Wii Successor at E3? Game Informer says yes

imo 1080p hasn't even hit stride yet on the current generation systems, the majority of ps3 games tap out at 720, and most 360 games will render at 720 and 360 just upscales the output buffer

 

Wii successor WILL have 1080p, gosh.

Comon, guys. You're better than this. -_-

 

people seem to confuse 1080p output, (upscaled for example, like on the 360) with native 1920x1080 rendering.

Of course Project cafe can output 1080p, even phones do that nowadays.

 

:lol:

Those have dedicated hw for 1080p video playback, which is not the same than pushing 500M polys per second at that res...

And of course it could output at 1080p, just like the 3DS could've been WVGA rather than WQVGA.

But nobody cared, and believe me nobody will give two shits if a year from now ninty releases a Wii2 with 1080i graphics.

 

Since it's a R700 chipset it can do 1080p natively, there's nothing to it. Also, please realise the difference between a scaler (the HANNA chip on the 360 for example) and rendering at that resolution, they are totally different ways of achieving 1080p or any resolution for that matter.

 

Why don't they go with the RV800? You can get a whole ATI 5850 for like 100€.

 

So far I cant help but feel slight dissapointment, I want a console that not only inspires creativity out of the developers but makes my eyes happy aswell, a ati 5000 series card is a two year old card, while im not expecting something of the caliber of a 6990 (or nvidia counterpart) when will I see my Mario in 1080p with full AA

Maybe im just expecting too much, I adopted high definition gaming too early.

 

Yeah, have a look at Crowd Run (legal to distribute, as far as I know) if you want to give your CPU a nice workout.

 

Still the preoccupation with graphics never ceases to amaze me. When all's said and done these machines are intended primarily for playing games on, a portal to an imaginary world of escapism. If the fact that you can't count individual blades of grass or can't see individual pores in someone skin diminishes your ability to completely immerse yourself in a game it's not the fault of the hardware or the developer but the gamer himself.

Just my opinion.

 

+1 consumed but to the other chaps, lets not forget project cafe is new and the GPU could be subject to change for a better model with similar enough arctitecture to make porting alpha projects easier. Just look at how many times the PS2 has GPU revisions for exmple, there were several kits.

I'm sure thre is a good reason for using a 2 year old GPU, chances are it could be partly due to cost and familiarity - even then it should still be more than good enough for you for years to come (especally as code will be optimised for the one GPU and not many) and leaps and bounds ahead of the Wii, so there is no need to complain

 

:thumbsup:

If I can still get enjoyment from my Saturn and Dreamcast, then I can certainly live without "zomg teh hi-rez!!!!" nonsense.

Honestly, I've never seen the big deal. I say the new Mortal Kombat in HD this past weekend and have played on many HD TVs... I still like good ole' fashioned S-Video. :shrug:

 

Was it being displayed through an S-Video cable?

Worth pointing out: there's so little creativity and new ideas in games these days, they gotta have bling to hold my attention.

 

Yes, I have S-Video cables for my 360, Xbox, Saturn, and Dreamcast.

Though S-Video on the Saturn is a bit rough... as it exposes the pixel-mesh pretty bad (especially in say, Radiant Silvergun).

Edit:
Oh, I think I misunderstood your post, you meant was Mortal Kombat being displayed through S-Video. The answer to that is no, it was being displayed through HDMI or whatever.

 

Modern games are intended to be viewed at a high resolution, that's how they look their best. If I'm somehow less of a gamer for wanting to view them as such... well, how will I ever live with the stigma

 

I'm not saying that people who want HD or whatever are wrong, I'm just saying that I don't see what the big deal is.

 

As above. Shinier graphics add nothing to the mechanics of how the title plays but all focus now seems to be on the technical aspect of a game and not the meat and gravy of gameplay innovation.

I've no problem with people who are graphics monkeys but for me it makes not the slightest difference. I'd rather play Burnout 2 on my PS2 than Need For Speed: Hot Pursuit on my PS3 even though they're essentially the same game and the reason for this is that the new NFS game just looks too clinical and soulless for my liking. Yes everything gleams and ooooh, what pretty lighting effects but to me that detracts from the experience, it doesn't add to it. It's horses for courses, it just all boils down to personal preference, no-one's right and no-one's wrong.

 

Rant incoming.

As it ever was.

Really, I'm a little tired of the "graphics are irrelevant" position that a lot of older gamers take. Why did we love Sonic? Because it looked great and moved with a pace that had rarely been seen before. Why did we love Chrono Trigger, FFVI? Because the artistic realisation of the worlds and graphical effects were peerless. Hell, even Super Mario Brothers looked amazing at the time. Obviously all these games have fun core gameplay mechanics, but graphics were important too, and that aspect seems to get ignored when people talk about retro games. The clincher for me is that whenever people talk about their favourite games, most of those games didn't just play great, they looked great too. A truly brilliant game should shine in all respects, and discounting altogether the value of graphical representation seems weird to me. But, as you say - horses for courses. I respect that some people don't care for the difference between RF and RGB, and don't give a fuck about HD. That's absolutely down to personal priorities, and I'm not trying to say anyone who holds those opinions is somehow less of a gamer than I am.

I'm not a whore for HD, incidentally - currently my 360 is hooked up to a 480i CRT, and I enjoyed Plants vs Zombies just as much as if I'd been playing it on my HD screen. When it comes to modern, HD-intended games though I want to see them on a screen that can do them justice. When I played through FFXIII recently the graphics left me absolutely stunned, it's one of the most breathtakingly beautiful games I've ever played, and that does add to the atmosphere and immersion of the game. I would've lost a portion of that that had I played the game on that same 480i CRT, and I do slightly resent being told that this appreciation is somehow a problem on my part.

 

In other words you are accustom to the crap known as composite which will bleed the mesh in to a quazi transparency effort with rainbow colours. S-Video on the Saturn is a million times better but true RGB is better still.

I don't know how you can say a 360 through S-Video and HDMI look the same. Even the step up from Dreamcast S-Video to VGA was a massive improvement. I remember playing Phantasy Star Online for the fist time in VGA after months through S-Video. The extra amount of detail I could see was unreal.

So I can only assume you are using a piss poor no brand TV or your eyesight needs checking. I can even take a comparison photo if you'd like showing just how much better HD is over S-Video.

Yakumo

 

I'm not saying they're the same quality; I can easily see that there is some difference and more detail, I just don't personally care about that difference.

 

fair enough. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion :nod: