Slashdot Mirror


How the Wii Was Born

saintory writes "Ars Technica has an article up looking at how the Wii was born. It's a nice overview of how Nintendo's culture came up with the 'new-gen' system." More from the article: "'Diverging from the road map takes a fair amount of courage,' [Engineer Shiota] said, 'especially when we didn't have a clear image of what we were going to do with this hardware.' However, once he saw the power level reduction (from one-third to as little as one-fourth that of current hardware) he was very excited. Instead of competing on 'how many more times the CPU is going to be faster, how much more memory is going to be on the machine, and how many more polygons can be rendered' he saw Nintendo as being able to do something different and unique."

97 comments

  1. Space constraints by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Interesting article - lots of detail on Nintendo's desire to fit it into a small space, driven, it seems by Iwata.

    in the busy confines of the modern entertainment unit, the Wii needed to be small enough to fit unobtrusively into a space between other components

    Which makes me wonder, why they still came up with something that's clearly designed to live vertically. Something with the form factor of the typical DVD player or set-top box would fit in amongst many people's setups even easier than the Wii in its standard orientation.

    --
    Accommodate Students

    1. Re:Space constraints by jimstapleton · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I lot of entertainment centers I've seen have quite a bit of space left over on the side with various players. More than enough for a vertical Wii - probably designed for things with side vents, which none of my VCR/Stereo/DVD players have.

      --
      34486853790
      Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
    2. Re:Space constraints by Frag-A-Muffin · · Score: 4, Informative


      Which makes me wonder, why they still came up with something that's clearly designed to live vertically. Something with the form factor of the typical DVD player or set-top box would fit in amongst many people's setups even easier than the Wii in its standard orientation.

      Spoken like the truly uninformed. I guess this is /. so I shouldn't expect much :)

      Watch this, and watch how Matt takes the Wii out of the vertical stand, and lays it flat. Hmmm ... even has rubber feet so it can lay horizontally.

      --

      AirSpeak - http://itunes.com/apps/AirSpeak
    3. Re:Space constraints by revlayle · · Score: 1

      It was designed to live horizontally OR vertically. They show it in the vertical mode because many of the ID from Nintendo thought the Wii looked really good in it's stand, but it is NOT necessaary,

    4. Re:Space constraints by Archibald+Buttle · · Score: 1

      You know, Wii looks pretty cool in its stand...

      Out of its stand though it looks far less cool to me. In fact it looks like a pretty average external CD-ROM drive.

  2. Hmm by majortom1981 · · Score: 1

    Maybe its just me but Since I live on Long Island with a company Like LIPA I am actually glad that the wii is going for lower power consumption. Lipa likes to raise rates every couple of months. I also dont mind the remote. It obviously has to be good for sony to have added it to their controller.

    1. Re:Hmm by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1
      with a company Like LIPA I am actually glad that the wii is going for lower power consumption.

      I'm not from long island (not even in the same hemisphere) so I can only assume that LIPA is Long island power authority or something similar. If a game console is going to make a hit on your power bill then you really do have problems there on Long Island :)

    2. Re:Hmm by Steve525 · · Score: 1

      If a game console is going to make a hit on your power bill then you really do have problems there on Long Island :)

      This is wandering off-topic, but yes there certainly are problems on Long Island - at least there was 10 years ago when I lived there. At the time, Long Island had the distinction of the most expensive electric rates in the country. The reason for this is that they built a nuclear power plant in Shoreham that they were never allowed to turn on. (The reason being they decided there was no practical way to evacuate Long Island). LIPA came into being around this time in an effort to bring the prices down. The electric company at the time was bought/forced out (with the executives receiving millions of dollars) and LIPA was born. I'm not sure were the money for this came from - probably from taxes. Our electic rates did drop a couple cents, from highest in the country to something like 3rd place.

    3. Re:Hmm by ShadowsHawk · · Score: 1

      Here in IL, ComEd will be raising our rates by as much as %50 come January 1st.

    4. Re:Hmm by majortom1981 · · Score: 1

      Yup now I think the rates are back up to highest in the country. LIPA every couple of months has been raising the rates. Now the thing is that lipa was supposed to have lowered our rates now it did the opposite and made them higher. Having a computer , a 360 or ps3 and a crt tv that both consume a lot of power really would put a lot on the power bill. So if I get the wii and not one of the other consoles that could save me money in the long run especially since it will consume less power then my gamecube.

  3. Looks Good by lordperditor · · Score: 1

    It might not be as powerful as the other two offerings but it sure looks better, very sleek and clean.

    1. Re:Looks Good by Channard · · Score: 1

      What bothers me about the Wii is not that it may not be as a powerful. My concern is that it's lacking a hard disk - a device which let the X-Box handle games like Halo, a title which would have required long load times on the PS2. I'm going to wait and see how well the Wii handles loading games before I invest in one.

    2. Re:Looks Good by devmage · · Score: 1

      Is load time really that important? Look at the PS1 whos load times were absolutely horrible and they sold how many? Since the Wii is basically GameCube x2 I'm not worried about load times. There were only a few games that had some bad loadtimes though I can't even recall the name of one. Of course the GC did use different media. Even still Nintendo has always been conscious of load times so I'm sure they are fine. I am very much looking forward to the Wii and playing Zelda soon :)

      --
      devmage
    3. Re:Looks Good by The+Warlock · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Nintendo is extremely careful about load times. I mean, hell, they went with cartridges instead of CDs for the N64 because of load tims. Gamecube devkits have deliberately-limited transfer rates from the dev hard drive so that the devs need to deal with load times. I'm sure it won't be a big deal here.

