I finally got around to watching IGN's videos. The normal mapping on the enemies is rather striking--definitely the best looking Wii FPS I've seen.
High Voltage Software's Quantum3 Engine for Wii
- Thread starter sfried
- Start date
- Status
Sparse and flat compared to a 360/PS3 game, sure, but compared to other Wii titles, it's about as good as I've seen. I'm also not sure what qualifies as "not generic" in an FPS, since that genre has been pretty played-out for almost a decade.
PDZ had bump, normal and parallax maps all over the place, plus some really nice lighting, particles and post process effects.Better looking game then Perfect Dark 0
DuckThor Evil
Legend
Still a better looking game then Perfect Dark 0
Not even close. Perfect Dark was a bad game or atleast I wasn't able to play it very far, but it' graphics are quite nice and at times very nice. If I was told that the conduit is Xbox1 game I still wouldn't think it looks anything special, but if I was told that PDZ was Xbox1 game I would have tought it looked incredible.
I thought PDZ looked like butt on a stick. Parallax mapping can't hide ugliness.
The art, in particular enemies and such yes. However, the environments looked phenomenal, and still do to some degree. This Wii game looks like an average Xbox game, look at Farcry Xbox or Riddick Xbox, or even the first Halo and compare to this Wii game, those Xbox games still look better, and some of them significantly better IMO. What I don't understand is how some people are suddenly impressed by some Wii graphics that we would have laughed at last gen. Have people set the bar that low? Sorry for derailing.
IMO PD0 was the perfect example that lots of effects can sometimes add up to an ugly game. Of course I'm not saying that The Conduit uses more effects, in fact my point was that I think a lot of games look much better then PD0 with far less effects used.
I'm not going to even try to judge The Conduit vs any specific consoles games on a technical level as all I've seen are low to medium res vids of one level.. same as you.
Last edited by a moderator:
Could it in fact be that you've seen barely anything of The Conduit while the people praising it so much (game journalists) have actually sat down and played through quite a bit of the game. Something to think about there..
I would agree that Far Cry on Xbox looks better. It was also IMO the best-looking FPS on the Xbox without contest, not an "average" Xbox game. Unless you think Peyton Manning is an average quarterback, McLaren makes average sports cars, the SR-71 was an average spy plane, and a Rolex is an average watch. Riddick made a lot of tradeoffs to do what it did--the frame rate and IQ are very bad, and it was mostly limited to confined spaces. Were the Conduit using Riddick's engine and on the Xbox, it wouldn't even be playable. It was impressive for the time, but let's not kid ourselves and say the Xbox was powerful enough to do any kind of game using that graphics engine. Halo, seriously? Either you love Halo too much, or it's been too long since you played it, since this really is a good deal prettier.
We're not impressed with the graphics per se, as though we'd never seen normal maps before. We weren't born yesterday, nor are we idiots. We're impressed with the effort put into the graphics and just how much more this small team has done than anyone else developing for Wii. So far, it looks like they've done a very capable job, having coded much more advanced effects on the Wii than pretty much anyone else so far. It's praiseworthy and, assuming it gets published, raises the bar for all the other Wii developers. Given the hardware they're coding for, it's impressive.
Are you kidding? Last gen, people lost continence every time they saw a bump map or a water effect that was something more than a scrolling texture. This game would have had people falling all over each other to praise the omg-shiny bump maps on the main character's arms. Have we really forgotten how easily impressed we were last gen?
Color me Dan
Regular
I think most are in denial over that, can't look like you were impressed by mere bump maps NOW and in that fashion. I know I am
I've made a 180 on this title, I have been looking through all of the available videos and come out thoroughly impressed. I just had to do what is so hard for me, separate my awe for technical prowess from good art direction. I don't think the game has good art direction, but it's tech is very impressive. I noticed that there were bump maps all over the place that were subtle and that I didn't see in the gametrailer videos (is it just me or are they horribly compressed?). I recommend looking at the IGN videos as they are better and show you more detail. I especially like the lightening effect from the lamp that was swaying in the tech demo and how it shaded everything.
I wonder if they will be licensing the engine akin to Unreal and keep updating it to keep it up to date and increase performance. If it could be kept competitive and have good tools we might see more graphically impressive games on the Wii. I believe most games on the Wii have the potential to look awesome, with well done tools and good art direction I think the Wii has the potential to look "next gen" but with jaggies. To me the savior of the Wii will be art direction however. There are a ton of beautiful games on both GC and PS2 that are all because of some nifty hardware use and art direction. My personal favorites among those I've played, and you may not agree with me and that's alright hehe, for the last gen PS2 and GC was Re4, Dirge of Cerberus, FF12, FF Crystal Chronicles, Okami, Gran Turismo, MGS3 and the GC remake etc. Most of those games looked awesome because of art direction. Slap some of the subtle effects Conduit has showed us can be viably done to pretty things up and "me want". I'm rambling, but go ahead and ramble with me if you want. The Wii deserves more attention, and if Conduit is what's needed to spur others then bring it on.
