Goriginal Content

EoD - SS motion

GN Podcast #466

EoD - Zelda music

EoD - Fatal Frame

EoD - Smash C-stick

EoD - Old games
 

DICE says Frostbite 3 engine was tested on Wii U, didn't perform favorably

Johan Andersson is the Technical Director on Frostbite at DICE...



Thanks to T27duck for the heads up!

Also check out:
Discussion Preview
82 total comments (View all)
No Avatar
06 May 2013 23:55

There's no reason to get upset about this, because does it matter if EA puts their games on the Wii U?

EA's current line-up is garbage; series that were once good have all gotten progressively shovel with terrible DLC. I can't name one game from them I am looking forward to.
User avatar
06 May 2013 23:58

@Eternal Rain Correct. They have been designing UE4 to be "infinitely scalable." When they say don't support the platform, that means they don't want to devote resources to help devs make games for that platform. Licensing the engine isn't just the engine, you get support and a guarantee for compatibility with platforms the engine-makers take the time to learn and test.
User avatar
07 May 2013 00:04

WHAT THE F**K? Disney closed Lucas Arts and gave the Star Wars games to EA? Guess I'll never be buying a Star Wars game again. This makes me very very worried for the entire Star Wars franchise. I was hopeful that Disney could handle this as well as they did Marvel, but it seems they are making bad decision after bad decision. You can hate George Lucas all you want for making Greedo shoot first, but at least he never let EA of all people have exclusive rights to Star Wars games. Well, Super Star Wars games have been my favorites for 20 years, and I guess they will continue to be. I guess I can always hope EA goes out of business... even more than usual.
User avatar
07 May 2013 00:07

KingBroly wrote:I'm watching with the eyes of a hawk. Be on your best behavior.

Keep in mind that CryEngine 3 is more CPU intensive than Frostbite, and it supposedly runs 'beautifully' on Wii U.


That's a good one. In fact since Crytek said that Cryengine 3 was running good on WiiU (and I think they even have Crysis 3 running on it) I knew that anything from other devs about WiiU being not powerful enough to run X or Y game will be just BS ...

There is this phrase in the PC-Gamer scene that says: "If it can run Crysis, it can run ANYTHING" ...
User avatar
07 May 2013 00:11

JJJJJJJJJ wrote:There's no reason to get upset about this, because does it matter if EA puts their games on the Wii U?

EA's current line-up is garbage; series that were once good have all gotten progressively shovel with terrible DLC. I can't name one game from them I am looking forward to.


Neither can I. All I can remember from EA is that old PSX game based on the First Harry Potter movie ... :lol:
User avatar
07 May 2013 00:16

All I know is that I love games. I don't really care if you use FB3, CE3, UR3, UB40(joke), etc. It will never be about what engine somebody uses. It will be about the time, effort, art style, and importantly gameplay. I have never once bought a game thinking "It uses FrostBite!!! I know it will be good!! Thats why I'm buying it....." Could it help make it look better, yes, possibly. But Nintendo is no slouch in making its games stand the test of time, something EA could take lessons on....
User avatar
07 May 2013 00:19

Uranio23 wrote:
JJJJJJJJJ wrote:There's no reason to get upset about this, because does it matter if EA puts their games on the Wii U?

EA's current line-up is garbage; series that were once good have all gotten progressively shovel with terrible DLC. I can't name one game from them I am looking forward to.


Neither can I. All I can remember from EA is that old PSX game based on the First Harry Potter movie ... :lol:


Yeah I just thought about it and I realized... there's really nothing from EA I'm looking forward to. Not even Battlefield 4. I'm getting CoD: Ghosts instead for my military shooter fix. Out of all the third parties out there I think the one company that's got the most hype from me is UbiSoft. New Splinter Cell with more of a stealth focus, new Rayman that looks as great as the last game, new Assassin's Creed that will hopefully be bug free, awesome looking new IP in the form of Watch_Dogs, and of course Rainbow 6 Patriots looks pretty neat from what I've seen so far.
User avatar
07 May 2013 00:25

DKnight15 wrote:All I know is that I love games. I don't really care if you use FB3, CE3, UR3, UB40(joke), etc. It will never be about what engine somebody uses. It will be about the time, effort, art style, and importantly gameplay. I have never once bought a game thinking "It uses FrostBite!!! I know it will be good!! Thats why I'm buying it....." Could it help make it look better, yes, possibly. But Nintendo is no slouch in making its games stand the test of time, something EA could take lessons on....


true dat. awesome profile pic btw.
User avatar
07 May 2013 00:27

DKnight15 wrote:All I know is that I love games. I don't really care if you use FB3, CE3, UR3, UB40(joke), etc. It will never be about what engine somebody uses. It will be about the time, effort, art style, and importantly gameplay. I have never once bought a game thinking "It uses FrostBite!!! I know it will be good!! Thats why I'm buying it....." Could it help make it look better, yes, possibly. But Nintendo is no slouch in making its games stand the test of time, something EA could take lessons on....



