|
|
|
Half-Life coming to 360/PS3 but not Wii!!!
|
|
|
s3a
Suspended permanently
|
18. July 2006 @ 20:56 |
Link to this message
|
|
What happened to the Wii being 875 Mhz? The CPU is weaker than my Xbox, right? Is the graphic card also weaker than the Xbox's? Console's should be made like PC's except instead of being like a PC which you have to build..it should be like the 360's hdd which is detachable (it=gfx card and CPU) now that would make a console last forever and ever...
Who agrees with me?
If I insult you...don't get offended...my insults are "friendly insults"...I know this sounds stupid (ridiculous) but I am fet up of writing, "no offense" in my posts...
My Comp: (will add specs later)
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
oofRome
Senior Member
|
18. July 2006 @ 21:03 |
Link to this message
|
I don't, because you basically described PC gaming... except with an upgradeable console...
which means that any game would have to have system requirements for a game to work...
which means it is pc gaming.
Quote:
What happened to the Wii being 875 Mhz?
No one but developers, Nintendo, and anyone else with a Non-Disclosure agreement knows exactly the specs to the Wii. I believe it is somewhat comparable to the Xbox, but at this point who even knows.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 18. July 2006 @ 21:04
|
|
pressed
Member
|
19. July 2006 @ 02:42 |
Link to this message
|
|
well if its really only comparable to an xbox it should definitely be $200 or less, because those are some OLD components, i'm sure they could keep the cost down and spring for a 1 ghz processor at least.
I cover my bases...
1)Xbox w/xecuter 2.6 solderless
2)Ps2 (slim) w/DMS4 Lite
3)Ps2 V7 w/DMS4 Lite and 200 Gig Maxtor HDD
4)GC w/qoob pro
|
Member
|
19. July 2006 @ 03:55 |
Link to this message
|
|
haha this is hilarious, wii.. next gen HAH. the only thing next gen is its...... uhm
-no HD support
-less than a GHz processor
-magic circle to make graphics all smooth and stuff
the new zelda game previews and screenshots didn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling and i dont see the graphics being comparable to ps3 and xbox360.
half life on xbox1 suffered because of the low resolution. xbox1 couldn't handle it.
think about this: the wii is supposed to have an online service that lets you get oldgen nintendo games and be able to them.....wow, the only other system that does this well is the xbox1 that just so happens to have comparable system specs... plus HD support LOL.
go out and spend 200 for your emulator.
XBOX v1.0 X2 80GB XBMC pwns j00 || XBOX v1.6 nDUREs Softmods 120GB + HD
Xbox360 Samsung ms25 Xtreme 3.0 + 111d
PS2 v7 scph39001 Matrix Infinity GD
forGET the swap magic and hdloader!!! if you want convenience and have it 100% working, get a modchip.
|
Senior Member
|
19. July 2006 @ 06:30 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
No one but developers, Nintendo, and anyone else with a Non-Disclosure agreement knows exactly the specs to the Wii.
Yeah, not so much man. They've publicly released the numbers, stats are everywhere, even GAMESTOP(The last website to get hardware news, ever) has them. It's pretty widely known at this point, since Nintendo confirmed all this. Among other things specified by nintendo, four gamecube controller ports on the top of the unit, along with two GC memory card ports as well. This has been confirmed, and final images have been shown as well.
@rdxtreme
Your knowledge of consoles allowing you to download older games is a bit off. The original XBox did have a FEW titles, less than ten to be specific. The 360 however, has more already, and is attempting to release 50 more before the year's end. It's apparently much more capable, most likely due solely to the slightly bigger (But still, way too small) hard drive.
And yeah, the XBox couldn't handle HL2, so with a slightly slower system, why on earth would anyone think the Wii could?
@pressed
Rumors are still circulating on the price, but it has been slipped by Nintendo's wonderful new (And for once, intelligent) PR director, stating that the price will not exceed $250. And further circulation indicates two models, one of which coming in right at $200. So, most likely, this will occur. The even cooler thing is that they are looking at one of the models coming with an extra controller and game, which would more than accomodate a few extra dollars.
