: Final Fantasy, Chrono Trigger, Secret of Mana, etc.; all games that were absolute juggernauts).

      Nintendo 64: More powerful than PlayStation, an although PlayStation sold VERY well and had plenty of games, Nintendo 64 sold incredibly well and was ridicuously popular; instead of going with the times and using CDs which mean better audio, ability to use CGI/full-motion video sequences at length, etc., they used cartrigeds which had severe limitations. Aalthough, they did have the benefit of no loading times, people were not bothered terribly by loading times so it turned out CDs were the obvious next step and a much better choice than cartridge-based games. Nintendo dropped the ball for the first time, but they at least had more power, which meant they at least could still have a huge benefit for developers and thus, a big library of games as well as the analogue stick which meant easier control of 3d games, which were becomming very, VERY popular. If Nintendo hadn’t “done their own thing” with their game storage format, they would have trounced PlayStation significantly.

      GameCube: More powerful, so again, it had that advantage. Problem was the their storage medium was, again, different from everyone else. You don’t garner wide 3rd party support by providing a roadblock for developers. Admittedly, the storage meduim is not a stop-gap, but it was something that made Nintendo’s console different than the others. Nintendo, at this point, has had a habit of doing half things right, and then screwing themselves into a corner by separating themselves from the pack. The problem with that is that it’s cool to be different, but it also separates you from developers; developers want the gain the most profit they can, which means reaching the biggest audience possible. If making a game for a Nintendo console means having to reduce the size of it, JUST to accomodate that one console, chances are many developers will opt to neglect that console and just go with the others. That is largely party of what happened to the GameCube: there were more AAA third-party games on XBOX and PS2, so people largely bought those consoles even though they were mildly less powerful.

      Wii: First console that was NOT the most powerful, and not only that, it was only mildly more powerful than the GameCube. People (and developers) were used to significant jumps in tech, and thus games, every generation. Nintendo went a different direction, which helped sell consoles and gain a new audience. But games wise? The Wii suffered GREATLY. Majority of Wii games were either first-party Nintendo games that many people had “grown out of” due to getting older and wanting something more engaging and more diverse than “jump on the turtles head!”, and many developers couldn’t create the huge, complex games they wanted to with the Wii’s limitations. Not to mention the non-standard controls limited games that required many buttons. While the GameCube and Classic controllers did probide some sort of answer, they were also not standard controllers, and thus, developers didn’t want to rely on people buying those accessories to play their games (because many people wouldn’t). If the Wii was at least AS powerful as the XBOX 360, it would have had SOME incentive for developers. But once the novelty of the motion controls (were weren’t even really great until MotionPlus came out) wore off, developers chose to go with PS3 and XBOX360 for their flagship titles, and only the occasional dumbed-down, poorly constructed ports of games like Call of Duty existed on the Wii and were TERRIBLE by comparison to other current-gen ports.

      Wii U: Again, not the most powerful (although we haven’t seen by how much yet, it’s obvious XBOX720 and PS4 will be more powerful, given that Wii U is very marginally more powerful than current gen platforms). Nintendo fixed the controller problem by offering a tablet controler that ALSO has standard buttons, so even if people don’t buy the Pro controller clone of the XBOX’s controller, they still have a default controller with all the standard buttons. Problem is: Wii U is only marginally more powerful than XBOX 360, and that’s bad because it requires a SECOND 480p screen which requires a lot more power. By comparison: for the XBOX 360 to run a 480p tablet well with all it’s current titles, it would need to at LEAST double it’s power. Wii U have have a video card that is twice as capable as XBOX 360’s, but it’s memory bandwidth is much slower, and it’s CPU is severely underpowered. This may not concern Nintendo fans, because they convince themselves that “graphics don’t matter” (which is asinine because they’ve all been drooling at the fact that Wii U is 1080p capable and at the Zelda demo last year, so obviously graphics DO matter), however, power means more than just “ooo, purdy pictures”. It has to do with all aspects of the game’s performance: frame rate, the engines that run the game, the physics, the size of the environments which affect gameplay; in fact, console power is one of the BIGGEST factos of gameplay: it determines the performance of the engine that runs the gameplay of a game!

      The next XBOX and PlayStation will most definitely have much more power than their predecessors, and by virtue of that fact, have quite considerably more power than the Wii U. Not to mention they can and likely will also have some sort of innovation like Wii U’s touchscreen. Which will mean developers will be attracted to those consoles more for various reasons: more power, similar or equally beneficial innovation (and thus, options), built-in audience that is much more dedicated than the “casual” audience that Nintendo garnered with the Wii, etc.