It's not so much that FB3 or CE3 etc is extraordinarily impressive and an indicator of a good game or anything.

It's just that, for better or worse, a lot of AAA third party games get made on those engines.

And if the proprietors of those engines make zero effort in either porting it over, or providing the tools to have someone else port it over, that's a lot of third party games that won't see a Wii U release, again.
User avatar
07 May 2013 00:32

"Most of our customers wouldn't want or appreciate such a slow and tedious game such as Final Fantasy VII."
User avatar
07 May 2013 01:54

DKnight15 wrote: But Nintendo is no slouch in making its games stand the test of time, something EA could take lessons on....

JJJJJJJJJ wrote:
EA's current line-up is garbage; series that were once good have all gotten progressively shovel with terrible DLC. I can't name one game from them I am looking forward to.

EA's games are literally garbage. I go to a lot of yard sales and stuff, and when you see a big pile of X-Box 360 or PS3 games for 50 cents each you can pretty much guarantee that they are all EA games. You can easily sell a copy of Earthbound for $250 and you can't get 50 cents out of a current gen 2012 Madden game or a SNES Madden 95 game. Even at 50 cents those games will sit there unbought, and will end up being given away to the Goodwill store where they will sit on the shelf for years. Seriously, you have a better chance of selling your Petz games collection than EA games.
User avatar
07 May 2013 03:41

Yeah. I'm calling bullshit.

This is either "we're still butthurt" or "we only know cack-handed brute force and can't actually code for shovel."
No Avatar
07 May 2013 04:20

It's a shame if there's anyone out there who cares for this. I personally realized some time ago that I won't be touching any game with "EA" on it. For me it means just "Pure Crap, annoying Company". I completely ignore anything they make. I wish people started ignoring these stupid third parties. Wii U will not be needing them with a myriad of first party games planned and some gems of third parties from Ubisoft, Capcom, Indies etc.
User avatar
07 May 2013 04:22

I'm a programmer... And seriously, this really sounds like they took the engine, made one or two header changes so that it would "run" on the WiiU, then "tested" it twice (the first time it didn't run because they forgot a semi-colon), saw that it ran badly (naturally), then were shut off by EA.
Yeah, that answer stinks of "currently it doesn't run well, and EA don't let us work on it".

Also:
Tradint2000 wrote:Image

THIS ROCK. xD
Still, they didn't lie! Can someone remember another partnership this disastrous? It's so bad, it's actually unprecedented!
User avatar
07 May 2013 05:20

BelievingWolf wrote:Seriously getting pissed at EA's attitude. It's all about Origin and blackballing Nintendo here. I really hope they finally hit rock bottom with their business practices.

THIS.NEVER.HAPPENED.
No Avatar
07 May 2013 06:24

Bruteforcing an existing engine to the wiiu wont give promising results. It has to be coded and optimized for the wiiu to be promising. Nintendo have work to do with getting 3rd parties to understand that (the cpu vs gpgpu balance being one issue). Im a programmer so i know the technical details.
User avatar
07 May 2013 06:32

komicturtle92 wrote:If 3rd parties want their games to sell on Wii U or Nintendo consoles, then they need to do two things:

1) Advertise their damn games. Why the hell did EA waste money investing in the port of Most Wanted U when there's no new advertisements for said game? They could have put out a marketing campaign for the new DLC that went to PS360 as well as market the Wii U version along side it. They're spending money of these ports and not advertising them making it seem like they're investing money in giving a reason as to why they won't support Nintendo consoles. That's what it looks like to me.

2) Optimization. They can easily work close with Nintendo like MANY developers have (Namco, Vigil, Eurocom, etc) to understand the hardware so their games run splendidly. Two big developers, Crytek and Criterion, actually spent the time understanding the hardware and optimizing their proper engines to work with absolutely no compromises on the Wii U. Even Shin'en, a small developer that seems extremely competent in Nintendo's hardware went on about how they found ways to avoid the bottlenecks that appear to plague the Wii U and found ways to optimize their code to run fast and smoothly (among other things).