"Its not stupid, its advanced!" - The Almighty Tallest, Invader Zim This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 19. July 2006 @ 06:31
|
Member
|
19. July 2006 @ 07:26 |
Link to this message
|
|
@handsom
I think you misunderstood what I was saying about downloading older games. With a modded/exploited xbox you can run emulators allowing you to play games from atari all the way to playstation 1. I was making fun at how the Wii - with comparable system specs - is supposedly going to let you do the same thing, just legally and probably at a price.
XBOX v1.0 X2 80GB XBMC pwns j00 || XBOX v1.6 nDUREs Softmods 120GB + HD
Xbox360 Samsung ms25 Xtreme 3.0 + 111d
PS2 v7 scph39001 Matrix Infinity GD
forGET the swap magic and hdloader!!! if you want convenience and have it 100% working, get a modchip.
|
Senior Member
|
19. July 2006 @ 15:26 |
Link to this message
|
|
Now I understand what you were saying, sorry about that.
...I just wish that there was an SNES emulator available on the system which could either use .cht files, or do it's own value editing. That'd be nice. I hate manually entering codes, and then 'hoping' they work right.
"Its not stupid, its advanced!" - The Almighty Tallest, Invader Zim |
|
oofRome
Senior Member
|
19. July 2006 @ 16:03 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
haha this is hilarious, wii.. next gen HAH. the only thing next gen is its...... uhm
-no HD support
-less than a GHz processor
-magic circle to make graphics all smooth and stuff
As I said earlier, no one except people with NDA's know the exact system specs, but that's besides the point; The Wii is about innovation, gameplay, and fun. It is NOT about top-notch hardware to make tech savvy happy.
Graphical capabilities are bragging rights, but that's about it. I hope you are a PC gamer, because that attitude doesn't ring consistant if you are a fan of any console or console maker.
Quote:
the new zelda game previews and screenshots didn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling and i dont see the graphics being comparable to ps3 and xbox360.
If I'm not mistaken, I believe the Zelda game at e3 was running on gamecube hardware. If they havn't changed their original plan, the game will look the same for both GCN and Wii versions, but new control scheme and missions. But I don't know for sure. I'm not that well versed in twilight princess knowledge.
However, I can tell you that it will be more difficult to find a graphical difference between a ps3/360 title and a Wii title for the 90% of the population that doesn't own an HDTV.
Quote:
half life on xbox1 suffered because of the low resolution. xbox1 couldn't handle it.
If it was lower resolution, than that would mean it would've been easier for the Xbox to play the game. But I think it has more to do with Half Life having a larger PC install base.
Sort of how Starcraft did better on a PC than the N64 version.
Quote:
think about this: the wii is supposed to have an online service that lets you get oldgen nintendo games and be able to them.....wow, the only other system that does this well is the xbox1 that just so happens to have comparable system specs... plus HD support LOL.
The wii can support SD & EDTV, for what it's worth. You may want to remember that the target audience for the Wii isn't the same as Xbox modders and people who have used their PC's (or consoles) for illegal emulation.
Quote:
go out and spend 200 for your emulator.
If you were halfway knowledgable about the Wii, than you would know it is more than an emulator.
I find it odd that you're telling people what not to buy, though.
That just doesn't really make sense to me.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 19. July 2006 @ 21:05
|
|
s3a
Suspended permanently
|
19. July 2006 @ 20:36 |
Link to this message
|
|
Quote:
"I don't, because you basically described PC gaming... except with an upgradeable console...
which means that any game would have to have system requirements for a game to work...
which means it is pc gaming."
I meant it to be just like PC Gaming but instead of constant hardware upgrades like PC's (which is forced if u wanna play top games)...the upgrades for the Wii (CPU and gfx cards etc..) should be done every console's life cycle (about every 5 years)
If I insult you...don't get offended...my insults are "friendly insults"...I know this sounds stupid (ridiculous) but I am fet up of writing, "no offense" in my posts...
My Comp: (will add specs later)
|
|
oofRome
Senior Member
|
19. July 2006 @ 21:04 |
Link to this message
|
Well you may be on to something, but I highly doubt that would work.
Think about it; Lets say the PS2 was upgradeable. That means that SOny would have to make new compatible hardware to make the ps2 support HDTV, thus having to put a new CPU, GPU, and everything else necessary to make the ps2 upgrade the equivalent of a PS3, a detachable drive that you would then have to purchase a BD-ROM drive.
