WiiGeePeeYou (Hollywood) what IS it ?

[Shifty Geezer]

So I can do a general question why are tools being upgraded if it is the same architeture, if it is a new/diferent or a superset of the old one it can make sense but this way (ie just a faster GC) I dont know if it would make sense.

you can still have better tools for the same hardware. I don't think there yet exists a perfect toolchain that satisfies every developers needs and wants without any bugs or difficulties. I presume there'll be new features added to the standard API, but we may be looking at the whole at general improvement rather than big feature increases. Dunno if ERP or similar would care comment on GC's dev tools and what reason/room there would be for improvements that aren't dependent on hardware upgrades.

As for being able to drop GC code into Wii and have it run, this I think bodes badly for the platform. There's got to be quite a temptating there to aim more at GC with it's existing 20 million consoles than target Wii specifically, and in doing so not focus ideally on the Wii's controller. Looking at Zelda as an example the game is a GC game with a Wii adaptation. How many more titles will be like that, developed to work with a GCs controller and then adapted to Wiimote? Hopefully only a few...

 

[pc999]

you can still have better tools for the same hardware. I don't think there yet exists a perfect toolchain that satisfies every developers needs and wants without any bugs or difficulties. I presume there'll be new features added to the standard API, but we may be looking at the whole at general improvement rather than big feature increases. Dunno if ERP or similar would care comment on GC's dev tools and what reason/room there would be for improvements that aren't dependent on hardware upgrades.

Well only a few can tell us.
Althought I guess that IF (some time in the future) it can be possible things like RS trailer/shoots then I think they would need some new features to the tools, and I doubt they could be done just with more speed.

As for being able to drop GC code into Wii and have it run, this I think bodes badly for the platform. There's got to be quite a temptating there to aim more at GC with it's existing 20 million consoles than target Wii specifically, and in doing so not focus ideally on the Wii's controller. Looking at Zelda as an example the game is a GC game with a Wii adaptation. How many more titles will be like that, developed to work with a GCs controller and then adapted to Wiimote? Hopefully only a few...

I guess this will hapen at the begining and/or kid games but being GC a dead console I think that will not happen during much more time (I wonder if even Nintendo would let them release GC games for much more time as it can be damaging for wii).

 

[darkblu]

As for being able to drop GC code into Wii and have it run, this I think bodes badly for the platform. There's got to be quite a temptating there to aim more at GC with it's existing 20 million consoles than target Wii specifically, and in doing so not focus ideally on the Wii's controller. Looking at Zelda as an example the game is a GC game with a Wii adaptation. How many more titles will be like that, developed to work with a GCs controller and then adapted to Wiimote? Hopefully only a few...

shifty, i really don't think you chose good arguments to make your point (but you do have one, admitedly).

zelda:TTP will be an AAA title*. even in its 'casual' version on the GC. the wii version will only build on top of that - they seem to be putting much thought in the control scheme, pollishing it to the max. to the extent that they traded off adding more eye candy to the wii version an focused entirely on a better interaction scheme. so it's not a GC title with a hacky wii adaptaion. a weak adaptation would be a GC game with upped visuals that otherwise plays identically. of course, i'm pretty sure we'll get such weak adaptations across all new platforms, en mass. same old with upped visuals. but i'm not convinced that the wii will be the one plaform suffering the most..

* i'm not a zelda fan, i'm just stating the obvious.

 

[Fox5]

Well only a few can tell us.
Althought I guess that IF (some time in the future) it can be possible things like RS trailer/shoots then I think they would need some new features to the tools, and I doubt they could be done just with more speed.




I guess this will hapen at the begining and/or kid games but being GC a dead console I think that will not happen during much more time (I wonder if even Nintendo would let them release GC games for much more time as it can be damaging for wii).

I'd rather have GC games with Wii exclusive features than a GC port followed by a Wii port. If they can sell 1 copy of a game that will run on both systems (and not through backwards compatibility) then all the better.

 

[OtakingGX]

I'd rather have GC games with Wii exclusive features than a GC port followed by a Wii port. If they can sell 1 copy of a game that will run on both systems (and not through backwards compatibility) then all the better.

Unfortunately this dried up with Zelda. It was originally intended that you'd play the Gamecube disc in the Wii and have a new control scheme. Ultimately, Nintendo decided to release two versions of the game.

I'm sure assets will not change overnight and games will still be built on engines developed on the PS2 and Xbox for years to come. In fact, wasn't the first Final Fantasy for PS2 hacked together (and I use the term "hacked together" loosely) on the same engine from the PSX?

I think the intention was to make developers ready to make games on Wii overnight. Instead of investing time porting code to the Wii from the Gamecube they could hit the ground running and tweak the code as they discovered new things about the hardware. I think this has paid off for Nintendo judging from the number of launch games we're seeing.