So, gtx, don't sit there and whine about "Wii U CPU is bad, that's why FB3 can't run on it" when there's numerous, upon numerous contradictory reports about the Wii Us hardware. To be quite honest, I think it's more of a business decision and resource issue than the hardware itself. Madden 25 and Crysis 3 come to mind. Don't think you can just get away with being ignorant.



What bottlenecks?
User avatar
07 May 2013 09:21

@ddddd We have no proof that it happened...but do you have any proof of what did happen?
User avatar
07 May 2013 11:31

To be honest, I'm actually wondering now if EA actually has some beef against Nintendo. Now, I would usually brush that off as fanboy conspiracy, but nowadays it seems as if they actually want Nintendo out of the market. I mean, you could go "Yeah but EA makes crap now why bother?" but really we are a minority compared to a cavalcade of impressionable 14 year olds who only buy the heavily marketed stuff that has a rating that is 16+ or above regardless of actual quality. That Wind Waker remake or even Super Mario Universe will convince them otherwise.

Or maybe they are merely still butthurt over no Origin, but godamnit not even the glory of Smash Bros is worth dealing with that piece of shovel.

EDIT: Muted Penguin is the real winner here.
User avatar
07 May 2013 13:13

Koopzilla wrote:WHAT THE F**K? Disney closed Lucas Arts and gave the Star Wars games to EA? Guess I'll never be buying a Star Wars game again. This makes me very very worried for the entire Star Wars franchise. I was hopeful that Disney could handle this as well as they did Marvel, but it seems they are making bad decision after bad decision. You can hate George Lucas all you want for making Greedo shoot first, but at least he never let EA of all people have exclusive rights to Star Wars games. Well, Super Star Wars games have been my favorites for 20 years, and I guess they will continue to be. I guess I can always hope EA goes out of business... even more than usual.


The developer attitude is mirroring the one of its parent company toward Nintendo.

While some point to the "weak" specs of the WiiU, it is at least more powerful than the current generation which is able to run the engine in question. (The WiiU has a lower clockspeed but is generally considered to be at least 1.5x as powerful as the Xbox 360 and PS3).

Of course, given EA's current line-up, its projected games, and the lack of any game-worthy content from Star Wars, this is probably an academic discussion for the next several years.

The question may be -- what happens first: EA goes under, Nintendo releases a new console, or there is a new Star Wars movie.

PS -- The novelization of "Star Wars" does not address who shot first. Found a late 1970s paperback (fourth printing). If you read between the lines, it is Hans.
User avatar
08 May 2013 00:42

Mike_Intellivision wrote:
Koopzilla wrote:WHAT THE F**K? Disney closed Lucas Arts and gave the Star Wars games to EA? Guess I'll never be buying a Star Wars game again. This makes me very very worried for the entire Star Wars franchise. I was hopeful that Disney could handle this as well as they did Marvel, but it seems they are making bad decision after bad decision. You can hate George Lucas all you want for making Greedo shoot first, but at least he never let EA of all people have exclusive rights to Star Wars games. Well, Super Star Wars games have been my favorites for 20 years, and I guess they will continue to be. I guess I can always hope EA goes out of business... even more than usual.


The developer attitude is mirroring the one of its parent company toward Nintendo.

While some point to the "weak" specs of the WiiU, it is at least more powerful than the current generation which is able to run the engine in question. (The WiiU has a lower clockspeed but is generally considered to be at least 1.5x as powerful as the Xbox 360 and PS3).

Of course, given EA's current line-up, its projected games, and the lack of any game-worthy content from Star Wars, this is probably an academic discussion for the next several years.

The question may be -- what happens first: EA goes under, Nintendo releases a new console, or there is a new Star Wars movie.

PS -- The novelization of "Star Wars" does not address who shot first. Found a late 1970s paperback (fourth printing). If you read between the lines, it is Hans.

I agree, it's EA not wanting them to optimize the engine for Wii U. I think the system is more than capable of running it.

I'd say the first thing to happen would be the next Star Wars movie, which is due out in a couple years. I think EA could be in pretty bad shape by that time though. A new Nintendo console isn't likely til about 2018.