Would you rather do all of that, or instead let sony do it for you, put it in a nice package, and sell it to you at their loss, which in turn would save you at least a couple hundred dollars, as well as the time you'd put into it to install these new hardware parts?
edit** what the?
http://www.envizionsinc.com/press_releases.htm
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 19. July 2006 @ 21:13
|
|
s3a
Suspended permanently
|
19. July 2006 @ 21:27 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:"Well you may be on to something, but I highly doubt that would work.
Think about it; Lets say the PS2 was upgradeable. That means that SOny would have to make new compatible hardware to make the ps2 support HDTV, thus having to put a new CPU, GPU, and everything else necessary to make the ps2 upgrade the equivalent of a PS3, a detachable drive that you would then have to purchase a BD-ROM drive.
Would you rather do all of that, or instead let sony do it for you, put it in a nice package, and sell it to you at their loss, which in turn would save you at least a couple hundred dollars, as well as the time you'd put into it to install these new hardware parts?"
___________
k, first of all, my suggestion only works with Nintendo because if my idea was implemented by Sony, it would only be for their benefit but Nintendo would make it a benefit for us [the customers] since they are not losing money by selling the Wii unlike the PS3 and 360...and remember the gfx card and cpu upgrades would be concealed just like the 360's hdd....as would be the Blu-ray drive...and HDTV support (correct me if I'm wrong) will work if the gfx card has a "hole" to connect it to an HDTV...
When I create ideas, I have planned it thoroughly unlike many fanboys...read my sig b4 flaming...
If I insult you...don't get offended...my insults are "friendly insults"...I know this sounds stupid (ridiculous) but I am fet up of writing, "no offense" in my posts...
My Comp: (will add specs later)
|
Member
|
20. July 2006 @ 04:44 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
I hope you are a PC gamer, because that attitude doesn't ring consistant if you are a fan of any console or console maker.
? I just don?t own a Gamecube, DS or a [nintentdo] wii. Lawl.
Quote:
However, I can tell you that it will be more difficult to find a graphical difference between a ps3/360 title and a Wii title for the 90% of the population that doesn't own an HDTV.
I watched the preview movies of all this gameplay footage on gamespot at low res and I could tell the difference, thank you. But hey, maybe they were using gamecube.
About Half Life 2? Xbox1 could barely handle it at a low resolution. That is the main thing valve did to make it run at okay speed, but xbox still stuttered a bit.
Quote:
If you were halfway knowledgable about the Wii, than you would know it is more than an emulator.
I find it odd that you're telling people what not to buy, though.
I can?t get a joke in or two? People are buying PSP?s and Xbox1?s solely for emulation (same price range). I know it can do more, I?m a satirical guy. *looks around* where did I say what not to buy?
XBOX v1.0 X2 80GB XBMC pwns j00 || XBOX v1.6 nDUREs Softmods 120GB + HD
Xbox360 Samsung ms25 Xtreme 3.0 + 111d
PS2 v7 scph39001 Matrix Infinity GD
forGET the swap magic and hdloader!!! if you want convenience and have it 100% working, get a modchip.
|
|
oofRome
Senior Member
|
20. July 2006 @ 15:28 |
Link to this message
|
s3a; I wasn't flaming at all. Sorry if it came out that way. I was just speculating on your speculation. :-)
did you check out that link? That's the kind of system I thought you were talking about.
Quote:
where did I say what not to buy?
well you didn't spell it out, but:
Quote:
go out and spend 200 for your emulator.
In the rest of the context, this is clearly implying that buying the Wii is a waste of money. Add to the fact that you are, for the most part, pointing out the cons to the Wii in all your posts, I just assumed this was your conclusion. If it was satire, than my bad, but you can see where I got confused.
|
|
oofRome
Senior Member
|
20. July 2006 @ 15:31 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
About Half Life 2? Xbox1 could barely handle it at a low resolution. That is the main thing valve did to make it run at okay speed, but xbox still stuttered a bit.
My point was that it wasn't the resolution, it was the fanbase.