      Nintendo’s only option is to really, REALLY use this time to their advantage. A tough job since XBOX 360 and PS3 are still doing very, very well with blockbuster games like Halo 4 and Black Ops 2, both selling hundreds of millions of dollars in their first 24 hours alone. The consoles are obviously not dead by any stretch of the imagination, and their audience-base is still HUGE, unlike the Wii U which is still in it’s infancy despite the large console sales recently. Developers who were waiting to see how well Wii U did (which is many of them; some of them really big names as well) are probably only now considering the Wii U, which is unfortunate because many of them already have dev kits for the next XBOX and PlayStation and are likely mid-development with title(s) for those consoles. What may end up happening is they will port said titles to the Wii U, but since they were started with the other more powerful consoles, the Wii U port will likely be dumbed-down, much like they were with the original Wii.

      I have a feeling that the Wii U will be a repeat of the Wii; slightly different, as it CAN actually provide decent graphics, and the next-gen consoles won’t be HUGE leaps in visuals. However, next gen games will have much better physics, much more realistic character movements, textures, environment interaction (environments that can dynamically change/be destroyed, more things to interact with, etc.), further draw distances allowing for less pop-ups, better lighting, , better online multiplayer and interactivity, etc. All these things may not be plainly obvious just by a quick glance, but they will definitely matter… big time.

      The Wii U, I fear, will be left behind to try to catch up to that, because Nintendo is more concerned with “doing their own thing” and don’t care what other companies are doing. The problem is: those other companies have the “core” gamer market locked down, which is what Nintendo wants to win back. Kind of hard to do that when you’re ignoring everything that has made those other consoles successful: online first-party titles, system-wide achievements, system-wide party chat, powerful consoles capable of handling the next-gen game ideas of big third-party developers, etc.

      I honestly hope the Wii U does well; I really do. Many people think I’m anti-Nintendo. I’m not. I am just disappointed by the choices of Nintendo over the years. I think they could do much, much better. They’re capable of so much better than what they’ve been doing, but they just… don’t do it. They’re too afraid of doing similar things that they force themselves to be different just for the sake of being different. Different isn’t always good or better; sometimes it’s better to go with what works, and put your own spin/take on it. Nintendo hasn’t been doing that; they’re going a COMPLETELY different direction every time, as if they don’t even know about the very successful things other companies are doing… it’s mind boggling. I hope the Wii U succeeds because it has a TON of potential, and it could mean a lot of really great games! Not to mention: more competition between companies means WE get better games. Competition breeds creativity and innovation. I just hope Nintendo doesn’t neglect things like graphics and power just to be different. Consoles don’t have to be one or the other: powerful or different. They can be both, and still be relatively affordable. Nintendo has made some major cock-ups with the start of the Wii U, I hope they smooth them out and start making it much more attractive to both gamers AND developers. That way, EVERYONE benefits.


      Cue immature fanboy rage & “you are an idioit, Nintendo rules! XBOX/PS FANBOY! SUCK IT” comments. However, if just ONE intelligent reply comes out of it, it was worth the 5 minutes it took to type :)

      1. TL;DR

        Just wanted to make that comment for everyone who was going to make it. I know it’s long, I know many of you can’t read more than 3 sentences before being distracted by something shiny and/or colourful. I don’t care; this post wasn’t for you :)

        1. I see you point, but it comes from Ninendo it will sell good as always, but maybe thats our problem… we are comformists… we should ask for more… thank you for makig me realize that… Im still buying WiiU though…

      2. You bring lots of good points but I would like to say that the NES was more powerful, but another factor to the games being good was because Nintendo had the seal of quality to make sure that nobody made super crappy games.

      3. That’s the most well thought out, negative, but somewhat logical comment I’ve heard from someone known to be a dumb-ass troll.

        Are you the REAL Icy Dead People? If so, you obviously have exited puberty into some form of adulthood, and are welcome to make comments such as these. There’s a difference between stupid, arrogant “Aeolus” comments, and constructive criticism such as you displayed just now.

        Although I love my WiiU, and do not understand the frame-rate hate on the internets, I respect your comments on the matter.

      4. This is the greatest post ever and completely somes up my problems with the current Nintendo and how worried I am about them in the futre. Good job :)

      5. Hey. I don’t totally agree because the playstation did better then the n64, even thought it was the inferior machine, yeah the cartridge crazy hindered the n64. However, there was also the 3d0 that failed and it was on par with the playstation, also Sega cd and 32x then Sega saturn. Now another point where power failed, unfortunately, the dreamcast. It was by far the most powerful system and had some amazing games, but that doesn’t mean it sells, it was also using a proper medium, so it had everything that you state should have made it a success. Unfortunately it wasn’t. Very sad really. point is that there is way more to a system being a success, the biggest in my opinion is, at this point in time, 3rd party support with good games. Nintendo has stated its going to keep pursuing them for support. Hopefully they will. Time will tell.

