During the birth of the Nintendo Wii there were many that compared the Wii’s graphics to that of a Game Cube, ala v1.5. However, since then Newsweek writer N’Gai Croal conducted his own experiments to find out exactly how the Wii compares, graphically to todays new consoles. The original argument was that the Wii’s graphics capabilities were less than the original Xbox, or so it would seem.
It’s difficult to judge the Wii’s graphic capabilities over the first few launch titles. Zelda proved graphically impressive, coupled with Wii component cables it was even better. However, other launch titles have fell short in the graphics area and have yet to truly push the Wii’s capabilities.
“The Wii’s GPU has fixed functions for vertex, lighting, and pixel operations,” said the source “All ‘programmable shaders’ means is that the code you write for the shader gets run on the vertex and pixel hardware of the GPU. This is how it works on the high-end ATI and Nvidia GPU parts. The Wii is an older fixed function design where you have lots of operations but the pipelines are not programmable in the sense of downloading shader code to run [on them].”
According to this finding it’s possible to achieve similar graphical effects, to the PS3 and Xbox360, but just takes a bit more programing. It’s still not a powerhouse, but can hold it’s own. Obviously where it may lack in graphics it makes up for it in gameplay….teh fun factorz.
May 25th, 2008 at 9:51 pm
Jon
We want games with great graphics, military/war games with great graphics like xbox 360. Games like world in conflict. Battlefield: Bad Company on xbox. Metal gear. Grand theft auto. We don’t want all this cartoon bull crap wii game makers are making right now. It is pathetic, I am waiting for games that push the wii’s graphical limits.
May 25th, 2008 at 10:07 pm
Wii’s flight games graphics goes without saying. PS2 games have better graphics. Interactiveness can only hold you for so long. Wii game makers has to step it up. Realistic flight sims, army. The focus needs to shift from mainly controls, to 1. graphics then 2. controls. Gamers don’t car about swinging remotes in every game. A game that is fun to look at and play is important. I look at the graphics before I think about buying a game, too cartoony than it will sit on the shelf. mario games and nintendo are an exception. I bout a game when I got my wii and it sucked I traded it right in and lost 20 bucks. People buy hoping to get something good and different, but constantly dissapointed. Are wii lovers forced to purchase poor graphic games because that all there is?
June 27th, 2008 at 1:11 am
To Jon,
First off, graphics aren’t what solely make the game, it’s the gameplay. Any gamer knows that. Games were made to PLAY, not to look at with googly eyes and be amazed at how pretty it looks. If graphics were all that were important, might as well watch a computer animated movie.
I agree that Wii should indeed step it up a notch with the graphics, but it is not a factor that will hold them down in the future. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a wii lover or anything, I just find that your argument is poor.
If Nintendo started pouring out the same kind of games that the ps3 and the xbox 360 gave, then what kind of ingenuity would it have? There’s a reason they’re aiming at different audiences. The ps3 and the xbox 360 are aimed towards more mature audiences, thus the presence of games such as Grand Theft Auto, Metal Gear Solid, and whatnot. Nintendo lessens the competition by aiming at different audiences. Seriously, if all three systems were to promote a single game, the person obviously won’t buy it for all 3 systems right? For example, one might buy the game for the ps3 cause of the graphics, and then the other two systems are stuck with games that don’t sell cause everyone will want to buy it for that system. In that sense, the wii saves itself from such competition by providing different type of games.
I’m with you that I would love to see more mature games on the Wii. However, you forget that Nintendo is primarily a family-oriented system. They may have games out there at the moment like Resident Evil 4 and Scarface, but let’s face it, they have always and will continue to provide games for the kids and whatnot.
Also, think about the future. You think we’re going to continue using controllers for the rest of our lives? The Wii is taking the first step in providing this interactive remote concept, making gaming even more virtual. Sure, at the moment there aren’t that many great games, but in the future I bet many consoles will be copying or adding to the concept of the wii. I am a playstation fan at most, but I will admit this. The Wii is the most original out of all the new consoles. The ps3 and the xbox 360, what did they do? they just turned themselves into computers basically. Improved graphics, blue-ray, plays dvds, online capability. Seriously, they’re just computers now. But the Wii, it went outside of the box.
You said that interactiveness can only go so far. I think that improving graphics can only go so far. How far will you go? Until you’re controlling real people? Where’s the fun in that? I dunno, perhaps it’s just a matter of opinion. As much as I love sony and all that, so far, the wii looks like it’ll lead the future.