GotGame: The publisher confirmed that the game isn't natively in 1080p, but does feature Nuketown 2025.
A moderate megaton for some. I was personally expecting this.. How about you?
Megaton? Doubt it. If for the past couple of weeks you've been planning to spend $299 on a Wii U and an extra $50 for Black Ops 2, something as trivial as a lack of native 1080p isn't going to stop you. EDIT: LOL, 7 people approved this in like ten seconds. Hilarious how serious this is for some people.
That's why I said for some.
^^And I'm agreeing with you. Those few people that do take it seriously are hilarious.
Thats fine. Console gamers.. Dont care about graphics. Though its funny they still cant do what PC has been doing since 1998 gaming in 1080p lol.
Won't it just be upscaled 560p again like every console, every year? This is hardly news...
@decrypt 1080p in 1998? You sure about that?
@decrypt 1080p in 1998? Don't think so...
If it's not native 1080p then what is the point of getting the Wii-U version? Just save money and get it on a PS3 or 360...
If it can't even do a current gen game in 1080p natively! Another reason -> for me <- to wait for the PS4/X720.
@SkullBlade169: It depends on what Nintendo Network has to offer, but as far as I can tell unless the upgrade is *really* significant, I wouldn't bother. I would just stick to XBL as it has the most active community around. A real community likely exceeds most features anyhow. To keep it in perspective though, a Wii U doesn't cost much more than a PS3 or Xbox 360 so I wouldn't expect a lot more either especially the costly second screen controller thing a ma jigg.
I already knew it wasn't native 1080p. It is upscaled just like the PS3/360 version. Sorry Nintenbots. You can't believe everything you read, especially when its too good to be true. I mean they couldn't even get that Wii U Mario game to run in 1080p(or didn't have time, we don't know yet)
It most likely still has higher resolution textures than other console versions.
@Herbs Nope. Stop lying to yourselves without proof. Nothing is "likely".
@herbs Assuming again leads to rumours like 1080p, Stop stating opinion as fact. We'll wait and see. Everyone should already know that the Wii.U has a a$$ ton of head room compared to the ps3 and 360 interms of ram and GPU, the problem is how lazy devs are. The only thing that I think we can still give to the previous consoles is PS3 and it's ridiculous powerful CPU and 360 and it's 8 MB of EDram....thats it. THis is when compared to the Wii.U not to each other. And even with that, if I'm not mistaken the WiiU might even have eDram on the GPU, sooooo yeah we'll have to see! I def think that its more powerful than both, but for a 7 year gap (nearly) it's not nearly the improvement we would've wanted to see. PS3 vs PS2 was insane difference (with exception of God of War 2 which looked sooooo next gen for its time) WiiU vs Wii is exactly like the same as going from PS2 to PS3... Been there done that...in terms of graphics so far! Time will tell, I personally can't wait to get my hands on Super smash, luigi mansion 3 ;), mario bros U and Zombie U (maybe paper MARIO!:D) but this might have to wait until Xmas 2013 for me, after the 3Ds launch I don't mind patience!
Why am I being accused of stating opinions as facts, I used the word likely. Don't get so uptight people this game will look great regardless. Im more excited about being able to use a variety of control methods. I actually enjoy FPS's with the wiimote maybe this will support motion+
Personaly I did not read it, Activision said it on the Wii U press conference. And they said it again in gameplay interviews later. Most of them is probably on Youtube. Kinda disapointing when developers formulate it like they did and it shows they jus either pulled one or dont know the difference between native or upscaled....
@GraveLord Why would you even want a Mario game running at vanilla 1080p anyway? I'd much rather have 720p with MSAA and V-Sync, etc. That's basically how Uncharted: Drake's Fortune visually bested almost everything that came before it's time... IN 720P.
The devs can't be too lazy, they have a PC version there that runs fine on better hardware. Wii U just obviously aint that much faster than PS3 and 360. http://www.legionhardware.c... Even a 550Ti can do 1920 x 1200 (better than 1080p) and 4x AA with well over 60FPS average on Black ops. Don't expect the sequel to be any more demanding. Thats like a cheapo $110/£80 graphics card... Something middle range like a 560ti can do 2560 x 1600 comfortably!
Honestly i wouldnt be surprised if microsoft bullied activision to make the wii u version graphically on par with the xbox version. We all know thats how MS works and proof was already given regarding the parity clause MS has with game publishers.
I doubt Microsoft had anything to do with cods resolution.
thats for release only. They cant control how the game looks on the platform http://www.escapistmagazine... Activision just doesnt want to do it. system could easily do native 1080p this whole thing started when treyarch said FULL HD and everyone thought they ment 1080p
Ya it's just a port of the ps3/360 game, like every other multi platform game will be.