    2. TheTruth4HatersLikeUlol

      Oh they most definately are bro… Im sick of people lying about the WIIU, its almost like they are getting bribed to do it, with Microsoft and Sony having a major vendetta against Nintendo for kicking their asses last gen. I say this because I have ALL the ports for WII U and 360… and I noticed the better graphics on the WII U Right away, and after doing back and forth comparisons its WII U with better lighting, details and overall resolution by far… and these people and reviewers have the audacity to say they are exactly the same or worse(IGN said that about several including DarkSiders2 which WIIU version TROUNCES the other 2!)… Its incredible they are either blind, stupid or bribed with toys… or all the above. Its time more Nintendo players spoke up and Im here to tell the truth. WIIU even on mere ports is kicking their asses, even if there were a few frame hickups on a few parts. Shame on all these Dam Liars. Spread the word people, we have a superior System, and it will do fine against the fony ps4.

        1. All I know is I’ve seen neutral or positive accounts on the game. All three ports they’ve compared on Wii U have been negative. All three of those ports I’ve seen on other publications have, again, had neutral or positive feedback. It’s not my fault I made an observation.

          1. And no I don’t wanna hear about Black Ops 2 article saying it runs worse than the 360 version. I have the Wii U version the online did not lag not A SINGLE time! And the AA and great quality textures just made the Wii U version miles better than the other console versions.

            1. as much as i dont like call of duty, wheni rented it on the wii u it was a lot more playable than on the 360 or ps3. i have no clue what these people are smoking when they say that it doesnt run as well, maybe they didnt have the update? idk. and arkham city is fine. it runs the same as the 360 version with better graphics and added gamepad functionality. just having the map on the controller screen alone makes the game better than the other versions lol.

              1. TheTruth4HatersLikeUlol

                Do you have a WIIU to prove NintendoGamer is “Exagerating”… Thats what Im sayin right there… it truly is way bettr looking and better performing…only thing its missing is the DLC. Thats a FACT haters wont admit to because they either dont have a WIIU, or they lookin at these sucky quality modified vids on youtube which shows nothing but bias against Nintendo.

      1. It is. Early Ps3 ports were fucking horrible. Guessing thats the systems fault now? Or is it suddenly the developers fault for either not spending enough time and effort, or not knowing how to use the system properly?

        I know your a fanboy, and a full blown idiot, but at very have some continuity

        1. You don’t even have to stop at early PS3 ports.

          Many recent ones are still massively inferior to 360, despite the slightly superior hardware in the PS3.

          Skyrim for example, is a joke, and that’s all on Bethesda.

          1. Skyrim was THAT bad, or least not anymore. When i first played it (i only bought it a couple of months ago), i literally started under the textures, and the game was just impossible to play, then i got it working, and after a while, all the textures returned to their base, which was like a turquoise mess, but after i deleted and reinstalled the update, it working perfectly, besides freezing a few times

          1. Have you played Bayonetta on PS3 ? It has framerate issues , washed out colors , Jaggies everywhere. ANd the xbox 360 version looks perfect. One of many examples…

              1. No it was in 2010 , which enhances the point. Lazy developers don’t wan’t to work around Hardware differences to EASIER hardware.

                1. The discussion was clearly about what “terrible ports” did the PS3 have early on or in its launch. Not 2010 games.

                  Going as far as to suggest it’s always the developers fault for these “terrible ports” is plain and simple ignorance. I’m going to especially look at a certain console known as the Wii.

                  1. Ok , but the fact that games such as bayonetta look SIGNIFICANTLY worse on the ps3 despite it being SIGNIFICANTLY more powerfull than the xbox 360 Kind of defeats the point of everyone Snarling at the wiiu’s launch ports.
                    Most of which have turned out perfectly fine.

                    1. Yes, I know it looks significantly worse. There’s a reason the majority of the fanbase for that game are 360 owners.

                  2. TheTruth4HatersLikeUlol

                    Dude quit your denial or uneducated BS. PS3 had shit ports thats no secret. Why dont you do the work and google, youtube or whatever you trolls do to find out… after all, you are on OUR page remember? Matter of fact, I remember many tv review shows hated the PS3, until they started kickin tail with games like GOW, and UNCH… but before that all their games looked like doodoo. NO SECRET again. Do your research.