I just wish Disney would have licensed them on a game by game basis. Giving exclusivity to one company for all the games is a bad idea, even if it weren't EA (which just makes it all the worse). I mean, for example, can there even be another Lego Star Wars game? It would have been better if they let different developers with different specialties, to get the best games possible.

Personally, I don't have much problem with most of the changes George Lucas made to the movies. I think they were fine the way they were though, I never had a problem with them before the changes were made. A few changes were really good, like taking the boxes around ships in space battles and stuff out, and fixing up the part where Luke falls down the pit in Empire Strikes back (I always thought that looked like crap in the original). I have no problem with stuff like putting more Storm Troopers in or more ships or aliens in the background. My biggest complaints are that they changed the song the Max Rebo Band plays in Jabbas Palace, and taking out the Ewok song at the end of Return of the Jedi, though I don't really hear people complain about that stuff. As for Greedo shooting first, I see Georges point that he didn't want Han to look bad by shooting first, but I never thought that made him bad, in a shootout, you shoot first or you die. My main problem with it is it was done poorly, it looks like they just shifted the film to make Greedo miss, it just looks bad.
User avatar
08 May 2013 01:20

Koopzilla wrote:
Mike_Intellivision wrote:
Koopzilla wrote:WHAT THE F**K? Disney closed Lucas Arts and gave the Star Wars games to EA? Guess I'll never be buying a Star Wars game again. This makes me very very worried for the entire Star Wars franchise. I was hopeful that Disney could handle this as well as they did Marvel, but it seems they are making bad decision after bad decision. You can hate George Lucas all you want for making Greedo shoot first, but at least he never let EA of all people have exclusive rights to Star Wars games. Well, Super Star Wars games have been my favorites for 20 years, and I guess they will continue to be. I guess I can always hope EA goes out of business... even more than usual.


The developer attitude is mirroring the one of its parent company toward Nintendo.

While some point to the "weak" specs of the WiiU, it is at least more powerful than the current generation which is able to run the engine in question. (The WiiU has a lower clockspeed but is generally considered to be at least 1.5x as powerful as the Xbox 360 and PS3).

Of course, given EA's current line-up, its projected games, and the lack of any game-worthy content from Star Wars, this is probably an academic discussion for the next several years.

The question may be -- what happens first: EA goes under, Nintendo releases a new console, or there is a new Star Wars movie.

PS -- The novelization of "Star Wars" does not address who shot first. Found a late 1970s paperback (fourth printing). If you read between the lines, it is Hans.

I agree, it's EA not wanting them to optimize the engine for Wii U. I think the system is more than capable of running it.

I'd say the first thing to happen would be the next Star Wars movie, which is due out in a couple years. I think EA could be in pretty bad shape by that time though. A new Nintendo console isn't likely til about 2018.

I just wish Disney would have licensed them on a game by game basis. Giving exclusivity to one company for all the games is a bad idea, even if it weren't EA (which just makes it all the worse). I mean, for example, can there even be another Lego Star Wars game? It would have been better if they let different developers with different specialties, to get the best games possible.

Personally, I don't have much problem with most of the changes George Lucas made to the movies. I think they were fine the way they were though, I never had a problem with them before the changes were made. A few changes were really good, like taking the boxes around ships in space battles and stuff out, and fixing up the part where Luke falls down the pit in Empire Strikes back (I always thought that looked like crap in the original). I have no problem with stuff like putting more Storm Troopers in or more ships or aliens in the background. My biggest complaints are that they changed the song the Max Rebo Band plays in Jabbas Palace, and taking out the Ewok song at the end of Return of the Jedi, though I don't really hear people complain about that stuff. As for Greedo shooting first, I see Georges point that he didn't want Han to look bad by shooting first, but I never thought that made him bad, in a shootout, you shoot first or you die. My main problem with it is it was done poorly, it looks like they just shifted the film to make Greedo miss, it just looks bad.




It's pretty obvious the Wii U is capable of "next gen" graphics. Pay attention to this video. Notice the buttons on the bottom when they're prompted. Those are buttons on the Wii U. Those graphics are amazing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYgY1Gfbvtk

View the full discussion!

Quickie Search

"Advanced" Search

Anti-social Tendencies

Advertisements

RSS feed trough

News Feed
Top Stories
Console News
Portables News
Podcast Feed
GoNintendo Radio Feed
Twitter Feed

Affiliates + Friends

Destructoid
Gamersyde
Modojo
TheBitBlock
Anime Your Way