The Red Factions stuttered like hell on the ps2, but that was still a popular game...
|
Senior Member
|
24. July 2006 @ 11:35 |
Link to this message
|
Red Faction stuttered. Apparently, you haven't played HL2 all the way through on XBox. Red Faction had a somewhat laggy framerate, which was okay, because it was a launch title(And to this date, no title has done the same cool things). Half Life 2 had horrible framerates the whole way through, suffered frequent drops when new characters or certain sounds were loaded. Never have I seen the sound parse and echo, just because I went to reload my pistol while a little flyer looked at me. I mean, this title's performance was simply terrible. And they did a great deal to make it more compatible, and higher performance, by utilizing the XBox' specific hardware to a tee. I must applaud them for this. However, a 733Mhz processor can only do so much, and the game just isn't (As fun as it is) cool enough to justify those kind of framerates, not to mention one other thing. With a controller that relies on your movement for the gameplay, you can't afford to have that type of lag. It would absolutely destroy the experience. A console relying on the kind of in-depth motion sensing that Nintendo's Wii is, needs silky liquid smooth framerates at all times, or people aren't going to enjoy the experience.
And after all, a company only serves to hurt themselves by allowing publishers to push out subpar titles at launch of their new system. In the end, this is for the best.
"Its not stupid, its advanced!" - The Almighty Tallest, Invader Zim |
|
johnodd4
Suspended permanently
|
25. July 2006 @ 21:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
there is a reason for this
wht did nintendo announce at e3 they are not building the console to have mind blowing graphics because of this several titles cannot handle well on the wii and remember nintendo makes mostly kiddie games
so think about why you would want half life a bloody gorry nasty game on a console for kiddies
duh
|
Junior Member
|
26. July 2006 @ 05:46 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
there is a reason for this
wht did nintendo announce at e3 they are not building the console to have mind blowing graphics because of this several titles cannot handle well on the wii and remember nintendo makes mostly kiddie games
so think about why you would want half life a bloody gorry nasty game on a console for kiddies
duh
Have you never played Resident Evil 4 for Game Cube? Dubbed the best game for the cube, also the most gorry.
Nintendo has said they are going for the older 'non-gamer' .. not for 'kiddies.' While Nintendo may not make rated M games, it doesn't mean that developers for the console wont.
No, the graphics on the Wii won't be as good as XBox 360 or PS3, but that wasn't Nintendo's goal. They kept the console cheap, while still keeping an awesomeness about it, which is great by me.
No half-life on Wii? I don't think it will make a big difference.
~ Angel of Black Fire ~
[ Wii D2A Cyclowiz v3 ]
|
Senior Member
|
28. July 2006 @ 13:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
As for RE and HL. Both share some common factors.
Both are rated M.
Both are bloody
Both are gory (To a degree)
Both are great series.
Both are by third party companies.
Now, this has been itirated before, so I'm going to say it again, and I'm going to suggest, that if you don't understand, you should read it again, slower.
Nintendo only makes a fraction of the games on their system.
Third parties like Valve or Capcom release for whichever system(s) they think will be most profitable. In RE4's case, Capcom had previously signed an exclusivity statement with Nintendo, when they were financially not doing so well (Around 2001), and they needed a cash fix. It's not something that happens often, especially for a company so big. And it's even rarer that Nintendo was able to afford this.
This is not a case of Nintendo saying "No, Wii don't want it."(Play on words, hehe), this is a simple case of Valve saying, "This game doesn't stand to make a profit on this system, why on earth would we do it!?!"
RE4 was only GC for a good long time. Admittedly, it is PS2 now, and notably it sells decently on the system still. Many people picked up used gamecubes(They are SO cheap) to play the game, but did not already have them. Being exclusive to this system does not mean that these people would have picked up the game for the system at all, if they had originally had any choice. Heck multi-platform titles nearly always sell the worst on Gamecube. Yes, there are exceptions, there always will be. I really don't care to hear a list of them, because we know they exist, but the majority case is that GC sales are fractional. I have the system, I love the system, but Nintendo with Multi Platform titles equals low net profits most of the time.
