backtop

Print 78 comment(s) - last by robinthakur.. on Aug 14 at 6:33 AM
Wii gamers yearning for something better than 480p may get their wishes

It’s no secret that the Wii isn’t a technical powerhouse, but even knowing that fact can’t help some to become used to the console’s decidedly less-than-sharp graphics, especially when the console is connected to a high-definition display.

Even if the Wii’s ATI-based graphics processing unit doesn’t feature the same roster of special effects that of the chips inside the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, the console could still benefit from a resolution increase.

Could a new, upgraded Wii that outputs in high-definition be in the works? Wedbush Morgan Securities analyst Michael Pachter thinks so.

"Consumers may hope for improved graphics, and my guess is that Nintendo will comply," said Pachter in an email to GamePro. "In two or three years, commodity prices for graphics processors and CPUs may decline to the point that a High Definition Wii could be introduced. If so, Nintendo will likely introduce one."

Nintendo is no stranger to releasing upgraded iterations of its consoles. The most recent example of this is the Nintendo DS, which saw an initial release form of a bulky, sturdy folding brick, and later reinvented into the DS Lite, a sleek, shiny iPod-like fun machine. Considering Nintendo’s great success with this strategy, it should not be surprising to learn that the games maker could be plotting a similar strategy for the Wii.

In a previous interview, Nintendo of America VP Perrin Kaplan was asked if a similar ‘hardware revision model’ would apply to the Wii, to which she replied succinctly, “Sure, absolutely. You'll see the ways in which we do that.”

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Even though....
By mdogs444 on 8/2/2007 9:48:07 AM , Rating: 5
Even IF they release and HD-Wii, which no doubt would be great this day in age, I see a potential flaw.

Wouldn't the game developers need to recode the games to have better graphics for use with an increased resolution?




RE: Even though....
By Marcus Yam on 8/2/2007 9:52:48 AM , Rating: 3
Maybe they'd be able to incorporate some sort of scaling chip to accommodate for different resolutions. Heck, PC GPUs are able to switch from low resolutions to high resolutions without all hell breaking loose.


RE: Even though....
By danz32 on 8/2/2007 11:17:56 AM , Rating: 2
Maybe they could make the user stick a cartridge in the front like the N64 :)


RE: Even though....
By deeznuts on 8/2/2007 12:38:37 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Maybe they'd be able to incorporate some sort of scaling chip to accommodate for different resolutions.
Pssssttt, you're TV probably already does this.

Crap in, Crap out. That's a saying in the A/V world regarding upscaling. IF you don't improve the source, don't expect much improvement regarding upscaling. You'll get some improvement, but not much, and as I said, most HDTV's already do this.


RE: Even though....
By jtesoro on 8/3/2007 1:05:11 AM , Rating: 3
While I generally agree on crap in crap out, I think one should seriously look at upscaling DVD players to improve quality.

For a long time I held off on buying an LCD TV because of the image quality using standard definition DVDs. When visiting stores looking at different models I kept saying to the salespeople that the pixellation on the LCD somehow made the experience worse than watching on a standard CRT TV. Only when I watched a DVD using an upscaling player did it become good enough for me that I took the plunge. So it should be considered over TV scaling.


RE: Even though....
By piroroadkill on 8/8/2007 11:12:32 AM , Rating: 2
You are TV does this?


RE: Even though....
By LordTerrin on 8/8/2007 12:32:36 PM , Rating: 2
piroroadkill, your my hero :)


RE: Even though....
By VIAN on 8/2/2007 10:05:45 AM , Rating: 2
no, the games would just be rendered at a higher resolution, which would look significantly better.


RE: Even though....
By Flunk on 8/2/2007 10:08:36 AM , Rating: 4
Maybe not, the textures would still be the same. Polygons would be sharper and maybe they could anti-alias everything but it wouldn't be a huge jump.


RE: Even though....
By OrSin on 8/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: Even though....
By omnicronx on 8/2/2007 11:07:12 AM , Rating: 5
but who is going to care? the xbox360/ps3 user who didn't want to buy it because it wasn't HD?
Nintendo has proven people care more about game play then about video quality. You have to give it to them though, Nintendo probably realized how many people don't have HDTV's right now, but in 2 years that number could double or even triple, especially with the US analogue TV shutoff. This being said eventually the majority of the public will demand HD content.

p.s never will there be an HD dvd or blueray player in the next refresh of the WII. the blue laser diode will cost half of what the machine costs in general, and nintendo is not going to go the route of microsoft and take a hit on console sales just to make it back in games/accessories.


RE: Even though....
By oTAL on 8/2/2007 11:39:11 AM , Rating: 2
The blue lase diodes will obviously cost a lot less in 2 years... That much should be obvious if you look at the DVD path.


