Slashdot Mirror
Wii Graphics 'Better Than At E3'
Gamespot and GameDaily have additional details on Nintendo's upcoming console. Gamespot reports on comments by Nintendo President Iwata that they were specifically not going for high-end graphics with the Wii. He goes on to say that some of their staff initially disagreed with the adoption of the Wiimote, but public and internal reaction has allayed the fears of detractors. GameDaily reports on comments from ATI, who says there is still a lot left to see from Wii's graphical output. What was shown at E3 was 'just the tip of the iceberg.' From the article: "Industry sources have said that the Wii GPU would be moderately more powerful than the GameCube's GPU, but how much more we don't know. Conservative estimates from developers have placed the Wii console as a whole at 2 - 2.5 times more powerful than the GameCube."
On price alone, I think Nintendo's going to do well. I'm not a console-gamer, but if I chose to get into console gaming, I'd go with a Wii I think. After all, I already have an incredibly expensive box full of hardware for super-pretty games: my desktop!
P.P.S. I'm doing Science and I'm still alive.
How does crap conjecture and speculation on the Wii's power keep making main page slashdot?
Who cares until Nintendo releases real, hard numbers?
I have to say, that even though the graphics have never been the issue with the Wii/Revolution I am still very happy to see that they appear very much "next gen".
I have to face the fact, that even though I admire gameplay and that "game-play" is really why we "play-games", graphics are darn interesting.
Additionally, the fact that the Wii is going to offer such a unique interface device will, I think, allow us to see "graphics" which will be completely absent on the other consoles. What I mean by this is that because the wiimote offers such a more intimate and intuitive interface with the console's game world that we will be able to interact with it in ways that will have the effect of looking even more "real-life" than a console with simply raw video processing power.
Example: by being able to hold a cooking skillet or wok and flip, shake, swirl and turn the food around in it the resulting imagery on the screen should looks very much and especially FEEL very much more "life like" than by being forced to use a joystick or keypad to move the virtual cookware.
Any additional video processing power should only serve to further enhance this experience. And that's truly what video should be for video games - the enhancement part (like a spice) - not the main course.
Hmm, I'm using a lot of cooking examples - is it lunch time yet?
--
Music should be free
My Computer Music Tutorial Videos
I've been a Sony gamer since the PS1... but Nintendo really seems to be shaking things up. Between the HD-DVD less 360, and the unbelievable trainwreck that is the PS3, I might be convinced that simplicity is a virtue. What good is a next-gen console if all the games are just the same rehashed 6 titles over and over?
When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.
When the Gamecube first came out, I was actually pretty pleased with the graphics - Monkey Ball, for example, was smooth and just a pretty game (as well as being a blast to play - playing "Monkey Punch" is one of those cracktastic party games).
The current Wii games that have just been shown look to be as good as "current" Gamecube games, which doesn't surprise me. Most of the dev kits the developers have were modified Gamecube kits with the controller, so odds are, that's the level of tech they focused on. So E3 shown games looked just like Gamecube games.
Since we can bet that the graphics chip has gone under a 2.5 - 3 x increase since the Gamecube, that should mean that within a year or so (as devs get used to the actual Wii developers kits and their power level), games should look better graphically.
Then again, with the Wii, most of us will shrug and go "Whatever". I've been playing "Digital Devil Saga: Avatar Tuner 2" today, and only just noticed that there were reflections on the floor. Then I tuned it out while I played. With the Wii's controller, odds are they won't have to compete on the graphics, letting Sony and MS developers spending the extra money on artwork that could have gone to game play.
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
I'm shocked. Shocked!
The same is true for all consoles and all games (as long as they're actually running in real-time on the real hardware and are not just bullshots or "target renders" *cough*Killzone2*cough*)
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
My expectations are being raised all the time by announcements. I'm trying very had to keep them in check by playing original NES and SNES titles - just so when the Wii is released it will seem even cooler! Kind of like running around the pool makes it feel warm when you jump back in ;)
:D
Which brings me to the thing I find so tantilizing about this system - the excitement I feel when I think about the Wii is something I haven't felt since I was a young child on christmas morning when my parents suprised us with the NES. I was flabbergasted! I played Mario for hours and watched my siblings play for hours. I never thought I would feel the same again about a video game console - and I haven't yet.
But the excitement around the Wii and hearing how developers simply laugh and laugh while playing it is making me feel like that 12 year old wearing his pajamas until sundown fighting bowser.
I'm so EXCITED
--
Music should be free
My Computer Music Tutorial Videos
A 2 to 2.5 times increase in performance is pretty shitty for five years of additional development
Is it?
I know I'm going to appear stupid here, but I have no idea what a 2 times increase in "power" even means in this context.
Does it mean that an average gamer is likely to feel that the graphics are subjectively "twice as good" when comparing new to old, or does it mean something more objective or something completely different?
That's the thing with Nintendo... whether intentionally or not, they've fallen behind in the cutting edge graphics and focused more on a different market than Sony and Microsoft. Nintendo games for the most part have simpler controls and are designed for a casual environment, either a party or when you just wanna relax and have a little fun. I still play solitare on my computer every once in a while, when I get sick of devoting time and energy to complicated RTSs and FPSs. I think that's the demographic Nintendo is aimed at here.
Even worse is the fact that they probably do not actually mean what they said.
'2 - 2.5x more powerful' is what they said... They probably actually MEAN '2 - 2.5x as powerful'. It's quite a difference.
If you make the GC a 1 for power, the first statement makes the Wii a 3.0 or 3.5. The second statement (the one they probably mean) would make the the Wii a 2.0 or 2.5. Quite some difference.
In the end, numbers like these mean nothing because you cannot trust the speaker to:
A) Know WTF he's talking about
and
B) Know WTF he's actually saying
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
Graphics give diminishing returns. Look at the transformations ten years ago compared to XBOX `now with armpit hair' 360. The Playstation has 10x more power (or some silly statistic like that) and it definately does _not_ have 10x better graphics. Nintendo was right on - Until another leap and bound we cannot create proper photorealism, and developers should accept that limition and aim for stylised art (that doesn't mean cartoons).
puts ("Python r0cks\n");
Anyone that questions Wii's potential graphically doesn't know anything about graphics beyond the buzzwords Sony and M$ shove down their throats. Don't listen to them. There's some very simple and telling facts about the Wii:
- 2-2.5x the power of Gamecube is a CONSERVATIVE estimate.
- The graphics in Resident Evil 4 were considered better on Gamecube than on any other platform. The graphics rivaled even the best of PC games like HL2 and Doom 3. The Gamecube was NOT a weak system, it's potential was just rarely reached.
- The Wii architecture is near identical to Gamecube, just multiplied in horsepower a few times. This means anyone that worked on Gamecube doesn't have to learn a new platform. This is unique to the Wii among consoles.
- Some very big names like BioWare and Capcom are onboard for the Wii, and their developers are excited as hell. You can pretty much count on these companies to squeeze everything they can out of the hardware and blow everyone away. Can you imagine a Resident Evil game with 3x the graphics of the 4th one, AND with new gameplay enabled by the Wiimote?
It's telling of Wii's upside just how desperate and weak the trolls' description of the downside sounds. There's never a guarantee and it will all come down to the games, but the naysayers really don't have anywhere to stand this time. If the Wii fails it will be against ALL rational expectations. But if you wanna hedge your bets and troll it, oh well, your loss when it's a success. I know how hard it is to say anything positive on the internets. Can't risk the e-peen.
5) The PS2 is actually faster than the GC by a substantial margin. However, it's designed more to push a huge number of polygons with relatively few special effects. If you look carefully at PS2 games versus Gamecube games, you'll notice that PS2 models are substantially higher in polygon count, while Gamecube models tend to mask lower-polygon counts with rich textures and special effects.
I'm not sure how accurate that statement is, but this comparison casts some serious doubt on it, after all, the proof is in the pictures(and videos):
http://www.gameswelike.com/web/re/RE%20Comp.htm
Capcom has lots of experience making games for both consoles, moreso for the PS2, so I'm sure they did the best they could with what they had in terms of power, and the results aren't pretty. Image quality, poly count, and special effects all suffer on the PS2 port.
The GameCube looks like the superior machine to me. Perhaps this is why Nintendo is taking its focus away from graphics this generation, it didn't do them much good to have the 2nd most powerful console on the market last time(barely behind the x-box, according to some developers)...
There's a lot of restaurants out there ready to do that. All you have to do is go to one.
I wouldn't call them "real adults" - but rather "lazy adults". Personally, it is very rare for me to go through the drive through - I usually park, get out, and go in - even if I am taking it with me.
Neither Sony nor Microsoft did anything to bring gaming to the masses. It was primarily Atari, and Nintendo did that - yes, Nintendo. Sony and Microsoft jumped on the bandwagon late in the game (no pun intended) and took over the market as a generation of gamers grew up - and that "small adult" group became a rather large group. Sony and Microsoft have neither done much to innovate in the gaming market either - all they have really done is add more graphical features. In the process, they left a good majority of the masses behind, and targetted only on that "small adult" group.
Nintendo, on the other hand, has primarily focused more on the masses than on that "small adult" group - and the Wii/Revolution only goes to show that even more. The Wii/Revolution will be a revolution because it once again brings gaming back to the masses. Nintendo will take over because their games will appeal to a far wider audience than Sony or Microsoft are looking to appeal, and an audience that does not care so much about graphical quality as they do that the game is just plain fun and entertaining. Joe Shmoe does not want to have to learn how to play a game for 4 hours before playing the game - they want to just sit down, play, and have fun. That is certainly an aspect that Sony and Microsoft have forgotten - or never intended to remember to start with.
The problem with this analogy is that the Wiimote will be provided with the Wii; where as you would have to go out and buy a racing wheel in addition to the system - no system has offered a wheel as its de facto controller. The Wiimote, on the other hand, it a very innovative device that captures the ease of using things in real life (a sword, a stick, a golf club, etc - things people already know how to use) and brings their normal, intuitive use into the gaming experience. Suddenly, it becomes a lot easier for real golfers to play Mario Golf - as golfing experience and a little gaming practice can make you very good; but a newbie to golfer, who may be able to hit the buttons at the right time on an NES, will have a learning curve just like in playing a real game of golf - they can practice and get it right - there will (of course) be slight differences, but it becomes a lot more natural to do various activities, such as playing golf, or playing the drums, or swinging a sword.
And best of all, the Wiimote is the default controller with the Wii - which means it will be widely accepted.
Ironically those are all gimmicks themselves. "Licensed brands" are just a way of aiding
Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
If you actually look at the raw hardware, you'll see that the PS2 is substantially faster. The PS2 had a GPU with 16 pixel pipelines running at 150 Mhz, resulting in a fill rate of 2.4 gigapixels/sec. The GC had a GPU with 4 pixel pipelines running at 165 Mhz, giving it a fill rate of 660 megapixels/second. The GC did T&L in hardware, but the PS2 had a seperate vector coprocessor running at 300 MHz to do T&L.
If you were displaying a flat-shaded CAD model, the PS2 would indeed be tremendously faster. The problem with the PS2 was that every extra feature you enabled resulted in a huge hit in fill rate. The GC did all these effects in hardware. So by the time you'd gotten roughly comparable features enabled (lighting, filtering, etc), you'd also lost your polygon count advantage. The PS2 was really designed to run games like FF X and The Boucer, with very high-poly models and relatively simple shading and lighting.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...