disolitude said: sc94597 said: You forget that the gamecubes architecture is far more efficient than the ps2s and the xbox making it be able to use more of its power. The gamecubes utilizes its gpu more than the ps2 meaning it doesn't have to rely on its cpu for graphics production and cpus aren't made for graphics production the way gpus are. So you should increase your estimate by 3 times because of two factors that I just thought of on the top of my head. I will think of more. I agree there are other factors and most of them favour gamecube. (other than polygon output if I remember correctly) But 3X the multiplier...lets not go crazy here. In that range we start stepping on Xbox 1's toes...and we don't wanna do that.

 Well there is a great debate on which is graphically superior xbox or gc and I say its about equal. If you seen games like rouge squadron, metroid prime 2, and re4 gc you would know that the gc could rival the xbox. When I said 3 I meant3 times the percentage that you gave so about 60%-100% more powerful than the ps2.  Efficientcy means alot more than you or I are crediting it. For ex pentium 4 with a sucky architecture at 3.2ghz doesn't rival an Anthon 64 at 2.0ghz. Same thing goes for gpus. You could tell the difference in alot of multiplatform games of the gc and ps2. Imo the wii could run re5 fine on a re4 gamecube engine + and still be a good game. It would be very easy to downgrade it to wii. All they have to do is downgrade physics,AI,Resolution,Textures,and shading which all these things are easy to do. You also have to know the wii is even more efficient than the 360/ps3 meaning you decrease the 300% estimate of the xbox 360. Raw power doesn't always win in a graphical standpoint bottlenecks are all over the 360 and ps3. If the 360 and ps3 didn't have HD they wouldn't stand to far graphically above the wii. 

Chrizum said: If you think clockspeed has anything to do with how powerful consoles are you have a lot to learn my friend.

Well actually its a pretty good base for estimation. Ofcourse one isn't going to start pasting text at how emotion engine works compared to the "gecko" in the Gamecube as that is far beyond most people. There are obvious differences that favour one or the other in the architecture design.

Comparing clock speed between a PDA and a PS2 is stupid but for console to console comparisons, it paints a fairly accurate picture.

Its like comparing horsepower in cars. Yes some cars apply the horsepower better to the road while my old mustang uses half the horses to just bend the chasis. Its still a valid comparison...

disolitude said: Chrizum said: If you think clockspeed has anything to do with how powerful consoles are you have a lot to learn my friend. Well actually its a pretty good base for estimation. Ofcourse one isn't going to start pasting text at how emotion engine works compared to the "gecko" in the Gamecube as that is far beyond most people. There are obvious differences that favour one or the other in the architecture design. Comparing clock speed between a PDA and a PS2 is stupid but for console to console comparisons, it paints a fairly accurate picture. Its like comparing horsepower in cars. Yes some cars apply the horsepower better to the road while my old mustang uses half the horses to just bend the chasis. Its still a valid comparison...

Actually no for example lets say that one processor has a clock speed of 3.2ghz and it uses 30% of this. Now lets say that my 1ghz processor runs at 100% efficiency. That means they are about equal in power that they could use. That is why pc processors such as pentium 4 at higher clocks were ditched for core 2 duo at 2ghz. So I say clock speed is half of what determines power if even half. You have to take in consideration other factors too but this is the main one.

 

sc94597 said: disolitude said: sc94597 said: You forget that the gamecubes architecture is far more efficient than the ps2s and the xbox making it be able to use more of its power. The gamecubes utilizes its gpu more than the ps2 meaning it doesn't have to rely on its cpu for graphics production and cpus aren't made for graphics production the way gpus are. So you should increase your estimate by 3 times because of two factors that I just thought of on the top of my head. I will think of more. I agree there are other factors and most of them favour gamecube. (other than polygon output if I remember correctly) But 3X the multiplier...lets not go crazy here. In that range we start stepping on Xbox 1's toes...and we don't wanna do that. Well there is a great debate on which is graphically superior xbox or gc and I say its about equal. If you seen games like rouge squadron, metroid prime 2, and re4 gc you would know that the gc could rival the xbox. When I said 3 I meant3 times the percentage that you gave so about 60%-100% more powerful than the ps2. Efficientcy means alot more than you or I are crediting it. For ex pentium 4 with a sucky architecture at 3.2ghz doesn't rival an Anthon 64 at 2.0ghz. Same thing goes for gpus. You could tell the difference in alot of multiplatform games of the gc and ps2. Imo the wii could run re5 fine on a re4 gamecube engine + and still be a good game. It would be very easy to downgrade it to wii. All they have to do is downgrade physics,AI,Resolution,Textures,and shading which all these things are easy to do. You also have to know the wii is even more efficient than the 360/ps3 meaning you decrease the 300% estimate of the xbox 360. Raw power doesn't always win in a graphical standpoint bottlenecks are all over the 360 and ps3. If the 360 and ps3 didn't have HD they wouldn't stand to far graphically above the wii.

