davygee said:
I agree to some respect. The difference between say Wolfenstein and Doom was just out of this world and I can see where you're coming from. But the Wii's power is much more similar to last generation than this. And you can see the difference. Look at Gears of War compared the last gen. Although it's not completely noticeable at the moment because the world isn't HD compatible yet...but in a few years time when more and more people have access to HD TV's....you'll pretty easily notice the different between Wii's 480p and PS3's 1080p. Resolution is a big deal and has been on the PC for years. I remember playing Quake at 640x480...but you can now play games with much more detail and at a much higher resolution.....while in the console arena...we have been used to 480 for too long. It's time to up the level a few notches. |
Well, I don't doubt there will be a huge difference in how realistic games will look on the Wii as compared to the PS3 and XBox 360; what I was specifically refering to was how the increased performance will impact gameplay. The reason I choose Doom II and Half Life was the difference in story telling and gameplay experience was drastic. Half-Life popularized the cinematic inspired FPS storytelling that is used in most games currently, and had a very large reasonably populated seemless world; Half Life 2 expanded upon these things but the improvement was mostly evolutionary.
Being that Half Life 2 and Doom 3 were easily ported to the XBox I see no reason to believe that similar games could not be produced for the Wii; I don't think that it is unreasonable to say that you're not going to see any revolutionary difference in gameplay between Half-Life 2 and what is available on the PS3/XBox 360.