If that makes you sleep better at night. SURE!
Rendering at 1280x1080p. At best it would be 720p native, I REALLY don't see why this cannot be achieved with this system.
there is no such thing as 1280x1080p. 1080p is an aspect ratio of 1920 x 1080.
Riiiiiight. Because a principled publisher like Activision wouldn't play up THAT angle if they could, instead of admitting to it not being 1080p. /s
@bladefist, I'm sorry but DigitalAnalogue is right. GT5 does run at 1280x1080: "By the time GT5 Prologue was released, Polyphony was well on the way to hammering down the specifics of the tech: the 1280x1080 target resolution we see in the final game was confirmed, and the performance of the game was pretty much on par with what we see today. " http://www.eurogamer.net/ar... The frame buffer is at 1280x1080 and its up scaled to 1920x1080
@Bladefist There is absolutely a 1280x1080p, 1080p states the render of 1080 pixels in height. FHD is 1920x1080 but there are plenty of variations of 1080p which can be customly scaled by developers. Just because the market only introduces you to 720p, 900p and 1080p as they are standard doesn't mean that that's all there is. For example my old tv was 720p, but it's actual resolution was 1272 by like 734 (something like that. :)
@kB0 there is no such thing as 1280x1080p... there IS a resolution that is 1280x1080...however 1080p is 1920x1080... there is no such thing as a "variation" of 1080p...there is 1080p and other resolutions... your old TV was NOT a 720p TV...it was a 1272x734 TV that was marketed as a 720p TV because the manufacturer used an odd ball resolution screen (probably to cut costs) 720p = 1280x720 all day, every day no discussions about it... 1080p = 1920x1280 ditto...
@metfanant P just means it is progressive. i means interlaced. There is 1080p and 1080i. The industry standard for 1080p is normally 1920x1080. 1080p doesn't mean it is always 1920x1080. The p stands for progressive. There is a variation of 1080p. A LOT of variations. Don't start stating things as fact when you only follow the basics of the industry.
@metfanant 1080p means 1080 pixels in progressive scan it's not God Damn set resolution, I can't believe how oblivious you can be. Edit: it seems that edgeofsins beat me to the punch:) It seems that a lot of posters are letting personal feelings come into play and completely neglect logic. Industry Standard has changed, we don't even use HD to refer to 1080p alone anymore. We statd, SD, QHD, FHD etc.
@edgeofsins @kB0 NO...look at the standards set forth by industry groups like DIGTALEUROPE...which REQUIRES for a Television to be marketed as HD Ready 1080p that it must have a MINIMUM resolution of 1920x1080...nothing lower even if it meets the 1080 vertical resolution... this is industry standard...period... the "variations" of 1080p are frame rate differences
Holy crap...frame rate difference? Rest In Piece metfant Intelligence. Frame rate has 0 to do with resolution and more to do with the amount of HZ tv has. That doesn't mean that the tv will actually operate at those frame rates, it merely describes that it can operate at those frame rates. Law vs technology is an abmigous case. The fact that I can make 3G be a minimum of 3 MB/s is the Countries' problem, the will obviously dumb it down to something where majority of ppl will understand. Now to intellects, and the added bonus of actually knowing the technology, our minds can conceive more that 1 + 1 = 2. In other words short and simple for the public, heavy and complex in real life. The fact that you can actually square root a negative number and get an imaginary isn't accept when dealing with purchases or real life, but the fact of the matter is that it is there. Same here, there are resolutions of 1280x1080, Gran Turimo 5 is a good example and so is Wipeout HD, as they both run at that resolution. It's still HD, but it's not FHD (Full HD)...they still run at 1080p which means 1080 pixels in progressive scan. Now if you want to be just some common idiot on the street and can't handle the truth and or don't want to go out of your way to understand it...well I'm sorry that is your problem. Just because you don't believe something is true doesn't make it wrong. Laptops are marketed at HD but actually 720p, which HD we have been led to believe is 1080p. Now the industry added F-HD to create another class and justify HD. Please don't take laws and rules and argue Technology with them, it doesn't make sense at all. @Bladefist, no 1080p IS NOT and aspect, it merely follows the aspect:). Meaning 16 is divisible in 1920 and 9 is divisible in 1080. They have a lot to do with each other but it's incorrect to think that 1080p is an aspect. 1920x1080 is an aspect, but 1080p isn't. Just like all Jacuzzi are hot tubs but not all hot tubs are Jacuzzis:) 1920x1080 fits the 16:9 aspect and is a resolution, 1080p is an undefined resolution but isn't an aspect because we don't know the width. (This is Sub High School math) Common aspect ratios are 4:3, 16:9 and 16:10. Software, movies and games don't need to follow those ratios, tell me what aspect COD's resolution fits? It's still a progressive Scan game but its 644p (or w.e) The same goes with games that are 1024x720. It's still 720p, since 720 IS THE FUCKING HEIGHT IN PIXELS which is outputted in progressive scan. :) Google something before you post, just because you got your facts at Best Buy or laws/rule books doesn't mean you know technology and how it works.
