Wii and it's 480p

[StevenNevets]

Looking at the specs of the Wii and my gaming tv I found there to be a big difference in max resolutions..


Wii
http://www.gamespot.com/features/6146540/index.html?tag=subnav;about

TV
http://reviews.cnet.com/Sony_KDF_E60A20/4507-6484_7-31304866.html?tag=sub

___
____

This wouldn't make to much of a differnce, would it?

 

[LittleNemoNES]

I think you already know the answer

Nintendo is crazy to not at least support 720i

 

[Kromis]

I am assuming it will. That is one sweet TV for the price.

 

[zephyrprime]

ummmm, yeah.

 

[frostedflakes]

My Gamecube doesn't look too bad upscaled from 480i to 720p. A Wii at 480p should look excellent on an HDTV.

 

[Dainas]

The Dreamcast way back when looked great too when its signal was forced to 720p, but then again it had true support for 640x480 and some sort of aa. I guess well have to see wether the Wii will be allowed to do higher resolutions with certain games.

 

[StevenNevets]

Originally posted by: gersson
I think you already know the answer

no I don't that is why I'm asking

 

[JBT]

I think 480p will look good. I would love it to do 720p but its not a deal breaker. I'll still be getting it. As long as they didn't stick with 480i that would just plan suck haha.
480p is atleast DVD quality. Do you think DVD's look like crap on your TV? probably not. Sure they are not PERFECT but its atleast good.

 

[clickynext]

Originally posted by: Dainas
The Dreamcast way back when looked great too when its signal was forced to 720p, but then again it had true support for 640x480 and some sort of aa. I guess well have to see wether the Wii will be allowed to do higher resolutions with certain games.

The dreamcast's image quality was awesome.

 

[SpeedZealot369]

Originally posted by: clickynext

Originally posted by: Dainas
The Dreamcast way back when looked great too when its signal was forced to 720p, but then again it had true support for 640x480 and some sort of aa. I guess well have to see wether the Wii will be allowed to do higher resolutions with certain games.

The dreamcast's image quality was awesome.

RE4 Looked amazing

 

[magomago]

If Dreamcast had real AA, then it wasn't implemented well. IIRC it relied on the fuzz provided by a TV to appear to be "smoothed".

If you every played a DC countless hours as I did on a Computer monitor using a VGA out, you'll know that it looked to DIE for because it was so crystal clear and sharp...
except that it was jaggy as HE|||||||| (and it SORELY needed Antriscopic filtering...go look at the the cutscenes in sonic where you saw image banding on an airplane runway that was absolutely horrid )

 

[Cookie Monster]

Wii's GPU is around the power of a 9800pro or slower. But you cant expect much. Look at the cost of Wii. The amount you pay for is what you get. Although 720p wouldve been nice.

 

[magomago]

9800pro? Where did you get this from? Source, link, anything?

 

[SpeedZealot369]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Wii's GPU is around the power of a 9800pro or slower. But you cant expect much. Look at the cost of Wii. The amount you pay for is what you get. Although 720p wouldve been nice.

You can't say the GPU "has around the power of a 9800 pro", it's a bogus statement, you just can't compare the two like that.

As for the price, they are charging $250 which is $50 less then the xbox360 So your point is completely invalid imo.

They are charging that much because they are next gen. not GPU wise, but controller wise.

-SZ


*edited for spelling

 

[LittleNemoNES]

SORELY needed Antriscopic filtering

Anisotropic

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: gersson

SORELY needed Antriscopic filtering

Anisotropic

whatever- i gave up on arguing tech bla and numbers years ago when i would sit there and debate on hours why the ps2 was the superior console on IGN.

just let me see prettyness, and make sure the prettyness is accomplished by fun else the prettyness becomes ugly very fast

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: magomago
9800pro? Where did you get this from? Source, link, anything?

B3D discussion about Wii

I gave you this link instead of the actual link. The site doesnt work (which had the interview), but it had an interview where they mention the power of Wii GPU is between X1400 and X1600.

 

[gorcorps]

Originally posted by: SpeedZealot369

Originally posted by: clickynext

Originally posted by: Dainas
The Dreamcast way back when looked great too when its signal was forced to 720p, but then again it had true support for 640x480 and some sort of aa. I guess well have to see wether the Wii will be allowed to do higher resolutions with certain games.

The dreamcast's image quality was awesome.

RE4 Looked amazing

Not talking about the GC, we're talking about the Dreamcast

 

[TekDemon]

Originally posted by: magomago
If Dreamcast had real AA, then it wasn't implemented well. IIRC it relied on the fuzz provided by a TV to appear to be "smoothed".

If you every played a DC countless hours as I did on a Computer monitor using a VGA out, you'll know that it looked to DIE for because it was so crystal clear and sharp...
except that it was jaggy as HE|||||||| (and it SORELY needed Antriscopic filtering...go look at the the cutscenes in sonic where you saw image banding on an airplane runway that was absolutely horrid )

Yeah but when it came out the only 3D competition was the Playstation one and the N64 and you can trust me that the PSX did not look better lol.