Wow, this has completely shifted topics...lol.

Well yeah, Athlon will be better as athlon 64 bus speed is twice as fast as the one found in Pentium 4's. And for sure, RE5 for Wii will work fine with RE4 engine but that is not so easy to do as you claim it is. We would have already seen ports of COD4 and DMC4 if this was the case as wii is selling like hot cakes. Its not a hard task if a team is assigned to it but Capcom is in the ports business to make a quick buck...not spend extra months in development. 

How is Wii more efficient than 360? I have not seen examples that support this...PS3 maybe as my Game Gear is more efficient than the Cell processor... 

sc94597 said: disolitude said: Chrizum said: If you think clockspeed has anything to do with how powerful consoles are you have a lot to learn my friend. Well actually its a pretty good base for estimation. Ofcourse one isn't going to start pasting text at how emotion engine works compared to the "gecko" in the Gamecube as that is far beyond most people. There are obvious differences that favour one or the other in the architecture design. Comparing clock speed between a PDA and a PS2 is stupid but for console to console comparisons, it paints a fairly accurate picture. Its like comparing horsepower in cars. Yes some cars apply the horsepower better to the road while my old mustang uses half the horses to just bend the chasis. Its still a valid comparison... Actually no for example lets say that one processor has a clock speed of 3.2ghz and it uses 30% of this. Now lets say that my 1ghz processor runs at 100% efficiency. That means they are about equal in power that they could use. That is why pc processors such as pentium 4 at higher clocks were ditched for core 2 duo at 2ghz. So I say clock speed is half of what determines power if even half. You have to take in consideration other factors too but this is the main one.

 

Please name me a console where this was an issue other than games taht are in early development? RE5 isn't some first party game where designers don't know how to push 360 and PS3 to its limits... By their 3rd year both PS2 and gamecube were getting pushed 80-100%.

disolitude said: sc94597 said: disolitude said: sc94597 said: You forget that the gamecubes architecture is far more efficient than the ps2s and the xbox making it be able to use more of its power. The gamecubes utilizes its gpu more than the ps2 meaning it doesn't have to rely on its cpu for graphics production and cpus aren't made for graphics production the way gpus are. So you should increase your estimate by 3 times because of two factors that I just thought of on the top of my head. I will think of more. I agree there are other factors and most of them favour gamecube. (other than polygon output if I remember correctly) But 3X the multiplier...lets not go crazy here. In that range we start stepping on Xbox 1's toes...and we don't wanna do that. Well there is a great debate on which is graphically superior xbox or gc and I say its about equal. If you seen games like rouge squadron, metroid prime 2, and re4 gc you would know that the gc could rival the xbox. When I said 3 I meant3 times the percentage that you gave so about 60%-100% more powerful than the ps2. Efficientcy means alot more than you or I are crediting it. For ex pentium 4 with a sucky architecture at 3.2ghz doesn't rival an Anthon 64 at 2.0ghz. Same thing goes for gpus. You could tell the difference in alot of multiplatform games of the gc and ps2. Imo the wii could run re5 fine on a re4 gamecube engine + and still be a good game. It would be very easy to downgrade it to wii. All they have to do is downgrade physics,AI,Resolution,Textures,and shading which all these things are easy to do. You also have to know the wii is even more efficient than the 360/ps3 meaning you decrease the 300% estimate of the xbox 360. Raw power doesn't always win in a graphical standpoint bottlenecks are all over the 360 and ps3. If the 360 and ps3 didn't have HD they wouldn't stand to far graphically above the wii. Wow, this has completely shifted topics...lol. Well yeah, Athlon will be better as athlon 64 bus speed is twice as fast as the one found in Pentium 4's. And for sure, RE5 for Wii will work fine with RE4 engine but that is not so easy to do as you claim it is. We would have already seen ports of COD4 and DMC4 if this was the case as wii is selling like hot cakes. Its not a hard task if a team is assigned to it but Capcom is in the ports business to make a quick buck...not spend extra months in development.  How is Wii more efficient than 360? I have not seen examples that support this...PS3 maybe as my Game Gear is more efficient than the Cell processor...

