Support NeoGAF

[LCGeek]

Here is a tidbit for those who keep thinking the Gekko or Broadway is just another G3. I grabbed this quote from the ign boards after someone posted a link on the cpu saying it's a lot more power than what people think.

"To clear things up: the top-of-the-line PPC 750, the 750GX, is the fastest 7xxx PowerPC. It's much faster than Apple's G4 (PPC 744x) at the same frequency. To call it an overclocked G3 would be quite an understatement. IBM's current 750-series PPCs even outperform G5s at the same clock speed, but don't feature 64bit integer processing. The 7xx series still is the mainline PowerPC family, the 8xxx series are special, embedded 7xx chips, and the 970 chips are nothing more than cheap POWER4 spinoffs, initially created for Apple (IBM prefers POWER4 and POWER5 over PPC970 for their own systems). And no, Gekko was no G3, it's only part of the same CPU family. But Gekko, aka PPC 750CXe, had SIMD units similar to Altivec/ VMX, the G3 only had a regular FPU."

 

[F#A#Oo]

No I haven't played it, but nothing in even the highest quality videos really screamed next-gen.

Next-gen just means successor...and that's what the Wii is to the GCN...regardless of power and graphics capabilites...

 

[The Abominable Snowman]

Next-gen just means successor...and that's what the Wii is to the GCN...regardless of power and graphics capabilites...

Nintendo defined it as the "New-Generation."

 

[VultureDude]

Here is a tidbit for those who keep thinking the Gekko or Broadway is just another G3. I grabbed this quote from the ign boards after someone posted a link on the cpu saying it's a lot more power than what people think.

"To clear things up: the top-of-the-line PPC 750, the 750GX, is the fastest 7xxx PowerPC. It's much faster than Apple's G4 (PPC 744x) at the same frequency. To call it an overclocked G3 would be quite an understatement. IBM's current 750-series PPCs even outperform G5s at the same clock speed, but don't feature 64bit integer processing. The 7xx series still is the mainline PowerPC family, the 8xxx series are special, embedded 7xx chips, and the 970 chips are nothing more than cheap POWER4 spinoffs, initially created for Apple (IBM prefers POWER4 and POWER5 over PPC970 for their own systems). And no, Gekko was no G3, it's only part of the same CPU family. But Gekko, aka PPC 750CXe, had SIMD units similar to Altivec/ VMX, the G3 only had a regular FPU."

and for us technologically challenged...?

 

[F#A#Oo]

Nintendo defined it as the "New-Generation."

Yeah becuse they know people like you base the phrase "next-gen" on whether you can see every single blade of grass in a game rather then a fuzz of green scattered everywhere...:lol

 

[The Abominable Snowman]

Yeah becuse they know people like you base the phrase "next-gen" on whether you can see every single blade of grass in a game rather then a fuzz of green scattered everywhere...:lol

Rightfully so. They shouldn't want to associate their console with the powerhouses of the X360, PS3, Lindbergh vein. The processors in use don't show a generational gap in performance, from the looks of it. Most people, myself included, define a generation as technical milestones, where the succeeding gen shows many definite advantages over everything in the previous generation. Every VG generation before had shown a drastic leap over the previous generation, often in the "first-generation" (Or first wave of) titles.

The Wii looks to be the first console system to upset that balance

 

[Chris Remo]

The Wii definitely has "technical milestones." You're just using a specific implication of "technical."

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

The Wii definitely has "technical milestones." You're just using a specific implication of "technical."

Yes, but a specific one that's been used Every. Other. Time. So it's fair to differentiate, I think.

 

[F#A#Oo]

Rightfully so. They shouldn't want to associate their console with the powerhouses of the X360, PS3, Lindbergh vein. The processors in use don't show a generational gap in performance, from the looks of it. Most people, myself included, define a generation as technical milestones, where the succeeding gen shows many definite advantages over everything in the previous generation. Every VG generation before had shown a drastic leap over the previous generation, often in the "first-generation" (Or first wave of) titles.

The Wii looks to be the first console system to upset that balance

Being honest yes there is a leap from PS2 to PS3...but it's not a drastic leap as you say...

