Stever89 said: leo-j said: They cant face reality, the wii is good at things like motion controls, let it be good at what it is, but please dont rant that the wii is almost as powerful as the PS3 or XBOX 360. I'm sorry, I really fail to see where anyone says that the Wii is as powerful as the PS3/360. All I see is people suggesting that the difference in power of the Wii and PS2 is similar to the difference in power of the Wii and PS3/360.

But combine that with Sony fanboys' conviction that the PS2 is not dramatically less potent than the Wii and there you go.

Whether it's a result of a subconscious or emotional attachment to the PS2, or simply the logical consequence of simultaneously believing "the GC is not much better than the PS2" and "the Wii isn't that much better than the GC", it's obvious from the posts in this thread that this is less about overestimating the difference between Wii and 360/PS3 and more about underestimating the difference between Wii and PS2.  

Million said: With screenshots of Sonic Unleashed rumoured to be for the Wii ( I must admit if they are Wii screenshot's that is pretty impressive) Nintnedo supporters have become increasingly confident in the Wii ability to display next gen graphics , one even claiming that the Wii was being used as the lead platform for Sonic Unleashed. r3av3r2k1 said: "The main development console for this game im almost sure is the wii" http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=23496&start=200 If this where true however , this could become a trend for multiplatform games (prays it's not so) , if this happen i'd proly stop buying multiplatform titles all together. I'm taking the quote slightly out of context because he said it was possible because the game was more cartoony , regardless of the artistic style the PS3 and 360 are still capable of superior visuals. To make it clear to everyone (including myself) could anyone with the knowledge explain how big the gap between the Wii and PS3/360 is , some are making it seem like it's similar to the gap betwen the GC/XBOX and ps2 when it clearly isn't.

First of all im no wii fanboy, i dont even have one, no hd consoles either. 

what i meant about lead platform for this game, is what i said in the next post that i dont think that you read

This is a sonic game we were talking about,not a multyplatform game like call of dutty , a game from a franshise well nown to the wii audience,a game that takes some ideas from both secret rings and sonic rush both on nintendo platforms  a game that will shurely have some 60 or 70 percent of its sales on the wii 

But for me what makes the wii the lead platform for development for this specific game is the gameplay not the graphics  sonic games from recent years all look good on the eyes but the gameplay totally ruins any fun that to be had in the game,because of this they will work hard to make a solid control method for this game and thats what will consume the most time in developing this game trying to make a fun sonic game again nothing else

This is a very specific project, thats the reason i say that im almost shure the wii is the lead platform for this game not every multyplatform games for goods sake  

As for the hd consoles they will have a supped up version of this game im not expecting the wii to match the graphics of the hd consoles 

Guys, the Wii is quite a bit more powerful than the ps2.  However, you can't say that the difference between these two:





Equates to the difference between these two:





And let's not forget that GoW2 had much larger environments than SSBB, and could be played in 720p.

makingmusic476 said: Guys, the Wii is quite a bit more powerful than the ps2.  However, you can't say that the difference between these two: Equates to the difference between these two: And let's not forget that GoW2 had much larger environments than SSBB, and could be played in 720p.

 Why are you comparing a 3rd person shooter vs a fighting game, at least GoW has fixed camera like SSBB... try to compare TP vs Uncharted or RE4 vs Uncharted (Both ports of the GC)... so far there isn't that kind of game in the Wii (Uncharted Gameplay)

i think Wii is in middle of ps2 and ps3....

ps2 never had graphics like Mario Galaxy or Super Smash..... (in 6 years of lifetime)

also, Zelda was maybe the 2nd game made for Wii, as it was made for Game Cube.....

FJ-Warez said: makingmusic476 said: Guys, the Wii is quite a bit more powerful than the ps2. However, you can't say that the difference between these two: Equates to the difference between these two: And let's not forget that GoW2 had much larger environments than SSBB, and could be played in 720p. Why are you comparing a 3rd person shooter vs a fighting game, at least GoW has fixed camera like SSBB... try to compare TP vs Uncharted or RE4 vs Uncharted (Both ports of the GC)... so far there isn't that kind of game in the Wii (Uncharted Gameplay)

It wouldn't make much difference. My comparison is already slanted towards the Wii considering the fact that fighters generally have much more detailed environments and character models than other genres given the small scale of the levels.

Leni said: i think Wii is in middle of ps2 and ps3.... ps2 never had graphics like Mario Galaxy or Super Smash..... (in 6 years of lifetime) also, Zelda was maybe the 2nd game made for Wii, as it was made for Game Cube.....

 Guys, these screens aren't of TP.  They're of the Bridge of Eldin stage in SSBB.

makingmusic476 said: FJ-Warez said: makingmusic476 said: Guys, the Wii is quite a bit more powerful than the ps2. However, you can't say that the difference between these two: Equates to the difference between these two: And let's not forget that GoW2 had much larger environments than SSBB, and could be played in 720p. Why are you comparing a 3rd person shooter vs a fighting game, at least GoW has fixed camera like SSBB... try to compare TP vs Uncharted or RE4 vs Uncharted (Both ports of the GC)... so far there isn't that kind of game in the Wii (Uncharted Gameplay) It wouldn't make much difference. My comparison is already slanted towards the Wii considering the fact that fighters generally have much more detailed environments and character models than other genres given the small scale of the levels.

 Yes it would, and then you get the less detailed level of SSBB (Well except for FInal Stage), and again look for some fighters games and you will se how they are not that detailed...(Mostly for preference for the battle vs the enviroment)

FJ-Warez said: makingmusic476 said: FJ-Warez said: makingmusic476 said: Guys, the Wii is quite a bit more powerful than the ps2. However, you can't say that the difference between these two: Equates to the difference between these two: And let's not forget that GoW2 had much larger environments than SSBB, and could be played in 720p. Why are you comparing a 3rd person shooter vs a fighting game, at least GoW has fixed camera like SSBB... try to compare TP vs Uncharted or RE4 vs Uncharted (Both ports of the GC)... so far there isn't that kind of game in the Wii (Uncharted Gameplay) It wouldn't make much difference. My comparison is already slanted towards the Wii considering the fact that fighters generally have much more detailed environments and character models than other genres given the small scale of the levels. Yes it would, and then you get the less detailed level of SSBB (Well except for FInal Stage), and again look for some fighters games and you will se how they are not that detailed...(Mostly for preference for the battle vs the enviroment)

Fighters are ALWAYS more detailed than other genres, particularly the character models. Just look at some Tekken 6 or Soul Calibyr IV screes and you'll see what I'm talking about.

And Mario from SSBB looks much more detailed than Mario from SMG.

 

makingmusic476 said: Guys, the Wii is quite a bit more powerful than the ps2. However, you can't say that the difference between these two: Equates to the difference between these two: And let's not forget that GoW2 had much larger environments than SSBB, and could be played in 720p.

Yeah, 720p at a much lower framerate

Also, I have much better examples:

vs.

and

If someone can't see the difference in geometry, shaders and textures, they're really blind.

Now, let's get technical. The Playstation 2 and the Gamecube (we'll start with the GC) had very different architecture that required deep analyzing to understand how they compared to each other. The PS2 had to resort in it's rather powerful CPU to overcome it's primitive GPU. Seeing that the GPU lacked MANY features that the Xbox and GC's GPUs had, the CPU had to brute-force all of those tasks and therefore all of it's processing power was wasted, nullifying it's advantage in processing power.

First of all, let's go with RAM. The PS2 had 36MB to work with graphics while the Gamecube had just 27MB (yes, the other 16MB could only be used for audio/DVD-buffer). If the GC had less RAM, how could it had better textures, models and effects? Answer: The Gamecube had 6:1 S3 Texture Compression. This means that textures that would take 24MB on the PS2, would just take 4MB on the GC. So, effectively the GC had around 4X more memory for textures. Now with the Wii, that has an Unified Memory Architecture and can use all of it's 88MB of RAM for anything the developer wants, it would have around 12X more memory available for textures... and I'm not taking into account that the Wii's memory is much faster than the one in the Cube, if so the difference would've be much higher.

Oh, now that we're talking about RAM and seeing that some people love Wikipedia facts so much, the Wii uses the very same GDDR3 RAM in the Xbox 360 in a (according to your beloved Wikipedia) 128 bit bus. The Wii's MEM-2 (that's the name of the GDDR3 in a game developing environment) can have as much bandwidth as the Xbox 360. That's 22GB per second. Are we being too generous with that piece of crap called the Wii? Ok, let's cut it in half the speed, ie 700Mhz effective. Now we have 11GB per second. That's over 3X the bandwidth on the Cube.

Want more? Everyone says "Wii's GPU is just an overclocked GC GPU!"... but wrong my little droogys. The Wii's GPU is radically different from the one in the Cube, more so that now it has been split in two chips :shock: If Nintendo had just used a process-reduced Flipper in the Wii, the chip would have taken less than 30% of the physical space than one of the chips in the package. Way to waste money on unused chip space Nintendo!... All sarcasm aside, we can assume that ATi has doubled the pixel pipelines, texture units, TEV units and/or embedded frame/texture bufers. Not to mention the TEV units have been improved to make them much more flexible and programmable, this to achieve advanced shader effects... that BTW the PS2 had none.

The bottom-line: The Wii is as far from the PS2, as the Xbox 360 from the Wii... but if you don't agree with me, you'll ignore everything I said above ;>