RE: Even though....
By exdeath on 8/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: Even though....
By Madzombie on 8/2/2007 1:26:26 PM , Rating: 3
It's not so much that the controller is a gimmick, it's that developers are using it as one. Wii sports has shown that the controller can be used for completely new styles of game that weren't possible on the older system. Twilight Princess has shown that simply tacking wii controls onto a Gamecube game is not innovating in the slightest. I completed TP on the Wii but when I went back to OoT I was glad that I could do the same basic sword moves as on the Wii just by pressing a button.


RE: Even though....
By exdeath on 8/2/2007 2:39:15 PM , Rating: 2
Good point, and that highlights my concerns with the Wii.

People are calling it innovative when Nintendo is doing the same thing Microsoft and Sony are doing. Microsoft and Sony rehash the same games with HD graphics. Nintendo is rehashing the same games with motion controls.

I definitely see the potential of the Wii controllers, but potential possibilities that have yet to be implemented in a serious game is not a free pass in innovation for Nintendo any more than HD graphics are free passes for Sony and Microsoft. Motion controls and HD graphics aren't going to add depth to games that don't have it.

Quite frankly, gaming sucks at the moment, period.

Time to dig out my SNES.


RE: Even though....
By rbuszka on 8/3/2007 12:49:07 PM , Rating: 1
The corporate entity is Nintendo, not 'Wii'.


RE: Even though....
By VIAN on 8/2/2007 11:47:48 AM , Rating: 2
I think you underestimate the significance of this move.

1. If you have a 1080p LCD display. You would be able to to play the game using native resolution, which will look a lot sharper. Even if you don't have a full HD LCD display, a higher resolution will get rid of artifacts that you see at such a low resolution of 480p, thus sharpening up the picture significantly.

2. It will not only get rid of aliasing on polygons, it will get rid of aliasing on the textures on the floor. Something that Zelda for the Wii has a lot of.

3. AA can do more for image quality than you think. It will make the games seem more life-like.

I would totally buy into this if Wii was my thing. In fact when I tried the Wii for the first time, and still I agree - it would kick ass if it was in HD. No, it won't look Next Gen, but it will look significantly cleaner.


RE: Even though....
By PrinceGaz on 8/3/2007 10:50:12 AM , Rating: 2
Textures can be upsampled and interpolated to a higher resolution; although this does introduce some bluriness, edges inside the texture with large contrast differences (those where the higher resolution is actually needed most) can be interpolated in a way that does not introduce additional bluriness by using algorithms such as 2xSaI and better versions.

Although upscaling the textures with a suitable algorithm is no substitute for having higher resolution textures to begin with, it is far better than nothing and can produce surprisingly good results.

The only problem would be implementing it. I suppose they could add something in whatever API the Wii uses to send graphics, and place additional code to upscale the textures whenever an SD game is being played on an HD console.

Whether it's really worthwhile releasing an HD Wii in thefirst place is another matter. They may as well just wait four or five years and release an all new console, which has backward compatibility for Wii games (possibly upscaling to HD). The Wii is doing fine without HD support and for the majority of people purchasing it, that is likely to remain the case for its whole lifetime.


RE: Even though....
By Spivonious on 8/2/2007 10:08:37 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, but the textures would still be designed for low-res. It would be like playing GLDoom back in the day.


RE: Even though....
By BMFPitt on 8/2/2007 11:09:04 AM , Rating: 2
I'm entertained by the number of people who talk about how the Wii is worthless without cutting edge graphics, yet play 20 year old game ports on XBL.


RE: Even though....
By therealnickdanger on 8/2/2007 12:21:51 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
yet play 20 year old game ports on XBL

... with updated graphics. ;-)

I see where you're coming from, but keep in mind that those arcade games are under $10 and they aren't purchased because of their graphics. In order for the Wii to truly be considered a "next gen" console, it has to step up in the hardware department. No matter how you slice it, it's still a GameCube.5. This bump in resolution would be welcome, but it still wouldn't do anything the pixel-pushing abilities.

Leave it alone, it's fun as it is. Nintendo is content being fun and ugly and so are its customers. There's nothing wrong with that.


RE: Even though....
By BMFPitt on 8/2/2007 12:55:06 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
... with updated graphics. ;-)
Not with many of the ones I've played (i.e. Street Fighter II.)
quote:
In order for the Wii to truly be considered a "next gen" console, it has to step up in the hardware department.
What makes you think this is the goal? The target market for the Wii doesn't know or care what "next gen" is.
quote:
Leave it alone, it's fun as it is. Nintendo is content being fun and ugly and so are its customers. There's nothing wrong with that.
I wouldn't call it ugly. I would call it simple and effective. If Wii Bowling had photorealistic graphics, would it really be any more fun?


