Wii U - General Discussion Thread

Reggie seems extremely short sighted.  The first in most game series' don't do as well as later installments.  Just because you don't think you'll make money on the first game doesn't mean that you won't on future installments.  I'm specifically referencing the last paragraph/question in this article:

http://www.siliconera.com/2013/12/04/nintendos-reggie-talks-wii-u-western-development-operation-rainfall/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+siliconera%2FMkOc+%28Siliconera%29

 
Well, I think he kind of has to say that so that a small vocal minority doesn't bug the crap out of Nintendo... But the fact is that Xenoblade AND Earthbound on VC both happened because of the fan base. (I just wish they listened more... and more quickly!)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, I think this is the first interview I've ever read where I felt Reggie was being fairly honest and "real".  I like him more because of it, but I also see how much more alien he is to me (i.e. I can't relate).  I know it's all about the business, sadly, in this capitalistic world, but what about inspiring some good will by giving fans what they want if you can break even?  Surely it's a good investment, even if you're not making money hand over first?

I suppose they only have so much time and energy, so they have to choose what will make them the most money.

Anyway, I ranted enough about this already on the comments at Siliconera...

I like how he's finally admitted that Nintendo needs to release GAMES with their hardware to sell.  You'd think the first year of the 3DS, where it struggled so much, would have shown them that they need games to release the Wii U.

Imagine if the 3DS had launched with Zelda: A Link Between Worlds, Mario 3D Land.  Imagine if Wii U had released with Zelda: WW and Mario 3D World.  Or maybe I'm wrong and it really doesn't matter.  PS4 and Xbone have terribly uninteresting (to me) launch titles, and they both seem to have been wildly successful launches.

I guess I have to admit that the video games industry has kind of left me in the dust in a lot of ways and I am more niche than I've ever been.

Sorry for the rant!

 
PS  Xenoblade Chronicles sold really well.  Imagine if Nintendo had given it a proper launch and advertised it.  If they weren't willing to do that, then why not give it to Xseed or someone?  Xseed published The Last Story, and it was their most successful game ever.  They could have done great things with Xenoblade, and they would have turned it around and given back to gamers with that success, unlike Nintendo who acts like they did us a tremendous favor.

He can say all he wants that they're not influenced by petitions, and yes, 100,000 signatures doesn't mean 100,000 sales, but as someone else already said, I seriously doubt they would have bothered with Earthbound or Xenoblade if not for fan outcry.

I am still annoyed!!!  I need therapy clearly!

 
soonersfan60 said:
Well, I think he kind of has to say that so that a small vocal minority doesn't bug the crap out of Nintendo... But the fact is that Xenoblade AND Earthbound on VC both happened because of the fan base. (I just wish they listened more... and more quickly!)
Click to expand...
That's not really what I was getting at. I was talking about the last paragraph where he specifically says that they weren't going to bring it to the US because they didn't think they could cover the cost to localize it. That seems really stupid because even if they lost money on it, it would have driven up demand for the next one. It's almost like these industry vets don't understand the way the business works. The first game in the series never sells as well as later installments. Compare Assassins Creed 4 to 1.

 
Yep.  Not only that, but they brought Xenoblade Chronicles out in the UK, in English.  These days, all they'd need to do is slap it up on the eShop, but even then, it was just manufacturing...  Like really, how many need to be sold to cover manufacturing costs?  I just don't get it.

I don't get why they don't put the Inazuma Eleven games on the eShop.  They are already in English.  Is it not practically free money?

 
Jesse_Dylan said:
Yep. Not only that, but they brought Xenoblade Chronicles out in the UK, in English. These days, all they'd need to do is slap it up on the eShop, but even then, it was just manufacturing... Like really, how many need to be sold to cover manufacturing costs? I just don't get it.

I don't get why they don't put the Inazuma Eleven games on the eShop. They are already in English. Is it not practically free money?
Click to expand...
I agree, since the English language version was already out there, the cost to get it into the US market was minimal.

The thing that really sucks about this is that they made a lot of them for Europe but Nintendo continue to does their region locking bullshit. Of course Iwata is doing it all for the gamer though...and because of the "law" even though the US has no laws about video games. What a bunch of bullshit.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/07/03/nintendos-president-discusses-region-locking

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Whelp, just sold my Wii on Craigslist for $50.  That worked out well since the Wii U already has the Wii hardware in it that lowers my "upgrade" cost from 225 to 175.

 
To be fair, the cost of localization is higher these days, largely due to the expectations surrounding voice acting. A text-only game is cheaper to localize. Most major console efforts will usually involve some degree of voice acting, especially the more story-driven games. Decent voice acting takes a fair amount of time and expense.

Nintendo is extremely good at convincing me to keep my old hardware. I keep my GameCube because of the GBA player. I keep my Wii because it is the best way to play GameCube games. And now my WiiU is the best way for me to play Wii games. I collect, so I would keep them anyway. But there is actual utility for all of my old Nintendo systems.

 
I'm thinking we sell our Wii and hook the GameCube back up. I have the component cable for the Cube so get progressive scan. Only catch is I don't think we can transfer locked Wii saves to the Wii U, right? Like Smash Bros.
 
Richard Kain said:
To be fair, the cost of localization is higher these days, largely due to the expectations surrounding voice acting. A text-only game is cheaper to localize. Most major console efforts will usually involve some degree of voice acting, especially the more story-driven games. Decent voice acting takes a fair amount of time and expense.

Nintendo is extremely good at convincing me to keep my old hardware. I keep my GameCube because of the GBA player. I keep my Wii because it is the best way to play GameCube games. And now my WiiU is the best way for me to play Wii games. I collect, so I would keep them anyway. But there is actual utility for all of my old Nintendo systems.
Click to expand...
Whatever floats your boat, I"m not a game collector, not interested in keeping that stuff. If I want to play an older game, I'll just buy the download. I've never been convinced to keep hardware, if I can get a Wind Waker Wii U bundle for $225 then sell my Wii for $50, I'll do it. The same goes for everything else. I early adopted HD-DVD but when they gave up, I sold all those disks and the player and bought a Blu Ray player and BR disks. Not interested in keeping a dead format.

crunchewy said:
I'm thinking we sell our Wii and hook the GameCube back up. I have the component cable for the Cube so get progressive scan. Only catch is I don't think we can transfer locked Wii saves to the Wii U, right? Like Smash Bros.
Click to expand...
I was able to transfer just about everything. Only a few things like the Voting channel data didn't transfer. It's actually kind of a bummer to me that they got rid of it, my wife liked doing that with me.

 
Blaster man said:
Whatever floats your boat, I"m not a game collector, not interested in keeping that stuff. If I want to play an older game, I'll just buy the download.
Click to expand...
Like you said, whatever floats your boat. I'm definitely in the minority when it comes to my approach to video game acquisition. And thankfully, Nintendo's approach to backwards compatibility works out just fine for consumers like yourself. Having a large chunk of the Wii library available for the Wii U is a big plus. I would personally recommend Kirby's Epic Yarn, Metroid Prime Trilogy, and Zack and Wiki to tide you over any lean times that the Wii U might have.

Part of the reason I hang onto the old stuff is that Nintendo always seems to provide some superior functionality for their backwards compatibility. Thanks to the dimmer screens on the GBA, the GBA player for the GameCube is still one of the best ways to play those games. The improved component cable integration for the Wii makes it one of the most ideal means of playing GameCube games. And now the HDMI support for the Wii U makes it one of the best ways to play Wii games.

 
Richard Kain said:
And now the HDMI support for the Wii U makes it one of the best ways to play Wii games.
Click to expand...
Kind of an off topic request, but have you compared the video output of the Wii U with Wii (and even just Wii U) games between the component and HDMI types? Both output types can technically handle HD, and I know most HDTVs nowadays natively prefer HDMI in terms of the video signal, but I still like going old school with the audio and hooking those directly up to a receiver (which is easy to do when it is component).

Not that it makes any difference now to me (as I don't have a Wii U yet), but I've always been curious if anyone has tested it first hand. Logic tells me that it's component either way, and the 480p signal should be the same from the Wii to Wii U, just not sure if the GPU in the Wii U cleans it up any, or if it is strictly the HDMI format that is the trick to a cleaner signal.

The bigger question would be if Wii U games look any different between HDMI and component for the HD signals. At least the HDMI format would clear up the sole component slot on my TV either way.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Does the Wii U upscale Wii games? If it doesn't what's the advantage to playing them on Wii U?

When I was setting up the Wii U I used the component cable from our Wii. It works fine and I was able to set it to 720p (our TV is 720p). It looked pretty good, but there was a little analog ghosting or something. I think at some point I"ll get an HDMI switch box and go the HDMI route.

Perhaps I just answered my own question. Ha ha!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
crunchewy said:
Does the Wii U upscale Wii games? If it doesn't what's the advantage to playing them on Wii U?

When I was setting up the Wii U I used the component cable from our Wii. It works fine and I was able to set it to 720p (our TV is 720p). It looked pretty good, but there was a little analog ghosting or something. I think at some point I"ll get an HDMI switch box and go the HDMI route.

Perhaps I just answered my own question. Ha ha!
Click to expand...
It's just Wii hardware, it's not making the picture any better. When the Wii U first came out a bunch of people were claiming that the Wii U looked a lot better than the Wii but I'm sure that was either their imagination or they were using composite video.

To answer your question: No. If we go by the following definitions, the Wii U will upconvert but will not upscale.

Upconversion - convert analog source (ie. composite, S-Video, or component video) to HDMI (no change in resolution)
Upscaling - changing resolution from lower (eg. 480i) up to 1080p (the TV automatically does this with all input video)

The Wii U does not do what upscaling DVD players do.

 
crunchewy said:
Does the Wii U upscale Wii games? If it doesn't what's the advantage to playing them on Wii U?
Click to expand...
Well, not having to have your Wii anymore, playing on the gamepad if you like... and I guess that's about it, really. I like it, though, and I wish PS4 could boot into PS3 mode and run my PSN content and PS3 discs. The last thing I need is another system sitting there like a pair of dogs balls, and I am not ready in the least to give up my PS3.

Richard Kain said:
And now the HDMI support for the Wii U makes it one of the best ways to play Wii games.
Click to expand...
I actually use component with my Wii U. The primary reason I do this is because then I can boot into Wii mode without turning on the TV (for some reason this does not work in HDMI mode); the secondary reason is that my TV only has two HDMI ports. :( But yeah, like someone said, might need to get a switcher box or something (hopefully someday a new TV!). I haven't noticed much difference between HDMI and component. If anything, my HDMI is too saturated.

Richard Kain said:
To be fair, the cost of localization is higher these days, largely due to the expectations surrounding voice acting. A text-only game is cheaper to localize. Most major console efforts will usually involve some degree of voice acting, especially the more story-driven games. Decent voice acting takes a fair amount of time and expense.

Nintendo is extremely good at convincing me to keep my old hardware. I keep my GameCube because of the GBA player. I keep my Wii because it is the best way to play GameCube games. And now my WiiU is the best way for me to play Wii games. I collect, so I would keep them anyway. But there is actual utility for all of my old Nintendo systems.
Click to expand...
I sometimes feel sad that I haven't kept my old hardware and games. :( I do still have my SNES, but that's about it. I just get freaked out with too much stuff. So I've been pretty happy (generally) about all this Virtual Console business.

It's funny about localizations; I would actually prefer they did not bother dubbing. Cut costs, get the games to me cheaply so that they don't have to sell a ton--if it comes down to playing a game with English voices or not playing it at all, who needs English voices? I know it's not that simple, though, and while some people prefer the original voice track, probably more prefer a full dub. The Yakuza games didn't bother dubbing after the first, but they still didn't sell enough to keep bringing them over. :(

 
crunchewy said:
You can remote play WIi games on the gamepad??? Cool if so!
Click to expand...
Yeah! I love it. The range is not very good, sadly. And, for Wii, including VC games, you still have to use the Wiimote, classic controller, whatever, just as you would on a real Wii. But the gamepad does have a Wiimote sensor bar built in, and not all games need you to point at the screen anyway.

So yeah, pretty darn cool. The Wii U has a lot of neat features that Nintendo does a poor job advertising.

 
Having to use separate controls kind of sucks, though. I thought you meant I could use the gamepad controls. Still, not a bad feature.

Somebody needs to make a range booster/signal retransmitter thing for the Wii U. If that's possible and wouldn't introduce lag. Big IFs.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
crunchewy said:
Having to use separate controls kind of sucks, though. I thought you meant I could use the gamepad controls. Still, not a bad feature.
Click to expand...
Yeah it's not that cool. A few of the virtual console games are upgradable to Wii U versions which don't require Wii stuff. I have about 12 virtual console games I got free from club Nintendo and 3 of them were upgradable.
 
I wish you could just use the gamepad controls, at least for the VC games and for Wii games that support the classic pad.

I still like it, even if you have to use separate controls, though.

 
Jesse_Dylan said:
I wish you could just use the gamepad controls, at least for the VC games and for Wii games that support the classic pad.

I still like it, even if you have to use separate controls, though.
Click to expand...
I'm sure they could patch that into the firmware for Wii mode but there's no way they will because they want to force you to pay them an extra $1.50 for the upgrade.

 
Blaster man said:
To answer your question: No. If we go by the following definitions, the Wii U will upconvert but will not upscale.

Upconversion - convert analog source (ie. composite, S-Video, or component video) to HDMI (no change in resolution)
Upscaling - changing resolution from lower (eg. 480i) up to 1080p (the TV automatically does this with all input video)

The Wii U does not do what upscaling DVD players do.
Click to expand...
This is not actually true. The Wii U does upscale Wii games. What it doesn't do is render Wii games at higher resolutions. This would be the ideal scenario, and sadly the Wii U does not allow for it.

But the Wii U will take the rendered 480p that most Wii games provide, and upscale it to 1080p before sending it out. While only a slight difference, it is significant because it takes the burden of upscaling off of the TV's hardware. Many TVs are notoriously bad at dealing with upscaling. It is always better to have upscaling handled on the video game system as opposed to the TV. When I play Wii games on my Wii U, the output resolution does not shift down to 480p, but remains at 1080p. My television informs me whenever the resolution changes, and what it changes to, so any such shift would be immediately obvious.

Like I said, it isn't a big difference, but it is better. Providing your TV with a 1080p pre-scaled signal over HDMI is better than feeding it a 480p signal and letting it handle the upscaling itself. Because of this, the Wii U is technically the best way to play Wii games at the moment.

 
Richard Kain said:
This is not actually true. The Wii U does upscale Wii games. What it doesn't do is render Wii games at higher resolutions. This would be the ideal scenario, and sadly the Wii U does not allow for it.

But the Wii U will take the rendered 480p that most Wii games provide, and upscale it to 1080p before sending it out. While only a slight difference, it is significant because it takes the burden of upscaling off of the TV's hardware. Many TVs are notoriously bad at dealing with upscaling. It is always better to have upscaling handled on the video game system as opposed to the TV. When I play Wii games on my Wii U, the output resolution does not shift down to 480p, but remains at 1080p. My television informs me whenever the resolution changes, and what it changes to, so any such shift would be immediately obvious.

Like I said, it isn't a big difference, but it is better. Providing your TV with a 1080p pre-scaled signal over HDMI is better than feeding it a 480p signal and letting it handle the upscaling itself. Because of this, the Wii U is technically the best way to play Wii games at the moment.
Click to expand...
It does not upscale. What you describe as rendering the graphics in a higher resolution IS upscaling as defined above. This is precisely what the Wii U does not do. All the Wii U does is take the 480p image and send it over an HDMI cable at whatever resolution you want. My cable box has 480p images on SD channels but because I have it connected with an HDMI cable and set to output at 1080p, my TV says the signal is 1080p. The images are not upscaled.

edit:

A lot of people simply don't understand what upscaling is. They click "info" on their TV and see that it says 1080p, 720p, etc and they think it's upscaled. The Wii U does NOT upscale. Period. The end.

http://www.giantbomb.com/articles/your-wii-games-wont-be-upscaled-on-wii-u/1100-3357/

http://www.1up.com/news/wii-games-wont-look-nicer-wii-u

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Blaster man said:
It does not upscale. What you describe as rendering the graphics in a higher resolution IS upscaling as defined above. This is precisely what the Wii U does not do.
Click to expand...
The definition you're using for "upscaling" is a conversion of a lower resolution image to a higher resolution output. That is EXACTLY what I'm describing. And it is EXACTLY what the Wii U is doing.