      Plus, it does have an internal Flash drive, although I think that's mostly for downloaded stuff.

      --
      I've upped my standards, so up yours.
    4. Re:Looks Good by Headcase88 · · Score: 1

      almost all GC games by Nintendo had awesome load times. Smash Bros Melee is a particurily awesome example. There may be things to worry about with the Wii, load times ain't one of 'em :)

      --
      "When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
    5. Re:Looks Good by tepples · · Score: 1
      My concern is that it's lacking a hard disk

      Wii has a 512 million byte internal flash drive and a slot for SD cards.

      a device which let the X-Box handle games like Halo, a title which would have required long load times on the PS2.

      DVD read speeds have increased since the PS2 came out.

      I'm going to wait and see how well the Wii handles loading games before I invest in one.

      Nintendo's GameCube games didn't need to spend too much time loading. Neither should games on an overclocked GameCube with a remote.

    6. Re:Looks Good by hords · · Score: 1

      If the hard drive was that important you would think every version of the X-Box 360 would have come with it. I bought the Pro version that comes with one, but the games don't utilize it since not everyone has one. Prey has long load times for certain on the 360, which perhaps could be better if content was shifted to the hard drive. I doubt that it is so long on the PC, but can't say for sure since I haven't played that version.

    7. Re:Looks Good by Omeger · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      512 million bytes is NINTENDO FANBOY speech for a crappy 512 MB flash drive.

    8. Re:Looks Good by Petrushka · · Score: 1

      My concern is that it's lacking a hard disk - a device which let the X-Box handle games like Halo, a title which would have required long load times on the PS2.

      I wonder if there might be room for some imaginative use of the USB ports one day. Not for an external hard drive, I mean, and not specifically with regard to the Wii -- but flash drives are getting cheaper and cheaper. I wonder if someday it might become economically possible for them to, if not supplant, then at least complement, the DVD as the medium of choice for distributing game content? It'd certainly solve the problem of load times. (They're certainly not cheap enough yet, mind you: for a 1 GB flash drive the best price I can find in my area is USD$24.41.)

  4. Power to the Wii by GORby_ · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Well, while the Wii certainly doesn't look like system providing next-gen graphics, I guess the article makes an interesting point though... with development costs of modern games going through the roof, it might make perfect sense to design a simple system (from a hardware perspective) like their new console.

    Also, does next-gen necessarily have to mean next-gen graphics? Or does good-enough-graphics with a fresh look on gameplay suffice?

    1. Re:Power to the Wii by Aladrin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeah, I'm afraid next-gen does indeed have more to do with graphics and processing power than anything else. In a sane world, creating a new (?) interface for gaming would be easily classed as 'next gen' because it evolved. Of course it isn't truly new, as motion sensing has been done before. Just not from the ground up.

      Nintendo's 'next gen' consoles and handhelds do indeed seem to lack when compared to their competition, but they really -are- fun. And that's what gaming was supposed to be about. These days, gaming seems to be more about entertainment (IE: lack of boredom) than fun. Nintendo still tries for fun.

      Not that I don't enjoy my x360 and psp. They've got some great games. But most of them are more about staving off boredom during my free hours than actively enjoying the experience.

      My examples: Test Drive Unlimited. I hate driving, and yet I play this game... I've actually driven over 200 miles in game, and yes, that took as long as it does in real life. (Well, at 100+ MPH.) Why? I don't freaking know. But I enjoyed it, oddly enough.

      And Okami. About half of this game you wander around feeding animals and drawing flowers. Why do I do it? I dunno. But it's entertaining. (Lord knows it isn't the regular battles that I play it for. -yawn-)

      But the DS has games like Trauma Center (it was fun up until 2-4, which was ridiculously hard and I quit.)

      What's the difference? I think it's the amount of involvement. With Trauma Center, you are really there, cutting things out and stitching it back up. You don't just press a button and jiggle an analog stick. You actually draw the lines for the sutures and cuts.

      I'm hoping the Wii continues this and games like Elebits are actively fun to play and experience, instead of just sitting back and pushing buttons.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    2. Re:Power to the Wii by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      IMHO, gameplay always trumps graphics. Case in point, Civ 2 vs. Civ 3. (possibly Civ 4). To be honest, none of the Next-Gen consoles offer anything compelling enough to make me want to buy them, at least not at the current price point. I don't have a HD television, and I don't have tons of money to spend on games. If somebody asked me what they should buy for a game console today, I'd tell them PS2. You're getting a console that plays DVD's and has a huge collection of great games for $20, and free online play. If I had to pick a Next-Gen console though, it would be the Wii based on price point and game selection.

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    3. Re:Power to the Wii by Yvan256 · · Score: 1
      Well, while the Wii certainly doesn't look like system providing next-gen graphics[...]
      Well, the Wii is able to display 480p graphics, so it's as good as a DVD and appropriate for non-HD TV sets (which is still the biggest installed marketshare). You have to see Metroid Prime 2 in 480p (via the component cables and a progressive-capable TV) to appreciate the graphics of the Gamecube.

      I'm ok with the Wii having 2-3 times better graphics than the Gamecube. In fact, I really like the idea: don't increase the resolution, increase the quality. From what I've seen from the Xbox 360 so far, it's exactly the same as the first Xbox, but in hi-res and more polygons. Basically, it just looks the same, but sharper. IMHO that's not "better graphics".