RE: Even though....
By exdeath on 8/2/2007 1:10:40 PM , Rating: 2
It looks ugly on a 1080p front projection system or on a 37" 1080p LCD when you are trying to shoot at something in the sky in Zelda and all you can see in the distance is a glob of smudged pixels and the precision of the controller is about 50 pixels.

Even if they left it as is but rasterized at 1080p with a true 1080p frame buffer without scaling, it would be 100x better. Even 720p upscaled to 1080p isn't too bad, it just looks a little fuzzy like excessive anti aliasing.

The only thing that looks worse for me is a Genesis on composite. It doesn't even have s-video.


RE: Even though....
By The Sword 88 on 8/2/2007 2:44:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Not with many of the ones I've played (i.e. Street Fighter II.)

Well Castlevania SOTN has a nice filter and looks better than the PSX version did.

quote:
What makes you think this is the goal? The target market for the Wii doesn't know or care what "next gen" is.

But if they released a new one that attracted people like me who care a lot about graphics then they would sell more consoles.

quote:
I wouldn't call it ugly. I would call it simple and effective. If Wii Bowling had photorealistic graphics, would it really be any more fun?

Yes Wii bowling in HD would be more fun.


RE: Even though....
By exdeath on 8/2/2007 3:16:57 PM , Rating: 2
HD would make Wii bowling no more fun than it would make Pong more fun in HD.

Games like Metroid and Zelda on the other hand... staying out of range of danger in order to see something far away and snipe at it would be a hell of a lot easier if you had more than 3 pixels to track...

That is the problem with lack of HD on the Wii, is that anything that isnt part of the UI or two feet from the character is a grainy mess. It really detracts from the immersiveness when you have to squint and shift around before you can recognize simple objects.


RE: Even though....
By The Sword 88 on 8/2/2007 6:37:17 PM , Rating: 2
"HD would make Wii bowling no more fun than it would make Pong more fun in HD."

Bowling in HD would be more fun for me because I would be like "Whoa, I can see that that one pin is dirt and that there is a scuff on the lane and everything looks real, that is awesome and thism is way fun to bowl with a wiimote!" Oh and its easier to get chicks with. "Oh no the real bowling alley closed at 10!?! Well we can wiibowl in my room..."

Haha

Anyway, I agree that Zelda and Metroid would be way better in HD


RE: Even though....
By augiem on 8/2/2007 1:34:16 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Wii to truly be considered a "next gen" console, it has to step up in the hardware department.


Narrow thinking.

And the reason why the games market is flooded with gaudy flash-dripping shiny BORING games. Consumers have been slowly brainwashed (by themselves) to see "good" (ie: REALISTIC) graphics as priority #1 in any form of interactive entertainment. Just look into your memory for all the games you enjoyed over the years. Now, with the modern "grafx #1" mentality, how do these old games that brought you so much _fun_ stack up? Well, by the brainwashed gamer's standards, they all look like total crap! They're not worth playing, I mean, just look at those graphics. But really, don't you remember how fun they were? Some of my best gaming memories involve running around with a blob of green pixels swinging a blocky sword.

It's the same mentality that says that music that doesn't fall into the this-week's-pop-sound sucks. Or all the millions of movie remakes HAVE to be redesigned to modern asthetics before the public can accept it. That's just plain ignorance and kills the heart of ART (and actually what the marketers WANT you to believe... Keep buying the new stuff! And make sure it's all the same so you can feel cool and fit in.)

I think we should all burn Picasso's artwork because it's not realistic enough for modern eyes. His paitings are not "perfect" so they shouldn't be bothered with anymore. Instead, let's all go stare at Nike ads and feel cool cuz we're different than everybody else.

Narrow thinking.


RE: Even though....
By Verran on 8/2/2007 1:56:29 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
In order for the Wii to truly be considered a "next gen" console, it has to step up in the hardware department.

Says who?!

Is there some board of approval that the Wii has to go in front of to be deemed "next gen"? Is there a secret rule set that defines "next gen"? No. Just because a console doesn't meet your approval doesn't mean it isn't "next gen". Generations are defined by chronology, not some arbitrary performance standard.

Besides, the console sales for April, May, and June would clearly disagree with you, as would about 8 million Wii owners.


RE: Even though....
By tajoh111 on 8/2/2007 4:29:44 PM , Rating: 1
To the more hardcore gamers, the Wii is a terrible system. The controller layout prevents some games from being played well altogether(fighting games that require six buttons).

What I didn't like about the Wii from the bat is Nintendo's arrogance that the Wii is going to be fun prior to even the public touching the thing. At least objectively for the most part we can judge what games look better. But something such as unique to each person as fun should not be so cut and dry.

