Activision Says Wii U Version of Black Ops 2 Not Natively 1080p

GotGame: The publisher confirmed that the game isn't natively in 1080p, but does feature Nuketown 2025.

The story is too old to be commented.
LX-General-Kaos1775d ago

A moderate megaton for some.

I was personally expecting this.. How about you?

LOGICWINS1775d ago (Edited 1775d ago )

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.


LOL, 7 people approved this in like ten seconds. Hilarious how serious this is for some people.

LOGICWINS1775d ago

^^And I'm agreeing with you. Those few people that do take it seriously are hilarious.

decrypt1775d ago

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.

jsslifelike1775d ago

Won't it just be upscaled 560p again like every console, every year? This is hardly news...

Gridloc1774d ago

1080p in 1998? You sure about that?

Gridloc1774d ago

1080p in 1998? Don't think so...

SkullBlade1691774d ago

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...

ShinMaster1774d ago

If it can't even do a current gen game in 1080p natively!

Another reason -> for me <- to wait for the PS4/X720.

nukeitall1774d ago (Edited 1774d ago )


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.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 1774d ago
GraveLord1775d ago

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)

herbs1775d ago

It most likely still has higher resolution textures than other console versions.

HammadTheBeast1775d ago (Edited 1775d ago )

Nope. Stop lying to yourselves without proof. Nothing is "likely".

kB01775d ago


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 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!

herbs1775d ago (Edited 1775d ago )

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+

_LarZen_1775d ago

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....

jsslifelike1775d ago


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.

vulcanproject1774d ago (Edited 1774d ago )

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.


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!

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1774d ago
raytraceme1775d ago

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.

LX-General-Kaos1775d ago

I doubt Microsoft had anything to do with cods resolution.

jetlian1775d ago (Edited 1775d ago )

thats for release only. They cant control how the game looks on the platform


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

wastedcells1775d ago

Ya it's just a port of the ps3/360 game, like every other multi platform game will be.

Beastforlifenoob1774d ago

If that makes you sleep better at night. SURE!

DigitalAnalog1775d ago

Rendering at 1280x1080p. At best it would be 720p native, I REALLY don't see why this cannot be achieved with this system.

Bladesfist1775d ago

there is no such thing as 1280x1080p. 1080p is an aspect ratio of 1920 x 1080.

SilentNegotiator1775d ago

Riiiiiight. Because a principled publisher like Activision wouldn't play up THAT angle if they could, instead of admitting to it not being 1080p.


fossilfern1775d ago

@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. "

The frame buffer is at 1280x1080 and its up scaled to 1920x1080

kB01775d ago


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.


Metfanant1774d ago


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 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...

edgeofsins1774d ago


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.

kB01774d ago (Edited 1774d ago )


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.

Metfanant1774d ago (Edited 1774d ago )


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

kB01774d ago (Edited 1774d ago )

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.