44 replies to this topic

[Chinomanila]

No I do remember developers saying the Wii was a more powerful xbox... Which I was ok with. But that didn't show in ANY of the games I've played on the Wii. I still think to this day Sonic colors is the only Wii game I can confuse with xbox360

Super Smash Bros Brawl for me.

[neverwinteru]

Super Smash Bros Brawl for me.

Meh brawl come's close but i have to agree with tron sonic colors is one of the best looking wii games to date, if not the best

[MorbidGod]

Better then the Xbox, Metroid Prime 3 proved that. Better then or just as good as Xbox 360? They never said that. Nor did they say it would be in HD.

[uPadWatcher2]

I hope that Nintendo and Epic Games co-exist when they have Wii U games powered by Unreal 4.

[Desert Punk]

Better then the Xbox, Metroid Prime 3 proved that. Better then or just as good as Xbox 360? They never said that. Nor did they say it would be in HD.

It certainly didn't prove that. I think Retro did an amazing job with Metroid Prime 3 but the graphics lack textures and have a fairly cartoon look to them in metroid prime. The wii can't really do realistic graphics. If you ever want a game to compare between original xbox and wii look at the difference between conker's bad fur day and mario galaxy. Remember the original xbox has 32bit colour not 24bit so has a lot of great transparency effects etc that the wii can't do that you see in Conker. It also has true 5.1 sound in almost all games. The built in hard drive allows for more complex games too. Its not hard to show the original xbox is more powerful than wii.

Forza for example totally outclasses anything on wii visually.



The best similar game on wii;



I keep reading people think the wii is more powerful but the reality and the specs say otherwise. This doesn't mean the wii doesn't have brilliant games but the wii just isn't more powerful. Games like Half Life 2 would be impossible on wii without the support of a hard drive. Some xbox games support 720p and 1080i graphics which again is impossible on wii.

Actual graphics from xbox;

[MorbidGod]

I don't know what your talking about, Metroid Prime 3 was a BEAUTIFUL game. Look at Zelda and Metroid to see just how great the Wii is graphically. Sure, it's no Halo 3 -- but it looks JUST as good as Halo 2, if not better.


Halo 2 (Xbox)


Metroid Prime 3 (Wii)


Metroid Other M (Wii)

Yes, the style of MP3 is a little cartoony -- but that doesn't mean the graphics were horrible. If you look at Zelda Skyward Sword, that is the most beautiful Zelda ever made. But it's somewhat cartoon style is vastly different from the realistic Twilight Princess. SW is, in my opinion, the better of the two graphically, and I think most people will agree.

[Keviin]

Yeah the thing is, first party games looked awesome.

Most third party games.. Not so. At all.

[InsaneLaw]

@DesertPunk

The Xbox wasn't more powerful than the Wii, it just had Shader Tech rather than TEVs, it also ran on Direct X 8 which helped developers that were used to working with PCs.

Plus, you're comparing Forza, a first party game made specifically for the Xbox, to NFS Carbon, a game running on a third party engine built on the PS2.

With Conker you can see the fur shaders look magnificent, but the SMG games are exactly the same in that department, since it's all art direction.

Also, Nintendo use higher res textures that are scaled down to fit 480p in most cases, and the Wii could upscale to 720p if it wasn't limited by the software on the system. The Xbox can't actually run 720p or 1080i games, only upscale them to 720p or 1080i.

Edited by Stulaw90, 13 May 2012 - 10:09 AM.

[Meelow100]

@DesertPunk

The Xbox wasn't more powerful than the Wii, it just had Shader Tech rather than TEVs, it also ran on Direct X 8 which helped developers that were used to working with PCs.

Plus, you're comparing Forza, a first party game made specifically for the Xbox, to NFS Carbon, a game running on a third party engine built on the PS2.

With Conker you can see the fur shaders look magnificent, but the SMG games are exactly the same in that department, since it's all art direction.

Also, Nintendo use higher res textures that are scaled down to fit 480p in most cases, and the Wii could upscale to 720p (very slowly) if it wasn't limited by the software on the system. The Xbox can't actually run 720p or 1080i games, only upscale them to 720p or 1080i.

I don't even think the Xbox upscales to 1080i, just 720p.

[InsaneLaw]

I don't even think the Xbox upscales to 1080i, just 720p.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox#Technical_specifications

[Blake]

^Wow, I do t understand half of the things up there.

[Plutonas]

@DesertPunk

The Xbox wasn't more powerful than the Wii, it just had Shader Tech rather than TEVs, it also ran on Direct X 8 which helped developers that were used to working with PCs.

Plus, you're comparing Forza, a first party game made specifically for the Xbox, to NFS Carbon, a game running on a third party engine built on the PS2.

With Conker you can see the fur shaders look magnificent, but the SMG games are exactly the same in that department, since it's all art direction.

Also, Nintendo use higher res textures that are scaled down to fit 480p in most cases, and the Wii could upscale to 720p if it wasn't limited by the software on the system. The Xbox can't actually run 720p or 1080i games, only upscale them to 720p or 1080i.

in matter of specs, wii was very weak.. 2.5 gflops cpu power for Wii, 45-56 gflops for xbox360, 33-44 for ps3... all this as a real performance, not theoretically.
Wii U if it comes with 4 cores, is going to be 96 gflops.. if they cut it... well it will still be more horse power than the xbox cpu... about 70-75 and depends the Ghz.. The numbers I give is for 3.0 ghz... if its more, then the glops increase dramatically.. if its less and with less cores... hmm

So basically it is not only the gpu that makes the fps and the game to run smooth, but the cpu power to... They did miracles in some nintendo games, thats true.. The only thing that matters is balance in the hardware, if nintendo wants to give us a horse machine, then they have to balance a strong cpu with a strong gpu... They cant add a weak cpu and a super power gpu... because the cpu will not be able to perform and push the gpu limits...

Edited by Orion, 13 May 2012 - 02:37 PM.

[InsaneLaw]

I know the Wii iss weak compared to the other current gen consoles, but that's not what we were talking about, it was the Original Xbox.

[Desert Punk]

The original xbox isn't upscaling its rendering at 720p and 1080i but only for a small selection of games.

Lots of mis-information here.

Firstly cartoon graphics are much easier to produce than realistic graphics.

Perhaps if someone can point out the actual parts of the specification of the wii that is superior to original xbox.

Honestly I don't even know why we are debating this, the original xbox is clearly more powerful.

I'll admit my comparison of Forza with the wii game is a bit unfair but Forza works so well on xbox and there is nothing to directly compare it with on wii except for very low rated games. I would of compared a proper wii serious racer that was well programmed if I knew of one.

Thats why Conker and Mario Galaxy is a good comparison except for the fact its cartoon graphics which don't push a system as much as real world graphics.

With regard the original xbox being direct x 8.1, the wii would be about direct x 7 like dreamcast if it ran direct x.

Metroid Prime 3 is still a stunning piece of game design though.

[HaoSenVastForest]

Yes Desert Punk I clearly do not know the reason why we are even debating this because the Wii is clearly more powerful. The GameCube was as powerful as the Xbox for crying out loud and I see no reason why the Wii would be less powerful than the GameCube. Also have you seen Conduit yet? Those graphics can rival those of a PS3. They are amazing. How about comparing Halo to Conduit:





For those who are hard of seeing The Conduit's graphics are clearly superior in every way shape and form. Both are exclusives to the consoles.

I heard that actually that the Wii U is to have 6 cores so 4 cores is NOTHING.

Edited by nl010203, 14 May 2012 - 03:29 PM.

[Keviin]

^xbox > GC

[MorbidGod]

I don't think the Conduit rivals the PS3, however it's a good example that the Wii is more powerful then the Xbox. I mean, the GCN could rival the Xbox in graphics. Look at Metroid Prime, Twilight Princess for examples? And the Wii is more powerful than the GCN.

And the Xbox could not. Produce 1080i, I'm sorry. 480p was the highest it can go. I mean the Xbox 360 wasn't able to do 1080p when it. First came out. It wasn't until they updated the firmware. And I don't think it produces it natively, but upscales it. If I'm wrong show me a game on the Xbox that was in HD. You can't, but please try.

[Grooseland]

It certainly didn't prove that. I think Retro did an amazing job with Metroid Prime 3 but the graphics lack textures and have a fairly cartoon look to them in metroid prime. The wii can't really do realistic graphics. If you ever want a game to compare between original xbox and wii look at the difference between conker's bad fur day and mario galaxy. Remember the original xbox has 32bit colour not 24bit so has a lot of great transparency effects etc that the wii can't do that you see in Conker. It also has true 5.1 sound in almost all games. The built in hard drive allows for more complex games too. Its not hard to show the original xbox is more powerful than wii.

