highwaystar101 said: If people wanted good games with 3D graphics then they would have stuck with the N64... but unfortunatley people want good graphics, which does not add to gameplay

 This isn't only about graphics its about Ai and Physics too and they both effect gameplay.

bdbdbd said: Ryudo said: Hard to do when he left Nintendo in 2002 shortly after stepping down as CEO remained on the board a few more months before finally leaving and Iwata was named CEO in 2002 and DS came out in 2004 and Wii in 2006 and it was Iwata who patched things up with Square/3rd party which Yamauchi started the war of words with them and alienated 3rd party for so long. Did you ever see that british TV special on Nintendo or read what Yamauchi said about Gamecube and GBA right before launch he was senile and arrogant bastard he was more insane than Kaz of Sony. ALso did you read Steven L Kents book?   Nexus was a fanmade photoshop deal nothing more. DS had the 3 pillars marketing of GBA SP and GBA Micro if DS flopped it would rely on it's GB brand when Micro flopped and DS took off they dropped Micro and slowly phased out GBA SP and then announced in early 2007 GB lined was pretty much retired.   I have read what Yamauchi has said (and Iwata), in which i based what i said. Besides, DS was started before Yamauchi left, and as a board chairman, don't you think he has something to do about how the company is lead? The 3 pillar strategy was to play it safe. If DS had flopped, they'd still have GBA. Iwata had a lot to do with bad relations with Square, but when the relations went bad? Nexus is a fanmade, i know, but it's based on the rumors considering Revolution years ago.

As much as I love the DS I still can't stand the man and Nintendo is a company I have grew up with and loved and followed as a historian (as with anything I love) but it was Yamauchi who started the bitterness with Square in the N64 era and Iwata patched it up when he took over.

 

 

And as to the poster who said Iwata is the best CEO in gaming history I fully agree I could not be happier to have him as CEO.

 

EDIT: and Yes the name is from Grandia II (Dreamcast version)

Wii runs a 750Mhz PPC cpu it's faster than the old Xbox or PS2 but the 360 is 3*3Ghz ie around 10* faster. And PS3 is 8*3ghz ie 25* faster. But in terms of what you can do many operations have exponential roll-off - In chess for example to compute just one extra move ahead of your opponent you need ~20* the processing power. Which is why the 360 and Ps3 had to go 10 to 25* the speed of the lastgen otherwise they would not have been improved enough to really warrant bring out a new console _ nintendo went on a real budget upgrade to the gamecube - repackaged it threw away the crap thumbstick controller added motion and IR pointing and it's totally pay off. Developing some unique new franchises and opened a HUGE new market with their quirky low cost design.

I Expect the next Nintendo unit to arrive late 2009 and be running a 3Ghz PPC possibly an enhanced Cell or Xenon and have complete backwards compatibility with Wii (unlike 360 or PS3).

Ryudo said: bdbdbd said: Ryudo said: Hard to do when he left Nintendo in 2002 shortly after stepping down as CEO remained on the board a few more months before finally leaving and Iwata was named CEO in 2002 and DS came out in 2004 and Wii in 2006 and it was Iwata who patched things up with Square/3rd party which Yamauchi started the war of words with them and alienated 3rd party for so long. Did you ever see that british TV special on Nintendo or read what Yamauchi said about Gamecube and GBA right before launch he was senile and arrogant bastard he was more insane than Kaz of Sony. ALso did you read Steven L Kents book?   Nexus was a fanmade photoshop deal nothing more. DS had the 3 pillars marketing of GBA SP and GBA Micro if DS flopped it would rely on it's GB brand when Micro flopped and DS took off they dropped Micro and slowly phased out GBA SP and then announced in early 2007 GB lined was pretty much retired.   I have read what Yamauchi has said (and Iwata), in which i based what i said. Besides, DS was started before Yamauchi left, and as a board chairman, don't you think he has something to do about how the company is lead? The 3 pillar strategy was to play it safe. If DS had flopped, they'd still have GBA. Iwata had a lot to do with bad relations with Square, but when the relations went bad? Nexus is a fanmade, i know, but it's based on the rumors considering Revolution years ago. As much as I love the DS I still can't stand the man and Nintendo is a company I have grew up with and loved and followed as a historian (as with anything I love) but it was Yamauchi who started the bitterness with Square in the N64 era and Iwata patched it up when he took over.     And as to the poster who said Iwata is the best CEO in gaming history I fully agree I could not be happier to have him as CEO.   EDIT: and Yes the name is from Grandia II (Dreamcast version)