What I think is people were caught into the hype of Nintendo's so called fun and just played Nintendo games for the first time. If people don't know atleast about the gamecube generation, games published by Nintendo are typically fun and simple to control. E.g Mario Party, wario ware, super smash bros, mario bros and etc. Basically what happened is people played the games on the Wii and attributed the success to the new controls not realizing that the games would be fun regardless of what system they were on.

I have a Wii and the novelty has worn off. People saying the Wii is next generation should really evaluate how the games look, not on how the game physically looks like on a screen but how you look like when you are playing. It looks nothing like what you are playing like if you were playing the real thing(its not a simulation its a gimmick).

Basically those laughing at the xbox 360 and Ps3 gamers for taking the wrong route this generation should look at PC gamers because in the end they are the least likely ones to get wii like controls and in the end they are better off for it.


RE: Even though....
By augiem on 8/2/2007 5:33:13 PM , Rating: 2
Well, I agree the Wii's control system leaves much to be desired IMO. But what I actually respect and totally agree with is Nintendo's attitude of "Fun First". Maybe the Wii's controller isn't fun to me, an old-school gamer, but you've got to admit there are more games designed for the Wii that are at least TRYING to be fun compared to games on the PS3 and X360 that are TRYING oh so hard to _LOOK_COOL_.

I'm just happy to see Nintendo, a company that has brought some great games out in every single generation, get more attention this time than all the dumptruck loads of jack-off tech demos. Can you say leather, chix, and blood? Seriosly, someone needs to outlaw teenagers.


RE: Even though....
By MeTaedet on 8/7/2007 7:31:18 PM , Rating: 2
I have heard this argument so many times: "Nintendo's goal isn't svelte, amazing graphics, but rather fun, innovative games". I bought into that, too, for a while, but then I went to IGN a did a comparison between the Gamecube, PS2, and XBox games and found that the XBox and PS2 had far more 9.0 and 8.0 games than the Gamecube. Even if you adjust for the ineptitude and unscrupulous venal reviews of the editors, one can still see that, despite Nintendo's attitude of "Fun First!," they really just don't have that much to offer. They found a few recipes and formulae that work - i.e. The Legend of Zelda, Mario, Metroid, etc... - back in the 80's and have stuck with them since, introducing few, or perhaps no, truly great and innovative games. And in fact, their flagship franchises, their cashes cows, too, really seem to be deteriorating quite dramatically; I was sorely disappointed by the dumbed-down, brainless-mainstream-consumer-oriented trash that was Twilight Princess. I could write pages describing why I found it to be a travesty, but I'll leave you with the following phrases: little freedom of movement/action (why wasn't I able to use the hookshot more freely for example?); items being able to be used only rarely and under very specific conditions; little interactivity; removal of traditional charming and nice, if strictly unnecessary, features; horrendously easy dungeons crafted for those with an I.Q. of 10 (i.e. the plebs); and so many other problems. I seriously resent that my beloved Legend of Zelda has been vitiated and profaned so that neuro-degenerated, technologically illiterate Gammy and beer-guzzling, factory worker Pa can understand and have themselves a "fun time!"

In short, Nintendo is mediocre in regards to both graphics and gameplay. The only area in which Nintendo excels is convincing the average brain-dead Joe-Schmo, which isn't hard to do in any case, that their crap is great wholesome family fun that just needs to be experienced, by using dumb advertising gimmicks and other gimmicks like the Wii controller, which doesn't have nearly enough buttons necessary for games geared towards serious gamers who are seeking an actual challenge.


RE: Even though....
By robinthakur on 8/14/2007 6:33:23 AM , Rating: 2
I think you're being a little cynical and hard on Nintendo for your own good really, considering that they are the one company which still makes the games which you like (liked?) at some point. Games get updated, live with it. Myself I apologise in advance because I enjoyed TP on Wii, and I've played all Zelda iterations on all consoles. I look forward to Mario Galaxy and Metroid as well as other up and comers, and I think its high time that the general public (i.e. not just Nintendo hardcore) experience Nintendo's quirky magic, which is after all is said and done, more fun and should be easier to pick up and play than it has been in the past. Maybe if you're that far gone, you should give up playing video games? Or Console games at least? The remote has its irritating moments for me, but recently playing Trauma centre on Wii, I can't remember having more fun in the last 6 months, its just so involving. It made the PS3 and Xbox 360's games which it is sitting in the shadow of seem dull by comparison. Trust me, the games have far more charm, humour and innovation (even the not so good games like Mario Kart DD) than anything available on its competition and there's more to gaming than what mark those monkeys at IGN give a game. They gave Grand Theft Auto and Gears of War pretty high marks i seem to recall, and I didn't really 'enjoy' playing them that much, so to me their rating wasn't very accurate. I genuinely found GOW most dissappointing because it ONLY had graphics.

