Top
360°

Nintendo confirms Wii U launch games will run at 720p

First party Wii U launch games will run in 720p, Nintendo has confirmed.

Read Full Story >>
wiiudaily.com
The story is too old to be commented.
LiamIRL822016d ago

How very 2006 of you Nintendo.

2016d ago
chasegarcia2016d ago (Edited 2016d ago )

"Paltry, insufficient, and laughable in effort"- Urban Dictionary

I guess I will be able to emulate the next generation Nintendo console on my pc.

I got Ivy bridge cpu. I am Next, Next, Next generation in NintendoLand.

specialguest2016d ago

I don't think your PC even has the power to emulate the Xbox 360 and play games at a playable frame rate. The amount of processing power it takes for emulation is crazy. In addition, Ivy bridge cpu cannot fully be taken advantage of if the game was never programed to take advantage of the multiple cores. Ivy Bridge is nothing without the high clock speed.

neogeo2016d ago (Edited 2016d ago )

I will take some 720p as long as it's 60fps and has NO LESS then 4xAA 720p needs some AA or it's jaggie city:) I always play around with my computer and 720 looks [email protected] 8xAA I can't even tell the difference from 8xaa 720p or 1080p with no AA. a 46 inch Sony TV XBR

Denethor_II2015d ago

" Ivy bridge cpu cannot fully be taken advantage of if the game was never programed to take advantage"

Yes, but assuming that Nintendo don't release an official emulation for PC users then maybe the emulation would, in fact, take advantage of the new chipset? Kind of like how PCSX2 can take advantage of multiple cores.

miyamoto2015d ago

does this mean wii u is not next gen

ProjectVulcan2015d ago (Edited 2015d ago )

Perfect emulation steals huge amounts of power, but good emulation won't be too far away for something like 360 i wouldn't have thought.

The PS2 emulation scene really started up before average PC hardware was capable anyway, and as the years apssed and the hardware and software became more refined, the better and more playable the games were.

Computersaysno2015d ago (Edited 2015d ago )

Even Ps2 emus can use multi cores...

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2015d ago
MacUser19862016d ago

Yeah, consider games like Infamous 2 run at 720p and how amazing it looks I could care less. Resolution means nothing it's the quality of the art and visuals.

chasegarcia2016d ago (Edited 2016d ago )

QUALITY.........that is why some of us want higher resolution. Have you seen 1080 with 8x anti-aliasing @ 60 fps. It is beautiful.

I want to see that nice art that the artist spend his time on for who knows how many hours clearly without blur.

ShaunCameron2016d ago (Edited 2016d ago )

Exactly. Besides, most PS3 games don't do 1080p anyway. Not even God Of War III for all of its graphical glory. WiiU games doing only 720P is a non-issue.

@ chasegarcia

And the key word is "some". To many, 720p is sufficient.

Treian2016d ago

Resolution means A LOT. Comparing a game running at 1680 x 1050 to 1600 x 900 is a HUGE difference.

Motorola2016d ago

^ You are correct, but that example is the worst one you could choose.

ProjectVulcan2016d ago (Edited 2016d ago )

Resolution must mean SOMETHING. Otherwise why bother even going to HD consoles from PS2 and Xbox. It is tempting for people to say something means nothing, be dismissive, when they don't know what a difference it can make. If they don't experience it for themselves.

The gap between 1280 x 720 and 1920 x 1080 is quite a lot. It is a little more complicated in previous generations, but in the PAL region at least the typical resolution was 720 x 576 from Xbox and PS2.

720 x 576 = 414,720 pixels
1024 x 600 = 614,400
1280 x 720 = 921,600
1920 x 1080= 2,073,600

Which means that going from the previous generation to this HD gen, a lot of people found the number of pixels a little more than doubled right? 414,720 to 921,600.

Except a whole raft of games aren't even double. 1024 x 600 included there is the Call of duty games for example, its not even double the previous generation resolution. Halo Reach 1152 x 720? JUST double.

1920 x 1080 is a little more than double 1280 x 720. The actual difference IS comparable going from PS2 to PS3, or from Xbox to Xbox 360.

Did you find the resolution increase meant NOTHING from PS2 to PS3? Or did you in fact crow over how much sharper and better it was? Were you impressed how much sharper Xbox 360 games looked on a HDTV compared to Halo:CE, or Splinter Cell Chaos Theory?

If so, then please do not dismiss 1080p as if its "nothing" or "meaningless".

Because that is as silly as saying the difference in resolution between the SD generation and this HD generation is just as meaningless too.....

Campy da Camper2016d ago

True, but if Infamous 2 ran in 1080p at 60fps with no motion blur or jaggies it would be jaw dropping. That's what I want, BOTH worlds.

TheRealist2016d ago

God of War like most of sonys other IPs SMASH these graphics into the ground! bump mapping, textures, lighting, & all. Not a single Nintendo game is on par with Sonys visuals.. Resolution may be 720p but the game SHINES.. Not like this Wii title w smoother edges

jeseth2015d ago

Considering machines released 6-7 years ago and designed ever further back than that (PS3/360) can do the same and better ...

this is pathetiv on Nintendo's part. We already knew the graphics would be basically the same as PS3/360 ... but now the games are not 1080 standard? That's crap.

