Wii-U

[Gardocki]

(11-05-2012 04:45 AM)BumblebeeCody Wrote:  Also, the Xbox isn't more powerful than the PS3. The PS3 may have a stupid way of processing (Two 256 CPUs at 700MHz) but the graphics card, processing power and processing speeds are of a much higher standard than the Xbox. The Xbox IS also a 720p console whereas the PS3 is a true 1080p console.

You misread my post, I said the Xbox had some better looking games then the PS3, which is a more powerful machine (said machine being PS3).

(11-05-2012 04:45 AM)BumblebeeCody Wrote:  In a nutshell, the WiiU (WiiU owners) are going to have to wait A LONG time until we get true third party titles for the WiiU since all of these games are ports from old/current generation technology. What this means is that you can buy AC: III on Xbox and it'll look pretty sexy. It'll look sexier on PS3 but will be pretty much classed as hardcore sexy porn on the WiiU. But that's due to game porting. Third Party developers need to make WiiU exclusive titles to show of the hardware. That's not going to happen any time soon though...

So you're repeating everything I've already said.

Got it.

(11-05-2012 04:45 AM)BumblebeeCody Wrote:  Lastly, I don't think using Call of Duty as a good argument case since that game is a 600p game(it's not HD basically, but upscaled to 720p, and also explains why it looks pretty good on a 480p console like the Wii). Not only are the graphics basic, but so is the shading and texture models, though the frame rate is one of it's best points (constant 60FPS). Playing Call of Duty expecting good graphics is like driving a Mini and expecting it to be fast since it has four wheels.

I stand by my use of Black Ops 2 because, like I said, I'm not going to buy it on a more powerful machine to play the game on when it (the game) looks the same on the other consoles. I already have an Xbox, there's no reason to get a more powerful Wii U when all the game footage I've seen from both consoles shows no significant difference.