They've said that at this point, they don't have any structure in place to license the engine. Perhaps if they do well, they might end up licensing it. The game really needs phenomenal sales in order to convince other publishers that actually taking advantage of the hardware is worth it. Remember Factor 5's Gamecube games? I thought that surely after Rebel Strike, we'd start seeing some better-looking Cube titles. I was wrong.
I remember a number of Xbox games last gen getting "9's" for graphics mainly because, despite bad frame rates, ugly texture work, extreme LOD pop-in, and sparse environments, they had bump maps and a few other oo-la-la effects.
P.S. You mean "lighting." "Lightning" is that flashy electricity that appears in the sky on a stormy night.
I remember a number of Xbox games last gen getting "9's" for graphics mainly because, despite bad frame rates, ugly texture work, extreme LOD pop-in, and sparse environments, they had bump maps and a few other oo-la-la effects.
P.S. You mean "lighting." "Lightning" is that flashy electricity that appears in the sky on a stormy night.
Err... Black? Burnout Revenge? Is this really still more than average?
Criterion's shooter even ran on the PS2. Granted it was the late stages of the console, but the same point could easily be argued for the Gamecube and the Wii's hardware extension of it.
The Conduit doesn't even hold up artistically, bump/normal makes it less full of blandness but replacing it is the "Timeshift effect"- aka it's really obvious in Sierra's Timeshift- terrible art assets with over-hard normal mapping and lighting. It's hideous, especially if texture resolution and variety are low and scarce respectively.
Criterion's shooter even ran on the PS2. Granted it was the late stages of the console, but the same point could easily be argued for the Gamecube and the Wii's hardware extension of it.
The Conduit doesn't even hold up artistically, bump/normal makes it less full of blandness but replacing it is the "Timeshift effect"- aka it's really obvious in Sierra's Timeshift- terrible art assets with over-hard normal mapping and lighting. It's hideous, especially if texture resolution and variety are low and scarce respectively.
Color me Dan
Regular
I thought it looked weird when I typed lightning, lighting is obviously the right one; thanks for the correction fearsomepirate hehe.
Tchock, I'm not sure if you are answering to my post or just thinking out loud so I'll just assume you're answering to my post and add that I didn't count any titles I haven't personally played because that would be unfair. Can't judge a game entirely by screen shots and videos. And since "The Conduit" is discussed here in the technical forum I'm trying to disregard the lack of awesome art direction that might make this game truly stand out. It's the technical details that are interesting to me in this game and the discussion at hand. Good art direction will always be what makes a game look good, and the more effects you get to use to improve art the better. You can do amazingly beautiful games with "just" awesome texture work, truth be told I usually prefer nice textures to crap textures with bump maps. But showing other devs and consumers that you CAN use more effects raises the bar and will hopefully have an impact on the visual fidelity on future titles.
Tchock, I'm not sure if you are answering to my post or just thinking out loud so I'll just assume you're answering to my post and add that I didn't count any titles I haven't personally played because that would be unfair. Can't judge a game entirely by screen shots and videos. And since "The Conduit" is discussed here in the technical forum I'm trying to disregard the lack of awesome art direction that might make this game truly stand out. It's the technical details that are interesting to me in this game and the discussion at hand. Good art direction will always be what makes a game look good, and the more effects you get to use to improve art the better. You can do amazingly beautiful games with "just" awesome texture work, truth be told I usually prefer nice textures to crap textures with bump maps. But showing other devs and consumers that you CAN use more effects raises the bar and will hopefully have an impact on the visual fidelity on future titles.
Just thinking out loud.
But in most cases art direction certainly affects tech development, unles they're throwing everything including the kitchen sink down the hood. Doom 3 and it's particular focus on stencil shadowing, anyone?
And speaking of technicalities, Criterion's Renderman (specifically the Burnout Revenge version) did reflection and specular on prev-gen, and normal should be in for X360. IIRC one of the interviews mentioned that if normal was too heavy, bump + specular could fit in that position with compromises. Id Tech 4 + Doom3 ran on the Xbox too, should have had bump/normal too. Textures were abysmally low-res though.
I did have doubts of whether the PS2 GPU could actually be more flexible than Hollywood's effects extensions (despite the latter's undisputed raw power). Not much knowledge on the former, but considering how Criterion pushed it to near-parity with programmable-age games, I'm still pleasantly surprised.
But in most cases art direction certainly affects tech development, unles they're throwing everything including the kitchen sink down the hood. Doom 3 and it's particular focus on stencil shadowing, anyone?