That's why Nintendo's winning, and at least in the Uk, their marketing for the Wii and DS is soo much better, so its not really a surprise. Don't assume that the people playing it are idiots, I think that's very far from the truth. The technology has yet to be fully appreciated and used but give it time and I'm sure it will.

Of course for anything remotely fighting game-like, its not a good option, but that's why you have two other consoles/emulators to buy :) Besides, apart from VF 5 and possibly Tekken what decent fighters still exist? People these days (who buy games) just don't seem to have the skill to remember large movelists/combos i'm afraid. I still play KOF, but I thought I was the only one left lol.

RT


RE: Even though....
By Moishe on 8/2/2007 2:06:02 PM , Rating: 2
only if "next gen" is defined solely by graphics. Thankfully, it's not.

Nobody is saying that fun + HD isn't better than just fun... But HD without fun, is still crap.


RE: Even though....
By Rampage on 8/3/2007 2:28:29 AM , Rating: 1
Next gen is defined by a HD experience matching the TVs we use today, alongide using the internet we use today.

The 360 utilizes both technologies to a great extent. Its mastered HD as well as the PS3, has better games, and has mastered the online experience with Xbox Live and XBLA.

I like the Wii, don't care for the PS3.. but the only game for the Wii really is Wii Sports.
Not enough to actually go out and purchase one. Maybe for someone else, especially those who want "anything but Xbox" (I have a lot of friends like that).

Even though (IMO) it offers the best gaming experience on any console today overall.


RE: Even though....
By JimFear on 8/6/2007 4:30:11 AM , Rating: 2
The thing is that those games are classics because of their style of graphics (rhyme!), now everything is 3D and flashy you have to do something noticeably different and stylistic to get that same kind of appreciation, take Okami for example.


RE: Even though....
By FITCamaro on 8/2/2007 10:08:47 AM , Rating: 2
Not when the textures are only so big. It might look a little better, but not a lot.

Not saying its horrible idea, just don't expect anything jaw dropping.


RE: Even though....
By Aikouka on 8/2/2007 10:12:57 AM , Rating: 2
Low-res textures in high-res... I don't see how that would look wonderful. Take a look at the Samurai Warriors games for the XBOX 360 and tell me that it looks good. The game has been criticized for using "PS2 graphics" only with a larger draw distance.

The games would most likely not be rendered at a higher resolution but rather scaled to a higher resolution.


RE: Even though....
By VIAN on 8/2/2007 11:54:04 AM , Rating: 2
PS2 textures are so low-res, it almost might as well have no detail in the textures. PS2 textures are one of a kind and bringing up the resolution won't make it look jaw-dropping, but it would make it look cleaner.

I bet with the Wii, we'll see a more significant difference. However, if they are just going to scale the thing, then forget the whole idea. Scaling is a poor substitute, although probably better than what some LCD displays can accomplish.


RE: Even though....
By ObscureCaucasian on 8/2/2007 10:31:00 AM , Rating: 2
What about the games that don't have Widescreen support? Wouldn't they be SOL


RE: Even though....
By Moishe on 8/2/2007 2:08:26 PM , Rating: 2
The Wii does widescreen natively now IIRC... But regardless, the display would handle it the same as any other 4:3 input: black bars on the side (or stretched to fit)


RE: Even though....
By orcasbay on 8/3/2007 6:29:57 AM , Rating: 1
The issue with just rendering a game at a higher resolution means that you now need to fill in pixels for a much larger area (hence fill rate stuff and junk here). If that is the case then they need a new GPU to do rendering with so that they can maintain "good" framerates for their games.


RE: Even though....
By MonkeyPaw on 8/2/2007 6:01:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Wouldn't the game developers need to recode the games to have better graphics for use with an increased resolution?


I wouldn't be surprised if developers re-released their popular titles for an HD-Wii. I think the real challenge would be to make sure that the new HD-capable games would still play well and look right on original Wii hardware.

Consider that original GameBoy games didn't keep Nintendo from launching the GameBoy Advance and the SNES color cartridge adapter (which later GB games supported better). It could be that the original Wii titles will just look crappy and only the newer HD games would look good.


RE: Even though....
By awer26 on 8/2/2007 11:43:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
"Consumers may hope for improved graphics, and my guess is that Nintendo will comply"

quote:
a High Definition Wii could be introduced.


This article is based on a complete lack of evidence. Just because a "Wedbush Morgan Securities analyst" thinks it might happen doesn't make it newsworthy.

Hey bloggers - I'm someone important and I think that the next Wii will have a Blu-Ray player as well, so add that to the article too.