      Also, does next-gen necessarily have to mean next-gen graphics? Or does good-enough-graphics with a fresh look on gameplay suffice?
      I'd rather take improved gameplay over improved graphics. I have no idea how people can manage to play first-person shooter games with the crappy analog sticks on a PS2 controller. Put those people against players on a computer (keyboard+mouse) and they'd be no match.

      Put computer players (keyboard+mouse) against Wii players (Wii-mote + nunchuck), and I currently have no idea who'd win. Maybe the Wii will be like going from Quake 1 keyboard-only to Quake 1 keyboard+mouse. It's a whole new world of freedom in game control.

      As for the graphics themselves, well, seeing the number of players on Starcraft and Diablo 2, if graphics were everything, those games should've been dead years ago.
    4. Re:Power to the Wii by Kuvter · · Score: 1

      I'll take gameplay over graphics any day

      --
      "To be is to do." --Socrates
      "To do is to be." -- Aristotle
      "Do-Be-Do-Be-Do..." --Sinatra
    5. Re:Power to the Wii by JonPhi · · Score: 1

      the purpose of games is the game-play, not the graphics.. although acceptable graphics can aid gameplay

  5. Power Consumption by Iwanowitch · · Score: 2, Interesting
    it was important that the machine stay powered on all the time, so it was designed to operate in a low-power mode that would turn off the fan when it was not being used to play games.

    I always wondered... If this thing is going to be plugged in always, and running always, doesn't it consume enormous amounts of power? I've often hear people say that it's better to unplug your tv, stereo, ... when not in use for 'longer periods' (say, the night) because even the smallest of control lights still uses power for no gain. Anyone who has ever done some tests with those power consumption meters? Anyone planning to do it for the Wii?

    --
    One CS student VS 893 DOS games: Let's play oldies
    1. Re:Power Consumption by chrismcdirty · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm by far no expert, but I believe the reason people say it's better to unplug everything is the miniscule power drain from being plugged in. It won't cost you more than a few dollars a year. But when the entire world is leaving devices plugged in, it ends up being a huge amount of power devoted to doing nothing.

      --
      It's like sex, except I'm having it!
    2. Re:Power Consumption by twistedsymphony · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm sure a power consumption analysis will be done... it's been done for the current consoles

    3. Re:Power Consumption by Wdomburg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If this thing is going to be plugged in always, and running always, doesn't it consume enormous amounts of power?

      The article states the power consumption is "from one-third to as little as one-fourth that of current hardware". Since the Gamecube drew only about 20W, that comes to 5-7W. That would make a full days consumption about the same as having an XBox 360 on for an hour. A years worth of power, assuming 0.14/kWh comes to a whopping $8.58. And that's assuming it draws full power the entire time. They have a power button which presumably drops consumption further. My guesss is it powers down the video chip, bluetooth, usb ports, and possibly clocks down the CPU.

    4. Re:Power Consumption by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 4, Funny

      But when the entire world is leaving devices plugged in, it ends up being a huge amount of power devoted to doing nothing.

      Not true! How else will I know that it's eternally twelve o'clock in my apartment?

      --
      This guy's the limit!
    5. Re:Power Consumption by revlayle · · Score: 1

      IIRC, Iwata at the E3 2006 presentation stated that, while the Wii is in standby mode, it would draw about as much power as a small LED light. Don't know if that has changed since then.

    6. Re:Power Consumption by JFMulder · · Score: 1

      Well, the bluetooth probably stays on otherwise you wouldn't be able to start the console from the controller.

      As for USB ports, I discovered recently that the 360 doesn't turn off it's USB ports when you turn it off. It's pretty handy. This way, I can recharge my MP3 player without having to leave my computer on. (my computer USB ports turn off when the computer turns off)

    7. Re:Power Consumption by AcidLacedPenguiN · · Score: 1

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsessive_Compulsive_ Disorder . . .perhaps you've heard of it. . .

      In all seriousness though, I've read somewhere that on stand by mode it uses less than 10 Watts, for comparison that nightlight you and/or your kids (may have) used as a child would use somewhere between 20 and 60. Hell, I bet running your digital alarm clock all night would be about the same as the Wii, and how often do you disable that at night?

      --
      disclaimer: I've been known to store numbers in my ass for which to dig out when quantities are required.
    8. Re:Power Consumption by Ultra64 · · Score: 1
      ^ The grammar in the above post is incorrect for the explicit purpose of pissing you off.

      I think you mean the express purpose.
    9. Re:Power Consumption by jackbird · · Score: 1

      A 60-watt nightlight? Maybe for a blind person. The old-style incandescent wasteful hot nightlight in my bathroom draws 4 watts.

    10. Re:Power Consumption by Wdomburg · · Score: 1

      Oh, duh. Forgot they added a power button to the controller. That's even on my list of rationalizations on why I really should buy a Wii as soon as possible.

    11. Re:Power Consumption by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

      But when the entire world is leaving devices plugged in, it ends up being a huge amount of power devoted to doing nothing.

      But the power plants are making that electricity anyway, and selling it on the cheap because the demand for electricity overnight is much less than the demand during waking hours.

      In fact, if a device uses more power to cold-boot than to wake up from standby, it could actually be MORE wasteful to unplug the device when not in use.

    12. Re:Power Consumption by AcidLacedPenguiN · · Score: 1

      okay so I always slept in the light, my nightlight had to be extra powerful so It show up over the ambient light, you insensitive clod.

