View Full Version : Screenshot comparison, Xbox360 and Wii
The new need for speed,
pic from Xbox version,
http://img.gamespot.com/gamespot/images/2006/187/reviews/933691_20060707_screen001.jpg
pic from Wii version,
http://img.gamespot.com/gamespot/images/2006/172/933687_20060622_screen002.jpg
Is it me or is the difference minimal, or is there a real difference at all? That little Wii may just be a pretty powerfull little baby....
That's not a good screenshot for comparison. A few shots of those cars racing in daylight against a very elaborate cityscape background might provide a better comparison. The XB360 & PS3 are simply more technologically advanced than the Wii when it comes to 3D rendering and relevant technologies (pixel shading, surface mapping, etc.). If for example, Bethesda were to take its hit rpg Oblivion and attempt to bring it to the Wii the results would (visually speaking) extremely disappointing. The Wii simply doesn't have the CPU horsepower or the 3D feature set needed to run a game like that with all its bells and whistles turned on. When discussing the graphical merits of the latest consoles it comes down to advanced, cutting edge technology (XB360/PS3) versus state of the art, off the shelf components (Wii). The former will consistently allow for better looking games but the latter costs far less to manufacture (and can be sold at a far lower price). Not that the Wii is hopelessly outclassed, Nintendo seems to be placing a helluva lot of emphasis on its revolutionary controllers.
I think the driving forces behind the Wii realized that for most people, good graphics are good enough and one need not break the bank creating and manufacturing a state of the art console capable of displaying astounding graphics. Even if an age where style seemingly triumphs over substance good gameplay always seems to beat great eye candy. Take a look at the phenomenal success of World of Warcraft, a great looking game but positively primitive looking when compared to games like Prey or Oblivion. However 6 million subscribers paying $14+/month to play WoW online think those graphics are just fine.
The Wii is more for innovation rather than graphics. Xbox360 wins that competition with ease.
The pictures you show are not in game screen shots.
professorspatula
07-11-2006, 14:14
The thing is these days, advances in graphics don't seem to be as big as the old days when things went from simple blocks to cute animated cartoon sprites and then to 3D. For the most part, enhanced water reflection effects and some more realistic shadows don't make a great deal of difference when it comes to gameplay. If the games aren't up to scratch, then it won't matter which console has the best graphics per se, although the media and grubby marketers will no doubt argue otherwise. Obviously the XBox 360 and PS3 will be able to handle more detailed objects and environments, but unless the game sets out to exploit this, the graphics capabilities aren't that important. In the case for Need For Speed, providing both the Wii and 360 versions are well coded for the machine (and not dire ports with crappy framerates) then things like loading times and the controller will probably be as important as which version looks the nicest.
The Spartan (Returns)
07-11-2006, 20:01
they look the same.
they look the same.
Nope, take a look at the upper center part of the Wii picture, note the flat grass look ... I don't see that issue with the 360 trees.
Not that it matters to me at the least, I'm a PC kind of guy.
I think the PS3 has the most graphical potential- IF developers ever learn to take full advantage of the cell architecture.
However, these screenshots show me the, graphically, the Wii looks fantasic- even if it is the weakest of the systems. :2thumbsup:
Bouchious
07-16-2006, 13:26
Does it really matter?
Playing any game at 30Fps or more and you don't see everything in a single so screenshot, I played PGR3 yesterday at a friends, yes it did look good but when you get down to it, it just looks the same to me as any fast paced car racer on any previous system.
I mean come on, 'flat grass'? So when you speeding down a road, furiously concentrating on winning, you actually notice these things?
Kudos to Wii for actually not letting us all become obsessed with graphics I say.
Alexander the Pretty Good
07-17-2006, 02:33
Even the Cube had passable graphics when the game devs bothered: Metroid Prime and Rogue Squadron come to mind. It wouldn't have mattered if they had shinier versions on other systems, either: both games were awesome fun. The Revolution will do fine if the games themselves play well.
Ab Urbe Condita
07-24-2006, 21:53
Man, I don't even care what the Wii version looks like, I'm not touching it with a ten foot pole.
Wanna know why? EA isn't incorporating the motion sensors in the Wii version.
What. The. Hell.
Man, I don't even care what the Wii version looks like, I'm not touching it with a ten foot pole.
Wanna know why? EA isn't incorporating the motion sensors in the Wii version.
What. The. Hell.
That's a nono for me as well.
Alexander the Pretty Good
07-26-2006, 23:52
What games will that apply to? CoD3? Just play one of the other CoDs. They're not that different. :rolleyes:
The Wii doesn't support HD or surround sound. The Xbox360 does. Enough said about power.
I'll still probably get a Wii though.
The Wii doesn't support HD or surround sound. The Xbox360 does. Enough said about power.
I'll still probably get a Wii though.
The cube allready supported surround, and had way better sound then the ps2 and xbox, I doubt the Wii won't have it. About xbox360, I got one, and I am not impressed, Oblivion looks nice but that's it so far. To make it even worse, the bloody thing is broken, won't even boot. I returned it, and got it back even worse, now it doesn't do anything, at all. The bloody thing is also VERY noisy, but I hated playing on it anyway. I hope the ps3 is better.
