By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
sc94597 on 24 July 2009
Edit Thread
PearlJam said:
sc94597 said:
PearlJam said:
Shitty PC? So the Wii is like a shitty Mac? The Wii is slightly more powerful than Xbox and now you're saying it's going to make up for its' shortcomings with brute force? That's a good one, you're not talking about a PS3 here.

It would need to be at least 2x as powerful to do what your saying, it isn't. What part of fixed function do you not understand? Xbox has a programmable pipeline that means it is customizable, you can program your own effects but with more options and flexibility. There's a reason why GC and Wii get PS2 ports instead of PC ports.

And you can't say that it's because of Direct X, PS3 doesn't use that but it gets games in the same league as PC and 360. Not to mention that PS2 and GC/Wii couldn't be more different.

@Bolded Um, so all this time it wasn't because the Wii isn't powerful enough to run these games without notable downgrades like many say, but because it doesn't have programmable shaders? 

Oh please go ahead and explain these numbers you are giving us. 2x? Where did that come from. Oh and may I note that you are the one who mentioned that the Wii and GC *could* do what the Xbox does, but they need to use more power to do it. I said that there is more power to use, which means that it is quite possible to do the same things if we go by *your* logic, unless I am interpreting things wrong.

Yes the Wii can do all the effects that the Xbox can, I never said it couldn't. It takes more power because they are not built into the hardware like they are with Xbox.

GC would get PS2 ports because it can't handle an Xbox game with all the effects you seem to think it can pull off with no effort. If they included all the effects it could do, framerate and geometry would be affected. This is what I mean by it taking more power to do the same effects, the best example being the Splinter Cell games. Yes GC could do those effects but not in a game like Spinter Cell, at least not as well as the Xbox could.

Wii gets PS2 ports because it's much closer to a PS2 than it is 360/PS3 and modern PCs.

 

Maybe 2x times the power isn't entirely accurate. Wii is more powerful than Xbox, but not enough to do all the effects that eat up resources at the same time with large levels and the works. Xbox and Wii are much closer than you think, Wii doesn't have enough of an advantage to do everything better. Games can look better but using different techniques that were never needed with Xbox in the first place.

 This is where I was getting at with my first post.  In my opinion though, the more the TeV is used by a developer and it is hardware is known the better the game will look. Evidence of this is developers like Nintendo making almost all of there games surpass and exceed anything we saw last generation. The more they know the less power is wasted, and it is very possible for it to get to the point where you could achieve the same effects with the same requirements. That is why there is a higher learning curve with a console like the Wii, that doesn't follow a 1:1 path that PC's do. So yes the common developer won't defrentiate games greatly from last generation, but the developers who put the most work into the game will make a game that could be recognized as something that wasn't possible last generation. Really I don't think any console this generation made a big jump in terms of what we get output wise compared to the jump we got other generations. This is evident, even when the leap is by the same amount. Games are getting more expensive, and the amount of things you could do when upgrading and staying profitable are decreasing. The only platform that seems relatively safe from this is the PC, where most every developer is familar with the hardware.