RE: Even though....
By afkrotch on 8/5/2007 7:08:21 AM , Rating: 1
Wouldn't a High Definition Wii with improved graphics, essentially be a whole new console?

Like taking a PS2, updating it's EE and Graphics Synthesizer to support HD. That would be a whole new console.

If Nintendo makes an HD capable console, it's not going to be the Wii, but their next console.


RE: Even though....
By piroroadkill on 8/8/2007 11:27:39 AM , Rating: 2
But the PS2 can reach 1080i (Gran Turismo 4) so technically it is "HD". I wish people would stop throwing around pointless shoddy buzzwords like this


I Have Doubts
By BradCube on 8/2/2007 9:51:52 AM , Rating: 4
If it does ever happen, I think it is a long, long way off - Long enough to be a completely new console. At the rate Wii's are currently selling I would think an upgrade to the GPU would be the last thing on Nintendo's mind. I would like to be proved wrong but I just don't see it happening. The logistics of it just don't fit.

If you release an upgraded console designed with a better GPU, then games released for that updated system would not be compatible with the "old" wii's currently available. Making games cross compatible would be a programming nightmare and require extra development/finances - both of which Nintendo are currently discouraging.




RE: I Have Doubts
By webstorm1 on 8/2/2007 9:59:01 AM , Rating: 2
I have to agree with you. I bet we will see the different colored Wii's long before they would change the hardware. Even the DS lite still plays the exact same games the same way.

Perhaps in the next go around Nintendo will try a more technical console, since they can afford to now. The low cost gamble has obviously payed off, but the more HD to invade people's homes, the less impressive the Wii will look as it ages.


RE: I Have Doubts
By BMFPitt on 8/2/2007 10:06:28 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Making games cross compatible would be a programming nightmare
If by "nightmare" you mean that they could leave the graphical engine basically unchanged and automatically scale the resolution up/down. Possibly adding some special effects encapsulated in IF statements. Maybe including both hi and low res textures, then yeah. Oh, the humanity!


RE: I Have Doubts
By VIAN on 8/2/2007 11:58:06 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, I don't see the nightmare he's talking about. It would be the same console with a more powerful GPU by the same GPU brand. All they have to do is recognize the GPU and render the games at higher resolution, it's not rocket science.


RE: I Have Doubts
By BradCube on 8/2/2007 6:04:51 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, you could be right.

"Nightmare" was probably overkill for what I wanted to say. It would be extra time developers would have to spend however. ie how does it run on Wii 1.0 compared to highres Wii 2.0 with new textures?

Also I would have thought that there would be some hit on the CPU by using new textures, models and a higher resolution. I understand that resolution wise the GPU will handle the majority of the work, but more textures need a greater amount of RAM to be stored in (or a we assuming that the wii has its RAM boosted also?). As far as I knew, I thought the CPU was actually the one calculating the polygons - then the GPU drawing and rendering them correctly. Correct me if I am wrong, but if that is correct then I doubt we will see any model upgrades unless the CPU gets an update also.

Either way, developers would have to start developing for two systems when designing wii games - I just don't see Nintendo encouraging that.


RE: I Have Doubts
By VIAN on 8/2/2007 11:58:30 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, I don't see the nightmare he's talking about. It would be the same console with a more powerful GPU by the same GPU brand. All they have to do is recognize the GPU and have the GPU render the games at higher resolution, it's not rocket science.


RE: I Have Doubts
By sxr7171 on 8/2/2007 12:00:33 PM , Rating: 2
Thank you. You got it. They just have to include both hi-res and regular textures on the disc and it will work with both systems. Now whether they would do that is up in the air as it isn't the typical Nintendo strategy, especially after the whole SNES CD-ROM fiasco, but they are now a new company and they may pull it off. They might need 2 discs for the biggest games, but that isn't terrible because it wouldn't surprise me to see 2 disc 360 games in the future.


RE: I Have Doubts
By akugami on 8/2/2007 1:19:16 PM , Rating: 2
No...it'll still work if done right. If your PC games can work with lower resolutions and lower polygon counts as well as graphical effects depending on the hardware you have, it should be able to scale similarly on any updated Wii. It'll auto detect between Wii 2.0 and Wii 1.0 games and render accordingly.

The problem is that I don't think it'll happen. In two years time, it'll be another year to two years before they release a true successor to the Wii. I think we'll be seeing a new console from Nintendo in 2010 (or at least announced then). A safe guess would be with updated motion control and updated multi-core cpu along with better graphics with physics co-processor. A safe guess on graphics would be roughly on par with what the PS3 is capable of now. I do hope they innovate on the control again, though I doubt it'll be as different as the Wiimote was.

