wii not reaching graphical potential?

Everyone knows the Wii, doesnt have the grand graphics capabilities, of the other next-gen consoles. And i'dbe the first to argue that it's about gameplay, and not graphics, but do you think many game publishers use that as an excuse not to reach the graphical potential of the wii?

In order to have games look good you need to build from the ground up.

If you build from the ground up it takes a considerable amount of time

Devs didn't plan on the Wii being this popular

In order to get games on the Wii many devs have had to resort to porting games over.

In other cases devs are showing the very first fruits of their labor from building from the ground up but it's still going to be behind the devs that took the time to build studios for their Wii titles.

No one expected the Wii to be this popular so most of the industry did not plan on making games this often (or at all) for it.

In order to have games look good you need to build from the ground up.

If you build from the ground up it takes a considerable amount of time

Devs didn't plan on the Wii being this popular

In order to get games on the Wii many devs have had to resort to porting games over.

In other cases devs are showing the very first fruits of their labor from building from the ground up but it's still going to be behind the devs that took the time to build studios for their Wii titles.

No one expected the Wii to be this popular so most of the industry did not plan on making games this often (or at all) for it.

Jaysonguy

This is over simplifying it a bit but the 360 is roughly 10 times stronger than Wii ( in arichitecture ot raw power) BUTdepending on the game, the 360 is processing 2-3 times the resoulution with some amount of Anti aliasing or anistropic filter...So, leaving out physics and Ai the 360 is about 3-4 times more powerful than the Wii in pushing pixel and shaders when optimized for 480 SD...

Again this is simplifying it but its good footing to see where the wii stands in terms of graphical power..And again, Physics and ai also play a big role but this hinderance is two sided for the wii and 360.

They should take their time one the graphics.Haven't you see Brawl graphics? I think they are awesome.But,I think I will be happy as long as they don't like PS ONE or N64 graphics

In order to have games look good you need to build from the ground up.

If you build from the ground up it takes a considerable amount of time

Devs didn't plan on the Wii being this popular

In order to get games on the Wii many devs have had to resort to porting games over.

In other cases devs are showing the very first fruits of their labor from building from the ground up but it's still going to be behind the devs that took the time to build studios for their Wii titles.

No one expected the Wii to be this popular so most of the industry did not plan on making games this often (or at all) for it.

Jaysonguy

In order to have games look good you need to build from the ground up. (true)

If you build from the ground up it takes a considerable amount of time (false, the GC and wii are considerably easier to program with than the likes of direct x, which is bogged down by microsofts attempts to make it, deep.)

Devs didn't plan on the Wii being this popular (true)

In order to get games on the Wii many devs have had to resort to porting games over. (true)

In other cases devs are showing the very first fruits of their labor from building from the ground up but it's still going to be behind the devs that took the time to build studios for their Wii titles. (EA, ubisoft and capcom allready have, they just have only started)

No one expected the Wii to be this popular so most of the industry did not plan on making games this often (or at all) for it. (true)

Jaysonguy

corrections written beside in brackets

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

In order to have games look good you need to build from the ground up. (true)

If you build from the ground up it takes a considerable amount of time (false, the GC and wii are considerably easier to program with than the likes of direct x, which is bogged down by microsofts attempts to make it, deep.)

Devs didn't plan on the Wii being this popular (true)

In order to get games on the Wii many devs have had to resort to porting games over. (true)

In other cases devs are showing the very first fruits of their labor from building from the ground up but it's still going to be behind the devs that took the time to build studios for their Wii titles. (EA, ubisoft and capcom allready have, they just have only started)

No one expected the Wii to be this popular so most of the industry did not plan on making games this often (or at all) for it. (true)

monty_4256

corrections written beside in brackets

I'll explain where you're wrong when I come back in, right now shoveling beats hardware/software discussion lol

i dont care the wii is fun and I will play it rgardless of graphics

[QUOTE="monty_4256"][QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

In order to have games look good you need to build from the ground up. (true)

If you build from the ground up it takes a considerable amount of time (false, the GC and wii are considerably easier to program with than the likes of direct x, which is bogged down by microsofts attempts to make it, deep.)

Devs didn't plan on the Wii being this popular (true)

In order to get games on the Wii many devs have had to resort to porting games over. (true)

In other cases devs are showing the very first fruits of their labor from building from the ground up but it's still going to be behind the devs that took the time to build studios for their Wii titles. (EA, ubisoft and capcom allready have, they just have only started)

No one expected the Wii to be this popular so most of the industry did not plan on making games this often (or at all) for it. (true)

Jaysonguy

corrections written beside in brackets

I'll explain where you're wrong when I come back in, right now shoveling beats hardware/software discussion lol

I don't think devs are taking wii to it's full graphical potential. I think the only way to really think about how much better wii graphics could be is to look at the gamecube. While wii and gamecube can't really be compared exactly since Nintendo never realeased exact specifications, they have stated that wii is roughly twice as powerful as the gamecube.