I do want Halo 3 though, and I want it NOW.
Bouchious
08-01-2006, 03:08
Nope, the cube did not have surround sound nor does the Wii, both do/will use Dobly Pro-Logic II which in essence imitates surround sound from a 2.1 output.
Nope, the cube did not have surround sound nor does the Wii, both do/will use Dobly Pro-Logic II which in essence imitates surround sound from a 2.1 output.
Oh? I didn't know that, I always felt that the sound of the cube has a lot more oomph then the xbox and ps2.....
Nope, the cube did not have surround sound nor does the Wii, both do/will use Dobly Pro-Logic II which in essence imitates surround sound from a 2.1 output.
At the risk of splitting hairs, Pro-LogicII is 'surround sound'(look it up on dolby.com if you dont believe me). It seperates out 5 channels + a sub from left/right audio cables. Pro-LogicII may not be as high-quality(particularly in the low-end sound) as it's digital counterparts, but I still thought it sounded great (on my Bose 5.1 system) coming from my GC for games such as Eternal Darkness. :bow:
The Wizard
08-03-2006, 15:28
Who cares about graphics? The Wii is going to pwn the X360 in terms of gameplay innovation, and will come close to it when it concerns graphics. Since the former is far more important than the latter that's a clear-cut win.
At the risk of splitting hairs, Pro-LogicII is 'surround sound'(look it up on dolby.com if you dont believe me. It seperates out 5 channels + a sub from left/right audio cables. Pro-LogicII may not be as high-quality(particularly in the low-end sound) as it's digital counterparts, but I still thought it sounded great (on my Bose 5.1 system) coming from my GC for games such as Eternal Darkness. :bow:
Didn't have an optical out. Neither will the Wii.
Along with the lack of high definition I think it is a big mistake. Maybe now HD isn't so important, but in 4 years no one will buy a Wii simply because it will look so dire next to other consoles.
The GC did look stunning at points. Star Wars Rouge Leader comes to mind.
AggonyDuck
08-04-2006, 21:57
Who cares about graphics? The Wii is going to pwn the X360 in terms of gameplay innovation, and will come close to it when it concerns graphics. Since the former is far more important than the latter that's a clear-cut win.
Well it's also a matter of games being released to the console and currently the coming games for 360 look just awesome. Just take a look at Mass Effect. :2thumbsup:
Evil_Maniac From Mars
08-09-2006, 04:45
Who cares about graphics? The Wii is going to pwn the X360 in terms of gameplay innovation, and will come close to it when it concerns graphics. Since the former is far more important than the latter that's a clear-cut win.
It's also cheaper. Nintendo has never let me down yet, and I certainly don't think they'll start now.
It's also cheaper. Nintendo has never let me down yet, and I certainly don't think they'll start now.
I believe that is the one factor which will give Nintendo a serious boost in the console race this time around, especially if they have a slew of name brand games (i.e. Zelda) on the shelves upon release and in time for the Xmas shopping season.
The XB360 is much more expensive to manufacture than the original XB and is most likely sold at a much bigger loss per unit. The PS3 is the most advanced console ever made and Sony's foolish insistence on cramming it with state of the art technology and proprietary components will likely force them to sell it at enormous loss per unit, even with an already bloated price tag of $400!
Come this holiday season you can bet that despite any protests voiced by bratty youths parents will readily pass over a $400 XB360 or PS3 (price does not include required memory sticks and other components) and instead opt for a Wii that costs anywhere from $200 to 250. And given Nintendo's reputation and consumer base the Wiii is almost guaranteed to clean up in households that have children aged 14 and under.
Ouch...
http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/06/28/news_6128295.html
Report: PS3 to sell for $399, cost $494 to make
Merrill Lynch Japan predicts Sony will lose more than $1 billion on hardware during its next-gen console's first year on the market--a sum it may not be able to recoup.
By Staff, GameSpot
Posted Jun 28, 2005 4:01 pm PT
According to the latest issue of Japanese magazine Toyo Keizai, Merrill Lynch Japan Securities has recently calculated an analysis that the production of a single PlayStation 3 console will cost Sony approximately 54,000 yen to make ($494), as of its initial release in 2006.
Merrill Lynch Japan estimates that the machine's main components--namely its Cell chip, RSX, and BD-ROM drive--will cost about 11,000 yen ($101) each. After adding the other electronics that will be used in the PS3, the machine's production cost goes up to 54,000 yen.
Given that Sony's PS3 will face stiff competition from Microsoft's Xbox 360, the chances that Sony will release its console at its production cost is slim. Under the assumption that the Xbox 360 is expected to sell at around $299, Merrill Lynch Japan predicts that Sony will sell each PS3 at the price of 44,800 yen ($410) in Japan and $399 in America. That would mean Sony would suffer a loss of more than 130 billion yen ($1.18 billion) during the first year of the PS3's release.
By comparison, the PlayStation 2 cost 39,800 yen ($364) in Japan and $299 in America when it launched in 2000. During its first year of release, Sony Computer Entertainment suffered a loss of 51.1 billion yen ($458 million), but it recovered the next year with a profit of 82.9 billion yen ($759 million), followed by 112.6 billion yen ($1.03 billion) the year after.