Graphically I think the PS3 and Xbox 360 has hit close to the point of diminishing returns. The graphics are pretty realistic and for the overwhelming majority of people who play games, even those with fancy HD systems, it's more than good enough.

The hardcore will demand nothing less than true lifelike graphics. As if you're watching, or acting out, a movie. For Joe Gamer, the Wii is currently slightly below what they want but at the same time it's good enough to get an enjoyable game. When we move into the current high end such as with Geforce 7 and 8 series (or Radeon X1900 and up), we are seeing graphics that for the majority of gamers will be as good as it needs to be.

Either way, I do not expect a new Nintendo console in two years time. Nintendo will likely release a new Gameboy. Perhaps the "true" successor to the Gameboy line since the DS is not suppose to be a direct successor.


RE: I Have Doubts
By Moishe on 8/2/2007 2:17:14 PM , Rating: 2
I think it's quite possible that Nintendo realized that they were risking a lot with the new controller scheme and didn't want to risk a new controller with a game system that was sold at a loss. It would be taking a risk with the added risk of throwing away a lot of money if the new system didn't catch on. At least the way is it now, they are making money on each console. It the Wii had failed they would have lost the R&D for the controller but they wouldn't have lost money on the console itself.

Now that they've proven the controller will sell, they can simply release a new console in normal schedule (4-6 years) and that one will have the updated graphics.

Frankly I think they are pretty smart about the whole thing. They are letting Sony and MS pay the cutting edge prices for HD gaming and Nintendo can use their competitor's investment in the future without incurring the same cost. By the time the next Nintendo console comes out 720p gaming will be old news and MUCH cheaper.


news?
By Verran on 8/2/2007 10:04:01 AM , Rating: 5
So the news here is that Nintendo might update the Wii in two to three years.

I guess the only question I've got is whether this analyst's PHD is in Rocket Science or Quantum Physics. What's next Sparky? A prediction that the DS could get smaller sometime in the next decade?




RE: news?
By Vanilla Thunder on 8/2/2007 10:20:30 AM , Rating: 2
I'm with you. This blog post provides nothing but speculation of things that most likely will not happen anytime soon. Tacking an analyst's opinion on it doesn't change the fact that this is guesswork. Pure fluff.

Vanilla


RE: news?
By thejez on 8/2/2007 10:49:22 AM , Rating: 1
hahah i was going to say the same thing... this is dumbest thing i have ever read... if they dont have HD in 2-3 years then Nintendo is completely retarded...


RE: news?
By randomlinh on 8/2/2007 11:44:58 AM , Rating: 2
Completely agree here. This has been speculated since the beginning. Why? Because all we have to do is look at the GBA, GBA SP, DS, DS Lite... we'll have WiiHD eventually.

And you know what, I will probably end up buying it. As much as everyone likes to tout "It's not about the graphics," as a human, you can't tell me you wouldn't like to have that upgrade.

The only thing I see issue with is they figure out a better way for the controller button layout and render my four controllers useless.


Not Going to Happen
By nowayout99 on 8/2/2007 1:00:53 PM , Rating: 3
Speculating on such a topic is useless. This analyst doesn't know what he's talking about. I suspect the poster doesn't really either, or else why give this issue credibility by posting it.

There is a huge difference between upgrading the Wii with HD graphics and upgrading the DS to DS Lite.

The DS Lite is the same exact machine as the DS. The changes were superficial -- brighter backlight, smaller form factor, etc.

An HD Wii would segment the Wii's market, and break compatibility with the tens of millions that would have sold by that point. Nintendo will NOT do that. They won't go HD until the Wii's lifecycle is officially finished, and they're certainly not going to cut the Wii's lifecycle short to only 3-4 years if they're having this much success with it.




RE: Not Going to Happen
By SirLucius on 8/2/2007 2:07:43 PM , Rating: 2
I agree.

How many times in the past has Nintendo "updated" a console with a new version (and I'm not talking superficial color updates) effectively splitting their user base into parts? Even within the handheld market, never. All of the DS and Gameboy revisions have occured long after the original release, and are ususally nothing more than a comestic change. The hardware remains the same.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Part of Nintendo's success has come from a simple marketing plan: one console. None of this Core, Premium, Elite, b/s; no 60GB and 80GB versions with confusion as to which is superior; you have one choice. Take it or leave it. People get confused when it comes to having 2 or 3 versions of the same system, and they also feel like they are getting ripped off by purchasing the "lesser" system. It just creates more headaches than it's worth. Why would Nintendo, who has clearly decided to follow a path of simplification, complicate matters?

Aside from all that, Nintendo made it very clear that graphics were not an important issue with the Wii. They've decided to focus on making fun games - looks are an afterthought. What makes people think they'd care about currently supporting HD gaming when the majority of their user base isn't even thinking about high definition gaming?