              2. That game had a lot of texture framerate issues. And guess what, all the other launch titles work fine, maybe very small differences here and there, but nothing reviewers have changed the original score from, (except for Ninja Gaiden, which got better).

            1. “Terrible launch ports”

              Then proceeds to give me a list of “ports” containing Ridge Racer 7, which wasn’t a port and happens to be a title rendered natively in 1080p, with a fairly stable framerate of 60fps.

          2. Bayonetta, Skyrim, Red Dead Redemption, Fallout 3, Any Call of Duty on the PS3, Crysis 1 and 2, BF3, Silent Hill collection, etc..

              1. And yes, im tired of bad ports…. even my high end PC has troubles with bad ports and again, yes, launch titles and later ports.

              2. Damage control as usual.. The Wii U is superior to your overpriced PS3 in every single way, admit it. It really is pathetic someoen could so heavilky support Sony, scum of the video game community.

              3. what does it matter whether they are early ps3 titles or not? the fact that they are giving you titles further into the ps3’s lifecycle only enhances the argument that development practices dont always make the best of the hardware.

                Where to this day, the ps3 versions of some multiplatform titles still perform worse than their 360 version, despite the ps3 having more powerful hardware.

                so ofcourse your going to see that sort of thing with wiiu launch games. if this thing is happening on a system developers have had 6 or so years to get familiar with, how do you expect things to turn out when you introduce new hardware, some of which (like mass effect; 5 months) that have had less development time and often lower tier development teams than the ones making the ps3/360 versions.

                there is just little relevance to you asking for launch titles, because for this stuff to be still happening to this day, proves that its an issue on the development side and not with the ps3 hardware

              4. It has nothing to do with them, I’d be more worries about Sony having shitty ports later in its lifecycle than early on. In 2009-10 I bought everythin on ps3, recent games such as battlefield, Skyrim and cod have showed me I should’ve done otherwise

            1. How are people expecting devs to make decent games for Wii U when they can;t even code for a six year old system for their fucking lives!

    1. So true, this is what EA have done to Nintendo for ages. Nintendo need game developer that can do this kind of games but focusing only on the Wii u since Nintendo themselves can’t do it

  1. this doesn’t look good im trying to figure out at this point is it because the system is much more powerful and they are having a difficult time like the early days of ps3 or it less powerful and can’t keep up wit the rest if this true were going to mis out on big titles again

    1. Some devs Just want quick money without the fuse you need to remember the wii u is the frist console to use the GPGPU and some devs seem to be trying to program the games like a normal CPU so their missing out on all this power.

    2. The PS3, unlike the Wii U actually had next-gen looking titles at launch.

      The console is just plain and simply less powerful as people imagined it to be. That will constantly be in denial for the next…1 or 2 years.

      1. It’s slightly more powerfull than current gen, and that’s all that matters. I still love playing Halo 4 and many others and think the graphics are awesome on the current gen.

        GTAV is costing like 100million to develop on CURRENT GEN consoles , is it even realistic to up production costs dramatically next gen ? Fair enough you can get 1080p 60fps on a big noisey , power consuming monster of a PC , but is it even worth it ?

        Graphics can easily get way better than they are now. But can they at a realistic price keeping console price and development costs low ? Absoloutly not…

        1. Playing games in 1080p at 60fps on a big ass PC is totally worth it, if you really really love games then you’d enjoy playing them that way too. Wii games running in Dolphin can look really great in 1080p too, on a PC!

      2. Resistance 1 did NOT have next gen graphics. gears of War had. When I showed Resistance to a friend he said ” Uh. What’s up with those textures and poor shadowing?” and when he saw Gears of War he said ” Wow. Is it bad that this looks just a little bit worse than Gears 3?”

      3. At this point there really is no “next gen” graphics. The computer is always the trend setter and here is the kicker… The systems out now are still keeping up. There are minor differences but over all games are very similar. Graphics are now at a point of going through slower evolution then the big jumps we grew up seeing. Name one new game for computer that completely outshines the console version. It’s all about how you use what you got.

      4. TheTruth4HatersLikeUlol

        WHAAAAAT!!! Bullshit it had next gen looking ports troll… Resistance? Bahaha! couldnt even stand next to Gears… COD? Bahahaha same case… dude please give it up.

    3. Its neither one of those. The system just works differently to the others.
      Since the WiiU, every system has had a GPU, and a bulky CPU. The CPU handles grphics, OS (operating system), audio, everything. The WiiU isnt like that, firstly it has a GPGPU which handles all the graphics processing, and a dedicated sound chip, so the actual CPU is being used for streaming to the gamepad, the OS, and so on.