For me a drastic leap is seeing Mario go from 2D to 3D or any game for that matter transformed completely from one console generation to the other...seeing a real significant difference in a game...I haven't really felt the same "wow" factor since Mario 64...just the odd..."that's cool and really nice"

I'd call the PS2 to PS3 more of a step if you will rather than a drastic leap...

Nintendo know they can't offer that same impact Mario 64 had on the world...atleast not in the visual experience stakes...even if they had the PS3 hardware...people get "wow'ed" for all of 10 minutes then they get use to that level of visuals and it no longer holds up to be impressive...

The next best option is to simply re-invent the way people play games...it has a deeper impact then any visuals will...and Nintendo knows this...

For example...lets take FPS's...if the Wii stands true to what I've seen at E3...it could mean I won't want to go back to playing FPS on the 360...or PS3 controllers. It would be like going backwards...

 

[The Abominable Snowman]

That's true, but back on graphics, it's still a bit unsettling, don't you think? I mean, a lot of the X360's and PS3's first gen launch lineup look beyond what's possible on the Xbox, PS2, and GC, but of all Wii's launch-window exclusive software, none of it would register as in the top 20 graphically for the previous generation. However 3 titles that are in one way or another available on the Wii (RE5, REmake, Zelda) would indeed register on that list. The 360 and PS3 has already shown graphical edge over the previous generation.

There's no reason why Nintendo could not have used awesome visuals in addition to the innovative gameplay, and perhaps it would have made users say 'Wow". If games like Viva Pinata and Kameo can be as bright, bubbly, and active as they are, there's no reason to think the next-gen SMB game could not be just as active if not more so.

Aren't the CG mario renders from the older Milk commercials still impressive? I dunno about you, but I definitely can imagine a much, much better looking Mario game.

IMO, I had seen better 3D predating Mario 64, so M64 wasn't that much of a graphical marvel so much as it was a well rounded, yet also graphically enthralling experience.

 

[NeonZ]

There's no reason why Nintendo could not have used awesome visuals in addition to the innovative gameplay, and perhaps it would have made users say 'Wow". If games like Viva Pinata and Kameo can be as bright, bubbly, and active as they are, there's no reason to think the next-gen SMB game could not be just as active if not more so.

There is a reason. More graphical power = expensive console. An expensive console wouldn't be able to copy the DS's strategy, and that's clearly what Nintendo seems to be trying to do.

 

[Gahiggidy]

There is a reason. More graphical power = expensive console. An expensive console wouldn't be able to copy the DS's strategy, and that's clearly what Nintendo seems to be trying to do.

But GameCube had cutting edge visuals for only $199. Why can't Revolution give us the same?

 

[bachikarn]

But GameCube had cutting edge visuals for only $199. Why can't Revolution give us the same?

diminishing returns?

 

[soundwave05]

But GameCube had cutting edge visuals for only $199. Why can't Revolution give us the same?

I think from Nintendo's P.O.V. this is the reasoning behind it ... not saying I agree with it 100%, but there is a method to their supposed "madness".

1.) The system may launch at $199.99, but I doubt it will stay at that price for very long. They will want to get it down to $150 and more importantly $99 quickly to enable broader audience access. A cheaper chipset enables this.

2.) Maybe we haven't hit a diminishing returns in graphics ... but I think we've hit a point where graphics have evolved to where you can get better, but the current visuals are also quite nice.

Even after playing the XBox 360 demo of Lost Planet, I don't look at Resident Evil 4 and say "oh man, this just looks bad".

3.) A lot of PS3/360 games still look like quasi-last gen games. And I don't think the reason for that has anything to do with the hardware.

It's all about economics. To make a game that looks like a CG-quality movie ... you have to spend a ton of money, a ton of time, and hire a ton of staff. And I just don't think a lot of developers are willing to do it.

Warhawk and Resistance on the PS3 for instance, yes they do look better than anything on the XBox, but it's really not a night and day difference. I think we're reaching a point where economics are coming into play.

Yes, for instance EA could probably make a Madden NFL game that looked like those target renders ... but why should they? It would probably cost a small fortune to make that game, and as "evil" as EA is, I doubt they're the only publisher that feels that way.

Even if you can make a game that looks like "Gears of War" ... how many games can you afford to give that kind of a budget to?