"Upscaling" is not the same as "rendering in a higher resolution." I'm not sure why you seem to be equating the two. Or why you are quoting articles that came out a year before the Wii U even launched.

"Upscaling" happens automatically with all flat-panel televisions. Flat panel screens are fixed-resolution displays. They only have a single resolution that they are designed to display at. So if you give them a lower resolution signal, they will "upscale" that signal to the screens native resolution. But most TVs don't handle this process very well, so leaving the "upscaling" to the TV itself is usually a bad idea. Your best bet for a cleaner signal is to have the "upscaling" handled before hand, and the TV's native resolution signal fed to it.

Rendering at a higher resolution is a completely different process. That is when a game is natively rendered in a higher resolution. Part of the reason why the Wii U does NOT do this is because support for such a feature would need to be added per-game. Too many games for the Wii were not designed with multiple resolutions in mind. (since the Wii was only designed to support a single resolution) Some Wii PC emulators have added such support, but concessions have to be made for individual titles. A blanket solution would be time consuming and tedious.

And that's why the Wii U "renders" Wii games at 480p, but then "upscales" that rendered image to 1080p before sending it to your TV. You aren't getting a high-definition rendered image, which is unfortunate. But you are getting a signal that has been pre-scaled to your TVs resolution by hardware designed to handle such a process. This improves the general picture available, as well as cuts down on latency. The image is just a scaled iteration of 480p, so it will still look fairly pixelated on higher-resolution screens. But at the moment it is still the best solution for playing Wii games, as playing Wii over component cables would force a high-def screen to handle the upscaling itself.

 
Richard Kain said:
The definition you're using for "upscaling" is a conversion of a lower resolution image to a higher resolution output. That is EXACTLY what I'm describing. And it is EXACTLY what the Wii U is doing.

"Upscaling" is not the same as "rendering in a higher resolution." I'm not sure why you seem to be equating the two. Or why you are quoting articles that came out a year before the Wii U even launched.

"Upscaling" happens automatically with all flat-panel televisions. Flat panel screens are fixed-resolution displays. They only have a single resolution that they are designed to display at. So if you give them a lower resolution signal, they will "upscale" that signal to the screens native resolution. But most TVs don't handle this process very well, so leaving the "upscaling" to the TV itself is usually a bad idea. Your best bet for a cleaner signal is to have the "upscaling" handled before hand, and the TV's native resolution signal fed to it.

Rendering at a higher resolution is a completely different process. That is when a game is natively rendered in a higher resolution. Part of the reason why the Wii U does NOT do this is because support for such a feature would need to be added per-game. Too many games for the Wii were not designed with multiple resolutions in mind. (since the Wii was only designed to support a single resolution) Some Wii PC emulators have added such support, but concessions have to be made for individual titles. A blanket solution would be time consuming and tedious.

And that's why the Wii U "renders" Wii games at 480p, but then "upscales" that rendered image to 1080p before sending it to your TV. You aren't getting a high-definition rendered image, which is unfortunate. But you are getting a signal that has been pre-scaled to your TVs resolution by hardware designed to handle such a process. This improves the general picture available, as well as cuts down on latency. The image is just a scaled iteration of 480p, so it will still look fairly pixelated on higher-resolution screens. But at the moment it is still the best solution for playing Wii games, as playing Wii over component cables would force a high-def screen to handle the upscaling itself.
Click to expand...
So you think you're right and Reggie is wrong. I guess Nintendo doesn't know it's own hardware.

 
Reggie:  PETITIONS MEAN NOTHING.  YOU GOT EARTHBOUND ONLY BECAUSE I GAVE YOU EARTHBOUND, AND I CAN DAMN WELL TAKE IT AWAY.

tumblr_mrdzr4jvpX1rx4vwco1_1280.png


 
Last edited by a moderator:
Blaster man said:
So you think you're right and Reggie is wrong. I guess Nintendo doesn't know it's own hardware.
Click to expand...
The exact quote from Reggie you are referring to...