      However, learn how to use it takes time (and effort), which developers just do not have the time for, they’re all on a very strict time frame, some games only have 5-6 months spent on them, its not perfect, but the system needs launch games.

      As for next generation (and you might want to listen to this one Aeolus, although its hard for you to learn something), we arent going to see a next gen game, either on the WiiU, or any system, till at least the xbox 720 is released. Because its not the next generation yet, most likely, the xbox 720 wont be out till 2014, and the ps4 till 2015, maybe late 2014.
      Its not like the previous gens, where we had 3 consoles out in the space of 8 months, this is 2-3 years apart.
      I doubt WiiU will get all the third party games the 720, ps4 and PC will, but definitely a lot more than the Wii did

      1. “…so the actual CPU is being used for streaming to the gamepad, the OS, and so on.”

        LMAO! You’re an idiot.

        This has gone on long enough I’m afraid, so I’ll just lay down this giant golden nugget from people who have expertise and aren’t foolish Nintendo fanboys coming up with incredibly stupid and downright misleading explanations:

        “GPGPUs have been in development since the early 2000s, but the fundamental problems as to why we still don’t all use unicore-systems is, that a GPU is still a GPU, regardless of how many levels of familiar syntax (f.e. nvidias cuda) you wrap around it.
        GPU architectures are highly specialized and are just not fit for many tasks you need in real world programs.
        f.e. GPGPUs are still terrible in anything concerning I/O, control and data-flow, they just suck on that field, which is why you normally outsource those tasks to the CPU, and that is where the problems with the latency, core synchronization and core communication arise.
        At their very basic architecture GPUs are specialized for number crunching, basic memory access and basic data flow monitoring. They struggle and deliver abysmal performances as soon as you want to have them cope with “irregular patterns”, treebranches ( fellow software engineers will know), loops and irregular memory access, like every complex program (and games are VERY COMPLEX programs) has all the time.
        This is what makes GPGPU ideal for lets say: protein diffraction computing, physics aso, remember: number crunching is where a GPU really shines.
        But this also makes them terrible for running complex-programs if you don’t go to great lengths to custom-fit it to that architecture.

        So plain and simple:
        GPU architecture constraints demand a good CPU to take over the tasks it simply isn’t built to do, if you don’t want to drive your programmers completely mad, which is why a slow CPU really limits the performance, even in a GPGPU centered system. The CPU/GPU roundtrip latencies have been a big problem for this technique, which is partially the reason why we see more and more integrated (cpu/gpu on one die) chips today.
        Pure GPGPU focus doesn’t make any sense besides highly specific computing.”

        1. “go to great lengths to custom-fit it to that architecture.” Nintendo doesn’t make custom hardware? Sometimes I spank in the pool.

        2. Okay, first of, well done for copy and pasting.
          Second, it was all meaningless, you’re talking about Nintendo. You know, the company thats been in the video game industry for nearly 40 years. What, you think they suddenly forgot how to make a working machine after 40 years?

          Seriously, you’re just boring. We get it, for some reason, you dont like Nintendo, i dont know why, maybe they killed your family, or raped you, oh wait no they didnt, so please in all seriousness… Why bother?
          You literally just make a fool out of yourself. “Oh shitty Nintendo, everything else is better”. Clearly not where you’re always on here. Do you not think its really pathetic, waking up, and having it in your day plan to attempt to “harass” a video game site?
          Whatever abandonment issues you may have, that make you carve for attention, because your parents didnt want you, or your too repulsive to actually have any real life friends, guess what, we dont fucking care. The vast majority of us play on all systems. Yeah, the fanboys on here are fucking annoying, but at least the dont go on a gaming news blog on a company they dont even like.

          I actually hope you when you reach 30 in a few years, with no kids, girlfriend/wife, or real job, you wake up and realise that youve been acting like a 14 year old on 4chan for half your life, and you actually do something with it, rather than being a waste of space, copy and pasting on wikipedia.

          I bid you adew.

          1. First bit is irrelevant.
            Second chunk is again, irrelevant and just full of talking shit.
            Third one is, surprise! The same thing.

            You were unable to refuted anything, either because you cannot argue towards the contrary, or you’re now too astounding that everything you’ve said about a GPGPU was complete and total conjecture. You’ve been exposed as little more than a brand loyalist now at this point…going out of his way to lie in their favor. Pathetic.

            Now you’re (along with fellow fanwanks) just going to go on with “well done for copy-paste” etc, etc, and ignore the core situation at hand because they probably don’t know what any of it meant. Buddy, I could have easily written that all in my own words if I so wished, so what would you have said otherwise? This saved me a load of typing, sorry but I have far better things to do than live on this blog like you do and worship Nintendo while blinding others into thinking it’s all going to be okay, the developers are fucking clueless and you’re completely correct.

