Sorry bud, but you really missed the point.
I was trying to put things into a frame that you might understand, you know an analogy.
So what youre saying is you dont believe Nintendos own words that its basically just gamecube hardware?
Basically is true, but what you're missing, is that it doesn't equate to being EXACTLY the same.
You should look for that article that talks about the Wii's CPU as in it was built from the ground up for power efficiency while maintain a high level of performance. This can't be done by simply overclocking. BUT, basically it's still the same CPU as the Cube, just like a Core 2 is basically a P3 to point out an extreme example.
I'll ramble further, maybe this time I'll find an explanation that will sink in.
What is factual about the Wii being just as good as the 360 at graphics...
HOLY MOLY, you misconstrued me BIG TIME. At this point I should probably just give up .
I never said just as good.
Anyways, that would imply that a Wii is on par with a 360, which for the record is not the case. But I can say a Wii at its basic level is similar to a 360. They both have Power PCs and GPUs developed during the same time period at ATI. Imagine that, they're brothers, the Wii's just special.
Before I ramble some more, I'm also not implying that a Wii can handle as many polygons as a 360.
Here's my original comment:
"A true Wii port would be fairly close to the 360 DR at SD."
This statement carries quite a bit of truth. Notice the word fairly.
If you look at the following screen shots of Dead Rising 360, hopefully you'll see what I see, that the Wii doesn't have to go far to achieve this look at SD. neither does a PS2 for that matter.
Look at this
screenshot. It looks like CRAP IMO. Now tell me why a Wii can't do this at SD, when this is something even a PS2 could manage?
Here's another
screen. Wow, this game looks great for a 360 title. Never understimate the power of a bottom of the barrel consumer gaming card, AKA, the x1600 variant.
If I had seen those screen shots with out reference, I could have easily mistaken them for some of the "HD" PS2 games, or PC games from almost a decade ago. They actually make this game look like VOMIT and sub par when compared to better games.
Now I see that even the Cube version of Dead Rising looks fine.
...and a 9600gt just being an overclocked 7600gt?
I'm just going to smile at you.
*
FAIL!*
PLEASE GO BACK AND READ MY POST THIS TIME!
Or Dead Rising being a gamecube port (why would they do that?)?
Simple, Capcom stated in a press release that Dead Rising is being built on the same engine as RE4 Wii. Just so you know, that's a GameCube engine with added Wii waggle and pointing. Capcom did nothing to improve upon it graphically when they were first testing the Wii's ground for which games sold.
Why would Capcom do this? It keeps development cost down and their risk of loss low. They obviously still don't trust the Wii/Nintendo, or else they would be building an engine from the ground up, which is required to do a proper port of this game. The only true Wii game were' getting from them is SpyBorgs. BLAH! It's not even an in-house game.
I dont have an hdtv so I play all my PS3 games in SD, and they look a hell of a lot better than any gamecube or ps2 game ever did on the same tv.
You're really not missing anything, just widescreen. HD TVs are still hype, but they certainly save on space.
Unlike the Wii, the PS3 at least has the benefit of getting its ports from 360 or PC. Most developes assumed the Wii would fail and have yet to put in any true effort to make something good. The Wii has been vomited on by publishers looking for that old PS2 game to dust off, add waggle, make profit.
Now that the Wii is in the top position and most of us are fed up with lazy developers, this seems to be changing, maybe. The next generation of Wii games and a few already available, also look a lot better than any Cube or PS2 game. Not as good as a PS3 game of course, but still way better than anything from last generation.
Not to mention all the interactive effects like physics which cant be done on the Wii since the cpu is too weak (look at the physics in Force Unleashed on the 360/PS3 and then compare them to the Wii version, totally different despite putting a lot of effort into the Wii version).
*SLAP* Have you been sleeping? Physics have been mainstay for a long time now. Many Wii games -- even some of the crap ones -- use Physics. It's a dedicated game machine and it CPU is WAY faster than some of my old PCs and they could handle physics just fine.
Every console from lsat genration had games that used physics and now you're trying to tell me they can't be done on the Wii, a more powerful console? Do you not see how ridiculous your comment is in this day and age?
This is more playground mentality.
I guess that because the Wii can't handle physics, games like Boom Blox aren't real?
Besides, the current trend is to offload physics onto the GPU and a Wii's GPU is way better at this sort of thing than a 360's proc as an example.
Anyways, nVidia upgraded their newer cards to do this when they bought Ageia(Physics for PC, 360, PS3, and
WII), ATI users hacked their cards to use nVidia's effort, so it's feasible for all consoles, if they're not already doing it.
The Wii version of Forced Unleash. I have a few words about this game.
Force Unleash Wii is a "PS2" game with waggle, so of course it looks rather poorly when compare to the 360 and PS3 port.
It's rather convinient that the same developer working on the PS2 version, is also working on the Wii version. Have you ever heard of shared assets? That's what's happening here. Lucas Artst was being CHEAP! If they were sharing the assets from the PS3, the Wii version would be fairing much better, but chalk this game up to more developer laziness.
Look at Clone Wars, it's a Wii game, it looks way better than Forced Unleashed Wii. Why? Because they're only developing it for the Wii. I've notice a trend, Wii games that don't rely on PSP, or PS2 assets, look way better.
People in general are pretty naive about graphics. They seem to quickly forget about what was possible not only a few years back with technically weaker components.
<]=)