I never got the VGA adapter for the dreamcast but it looked fantastic enough on the TV. Poor sega =(

I still secretly harbor a desire for Sega to secretly develop a console without anyone knowing and then just drop it one day when nobody expects it. Maybe they can even build up a huge library of games now as a developer-like hit series of games that they can make sequels to (like squaresoft style, although Sega already has Sonic of course). Then one day when everyone is playing all their Sega games on their Sony and Microsoft consoles and totally hooked, Sega should just drop the bomb that all their hit series are moving to their own console exclusively and that they're back in the hardware game bitches!

Haha seriously though, look at what Sega sells in Japan:
http://www.segatoys.co.jp/homestar/index.html

They're totally gonna incorporate some awesome future version of that into a secret console...it'll project a virtual world all over your friggin room and basically make all the other consoles cry in shame. Yeah I'm getting carried away with my fantasy, but a guy can dream can't he?

Seriously though, the Dreamcast was so ahead of it's time (I actually surfed the web quite a bit on it back in the day) that it totally pained me to see it die =(

 

[SpeedZealot369]

Originally posted by: gorcorps

Originally posted by: SpeedZealot369

Originally posted by: clickynext

Originally posted by: Dainas
The Dreamcast way back when looked great too when its signal was forced to 720p, but then again it had true support for 640x480 and some sort of aa. I guess well have to see wether the Wii will be allowed to do higher resolutions with certain games.

The dreamcast's image quality was awesome.

RE4 Looked amazing

Not talking about the GC, we're talking about the Dreamcast

My bad, never played that system

 

[Chocolate Pi]

Originally posted by: SpeedZealot369

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Wii's GPU is around the power of a 9800pro or slower. But you cant expect much. Look at the cost of Wii. The amount you pay for is what you get. Although 720p wouldve been nice.

As for the price, they are charging $250 which is $50 less then the xbox360 So your point is completely invalid imo.

Don't be ridiculous; The Xbox 360 is for all intents and purposes $400, as no sane human should ever be allowed to buy the cut-down "core" version. Face it, the fact that the core SKUs make up such a small percent of the total shipments and isn't even present in some markets is a clear indication that it's only purpose is to make people perceive the price to be lower... like you just did.

Also, recall that Microsoft is selling their hardware at a loss and making it up through games costing $10 more each, in addition to highly overpriced accessories like $50 controllers and the absurd $100 wireless adapter. (Something built into the lowly Wii for free...)

I'm not trying to throw any sort of Wii bias into the thread, but just point out that to say that the price difference is only $50 is rather silly.

 

[SpeedZealot369]

Originally posted by: Chocolate Pi

Originally posted by: SpeedZealot369

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Wii's GPU is around the power of a 9800pro or slower. But you cant expect much. Look at the cost of Wii. The amount you pay for is what you get. Although 720p wouldve been nice.

As for the price, they are charging $250 which is $50 less then the xbox360 So your point is completely invalid imo.

Don't be ridiculous; The Xbox 360 is for all intents and purposes $400, as no sane human should ever be allowed to buy the cut-down "core" version. Face it, the fact that the core SKUs make up such a small percent of the total shipments and isn't even present in some markets is a clear indication that it's only purpose is to make people perceive the price to be lower... like you just did.

Also, recall that Microsoft is selling their hardware at a loss and making it up through games costing $10 more each, in addition to highly overpriced accessories like $50 controllers and the absurd $100 wireless adapter. (Something built into the lowly Wii for free...)

I'm not trying to throw any sort of Wii bias into the thread, but just point out that to say that the price difference is only $50 is rather silly.

I disagree, we are comparing hardware to hardware, so $250 gives you the Wii, and $300 gives you the Xbox360.

Does wii come with a built in HD? Maybe a headset? I don't think so. It's a fair comparison IMO.


*edited for spelling

 

[Chocolate Pi]

...but that $300 figure for the 360 blissfully ignores extra and inevitable associated costs... Fore example, Dreamcast was for awhile free with commitment to sega's online service, so was the Dreamcast a free system?

The fact is, Wii costs considerably less than the 360 at the expense of high resolution and graphical ability.

 

[SpeedZealot369]

Originally posted by: Chocolate Pi
...but that $300 figure for the 360 blissfully ignores extra and inevitable associated costs... Fore example, Dreamcast was for awhile free with commitment to sega's online service, so was the Dreamcast a free system?

The fact is, Wii costs considerably less than the 360 at the expense of high resolution and graphical ability.

The 360 can also double as a media center, playing dvd's, music, etc. Not to mention the HD-DVD capablity.

The Wii is cheaper yes, but I think it's much more expensive then it should be. Considering the only difference is basically a new controller.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

I bought my primo 360 from Target, saved $40 by using the 10% discount they offer for applying for their card. It nearly covers the year of Live Gold, not a big savings, but beats paying full price. For wireless, you can find a used adapter for $50 or so, I did. Don't need a 2nd controller yet, Live lets me play with my friends and private chat, so it is better than them being in the same room, as no one can rip ass or drink your beer that way That makes up for the more expensive game library and accessories right there

To the OP; there is a distinct IQ difference between 720p/1080i 360 titles and Xbox 480p titles on my CRT RP HDTV, but the 480p stuff looked much better on my 17" LCD monitor, so perhaps since you have a LCD HDTV the quality difference I see won't be nearly as pronounced for you? I don't know though, I have a 57" and you have a 60", so the screen size might play a part in how noticable it is?