As you can see, it was in the N64 era. Maybe i should have been more specific with "N64", since i was meaning Yamauchi apparently saw the industry and Nintendos position in it. Isn't it funny how history repeates itself, Sony has done the excact same thing as Nintendo. Anyway, in general 3rd party relations, were pretty much fixed, when GC was launched, just look at it's good support at start, and what's more important, is they were fixed while Yamauchi was still the CEO. If we look at Nintendos direction and what Yamauchi said couple of years ago, you can see that he had went into himself and rethink things. The biggest difference i see between Yamauchi and Iwata is, that Yamauchi saw 3rd parties as competition, while Iwata sees them partners.

bdbdbd said: As you can see, it was in the N64 era. Maybe i should have been more specific with "N64", since i was meaning Yamauchi apparently saw the industry and Nintendos position in it. Isn't it funny how history repeates itself, Sony has done the excact same thing as Nintendo. Anyway, in general 3rd party relations, were pretty much fixed, when GC was launched, just look at it's good support at start, and what's more important, is they were fixed while Yamauchi was still the CEO. If we look at Nintendos direction and what Yamauchi said couple of years ago, you can see that he had went into himself and rethink things. The biggest difference i see between Yamauchi and Iwata is, that Yamauchi saw 3rd parties as competition, while Iwata sees them partners.

 I think the biggest difference between Yamauchi and Iwata is that the former based his judgement on instinct and insight the latter on his understanding and vision of gaming market.

One is self-made man that build a billionarire empire starting from a little hanafuda company the other is the only CEO of bigger gaming company that was a programmer and lived gaming from inside  the "software maker" environment. 

the Wiis true source of power is the souls of a thousands of murdered babies, each night while you sleep the "Inoktucha", or soul eater, escapes out of the Wii and feast on baby souls.....they only way i know of calming this monster is to offer it a "Hungdoh".....for more on the rites and rituals visit

here

  

sc94597 said: 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.

You lack of knowledge is proved then Cell has 8 cores, and without that extra resolution you only have so many pixels to work with, so again, there is no way in hell that SD would look better than HD, AGAIN, thread ended.

 

stephen700 said: Wii runs a 750Mhz PPC cpu it's faster than the old Xbox or PS2 but the 360 is 3*3Ghz ie around 10* faster. And PS3 is 8*3ghz ie 25* faster. But in terms of what you can do many operations have exponential roll-off - In chess for example to compute just one extra move ahead of your opponent you need ~20* the processing power. Which is why the 360 and Ps3 had to go 10 to 25* the speed of the lastgen otherwise they would not have been improved enough to really warrant bring out a new console _ nintendo went on a real budget upgrade to the gamecube - repackaged it threw away the crap thumbstick controller added motion and IR pointing and it's totally pay off. Developing some unique new franchises and opened a HUGE new market with their quirky low cost design. I Expect the next Nintendo unit to arrive late 2009 and be running a 3Ghz PPC possibly an enhanced Cell or Xenon and have complete backwards compatibility with Wii (unlike 360 or PS3).

Actually PS3 has 9 times 3,2GHz processor. General purpose processor and 8 specialized. From the 8 SPE:s, one is a spare part, one is reserved for the system and 5 are used solely for games, and one (sixth for games) is shared between system and games, but it's primarly for system, meaning that even if a game uses that SPE, system can take control of the SPE without prior notice. So that leaves six processors for games. According to M$ and Sony, floating point operations per second between the systems are 210 and 240GFLOPS (3 times 70 for 360). So the 2 systems are actually closer to each other than you seem to think. But systems as a whole, i really can't say which one's more powerful.

I see people are still comparing clock speeds of different architecture chips... It doesn't work.

Remember as well it wasn't just a cost issue, the small form factor of the Wii and low power consumption make it an easy addition to even the most modest room.  The small white inconspicuous box is easier to get past wives and girlfriends than some hulking black or grey beast!!  Making it some uber-spec machine would mean a larger form factor with more cooling and power drain.

 I think it's a genius pitch, it's the one home console that sells at a profit too.

^sad thing i have proof of this--my wife hates the video game clutter but dosent mind the wii