      --
      disclaimer: I've been known to store numbers in my ass for which to dig out when quantities are required.
    13. Re:Power Consumption by wolrahnaes · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have a Kill-A-Watt and actually have a gamecube attached to it right now. Here's what I've seen:

      Standby (power off): 0w, no draw
      Idle (power on, no disc): 21-22w
      Game (3" disc): 22-23w
      Game (5" disc): 23-24w

      The various gadgetry on my desk (PC, LCD, IP phone, wireless router, Xbox 360, various chargers, and alarm clock) pull more power as a whole in standby mode than the Gamecube does when playing a game off discs too large to even fit in a stock console.

      --
      I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
    14. Re:Power Consumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Wiimote also has IR to be tracked be the sensor bar, that could double as a wake-up transmission.

    15. Re:Power Consumption by lkeagle · · Score: 1

      That would be completely dependent on the frequency of power cycling the device.

      I challenge you to present a device that you turn on and off so often that it saves a significant amount of energy.

      Now on the other hand, many people leave computers/electronics/lights on because the mechanical stresses of turning them on and off frequently can cause physical damage to the device. If you factor in the cost of replacing/repairing the device due to physical damage, then you may have an argument for a very small selection of devices.

    16. Re:Power Consumption by JFMulder · · Score: 1

      Well, it wouldn't be too usefull I think to have to wiggle the remote to turn the unit on. That means that when I do some cleaning and need to move the remotes, I would accidentally turn the unit on. It would be a nice way for the console to know if it should pause the game tough : if the remote is not moving at all, the game could pause automatically and the console would dim the display (kinda like the 360 does when it can't detect controllers). Heck, it could even go in sleep mode. :)

    17. Re:Power Consumption by Stregone · · Score: 1

      No, the sensor bar works in the opposite way tv remotes work. The transmitter is in the bar, and the sensor is in the wiimote.

    18. Re:Power Consumption by CopaceticOpus · · Score: 1

      In my apartment it's only intermittently 12:00. Like right... now! Not now! Now! Not now!

  6. Deja Vu by neutralstone · · Score: 1, Troll

    Is there anything in TFA that was not already mentioned in NOA's translation of Iwata's interviews?

    1. Re:Deja Vu by neutralstone · · Score: 1

      > It's a nice overview of how Nintendo's culture came up with the 'new-gen' system.

      Oh, I see. The added value is *brevity*.

    2. Re:Deja Vu by conigs · · Score: 1

      I came into this duscussion to say the same thing. Ars pretty much just summed up the first three pages of the round-table with Iwata.

      URL bears repeating: http://wii.nintendo.com/iwata_asks_vol1_p1.html

      --
      Slashdot: where repeating an article in a post is "+5 Insightful"
    3. Re:Deja Vu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone moderated that troll? It would be like modding down a link to the original source of a blog linked to in the /. write-up.

      I guess the Ars guys have modpoints today?

  7. Interesting decisions... by mgblst · · Score: 2, Interesting

    for Nintendo. They opted away from the childish design of the gamecube, for something more sleek. I can't see this as a bad thing.

    Always on, could be good too, but could backfire in our green world.

    But a weak CPU, I am pretty sure that developers will always push for a better CPU. One of the ways of measuring a console is to compare those games that run on all three - and this could make the Nintendo look bad, very bad. Risky.

    1. Re:Interesting decisions... by chrismcdirty · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Then again, developers may be happy that they don't have to spend upwards of $50 million just to get a game out the door because Nintendo is forcing them to make sure it works in SD, 480p, 720p, 1080i, and maybe 1080p. Part of Nintendo's strategy is to reduce the amount of money it takes to make new games by reducing the importance of the high-cost items (CPU, GPU, HDD). And from what I hear, the DevKit is very similar to the GCN, since the architecture is merely an upgrade, as opposed to a total overhaul, so developers should be familiar with developing on it. I have extremely high hopes for what Capcom will do with the new Resident Evil game.

      And the CPU is technically better. It's (supposedly) 1.5x more powerful than the GCN processor, and some degree better than the original Xbox.

      --
      It's like sex, except I'm having it!
    2. Re:Interesting decisions... by montyzooooma · · Score: 1

      And as you said it doesn't have to do HD so in the broadest terms possible it only needs a 1/4 of the power under the hood to render the same scene (I know I'm going to suffer for making such a horrible generalisation...) vs a HD rendering.

    3. Re:Interesting decisions... by hal2814 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "Then again, developers may be happy that they don't have to spend upwards of $50 million just to get a game out the door because Nintendo is forcing them to make sure it works in SD, 480p, 720p, 1080i, and maybe 1080p."

      But they're spending that money anyways to get the game to also run on the 360 and PS3. Honestly, the best thing I can see about the Wii is that the new controller will force 3rd party developers to actually think about the port to Wii instead of it just being an afterthought. For example, EA is already talking about what features they can put into the Wii Madden 07. They're not just dumping what they have to console X like they do for every other console. They're actually thinking about how to make the game better using the Wiimote.

    4. Re:Interesting decisions... by neutralstone · · Score: 1

      Is it really that risky? Does the success of a console necessarily depend that much on the number of operations per second that can be performed by the CPU? If so, how do you explain the fact that the DS is (if you go by console sales estimates) more popular than the PSP (which has a more powerful CPU)?

      Also, +1 to chrismcdirty; cost really is an important factor -- both for developers and consumers. I'll probably buy a PS3, but not before the price drops to something near US$200. (And I was planning on getting Wii Sports anyway, so this is pretty much what I'll be paying for the Wii.)

      Finally, note that the low cost of hardware production for the wii makes it possible for them to make a profit on the *consoles* and not just the games.

      So really, their strategy seems as low-risk as can be: they probably would have been taking a *higher* financial risk if they had tried to max out ops/sec in their CPUs. And they've already proven that high performance doesn't necessarily translate into a more popular system in this generation, so really, why should they feel pressure to compete on raw CPU power?

    5. Re:Interesting decisions... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      But a weak CPU, I am pretty sure that developers will always push for a better CPU. One of the ways of measuring a console is to compare those games that run on all three - and this could make the Nintendo look bad, very bad. Risky.

      I'm not too sure about this ...

      First off, Developers and Publishers are like any type of buisness and produce games where they believe that the reward from producing the game is greater than the risk involved. The main factors which affect risk are Game Complexity, Game Cost, the ammount of Competition on a platform, and the size of a platform's userbase; Game Complexity and Game Cost are related but not exactly the same thing. Now, when you look at the PS3 (for example) it is likely that the userbase will shrink from the previous generation, the Game Complexity will increase, and the Game's Development Cost will increase which means that the Risk in producing a PS3 game is far greater than the risk for producing a PS2 game. Wii games (as compared to Gamecube games) will have similar Game Complexity, similar Development Cost, and (probably) a larger userbase which leads to a similar/lower level of risk to produce a Wii game; possibly a dramatically lower risk than producing a PS3 game.

      On a side note, I need to ask to what extent will the extra power of the PS3/XBox 360 be used to produce better games and not just better graphics? It seems to me that most AI is still scripted and doesn't take all that much processing power, and few games would have much use for realistic physics of more than a handful of objects at the same time. I could be wrong but this entire generation (PS3/XBox 360) seems to be about High-Definition Displays that few people have, and advanced shaders which make surfaces look more realistic (at a massive development cost) which is mostly noticable on the display that few people have.

    6. Re:Interesting decisions... by Raenex · · Score: 1
      But they're spending that money anyways to get the game to also run on the 360 and PS3.

      Could be that there will be a lot of games made exclusively for the Wii. Especially by smaller, creative studios that don't have a gazillian dollars to spend.

    7. Re:Interesting decisions... by LKM · · Score: 1
      But they're spending that money anyways to get the game to also run on the 360 and PS3

      Interestingly, this doesn't seem to be the case so far. A lot of the Wii games are Wii exclusive, and even most of the franchises that are ported to the Wii seem to be totally different games from their 360/PS3 counterparts.

    8. Re:Interesting decisions... by KillerBob · · Score: 1
      And as you said it doesn't have to do HD so in the broadest terms possible it only needs a 1/4 of the power under the hood to render the same scene (I know I'm going to suffer for making such a horrible generalisation...) vs a HD rendering.


      Not suffer, so much as have something gently pointed out :)

      Standard Definition has a resolution of 320x200 pixels (through an RCA cable), or 64,000 dots. S-Video can carry up to 800x600 pixel, or 480,000 dots. 1080p carries a resolution of 1920x1080 pixels, or 2,073,600 pixels. If you're talking about just rendering the dots, then yes, about 1/4 of the processing power is needed to draw an S-Video picture versus a 1080p picture. BUT... as you increase the number of pixels on screen, you increase exponentially the amount of processing you need to do in order to properly render a 3D image... because of raytracing. Granted, the quality of rendering in a video game isn't anywhere near the quality you'd see in a top notch rendered scene, but you still have to do some calculation to figure out what part of a texture is reflecting off what part of your water, or how the lighting is affecting the shadows you're rendering. It's not simply a question of rendering at low resolution and then resizing the picture to high resolution, though I wouldn't be surprised if some titles for PS3/X-Box360 actually end up taking that lazy way out.

      Modern video cards take shortcuts, because they simply don't make a video card that's capable of fully rendering a scene in high def, in real time. The consoles will use the same shortcuts... stuff like algorithms that decide what polys are obscured and not rendering those polys. But by increasing the number of polys on screen, you're still drastically increasing the amount of processing power you need in order to render the scene. By a factor much greater than just 4.

      Generally, though, you're right. The Wii can afford to be significantly less powerful (and less costly) because they aren't bothering to make the system play at high def resolutions. It's a simple concept, really: most people who buy a console want something that works and is fun. They aren't very likely to buy a $4000 TV when a $500 TV (that's the same screen size but not high def) will do the trick. It's really only a very small niche that will ever see the difference between SDTV and HDTV in the near future. And even if you do see the difference, you need to ask yourself a simple question: do I care more about gameplay value, or eye candy? Eye candy is nice, but it's not going to get me to keep playing a game.
      --
      If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
    9. Re:Interesting decisions... by baconfish · · Score: 1

      "Standard Definition has a resolution of 320x200 pixels (through an RCA cable), or 64,000 dots. S-Video can carry up to 800x600 pixel, or 480,000 dots. 1080p carries a resolution of 1920x1080 pixels, or 2,073,600 pixels." Well - your idea that SD takes less to render than HD is correct - but your NTSC stats are WAY off. NTSC is 720x486 pixels. No more - no less. 800x600 is a computer resolution - NOT a video one. DVDs (and MiniDV) are actually 720x480. But also - this is moot - because RCA and SVIDEO are ANALOG so pixels don't enter into the picture at all. But stored as a digital source - uncompressed NTSC video is 720x486 non-square pixels.

    10. Re:Interesting decisions... by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

      I'll probably buy a PS3, but not before the price drops to something near US$200.

      You may be waiting a long, long time then.

      There are a rare few examples I can think of where a game console eventually sells new for less than half of its launch price. The GameCube is one: launched at $200, now on sale at around $100. Sega's Nomad portable went from $180 to $80 during its brief lifetime, and the Atari 2600, originally $200, eventually went for $50 (but it took a full decade to get there).

