jarrod said:
Ugh, this point-by-point-quote-within-quote thing you do is incredibly annoying. If you're going to respond to me in the future, please don't do it.
i only do it to respond individually to each of your points
UGH. I hate this. I hate you for making me do this. And I hate myself for doing this. H8! ;_;
Anyway, my only point was that the shader effects already seen in 3DS are closer to 360/PS3 than anything else we know of.
i agree but above you are saying its like 360 and PS3 quality which i didn't agree with
No I wasn't, I said "closer". 360 and PS3 are like all we can compare it to, as while Xbox could do some of these effects, it's shading architecture wasn't flexible enough or supported enough to really make use widespread in-game.
Obviously 3DS doesn't have near the fillrate, programmability or flexibility they do, but what it's doing is so far beyond PSP...
yes i agree it wold be better than PSP
but is it the leap that we see between 2 generations,not much.would be be comparable to PSP2,which it will not?now i know we don't know PSP2 specs but from whatever and however we follow gaming,we should know that PSP2 leap will atleast be bigger than this.
if you are gonna go saying Wii is a great system and it is stronger than PS2,GC and XBOX,that doesn't matter.what matters is did it take the leap that 360 and PS3 took.no it didn't.
In terms of effects, going from virtually no shaders to a wide array of shaders is a generational leap. It's like going from purely flat shaded to textures polygons, it's the next step. That's why I prefaced it "in terms of effects".
Wii's a great architecture, and one that corrects basically all GameCube's flaws, but I wouldn't say it's entirely ahead of Xbox. Xbox could do things Wii can't and vice versa. Like PS3 vs 360 to some extent.
it's like comparing Dreamcast to Xbox. Sure, they're within the same "generation" class of spec, but there's a huge difference in capability. There is a readily apparent "leap" here.
yes but the leap should be comparable and the Dreamcast was released far earlier than XBOX,it more like DREAMCAST was released in middle of the PS1 generation not in a new generation
Dreamcast came only 3 years before Xbox. That's less time than between PSP and 3DS actually.
And when I say Wii 2 will be a "generational leap" I was clearly referring in regards to Wii.
yes i think the same but wouldn't you like a leap and it being comparable to PS4 and 720.it would be a generational leap from what PS2.5 to PS3.5.generational leap WOULD ONLY BE WHEN IT IS LEAP COMPARABLE TO the current generation
Nintendo's current generation *is* Wii. It's like how DS was a generational leap from GBA, even it was basically a gen behind PSP in hardware class, it was still a generational leap all the same.
Frankly, CELL is a terribly unoptimized chip for gaming,
its a new architecture,would you be saying the same if PC's from 1980's be using CELL then they would have gotten used to the architecture.
Uh, an off the shelf PC chip from the 1980s would also be a horribly unoptimized chip. I'm not seeing any disconnect?
I've no doubt Nintendo will use chip that's weaker on paper, yet appreciably more powerful in the real world for gaming application, and at a much more logically economical pricepoint...
think the same but i have certain doubts still as PS3 hadn't still been maxed anywhere near
Outside Sony themselves, I'd say there's little chance for it to be maxed out honestly. Only 1st place consoles tend to get pushed to their limits, and with the lurch towards HD multiplatform development for most 3rd parties, that's just make things less likely to really push the strengths of either HD platform.
it'll be like PS2 vs GC all over again.
so you saying Wii will be comparable or a little bit over PS360 and be like PS2 vs GC.now PS2 wasn't that behind that Wii.5 vs PS4 will be PS2 vs GC
Wait what, I'm confused? I was saying PS2 vs GC for PS3 vs Wii 2, but honestly it'll probably be more like PS2 vs Wii.
|