"Nintendo of America Reggie Fils-Aime revealed the news in an interview with GameTrailers this week. "It will not do that," he said when asked about the possibility. "That's really driven by the hardware, and the original Wii games were built for a specific type of hardware. There's no mechanism to quote-unquote 'up-res' that unless we launch a brand-new game." Giant Bomb also confirmed that this is the case with Nintendo PR director Mark Franklin."

The term that Reggie uses in that article is "up-res," a direct reference to rendering the games in question in a higher resolution. You were simply being confused by a poorly-written article, that used the term "upscaling" at the beginning out of context.

It is entirely true that the general appearance of Wii games on the Wii U are not that much better. The improvement in quality is slight at best. They are NOT being rendered at better resolutions. And because of that they do not seem all that clearer. But I never claimed that was the case. I'm simply pointing out that due to the various factors involved, the Wii U is the best method for playing Wii games at the moment. While only a minor improvement, it is an improvement all the same, and makes the Wii U the optimal platform for enjoying Wii software.

Please don't brow-beat me over your misinterpretation.

 
Richard Kain said:
The exact quote from Reggie you are referring to...

"Nintendo of America Reggie Fils-Aime revealed the news in an interview with GameTrailers this week. "It will not do that," he said when asked about the possibility. "That's really driven by the hardware, and the original Wii games were built for a specific type of hardware. There's no mechanism to quote-unquote 'up-res' that unless we launch a brand-new game." Giant Bomb also confirmed that this is the case with Nintendo PR director Mark Franklin."

The term that Reggie uses in that article is "up-res," a direct reference to rendering the games in question in a higher resolution. You were simply being confused by a poorly-written article, that used the term "upscaling" at the beginning out of context.

It is entirely true that the general appearance of Wii games on the Wii U are not that much better. The improvement in quality is slight at best. They are NOT being rendered at better resolutions. And because of that they do not seem all that clearer. But I never claimed that was the case. I'm simply pointing out that due to the various factors involved, the Wii U is the best method for playing Wii games at the moment. While only a minor improvement, it is an improvement all the same, and makes the Wii U the optimal platform for enjoying Wii software.

Please don't brow-beat me over your misinterpretation.
Click to expand...
So, explain to me how there is an increase in in quality regardless of how small that increase is, if the images are rendered the same.

 
Richard Kain said:
And that's why the Wii U "renders" Wii games at 480p, but then "upscales" that rendered image to 1080p before sending it to your TV. You aren't getting a high-definition rendered image, which is unfortunate. But you are getting a signal that has been pre-scaled to your TVs resolution by hardware designed to handle such a process. This improves the general picture available, as well as cuts down on latency. The image is just a scaled iteration of 480p, so it will still look fairly pixelated on higher-resolution screens. But at the moment it is still the best solution for playing Wii games, as playing Wii over component cables would force a high-def screen to handle the upscaling itself.
Click to expand...
This is actually the information I was looking / hoping for, is that the Wii U handles the upscaling before sending it out the TV. The processing / upscaling on the HDTV adds too much latency (aka HDTV lag) when its a 480p signal (my TV has a native resolution of 1080p), so I'm forced to do fast processing mode on the TV to help reduce this, and use separate audio jacks to a receiver to avoid the audio lag (which is even worse than video lag).

My Long story short: I will still have jaggies (the Wii U doesn't get rid of these at all for Wii games), but with the extra upscaling processing handled by the Wii U instead of the TV, this decreases latency and (in my case) allows me to use more built-in TV features if I want to (like Smooth Motion), which can make the picture look better (just not in terms of resolution).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Blaster man said:
So, explain to me how there is an increase in in quality regardless of how small that increase is, if the images are rendered the same.
Click to expand...
A game rendered at 480p and output through component analog cables is fed into the TV at 480p, and gets up-scaled by the TV itself.