 

[pc999]

I think the intention was to make developers ready to make games on Wii overnight. Instead of investing time porting code to the Wii from the Gamecube they could hit the ground running and tweak the code as they discovered new things about the hardware. I think this has paid off for Nintendo judging from the number of launch games we're seeing.

The question still is how much can they upgrade in this conditions (eg this would be true about a 9800 and a X1900 as the code made for the first would run in the other and althought most of the strenght of the latter is made on additions/new features/a superset of the 9800 it does have a lot of room to upgrade), or in this case how much hey did, as they are upgrading tool for wii (if is just a "regular" upgrade it wouldnt worh mention I think)?

 

[StefanS]

Anyone saw the new Super Mario Galaxy screens. Although SMG is so far the graphically most impressive Wii title, it seems like there's no AA.

http://media.wii.ign.com/media/748/748588/imgs_1.html

 

[Beafy]

(disclaimer: I am a nintendo f*nb*y)

I'm sure most casual buyers couldn't care less about AA, but the lack of consistent AA throughout most games makes the Wii a really tough buying decision for me. I'm not a fan of HD-TV, so the resolution itself doesn't matter that much. But I do believe that adding a some hardware for easy 2xAA (see, I'm not even asking for 4xAA!) would help the look tremendously. It's the one thing that really annoys me with previous gen games, graphical wise...

 

[Ooh-videogames]

I don't know, alot of the imageson IGN Wii site seem to be shots we have seen months ago, they also seem to be stretched. I doubt they're at they're native resolution.

 

[Ooh-videogames]

Here's some new level shots for Red Steel, I would assume they have been touched up a bit.

http://www.enregistrersous.com/images/ec7e4f2bb617219a9b8c1e820ed5b6e4.jpg

http://www.enregistrersous.com/images/ee139a6d4764567de01dbaec1f8d5ac5.jpg

http://www.enregistrersous.com/images/11e01b8d9f46dacb559af62a3407eb1b.jpg

They can also be found on the Red Steel website, www.redsteelgame.com. At a much lower resolution than some of the shots on jeuxfrance, but still sharp.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

It's amazing the difference shed-loads of AA can make. If the Wii game had this level of IQ I'm sure many wouldn't notice the lower poly counts etc.

 

[pc999]

Anyone new this.

As with just about every Wii game we've played thus far, the closer you are to the television and the sensor bar, the less responsive the control seems to be. Therefore, being well-trained little Wii-lovers, we immediately pulled our chair six or seven feet back from the television and noticed an immediate improvement in accuracy. With this slight alteration achieved, learning the basics for Elebits couldn't be simpler or more intuitive.

Althought I guess it is nothing problematic.

This still happening, I hope they improve it.

This is all good and fine, but the game doesn't impress on every level. The title's physics system is lacking in that every object, regardless of size or density, appears to fly through the environment with the same sense of weight. Whether we're tossing a plate or chair into the air, they tend to have a very floaty, loose motion, with no particular need to hit the ground in a speedy fashion. When everything more or less feels the same, only the visual differences separate items, which can be disappointing. Then again, we've only played a single level and perhaps there's much more variety to come.

About the RS ss/trailer, some the scenarios dont look bad, good art is paying off, but I still think that the original ss/trailer looked much better (fxs like blooms, more/better lights abd such can do very well) but the caracthers are looking really bad.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

This still happening, I hope they improve it.

From experience I'd say that's unlikely. Realistic physics speeds need high and computationally expensive accuracy on the physics engine. If you use low values for things like gravity you can get away with far less calculations per frame. I think there's any physics solver out there that's speedy for realtime and doesn't have this problem, but maybe someone can correct me?

 

[Ooh-videogames]

Any chance this amount of AA could be acheived, assuming Wii has enough pixel fill rate and bandwidth?

Why is AA such a problem on 360 and PS3? I thought the new hardware would alow AA to come at no cost, will the missing link to matching real CG be unattainable forever?

 

[pc999]

From experience I'd say that's unlikely. Realistic physics speeds need high and computationally expensive accuracy on the physics engine. If you use low values for things like gravity you can get away with far less calculations per frame.

Interesting, I thought that you would need always the same number of calculations (from the litle I recal of my old physics class), or is just the case that with the low speed if you dont update so many times it is not perceptible to the gamer?

Althought this in some cases bad physics can be even worst than not having physics (see all the bad reps about H2 physics), lets see how it end up in the final game.

Personally I am very interesting in knowing more about the tech in this game, they talked about some complex AI too, would also be interesting in knowing more about the transition and diferences of the GC SDK and Wii SDK as the physics had only be possible on the latter and if they are indeed using Havok what kind of improvements could come from the optimization to Wii.