            Anyway, these are the facts of the matter and if you can’t handle the simple truth, get the fuck out and refrain from further posting misinformation. =P

            1. Except you didnt, you sure as hell dont understand anything that you copy and pasted into there, because you copy and pasted it. What good does it do copy and pasting to prove a point? If you wanted to prove you had the knowledge, that you flaunt oh so much, you’d do it yourself.

              Im not going to lie, and say i know exactly how tech and specs work ect, however, people who do, and PC nuts that i work with do understand, and actually explain it, rather than posting meaningless paragraphs that dont actually explain anything, not to mention anything regarding the WiiU, WHICH NOBODY KNOW THE SPECS OF.

              1. So should I perhaps bag on everyone for posting links to prove their claims or explain something from now on? Basically what you’re doing, except I didn’t provide a link, because there was no need to. As I said before, there’s no reason for me to type up what would basically be the same fucking explanation.

                Allow me to summarize what you’re doing, though:

                “Oh no! this fellow posted a source to useful information to explain something!”

                “Oh fucking heavens no! Let me skirt around it and dodge the ENTIRE ARGUMENT!”

                From what it seems, you don’t even know what was said in that entire paragraph, because you said it doesn;t explain anything. Uhm, It explains just about everything there needs to be said. It’s to explain a GPGPU’s limitations, and why the nonsense you typed suggesting it could do most of the CPUs work while the CPU can be left for the most IRRELEVANT of tasks, was absolute bullshit.

                So basically, you knew nothing and decided to skirt around it to talk shit. Thanks for the confirmation.

                1. You didn’t provide a link because your spreading false infromation. You spew more progapanda than the Third Reich.

            2. lol
              Hello owner of a 3DS, no one here respects you, you will always be bashed for saying all this crap, like always. Go play some 3DS game, because your Vita is dying.

        3. Yep this KID has just copied and pasted this YOU DONT KNOW THE SPECS so why fight over the specs its stupid and how i know your a kid because oherwise you would remember how valve came out a bashed the fuck out the ps3 and said sony should start again. you a TIDIOT to judge the wii u power now just look at the ps3 again look how bad the grpahics were then and look now the wii u need time and until you know the specs or played with the wii u why dont you shut your mouth and leave this website twat

        4. Now, look at the psp cpu compared to the 3ds cpu, if you compare them based on just that, the 3ds will suck. So explain how the 3ds runs better in spite of its slow cpu.

          1. yes, after the 3ds, you would think that fanboys would understand that a better cpu does not mean better graphics and power. so i am waiting for aeolus to answer me.

                1. Clock speed has very little to do with how “fast” a CPU is, let alone better.

                  Both the PS3 and 360 processors are clocked roughly the same, yet I’m sure you’re aware which of the two happens to be a stronger CPU.

                  1. I have been coming to this website for a while now….and man….watching everyone fight in the comments just makes me smile! ^_^

                  2. Exactly! The 3ds has a secondary CPU aswell for the lower screen which was used by Resident evil and Ocarina 3D.

                    The Wiiu CPU could be (probably is) quite powerfull and efficient. It’s just developers and optimizing shit.

        5. Bang on. If the Wii CPU is slower than developers would like then they are going to have to work out techniques to compensate for it, but I can’t see the GPGPU saving it from it’s shortcomings myself.

        6. Clock speeds are kind of misleading now days. Comparing the clock speeds of let’s say, an i3, i7, atom, or atom 2. They can all be 2 ghz but the results will state that the 2ghz on an i7 is far different from the atom 2 or even i3. Core to core of course. Just putting that out there.

  2. Since the Wii U came out, seems as though these guys have been hating. I have this game. Visuals are great. No framerate issues (thus far). Plus, love the gamepad controls, and the off screen play. Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who will hate on Nintendo, no matter what they do.

    1. They’ve been pretty wrong about a few of these. Everyone ive talked to who’s played this, Mass Effect 3, Ninja Gaiden, Assassins Creed 3, and Black Ops 2 says it works fine, sometimes better when comparing it to their other system.

      1. It’s ok guys… I got Aeolus pregnant so he is upset and irritated don’t mind him. Now Aeolus hows our little baby coming alone? I think his first word will be NINTENDO.

  3. Why so serious? this is what i have being seeing thus far on the wii u life (Just one week):

    1.- LIghting, particles and textures are a bit better on Wii U than ps360 (see the ship scene on AC III, the rain level on NG 3 and Batman AC neon lights, for examples).