Forza for example totally outclasses anything on wii visually.

I keep reading people think the wii is more powerful but the reality and the specs say otherwise. This doesn't mean the wii doesn't have brilliant games but the wii just isn't more powerful. Games like Half Life 2 would be impossible on wii without the support of a hard drive. Some xbox games support 720p and 1080i graphics which again is impossible on wii.

I think you're missing an important factor here, and that is: Gamecube.

Both the Gamecube and Xbox were similar in terms of graphics, but they were very different when developing for them. But in theory, (and I can't stress that enough), in theory they were both capable of making the same graphics.

Let's take a look at the most important launch titles for both consoles:

Rogue Leader for Gamecube and Halo for Xbox... yes, they are very different: one is an arcade space shooter based on a movie franchise and the other is a sci-fi FPS. But those were the games to identify with those consoles, and also were the best graphically.





Rogue Leader runs at 60FPS, has bump mapping, self-shadowing, millions of polygons etc...

Halo runs at 30FPS, has bump mapping...

Remember: Rogue Leader is a third party game while Halo is first party.

Which one looks better?

Now, if you go to forums discussing Gamecube vs Xbox, the majority of the time when mentioning the best graphics for each console are Rebel Strike and Doom 3.

Again, both games are different but utilize each system's strengths:



60FPS, high polygon count, bump mapping, self-shadowing, greater draw distance etc...


Wow, it's difficult to find a decent Doom 3 Xbox pic out there... sorry:



Xbox could do shadowing and self-shadowing very well and in a enclosed environment, they work very well.

Now let's compare two games that share some important similarities: Starfox Adventures and Conker Live And Reloaded.

1:They were both developed by Rare (Rare knows how to get the most out of the hardware they are working on)

2:Both games started out as Nintendo 64 games: SFA was an original late N64 game but it was pushed to the Gamecube and Conker Live was a remake of Conker's Bad Fur Day for N64. They're basically two remakes of N64 games.

3: The main characters have fur therefore they use fur shading:





Both games share similar graphical effects, but SFA runs at 60FPS with no loading screens and it was released in 2002 (early Gamecube game). Conker runs at 30FPS, lots of loading screens and it was released in 2005 (very late Xbox game)

What I'm trying to say is that the Gamecube was more efficient than the Xbox, a lot more and it could look the same if not better than Xbox best games graphically.

The Wii is more powerful than the Gamecube, but also you have to think that the Wii was not pushed as hard as the Gamecube when it came to third party games.

Seriously, High Voltage Software made the most impressive graphics engine on Wii... let that sink in for a while, High Voltage... It wasn't EA, Capcom, Activision, Konami, Ubisoft... all of the big developers... it was High Voltage.

As far as "The wii can't really do realistic graphics" have you played Silent Hill Shattered Memories? I don't think the Xbox could do that game, at least not at 60FPS like the Wii does.

Edited by Grooseland, 15 May 2012 - 11:49 AM.

[Desert Punk]

Firstly the Halo vs Conduit comparison shows a huge difference graphically. Halo presents a realistic portrayal of a real world where as the conduit uses a huge number of repeated textures and even plain textures on occasion. Its relatively flat and unrealistic and you can see its quite cartoony and unrealistic. Its similar to PS2. However where Halo really scores is the more sophiticated engine with far larger level areas thanks to the hard drive quickly bringing in new data. Conduit is not a good game to compare to Xbox its got flashy graphics with lots of colour etc but it doesn't take much of an eye to see the difference. That said Halo pales in comparison to Half Life 2 on xbox which has a full physics engine and many other fantastic features. The Conduit is a very primitive limited fps game with fairly poor scores.

This site lists the game titles that are 720p and 1080i on original xbox.

http://www.hdtvarcad...o=show&pageId=4


Half Life 2 is amazing on xbox. Not the best visually but very good but with a full physics engine.



As previously stated it doesn't make any sense to compare the wii to xbox. Its a slaughter. However as previously stated if you think the wii is better in its specification state what you think is better?

I have both consoles and use a projector and its clear to me the wii doesn't compare. Both are connected by component. I don't understand how anyone could believe the wii was superior.