Just because it's "next-gen" now doesn't mean it's suddenly cheap now to make a game of even Resident Evil 4 or DOOM 3 visuals. It will still cost you a lot to make a game that looks that good, and if you want to go far beyond that, you will have to be willing to pay even more.


I would expect the jump from GCN to Wii to be like going from Dreamcast to GameCube. An appreciable 2-3x jump, but not exactly a night/day type difference.

 

[JavyOO7]

There's no reason why Nintendo could not have used awesome visuals in addition to the innovative gameplay, and perhaps it would have made users say 'Wow". If games like Viva Pinata and Kameo can be as bright, bubbly, and active as they are, there's no reason to think the next-gen SMB game could not be just as active if not more so.

IMO, I had seen better 3D predating Mario 64, so M64 wasn't that much of a graphical marvel so much as it was a well rounded, yet also graphically enthralling experience.

There is no reason (this is just IMO) why NIntendo did'nt harbor a graphical power house like the 360/ps3. I'm a dissapointed? Oh yeah I will be no doubt. Regardless, I'll buy a Wii in day one. Why? I think we've seen nothing yet on the controller and it could only improve the way we play games from here. The upside with the controller is that we are one step away from VR in console gaming when you think about it... so I can't wait and see what happens with the Wii this gen.

Speaking of Mario64, don't know about everyone else, but I was blown away by that title... even after seeing 3d for many years before that. I <3 Mario 64.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

I think from Nintendo's P.O.V. this is the reasoning behind it ... not saying I agree with it 100%, but there is a method to their supposed "madness".

1.) The system may launch at $199.99, but I doubt it will stay at that price for very long. They will want to get it down to $150 and more importantly $99 quickly to enable broader audience access. A cheaper chipset enables this.

GameCube already did this. However, things like funky new controller and $200 in 2006 being slightly less than $200 in 2001 do cause a bit more trouble.

The rest of your post sounds like what Nintendo's going for, though.

 

[the androgyne]

It's all about the developers anyway. 90% of GCN's library doesn't come close to Rogue Leader, a bloody launch game. The games I care about will look great on Wii whether they're technically below par or not.

 

[Shalomi]

But GameCube had cutting edge visuals for only $199. Why can't Revolution give us the same?

Why the Hell are you questioning this, of all people?

 

[Deku]

No I haven't played it, but nothing in even the highest quality videos really screamed next-gen.

Well if you haven't played it, why are you trying to comment with such authority?

One thing was very clear from the show attendees. Several games on display, Mario in particular, appear to be running on a different hardware than some of the other games. It's still an open question as to why, but simple deduction would indicate that if the Wii hardware can do a game like Mario Galaxy, then it must at least be that powerful/

And before you derailed the discussion into your 'definition' of next-gen, which ironically reality hasn't quite lived up to (ie: Xbox360 games dont look significant better and neither does PS3 games and some look outright terrible - Tekken ) You made the following comment in which I initially responded to.

While the demos shown at E3 were nice... they weren't beyond anything on the current generation of consoles.

That statement is false. If I were to apply your obtuse definition ot next-gen, very few games would past your test. Even if you're trying for all or nothing gambit where all games on a given console must past some arbitrary graphical standard, then all 3 consoles fail. The only one that might squeek through is the 360 but that's because its already on its second generation games.

And FYI, no one is trying to argue that Wii will be a graphics powerhouse. It probably won't be near the level of the 360 or the PS3, but your armchair observations about what is next-gen and what isn't is highly debatable. Mario Galaxy certainly can't be done on current gen hardware.

 

[Ulairi]

But GameCube had cutting edge visuals for only $199. Why can't Revolution give us the same?

Not only must publishers and developers spend money altering their content for the new controller, but they also have to spend money creating the new assets. Development costs are jumping a lot this generation. If Nintendo had the beefy systems that Sony and MS have, we would see more lame ports to the console. Nintendo is forcing developers and publishers to develop for the system.

