Some Truth to Wii as GameCube 1.5? 519
Newsweek's N'Gai tackles the allegation that the Wii is a glorified GameCube. He specifically looked at recent comments by Microsoft's Robbie Bach saying that 'the video graphics on it aren't very strong; the box itself is kind of underpowered; it doesn't play DVDs; there are a lot of down-line components [that] aren't actually that interesting. ... They don't have the graphics horsepower that even Xbox 1 had. So it makes sort of the comparison set a little bit difficult.' LevelUp spoke with a pair of technical experts at third party publishers and learned that, essentially, Bach's comments about horsepower are accurate. However, "the 'Gamecube 1.5' moniker, while accurate, doesn't mean that gamers won't see graphical improvements on the Wii. 'There are three main differences which will result in graphics improvements. One, the increased memory clock speed, from 162 megahertz to 243 megahertz, means that it is easier to do enough pixels for 480p mode versus 480i. Two, the enhanced memory size of the Wii gives much more room for image-related operations such as anti-aliasing, motion blur, etc. The performance to these memory systems from the graphics chip is also improved. So full-screen effects and increased texture usage seem likely as a result.'"
Re:Who cares? (Score:5, Interesting)
Graphics are not the only thing that makes a game console new and improved, there are many more factors.
interesting quote (Score:3, Interesting)
Yep, I'll agree to all but the last sentance. One can easily compare sales and popularity figures.
Kinda that something that can have all those complaints, which are accurate, with such a lousy marketing campaign (come on, two creepy Japanese guys telling a little girl, "Wii would like to play"? There is so much that is wrong with that), could even get 10% of the market share of the current XBox or PS consoles, and yet it does.
Says something rather bad about MS and Sony if anything.
Take Microsoft's word, it's not all that great. :P (Score:5, Interesting)
He specifically looked at recent comments by Microsoft's Robbie Bach
A competitors review of a product, real informative.
Though I think the real issue is that the Wii is getting the market share of consumer attention in spite of the superior graphics processing power of the XBox and the PS3, and maybe they should do an article on not the resolution and frame rates but on the human interaction and game play of the consoles.
So what? (Score:2, Interesting)
Microsoft wants to drive the market, but the market wants something else. They need to wake up and realise this, and stop dissing everyone else. I guess this is a similar ethos as to where those comments about business not wanting the iPhone originated...
Microsoft are no longer the piper, and they really need to start thinking about this soon.
I thought this FUD died of old-age months ago (Score:5, Interesting)
All the way up the PC scale, each improvement is an incremental improvement on what went before. Does anyone complain about that? No.
Fundamentally, computers all do the same things. As long as you can perform the fundamental turin operations, you can do anything. Yeah, multi-core machines can do these same operations at a greater rate, but there's nothing different that what they are capable of (apart from making programmers worry about race conditions and such like).
People don't complain about the similarity between upgrades in PC processing power for a good reason, you don't have to spend many months training your programmers in how to get started and them watching them spend years before they are capable of fully utilising the system. With a similar architecture as you are already used to, the learning curve and associated costs are much much lower, programmers are more productive and happier.
you know (Score:2, Interesting)
Turn the article around (Score:5, Interesting)
Wii wins with a new way to interact with the machine making it fun and for having the standard Nintendo appeal of social games that involve a group of people vs the solo sniper approach.
Nintendo has a winner, Sony and Microsoft have dogs, very pretty dogs, but dogs. Of course Sony and Microsoft are going to point out their dogs are pretty. But they are not popular.
Things learned from this
1) group games have more mass appeal than solo games
2) interaction with the game can be fun
3) game play is more important than graphics
4) cheaper is better
5) make a console that is not a loss leader
Wii vs Xbox360/PS3 (Score:1, Interesting)
Another detail that a lot of people don't take into account: load times. If you got a lower resolution graphics then it means lower resolution textures which means it loads faster. It doesn't matter if the game looks better if you need to wait 2 minutes between each level. You may be used to long load times but as a Nintendo gamer I hate load times.
One last detail that hard-core players keep forgetting: the console price. Not everyone can afford to shell more than 400$CAD for a damn GAMING BOX. Not everyone can afford a 800$-2000$CAD+ television either. Not everyone cares about specs over fun. Brag all you want about your PS3 and Xbox 360 connected to your 50" plasma screen, I don't care.
The Xbox360 and PS3 may be selling, but I'm glad Nintendo is taking over again. Fun is back!
An F for Innovation? (Score:2, Interesting)
DVD? (Score:5, Interesting)
As of the end of 2006, over 80% of households have dvd players http://blogs.zdnet.com/ITFacts/?p=12220 [zdnet.com] . Do you think the other 20 percent are choosing between a console or dvd player? 3.5 percent of households are below the poverty line http://www.soundvision.com/Info/poor/statistics.a
What are they going on about?
Re:Who cares? (Score:5, Interesting)
On the other hand... the Wii DOES have something to offer, yet its not the graphics powerhouse that its 'competitors' are. Oh and as a little bonus, Wii is cheaper by about 50%.
Sony and Microsoft have to be really pissed about it. They must be like, buuuuuut.... uh.... our graphics are better. And... uh... our controllers vibrate! Does that count as motion control?
Re:Who cares? (Score:3, Interesting)
hehe, tell me about it! Here I am playing Super Mario Brothers, Super Mario World, The Legend of Zelda, etc. Man, graphics must be REALLY important in selling a video game system or games for it! Oddly, like the GP said...
'nuff said.
