Gabe N diss PS3 - praises Wii

You gotta realize that the Wii only has 80 Mb of ram. A Valve game converted to the Wii would have to be crunched BIG time

Maybe they could port over Codename Gordon. HL2 on the Wii would be pretty butchered, I'd think.

Yeah, but that's a 2d game, and to me the proper way to use Wii's controls in a 2d game is by using the wiimote only, flip it 90° and use it as a normal pad.

A classic Half Life though would be cool. It'd actually be nice to see a whole range of classic old games make it to the Wii in a "Golden Games" collection of some kind

I was kidding about Codename Gordon

NO YOU WEREN'T!

Now come on Magnar, you and I both know it could turn out to be the best looking Wii game so far

Didn't HL2 get ported to the Xbox fairly successfully? If that 64mb wonder could handle it then the Wii should be able to, even if nowhere near as beautifully as a PC or a 360/PS3. Though I still think if you're after deeply cinematic gaming like Valve provide, you're better off with the number crunchers rather than the physical fun of the Wii.

wii will not win next gen war

CPU IBM Broadway 729MHz

Internal Storage 512MB Flash Memory

GPU ATI Hollywood Supported Resolution up to 480p

Optical Disc Drive 8cm GameCube/12cm Wii

12cm Disc Capacity 4.7GB (single) / 8.5GB (dual)

lol

The way Rayman was made, the idea was more "Make it for the PS2, it'll fit on the Wii ok". That's how next gen our processes were Hell even Nintendo said it. it's all about the gaming experience, not the high res hardware.

If you look at Zelda, it's a GCN game.

Why are the specs so shit?

Quote from Pericolos0

hl2 with the wiimote would be seriously awesome though

Yeah, I remain really surprised about the PS3's relatively shitty 256mb of memory. Apparently they couldn't even get Linux -- well known for running on just about anything -- to run smoothly with media playback and such because of the RAM.

Even the 360 isn't sitting that pretty with its 512mb of RAM, even though it's the best of the three.

In general though, I don't buy consoles for graphics; that's why the Wii's relative lack of strength doesn't bother me too much, as I know games like Zelda: Twilight Princess and Mario Galaxy will kick ass regardless. If I really want gut-wrenching graphics, I'll just upgrade my PC; even a non-cutting-edge machine with a modest budget can outdo the current generation of consoles as they're already falling behind, whether 360/PS3 zealots want to admit it or not -- an ongoing tragedy of graphics centric consoles.

haha, its so true about he ps3. They should have just made it a grill instead

I think it’s fair to say only PC Gamers give a shit about specifications and how many maps you can apply to the millions of polygons on the screen while still achieving a smooth 60fps. The Playstation 2 was ridiculously weak in power even on release, but after 4 years it's still got some life left in it.

I think any comparison between the Wii and another console is absurd. Sure, bitch about the developer support all you want, but the Wii is distinctly unlike PS3 or 360. When you think of a Wii, you see 4 people (usually all racial minorities) looking way too excited throwing shapes in their living rooms – possibly with one looking dumbfounded with a Wii-Remote sailing at high velocity towards the TV. It’s predominately multiplayer utilising the Wii-remote shtick. The other consoles are much more sensible and forlorn.

And while there’s nothing wrong with that at all (the N64 was predominately party games), I don’t see it doing better than the PS3 or 360. The big Japanese games, aside from Nintendo’s own, still seem to be coming out on Sony’s console and ultimately that’s what people are after. Sure Square-Enix will drop Chronicles and Tactics on the Wii because, well, that’s a shitload of money and mugs like me will buy one for it (even after I did this with the Game Cube), but their big franchise is sticking with the PS3. And that's what matters, or at least matters more than the texture memory.

Quote from Taylor

I think it’s fair to say only PC Gamers give a shit about specifications and how many maps you can apply to the millions of polygons on the screen while still achieving a smooth 60fps. The Playstation 2 was ridiculously weak in power even on release, but after 4 years it's still got some life left in it.I think any comparison between the Wii and another console is absurd. Sure, bitch about the developer support all you want, but the Wii is distinctly unlike PS3 or 360. When you think of a Wii, you see 4 people (usually all racial minorities) looking way too excited throwing shapes in their living rooms – possibly with one looking dumbfounded with a Wii-Remote sailing at high velocity towards the TV. It’s predominately multiplayer utilising the Wii-remote shtick. The other consoles are much more sensible and forlorn.

And while there’s nothing wrong with that at all (the N64 was predominately party games), I don’t see it doing better than the PS3 or 360. The big Japanese games, aside from Nintendo’s own, still seem to be coming out on Sony’s console and ultimately that’s what people are after. Sure Square-Enix will drop Chronicles and Tactics on the Wii because, well, that’s a shitload of money and mugs like me will buy one for it (even after I did this with the Game Cube), but their big franchise is sticking with the PS3. And that's what matters, or at least matters more than the texture memory.

I agree with most of that. My big question about the longevity of the Wii and it's overall sell through is going to be who steps up to the plate besides Nintendo. What other developers out there are going to be able to make some memorable game using the wiimote that really reaches audiences. To me, that was where the GC failed. Over 90% of the big games were out of Nintendo (or a developer working for Nintendo).

tbh... make a starwars game, with a lightsaber wiimote... and ill buy it and waste my life away on it.