It is normal for game companies to take a loss on hardware whenever a new console launches, since they typically focus on acquiring market share rather than generating a profit during the first year. During the second year and afterward, they can recover the losses with the savings that come from mass production and with licensing fees from publishers.
However, Merrill Lynch Japan warns that the normal console business cycle may be disrupted if Microsoft cuts the Xbox 360's price when the PlayStation 3 launches. The report goes on to say that such a move could hurt Sony's plans, bringing an additional loss of 80 billion yen ($730 million) in its second year and 50 billion yen ($457 million) in its third year. Thus far, Sony has already invested 200 billion yen ($1.83 billion) into development and production for the Cell chip alone.
Toyo Keizai goes on to interview Sony Computer Entertainment president Ken Kutaragi, who avoided revealing the PS3's price but hinted that it would not be marked down excessively. "Whether consumers think a product is expensive or cheap all depends on the balance between its appeal and price," he said. "Our ideal [for the PS3] is for consumers to think to themselves, 'OK, I'll work more hours and buy it.' We want people to feel that they want it, no matter what."
"When Nintendo was selling its 16-bit machine at around 12,500 yen ($114), we sold the first PlayStation at 39,800 yen ($364)," continued Kutaragi. "The press was saying that it was expensive, but it was a huge hit. It's the same thing with the PlayStation Portable from last year. The Game Boy Advance is a same handheld gaming machine, and it costs less than 10 thousand yen ($91). On the other hand, our PSP had cost 25,000 yen ($229). But people lined up overnight to buy it, and it sold out on the day of its launch. It all depends on whether people want it. Of course, I'm confident that the PS3 is a product that people will definitely want."
Silver Rusher
08-10-2006, 22:15
For me, Nintendo can stop at the Gamecube as far as graphics are concerned. They're fine. I honestly have no idea why you would need to get any better than that.
I fear, however, that most of the morons, if you will excuse the term, who buy consoles simply because of their graphical power without paying consideration to any other factors except compelling advertising (and I'm sorry but Nintendo really do need to fire everyone in their marketing department) will go for the 360. Reasons for getting a Wii instead? Cheaper. Better games (From Nintendo and second-party developers, I mean). Innovation. Each one of these is far more important than the small difference in sound and graphics put together. If more people would only realise this, the 360 and the PS3 wouldn't stand a chance. I don't think PS3 stands a chance anyway... I mean, come on, $500 to make? They are gonna have to sort that out, and by the time they do and get it release it will be too late because everyone will already have a wii or a 360.
Evil_Maniac From Mars
08-11-2006, 02:16
Yes, Microsoft gets enough of my business from computer games. They're certainly not getting any more money for a system that's made slight improvements in graphics but lags behind Nintendo in gameplay, innovation, and, what counts in games, but too many people seem to forget: fun.
The PS3 is the most advanced console ever made and Sony's foolish insistence on cramming it with state of the art technology and proprietary components will likely force them to sell it at enormous loss per unit, even with an already bloated price tag of $400!
It's worse than that- the link you found was from '05 while the actual price was announced at E3 '06....
"Today we're pleased to announce the global PS3 launch details. We will make PS3 available via a two-configuration plan. One with a 60GB HD. And the other with a 20GB hard drive. Japan's date: Nov. 11. In Japan 59,800 Yen. The 60GB PS3 will have an open price which retailers will set. In North America [to launch Nov 17]: 20GB for $499, 60GB for $599. Europe has 20GB for 499 Euro, 60GB for 599 Euro."link (http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/08/sony-playstation-3-launch-details/)
It's worse than that- the link you found was from '05 while the actual price was announced at E3 '06....
link (http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/08/sony-playstation-3-launch-details/)
:dizzy2: ~:shock:
20GB for $499, 60GB for $599?!? Ye gods, a little bit more cash could get you a fully equipped PC with LCD monitor. No doubt the 60gig model will be recommended for playing the truly state of the art, graphic intensive titles.
For me, Nintendo can stop at the Gamecube as far as graphics are concerned. They're fine. I honestly have no idea why you would need to get any better than that.
I fear, however, that most of the morons, if you will excuse the term, who buy consoles simply because of their graphical power without paying consideration to any other factors except compelling advertising (and I'm sorry but Nintendo really do need to fire everyone in their marketing department) will go for the 360.
Enhanced graphics can be a good thing, the xbox360 isn't that spectacular, but the sharper graphics make it all very easy on the eyes. You will get none of these jagged edges which is really a plus, I must admit that I am starting to slowly fall in love with the thing. I don't think the Wii is intended to be a primary gaming system, it's a second console by nature to have along with the PS3 or xbox, hence the low price. I will be all over the little darling the day it's released, but I definatily don't want to miss out on Halo3 and Bioshock.
Pretty spectacular, new red steel screens.
http://i.i.com.com/cnet.g2/images/2006/236/932528_20060825_screen008.jpg
http://i.i.com.com/cnet.g2/images/2006/236/932528_20060825_screen007.jpg
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.