@kB0 again NO.. yes...the variations of 1080p come down to framerate differences...because the industry accepted definition of "1080p" is 1920x1080 progressive...just like "1080i" is 1920x1080 interlaced and so forth... like i said in my post...yes there are other resolutions that have a vertical resolution of 1080 pixels...Gran Turismo 5 is a perfect example like you said...but it is NOT natively 1080p..because it is not 1920x1080... i said NOTHING about laws in my post..nothing at all...simply that the body in charge of certifying a television set (in all of Europe) as 1080p requires that the set meet a minimum of 1920x1080...that is a FACT...to simply be "HD Ready" you must meet a vertical resolution of 720 pixels or higher...that is why there are oddball sets labled as "720p" when they are often 768p in fact... laptops that are 720p but marketed as HD are pefectly fine...because 1280x720p is an industry accepted HD resolution...in reality anything above 1280x720 is considered HD.. i think you need to practice what you preach and use Google yourself...you might learn something... its actually comical how wrong you are...i could go for days about resolutions...youre wrong...
" I was personally expecting this.. How about you? " Only since day 1 of the Wii U's announcement, is all. When they danced around Geoff asking them about "NATIVE 1080p", I knew they were doing what they did with Wii in terms of power (barely more powerful than last gen competitors). But as for more recent suggestions...WiiUDaily was the only group "confirming" native 1080p titles without names, quotes, or 1080p screens, other than 1080p 2D/2.5D platformers and Wii ports.
The truth is strating to come out that the wiiU too wont be playing the big AAA titles at 1080p either. Its a ripoff when the games will be no better than a ps3 or 360 which is less than half the price.
"...less than half the price." 1/2 of the Wii U price tage = $150/$175 Cheapest Xbox 360: $200 Cheapest Playstation 3: $250 Something doesn't add up here.
"Something doesn't add up here." Yeah you forgot the 150$ controller
Im sorry it's 2012. 1080p should be mandatory, and higher resolutions should be optional. This is not right.
not everyone has a 1080 p capable television. mine is most likely 736 p, seeing as it's an off brand. sure when you multiply 1920x1080 and 1280x720, 1080 p has 2.25 times as many pixels, which is an actual great deal of work to do. i'm not sure if it was laziness on the developer's part, but when your current console derivatives aren't displaying 720 p native, unless the money is being put there way from up top or from Nintendo, 1080 p native may not be worth their time just yet. it wouldn't be a selling point for me, in this case, my tv doesn't even support 1080p, ha.
Would've been nice I suppose, but honestly, I played the game earlier this week and it looked really good and ran as smooth as butter (framerate).
Cool, can I be invited to the secret, magical place where they've shown the WiiU version played?
Wasn't it at the new York comic con? Monster hunter was. A lot of wiiu stuff was actually.
"without proof nothing is likely" so.... you believe the story of some guy that said activision emailed him... but showed no proof... (im not saying its not true or is true... just pointing out your flawed logic)
It'll still be the best version, HANDS DOWN!!
No question about that. Map, using kill streaks, and playing it all on the gamepad, etc made the other versions far inferior, but this is still a downer.
Why pay $300+ for a slightly better version.
@HammadTheOne. People are not buying the Wii U for CoD. For the people that are already getting a Wii U, you may as well just pick up the better Wii U version since it will cost the same as the others whenever you buy it.
"Map, using kill streaks, and playing it all on the gamepad, etc made the other versions far inferior" Sooo.....clicking on the screen instead of the much quicker motion of moving your thumb to the D-pad for kill streaks, looking AWAY from the screen to see the map, and playing on a tiny screen so that....your dad can watch baseball?... ...makes the other versions "far inferior"? LOL
[accidental double post]
@SilentNegotiator No, but the added control schemes inherently gives the Wii U version more options. Just because you don't care for it doesn't mean others won't.
