My thoughts on what's Wii's standard graphics should look like

[Bored4life]

supermetalrockdave99 said:

Mifely said:

supermetalrockdave99 said:
All those numbers when comparing the Wii with the Xbox 1 don't really mean anything since the Wii is *supposed* to be developed completely differently than the other systems due to it's unique architecture (which Third Parties don't seem to know or care or use)

Read this: http://revoeyes.blogspot.com/2007/09/wii-can-do-lot-more-graphically-factor.html

Another Factor 5 interview but this time the Wii is being compared to the PS3. Remember that raw numbers don't mean anything; it's the performance and the resulting look of the game that are the key and Julian from Factor 5 explains why this is true for the Wii and why games can look almost as good as PS3 in SD.

I remember CNN posting an article about a decade ago about how, before or by 2008, robots would be intelligent enough to threaten mankind. Here's a link:

http://www.cnn.com/TECH/science/9802/18/swiss.robot/

Don't believe everything you read. Heck, Julian Eggbrecht is a designer, not an engineer, even, isn't he?

Bad example my friend, Julian Eggbrecht and Factor 5 helped research the development of the Gamecube and they probably know the system better than Nintendo themselves. Rebel Strke is proof enough since that game still looks awesome with something like 20 million full shaded textured polygons running at a consistant 60 frames per second. Trust him when he says he knows what the Wii can do in relation to the other systems. I actually thought it was pretty funny that you thought that was a fake story....

 Rogue Leader was 16 million.

The engine allowed it to do 22 million with full bump mapping at 60 fps.