By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - My theory on the wiis power.

Username2324 on 19 February 2008
sc94597 said:
Griffin said:
"This allows many wii games to look better than alot of ps3 and 360 games" Can you please show me some wii games that look better then these shots. But don't look to hard i includued a picture of the best looking wii game and it fails very short of these PS3 games. Plus i included a pic of Crysis for the hell of it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


That was mostly for the 360 and I never remember saying the best game graphics and I also never remember saying any current wii game has better graphics but there is a number of 360 games that some of the wiis game graphics are better. I bet I could find some ps3 games that look worse than smg and mp3.

 You don't know anything about games do you? Those were all PS3 titles, a couple were multiplatform, but all are available on PS3, with the exclusion of Crysis of course. Again there is no chance of a Wii game looking better than a 360 or PS3, the sheer resolution of PS3/360 games gaurantees they will look better than Wii games. When you stretch that Wii game to the resolution of PS3/360 it will become majorly distorted and look even worse.



Around the Network
superchunk on 19 February 2008

I agree with the idea that Wii's current selection of games are not at the peak of Wii's abilities. Especially 3rd parties who mostly have not even tried. Most of their Wii projects are simply PS2 ports.

However, on an HDTV the best Wii game will look a lot worse than the best PS360 game. On an SDTV or EDTV, the result will be slightly closer but still the same effective result. The Wii is just not anywhere near their specs. That is why no 3rd party has simply ported CoD4 or other game to Wii. I'm sure if they thought it was possible they would.

Instead what I see happening is a lot of Wii projects that fully utilize the Wii's power in the next few years and then being ported up to the PS360 in many cases.



sc94597 on 19 February 2008
Username2324 said:
sc94597 said:
Username2324 said:
 

The Wii's specs are only about 50% better than the Gamecubes, so I don't see how this could be true, and you can't say 30-50% of the power is lost because of the High Resolutions (what about registering the motion, and sending audio to the controller for the Wii? That takes power too), that's part of making a beautiful game, so that statement is false as well. I would also like to know where you got your "efficient" part at, everyone knows its up to the developers code, not exactly the hardware, so again, that statement is false. "wii games to look better than PS3 and 360" again completely false, compare multiplatform games, the low resolution and weak power of the Wii becomes extremely noticeable.

People are mad at Wii 3rd part developers because they can't code for the Wii, it's because they have lowsy game ideas. The Wii's potential as already been reached, due to Nintendo not using any new technology. Your comparison of the 3 consoles is very flawed.


Yep cause the wii mote uses as much power as high res and high res textures./sarcasm Efficiency is greatly determined by the hardwares architecture and how many bottlenecks are in that hardware not just how well a dev could produce something. Its like comparing a lower clocked 2ghz cor 2duo ot a 3.6ghz pentium 4 which is better. The more efficient one because it does twice+ of its power in the same time the other processor does one. The only significant multiplatform was CoD 3 and that was a launch game. Who ever said the wii was pushed to its limits. When the wii is running games at 30fps then I will say it is pushed to its limits.


I'm not quite sure I understand your comparison... Your comparing a 2.0Ghz COre 2 Duo to a 3.6Ghz P4, and your saying the P4 is faster? That is not the case, so if that's your comparison you are wrong and your post becomes irrelavent. Or are you comparing the two and saying the Core 2 Duo is faster? If that's the case your still doing a poor comparison, if anything the Core 2 would represent the PS3 and the P4 the Wii, in which case the P4 has many more bottlenecks and the Core 2 is far more efficient. And yes it is up to the developers, because they can take these "bottlenecks" and work around them, put them to their advantage,

You obviously have a poor understanding of CPU's and development, and it shows is your original post how you go from x more powerful to x more powerful.

I mean if you honestly think that any game would look better on the Wii rather than the 360 or PS3 then you are living in a false reality. You don't seem to realize that a fair comparison would be on identical screens, so if the screens were both low-res the PS3/360 would look better, or if they were both HD the PS3/360 would look better.

PS3/360 games will always look better whether there in HD or not. End of thread.


 I saide the core 2 duo is better. The cell as far as I know has alot more bottlenecks than any other cpu and is extremely hard to design for. Also why would you say a cell is a core 2 duo when it is only has 1 core while a core 2 duo has 2. That was just to show  you that being more efficient allows more power per unit of time. I'm talking about alot of the early games the wii could look better I know it won't look better than up to date games. Not all bottlenecks could be developed around. Thats why having less bottlenecks is better because you can't develope around it. I'm not saying the wii is more powerful I'm just trying to make out where it is graphically. I never said they won't look better in sd. I'm just saying that in sd they would look even better than in hd because the devs could use more of that power put in hd for other more important things. You think that i'm trying to say the wii is better but I'm just trying to say that the other consoles aren't going to produce games 8-10 times more graphically powered because of the reasons I stated. /Thread not ended. 



sc94597 on 19 February 2008
superchunk said:
I agree with the idea that Wii's current selection of games are not at the peak of Wii's abilities. Especially 3rd parties who mostly have not even tried. Most of their Wii projects are simply PS2 ports.

However, on an HDTV the best Wii game will look a lot worse than the best PS360 game. On an SDTV or EDTV, the result will be slightly closer but still the same effective result. The Wii is just not anywhere near their specs. That is why no 3rd party has simply ported CoD4 or other game to Wii. I'm sure if they thought it was possible they would.

Instead what I see happening is a lot of Wii projects that fully utilize the Wii's power in the next few years and then being ported up to the PS360 in many cases.
I never even said the wii would look as good in hd. I said it would look better in sd than it would look in hd.  I didn't even say they would look close. I said that its not as far as a difference as people think.