Yeah, the Wiimote is cool. But realistically knowing that the majority of their fanbase either has a PC, a 360, or a PS3; why would Valve even bother spending all the money both to reprogram the input for that controller, not to mention all the re-optimizing of the game, to make it run even worse than the XBox version did, so that gamers can complain about how bad of a port it is, compared to other systems?
Honestly, nothing about Valve releasing the title on WIi makes any bit of business sense.
"Its not stupid, its advanced!" - The Almighty Tallest, Invader Zim |
|
s3a
Suspended permanently
|
9. August 2006 @ 10:11 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well...I am over buying a Wii...If only Valve could make a patch for a Wii-mote to work on the PC version of HL2! And also lets hope someone makes a Wii-mote for PC. I am hoping it is logitech.
If I insult you...don't get offended...my insults are "friendly insults"...I know this sounds stupid (ridiculous) but I am fet up of writing, "no offense" in my posts...
My Comp: (will add specs later)
|
Senior Member
|
9. August 2006 @ 16:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
Logitech's greatness aside, PC 'gimmick' controllers (and I dare anyone to say this isn't one; regardless of the fact that it is a great gimmick, and I am buying one) have historically *never* worked right. Not because of bad manufacturing, or anything like that, but because game companies aren't supporting that kind of hardware, they have no reason to. Gamepads are far from standard and make little difference on whether someone buys a game. I would literally venture so far as to say that less than 1 in 1000 pc game purchases are made with the knowledge of whether a gamer's particular gamepad or joystick will be utilized.
That's a big statement, and there are a few exception people. But they are so rare, and so few, that they are factored into the 1 in 1000.
For that reason, game companies have absolutely no reason to write better pc software for that kind of controller. It is very unfortunatel, but something like this may never take off on the pc, at least not until game consoles have been using motion sensing functions for some time. Rumble didn't come to pc in a practical form until about three years after Nintendo introduced the original console rumble pack. And even now, it's not a common or 'standard' feature for all pc gamepads. And there are still many games that simply do not have DirectInput support for those features yet.
All in all, it 'would be nice'... But until it becomes more mainstream for console games (And I mean until games really use it in a *practical* non-gimmick way) I wouldn't expect to see remotely decent support for it on the pc market, and even then, it may be a few years before we have an initialized standard.
I agree, it would be great, but given the game market, and how it works; I don't foresee it in the next couple years.
"Its not stupid, its advanced!" - The Almighty Tallest, Invader Zim |
|
sam805236
Suspended permanently
|
9. August 2006 @ 23:37 |
Link to this message
|
|
I grew up on Nintendo and its a shame to see it in the state that its in. Nintendo needs to grow up and start producing games like Half-Life or Halo types if they want to compete. Maybe if they stopped including a Mario character in every game they could do better. My guess, wii will fade into the dark shadows of the looming PS3 and x-box360. Bye-bye Mario.
|
|
Teirwin
Newbie
|
11. August 2006 @ 05:12 |
Link to this message
|
I disagree with the statement that Wii will be equal or slower than the Xbox1. First off the processor is not the only factor in gaming for a console or a PC. You have to balance everything, or you get bottlenecks. Also, older consoles run a game with practically nothing else in the background, whereas PCs (mostly) have things running in behind the scenes draining resources and causing conflicts. Newer consoles have a system menu running in the background , but it is much cleaner and efficient than a PC. The supposed exception will be Windows Vista. Which I have, but have barely tested. Vista is not only optimized for gaming, but it is suppose to focus on running a game and less on background tasks. Now back to why I think Wii will be fast and could have ran Half life 2 or any xbox game. A little example, until recently I ran World of Warcraft off of a Pentium 3 700mhz with 384 ram and a geforce 4 64 meg video card at about 20-30 fps at 1024x768 or 800x600. Now I run a p4 4.0 with a geforce 6600gt video card and 1 gig of ddr2 ram, at about 90 fps. I only felt slowdown when they're were over 40 people on my screen and if they were active. That's why I upgraded, but believe me it was more than tolerable. Wow's minimum Cpu requirement is still 800mhz, but it's not just about processor speeds! We only officially know the Wii's Cpu speed. We don't know the ram or video card specifics. Depending what speed/type and amount of ram is used the system will eat the xbox 1. Also the video card will surely be superior, I don't think the xbox1 even had a GPU (graphical processor unit) on its video card or much video ram on it. Prices of ram and video cards have dropped alot as newer have become available (as usual), so the Wii will certainly be faster than the xbox1. So if I could run WoW decently on an outdated PC with things running in the background, what makes you think a console with a similiar processor, more/faster ram and video card won't be able to run half life2 or other things fast? Oh and by the way newer motherboards and processors have fun stuff like, more cache on processor, faster bus speeds, onboard 8.1 surround sound, flash memory for caching games, and my personal favorite dual core processors and video cards ( 2 brains on 1 device) for multitasking. Like mine for example: Intel Pentium D805 Dual Core processor (2.66ghz overclocked stable to 4 ghz) for $120 canadian...thank you tomshardware. So I agree we know a couple rough stats about the Wii, but we won't know its potential until we have it and a slew of non rushed games out for it.
|
Senior Member
|
11. August 2006 @ 07:05 |
Link to this message
|
|
I'm not sure why we got into pc requirements and background overhead vs consoles which don't have that issue. It's really something that there's been no question on, so brilliant post there, which genuinely shows some knowledge on the workings of computers and consoles, but the question wasn't existent.
As for Wii's system specs, they have confirmed 512mb of flash memory. That's not ram, that's storage, and this is not only an apparent fact, but a confirmed one from Nintendo. Curiously; Nintendo is keeping completely silent about the amount of ram available in their system, they usually just throw it out their, not to mention the fact that they are absolutely notorious for putting too little ram into their systems. I mean look at the n64(God I loved it), they ended up releasing an expansion pak; which added 4mb more memory to it. Effectively doubling the ram. Ironically, that's not what they had planned for that port. In fact, they had planned nothing for that port, and made it a generic, passive standby port, that would only become active with a small sect of games that requested it(Which ended up being: 'Expansion Pak Compatible'). Just like the port underneath, which they swore was for the 64dd(never released, turned into dolphin, turned into gamecube over years of development).
I'm concerned that with the priceline, Nintendo is going to do 64mb. Even 128 would be an improvement, but this is where there are genuinely no known facts, only educated guesses, based on Nintedo's history. And as much as I love their new PR rep, Reggie, he has nothing to do with the design process. I wouldn't expect more than 256mb, as, for a console, that might be some serious overkill.
I am hoping for bigger storage options(USB Hard Drive Compatibility, anyone?) but again, looking at the big N's past, it's not likely. They've never been interested in mainstream formats. Ever. And unfortunately, I don't see that on the horizon this time either. That's not to say it couldn't happen, but it's unlikely.
Not to mention counting in the cost of the new controllers. That's a technology that has never been so effectively applied to a console, and requires precision manufacturing, it can't be cheap to produce those things. I say this, because it means more squeezing Nintendo has to do on system cost, making more memory less likely.
As said earlier, brilliant post on noticing that PCs have overhead. It's good to see someone who understands that. However, the XBox(as close as the hardware is to a pc) is not a pc, and does not have this overhead issue. Yet it's 700mhz and firmware revisable NVidia based grpahics board could barely handle that, and certainly not in a decent state. True, more memory might help, but let's also notice that Nintendo doesn't use standard hardware architecture, they, like Sony, always use some weird, self-created hardware that programmers have to relearn to use. The XBox port was as 'good' as it was because it was such an easy transition from the natural code, with no overhead, and hardware that millions of optimizations already existed for, making the porting and optimization process 'much easier', because they 'only' had to apply these optimizations, not invent them. Unfortunately, it still took them more than six months purely to do that much. Imagine it on a system which is entirely new, with another set of code, altogether.
As for the PS3 and 360 releases. They both have a LOT more hardware to work with, almost no optimatization(if any) will need to be done to run that smoothly at full settings; not to mention that, yet again, M$ system uses the same common code that the original PC version did, making the port much simpler on that particular console, even more so with this iteration. The PS3 is supposedly a pain to code for, but with that much hardware, it shouldn't matter much, they shouldn't need to worry about optimizing.