With the Wii U, the game is rendered at 480p, and then the Wii U itself scales the rendered image up to 1080p. Once the image has been upscaled it is then output over HDMI to the TV at 1080p.

The difference is WHERE the upscaling is taking place. Over standard Wii component output, it is taking place on the TV itself. On the Wii U it is taking place on the Wii U itself, and no upscaling is happening on the TV.

There are some very high-quality TVs where there may be little to no difference, as those TVs might be great at handling upscaling themselves. But most modern fixed-resolution displays are terrible at upscaling. (and even down-scaling, for that matter) If you feed them any signal other than their native resolution, you are going to get a drop in quality, simply because they aren't very good at handling the scaling themselves. This drop in quality usually takes the shape of compression artifacts in the image. Basically, it makes the final rendered image look like a JPEG that has been scaled up.

With the Wii U, all the upscaling happens on the system itself. This allows it to avoid having any scaling handled by the TV. It provides a more consistent quality across multiple TVs, as well as a generally cleaner final image. The image is still derived from a 480p max original, but the scaling is of a higher quality, which helps keep the final image clean and free of artifacts.

 
This is sort of on-topic and sort of off, but is there any way to reduce latency on the TV?

It's only a big deal when the sound between the gamepad and TV is out of sync (tv sound is very slightly later than the gamepad), or when I'm playing a retro game like, say, Super Mario World.  Unlike playing with a tube TV (or on the gamepad), there is a tiny tiny tiny delay between hitting jump and Mario jumping.  

My TV doesn't have a "game mode" or anything.  Nothing seems to be there to fix it.  It happened on Wii as well; it's just only noticeable with some games, like Mario World (doesn't seem to matter on much else).  And the sound "echo" is annoying.

 
Richard Kain said:
A game rendered at 480p and output through component analog cables is fed into the TV at 480p, and gets up-scaled by the TV itself.

With the Wii U, the game is rendered at 480p, and then the Wii U itself scales the rendered image up to 1080p. Once the image has been upscaled it is then output over HDMI to the TV at 1080p.

The difference is WHERE the upscaling is taking place. Over standard Wii component output, it is taking place on the TV itself. On the Wii U it is taking place on the Wii U itself, and no upscaling is happening on the TV.

There are some very high-quality TVs where there may be little to no difference, as those TVs might be great at handling upscaling themselves. But most modern fixed-resolution displays are terrible at upscaling. (and even down-scaling, for that matter) If you feed them any signal other than their native resolution, you are going to get a drop in quality, simply because they aren't very good at handling the scaling themselves. This drop in quality usually takes the shape of compression artifacts in the image. Basically, it makes the final rendered image look like a JPEG that has been scaled up.

With the Wii U, all the upscaling happens on the system itself. This allows it to avoid having any scaling handled by the TV. It provides a more consistent quality across multiple TVs, as well as a generally cleaner final image. The image is still derived from a 480p max original, but the scaling is of a higher quality, which helps keep the final image clean and free of artifacts.
Click to expand...
I'm still a bit confused by this...I don't set my TV to expand the picture to fill the screen. I have it displayed at the resolution that it comes in at...

Jesse_Dylan said:
This is sort of on-topic and sort of off, but is there any way to reduce latency on the TV?

It's only a big deal when the sound between the gamepad and TV is out of sync (tv sound is very slightly later than the gamepad), or when I'm playing a retro game like, say, Super Mario World. Unlike playing with a tube TV (or on the gamepad), there is a tiny tiny tiny delay between hitting jump and Mario jumping.

My TV doesn't have a "game mode" or anything. Nothing seems to be there to fix it. It happened on Wii as well; it's just only noticeable with some games, like Mario World (doesn't seem to matter on much else). And the sound "echo" is annoying.
Click to expand...
My TV has a "game mode" that really helps. I've only noticed latency in one game though. Pinball for PS3 while in 3d mode. What TV model do you have? Mine has it in the settings with like "cinema" and some others.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I didn't notice any difference in the Wii menu quality through my Wii U w/HDMI vs my Wii w/component cable. I'll try with DKCR, later.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Once major difference on an HDTV for Wii vs. Wii U is that on the TV your Wii U will have black borders, so you're ultimately getting a smaller image.  I think Wii games look better this way, but that's just me, even though the black borders do tick me off a bit.