 

[Fourth Storm]

I think alot of you graphics whores overestimate how the casual gamer sees graphics in a game. Look at the GTA series. IMO, those games are downright ugly, but it's the gameplay that created the incredible immersion into those virtual cities. As an example, a casual gamer friend of mine was talking about the Red Steel shots in Game Informer. You know, the same shots that people over here were calling "N64 quality?" He seemed really intrigued by the controller overall, but here's the kicker. He thought it was for PS3. I think Nintendo is making a great choice w/ their priorities, and I don't doubt that they will make the best affordable gaming machine possible.

Even if the specs are what IGN claims, I would be satisfied if my play experiences are fun. The system has about 4x the RAM as Gamecube without having to fill in more pixels for a resolution jump. The RAM is low latency which should help make the loading just as quick as cube (after recently playing Indigo Prophecy on PS2, I can appreciate this). The discs hold more data than the cube. Bigger, more seamless worlds will be possible and the textures should be crisper than ever (on a 480p console that is). It's also familiar and easy to develop on, which should make things like 60fps more attainable. It's yet to be seen how much more geometry the Wii is able to render, but with the right artists it shouldn't even matter. In reality, you are only able to truly appreciate things like great character models in slower paced games, and the Final Fantasy X and Silent Hill teams proved early on in the PS2's life that a group of talented artists goes a long way.

Also, it looks as if the Hollywood will have a built in DSP just as the cube does. In contrast, the 360 and PS3 need to use their main cpus for sound, forcing developers to make what should be an unneccessary choice at times. It's also not going to have an obese OS to support.

In conclusion, I just really admire the elegence that the Wii brings to the console table. Just like the DS and Gamecube, it's going to be a great system for playing games. Keyword = playing. I'll still be picking up a PS3 eventually to get my Final Fantasy and Metal Gear fix and I may also get a 360 depending on how the latter half of this year's games turn out, but the Wii is a nobrainer.

 

[soundwave05]

I think alot of you graphics whores overestimate how the casual gamer sees graphics in a game. Look at the GTA series. IMO, those games are downright ugly, but it's the gameplay that created the incredible immersion into those virtual cities. As an example, a casual gamer friend of mine was talking about the Red Steel shots in Game Informer. You know, the same shots that people over here were calling "N64 quality?" He seemed really intrigued by the controller overall, but here's the kicker. He thought it was for PS3. I think Nintendo is making a great choice w/ their priorities, and I don't doubt that they will make the best affordable gaming machine possible.

Even if the specs are what IGN claims, I would be satisfied if my play experiences are fun. The system has about 4x the RAM as Gamecube without having to fill in more pixels for a resolution jump. The RAM is low latency which should help make the loading just as quick as cube (after recently playing Indigo Prophecy on PS2, I can appreciate this). The discs hold more data than the cube. Bigger, more seamless worlds will be possible and the textures should be crisper than ever (on a 480p console that is). It's also familiar and easy to develop on, which should make things like 60fps more attainable.

Also, it looks as if the Hollywood will have a built in DSP just as the cube does. In contrast, the 360 and PS3 need to use their main cpus for sound, forcing developers to make what should be an unneccessary choice at times. It's also not going to have an obese OS to support.

In conclusion, I just really admire the elegence that the Wii brings to the console table. Just like the DS and Gamecube, it's going to be a great system for playing games. Keyword = playing. I'll still be picking up a PS3 eventually to get my Final Fantasy and Metal Gear fix and I may also get a 360 depending on how the latter half of this year's games turn out, but the Wii is a nobrainer.

Yeah I agree.

As long as you can throw several million polygons on screen, cover them with nice looking textures, and run it at 30-60 fps ... to be dead honest, that's good enough for "Joe Public".

I think actually the hardware for the Wii may be a benefit to Nintendo in getting third-party support.

There are a lot of franchises like Metal Slug and Megaman now ... they really don't have a place on the 360/PS3 anymore. Their publishers are not going to spend massive amounts of resources bringing those franchises up to snuff with high-end graphics, because it's just not worth it.

I would bet also that Tekken 6's graphics are a result of this too ... if you're the boss of Namco are you going to spend a fortune making Tekken 6 look like that target render? The series has declining sales.

It would not suprise me if Resident Evil 5 and DMC4 eventually also do not look as good as their original target renders.

I think the industry is headed to a crossroads where some developers/franchises just are no longer a fit with the philosophy Sony/MS are advocating. The Wii is well positioned I think to get a lot of developer support.

