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.
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?
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
yeah ps3 sucks man
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
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
@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.
... You make us PlayStation fans/owners look bad.. Calm down all the dude put was lol.
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.
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
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!
The 360 doesnt even get mentioned "move along people, nothing to see here" lol
The PS3 came out in march 2007 here in Europe. Stop saying it's seven years old, just to overstate some anti Nintendo point.
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"
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.
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.
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.
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.
"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".
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.
@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.
@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.
"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.
I don't know what you guys laugh at, but the pic of sad Batman really crack me up lol
"but what do you expect out of a port? AT LAUNCH?" Well... yeah. PS3 launch games didn't get a break, so why should WiiU games get a break? I *do* recall the comparisons between Gears of War and Resistance, Motorstorm and whatever game people tried to compare that game to, and a few others. Some were better graphically, and some were not. To me, Gears was better looking than Resistance, the 2's of each was debatable; although by the 3rd of each, the tables turned. Resistance 3 gave Killzone 2 and 3 a run for it's money, although I think that GG has their tech thang down more than Insomniac. To me, Halo has the better story overall between Killzone and Halo, up until 3, that is. Sarge's death didn't make any sense. What, did they just want to kill him off because he was arguably the best character in the Halo universe? C'mon: an unsuited marine surviving in areas where Spartans fell? That dude WAS the best! Halo never touched Killzone's graphics, not even Reach; but I'm hoping that Halo 4 will give it a run for it's money, and guaranteed that the comparisons will fly between H4 and K3, despite the years difference... : / But of course, once again, that comparison will be fair for some reason.
My point is that I'm not gonna max a setting that's essentially broken, or at least was back when I was playing it. I turn up all the settings on Battlefield 3, Crysis 2 DX11, Max Payne 3 DX11, the original Crysis, and countless other DX11 titles because the settings in those games work how they're supposed to. If Arkham City's DX11 is working properly, then I'll go back an enable it for the trade in FPS. That's not a problem to me. I'm not saying that tessellation and HBAO aren't worth it. But at launch, DX11 was causing people with even SLI GTX 580s to have random dips to the single-digits. That's broken.
its a port, of course its gonna look worse and most ps3 multi plats are ports from the 360 so they also look worse. but who cares? its not that noticeable for the most part
Wii U is definitely more powerful than PS3 and 360, so if the games look bad, the dev make them look bad!
do you own Wii U ? please can I buy it from you if you have it ? I would like to see that myself.
Because for now Batman AC shows otherwise.
do you really need to have a Wii U before believing that it's more powerful? PS3 and 360 are 2005/2006 techs and there's no way Wii U will be less than those! it's called COMMON SENSE!
smh this site wouldnt accept the fact that the vita is more powerful than a 360 and maybe a ps3 in the right light. and the 3ds is close to on par with the wii.
wow man wrong logic, it's like saying the ps2 version of tony hawk wasteland looks more detailed than the xbox 360 launch version, no way, no freaking way this is either an old build or is that the wiiu is truly not that powerful
Power is a relative term. It is what the developers can do with the unique capabilities of a system that often matter most. However, when talking about power it would help to know what the specifications are for the system in question. Nintendo has been mum about this and quite frankly to do so at it's second unveiling and the E3 before launch is to me a little disconcerting. It is almost as if they have yet to decide on some final specs or else it isn't all that it is cracked up to be and they want more time for marketing to take hold. If someone else has a logical reason for Nintendo to be secretive at this point I would like to hear it.
no, i'm called Common Sense. look at this current generation. by your logic (or lack there of), the wii is automatically more powerful than an original xbox. well, it's not. and the wii came 5 years later. might wanna look up the definition of "common sense."
Wrong, the device has been in devs hands for some time now and the WiiU is certainly easier to code for than the PS3 was and still IS. Even if your arguemnt was valid and that's the case, then it still doesn't matter because by the time they 'master' the wiiU in a couple of years and graphical quality rises. The next PS and Xbox will be on the market making it look even worse so in my eyes it's a 'lose lose' situation for Nintendo core gamers.
Sorry dude, common sense only applies to Sony on N4G. Sweeten you explain things to people about PS3 launch titles looking like late PS2 games ( ridge Racer 7 PS3 vs Gran Turismo 4 PS2). They say that OK. But when an unfinished WiiU games looks on par with 360/PS3. They the start complaining because it's Nintendo. Of course they are also in denial about there fanyboyism which is why this comment will get 20+ disagrees. PS3 started from PS2 level and now we have games like the Last of Us... That took 6 years, right? Sony boys are just upset that WiiU is capable of doing Last of Us level games within a year, once developer learn how to use the system... I mean only Epic, GearBox and CryTek have the latest version of the de kits based on comments we heard pre E3... Once all devs get the final. As for those quoting30 FPS WiiU game quote from digital foundry You left this part of the article out. " As this was not live gameplay based on direct feeds from the console itself, we can't confirm the provenance of the footage"
@yabhero You are trying too hard. I will not push the disagree button on you even though I DO disagree. "once developer learn how to use the system" Now you are on to something. If you could somehow prove to people here that it is just as difficult to program for the Wii U now as it was to program for PS3 in 2006 you might have something. It would also help if you could prove that the processor in Wii U has the same kind of potential as CELL had in 2006. Prove those 2 things to people here and then and ONLY then you can say people here have double standards and are biased in favour of the PS3. OK......GO! IMO Nintendo is in a tight spot here. They pretty much lost all hc-fans with Wii and now they want to come out with a console for hc-gamers too? They might be in for a SERIOUS uphill battle. We shall see and in no way am I spelling doom on WiiU. I'm merely giving my observations here. I hope they pull it off.