      I don't expect the PS3 to ever drop below $250, at least not until the PS4 launches. The most likely scenario where it might would be if the PS3 turns out to be an abject failure, and Sony slashes prices in a last-ditch effort to recover marketshare. But in that scenario, would owning a PS3 even be worth it?

    11. Re:Interesting decisions... by Senzei · · Score: 1
      On a side note, I need to ask to what extent will the extra power of the PS3/XBox 360 be used to produce better games and not just better graphics? It seems to me that most AI is still scripted and doesn't take all that much processing power, and few games would have much use for realistic physics of more than a handful of objects at the same time.
      My understanding was that the processor configurations used for the ps3 or 360 (or both) were also pretty bad for doing AI. I don't remember the details, but it pretty much amounted to requiring a lot more clock cycles to get the same effects you could do on the wii.
      --
      Slashdot: Where anecdotes and generalizations can be freely substituted for facts, logic, or intelligence
    12. Re:Interesting decisions... by arose · · Score: 1

      This is the first time I hear 486 instead of 480, any more info on that?

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    13. Re:Interesting decisions... by baconfish · · Score: 1

      720x486 is standard NTSC full res. When I load uncompressed video into an Avid - the video res is 720x486 - standard NTSC. It has been this way since the dawn of digital video editing in the early 90s.

      720x480 is the standard res for DV or DVD. They lost the 6 pixels for compression reasons - but you'll only notice the difference if you load it into an editing system - you'll never see it on a TV.

      Trivia: The N64 (and PS) only outputted 320x240 and it was upscalled to full NTSC.

  8. When a mommy console and a daddy console by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    love eachother very much, the daddy console hooks his nunchuck up with the mommy console's wiimote, and that is how a little wii is born!

  9. Interview translations by neutralstone · · Score: 2, Informative

    For those of you who can't get your interview translations fast enough: it seems that Nintendo Europe has been updating theirs faster than NOA.

  10. Old News by Nalgas+D.+Lemur · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The interview itself has been posted in pieces over the past few weeks, starting with this segment. It's been ongoing, and it's pretty interesting stuff, if you're into that sort of thing. There was a story posted on Slashdot a week or two ago that mentioned it, even, but it hardly had any replies, so I don't know if that's a sign that no one read it, or what.

    Anyway, as I posted on that story back then, among other things, the interview mentions some things that I've seen people here talking about, like the possibility of distributing independent games via the Virtual Console system. They seem to be considering it and possibly in favor of it as high up as Iwata. It goes into a whole lot more detail than the Ars Technica summary does, and the more recent segments talk about some of the software design elements, not just the hardware side of things. Interesting reading.

  11. No more Excuses... by blahplusplus · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I don't get how anyone could think going with slower hardware is a GOOD thing, also excusing the Wii's slower hardware using "game development costs" is ridiculous, the cost to develop games will always be changing as game companies look to find cheaper ways to make the latest and greatest games. The fact is if you provide the developers hardware *they will find ways to use it for something* even if that is not graphics!! Exta processing power does not always have to be about graphics... I'm getting a litle tired of the "so the graphicss aren't as good, who cares?" well what about things we don't see "visually" that the game developers use the extra processing power for?

    The fact is if the PS2 and Xbox 360 are with $50 of the Wii at Wii's launch you definitely know an extra $50 is not much of a stretch.

    1. Re:No more Excuses... by hal2814 · · Score: 1

      "Exta processing power does not always have to be about graphics... I'm getting a litle tired of the "so the graphicss aren't as good, who cares?""

      It doesn't have to be but historically, that's where the extra oomph is being used. Games still have generally simplistic AIs and I haven't seen a major physics upgrade to a game in a while. The biggest non-graphics jump I've seen recently is the sheer number of simultaneous objects Call of Duty 2 keeps track of on the 360. I imagine if you cut HD out of the equation, the Wii will handle those objects just as well even with a lesser processor.

      "The fact is if the PS2 and Xbox 360 are with $50 of the Wii at Wii's launch you definitely know an extra $50 is not much of a stretch."

      Technically, that's an opinion not a fact. And as such, I would disagree. If the 360 is $300 and the Wii is $250 and they are similarly equipped and I'm going to buy one (as fair as I can make it to both sides), I'm getting the Wii. I'm just looking for something different this time around. Now if the Wii and its developers botch the controller's potential, then I could see reversing this decision.

    2. Re:No more Excuses... by Raenex · · Score: 1
      I don't get how anyone could think going with slower hardware is a GOOD thing

      But it is a good thing. I own a 360, and for all it's extra power, it's hardly a huge improvement over the original XBox. On top of that it is more expensive, noisier, and has heat issues. The article mentions the law of diminishing returns, and they're completely right. Nintendo saw this and took a step in a different direction, refusing to play the spec game.

    3. Re:No more Excuses... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I don't get how anyone could think going with slower hardware is a GOOD thing, also excusing the Wii's slower hardware using "game development costs" is ridiculous, the cost to develop games will always be changing as game companies look to find cheaper ways to make the latest and greatest games.

      Developers do try to find the cheapest ways to make the latest and greatest games they can, and quite often this means that they produce their game on the Gameboy rather than on a PS2. The reality is that most developers have a limited total budget to produce games that they have to divide between all projects, and in many cases this entire budget is now smaller than the expected cost of one PS3/XBox 360 game; if you have $25 Million you could (probably) produce 3 reasonably high budget Wii games on one low to moderate budget PS3/XBox 360 game. The fact is that the reason you see so few "big-budget" PC games these days is the same reason you'll see very few PS3 and XBox 360 games, the number of developers who can afford to make a $20 Million game is very limited; outside of internal developers of the top 10 publishers in the world I think that producing a game at that budget is a good way to go bankrupt.

      The fact is if the PS2 and Xbox 360 are with $50 of the Wii at Wii's launch you definitely know an extra $50 is not much of a stretch.

      Well the Wii comes with a game (Wii sports) and doesn't require a memory card so claiming that there is only a $50 difference to the consumer is misleading; anyway you look at it, it would be at least a $100 difference in cost. The Wii is also designed to break even on hardware (and be profitable from the start) which doesn't (directly) effect consumers, but personally if Nintendo wants to invest $100 in me I'd rather see that money go into game developement. The Wii is also much more complicated than the PS2/XBox 360 are in that it is the basic hardware, sensor bar, wireless Wiimote (which is far more expensive to produce than a standard wireless controller) and Nunchucku.

    4. Re:No more Excuses... by revlayle · · Score: 1

      To be fair, the PS3 will not require a memory card either (both versions have some sort of hard drive).

    5. Re:No more Excuses... by revlayle · · Score: 1

      OOPS

      Mod me "-1 STUPID"... I swear I read PS3, not PS2 :-P

    6. Re:No more Excuses... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure he meant PS3. Not that this makes much sense, because the stripped PS3 is $150 more than the Wii not $50, but more sense than PS2 because if he's paying $300 for a PS2 he's an idiot.

      So I'd say your point stands. Though it's still $150 more. :)

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    7. Re:No more Excuses... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are also size and energy consumption considerations.

    8. Re:No more Excuses... by nasch · · Score: 1
      The fact is if the PS2 and Xbox 360 are with $50 of the Wii at Wii's launch you definitely know an extra $50 is not much of a stretch.
      Sure, and if the new Porsche coupe is within $1000 of a Civic that would be a good deal too. Have you heard anybody knowledgable suggesting that the 360 or PS3 could be within $50 of a Wii?
    9. Re:No more Excuses... by justchris · · Score: 1
      Slower hardware is a good thing only when it comes to cost. Cost is always a concern in everything everyone ever does. EVER.

      But you're really complaining about the wrong system. The Xenon & Cell CPUs were made to be incredibly fast with high clock cycles. They were also designed to be monsters at graphics processing. However, to do this, they chose an chip architecture that is particularly bad at Physics and even worse at AI. In an effort to maximize graphics, they sacrificed everything else. Luckily, the processors are so fast that they still manage to pull off fairly decent simulations, and they have killer graphics.

      Currently, not much is known about the actual architecture of the Wii CPU, but if it is designed as similarly to the GC CPU as everyone expects, then even being slower, it will be able to produce better Physics & AI than either the 360 or PS3, because it offers a more balanced approach to processing, rather than being focused on graphics. Especially if it has the following: Out-of-Order Execution (both the 360 & PS3 feature only in-order execution) and massive CPU cache (a feature the GC had as well). The 360 actually has a fairly large CPU cache, whereas the PS3 has a standard CPU cache.

      High speed isn't everything. Sometimes, to get those amazing speeds, you have to sacrifice something (as Microsoft did with Xenon. Part of the instruction set had to be removed from the CPU cores in order to allow it to run at 3.2 GHz, they wanted to advertise the speed as a bullet point, and were willing to give up on versatility to do so. Sony had to do something similar with Cell in order to get it to run as fast as it does).

      --
      just some guy
  12. slashdot.ars by neelm · · Score: 1, Funny

    Reposting Ars Articles for over 6x10-2 centuries

  13. Re: Power Devoted to Standby... by trdrstv · · Score: 1
    Ok, The device isn't completely dormant, but this isn't a power 'leak'. It's a feature that makes powering on devices much quicker and keeps things like the IR receiver for your remote control active so when you hit power on the remote, it works. (and quickly)

    For the minimal amount of power that pulls per year you are far better off leaving it go rather than wasting time constantly plugging/ unplugging your devices, or wire up a master kill switch so you aren't trading off minimal power savings for productivity loss. Remember you can buy more electricity, you can't buy more more time to live.

  14. Just Read the Original by Psiven · · Score: 1

    Just read the orginal source material. It's more interesting and detailed.

  15. Exactly by LKM · · Score: 1

    Exactly. About 10% (or more, depending on who you ask) of all "household energy" is used by devices in standby mode. It's not a lot of money for every single household, but it is a lot of energy if you add it up.

    As an example, if you use your Xbox for two hours a week and keep it in standby for the rest of the week, it uses more energy in standby than during the two hours you use it - and the only thing you gain from it is that you can turn it on using the remote.

    So if you do have devices which keep their settings even if they aren't plugged in (and most devices do), please do unplug them.

  16. Yes more Excuses! by LKM · · Score: 1
    I don't get how anyone could think going with slower hardware is a GOOD thing

    Slower hardware isn't a good thing. It's also not a bad thing. It has positive and negative effects. The main negative effect is, of course, that the games won't look as good as on other consoles. Positive effects include cheaper games and more room for smaller games and smaller publishers/developers.

    As with everything in life, it's a trade-off.

    the cost to develop games will always be changing

    Yep, and with the Wii, they're changing downwards.

    The fact is if you provide the developers hardware *they will find ways to use it for something* even if that is not graphics!!

    Exactly. And finding and impelmenting those things costs money.

    Exta processing power does not always have to be about graphics...

    Technically, you're right. In reality, not so much.

    I'm getting a litle tired of the "so the graphicss aren't as good, who cares?" well what about things we don't see "visually" that the game developers use the extra processing power for?

    Like the crowd in Assassin's Creed? You know, most developers don't invest time in things like these, and even if they do: It's unclear whether it matters. Will the PS3 version be better than the 360 version because the crowd acts less stupidly? I have no idea.

    So, what about the things that developers do with the Wii controller? Isn't that a more immediate effect than a crowd that behaves more intelligently?

  17. Re: Power Devoted to Standby... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People are a renewable resource and electricity, at this point in time, is not...

  18. Interesting Article by lbmouse · · Score: 1

    And here it was I thought it had something to do with, "...and this little piggy went wii wii wii all the way home."

  19. Set top devices are notorious for power drain by brokeninside · · Score: 1

    For the past few generations, DVD players, VCRs, Stereos and Televisions have been notorious for power drains when turned ``off''. With the exception of high end items, most of these appliances are not being engineered with being green in mind. Instead they're designed with instant gratification in mind and keep things charged up so as to be ``instand on'' when the remote gets hit.

  20. Where's the PPC asm coders when wii need em? by Z80a · · Score: 1

    well,the lil game cube could access the frame buffer directly with the processor,and could do multiply add pretty fast

    so... why the heck they did not used it to just scan the entire screen once with a Dot product calc to do normal mapping?

    its that hard?

  21. Initially, graphics gameplay by MMaestro · · Score: 1
    Initially, graphics > gameplay. The mass market is just too easily fooled at first.

    After about 2 or 3 years though, you see a big drop in trust. Any video game fan knows what I'm talking about. After the "it'll get better when the second and third gen games come out" and the "those defects are just a fluke, the next batches will be perfect" the market just gets fed up. (And no, I'm not just picking on Sony. The Gamecube was criticized for its lack of good/notable second gen games (remember Mario Sunshine?) and the Xbox/Xbox360 suffered hardware problems for years on and off.)

    In the long run, if the company can last that long, gameplay > graphics. Nintendo has long mastered this skill while Sony has never really picked up the ball after 2 systems (remember The Legend of Dragoon?). Microsoft has (arguably) begun to learn (Halo 2 was an unarguable success) but isn't quite there yet (Halo 2, yay! Now what else is there...?)

  22. How the wii was born... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    miyamoto drank lots of beer then took a wicked wii...

  23. This is actually a big issue in Europe by elrous0 · · Score: 1
    A lot of EU countries are already concerned about this waste. IIRC, Europe even has tougher requirements on computer power supplies to help prevent waste.

    They certainly don't look on it as a minor issue. And they're right. Even a little electricity adds up fast when you start talking millions of users, each using dozens of pieces of electronic equipment in "standby" mode.

    -Eric

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  24. Re:Initially, graphics gameplay by Skreems · · Score: 1

    I remember Mario Sunshine being ridiculously fun...

    --
    Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
    The Urban Hippie
  25. Re:truly uninformed by Psykechan · · Score: 1

    Hmm... nice. I like the fact that the bottom/side vent is essentially blocked off when using the stand.

    Anyway, since you seem to know so much about the console that you can refer to others as "truly uninformed", maybe you can answer this question for me.

    Will the Wii be able to connect up to a WPA encrypted wireless network or is Nintendo still insisting on using WEP like with the DS? I couldn't find mention of that anywhere.

    I can't even find out if the nunchuk part of the controller(s) will be included with the system or if it will be completely optional. How about if the Gamecube controller can be used to play Virtual Console games in lieu of the Classic controller add-on. Can you answer these?

    Maybe Im just expecting too much, after all this is /. ;)

  26. Re:truly uninformed by blighter · · Score: 1
    I'll jump in with the answer to the only one of your questions that I know, though I'm interested in all of them.

    Out of the box the Wii will include a Wii-mote and a nunchuk attachement. If you buy additional controllers, the Wiimote portion and the nunchuk portion will be sold seperately: the Wiimote for $40, the nunchuk for $20.

    Here's hoping someone knows the answer to your other questions...

  27. Re:truly uninformed by revlayle · · Score: 1

    AS blighter mentioned about the nuncuk here is more information about what the Wii package will come with (in the US, at least): the console, wii remote, nunchuk (which plugs into the expansion port of the remote), and wii sports. Also, the Wii has a spot to plug in 4 Gamecube controllers and slots for up to 2 Gamecube memory cards (since the Wii is supposedly 100% backwards compatible with gamecube games... i.e. you can play Wii games or GC games on the same system. Note, the Wii won't work with some of the GC peripherials that plugged into to the odd expansion ports of the GC (for example, the GBA addon for the GC will certainly not work or fit anywhere on the Wii).

  28. Re: Power Devoted to Standby... by ThePiMan2003 · · Score: 1

    People yes, but not this person.

  29. 1,000,000 != 1,048,576 by tepples · · Score: 1
    512 million bytes is NINTENDO FANBOY speech for a crappy 512 MB flash drive.

    That, or there's a difference between 1,000,000 bytes and 1,048,576 bytes. Most flash drives have about 5 percent of their capacity dedicated to wear leveling. For instance, a "256 MB" CF card will have 256 million bytes for files, folders, and FATs, and about 12.4 million bytes for spare sectors.

  30. Re:truly uninformed by rpenner · · Score: 1

    > Hmm... nice. I like the fact that the bottom/side vent is essentially blocked off when using the stand.

    Didn't you see the hole in the stand for the vent?