Memory makes a difference. To a degree. I build and optimize systems as a side job, and have been since I was about 12(Thank you virtual memory tweaks). So I'm the first to say, ram can help a LOT. But I question how much it will help the load times(Unless they implement a DARN effective precaching system, the likes of which we have never seen), not to mention the level of detail in effects and reflections that can be effectively processed on the fly. Yes, texture-wise, it's gold. Yes, it can be used for precaching. Yes, it can smooth things out. No, it does not cure a 729Mhz bottleneck. I wish it did. But hey, I'm still buying one, because it's a unique way to play games. That's why I'm buying it, and that's why I wouldn't buy a mainstream title for it, this isn't the system to buy if you want to replay your favorites, or keep up with the mainstream, this system is for completely new experiences. If you're looking for more shooter games, get one of the consoles that's out now, or better yet, upgrade your pc to play the bleeding edge titles. But the Wii was simply not designed for these things.
Yeah, we don't know how much memory it will have, and that can make a difference. But all things considered, can you still look at all the other facts, and say this would be a worthwhile investment for Valve to make? Most of their fans aren't Nintendo fans. Most of their fans are PC, and they're guessing a market might be available for the PS3 as well, which (should) cater to an older crowd. As for the 360, most of the XBox fans are pc gamers, so it's not a bad choice their. But given Nintendo's track record, and fan base, this move from Valve is anything but surprising, it would make almost as much sense as GTA or Quake 4 for Wii.
"Its not stupid, its advanced!" - The Almighty Tallest, Invader Zim |
|
Teirwin
Newbie
|
11. August 2006 @ 08:31 |
Link to this message
|
The reason I used a pc vs console comparison was to show the potential of a similiar machine, albeit with a different architecture and OS. The PC I mentioned can run one of the most demanding video games I know, and is about 3-4 years old. The Wii is brand new and therefor should be faster, as the cost for the parts "should" be cheaper than the xbox1, which is also a few years old. So you take a sub ghz cpu, a good gpu, a good cheap amount of ddr ram, a recent equivalent tech motherboard, and build the Wii. I would think if less could run a high end game, why couldn't this run a "lower" end game?
Also, I think with the x,y,z axis in the controller allowing any first person shooter to control movement with a wrist movement rather than a mouse and a few key strokes allows the gamer to concentrate on the other keys for other things. To me that makes this controller (and system) ideal for any fps.
If people are going to say companies aren't going to put high end games on Wii, because PS3 and Xbox360 will beat it in graphics, then I find that absurd. A PC running Vista will beat the ps3 and xbox360, because it will have extra graphics the consoles don't and it can be "suped" up. Example, the E3 video on Crysis. I simply don't agree that the reason half life 2 isn't on Wii is lack of performance, certainly compared to how Xbox1 ran half life. To me it must have been something else. There will be plenty of fps games on Wii (and Xbox360 + ps3) equal or more demanding than half life, that will run well on Wii.
One thing I do like about PC over console, is squezzing that extra bit of oomph out of a system, that you just can't do with a console. Raising my virtual memory stopped so many hangs and core dumps (game crashes). In the Wii, the 512 flash memory might get used as virtual memory, maybe as cache for common files from disk, or maybe it'll be strictly for downloaded content, maybe SD memory will be involved.
I do hope we see more than 64-256 megs of ram in the machine. I picked up a single stick of 800mhz(bus) 512 ddr ram for $40 canadian from best buy a month ago. Surely Nintendo buying in bulk will get this cheaper. Do they even make ddr ram under 256? surely they wouldnt go back to sdram for fun? It wouldn't be cheaper.
As far as expansion ram packs go, I know the DS already has one! I've seen it bundled for $50 US from Lik-Sang with the Opera browswer. The puny DS needs the extra ram to load web pages and cache better. It is uses the GBA slot.
Also on the topic of additional expandable ram methods. I've heard rumors from fellow computer networkers, that Vista is utilizing Flash memory (ex:usb flash pen) as actual virtual ram, and rather than/as well as use a hard drive as virtual ram. Although I don't think we'll see Nintendo using something that crazy, I do see them using something similiar to the DS expansion method, as it is so recent and will probably be used in conjunction with the Wii in many ways.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Senior Member
|
11. August 2006 @ 14:37 |
Link to this message
|
|
I'll comment after my eyes stop bleeding from those uber long posts LOL.
|
|