@insomnium2 the biggest thing about the cell was it's flops. OMG its a super computer! claims etc.... PlayStation 3's Cell CPU achieves a theoretical maximum of 230.4 GFLOPS RV770 GPU, which is part of the 4800 series of graphics cards. According to AMD, the GPU can deliver out more than 1 TFlops – a performance that would have required 5000 Pentium Pro processors 12 years ago. OK They even added new stuff to this chip which obviously was not used in a port from last gen... Fact no last gen games use a tesselator at all... http://www.songho.ca/opengl... Ok 230.4 Gflops is a lot but The GPU in the Wiiu is in the 1ooo Gflop range by it self and it has more ram. We wont even talk about the power 7 chip. This is a very old chip and this is why the media's boosting that the PS3 was beyond PC is a rose colored lie. Hey but it's a feel good peace so people will discredit nintendo. It's like saying the snes port of mario world isn't better than than a machine designed for 3d polygons...
Wii is more powerful than GC and GC is about as powerful as XBOX. so...I'm pretty sure Wii is more powerful than the XBOX too.
I personally have looked at the gameplay of WiiU edition and Arkham City on game trailers.com and it doesn't look any worse than PS3/X360 versions at all so far. So this is just more articles of lies. I am surprised Forbes would submit an article like this without legitimate evidence. One photo means nothing. When side by side Joker's face is identical. Two different suits means they will look different. Gameplay of batman in motion in videos looks very solid and identical to PS3/X360 versions of the game other than shiny new Armor.
Nice one there Kamikaze . Arigato BTW are we forgetting another console here?
Also where was the HD Zelda game they showed last year? I thought that one was amazing display of Wii U power like Reggie said & a game demo should have silenced the critics. Because its confirmed by Katsuya Eguchi that all first party Wii U launch games will be at 780p also very important to me is Will Wii U upscale Wii games to HD on top of its Backwards Compatibility?
LOL is right... for the hater thinking the Wii U is less powerful. Take a look at PS3 vs WiiU Assasin Creed 3. Guys it is not even close. The WiiU version(1080p at 60fps) is far more detailed with much better texturs, lighting etc. But I know what the response to this will be, "Well Uncharted looks way better". That game was done by Sony's first party developer. My answer to you is lets see what Retro (Nintendo's first party developer) brings to the table.
1080p at 60fps Got any proof of that? Please don't use this source: http://mynintendonews.com/2... It's fake..
@ Sjaakiejj LOL.... No i am not using that source. Those spec are not going to happen. My reference is, once again, WiiU version of Assassin Creed 3. Look it up.
Hmmm and since when did batman look bad on the ps3? And anyways who cares about the wii U? Nintendo is dead
they trolling too hard. i don't see a damn difference at all.
i could lol too at how much worse the ps3 version looks than the PC version.
LMAO wow all you guys are messed clearly if you cant take a game thats already made and upgrade it and it still cant look better than PS3 6 years old WiiU have a MAJOR issue. especially in 2012!!! you cant sit here and talk like its 2007 and devs are lazy LOL that prety much doesnt exist anymore WiiU FINALLY entered current-gen standards and Playstation will be going next next-gen very soon end of story bye WiiU. also would love to see WiiU handle BF3 ohhhh thats right iiiiits not gona happen and by the time BF4 comes out with PS4 WiiU cant handle it.
I like how they take a certain angle and claim it's less detailed. "P.S. I realize that Batman is wearing a different suit of armor in both screenshots, making this comparison more difficult. " Yeah....nice title.
its like the last year when people said the games looked worse when what nintendo showed is actually 360/ps3 footage. lol!
Never forgot that.
Gearbox already said the WiiU is more powerful than ps3/x360, and they even said the WiiU version will look better. Do we really need to talk about it again?
@hisiru, i think they praise te Wii U cause some dude was talking about how the Wii U is so strong and how he controller is the best.
Batman: Arkham City' Looks Worse On PS3 Than 360 http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...
7.8 GB (360) vs. 7.7 GB (PS3) even with 3 different audio formats. Thanks for proving PS3 multplats are gimpped on purpose.
Compare WiiU lauch titles to PS3 launch then come back to me. This is in pre alpha demo version seriously...
What are smoking/drinking. Can I have some.
he is smoking logic