I think there's any physics solver out there that's speedy for realtime and doesn't have this problem, but maybe someone can correct me?

Sorry my english is failing oops: ), do you mean that you think there is no program without this problem in real time physics?

BTW new ss of Rayman, nothing great from a tech POV but good looking anyway IMO.

http://media.wii.ign.com/media/821/821585/imgs_1.html

 

[StefanS]

Interesting, I thought that you would need always the same number of calculations (from the litle I recal of my old physics class), or is just the case that with the low speed if you dont update so many times it is not perceptible to the gamer?

I think the point Shifty is trying to make is the following: Although the gravitational acceleration is the same for all objects, the drag, the friction is not. Moreover since the objects all have different weight, the force exerted by the beam causes different accelerations for all objects. Adding to that each body is slightly accelerated differently (different force vector, different point where the force is applied). Now those objects could be sent in a spin as well. Furthermore, what about collisions? The bodies could collide causing different vectors, etc. Moreover, a house colliding with a truck would cause deformation since real object aren't rigid points. etc...
I could continue the list. Physics depend largely on the model you chose to apply to your situation. You can make it arbitrarily difficult / realistic, but your computation time is increasing.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Interesting, I thought that you would need always the same number of calculations (from the litle I recal of my old physics class), or is just the case that with the low speed if you dont update so many times it is not perceptible to the gamer?

It's to do with how the intersections and response are calculated. At higher object parameters like speeds and weights, there's far greater chance of missed collisions. You can get round that by doing more physics updates with smaller advances, increasing accuracy at a cost of more calculations per frame.

Sorry my english is failing oops: )

Sorry, I made a typo! I should have said I don't think there's any physics solver out there... AFAIK they all have the same limitation in that simulations become increasingly unstable and erratic when you start 'pushing' the parameters higher and faster, with results like objects passing through each other instead of colliding, or systems exploding, which have to be fixed by either dropping the parameter value or increasing calculations. That's why every physics implementation I know of runs with moon-like gravity.

 

[OtakingGX]

Sorry, I made a typo! I should have said I don't think there's any physics solver out there... AFAIK they all have the same limitation in that simulations become increasingly unstable and erratic when you start 'pushing' the parameters higher and faster, with results like objects passing through each other instead of colliding, or systems exploding, which have to be fixed by either dropping the parameter value or increasing calculations. That's why every physics implementation I know of runs with moon-like gravity.

This reminds me of a dynamic analysis we were trying to run on a solid model (Pro/E) of an engine when I was in school. We were missing a constraint and every time the model ran part of the engine shot off and ended up 3 miles away.

I've been rather disappointed with all the videos I've seen of physics accelerated games. It always looks like a bunch of wooden blocks smashing into each other. I think that the problem is that most code still relies on rigid body approximations to simulate physics, and bodies really aren't rigid. Of course, as Shifty pointed out, when g is smaller and bodies tend to move slower they deflect less when colliding, and the rigid body approximation works again.

 

[V3]

Anyone new this.

Althought I guess it is nothing problematic.

Well maybe only a problem for the Japanese market. Their rooms are generally smaller.

Maybe it isn't calibrated properly ?

 

[Megadrive1988]

the AA that we are seeing in Xbox360 games that use it, is what I had expected from last generation, PS2,GC,Xbox and even Dreamcast. but most games completely lacked any real anti-aliasing last gen. true, some had AA but most did not. alot of games used what's called flicker filter, a technology that I don't understand very well--but anyway, if you go back to before last-gen, and look at the highend arcade scene with MODEL 3 dominating in technology, you see most if not every MODEL 3 game had some amount of AA. I recently watched Scud Race very carefully. while you can see some aliasing, its not the raw jagged type, because some AA is clearly applied, which is not the case with most Dreamcast, NAOMI, PS2,System 246, NAOMI 2, Gamecube, TriForce, Xbox, and Chihiro games.

as for the next console generation: Xbox720, Wii2, PS4 (or at least the X720 and PS4) I expect very low cost, almost free 16x anti-aliasing. that's the level of AA that makes the jaggies really disappear. although decent prerendered CGI in cutscenes, techdemos, television, etc. no doubt use a significantly higher amount of AA.

on the highend realtime side, with 4 or 8 Nvidia GPUs, I think they're upto 32x AA if I'm not mistaken.

as for Hollywood and Wii anti-aliasing, I don't expect much, maybe games will use more of what Gamecube already had, but didn't use because of fillrate restrictions. Wii has at least a wee bit more fillrate so, 2x or 3x AA should be used more often. I forget the level of AA that Gamecube was capable of, I think it was 3x max.