To me a game which took gamecube graphics to their full potential... was, Resident Evil 4.

RE4 even looked better on gamecube than on PS2

many games that are multiplatform this cycle have been ported for both ps2 and wii, when wii should be getting games that are twice as powerful as at least ps2 and preferebly graphics that visualy are twice the quality of RE4.

Actually where you're wrong is in misinterpreting what Jasonguy meant. He's not saying that writing for the Wii is harder than writing for other consoles, he's saying that writing *from the ground up* takes signficantly more time than porting work from another console. There's not really anything to dispute there, it is much more labor intensive to write the code in the first place than it is to modify already written code (assuming it is reasonably well commented/documented) to run on another platform. While porting is nota trivial task, you're almost always looking at compromises and suboptimal code that wasn't written to maximize the potential of the platform it is being ported to. That's also why so many first year Wii ports have felt like little more than PS2 games with "motion controls" poorly slapped on top.WylFret

haha sorry, it's easy to read it both ways lol, either cross platform or general old game ports... meh
but yes then porting is much quicker, but of much less quality because you don't want to comprimise and build the thing from scratch

I don't think devs are taking wii to it's full graphical potential. I think the only way to really think about how much better wii graphics could be is to look at the gamecube. While wii and gamecube can't really be compared exactly since Nintendo never realeased exact specifications, they have stated that wii is roughly twice as powerful as the gamecube.

To me a game which took gamecube graphics to their full potential... was, Resident Evil 4.

RE4 even looked better on gamecube than on PS2

many games that are multiplatform this cycle have been ported for both ps2 and wii, when wii should be getting games that are twice as powerful as at least ps2 and preferebly graphics that visualy are twice the quality of RE4.

N_ZzZ

technically according to specs, they should look a lot better than twice a PS2, should look twice a GC... which was considerably better than PS2 as you said
but i doubt they ever will

(Jaysonguy Said: If you build from the ground up it takes a considerable amount of time) (false, the GC and wii are considerably easier to program with than the likes of direct x, which is bogged down by microsofts attempts to make it, deep.)

would help if i was wrong, since what i've said is from developers who use both and have commented on it a while ago on ign (was like a comparison topic between the pros and cons and they asked each developer to give theirs, was asked to square enix free, radical, ubisoft, kuju?... not sure bout that one, and some others)monty_4256

Ok, now here comes my usual list of things.

1. If you build from the ground up correctly you need a studio that only does TEV and all that other good stuff. That means that when you start making games on the Wii you're going to take a significant hit in the wallet to get that studio up and running. This is a reason why so many developers were hesitant to jump on board with the Wii, unless you know that you're going to end up making a lot of games for the console it doesn't make much sense to get a studio going. Since the Wii has grown in popularity and more importantly sales more devs think that taking money out to make a studio isn't bad. Now you have EA with their own and Namco/Bandai teaming up with Nintendo for one.

2. When it comes to shaders it's a lot easier to program for the 360 and the Ps3 because they have a simple plug and play shader. Now in the case of the Wii you're dealing with the almighty TEV which means that every single thing you need from a shader you have to build from the ground up to match it with TEV. That means once again that startup is long and tedious because it's from scratch. Think of the 360 and PS3 are ready make cakes that you just have to add the egg and oil while the Wii is a cake from scratch with flour, salt, baking power, etc.

The advantage that TEV has over everything else is that the more you build it the better and better it'll look and everything is transferable. Let's say you make a motorcycle game and the chrome you built with the TEV looks 60% real. Well another game could be on the way, all they have to do is take that chrome that looks 60% real and start exactly where you stopped and work even more on it making it look 80% real, there you go with better looking robots.

3. Once you have everything going it's cheaper and easier to make games for the Wii if you don't expect to improve on anything and even if you do want to improve on things it's still much cheaper (while still long and tedious depending on what you're going for). That's after you build the studio and start from scratch though.

[QUOTE="monty_4256"]

(Jaysonguy Said: If you build from the ground up it takes a considerable amount of time) (false, the GC and wii are considerably easier to program with than the likes of direct x, which is bogged down by microsofts attempts to make it, deep.)

would help if i was wrong, since what i've said is from developers who use both and have commented on it a while ago on ign (was like a comparison topic between the pros and cons and they asked each developer to give theirs, was asked to square enix free, radical, ubisoft, kuju?... not sure bout that one, and some others)Jaysonguy

Ok, now here comes my usual list of things.

