| kingofwale said: >he did it with the Wii's hardware. but here's the thing, to program something with a true 3-D engine, will it requires extra code (layering, angling) and therefore, extra need for graphical power? so will it put it out of the reach of Wii hardware? Wii 2 for sure. As a beginner programmer, I have no idea, can anyone explain it? |
Give credit where credit is due. The Wii is the weakest system, but it still has some power behind it. Also, ability to output in HD has nothing to do with how powerful the CPU is.
Well, it kinda does though (I know I'm refutting my own point). I've done some (minimal) research into the actual "specs" of the systems, and this is what I got:
Console | Xbox360 Specs | PS3 Specs | Wii Specs |
| CPU | 3 cores at 3.2 GHz each | 7 cores @ 3.2 GHz each | 729 MHz |
| GPU | 500 MHz | 550 MHz | 243 MHz |
| BUS speed | 22.4 GB/s | 25.6 GB/s | Not specified1 |
| Main RAM | 512 MB | 256 MB | 88 MB |
| GPU RAM | 10 MB | 256 MB | 3 MB |
Things to note: None of these are as official as I would like, especially for the Wii, since Nintendo is pretty hush hush about that kind of stuff. Obviously these are not the only things that make these systems, but it's the best I got.
As you can see, the Wii's GPU system is only half that of the 360s GPU. GPU RAM is a lot smaller on both the 360 and Wii, but the 360 can use main RAM for GPU stuff, and that's bigger than even the PS3s. The different cores usually do different things. Like the PS3 has 7 (maybe 8) of them, but one is dedicated to the OS, and another is used to "increases yeilds" meaning that if one core fails, there's already another in there so you dont have to fix the system. Also, I've read these cores are much less effiecent and ultimately slower than a regular CPU (that the Wii has), but since there are more of them, it makes it up. That's why a PS3 can basically have 7 CPUs, but only cost $400, where a PC that would have 7 CPUs would probably cost a good $2,500. That's also why the Wiis CPU is slower, but ultimately, better, than one "core" of either the PS3 or 360, even though they are "faster." the BUS speed for the Wii is unknown, as I could not find it anywhere, but it's probably along the lines of 6-10 GB/s. Finally, the way the PS3/360 get a lot of their GPU power is from using the cores as extra processors, and this is always why it's so expensive to develope games for them.
My point is that, though the Wii isn't the powerhouse the 360/PS3 are, doesn't mean it can't do anything. The PS2 paled in comparison to the Xbox, and from I've found, the N64 was nearly 3x as powerful as the PS (though the N64s carts limited the amount of stuff that could be stored, so the power was kind of wasted), yet I don't think I've ever head anyone say "man I wish this game was one the Xbox, it would of looked so much better. Try comparing some FFXII screens to SMS screens, and I would say, though the PS2 had only maybe 60% of the power, was able to match up well to the GameCube.
Sorry for the rant. Basically, though the Wii might not be able to pull off the headtracking as well, or make a world as "real" for the headtracking, it should be able to do it easily.
Also, Phalanx, what is POV? Does it mean Point of View? I doubt it though. lol
Edit to keep on topic: If anyone makes a headtracking game i feel they will release it on as many things as possible, because I would think it would be a game that only a few buy.
