Quantcast
Is the Wii stronger than the original Xbox, if so..

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Is the Wii stronger than the original Xbox, if so..

Alby_da_Wolf said:
Yes, but compared to XB360 Wii added little more RAM and while the driver itself for motion is surely small, some memory will be consumed by the game code that actually uses it giving a meaning in the game to the motion detected... In the end Wii has little more RAM but it uses it very well for things that people notice more than graphics, once these have reached an acceptable level and even exceeded SD TV's capabilities, increasing graphics performance would require a lot more RAM, not for the resolution itself, but particularly if increasing effects, textures size, antialiasing level, etc (as those 32MB of the first GeForce, for example, were enough for 1024x768@32bit, that's more than SD, but with very basic antialiasing and relatively small textures).
My point, to cut it short, is that having little more RAM it's perfectly natural it doesn't exceed XBox graphics capabilities in a dramatic way, as graphics are quite heavy on RAM, but Nintendo never meant to do it.

 

One consideration is that the Flipper handled texture compression on the GPU while the XBox GPU required any compressed textures to be decompressed before being passed into the GPU; on top of this the Flipper had 3MB of memory built into it, of which 1MB was devoted to frame-buffers, and (if compressed to the maximum allowed by the GPU) the 2MB of remaining memory was similar to a high speed 18MB texture cache. While this still may not sound like a lot compared to what the HD consoles have, this works out to 16 32 bit texels for every pixel at 480p.



Around the Network

It was 2MB FB (24bit FB + 24bit z-B) and 1MB texture cache, but the long and short of this is the same , very well used RAM (and let's not forget that in the past RAM price was much higher and subject to wild jumps and speculations), more than enough computing power carefully employed where it matters.



Stwike him, Centuwion. Stwike him vewy wuffly! (Pontius Pilate, "Life of Brian")
A fart without stink is like a sky without stars.
TGS, Third Grade Shooter: brand new genre invented by Kevin Butler exclusively for Natal WiiToo Kinect. PEW! PEW-PEW-PEW! 
 


of cousr the developers are being lazy, at least the most of them. High Voltage, Sega, SquereEnix, Capcom and Nintendo itself are the hard workers here.



MY ZELDA COLLECTION
Tuulikk said:
Resident_Hazard said:

These aren't all the same people as before buying up these games, ie, it's not just the Nintendo fans pushing these sales.  There are a ton of new Wii users adopting these games.  Granted, some are actual, regular hardcore gamers warming up to the new Nintendo system, but it can't be denied that a good number of the Blue Ocean crowd has begun to move to a more hardcore flavor.  Gradually, they'll become more informed, they'll understand more, and they'll want more than just Wii Sports and Carnival Games. 

Well, some Nintendo fans that left after SNES and N64 and probably some Nintendo fans that had a handheld console as last Nintendo console are back. And then we have fresh newstarted core gamers that never was casual. Probably even Xbox 360 and PS3 ovners that have Wii as secondary console buying a few core games for Wii, PS2 and Xbox gamers that moved to Wii. And last the casual/expanded audience going more core. Maybe more kinds of people.

It could be argued, however, that the reason pretty much everything has sold better on the Wii is simply because the GameCube incarnations of many of these games were sub-par compared to what they should have been (aside from Metroid Prime 1).  Wind Waker and Mario Sunshine were easily two of the worst titles in their respective series (yes, I believe this--WW was too easy, too simple, had too many dull fetch-quests, was too predictable, had too many hearts, and so forth). 

I don't know, Wind Waker was a damn good game, but a bit to different to many potential buyers on a console that did not sell so good.

Anyway, I believe that there is clearly a substantial hardcore crowd on the Wii.  So there's no reason at all to be gimping the graphics on these games.  And since the Wii is essentially a much more effecient machine roughly on par with the original Xbox, there's no excuse for any game that looks grossly inferior to Doom 3, Halo 2, God of War, Metal Gear Solid 3, Resident Evil 4, or Rogue Leader.  And when gamers really start seeing how good things can look on the Wii--perceived Blue Ocean crowd, hardcore, or transitional gamers--they'll want better looking software.

Well, there is a reason to gimp the graphics actually and I don't mind. Simpler graphics often translates to cheaper game and less developing time (or smaller team). That can make smaller developers take a chance on Wii and other good things. That said, a good game with polish would probably sell more.

Just some comments in your post.

 

 

Oh, I did forget the swath of former gamers returning with the Wii.  They were part of the plan Nintendo had with the Wii--bring those former gamers out of retirement, so to speak.  Many gamers who "retired" during any of the previous generations will likely see the Wii as a novel way to return to the fold--especially since it has the ability to allow many to revisit their classic gaming memories. 