1. If you build from the ground up correctly you need a studio that only does TEV and all that other good stuff. That means that when you start making games on the Wii you're going to take a significant hit in the wallet to get that studio up and running. This is a reason why so many developers were hesitant to jump on board with the Wii, unless you know that you're going to end up making a lot of games for the console it doesn't make much sense to get a studio going. Since the Wii has grown in popularity and more importantly sales more devs think that taking money out to make a studio isn't bad. Now you have EA with their own and Namco/Bandai teaming up with Nintendo for one.

2. When it comes to shaders it's a lot easier to program for the 360 and the Ps3 because they have a simple plug and play shader. Now in the case of the Wii you're dealing with the almighty TEV which means that every single thing you need from a shader you have to build from the ground up to match it with TEV. That means once again that startup is long and tedious because it's from scratch. Think of the 360 and PS3 are ready make cakes that you just have to add the egg and oil while the Wii is a cake from scratch with flour, salt, baking power, etc.

The advantage that TEV has over everything else is that the more you build it the better and better it'll look and everything is transferable. Let's say you make a motorcycle game and the chrome you built with the TEV looks 60% real. Well another game could be on the way, all they have to do is take that chrome that looks 60% real and start exactly where you stopped and work even more on it making it look 80% real, there you go with better looking robots.

3. Once you have everything going it's cheaper and easier to make games for the Wii if you don't expect to improve on anything and even if you do want to improve on things it's still much cheaper (while still long and tedious depending on what you're going for). That's after you build the studio and start from scratch though.

Tell me what you think. Are Metroid Prime and Mario Galaxy truly pushing the Wii to its limits? The both look good, Galaxy looks fantastic but I'd still be let down if Wii games didn't evolve much beyond Galaxy. Emmenite7

No, it just doesn't make sense.

I mean Metroid and Galaxy while good are also games made before the Wii was even a year old. Heck most of both of those games were made while the Wii was still in it's infant stages.

The graphics will get better after time, it's just the rule for consoles. Take a look at any game library it's first year and then it's last. Overall there's always an improvement.

Galaxy is the best the Wii can do right now. It's not the best the Wii can do overall.

The graphics will get better after time, it's just the rule for consoles. Take a look at any game library it's first year and then it's last. Overall there's always an improvement.Jaysonguy

That is 100% true.Compare one of the PS2 first games with MGS3 and you will notice a huge difference!

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]The graphics will get better after time, it's just the rule for consoles. Take a look at any game library it's first year and then it's last. Overall there's always an improvement.Androu1

That is 100% true.Compare one of the PS2 first games with MGS3 and you will notice a huge difference!

No! Don't expect to see anything much better than Mario Galaxy on the Wii, ever! The Wii was already maxed out in the first year because it barely is more powerful than the Gamecube and developers already understand the technology. There is no more power to squeeze out of the Wii, and since the Wii is almost identical to the Gamecube, developers won't have to learn how to use it! Enjoy what you have now, because that's all you'll be getting until the next Nintendo console.

the graphs don't have to be much better then SMG, I love the look and amount of detail put into the game. IF future wii games can do what SMG did I'm happy.Lub1

Not everyone will be as happy as you in 2 or 3 years when the graphics are still like Mario Galaxy and the other two consoles are getting better graphics every month. I love the Wii, but I think Nintendo could have done a lot better with the processor inside the Wii. I just have to deal with it because the PS3 is too expensive and the 360 is junk.

I am convinced that we will see better graphics on the wii in 2008.jjr10

same here

I am convinced that we will see better graphics on the wii in 2008.jjr10

Please don't quote me, i could be wrong.. but i don't wanna be!

Developers are finally taking the Wii seriously, i hope.

I think the moment that the majority of the devs start taking advantage of the Wii's capabilities is when the PS2 dies out. Because right now it's so easy (and probably tempting) for devs to just release the PS2 version of a game for the Wii.

Personally Im hoping Factor 5 is going to make a Wii game. The Rogue Squadron games for the GC looked amazing, plus they were good games.And even though Factor 5 has said they were dissapointed with the Wiis graphical capabilities. A couple of months ago one of the Factor 5 devs he said that the Wii was capable of a lot more than we've seen so far.