Oh, indeed SilentNegotiator. It does make me laugh when people say this Game Pad device will be so amazing with all the new gameplay experiences it will provide. A Game Pad is exactly what is _not_ needed for most types of games. You cannot look away from the screen for a split second in COD without getting shot at, so why do people think it will be handy to look down and see the map or use their kill streak? Just look at the trash example they showed for ZombiU. Essentially pausing the game to then scan the room with some kind of thermal/x-ray type vision. You mean to say that couldn't be done before now, by, oh I dunno - pressing a button?
Interesting point for Cod because I'm sure there are a number of gamers who feel the same way because it is easier. I think there are people who would enjoy a reason to actually feel pressured while playing though because I assume it is not more realistic to say that in an actually firefight you would never have to look away to pull out the computer that you use to call a killstreak. Luckily there is the pro controller so you have both options. As for Zombie U I disagree. In the video they didn't essentially pause the game to scan because the zombies kept attacking like with any aspect of that game where the gamepad is used. It puts some pressure and thrill into a situation where you actually need look away to get something you need which is realistic and is a quality that any horror shooter like that should strive for. I mean a zombie game without thrill is basically a cabela's hunting game. Now it's not for everyone of course but if you don't want it the traditional type of controller isn't going anywhere.
That is a fair comment about ZombiU, when I said paused I kind of more meant you're no longer playing the 'actual' game, you're taking time out from looking at the big screen to look at a small screen. I fail to see the difference. To be something useful it needs to compliment what is on the big screen, not offer an alternative viewing output.
If you can use the gamepad without the TV, that means you have another window to see what the TV can not. Imagine running straight, and looking side to side by simply moving your hands side to side while still looking straight on the screen. It's light enough to multi-task, changing weapons, and is much faster to drop mortars by tapping on a screen than it is to move an anologue stick across the TV. Maybe it's just that you gamepad naysayers lack imagination, that is until your big bad multi-billion dollar corporations emulate what innovation is supposed to look like. I don't know about everyone else, but the Ps360 controllers are outdated by at least 10 years. Don't worry, they'll try to come up with something that doesn't require to sell their systems at a loss.
Old news but confirmed.
http://n4g.com/news/1088773... What was that all about then? Personally I don't care too much either way, I'll be buying it on PS3 and nobody who plays CoD plays it for the graphics.
some moron who doesn't understand that NATIVE 1920x1080p resolution isn't the same as"FullHD". He then went on to champion his cause by making grand assumptions while not understanding the basic terminology invented by TV manufacturers. The WiiU version will still be the best console version. PC>WiiU>360>PS3. "nobody who plays CoD plays it for the graphics". Absolutely true.
"not understanding the basic terminology invented by TV manufacturers." This is your number one problem. Do you really believe all game developers use the same terminology as TV manufacturers? Most do not. Just the same as every year too the console version will be coded mainly around the 360 as it is lead platform for CoD.
Can I get your time machine CBOATH?
'Today, Activision confirmed to us via email that “The game is not natively 1080p”, which of course means that it’s the Wii U that will be able to upconvert it, since the system supports the format.' They couldn't have bothered to show a scan of the email or perhaps a link to a source statement of some kind? I'm not trying to discredit this news, but after believing one too many rumors I try to authenticate my news as best as I can.
There is no link to a source (actually, I'm the source) ...their PR team emailed me today after I asked if the game was natively in 1080p and they said, and I quote: "Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. The game is not natively 1080p. As for Nuketown, a re-imagined version comes with the game as a pre-order bonus." This is not a rumor and I don't need to "scan" my email. I played the game at a Nintendo event on Wednesday and met w/Activision reps there. They said they'd get back to me on the question and that was the response. This is the preview I wrote from the event for Black Ops 2 - http://gotgame.com/2012/10/...
But where is your source? Sorry am not implying that you are lying but you can't just post some news without any valid sources. You can scan the mail but blur your email adress at least.
Exactly what I am saying. Show us the email then I will believe it. @Ramon3MR, So we are to just trust what you post? NEWSFLASH! I got an email from Activision and they say it is running at "FULL HD". /s
I just got an Email from Nintendo. I have 4 weeks left to live.
Ramon sent me a screen shot of the email. Seems legit. Well what the heck does full 1080p mean if it doesn't mean full 1080p? I wouldn't have cared except Activision already claimed it was. Why lie? Or at least why word their statement in a way that would be misunderstood?
I don't know why people would disagree with someone for saying news sites should cite their sources. I'm like 89% expecting this article to be accurate, but I'm going to wait for other news sites to confirm.
so you dont know why they should cite sources... ...yet you are 89% its true.. cant you see THATS why they want an actual source? to be 100% sure instead...? and waiting on OTHER sites to have the same story DOES NOT help at all...why? i think you are smart enough to figure it out