Slashdot Mirror

WiiGuns are the future - certainly going to liven up the office - WiiGun

Wario Ware has games where you do things like hold the wiimote at your side and hula hoop.
link

http://www.thewiire.com/features/1/1/Exclusive_Rev olution_Report_Talks_with_ATI_about_Hollywood

Revolution Report: Is Hollywood based off Flipper, a current or upcoming PC architecture, or built from the ground up?

Swinimer:It is designed the same as the Flipper was -- from the ground up for a specific console. Totally different sort of architecture from what you might find on the PC. Certainly, there are some underlying values, you know, how you get graphics on the screen, that's there. It's not, for example, like we took a PC design and said 'oh, you know what? If we tweak this and test this, it will work in a console.' [That's] not the case.

http://www.thewiire.com/news/340/1/ATi_E3_Graphics _Were_Tip_of_the_Iceberg

Speaking with GameDaily.biz, ATi's Senior Public Relations Manager of Consumer Products John Swinimer noted the graphics for Wii titles on display at E3 2006 only scratched the surface of the machine's visual capabilities.

Nintendo's definition of the Wii as a New Generation platform is quite valid; the system is much more powerful than the Gamecube but does not include some of the technology that the PS3 and XBox 360 do. Since few people really understand what Nintendo is developing I'll spell it out for you; I'm going to characterize the processors in PC terms in order for rapid understanding).

The PS3 could be characterized (in PC terms) as a AMD X2 3800+ with a Geforce 6800GTX, the XBox 360 could be characterized as a AMD FX5500+ with a ATI X800, and the Wii could be characterized as an Intel Pentium M 2GHz with an (supercharged) ATI Radeon 9800. (I'm not saying that these systems remotely resemble the actual archetectures of any of the systems ... it is just a conceptual model). Essentially what I'm saying is that the CPUs of the systems are (in theory) pretty similar in real world performance with vastly different designs and specifications, on the GPU side Nintendo choose to include a less technically advanced (in feature set) GPU that performs at a very high level. You can choose to believe it or not but the Wii has far better single thread performance than either of the PS3 or XBox 360 and can produce more geometry with greater texture detail; the PS3 and XBox 360 destroy the Wii in Multi-thread performance and have the ability to do highly complex pixel and vertex shading operations.

The design of the Wii was entirely intentional ... Their goal was to design a system where you could make beautiful games with no focus on photo-realism. Essentially, it is Nintendo's belief that gamers don't need to see the pores on a avatar, or the sweat on a basketball player to see a game as beautiful.

http://www.thewiire.com/features/1/1/Exclusive_Rev olution_Report_Talks_with_ATI_about_Hollywood

Revolution Report: Is Hollywood based off Flipper, a current or upcoming PC architecture, or built from the ground up?

Swinimer:It is designed the same as the Flipper was -- from the ground up for a specific console. Totally different sort of architecture from what you might find on the PC. Certainly, there are some underlying values, you know, how you get graphics on the screen, that's there. It's not, for example, like we took a PC design and said 'oh, you know what? If we tweak this and test this, it will work in a console.' [That's] not the case.

http://www.thewiire.com/news/340/1/ATi_E3_Graphics _Were_Tip_of_the_Iceberg

Speaking with GameDaily.biz, ATi's Senior Public Relations Manager of Consumer Products John Swinimer noted the graphics for Wii titles on display at E3 2006 only scratched the surface of the machine's visual capabilities.

Nintendo's definition of the Wii as a New Generation platform is quite valid; the system is much more powerful than the Gamecube but does not include some of the technology that the PS3 and XBox 360 do. Since few people really understand what Nintendo is developing I'll spell it out for you; I'm going to characterize the processors in PC terms in order for rapid understanding).

The PS3 could be characterized (in PC terms) as a AMD X2 3800+ with a Geforce 6800GTX, the XBox 360 could be characterized as a AMD FX5500+ with a ATI X800, and the Wii could be characterized as an Intel Pentium M 2GHz with an (supercharged) ATI Radeon 9800. (I'm not saying that these systems remotely resemble the actual archetectures of any of the systems ... it is just a conceptual model). Essentially what I'm saying is that the CPUs of the systems are (in theory) pretty similar in real world performance with vastly different designs and specifications, on the GPU side Nintendo choose to include a less technically advanced (in feature set) GPU that performs at a very high level. You can choose to believe it or not but the Wii has far better single thread performance than either of the PS3 or XBox 360 and can produce more geometry with greater texture detail; the PS3 and XBox 360 destroy the Wii in Multi-thread performance and have the ability to do highly complex pixel and vertex shading operations.

The design of the Wii was entirely intentional ... Their goal was to design a system where you could make beautiful games with no focus on photo-realism. Essentially, it is Nintendo's belief that gamers don't need to see the pores on a avatar, or the sweat on a basketball player to see a game as beautiful.

It also will be home to new games conceived by indie developers whose creativity is larger than their budgets.

Red Octane was purchased by Activision, and have stated that the property is not exclusive to sony.

Which is why I'm hoping for a 360 version.

And while MS hype can be dangerous (Brute Force?), they really delivered this E3 with a stellar games lineup.

Revolution Report: Is Hollywood based off Flipper, a current or upcoming PC architecture, or built from the ground up?

Swinimer: Hollywood is a specific design and is in no way reflective of PC technology. Even when the Flipper chips came out, people were asking that question: "Is this a spin-off of something done on the PC?", and the answer is no. It is designed the same as the Flipper was -- from the ground up for a specific console. Totally different sort of architecture from what you might find on the PC. Certainly, there are some underlying values, you know, how you get graphics on the screen, that's there. It's not, for example, like we took a PC design and said 'oh, you know what? If we tweak this and test this, it will work in a console.' [That's] not the case.

http://www.thewiire.com/features/1/1/Exclusive_Rev olution_Report_Talks_with_ATI_about_Hollywood

There is an interview with IBM (I'm too lasy to find it right now) where IBM says essentially the same thing; that the Broadway processor has been built from the ground up to serve Nintendo's purpose. The Wii (whether you understand it or not) is virtually as powerful as either the XBox 360 or PS3; Nintendo's goal was to keep development costs down so they dropped programmable shader support because developers will use all the hardware you give them. If you look at either the PS3 or XBox 360 they have 48 programmable pipelines, which make their GPUs far larger and more expensive; Nintendo is not using old technology, they're using new technology in a more intelligent way.