Yeah I felt I was getting off topic a little. The wii is more efficient than one of the xbox 360s cores should have added that. The wii is also more power efficient and runs cooler. I also think the ar Fine I will compare anthon to pentium extreme  edition. The reason we haven't seen CoD 4 for the wii is because infinity ward isn't interested in the wii imo. Another reason why this game wouldn't be on the wii because most of the install base are casuals. Idk why DMC 4 wasn't ported to the wii. Also it would take 1 month at most to downgrade to a wii version. That is because they have the tools to downgrade to a wii version. I believe in another thread Fazz downgrade one gameplay pic of re5 so it would be able to run on the wii at 30-40fps and it didn't look too different from the ps3/360 version. It would still be alot cheaper than to make a whole game and they would make alot of money of it. They would benefit more than what they would lose if they made an re5 port for the wii. Everyone who bought re4 Wii Edition most likely will buy re5.

disolitude said: sc94597 said: disolitude said: Chrizum said: If you think clockspeed has anything to do with how powerful consoles are you have a lot to learn my friend. Well actually its a pretty good base for estimation. Ofcourse one isn't going to start pasting text at how emotion engine works compared to the "gecko" in the Gamecube as that is far beyond most people. There are obvious differences that favour one or the other in the architecture design. Comparing clock speed between a PDA and a PS2 is stupid but for console to console comparisons, it paints a fairly accurate picture. Its like comparing horsepower in cars. Yes some cars apply the horsepower better to the road while my old mustang uses half the horses to just bend the chasis. Its still a valid comparison... Actually no for example lets say that one processor has a clock speed of 3.2ghz and it uses 30% of this. Now lets say that my 1ghz processor runs at 100% efficiency. That means they are about equal in power that they could use. That is why pc processors such as pentium 4 at higher clocks were ditched for core 2 duo at 2ghz. So I say clock speed is half of what determines power if even half. You have to take in consideration other factors too but this is the main one.     Please name me a console where this was an issue other than games taht are in early development? RE5 isn't some first party game where designers don't know how to push 360 and PS3 to its limits... By their 3rd year both PS2 and gamecube were getting pushed 80-100%.

Do you have a link to a game where the gamecube used 80-100% and a game where ps2 used 80-100%. If you do then we could compare them and see the difference in graphics quality. I really find it hard to beilieve the gamecube and the ps2 where pushed to 100% maybe 80% for a few games.This is probaly a select few anyway. Like I said there are other factors than efficiency  and clock speed. This is certainly not the case this generation anyway the 360 and the ps3 barely used there full power this gen. I just saw a thread that said uncharted uses like 20% of the ps3.

sc94597 said: disolitude said: Wow, this has completely shifted topics...lol. Well yeah, Athlon will be better as athlon 64 bus speed is twice as fast as the one found in Pentium 4's. And for sure, RE5 for Wii will work fine with RE4 engine but that is not so easy to do as you claim it is. We would have already seen ports of COD4 and DMC4 if this was the case as wii is selling like hot cakes. Its not a hard task if a team is assigned to it but Capcom is in the ports business to make a quick buck...not spend extra months in development. How is Wii more efficient than 360? I have not seen examples that support this...PS3 maybe as my Game Gear is more efficient than the Cell processor... Yeah I felt I was getting off topic a little. The wii is more efficient than one of the xbox 360s cores should have added that. The wii is also more power efficient and runs cooler. I also think the ar Fine I will compare anthon to pentium extreme edition. The reason we haven't seen CoD 4 for the wii is because infinity ward isn't interested in the wii imo. Another reason why this game wouldn't be on the wii because most of the install base are casuals. Idk why DMC 4 wasn't ported to the wii. Also it would take 1 month at most to downgrade to a wii version. That is because they have the tools to downgrade to a wii version. I believe in another thread Fazz downgrade one gameplay pic of re5 so it would be able to run on the wii at 30-40fps and it didn't look too different from the ps3/360 version. It would still be alot cheaper than to make a whole game and they would make alot of money of it. They would benefit more than what they would lose if they made an re5 port for the wii. Everyone who bought re4 Wii Edition most likely will buy re5.

 

Yeah, I'd buy it for sure if it came out on the Wii. Its a whole different experience of my 2nd favourite game series...sign me up! 

My argument was never that I don't want to see it made, but that it most likely wont get made... I just can't think of any examples in recent years where a company has bothered to port somethign this big down, even slightly. 

This thread is getting off topic anyway. IT went from okami being a re5 test then to wii wouldn't get a re5 to gamecube vs ps2 graphics then efficiency vs clock speed. Lol yep well I guess its everyones opinion. I think there is a 40% chance the wii will get re5. I would buy both versions anyway.

I don't have a link to screen shots but I can think of a few games. MGS2 for ps2 and MGS for gamecube.

2 different games, done by completely different teams using different engines yet visually they are very similar. One will have a hard time telling them apart when playing them a first time. MGS3 looks much better than either as it came 3 years later and by then PS2 was being pushed to its limits.

There was massive slowdown obvious in games like Onimusha 3 and Killzone at that time. Now I do believe there wouldn't be slowdown if those games were developed as is for the gamecube, but if anything was changed such as added 480p support or the draw distance, those games would have slow down on the gamecube too.

Its hard to know the exact data without being in the industry but I don't think gamecube could have done 60% better visuals than PS2 based on my judgment of owning both systems at the time and playing dozens of best games for each.