Author Topic: If A=B and B=C, then Wii= 720p? (Read 6615 times)

Nile Boogie · « **on:** October 03, 2006, 11:47:46 AM »

Here a quick question?

If XboX 1 can do 720p over component and the Wii is, at the very least as powerful as an XboX, then why am I asking this question?*

*poster's note: I know the Wii is more powerful than an XboX, and I am well aware of the 480p 16x9 ratio abilities. I thought I might have missed something. Thank You.

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #1 on:** October 03, 2006, 12:27:38 PM »

Unless Nintendo has a design restriction to prevent 720p display, 720p display is possible. Nintendo is pushing 480p as the standard/recommended design format, therefore 480p is what we should expect at most.

hudsonhawk · « **Reply #2 on:** October 03, 2006, 01:10:20 PM »

I disagree completely Professional. We don't know enough about the graphics hardware or the Wii's firmware to say that it is possible.

Why would they understate what it can do? If they could they'd claim it was just as possible of HD resolutions, but that it was up to the developers to decide if they were going to support it.

In which case no one would - there were very few Xbox1 games that were in 720p, since it wasn't required.

JonLeung · « **Reply #3 on:** October 03, 2006, 01:16:53 PM »

Even if you can say that the Wii is more powerful than, say an Xbox, the question might be how is it more powerful? Perhaps it's more powerful in general but not overall.

I'm not saying the Wii can't do 720p, as I don't know enough either way, but just because the Xbox can do something doesn't mean that a generally-accepted-to-be more powerful system can do it, or do it as easily or in the same way. Otherwise you'd think all Xbox games would work properly on the Xbox 360.

It's like, just because a rock beats scissors and a paper is better than a rock, doesn't mean that paper can beat scissors. Now replace "beats scissors" with "displays in 720p", "paper" with Wii and "rock" with Xbox.

Ceric · « **Reply #4 on:** October 03, 2006, 01:26:31 PM »

I read most of a book called "Game Coding Complete" before and they mentioned that the GCN had a fix resolution you could program for period. While the other systems it could vary. I could see that happening again.
(I'll try to find the quote tonight)

BlkPaladin · « **Reply #5 on:** October 03, 2006, 01:27:50 PM »

I wouldn't hold my breath for it. HD depends as much on how much memory and how the system(console) is set up as it does how powerful the GPU is. The PS3 and Xbox360 where both designed with HD in mind. I doubt Nintendo designed the Wii for HD and its not something you can just drop in.

Ceric · « **Reply #6 on:** October 03, 2006, 01:29:39 PM »

I just have to say it. The 360 did. lol...

A firmware patch is suppose to up the 360 to being capable of 1080P. I know thats different...

*waves hand*

MaryJane · « **Reply #7 on:** October 03, 2006, 03:07:20 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
It's like, just because a rock beats scissors and a paper is better than a rock, doesn't mean that paper can beat scissors. Now replace "beats scissors" with "displays in 720p", "paper" with Wii and "rock" with Xbox.

absolute genius

Athrun Zala · « **Reply #8 on:** October 03, 2006, 04:33:05 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: hudsonhawk
Why would they understate what it can do?

a) Nintendo ALWAYS does that
b) simple, look at this syllogism

suppouse the Wii outputs 720p
average people think that 720p is just shiny surfaces, reflections and lens flares
X360 outputs shiny surfaces, reflections and lens flares
Nintendo is aiming at average people
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
average people think that the Wii is like the X360

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #9 on:** October 03, 2006, 05:19:48 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: hudsonhawk
I disagree completely Professional. We don't know enough about the graphics hardware or the Wii's firmware to say that it is possible.

Why would they understate what it can do? If they could they'd claim it was just as possible of HD resolutions, but that it was up to the developers to decide if they were going to support it.

In which case no one would - there were very few Xbox1 games that were in 720p, since it wasn't required.

Did you not read what I said? I implied that the Wii hardware has the POTENTIAL to display 720p, but by design Nintendo may never allow anything greater than 480p -- FOR PERFORMANCE sake. By saying Wii could potentially display so many dots doesn't factor in the resulting performance degredation that would result -- cuz i'm not talking about performance, i'm talking about display resolution (DOTS, PEOPLE), nothing more. Don't jump to your 5th floor conclusion when my foyer only goes to the 2nd floor.

1280x720 = 921,600 pixels

1024x768 = 786,432 pixels

921,600 / 786,432 = 1.17

720p has roughly 17% more pixels than 1024x786, NOT A BIG JUMP, considering 1024x768 is a PC resolution that's been around since GRAPHICS CARDS ONLY HAD 4MB, RUNNING ON A WIN95 MACHINE. Wii is ages beyond that. C'mon.