On Wii's "shaders" and possibilities: "If you connect you can get a lot of shader effects which would've been on the 360 or the PS3." (...)"it's got so much more power compared to the GameCube. If even with the extremely similar shader hardware, the system clockrate is so much higher, you can do so much more advanced things" (...)"in the photorealistic route there're certain things which the basic structure of the graphics hardware was not meant for and which you have to find really clever tricks to basically make up.

[QUOTE="Androu1"]

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]The graphics will get better after time, it's just the rule for consoles. Take a look at any game library it's first year and then it's last. Overall there's always an improvement.santiagochile

That is 100% true.Compare one of the PS2 first games with MGS3 and you will notice a huge difference!

No! Don't expect to see anything much better than Mario Galaxy on the Wii, ever! The Wii was already maxed out in the first year because it barely is more powerful than the Gamecube and developers already understand the technology. There is no more power to squeeze out of the Wii, and since the Wii is almost identical to the Gamecube, developers won't have to learn how to use it! Enjoy what you have now, because that's all you'll be getting until the next Nintendo console.

I don't know if I should take this as a serious post, or as just someone being funny. I just don't know how to respond.. I want to, but I don't know how. If you're serious, what?

well smg runs at 60 fps , mp3 too,so imagine the graphics of a 30 fps game made just for the wii

IMO I think that SMG is just a preview of where graphics on the WIi can go. Let's all remember that the system is only 1 year. I also think that many developers stayed away from the Wii initially because of fear that it would not sell. Now that it is still selling well I think you will see developers start to take the Wii more seriously. I am hoping that the grapics will improve upon SMG, but honestly if they get no better than SMG I will not be mad.

If people bought a Wii expecting it to have the graphic power to produce 360 or PS3 like graphics should have known better before buying one. Nintendo made themselves perfectly clear thatthey weren't really worried aboutgraphics as much as gameplay.

So will we see better graphics? I hope so, but am still happy with the graphics right now because I have alwayspreferred gameplay over graphics.

Don't blame developers for crappy looking Wii games. The real problem is Nintendo. They have made it a lot harder to port things into their games like shading and lighting. If we do see a game that looks better then Mario Galaxy from a 3d party developer it would be 3 years from now. As nice as the user base is for the Wii developers rather make games for the ps3 and 360 because it's easier and faster. Both are also portable versions.

I think the Wii's graphics are gradually getting better, but developers seriously aren't taking the console serious enough. Part of the reason for that is this stupid bandwagon deal between companies, every company is making kids versions of their old games! Maybe it's because they are too lazy to make the good graphics, because it is a lot harder on the wii than other consoles...like playing Fire Emblem on a pick-up-and-play impulse if y'know what I mean.

Don't blame developers for crappy looking Wii games. The real problem is Nintendo. They have made it a lot harder to port things into their games like shading and lighting. If we do see a game that looks better then Mario Galaxy from a 3d party developer it would be 3 years from now. As nice as the user base is for the Wii developers rather make games for the ps3 and 360 because it's easier and faster. Both are also portable versions.

zaku101

True and false, mostly false though.

I already explained this issue in another post. If you missed that just scroll back to page one read up on it and come back

[QUOTE="santiagochile"][QUOTE="Androu1"]

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]The graphics will get better after time, it's just the rule for consoles. Take a look at any game library it's first year and then it's last. Overall there's always an improvement.dotWithShoes

That is 100% true.Compare one of the PS2 first games with MGS3 and you will notice a huge difference!

No! Don't expect to see anything much better than Mario Galaxy on the Wii, ever! The Wii was already maxed out in the first year because it barely is more powerful than the Gamecube and developers already understand the technology. There is no more power to squeeze out of the Wii, and since the Wii is almost identical to the Gamecube, developers won't have to learn how to use it! Enjoy what you have now, because that's all you'll be getting until the next Nintendo console.

I don't know if I should take this as a serious post, or as just someone being funny. I just don't know how to respond.. I want to, but I don't know how. If you're serious, what?

Yes, of course I'm serious. The Wii only has a 732 mhz processor. That was good about 6 years ago. The Wii has the same power as the original XBOX. Don't expect to see anything more than XBOX/Gamecube graphics on the Wii. For those of you who think just because the PS2 had better graphics after a few years than it did after the first year, so what? The PS2 was much more powerful than the PS1. The Wii is not much more powerful than the Gamecube. It has the same architecture. Nintendo chose to emphasizse gameplay over graphics and after 2 or 3 years you will all realize what that means. The graphics will not improve from Super Mario Galaxy. Enjoy the gameplay, but stop inventing ideas like the one where the Wii will have marvelous graphics in the future. It won't. It will have the same graphics that you see in games now and that you saw on the original XBOX years ago.

[QUOTE="monty_4256"]

(Jaysonguy Said: If you build from the ground up it takes a considerable amount of time) (false, the GC and wii are considerably easier to program with than the likes of direct x, which is bogged down by microsofts attempts to make it, deep.)

would help if i was wrong, since what i've said is from developers who use both and have commented on it a while ago on ign (was like a comparison topic between the pros and cons and they asked each developer to give theirs, was asked to square enix free, radical, ubisoft, kuju?... not sure bout that one, and some others)Jaysonguy

Ok, now here comes my usual list of things.

1. If you build from the ground up correctly you need a studio that only does TEV and all that other good stuff. That means that when you start making games on the Wii you're going to take a significant hit in the wallet to get that studio up and running. This is a reason why so many developers were hesitant to jump on board with the Wii, unless you know that you're going to end up making a lot of games for the console it doesn't make much sense to get a studio going. Since the Wii has grown in popularity and more importantly sales more devs think that taking money out to make a studio isn't bad. Now you have EA with their own and Namco/Bandai teaming up with Nintendo for one.

2. When it comes to shaders it's a lot easier to program for the 360 and the Ps3 because they have a simple plug and play shader. Now in the case of the Wii you're dealing with the almighty TEV which means that every single thing you need from a shader you have to build from the ground up to match it with TEV. That means once again that startup is long and tedious because it's from scratch. Think of the 360 and PS3 are ready make cakes that you just have to add the egg and oil while the Wii is a cake from scratch with flour, salt, baking power, etc.

The advantage that TEV has over everything else is that the more you build it the better and better it'll look and everything is transferable. Let's say you make a motorcycle game and the chrome you built with the TEV looks 60% real. Well another game could be on the way, all they have to do is take that chrome that looks 60% real and start exactly where you stopped and work even more on it making it look 80% real, there you go with better looking robots.

3. Once you have everything going it's cheaper and easier to make games for the Wii if you don't expect to improve on anything and even if you do want to improve on things it's still much cheaper (while still long and tedious depending on what you're going for). That's after you build the studio and start from scratch though.

while the TEV can seriously improve graphics, very few ever bother to use it and can get great results still without it.

[QUOTE="dotWithShoes"][QUOTE="santiagochile"][QUOTE="Androu1"]

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]The graphics will get better after time, it's just the rule for consoles. Take a look at any game library it's first year and then it's last. Overall there's always an improvement.santiagochile

That is 100% true.Compare one of the PS2 first games with MGS3 and you will notice a huge difference!

No! Don't expect to see anything much better than Mario Galaxy on the Wii, ever! The Wii was already maxed out in the first year because it barely is more powerful than the Gamecube and developers already understand the technology. There is no more power to squeeze out of the Wii, and since the Wii is almost identical to the Gamecube, developers won't have to learn how to use it! Enjoy what you have now, because that's all you'll be getting until the next Nintendo console.

I don't know if I should take this as a serious post, or as just someone being funny. I just don't know how to respond.. I want to, but I don't know how. If you're serious, what?

Yes, of course I'm serious. The Wii only has a 732 mhz processor. That was good about 6 years ago. The Wii has the same power as the original XBOX. Don't expect to see anything more than XBOX/Gamecube graphics on the Wii. For those of you who think just because the PS2 had better graphics after a few years than it did after the first year, so what? The PS2 was much more powerful than the PS1. The Wii is not much more powerful than the Gamecube. It has the same architecture. Nintendo chose to emphasizse gameplay over graphics and after 2 or 3 years you will all realize what that means. The graphics will not improve from Super Mario Galaxy. Enjoy the gameplay, but stop inventing ideas like the one where the Wii will have marvelous graphics in the future. It won't. It will have the same graphics that you see in games now and that you saw on the origianl XBOX years ago.

You're wrong, very wrong actually.

Please go research the subject a bit before you dig yourself deeper.

Just a holiday tip from me to you.

You're wrong, very wrong actually.

Please go research the subject a bit before you dig yourself deeper.

Just a holiday tip from me to you.

Jaysonguy

No, it's all quite true. The Wii specs were leaked months before the Wii came out. I'm sorry to have to break it to you, but the Wii can't do much better than Mario Galaxy. It has the power of a last generation console. Why is this so hard for you to accept??

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

You're wrong, very wrong actually.

Please go research the subject a bit before you dig yourself deeper.

Just a holiday tip from me to you.

santiagochile

No, it's all quite true. The Wii specs were leaked months before the Wii came out. I'm sorry to have to break it to you, but the Wii can't do much better than Mario Galaxy. It has the power of a last generation console. Why is this so hard for you to accept??