 



weezy on 19 February 2008

@griffin

 

BOOYAAAKAAAA MOTHAFUUUCKAAAA!!!

I am WEEzY. You can suck my Nintendo loving BALLS!

 

MynameisGARY

Around the Network
skip on 19 February 2008
sc94597 said:
Something I will also like to add. I feel really sorry for the people who have sdtvs and bought a 360 and ps3 but not get the benefits of the hd. Also they should make sd versions of games these versions could have better textures,shading,more polygons, frame rates so people who don't have hd get to enjoy the supposed to be all powerful graphics too. If the consoles didn't produce hd they might even rival pc gaming with those specs for about 2 years.
someone needs to go to school more often.  

 



DSLover on 19 February 2008

I thought gamecube games look nice enough so wii is pentry powerful. graphics don't sell games, creativity, gameplay and art style do.



 

 

sc94597 on 19 February 2008
skip said:
sc94597 said:
Something I will also like to add. I feel really sorry for the people who have sdtvs and bought a 360 and ps3 but not get the benefits of the hd. Also they should make sd versions of games these versions could have better textures,shading,more polygons, frame rates so people who don't have hd get to enjoy the supposed to be all powerful graphics too. If the consoles didn't produce hd they might even rival pc gaming with those specs for about 2 years.
someone needs to go to school more often.

 


Someone has to explain how I need to go to school more often. If you are talking about my grammer then fine maybe my grammer sucks on the internet because I don't feel like taking 30mins to proofread my whole post. If you are talking about the contents of my post then explain how that has anything to do with school. Also the time you spend in school doesn't determine your overall knowlege. I missed 11 days the whole year so far and my first quarter grades were all perfect 99s and my second quarter were all high 90s. If you don't believe me I will scan my report card and even direct you to my schools website where they have me listed on the high honors which you need 95+ in all of your academic classes. This could also be classified as trolling because it is off topic and causes an emotional response. If not for trolling this could be classified as personal targeting somebody.  So please if you don't have anything that correlates by the littlest means to the main topic don't post.



skip on 19 February 2008
sc94597 said:
skip said:
sc94597 said:
Something I will also like to add. I feel really sorry for the people who have sdtvs and bought a 360 and ps3 but not get the benefits of the hd. Also they should make sd versions of games these versions could have better textures,shading,more polygons, frame rates so people who don't have hd get to enjoy the supposed to be all powerful graphics too. If the consoles didn't produce hd they might even rival pc gaming with those specs for about 2 years.
someone needs to go to school more often.

 


Someone has to explain how I need to go to school more often. If you are talking about my grammer then fine maybe my grammer sucks on the internet because I don't feel like taking 30mins to proofread my whole post. If you are talking about the contents of my post then explain how that has anything to do with school. Also the time you spend in school doesn't determine your overall knowlege. I missed 11 days the whole year so far and my first quarter grades were all perfect 99s and my second quarter were all high 90s. If you don't believe me I will scan my report card and even direct you to my schools website where they have me listed on the high honors which you need 95+ in all of your academic classes. This could also be classified as trolling because it is off topic and causes an emotional response. If not for trolling this could be classified as personal targeting somebody. So please if you don't have anything that correlates by the littlest means to the main topic don't post.

It's not the grammar it's the fact that you posted a bunch of nonsensical, and contradictory gibberish.

 



sc94597 on 19 February 2008
skip said:
sc94597 said:
skip said:
sc94597 said:
Something I will also like to add. I feel really sorry for the people who have sdtvs and bought a 360 and ps3 but not get the benefits of the hd. Also they should make sd versions of games these versions could have better textures,shading,more polygons, frame rates so people who don't have hd get to enjoy the supposed to be all powerful graphics too. If the consoles didn't produce hd they might even rival pc gaming with those specs for about 2 years.
someone needs to go to school more often.

 


Someone has to explain how I need to go to school more often. If you are talking about my grammer then fine maybe my grammer sucks on the internet because I don't feel like taking 30mins to proofread my whole post. If you are talking about the contents of my post then explain how that has anything to do with school. Also the time you spend in school doesn't determine your overall knowlege. I missed 11 days the whole year so far and my first quarter grades were all perfect 99s and my second quarter were all high 90s. If you don't believe me I will scan my report card and even direct you to my schools website where they have me listed on the high honors which you need 95+ in all of your academic classes. This could also be classified as trolling because it is off topic and causes an emotional response. If not for trolling this could be classified as personal targeting somebody. So please if you don't have anything that correlates by the littlest means to the main topic don't post.

It's not the grammar it's the fact that you posted a bunch of nonsensical, and contradictory gibberish.

 


Why don't you counteract my nonsensical gibberish with details rather than infer that I have no intelligence.

 

Edit: Oh I think its me saying the consoles could rival gaming pcs. Well I think that is true. Want  me to explain why. This is because most gaming pcs don't have 3.2ghz tricore processors do they? The limited ram isn't a problem because about a 3rd of 512mb of ram is being used for XP and the extra processes used to run the game take up more ram if they were on a console. Not to metion the ps3 has the fastest ram available. Now the cell is alot more powerful than most processors if its power is utilized more. The only thing I think would be a problem is the graphic cards. They are highly outdated but if microsoft and sony wanted to rival gaming pcs for a few years they would put in custom gpus with alot of power. So that is why games may look better on a console than a pc for about 2 years if they ran sd only. Hd doens't add too much except for detail which is barely noticable by alot of people. I'm probaly wrong here about console making better graphics but I know for sure that my other posts had alot of thought and are of higher quality.