 

[Kangu]

Also, it looks as if the Hollywood will have a built in DSP just as the cube does. In contrast, the 360 and PS3 need to use their main cpus for sound, forcing developers to make what should be an unneccessary choice at times. It's also not going to have an obese OS to support.

The processors in both next gen consoles are so massively powerful that sound processing is completely trivial on them.

 

[richman555]

The processors in both next gen consoles are so massively powerful that sound processing is completely trivial on them.

It still cannot use all of the system because the sound will be always be utilizing some of its processing power. I also would not call these processors massively powerful, as I don't beleive the hype with the cell.

 

[Jonnyram]

The processors in both next gen consoles are so massively powerful that sound processing is completely trivial on them.

I doubt that, unless they're sticking with stereo ;P

 

[F#A#Oo]

I think the industry is headed to a crossroads where some developers/franchises just are no longer a fit with the philosophy Sony/MS are advocating. The Wii is well positioned I think to get a lot of developer support.

That's what Nintendo is hoping for...and thinks it has forseen as to where the industry is going. I think Nintendo has done well picking up developer support thus far...I think post E3 alot of developers and publishers would have turned around and thought..."why the hell are we are not doing something on the Wii?"...

Ubisoft stand to profit alot from Red-Steel and Rayman on Wii...like-wise SEGA with SMB. Atlus with Trauma Centre...Konami with elebits...Even THQ with their SpongeBob and Cars...these comapnies will probably be raking it in...

 

[Shogmaster]

Yeah I agree.

As long as you can throw several million polygons on screen, cover them with nice looking textures, and run it at 30-60 fps ... to be dead honest, that's good enough for "Joe Public".

If you throw several million polys on screen @ 30~60fps, you are talking about X360/PS3 league of power (3~5 million polys per frame x 30~60 fps = around 90M ~ 300M polys per second).

Wii games are probably gonna end up doing between 20~40M polys per second on the average.

 

[soundwave05]

That's what Nintendo is hoping for...and thinks it has forseen as to where the industry is going. I think Nintendo has done well picking up developer support thus far...I think post E3 alot of developers and publishers would have turned around and thought..."why the hell are we are not doing something on the Wii?"...

Ubisoft stand to profit alot from Red-Steel and Rayman on Wii...like-wise SEGA with SMB. Atlus with Trauma Centre...Konami with elebits...Even THQ with their SpongeBob and Cars...these comapnies will probably be raking it in...

That's not exactly what I meant.

Of course there will be developers that cash in on any new platform ... the guys who did Ghost Recon are cleaning up on the XBox 360 for instance, Acclaim did so on the N64, Namco early on with the Playstation, etc.

I think though there are now franchises like Megaman, Metal Slug, etc. that just don't fit on a PS3/360. There isn't the audience for these games on those platforms, and these games won't get the attention or stand out because they don't have a certain level of graphics.

Now as a publisher you can spend tons of money/time bringing the graphics of these games up to snuff ... or you can continue these franchises on the Wii at a fraction of the development cost and still have a pretty decent looking game.

The higher price points of the PS3/360 also alienate a good portion of certain demographics, which also makes Wii a more viable platform for certain types of franchises.

In cases like this, I think developers will put these franchises on the Wii.

I could see franchises like Megaman, Ghouls N' Ghosts, Contra, Time Crisis, House of the Dead, possibly even Soul Calibur, etc. becoming Wii-centric or Wii-only franchises.

 

[Gahiggidy]

If you throw several million polys on screen @ 30~60fps, you are talking about X360/PS3 league of power (3~5 million polys per frame x 30~60 fps = around 90M ~ 300M polys per second).

Wii games are probably gonna end up doing between 20~40M polys per second on the average.

How do you know so much about grafx?

 

[soundwave05]

If you throw several million polys on screen @ 30~60fps, you are talking about X360/PS3 league of power (3~5 million polys per frame x 30~60 fps = around 90M ~ 300M polys per second).

Wii games are probably gonna end up doing between 20~40M polys per second on the average.

I was talking about polys/sec, not per/frame.

20-40 million polys per second is more than good enough for the audience Nintendo is going for, and quite frankly it's pretty much good enough to create just about any kind of game scenario with a reasonably nice amount of detail.