    2.- Frame rates go down on crowded scenes.

    But I just have one recomendation to all people. Just try to actually play the games almost all the time they feel really smoot and you should be a gifted one if you could tell te framerate drops without a direct comparisson. For my wii u games plays well and looks overall better (but I disagree with Reggie, it´s not dramatically better just now).

    1. I know right. “Oh the framerate dropped for one second”. Okay, glad i knew about that /sarcasm.
      I pretty never even notice it, and when i do, its just like, “well no shit”, like when you spin attack about 8 enemies on Twilight Princess, it slows down for a second. “Oh geez, better stop playing it”.


  4. I’ve been playing the wiiU version for a while now and i’ve had no problems at all. The game looks great and the framerate is great.

  5. Ok, just a question for an WiiU owners, is ZombiU worth getting? I saw a bunch of crap review (why the fuck do you give Greg Miller or Playstation IGN a WiiU review?), but Rwv3 games review was great, totally opposite to what other said, and i watched a lets play, and it looked very good, because they were playing it the way its supposed to be.

    1. Metacritic is 74/10 :S . That’s a good game. It seems ZombiU is a Marmite game. You either love it or despise it. There’s just as many Good reviews as there is bad.

      My soloution is , I’m getting it day 1 and discovering for my self. If the game sucks after a few days , it’s going back to the shops and traded in.

      1. Yeah. I mean im still deciding on which bundle to get, the deluxe or zombiu/pro controller bundle. Wont be getting a basic, im using the space in the system, and a 1TB external, and basically transferring the games im playing to the system, and to hdd when im not playing (how do you like them apples aeolus, trying make an excuse about loading times now).

      2. But yeah, ive been warching Ghotorobo’s walkthrough of it, and because he plays it like a survival horror, he has the ammo reviewers said they didnt have, found the crossbow in a secret area, levelled up his character, never got close to dying in the last 3 videos, despite being jumped and always had good health, and went about 5 chapters so far without dying.

        1. Yeh , Transfering games from HDD to Internal Flash memory is a good idea. I wonder how much that will affect load times ?

          And also if you’re shit at the game and your walting around with a cricket bat getting fucked up by zombi’s , that can’t be considered fun. But if you nuckle down and concentrate the game is supposed to be Immersive and excellent. I enjoyed red steel as an intro to the wii’s pointer shooting , So I’m sure I will enjoy this equally or more so.

    2. IGN reviews are usually garbage though,same with gamespot. Most of the reviews are reviewing it as if they thought it was supposed to be run and gun, L4D,COD zombies type game and they dont get it. Read other neutral/mixed reviews or read the review of the game over at Kotaku that from their perspective its like bringing back RE 1 roots mixed with Dark Souls(difficulty).

      Game is far from perfect, its no 9 or 10. But its not 4.5 or 6 either, its easily a 7.5. It is a good game.

  6. In other words, the Xbox 360 and PS3 version of the game are better than the Wii U version. But it is still a good game overall.

        1. Fuck….Someone posted an opinion…Oh well…Oh wait? they spam it all over everyone’s dick and say it to be truth?…..OK….MAKES SENSE!

  7. LMAO! People are still replying to Aeolus on this site!

    Holy SHIT!

    He’s still yet to answer why he’s on this site.

    Words of advice: Ignore the little bitch!

  8. I usually love Digital Foundry but I think they’re cherry-picking their Wii U comparisons. They’re deliberately making comparisons of the games that have been reported to have technical issues on the Wii U. Why haven’t they compared the ones that have been confirmed to look better on Wii U?

    Where’s the comparisons of Ninja Gaiden 3, Tekken Tag Tournament 2, Assassin’s Creed 3 and Darksiders 2? I guess negative press is better for site views. Doesn’t matter to me anyway. I’m still going to buy this game. I love Batman games. And watching Wii u playthroughs on youtube has convinced me. Leave luck to heaven.

      1. Right, but giving people only one side of the story isn’t fair to anyone. These articles are just flame bait and flaming Nintendo is all the rage these days.

  9. American weak third party developers and stupid british tech noobs will bash nintendo know why? It’s because an American console the xbox360 was crashed by a little console called a Wii, overall crushed by ps3 world over was the 360. They realize the Wii U shall yet again lead generation 8, only difference is the Wii U shall actually get 3rd party multiplatforms and that has the scared. Think about it seriously.

  10. This just once again, bullshit, plain and simple. A bunch of arrogant nerds thinking their opinion actually has an affect on anything.