I'm not saying Kameo HD is gonna run on 4mb, but we've been playing with SO-CALLED "high-def" pixel-counts for quite a long time. I am saying Wii, by RAW MODERN COMPUTING HORSEPOWER alone, could throw around enough pixels to satisfy HD displays. But we all KNOW Nintendo isn't allowing it BY DESIGN, and ONLY in that sense, HD is not possible on Wii.

Nintendo can't fit a Humvee into a garage because Nintendo DESIGNED the garage door for smaller cars -- in the end it still fits cars. Wii isn't suddenly "worse technology" than your decade-old beloved Voodoo card. Having a worthy framerate is the hard part. Pixels are a piece of cake. That's all there is to it.

Hostile Creation · « **Reply #10 on:** October 03, 2006, 05:21:44 PM »

"It's like, just because a rock beats scissors and a paper is better than a rock, doesn't mean that paper can beat scissors. Now replace "beats scissors" with "displays in 720p", "paper" with Wii and "rock" with Xbox."

That took me so long to decode, but I have to agree: absolute genius. Nicely done.

lastexit · « **Reply #11 on:** October 03, 2006, 09:40:15 PM »

If you design a game for a one resolution it won't look or play the same in others. Nintendo doesn't want the experience to vary based on who has what tv.

This is quality control. Sony and MS would be wise to learn of it.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #12 on:** October 03, 2006, 10:07:28 PM »

He used = which is defined as the equivalence relation which is by definition transitive and as such A=B and B=C implies A=C.

Nintendo based the Wii on the Gc so that arbitrary restriction may still be in place. There's a chance it isn't but this being nintendo I'd say there' a good chance the restriction still exists.

Kairon · « **Reply #13 on:** October 03, 2006, 10:56:00 PM »

Maybe A > B, B = C, A > C would be more accurate?

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

vudu · « **Reply #14 on:** October 04, 2006, 09:07:10 AM »

You guys need to use less rock-paper-scissors in your analogies and more swords-axes-lances.

GoldenPhoenix · « **Reply #15 on:** October 04, 2006, 04:22:30 PM »

This is a bit off topic but I find it funny that during the N64 days it was a big deal for the games to have 680 x 480 resolution, I think it was even referred to as "High resolution" especially with the use of the expansion pack.

JonLeung · « **Reply #16 on:** October 04, 2006, 06:50:31 PM »

In a few years people will be whining that games only run at 120 frames a second.

BranDonk Kong · « **Reply #17 on:** October 04, 2006, 07:26:46 PM »

The games wouldn't look and different if the resolution was upped. They're specifically made for 480i or 480p, so if you could magically change the resolution to 1280x720, or 1920x1080, the games would either look identical, or look the same and run like crap. The Wii cannot output anything higher than 720x480. This thread is actually pretty pointless.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #18 on:** October 04, 2006, 09:27:43 PM »

In a few years people will be whining that games only run at 120 frames a second.

No, that would only happen if the standards consortiums for the TV standards finally decided to up the refresh rate instead of the resolution. Okay, you can double the refresh rate by drawing each frame twice (our widescreen TV in the living room does that, really pronounces the interlacing artifacts) but AFAIK no TV accepts a 100Hz or 120Hz input signal yet.

The games wouldn't look and different if the resolution was upped. They're specifically made for 480i or 480p, so if you could magically change the resolution to 1280x720, or 1920x1080, the games would either look identical, or look the same and run like crap.

Um, no. Even if they're made for that resolution they'd look better (specifically far-away things would be easier to recognize and the "jaggies" would be smaller) at higher resolutions. Never mind we aren't talking about upping the resolution on released games but allowing games to offer higher resolutions if they want.

Chode2234 · « **Reply #19 on:** October 05, 2006, 02:10:12 PM »

if you want games in 720p just make sure your TV does automatic upscaling. I think N, to keep dev costs down and ensure consistency, is limiting the dev tools to 480p.

BranDonk Kong · « **Reply #20 on:** October 05, 2006, 04:34:46 PM »

I think there are some PAL TVs that can do 100Hz. And, ok, maybe the "jaggies" would be less noticeable, but essentially the game is going to look identical - what I'm saying is, the polygons may look sharper but the textures are going to be the same, there won't be any new details that weren't there before.

Nile Boogie · « **Reply #21 on:** October 05, 2006, 07:07:28 PM »

My thread is NOT pointless! I have made countless pointless threads on this board so I know a pointless thread.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #22 on:** October 05, 2006, 10:50:25 PM »

Brandogg: And stuff will be more recognizable at a distance.

BranDonk Kong · « **Reply #23 on:** October 07, 2006, 05:55:07 PM »

That basically goes hand in hand with less jaggies.

News:

Author Topic: If A=B and B=C, then Wii= 720p? (Read 6615 times)