 

[Shogmaster]

How do you know so much about grafx?

Duder, I make up stuff with the best.

 

[ghst]

This is just a thought ive been having, Nintendo at E3 was as much a plea to devs as it was to potential customers. Alot of devs will have their imaginations sparked by the Wii, theyll have gameplay concepts ranging from simple and gimmicky to (hopefully) revolutionary based on Wiis new approach, and theyll obviously want to put these into practice.
If every Wii game looked like (and had the scope of) Gears of War ,devs would be alot more inclined to shy away from taking a risk with a new gameplay mechanic/console. But what was on display was largely simple looking, simple playing almost experimental games. Devs will have seen these (combined with the nature of successful DS games) and will have far less (financially) holding them back from trying something a little different with Wii.

 

[senahorse]

Just out of curiosity is there a good side by side comparison of the gcn and the wii somewhere that any of you guys know of?

 

[Fatghost]

I remember when SGI was saying shit like "Reality is 5 million polygons per second"




(I must be old).

 

[Scrow]

Duder, I make up stuff with the best.

:lol

 

[ziran]

This is just a thought ive been having, Nintendo at E3 was as much a plea to devs as it was to potential customers. Alot of devs will have their imaginations sparked by the Wii, theyll have gameplay concepts ranging from simple and gimmicky to (hopefully) revolutionary based on Wiis new approach, and theyll obviously want to put these into practice.
If every Wii game looked like (and had the scope of) Gears of War ,devs would be alot more inclined to shy away from taking a risk with a new gameplay mechanic/console. But what was on display was largely simple looking, simple playing almost experimental games. Devs will have seen these (combined with the nature of successful DS games) and will have far less (financially) holding them back from trying something a little different with Wii.

i agree.

nintendo made wii an enhanced gamecube intentionally because going better graphically would lose any advantage it would have as (relatively) cheap and easy to develop for given such a new kind of interface.

nintendo is also really serious about attracting those who don't currently play games and who've stopped playing. to these people super powerful hd graphics have no baring on why they don't play games so wii's power is more than enough.

personally, i've been more than impressed with wii's visuals, especially in games like mario galaxy, project hammer and rayman rr, i think they look amazing.

 

[jarrod]

That's true, but back on graphics, it's still a bit unsettling, don't you think? I mean, a lot of the X360's and PS3's first gen launch lineup look beyond what's possible on the Xbox, PS2, and GC, but of all Wii's launch-window exclusive software, none of it would register as in the top 20 graphically for the previous generation. However 3 titles that are in one way or another available on the Wii (RE5, REmake, Zelda) would indeed register on that list. The 360 and PS3 has already shown graphical edge over the previous generation.

I dunno, 360's launch lineup was widely panned for looking like "last gen in HD" in most cases... we've already gotten confirmations that most E3 Wii titles were developed on GC kits (excepting possibly a few NCL titles like Mario Galaxy) I don't see what the unsettling issue is really with most looking GameCube level? Going by your post history, unsettled is about the last reaction I'd expect.

 

[LCGeek]

It's not an enhanced gamecube if it was why the hell would nintendo bother developing the system since they announced dolphin and have new customised cpu and gpu for the system? Not saying nintendo is walking past gc architecture, they aren't the system was beast just the notion it's a souping up or overclocking is just completely misleading. One comment taking out of context (Iwata's) and people seem to forget that for basically every nintendo console it has been comparable or equal (almost a definite no with Wii) to what their competitors offer.

 

[Docpan]

The Wii looks to be the first console system to upset that balance

And that's a problem because...?

 

[F#A#Oo]

It's not an enhanced gamecube if it was why the hell would nintendo bother developing the system since they announced dolphin and have new customised cpu and gpu for the system? Not saying nintendo is walking past gc architecture, they aren't the system was beast just the notion it's a souping up or overclocking is just completely misleading. One comment taking out of context (Iwata's) and people seem to forget that for basically every nintendo console it has been comparable or equal (almost a definite no with Wii) to what their competitors offer.

ATI's John Swinimer at E3 couldn't even say the Hollywood was more powerful then the Flipper...he said something alone the lines of...on-par or greater...

It's things like this that lead people to believe Nintendo hasn't invested all that much money in competitive hardware...and also give the impression the Wii lacks real solid improvements hardware-wise...

That said...only a couple of developers ever really used the GCN hardware to it's true potential...one is Factor 5...the other is Capcom...and Retro Studio's...

The GCN lack of exclusives can be blamed for that...

 

[Snow]

ATI's John Swinimer at E3 couldn't even say the Hollywood was more powerful then the Flipper...he said something alone the lines of...on-par or greater...

It's things like this that lead people to believe Nintendo hasn't invested all that much money in competitive hardware...and also give the impression the Wii lacks real solid improvements hardware-wise...

That said...only a couple of developers ever really used the GCN hardware to it's true potential...one is Factor 5...the other is Capcom...and Retro Studio's...

The GCN lack of exclusives can be blamed for that...

Are you talking about this?

http://www.gametrailers.com/e32k6.php?filter=wiipress
Click "Nintendo Wii E3 2K6 ATI Graphics Interview".

 

[F#A#Oo]

Yep...

 

[Emotions]

in that ATI interview the guy says practically nothing, they don't talk clearly about the graphics, always dodging the questions, i guess we'll know more later on about it's graphics capabilities.

 

[Gahiggidy]

ATi will probably make the most money off the Wii contract.

 

[F#A#Oo]

in that ATI interview the guy says practically nothing, they don't talk clearly about the graphics, always dodging the questions, i guess we'll know more later on about it's graphics capabilities.

What?

When asked..."How does this compare to Nintendo's last console?"

He tried to dodge it...then said "There is going to be on-par or greater graphics performance"



If it was so clear cut...he would have said "ofcourse it going to be more powerful"...but he didn't...he down-played the graphics...then had to justify it by reinforcing what we all know...Nintendo is offering new and fresh game play.

And sure he's a PR guy...and he's no techie...but I'm sure he knows the specs and how it compares to the Flipper...and the difference between the two...

 

[Doc Holliday]

I'ts funny...for all the crap DS was getting hardware wise it seems the jump from GBA > DS is much greater than the jump from GC > Wii.

Nintendo should have pumped up the specs a little a bit more. It would be a shame of Wii mote turns out great but is ignored because of the crappy graphics.

 

[Rayven]

Nintendo should have pumped up the specs a little a bit more. It would be a shame of Wii mote turns out great but is ignored because of the crappy graphics.

do you even read a thread b4 you post in it?

 

[Emotions]

I'ts funny...for all the crap DS was getting hardware wise it seems the jump from GBA > DS is much greater than the jump from GC > Wii.

Nintendo should have pumped up the specs a little a bit more. It would be a shame of Wii mote turns out great but is ignored because of the crappy graphics.

Mario Galaxy isn't current-gen, his model when he gets the star looks like the CG model from SMBM, and the enviroments are quite detailed.

 

[Drinky Crow]

What about Mario Galaxy's graphics couldn't be done on the Xbox? Hell, it could probably be done on the GC -- the poly count really isn't that high, and it isn't using anything but current-gen (DX 7) lighting effects.

 

[ghostlyjoe]

Dudes. The Wii is between GC and 360. There is plenty of evidence out there, and enough developer testimony, that it's pretty much inarguable. It is better than "current-gen" (which is hardly much of a standard, considering the entire spectrum of graphics on PS2, GC, XBox) and, apparantly, less than "next-gen" (also not much of standard, and a loaded term with very little real-world meaning -- the Wii is "next-gen" by definition).

Also, if you're not programmer, please refrain from discussing "shaders" and ploygon counts and "mapping," as you most likely don't know what you're talking about, and you certainly lack the experience and knowledge to know exactly what techniques were employed and to what degree based on a 5-minute demo or, worse yet, a 3-minute streaming video.

Not to mention, in the real world, only a small number of games max out any piece of hardware. There is a wide degree of variation in artistic and technical presentation. That means that any single game offers very little insight into a system's capabilities. It also means that most of the people in this thread are full of shit. If you were actually basing your comments on honest observation and technical knowledge, you wouldn't always fall on the same side of every argument (for Wii / against Wii).

This thread lacks common sense.