inefficient
Veteran
What's BIA? I can't figure out what it stands for.I saw some pretty awesome looking Transformers scans from NP though, and they look very nice for a movie based game.
Brothers In Arms
Ok, full interview from anonymous third party about Wii GPU.
- Thread starter DeadlyNinja
- Start date
Brothers In Arms
tongue_of_colicab
Veteran
Not that I have more knowledge than the EA guy, but the thing I wonder is the top end GC games didnt look that much worse than the best xbox games, now even if the Wii only has doubled up clocks, you'd still expect it to exeed xbox as GC already was close to the xbox.
Maybe its just EA wanting to re-use as much of their code as possible without making somethings actually tailored for Wii hardware? He's also somewhat saying that.
Maybe its just EA wanting to re-use as much of their code as possible without making somethings actually tailored for Wii hardware? He's also somewhat saying that.
Wii has 50% up clocks.
tongue_of_colicab
Veteran
I thought the gpu was double?
I don't know. If we can get some games that look as good as Fable, I'll be happy.
But I agree with what was said by tongue two posts up. The GC was comparable to the X-Box a lot of the time with games like Rogue Squadrun II, Metroid Prime, etc. So far, the Wii hasn't even touched either of those titles.
Basically, there has to be room for improvement.
Either way, I still find Metroid to be a damn impressive looking game, so meh.
But I agree with what was said by tongue two posts up. The GC was comparable to the X-Box a lot of the time with games like Rogue Squadrun II, Metroid Prime, etc. So far, the Wii hasn't even touched either of those titles.
Basically, there has to be room for improvement.
Either way, I still find Metroid to be a damn impressive looking game, so meh.
Bull, sh*t!
This guy doesn't know what he is talking about, or even worse he does, but is lying for some reason.
GC had very very good shaders for its time and price, in many cases better than xbox ditto.
It's only that they where held back by the clock rate and that they were not supported with copy/paste code from the direct-x API.
You need to do some actual work to get results from them.
Wii is a significantly better machine than xbox in almost every conceivable way.
Yeah, the guy has made games for both systems, and is in charge of one of EA's most important franchises. Clearly he has no idea what the fuck he's talking about, or he's a liar.
If only lazy devs would master the TEV it could match Xbox 360 at SD resolutions. These lazy fucking idots, or liars, or both, the TEV has more pixel shading power than the Xbox, or even Toy Story. Or even god. Why are devs so lazy? Six+ years on, and only Factor 5 have mastered the TEV, and made Rogue Leadersquaron that looks better than any Xbox game and actual real life as well.
The TEV can also cure cancer and impotence. If you're designing games for SD resolutions anyway. So if the GC is this powerful, if you times it by three, it must be equivalent to something that's better than Xbox. Not that it wasn't better anyway.
Bullshit lying lazy idot devs!!!!!
If only lazy devs would master the TEV it could match Xbox 360 at SD resolutions. These lazy fucking idots, or liars, or both, the TEV has more pixel shading power than the Xbox, or even Toy Story. Or even god. Why are devs so lazy? Six+ years on, and only Factor 5 have mastered the TEV, and made Rogue Leadersquaron that looks better than any Xbox game and actual real life as well.
The TEV can also cure cancer and impotence. If you're designing games for SD resolutions anyway. So if the GC is this powerful, if you times it by three, it must be equivalent to something that's better than Xbox. Not that it wasn't better anyway.
Bullshit lying lazy idot devs!!!!!
Last edited by a moderator:
Except at graphics.
tongue_of_colicab
Veteran
Well if you read my post, GC was already very close to the xbox, Wii having higher clocks and the mistirous bigger die size for the gpu and it would seem logic to think wii is faster than xbox as GC was already close to xbox. Nobody says the EA guy isnt right, All I wonder is how true it is, as he also says they butcher most of the code out of old engines and only fix some things for Wii wich dont work straight out of the older code, so it doesnt seem as they actually make something wii specific in wich case it wouldnt be very strange that you dont get everything out of it thats in it.
Not really.. Look at the best looking GC game, then add 50% more fillrate, 50% more CPU power, 3.5 times the amount of memory and 3 times as much memory bandwidth. About the only thing XBox has going for it in comparison to Wii is its standardised shaders, hardly a clincher..
Then there's the stuff we don't know about. Like the explanation for the size of Wii's GPU. Which suggests there's more added then simply the 50% extra clocks.
Last edited by a moderator:
YOU sir, will never be my best friend!!!
Seriously, the industry is rife with idiots and people pretending to be experts way out of their field. Even worse, devs that are regular zealous bigots or economically dependent on one platform.
And also the head of the EA (as in RenderWare "spectacular") sports line (sports games are basically a dozen guys running around a flat rectangle or similar simple environments) is hardly the place to go looking for definitive answers on the power of various consoles.