 I know a lot of fools dismissed Wind Waker due to it's graphical overhaul, but that's not at all why I feel that it's one of the weakest entries in the series.  Like I said, it was way too easy, there were too many hearts, and too many pathetic fetch-quests--most of them for unnecessary heart pieces or rupees.  Frankly, I thought Wind Waker's presentation was brilliant.  Some absolutely gorgeous animation and some great atmosphere, and of course, it's relation to Ocarina of Time.  I also felt that the final battle with Ganon undersea with the ocean pouring in was one of the best battles of the series.  But the game fell too far short in too many ways.  Sailing took forever, and for as large as that world was, it just felt so empty.  Bosses were all push-overs and puzzles were more obvious to solve than probably any other time in the series' history.

 

This year will show us just how many hardcore gamers there are on the Wii.  And there will be plenty of reasons for hold-out hardcore gamers to finally adopt the system.  Hopefully, the seemingly solid and impressive initial line-up of titles won't peter out halfway through the year like they did in 2008.  We started with No More Heroes, and then moved to Smash Bros, then Mario Kart and then Wii Fit--Nintendo seemed to be on a roll churning out some higher quality titles.  Then, nearly nothing.  Part of spring, all of summer, part of fall--the hits had vanished.  Hopefully it won't be the same this year.  That will be an important part of snagging dollars from the hardcore hold-outs.



Found an Intresting article

The important word for Wii's graphical capabilities is TEV (Texture Environment Unit). Don't forget that. When developers talk about making a game for Wii they never ever mention the TEV unit in the Wii. They only say it can't do some of the things the original Xbox could do, like shaders. They are very wrong though and they need to go back to Gamecube school (or talk to Factor 5's Juilan Eggebrecht) to find out that even the Gamecube could do everything the Xbox1 could do, only with a different method. The Xbox1 worked similar to a PC, so if developers made a game for it they would make it like a PC game. They couldn't do that with the Gamecube since developing a game on Gamecube was completely different. Custom shaders, custom lighting, custom textures - custom everything. Xbox and PC follow a code that most developers know and its not all custom. They have programmable shaders, like Shader Model 2.0 for instance.

The Gamecube has the TEV and that allowed for games like Starfox Adventures and Rouge Squadron 2/3 to have texture compression, Light sourcing and advanced shading for graphics that were considered amazing for the time they were released. Go back and play Star Fox Adventures again and tell me that it doesn't still look awesome, and it was released 5 years ago.

The same applies to the Wii. Developers don't want to have to make a game from the ground up for the Wii when they can just port over PS2 games with PS2 graphics and add Wii controls to make a quick buck. When they release a game on all systems they don't use the 360 version because they can't do it without re-writing the entire game all over again for Wii to make it look similar. It's just too much work for those lazy devs. Using a PS2 engine for a game is a lot more easy since the Wii can do that in its sleep.

The Wii does not have Shader Model 3.0 and it doesn't have the power to run it, but it can produce custom shaders with the TEV that look almost exactly the same but have no name other than "custom". You can see this in Super Mario Galaxy. Basically all you can do is look at the game and ask yourself if it looks as good as high level shaders in other games, I'm sure the answers will vary. Mario Galaxy definitely has the best shaders yet in a Wii game and many people from various sites have said that the game looks so good that its on par with many Xbox360 games.

The Wii has S3 texture compression for incredibly detailed textures on walls and surfaces. Only 2 games on Gamecube used this technique and they were Geist and Timesplitters 2. No games on the Wii use this yet, but they are coming.

The Wii also is capable of the Next-Gen Motion-Blur that is so nice in games like Gears of War and Lost Planet. It remains to be seen how much of this effect we will see in Wii games if it is being used with other effects turned on.

We don't really know the Wii polygon pushing power, but we do know that it has to be more than Gamecube. Remember that the Gamecube was no slouch with polygons, Rouge Squadron 3: Rebel Strike accomplished 20 million fully textured, light sourced and shaded polygons at 60 frames per second in the famous "Escape from Hoth" level. Many people think Resident Evil 4 was Gamecube's limit in power, but I think it really was Rebel Strike.

Here is a quote from an IGN interview with Factor 5's CEO Julian Eggebrecht on the Wii's power and developers being sloppy:

IGN: Resident Evil 4 was a beautiful GCN title. Rogue Squadron was doing things at launch that developers still haven't done on Wii. Why do you think that is? Are studios getting sloppy on Wii?

Julian: Yes. I'm so disappointed knowing exactly what the Wii can do -- and I still think nobody knows it better than we (no pun intended) [laughs]. I really have to say, boy, am I disappointed! They all have finally figured out, five years into the hardware's life cycle, how to do at least basic shaders and a rim light, but that's what everybody does. But I still don't see enough bump and normal-mapping, if any. I still don't see enough post effects, although you would have insane fill-rates with Wii. I don't see any of that. I was digging out Rebel Strike the other day and was looking at it, and we had some people who were visiting ask, "Why isn't anybody else doing this on Wii?" And I am at a loss. I really am.