And speaking of technicalities, Criterion's Renderman (specifically the Burnout Revenge version) did reflection and specular on prev-gen, and normal should be in for X360. IIRC one of the interviews mentioned that if normal was too heavy, bump + specular could fit in that position with compromises. Id Tech 4 + Doom3 ran on the Xbox too, should have had bump/normal too. Textures were abysmally low-res though.
I did have doubts of whether the PS2 GPU could actually be more flexible than Hollywood's effects extensions (despite the latter's undisputed raw power). Not much knowledge on the former, but considering how Criterion pushed it to near-parity with programmable-age games, I'm still pleasantly surprised.
Color me Dan
Regular
Being that I'm not a coder I might be under some romanticized illusion about programming, Actually I am most likely under a romanticized illusion about programming, and to me I find both architectures really interesting; GC, PS2 and Wii that is. If I was a programmer I'd just wanna sit down with the hardware of each and see what it could do. And I get thrilled every time someone does, like Conduit.
My stepbrother has a friend working on a multiplatform game that will be released on Xbox 360 and PS3 and me and my stepbrother talk a lot about this generations consoles. He had been in contact with his friend and had been told that devs today have the "luxury" of spending time on languages and tools that are not the best performance wise but a hell of a lot easier to work with because of the power this gen has. On the PS2, if you wanted to push it, I can imagine that you had no such "luxury" when coding. Apparently then at least his friends and some other multiplatform games could theoretically be leaving 15-20% of a platforms performance by using these other languages I do not mean to say that "zomg, devs are lazy" because really, it's not about that. In the current developer environment you may not get the "luxury" of using harder code to get more performance due to time constraints, It might be a trade off as to what you need vs what you can get and a ton of other different parameters. I'm just saying that as I understood my stepbrothers friend, and how my stepbrother understood that friend, It wouldn't be a illogical conclusion that the Wii might not be stressed because of the choice of code and constraints publishers and other factors put on Wii games development.
About Doom 3 on the Xbox I think that port suffered from a lot of things not tied to the hardware but rather to how it was done. I am no expert but every port I've ever played has been rather weak in the performance and looks department, the bigger the difference in hardware the worse. Not to say it's the port guys fault, but I appreciate that it's hard to rebuild a game to be the same on hardware that is different and never designed for. Funny thing is that I personally liked the PS2 version of RE4 better graphically then the GC version, so there are exceptions.
Back on topic I'm looking forward to see developers start playing with the Wii internals, I read that Factor 5 was going to make a graphical tour de force for the Wii also so the platforms graphical capabilities wont be showed off in only one game.
My stepbrother has a friend working on a multiplatform game that will be released on Xbox 360 and PS3 and me and my stepbrother talk a lot about this generations consoles. He had been in contact with his friend and had been told that devs today have the "luxury" of spending time on languages and tools that are not the best performance wise but a hell of a lot easier to work with because of the power this gen has. On the PS2, if you wanted to push it, I can imagine that you had no such "luxury" when coding. Apparently then at least his friends and some other multiplatform games could theoretically be leaving 15-20% of a platforms performance by using these other languages I do not mean to say that "zomg, devs are lazy" because really, it's not about that. In the current developer environment you may not get the "luxury" of using harder code to get more performance due to time constraints, It might be a trade off as to what you need vs what you can get and a ton of other different parameters. I'm just saying that as I understood my stepbrothers friend, and how my stepbrother understood that friend, It wouldn't be a illogical conclusion that the Wii might not be stressed because of the choice of code and constraints publishers and other factors put on Wii games development.
About Doom 3 on the Xbox I think that port suffered from a lot of things not tied to the hardware but rather to how it was done. I am no expert but every port I've ever played has been rather weak in the performance and looks department, the bigger the difference in hardware the worse. Not to say it's the port guys fault, but I appreciate that it's hard to rebuild a game to be the same on hardware that is different and never designed for. Funny thing is that I personally liked the PS2 version of RE4 better graphically then the GC version, so there are exceptions.
Back on topic I'm looking forward to see developers start playing with the Wii internals, I read that Factor 5 was going to make a graphical tour de force for the Wii also so the platforms graphical capabilities wont be showed off in only one game.
It's not; it's actually very primitive by comparison. However, it had lots more fillrate. The PS2s graphical muscle lay in its vector units, which were on the CPU. There's lots of info on how devs used these to great effect. Yes, they were programmable, and there's tons of info out there on them if you look. It's entirely arguable as to which had more power, since they were good at different things.
Color me Dan said:
Doom 3 in large part suffered from the Xbox having only 64 MB of RAM and a very weak (by comparison to the PCs Doom 3 was made for) CPU. So it was very much a hardware issue.
DeadlyNinja
Veteran
The general consensus is that the art blows. This was known from day 1. Even to this day, I sometimes get the feeling like the art's growing on me, then only to see the aliens in motion again and absolutely hate it. I don't think you'll find a many people out there that actually likes the art. The aliens are different, but just something about them that doesn't click with me, and no doubt other people.
- Status