Overclock a GeForce 2 by 50% and double its RAM and you still don't have a GeForce 4, if you get where I'm coming from.
Btw, even at 50% faster, the Xbox would still have a polygon transform advantage over the GC on top of its pixel shaders and image quality. NFans shouldn't feel bad about this: Nv2A, or "GeForce 4 beta" was actually quite a monster in its day - something the GC was not designed to be. A speed increase and a few tweaks won't change this.
The Wii is nice. It does exactly what Nintendo wanted it to do. It performs exactly how Nintendo felt it needed to. And it's a runaway success!
Btw, even at 50% faster, the Xbox would still have a polygon transform advantage over the GC on top of its pixel shaders and image quality. NFans shouldn't feel bad about this: Nv2A, or "GeForce 4 beta" was actually quite a monster in its day - something the GC was not designed to be. A speed increase and a few tweaks won't change this.
The Wii is nice. It does exactly what Nintendo wanted it to do. It performs exactly how Nintendo felt it needed to. And it's a runaway success!
Quite seriously, don't judge a person by how much you like the publisher they work for, and don't judge them for working with Renderware!
I guarantee that however much you don't like EA, and however much you think that having worked on a game that uses Renderware means someone can't know what they're talking about, their opinion counts for a lot more than:
"I think GC was great * 1.5 * unknown transistors = better than Xbox"
EA have some very good people working from them btw. I always like to hear what EA people have to say!
tongue_of_colicab
Veteran
If your talking gf4mx I believe you are wrong. Wasnt that just a gf2 with some minor updates?
True. Though EA isnt exactly known for pushing any platform either. And as said before 4 times already, Top gc games didnt look that much worse than top xbox games so Wii just being xbox sounds a bit weird. For example, why has the Wii 3 times more ram than the gc had? (not counting that 16mb for buffering the cd) if Wii is as fast as xbox that wouldnt make sence as GC with its 24mb already did more or less the same.
He is probably talking about the Ti (althought XB had some serios limitations over a Gf4, like memory BW CPU).
The thing that people still forget is thatone probably shouldnt compare it as we compare DX cards here both are design to do the same and only matters how do it faster. Those two consoles are (from a HW POV) supossed to do diferent things that is why in games like CoR/H2... or the ones like RE4 or even GoW2, we dont say that y game looks better than w, we say they look diferent but I do prefer y or w.
Wii will be better in somethings without a doubt, within those are probably poly counts, filrate based fx, EMBM fxs, tex rez, and whatever the CPU can give advantage.
In things like complex shaders, whateverit could be done in VS isntead of the CPU (some animations and such) ... It will have disvanages
Put that in your head games look diferent before they look better or worst.
first post on B3D...
actually, i'm kinda a novice in technology...i've been a nintendo fan for years and i heard about TEV just few months ago...shame on me.
but i'm very curious...
now..we assume that wii GPU still uses TEV just like the flipper...reading on B3D and around the internet i understood that TEV use fixed functions and the reason devs never really used them is because of the GC ram and that TEV killed the fillrate...
after readin that interview on n'gai croal's blog..i have a question: is it possible that, thanks to better ram and processing power of the wii, devs could use TEV to obtain programmable shaders like effects? i mean...in the first interview about dewy's adventure. the producer said they're using normal mapping in the game. is this really possible?
another question: in n'gai croal's blog is mentioned a "shaders-to-TEV" tool...would a tool like this actually work?
actually, i'm kinda a novice in technology...i've been a nintendo fan for years and i heard about TEV just few months ago...shame on me.
but i'm very curious...
now..we assume that wii GPU still uses TEV just like the flipper...reading on B3D and around the internet i understood that TEV use fixed functions and the reason devs never really used them is because of the GC ram and that TEV killed the fillrate...
after readin that interview on n'gai croal's blog..i have a question: is it possible that, thanks to better ram and processing power of the wii, devs could use TEV to obtain programmable shaders like effects? i mean...in the first interview about dewy's adventure. the producer said they're using normal mapping in the game. is this really possible?
another question: in n'gai croal's blog is mentioned a "shaders-to-TEV" tool...would a tool like this actually work?
Ok, first of all, the word "shader" is kind of ambiguous. Apart from Unified Shader solutions there are usually vertex shaders, geometry shaders and pixel shaders.
Wiki said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shader
Now for the GCN and the Wii the TnL is fixed function (i.e. no vertex shadering capability). The TEV on the other hand are texture combiners which are similar to Pixel Shaders. Thus, Wii and GCN allow for pixel shading.
As for more info, I suggest you use the forum search function (ERP's posts on that matter are particular enlighting) and / or read the Sauer article on Gamasutra
Search Function is your friend bro.