Cheers,
Fozzy
Re:Who cares? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Who cares? (Score:5, Interesting)
So looking back I guess the Wii controller shouldn't be a surprise - it's exactly what Nintendo has been doing ever since the Famicom's inception: innovation in controller design.
Also interesting is that the Gamecube was their only system that didn't include anything really new on the controller (analog shoulder buttons was about it) and was also their least-successful system.
Re:I'm surprised.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Hello Microsoft, I have a clue for you...
It's worth also noting that playing cards are still very popular, and they're rather low-tech too! Plus, despite being very cheap, I don't think they're sold a loss. Hehe.
Re:Who cares? (Score:3, Interesting)
So you have an HD-TV thats great, but you have to remember that alot of people don't have HD-TV and if your not playing an XBOX 360 on an HD-TV it levels the playing field a little bit. You also have to stop at some point and start thinking of new ways to advance a console, make it different and stand out from the rest, make it more and more real. Graphics are a big part of this but they arn't the only way to go. Motion sensors are going to be a huge part of gaming in the future, but not all games will translate to it. I think the biggest problem that pluegs a new controller system is that its over used or not used correctly, I think developers will have growing pains with the wiimote and how to use it. I don't know why nintendo didn't update the power of the wii, it may hurt it later on when titles will run on the PS3 and xbox360 but not the wii because it can't render the graphics(but only time will tell).
If someone says that if they upped the graphics on the Wii it would cost as much as a 360 or PS2 remember this, the wii is one of the few conosoles in recent years to be sold at a profit. If nintendo had sold it to break even or even loose money on the system like other manufatures did it could still sell for about the same with a few small graphics improvements. On that note as well if it is a simular model to the game cube I think you would have to face facts that manufaturing costs wouldn't go down as much as if you created a completely new system.
In the end out of the 360 and wii(the only two I've played) I much prefer the wii.
Didn't Iwata address this... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Who cares? (Score:3, Interesting)
Wait a minute, how did you get BSG in HI-Def? I have some hi-def channels, but SciFi is not one of them. AFAIK, it isn't even offered by my system, Dish Network. With my Dish contract coming to an end soon, I intend to start looking around. Any cable/satellite system that offered BSG in Hi-Def would be high on my list of potential suppliers. As it stands now, BattleStar actually looks better on my small TV than it does on my Hi-Def widescreen. Are you getting BSG on another channel besides the SciFi Network (European channels, etc.)?
Re:Brute Force trash talk (Score:2, Interesting)
As far as raw CPU horsepower, the Wii is no slouch. It easily keeps up with the CPU's in the Xbox 360 and the PS3. Only the asstastic custom Gamecube++ graphics architecture is to blame for it "falling behind" in technical ways to the other two systems. Why? Well, let's just go through the specs.
PS3 has the "Cell" processor. It's a PPC4xx controller keeping 8 single-pipeline cores (6 integer, 2 FP/Integer) full of properly-scheduled instructions. The cores run at a ridiculously high clock rate, but are capable of only the simplest operations. The controller runs at a moderate clock rate, processing instruction controls in batches. PS3 also has an Nvidia graphics chipset to handle the load of rendering.
The Xbox360 has a custom 3-core PPC6xx, with each core having 2 pipelines. That's 6 total pipelines in an architecture known for kickass FP performance. All pipelines in all cores run at 3.2 GHz. Xbox360 also has an ATI graphics chipset to handle the load of rendering.
The Wii has an off-the-shelf (read: cheap, well-documented) PPC750CX, underclocked to 730MHz (give or take). The lowest stock clock speed of this chip is 900MHz. The PPC750 has better integer performance (by a long shot) than the PPC600-series (at the expense of some of that blazing FP performance). It has FP, which is more than can be said for the PPC400-series (and all but two of the specialized cores in the PS3). The PPC750CX does not have a SIMD. (The PPC750FX does, though, and it's a pin-compatible drop-in replacement for the CX, should Nintendo feel the need to make a Wii 2.0 in a couple of years.) This chip easily meets the capabilities of the other two CPU's. Unfortunately, the Wii is saddled with a barely-upgraded ATI/ArtX custom GPU from the Gamecube. Sure, they added programmable shaders (not "unified"!!!) and bumped the clock rate, but it's still basically the same poorly-documented, asstastic, made-by-a-black-sheep-team-imported-from-a-defunc
Given the ability Nintendo has to upgrade the Wii hardware into something great (with minimal hassle), and the fact that they seem to be "winning us all back" right now with excellent gameplay as their focus, I would be worried too if I were MS or Sony.
Re:Who cares? (Score:2, Interesting)
480p/480i... what? (Score:3, Interesting)
means that it is easier to do enough pixels for 480p mode versus 480i
OK... unless you can 100% guarantee you game will run over 60fps all of the time, you will get nasty interlacing artifacts unless you have a full 640x480 display buffer available at all times. From that standpoint, 480p and 480i are exactly the same as far as the number of pixels they need to render. 480p games were available on every single console last generation too...
Re:I don't know. (Score:1, Interesting)
I applaud Nintendo for saving their GC business by essentially relaunching it. The Wii started life as a funky new controller (a la the bongos) but they realized the Cube was pretty much dead and an accessory to a dead console would flop. They needed a new console for the public to even consider looking at their new controller. Old chipset + new manufacturing process + slim design + new controller = Wii. So Gamecube 1.5 isn't really accurate unless you count the Wii-mote as 0.5.
Re:Who cares? (Score:2, Interesting)
Oblivion is indeed very pretty - shame they forgot about the gameplay.
Gameplay is king. Graphics are fantastic, and can aid gameplay, but come second in importance.
See also : Angband/Nethack.
if (Score:2, Interesting)