 
KingBroly said:
Once major difference on an HDTV for Wii vs. Wii U is that on the TV your Wii U will have black borders, so you're ultimately getting a smaller image. I think Wii games look better this way, but that's just me, even though the black borders do tick me off a bit.
Click to expand...
The Wii games on my HDTV have all been full screen.

 
Blaster man said:
I'm still a bit confused by this...I don't set my TV to expand the picture to fill the screen. I have it displayed at the resolution that it comes in at...

My TV has a "game mode" that really helps. I've only noticed latency in one game though. Pinball for PS3 while in 3d mode. What TV model do you have? Mine has it in the settings with like "cinema" and some others.
Click to expand...
I've got an older Sony 720p TV. I'll have to figure out the model number and Google it. I don't seem to have any modes like that, though. I've got vivid and cinema and standard, but those are only for the color and brightness settings and stuff. :(

 
KingBroly said:
Once major difference on an HDTV for Wii vs. Wii U is that on the TV your Wii U will have black borders, so you're ultimately getting a smaller image. I think Wii games look better this way, but that's just me, even though the black borders do tick me off a bit.
Click to expand...
There's a setting on the options menu to change that. On mine, the picture actually went past the edges of the TV, so I wasn't seeing some of it. I went in there and narrowed it down so I could see the full picture. You can go in there and make it bigger so you don't have the box anymore.

 
Jesse_Dylan said:
I've got an older Sony 720p TV. I'll have to figure out the model number and Google it. I don't seem to have any modes like that, though. I've got vivid and cinema and standard, but those are only for the color and brightness settings and stuff. :(
Click to expand...
Okay, my old Sony 720p TV doesn't have a game mode either. It's a Bravia XBR1. Your best bet is to buy a big new TV! Life is hard, I know.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Blaster man said:
Okay, my old Sony 720p TV doesn't have a game mode either. It's a Bravia XBR1. Your best bet is to buy a big new TV! Life is hard, I know.
Click to expand...
Anything that can be done with these old honkers? I really don't want to buy a new TV (I think my PS3 is dead, too! or just the hard drive maybe--zero budget for either).

I'll check my model # real quick here. KDL-32ML130 That's a mouthful.

 
Jesse_Dylan said:
Anything that can be done with these old honkers? I really don't want to buy a new TV (I think my PS3 is dead, too! or just the hard drive maybe--zero budget for either).

I'll check my model # real quick here. KDL-32ML130 That's a mouthful.
Click to expand...
You'll just have to put up with it. As for the PS3, no clue what to tell you. Mine was making weird noises so I sold it on Craigslist for $125 then bought a new one on Black Friday for $200.

 
How does the upgrade thing work for VC games? Do you have to transfer your Wii to the Wii U before you can get the discount on the Wii U VC version of games? Or do they otherwise somehow figure out that you own the game on Wii? Also is there any advantages to the Wii U VC? Why upgrade?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
crunchewy said:
How does the upgrade thing work for VC games? Do you have to transfer your Wii to the Wii U before you can get the discount on the Wii U VC version of games? Or do they otherwise somehow figure out that you own the game on Wii? Also is there any advantages to the Wii U VC? Why upgrade?
Click to expand...
They wouldn't have any way of knowing unless you transferred your Wii content to your Wii U.

Advantages are being able to play entirely with the gamepad (rather than using a Wiimote), access to Miiverse, not having to be in Wii mode... That's about it. It's worth it to me, though, for the $1 or $1.50.

 
crunchewy said:
I thought maybe they could know from Club Nintendo, since the games get registered there.
Click to expand...
One advantage he forgot, you can get rid of your Wii if you transfer to Wii U. The process takes for fucking ever. Seriously, it's stupid slow. I want to say it took somewhere in the neighborhood of 60-90 minutes for it to transfer for me.

One other advantage, when you do the "upgrade", you retain the Wii Mode version. So if you ever get a Wii U2 and move content from Wii U mode to Wii U2 Mode, you'll still have duplicates of that content in Wii Mode which is good for obvious reasons.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top