The Wii-U is really looking bad right now.

LNDCalling2015d ago

@vulcanproject Does that mean you are all for 4k movies and games as the next step forward? Or do you think that there is a point where resolution would be beyond what the human eye can easily notice (if at a reasonable distance from screen)?

Many PC gamers will see resolution from a different perspective if they are used to gaming at close range to a monitor as differences are more easily noticeable, the same cannot be said for people gaming on a large screen from beyond 5ft (assuming 40" TV 1080p content) as pixel definition is lost beyond 5ft.

The higher the resolution the smaller that distance becomes i.e. if you doubled the resolution to 2160p you would need to sit 2.5ft away to not lose any detail, in other words at a sensible viewing distance most people wont see the pixels in any case!

ProjectVulcan2015d ago (Edited 2015d ago )

Ahh yes LNDcalling i expected that argument.

It is true there is a limit to what you can see difference in resolution, of course there is a maximum limit from certain distance and size. I acknowledge that.

HOWEVER.

That limit is not really being tested too much by 1080p on a decent HDTV an average living room. YOU CAN TELL THE DIFFERENCE AND IT IS SIGNIFICANT. Whether its on a HDTV from 5 feet or on a screen up close. http://s3.carltonbale.com/r... This particular graph claims that 1080p on a 40 inch screen from 5 feet is fully noticeable. Indeed on a smaller set from 5 feet it would be. Anyone with a 42 incher or more would notice a good benefit as far away as roughly 8 feet.

You claim you can't see much difference but i am one of those that games in 1080p up close on a PC, AND on a 1080p HDTV in my living room from a distance.

Claiming that it is all lost beyond 5 feet is simply NOT true as there is still benefits, nor does everyone only have 40 inch screens. To be fair in developed countries thats actually a fairly modest screen size, with manufacturers pushing 42 inches and more. According to sales data customers are opting for bigger screen sizes because of all time low prices and they prefer it. 50 inch market share is increasing.

So it is a fact it is well within the range of average human eyesight on a good sized HDTV. There is diminishing returns beyond this, but there is also still a reason why even some existing generation console games run in 1080p or attempt higher resolutions. Otherwise they would be pointless.

Its a fact also backed up by everyone going out and buying Bluray players and 1080p HDTVs. Will you turn around and say if Bluray was only 720p nobody could tell the difference in their living rooms? Of course they could.

Why is 4k even being developed and being commercialised? Because you CAN tell the difference. If literally the limit is so low as you claim, all that other stuff is pointless too.

But obviously it isn't, I know that from common sense and first hand experience....

Computersaysno2015d ago (Edited 2015d ago )

1080p is noticeable for me in my living room. I also want 1080p standard too because it would help Pc games out and improve their standards. Assets and art built for a higher resolution. Ports to Pc would be better

There are more than basic one system benefits to moving to 1080p. 720p is ok but to cover more bases or situations 1080p is what you really want and if it stops there and thats the maximum then so be it.

aquamala2015d ago (Edited 2015d ago )

For everyone that think 720p is sufficient, if your ps3 has the option to play games at 1080p (let's say a setting under display settings on xmb), would you still play your games at 720p since its "sufficient"?

do you watch blu ray movies in 720p? since that is "sufficient".

tee_bag2422015d ago

720p is great, 1080p is better, 1440p on a Big Monitor is even better.
I dont want to sound like an elitist pig, but I do all these resolutions so it sounds petty to hear people here gloating about 1080p being the bee's knees and somehow 720p is inferior.

What I care about the most is a frame rate with all the extra trimmings turned on ultra. Id rather 720p at 60fps ultra than 1440p at 30fps on mediium settings.

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 2015d ago
badz1492016d ago

but their HD console is 7 years late and launch with 720p games?? WTF big N?? sacrificing 1080p for 60fps means that the console itself is not powerful enough to begin with! much like the GC compared to PS2 but they are in the same gen! so...this pretty much confirm that Wii U is indeed NOT a next gen console!

err...welcome to 7th gen Nintendo!

GamingPerson2015d ago

how very 2003 of everyone compared to pc.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2015d ago
LOL_WUT2016d ago

Ouch, well its been officially confirmed. ;)

ChickeyCantor2016d ago (Edited 2016d ago )

It does say "launch games"
It still implies that future games could go higher.

Just saying, cause most people don't know how to read.

"We might consider using 1080p, but, for example, if we want to get 60 fps, at a particular stage of development, it may seem 720p is more realistic.”"

You didn't read the article did you?

2016d ago
Solid_Snake372015d ago

unless it is a racing game, its pretty hard for it to happen....

eagle212015d ago

Oh dear, New Super Mario Bros. U will still be awesome in 720p. Oh dear, NSMB games haven't sold less than 25 million each. Oh dear, LAUNCH games mean no game will ever run at 1080p on WiiU /s. Oh dear....lol.

Our game sucks but hey it's 1080p..lol...well you can keep it cause i won't play it over 480p classics.

Uncharted2Vet2016d ago

1080p exchanged for 720p with 60FPS im cool with that.

Lior2016d ago

U idiot don't take this from Nintendo almost every decent pc can run 1080p with 60fps and a 2012 console cannot very sad

PirateThom2016d ago (Edited 2016d ago )

720p = 1280 x 720 = 921,600 pixels
1980p = 1920 × 1080 = 2,073,600 pixels

Yeah, barely any difference.

Again, it's 2012, can you even buy 720p TVs anymore?

dark-hollow2016d ago

@piratetho

but the wii u have to stream to 1/2 480p controllers which also tax the hardware.

so we have 900000 pixels (720p) on the main screen, add to that 400000 pixels have to stream to the wii u controller, and dont even forget those games that can be played with TWO controllers and it all adds up to almost 2 million pixels!

StraightedgeSES2016d ago

I see you don't know how to read the launch titles are 720 p not the console.

godzilla722016d ago (Edited 2016d ago )

People actually still play games on a pc? Still stuck in the 90s i see. I can just picture you hunched over at your desk with a mouse and keyboard playing warcraft, haha. Go geek out you loser, while real gamers kick back with a REAL controller and REAL games. You sound like the idiot!

Death_Grin482016d ago

It's 720p for LAUNCH games, you idiot.

Ju2016d ago

Screen on controller is a nice idea. But if i'd have a choice, I'd rather go hi res on one screen than half ass on two. I don't know. From an engineering standpoint to have a dump controller as a passive screen only is stupid. It should have its own CPU and offload those things to the controller. I'm wondering if it would really have cost so much more to have a little ARM in that thing which does that. Cost wise that's probably what was necessary to make it competitive. But you loose somewhere. In that case you still need to offset the additional load with what the console can handle. I'll wait if it's worth having that feature.

StanSmith2016d ago (Edited 2016d ago )

@godzilla72

You call Lior an idiot yet make stupid comments yourself.

Now I'm not a PC Gamer, but you do realise most PCs include HDMI output now don't you? You just hook it up to a TV and you can use a 360 wireless pad to play the games from the comfort of your couch.

The only person stuck in the 90s is yourself as it seems that you have not realised that technology has advanced to the point that PC gamers are no longer stuck at a desk.

*on topic*

If Nintendo just released the damn specs of the WiiU, we could put all this Power speculation to rest.

ShaunCameron2016d ago

@ PirateThom

<Again, it's 2012, can you even buy 720p TVs anymore?>

Yes indeed. Where I live got plenty of those.

Swagman23212016d ago

godzilla72 - Real gamers play on X360/PS3. Not casual gaming on Kidtendo consoles

StarCSR2015d ago

Real gamers play games on ALL consoles.

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 2015d ago
Nutsack2016d ago (Edited 2016d ago )

If it were technically very demanding games, with insane graphics and crazy physics, lets say a game like Uncharted, The Last of US or Ubisofts new Watch Dogs, I'd say yes if it got 60fps but reso has to be 720p agreed.

If its a New Super Mario, that looks about like the same game on Wii, or a Pikmin thats a tad sharper... No. That should have been 1080p AND 60fps.

Certainly for a console thats released in 2012. This just confirms that WiiU isn't really next gen. Its this gen. Next gen will start with Xbox 8 and PSOrbis, games in 1080p from the start.

Todays HDTV's are 1080p. This is the Wii all over again. Wii did 480p while 720p was already standard and 1080p was upcoming. WiiU releases and doesn't reach the current 1080p standard but goes 2005/2006 standard when 360/PS3 launched.

Weak Nintendo, weak. Recent comparisons of Batman on PS3 and WiiU show even something worse, PS3 version > WiiU version. And worse, WiiU game will be full price 50 to 60 bucks for an old recylced game that looks worse than on the other consoles, PS3 version will be 20 to 30 bucks around the time that WiiU will get it. Sad, just sad.

@ Deat_Grin

Thats what Sony sad about the PS3 too at its launch... They said games would be 1080p, but then the games arrived at 720p. And it never changed with a few exceptions. Mostly the launch games are not as demanding on textures and physics as the games lateron in the lifecycle of the console, and thus, it doesn't get easier to up the resolution it gets harder as more power is taken to do other technically impressive stuff.

vallencer2015d ago

I find it funny that everyone is talking about these articles of how Batman doesn't look as good yet IGN said themselves that AC 3, which is a much much better looking game than Batman, looks great on the Wii U and noone should worry. So i wonder which one it is. I'm more inclined to believe IGN than the other websites.

I also find it funny that people think the Wii U won't do well. Alot of people who have a Wii will just upgrade to the Wii U because they already have all the controllers for the Wii. So for them "old recycled games" are new. You don't have to buy it but it's still going to do well.

chukamachine2016d ago

Wow i got disagree's for telling people this.

WII U- Can either do.

720p with 4aa

1080p no aa possible 2aa depending on load.

wishingW3L2016d ago

the difference between 720p to 1080p is pretty big and AA is not that demanding compared to frame-rate anyway. Your comment is all wrong and that's why people are disagreeing with you.