  11. Aren’t these the same guys who ranted on how BO2 is a horrid port on Wii U? Funny they are the only ones I see saying this. Wii U’s ports looks actually better with a few exceptions. Also, I don’t think Next Gen will be the power house people think it will. And if it is, then PS4 and 720 will lose, because the world is in a recession and people don’t have 900 dollars to blow on systems. Also, I bet the games themselves would be higher. Wii U took the best aproach by a mile.

    1. From this point, All I can see the developers of the system doing is increasing the resolution and having a stronger CPU or well GPU that’ll allow for fluid animation/frame rate. I honestly can’t see actual in-game models becoming any more detailed at this point, especially after seeing Halo 4 and The Last of Us.

  12. the framerate dropped in batman ac several times but most of the time the framerate was f***ing perfect. Ac3 freezes alot but my progress is saved so I can’t complain. btw what’s your high score in the jokers carnival? mine is 2525590 with batman

  13. can i just make a suggestion and hopefully start a trend. watever this aeolus guy sez just reply with a simple ‘You’re Correct’ and hopefully he’ll get so pissed off by us not arguin bak that he’ll implode, come on people try it out ;)

  14. I took a minute to read this article about GPGPUs and why they would be useful for gaming. It’s a little easier to digest for laymen than most articles since it gives more parables and examples than computer science jargon (but understanding the jargon will help). And there is a lot more to this GPGPU than you might expect. For floating point calculations and stream processing, it’s PERFECT. It takes a lot longer to code for, but it gives you amazing performance. It’s easy to throw code at a CPU, but if it handles EVERYTHING, there will be bottlenecking. But enough from me, just read the article.

  15. Don’t get me wrong here guys n’ girls I am picking my black beast up on launch here Friday but I must say I do have a few flaws the more I read reviews etc. Assassins Creed visualy just like on Xbox and PS3, now Batman, middle ranged reviews on ZombiU.. Console bugs and load times able to allow time o wash your hair..The list goes on. I hope the future is brighter the more titles are announced. Reggie saying all 3rd party titles look better on WiiU…Naaaah I don’t think so.

    Still….Wii U wah wah wii wah it’s a very niiiiice.

    1. There are exsagerations is all opinions for exsample 10 secs from 1 menu to the other maybe for some. Zombiu is a game that is ikf you espect run and gun is not for you but if you like tactical thinking and movement then yes

  16. It comes as no surprise that the port of this game (and the other Wii U ports for that matter) may come with minor cons compared with the other versions. Plus, the way that the journalists write these kind of articles make it seem as if the difference is outrageous, when really it’s quite minor and actually understandable… yet some people will lap up this kind of news and use it as food for their fan-boy bias (Hi Aeolus).

  17. [STUFF ABOUT WII U]I can’t believe no one has though of this. Why would you create “next gen” games when your current competition can’t? I bet the console is really capable, Nintendo has kept secret about the exact specs so the rivals will be like “Wow, the wii u is crap” and think that they don’t really have to try (BTW i am not saying any other gaming company is better/worse than the other. I’m a fan of all). Allot of people have been saying that the wii u actually plays the ports better, some say it doesn’t. However remember the first xbox360 games? Even ps3? They where far of from their modern counterparts. Before some ignorant troll has a go, this is my opinion….therefore i cannot be wrong, It really doesn’t make sense about the wii u’s power, i mean remember the tech demos from 2011?- the zelda and Japanese garden ones. Those looked close to CGI.

    Finally what i will say is that if you think the wii u is weak and buy consoles for graphic reasons only (which i really hate when people HATE on that. Aren’t people allowed to like things for their own individual reason? Hypocrites) then by all means, perhaps try a gaming PC? Seriously if your life is centered around loathing an inanimate object… might want to seek help? And what’s funny is that everyone calls each other “12” year olds but i’ve seen them act more mature than some of you. Also please keep the sexist, racist, homophobic and many other pathetic comments to yourselves? “I know! To show I’m right, i shall insult people and discriminate! YAY DISCRIMINATION”

    If anyone bothered to read this (Sorry for it being so long) Thanks for your time :)

  18. I have this game on the PS3 so I don’t need it for the Wii U, unless it’s at 5 bucks then I’ll go ahead and get it.

  19. this is the site that all of the wii u hate and lies are coming from. they are clearly mad at nintendo about something and are abusing their exposure to try and make the wii u look bad.
    i have batman and it looks ten times better than on the other consoles. and the framerate is call of duty quality.
    not to mention it really uses the wiipad in every creative way possible.
    these fuckers need to be stopped.

  20. Pingback: Warner Bros Registers New Batman Arkham Domain Names | My Nintendo News

  21. Pingback: The “Nintendoom” Industry | NintendObserver

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: