Top
1110°

'Batman: Arkham City' Looks Worse On Wii U Than PS3

Forbes editor Erik Kain writes. Despite the fact that the PS3 is seven years old and the Wii U isn’t even out yet, the PlayStation version of the game looks more detailed and realistic.

The story is too old to be commented.
1900d ago
live2play1899d ago

what is LOL is that ps3 fans know that lazy ports on their system doesnt show the true systems power

and also that as the consoled life goes on games start looking better

see uncharted 1 and 3
kilzone 3
last of us

why are you guys so double sided?

yes it looks better but what do you expect out of a port? AT LAUNCH?

Kamikaze1351899d ago

Lol

You have no idea why I'm laughing; relax buddy, no need to have a heart attack. I'm laughing because they (the site) show two screenshots and base the entire game's quality on it. You make way too many assumptions.

KonaBro1899d ago

The fact remains that the game looks bad. Period. For a system Nintendo is going to great lengths to try and say is more powerful than the PS3/360, it's sure doing a bad job at showing it. A port like this should be nothing for the Wii U but evidence has shown us otherwise. I'm sure we'll see better looking games later on in the generation but Wii U is looking more like a stop-gap consoles and not a true next gen leap.

live2play1899d ago

KAMIKAZE
im so sorry but can you blame me? xD

i apologize

KONABRO
nitendo is going through great lengths to say wiiu is MORE POWERFUL THAN THE WII

developers words and fanboy fanning started the whole more powerful argument

Hisiru1899d ago (Edited 1899d ago )

@CaCl
Lol

Neko_Mega1899d ago

Don't know what you are smoking, Batman mostly looks better on PS3. Games like Skyrim and COD are the main ones that copy and paste to a bluray.

Besides this isn't a shock, I bet Nintendo wants to make a system that can do HD. But won't cost as much as a PS3.

WagFanger1899d ago (Edited 1899d ago )

You say the exact same thing every comment - do you have nothing better to do?

And why are you spouting off about 'Oh, but but but but.. Nintendo says the WiiU is more powerful than the *Wii*'

It better f*cking well be! Nobody's going to pay money to downgrade their console.

Face it, nothing shown so far about the WiiU is impressive - no need to keep defending it.

fatstarr1899d ago

I dont get why people mock the WIIUs graphics when they are playing games on the ps3 and 360 still...

this is the base of wiius graphics, lazy ports and not trying...
now when devs try 3 years from now it will be a different story.

silly to know the specs of the wiiu and not expect great graphics when the shitty specs of the ps3 and 360 make good looking games that we see today... logic use it.

Optical_Matrix1899d ago

Problem is with your argument, what little Nintendo did show of 1st party games on Wii U weren't impressive either. I'd argue they were lazier than the 3rd party games. Hell, New Super Mario Bros. U looks like a Wii game running in Dolphin, except it isn't 1080p.....

Nintendo's lucky that Rayman Legends and Pikmin 3 are launch/launch window games. That'll get a fair few 'core gamers' on board pretty early on, myself included.

CommonSense1899d ago

saying that wii u's first party titles weren't impressive is the understatement of the year.

there were downright disappointing. nintendo started this current generation a generation behind. looks like they are kicking off the next generation even more than a generation behind.

in fact, it's not even fair to say they are starting the next generation. if anything, they are finally entering the current gen...sorta.

bobtheimpaler1899d ago

Saying that the hardware is new is not an excuse. It uses a similar processor to the 360. This isn't some fancy new and intricate to program for architecture. It's a 4 core power pc for crying out loud
You people need to get your minds out of 2006 lol.
Also with how small the console is, it would either have low TDP, slow or a noisy as hell fan to stop the components from melting.

If anything there's no excuse for the Wii U not looking better.

vulcanproject1899d ago (Edited 1899d ago )

Does it look worse? The guy picked 2 useless shots to base that opinion on. Try these:

WiiU: http://images.eurogamer.net...
PS3: http://images.eurogamer.net...

WiiU: http://images.eurogamer.net...
PS3: http://images.eurogamer.net...

WiiU surely looks better. Not by a lot, its subtle. But it has better fine detail and better anti aliasing quality. In the first one look at the pattern below the scales of justice- or even finer, the tiny poster of uncle sam on the far right hand side wall. The writing is sharper.

Look at second picture and the anti aliasing on the base of the water towers on the left, or the spikes on the bottom of the main building, or the brickwork and cornices on said building. Undoubtably better in the WiiU shot.

I don't know how anyone could these look worse on WiiU.

corrus1899d ago

Now i;ll show you're very wrong

Resistance Fall Of Man
http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Uncharted 1
http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Kilzzone 2
http://www.youtube.com/watc...

This are first PS3 games and looks awesome

SugarSoSweet1899d ago

So what if its Launch the Hardware is SIX YEARS NEW..... SIX!!! it should be doing Batman Arkham @ 1080p 60fps EASY but because the Wii-U is a piece of it actually looks worse then 6 year old hardware what a joke

vulcanproject1899d ago (Edited 1899d ago )

@SugarSoSweet To be fair Arkham City in DX11 and Physx is pretty demanding. It takes a proper high end card to break 60FPS at 1080p and max settings with say 4x AA, and only the very fastest cards can boast a 60FPS minimum framerate at those settings.

However it doesn't take quite as much to do 30FPS. A Radeon 7850 could do it.

DG901899d ago

... You make us PlayStation fans/owners look bad.. Calm down all the dude put was lol.

STONEY41899d ago (Edited 1899d ago )

My GTX 560 Ti also gets 45-60fps maxed out in DX9 (not sure if DX11 is still broken), 1080p, 8xCSAA, Physx, and V-sync. If I lower the AA, it doesn't go below 60fps at all. Arkham City isn't that demanding of a game, at least in my opinion since it's a mid-range GPU and not all that high-end.

Computersaysno1899d ago (Edited 1899d ago )

What are you on with STONEY4 you say arkham city isnt demanding and you dont turn on DX11 which was patched and sorted 6 months ago? If you arent running it close to maximum how can you even comment about how demanding it is? POINTLESS!

Thats like saying Metro 2033 wasn't demanding I ran it on Medium settings with DX11 off no MSAA and no physx!!!!!!!!!! Yeah runs piece of piss it does! Lets all just turn off the high end features on games and claim they arent demanding

DUHHHHHHHHHH

Turn on DX11, turn Physx on to max, turn proper MSAA on then come back and tell us how undemanding it was and how easily your system ran it. LOL

GTX560Ti will be lucky to scrape 30 frames minimum in 1080p with everything on and 4 MSAA

WetN00dle691899d ago (Edited 1899d ago )

Yeah id rather take Eurogamer words for it rather than a NO NAME POS fanboy site! The fact of the matter is WiiU will be an amazing console!

BY the way it seems that the Pic was removed!
That only tells me that that guy was FULL OF SH!T!

Hellsvacancy1899d ago

The 360 doesnt even get mentioned "move along people, nothing to see here" lol

DrJones1899d ago

The PS3 came out in march 2007 here in Europe. Stop saying it's seven years old, just to overstate some anti Nintendo point.

guitarded771899d ago

Here's the funniest part of the whole thing...

(from article)
"However, I do agree that we should withhold judgment until more screens are available."

(My reply to author)
DUDE!!! You do realize you just wrote an article titled "'Batman: Arkham City' Looks Worse On Wii U Than PS3"

stragomccloud1899d ago

Wow. The number of disagrees you got really prove your point. From 2006 to 2009, PS3 received the laziest of ports from third party developers. Furthermore, 1st party developers didn't even really start getting a hang of the hardware until about that time.

ThanatosDMC1899d ago

Weird. I thought the WiiU version (based on the pictures) had much more detail and textures. Just look at the clothing. Doesnt look as good as my laptop's textures, but comparing the two consoles WiiU's looks better.

gatormatt801899d ago

What I don't understand is why people, the author, proclaim that the PS3 is 7 years old. It hasn't even turned 6 yet.

N4g_null1899d ago

Also the port is coming from xbox 360 code.... Why are we even comparing these again? I though all PS fans though the xbox sucked yet the multiplats whee better on xbox 360...

Well At least you got a new game from the interactive story making guys.

STONEY41899d ago (Edited 1899d ago )

"What are you on with STONEY4 you say arkham city isnt demanding and you dont turn on DX11 which was patched and sorted 6 months ago? If you arent running it close to maximum how can you even comment about how demanding it is? POINTLESS!"

Last time I played Arkham City was with the first patch that supposedly "fixed" DX11, and it was still doing the *high framerate, drop to 10fps for a second, high framerate* thing. I remember the performance being good when it wasn't bugging out though. I actually played the first 2 hours on DX11 until I felt like something was really off about the framerate dips, then looked at the forums. I don't know if they released another patch that completely fixed DX11, so sorry if it's been fixed already.

"If you arent running it close to maximum"

Maxing it out in DX9 is close to maximum anyways. All DX11 adds is the tessellation and HBAO. It's not like it completely revamps the lighting or texture work, or allows higher-resolution shadows.

"Thats like saying Metro 2033 wasn't demanding I ran it on Medium settings with DX11 off no MSAA and no physx!!!!!!!!!! Yeah runs piece of piss it does! Lets all just turn off the high end features on games and claim they arent demanding"

Metro 2033 isn't all that demanding either unless you have Advanced DOF (DX11) on, which cuts your framerate in more than half, plus has a MARIGINAL difference. With Physx and tessellation on, I had it maxed (minus Advanced DOF) at constant 60fps, 1080p, and *I think* 2xMSAA. That's more of bad optimization of one setting than "demanding".

Anon19741899d ago (Edited 1899d ago )

Ugh. All that PC "DX 9 vs DX 11" and talk of endless settings tweaking - reminds me why I quite PC gaming a decade ago. Who has time for all that nonsense when you can hardly tell the PC games apart from the console versions anyway? And even if I could tell them apart, I don't care. The ease at which I can sit down on my couch and plunk a game into my console and start playing by far trumps any slight graphical advantage that's meaningless to me anyway. And all on consoles that will only run you $200-250.

SilentNegotiator1899d ago (Edited 1899d ago )

@CaCI

Wii U's first party titles are also 720p and nothing spectacular to look at. Plus, the ps3 is 6 year old hardware, the Wii U is not.

Worse? Nah.
Few to no appreciable improvements (especially for new hardware)? Yes.

The big difference is that you have to watch Batman's shiny suit on Wii U, and the aliasing constantly sparkles and dances as you move.

LOL, look at sad Batman. What a sad batman.

Boody-Bandit1898d ago (Edited 1898d ago )

@darkride
"when you can hardly tell the PC games apart from the console versions anyway?"

Trust me when I say to you not only can you "easily" tell the differences, but in some cases, those differences are night and day.

With my rig there is no tweaking. I just install a game and set everything to maximum and kick back, sometimes on my recliner, and enjoy the game.

I do agree with your ease of use / plug and play ability. That is the one of the main reasons I still prefer consoles over PC gaming. That and most of my friends don't own PC gaming rigs.

Computersaysno1898d ago (Edited 1898d ago )

"Maxing it out in DX9 is close to maximum anyways. All DX11 adds is the tessellation and HBAO. It's not like it completely revamps the lighting or texture work, or allows higher-resolution shadows"

It isnt maximum is it? 'All DX11 does is add these extras lovely effects that makes it prettier that doesnt count' LOLOLOLOL. You are being ridiculous. Oh a game is only demanding when its maxed. Stupid comment is stupid.

DUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

Metro 2033 and Arkham city exist as DX11 titles with excellent add ons in Physx and advanced lighting and tesselated effects.

If you don't turn them on, then OF COURSE THEY ARENT DEMANDING.

Because they are not nearly maxed are they? If you only want DX9, then you may as well go back to playing console games. Why even bother buying a PC and having decent DX11 hardware if you arent going to turn it on and run it?

Its not bad optimisation, its frickin max settings you muppet. Its pretty retarded to say a game isnt demanding when you dont even turn on the high end effects that separates it from the bog standard console versions! Hahahahaha you loon

What next, you gonna claim that climbing Mount Everest is easy because you only have to put one foot on the mountain to say you have climbed it. Sure technically you have climbed it, a tiny bit. Thats what you are saying.

Hardly the point LOL

Arkham City maxed out in 1080p, the very possible best settings you can run it is demanding. End Of.

sikbeta1898d ago

I don't know what you guys laugh at, but the pic of sad Batman really crack me up lol