So basically the Wii can look very similar to the Xbox360 in terms of graphics in low-res 480p when a game is made by a developer that actually makes the game knowing the Wii's strengths. You can't go into making a game on the Wii thinking that its a PC or an Xbox, because if you do you won't be able to make games look as good as you want. The developer willl come away thinking that the Wii just isn't capable of doing things like Shaders, Normal Mapping, Motion-Blur, detailed textures and Bloom lighting-when it absolutely can. I'm not saying the Wii will look exactly the same as 360 in the future, but I am saying that we haven't seen what the Wii can go graphically by a long shot. The system is capable of every Next Gen effect out there, maybe it can't do all at once but it can do them all to a lesser degree at least.

Look for Super Mario Galaxy to fully expose all these developers when it actually does all things graphically that Third Parties have said the Wii cannot do. Its too bad we only have 1 true game to prove this(Metroid Prime 3 is close) but I'm sure we'll see more in the future. Factor 5 needs to show them all how its done and Capcom needs to bite the bullet and release Resident Evil 5 on the Wii.

http://revoeyes.blogspot.com/2007/07/wii-has-more-power-than-you-think.html



 

Around the Network

lazy devs



tk1797 said:

The Wii does not have Shader Model 3.0 and it doesn't have the power to run it, but it can produce custom shaders with the TEV that look almost exactly the same but have no name other than "custom". You can see this in Super Mario Galaxy. Basically all you can do is look at the game and ask yourself if it looks as good as high level shaders in other games, I'm sure the answers will vary. Mario Galaxy definitely has the best shaders yet in a Wii game and many people from various sites have said that the game looks so good that its on par with many Xbox360 games.

The Wii also is capable of the Next-Gen Motion-Blur that is so nice in games like Gears of War and Lost Planet. It remains to be seen how much of this effect we will see in Wii games if it is being used with other effects turned on.

So basically the Wii can look very similar to the Xbox360 in terms of graphics in low-res 480p when a game is made by a developer that actually makes the game knowing the Wii's strengths. You can't go into making a game on the Wii thinking that its a PC or an Xbox, because if you do you won't be able to make games look as good as you want. The developer willl come away thinking that the Wii just isn't capable of doing things like Shaders, Normal Mapping, Motion-Blur, detailed textures and Bloom lighting-when it absolutely can. I'm not saying the Wii will look exactly the same as 360 in the future, but I am saying that we haven't seen what the Wii can go graphically by a long shot. The system is capable of every Next Gen effect out there, maybe it can't do all at once but it can do them all to a lesser degree at least.

 For all those Wii haters out there:

"The system is capable of every Next Gen effect out there..."

 take that loosers



The_vagabond7 said:

Just as a frame of reference.

Doom 3 Xbox

Conduit



Gears of War

that is definetly not the conduit because i own it and the grenades and ammo slot and whole screen don't look like that. IT looks much better
'



@OP
Yes the NGC was actually signifigantly more powerful than the XBox. It's raw number crunching capabilities was apx x3 of the XBox. It had numerous very efficient BUS lines and RISC operations. The NGC was built to stream data rather than load entire chuncks. So it was more suitable to GTA sandbox worlds than classic level designs. It also had the TEV which by developers effective use must be a bitch to use. Since only a handful of developers ever used it since the NGC was released. Because of the difficulty of the TEV and the ease of use of DX Shader Language(Nintendo should have used OpenGL Shader Language with the Wii). It was just easier to get better graphics out of the XBox. Also the XBox had more gfx mem and system mem which meant easier to due chunk loading where as stream loading takes more effort.

The effeincy of the Wii takes advantage of the NGC architect. So as Rol says the Wii is NGC on steroids. So the Wii isn't twice as powerful as the original XBOX it is potentialy x6 that of the XBox. Even after that others are right. Developers unlike last gen who pushed the vastly tech inferior PS2 are not putting in the effort this gen, for most system they are not putting the effort in. Many developers have gotten into a state of just throwing tons of textures and high count models at the hardware and claim to PUSH the system. I don't know why, but I assume it's in part because many PS3 developers got into gaming in the PS1 days. So many are pretty much Sony or MS fans. Developers are no more immune to fandom than any other person.

So yeah developement design is being lazy. Many programmers and artists are putting lot's of effort into there part of the work, but it doesn't matter if the design itself is poor.

ANyways that's my 2 cents on the subject.



Squilliam: On Vgcharts its a commonly accepted practice to twist the bounds of plausibility in order to support your argument or agenda so I think its pretty cool that this gives me the precedent to say whatever I damn well please.

Considering that the GameCube was the most powerful console last generation.
The Wii is obviously Superior to the xBox.
Fact;
PS2
http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=47538



 

I own all of lastgen systems as of October 2008. (Finally got a Dreamcast)

I own every currentgen system except PS3.