I'd be willing to bet the next Nintendo system (probably 6 years from now) will have HD support because by that time, HD entertainment will be much more of a standard than it currently is. There's no reason for Nintendo to try to get ahead of the game here, we all saw what happened to Microsoft.


By SilthDraeth on 8/2/2007 10:20:12 AM , Rating: 4
Almost none...
Nintendo was co-developing, with Sony, a cd add on for the Super NES, but decided not to release it, thus was born the original Playstation.

N64, had a RAM cart upgrade that was used for a few games, but it wasn't a full system upgrade.
In Japan they released the DD which allowed for some games to be upgraded, ie race games having new tracks added etc, but it wasn't a upgrade to the standalone hardware.

Gamecube, may have had a special addition rerelease that could play dvd movies. But I am not sure about that. But that still wasn't really any hardware upgrade, it was just adding some functionality on a "special edition" limited release.

Wii, why bother? An upgrade to HD won't do much for any existing games. Isn't needed on the system anyways. It is selling like hot cakes as it is.

I firmly believe Nintendo's next home console will be a full HD console. Not a rehashed Wii.




By that time...
By Spivonious on 8/2/2007 10:25:57 AM , Rating: 2
By the time they would upgrade the innards of the Wii, they may as well just release the Wii 2. It would make it much easier on the developers.




RE: By that time...
By Dactyl on 8/6/2007 2:26:29 AM , Rating: 2
the innards of the Wii

You know, you could make that into just one word

"Wiinards"

Catchy, huh?


Upgrade seems rather silly
By Murst on 8/2/2007 10:46:29 AM , Rating: 2
Lets see... the Wii has been out for 9 months or so. In a couple years, I'm guessing that the Wii will have HD... but it will be called Wii2 or WiiHD or something like that. It will not be the original console, but it will have the same relationship to the Wii that the Wii has to the GameCube - it will be able to play older Wii games, but the older Wii will not play games for the new console.

As it is right now, the Wii isn't as horrible at playing on HD screens as people make it out to be. I have it hooked up to my 1080p Panny plasma (50"), and sitting usually 5-8 feet away everything looks fine. Of course, games aren't realistic and I have no doubt that a game like GT5 could never exist on the Wii, but that's not what the Wii is trying to achieve.

I guess my point is... the Wii is still fun w/o HD support right now, and when they do put it in, it just wouldn't seem to make sense to also keep it in the same gen as the current console.




RE: Upgrade seems rather silly
By sxr7171 on 8/2/2007 12:06:33 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah I agree it looks just fine on HDTV but not optimal. It wouldn't surprise me if they just release a whole new console in 2 years from now since they really didn't have much R&D costs on the Wii and I think the market could support another $250 console in late 2009. Now Sony and MS have to ride out their 5 year console lifespans because of how much they spent on development and the huge losses they took on hardware but Nintendo doesn't.

The second thing is that the original Xbox had HD, and it also had some amazing graphics. If what they say about the Wii being as powerful or slightly more powerful than the Xbox, then we should be seeing some really good graphics on the Wii. I don't understand why it seems that the current Wii games are really under utilizing the Wii hardware. Most Wii games don't even come up to the best Gamecube games yet in graphics.


It's obvious...
By CZroe on 8/2/2007 1:12:00 PM , Rating: 2
It's obvious to me that any potential HD Wii would be a "Wii 2" containing new hardware with original Wii/Gamecube hardware included and a higher price. This is exactly what Nintendo did with the Gameboy as time went on... shared screen , link port, and buttons; but dual-voltage dual-hardware with a cartridge-activated switch to engage the included GB Color hardware in the GB Advance.

Think about it: Once the Wii's technical inferiority is obvious in a couple years, the costs of hardware nearly equivalent to the XBOX 360 and PS3 will be MUCH cheaper. By staying behind the curve and just implementing them as they become cheap, they will always be able to keep costs low. It will be very difficult to get an engineer to design a new GPU with the obsolete features of the Gamecube GPU inside, so it makes sense just to include a new one for new games. *Perhaps* they'd use a compatible CPU, but I'd be willing to be that even that would be totally new in an HD Wii.




RE: It's obvious...
By CZroe on 8/2/2007 1:16:22 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, and it's obvious because this is what Sony already does with the PS3 and what they DID with the PS2 (including the hardware from the previous generation). Sony does it from the get-go and loses tons of money by over-powering the system while Nintendo's strategy is to buy time with something new (motion controls) and implement comparable performance later (when it's cheap).


Ps3
By SavagePotato on 8/2/2007 6:58:17 PM , Rating: 2
Personally I don't think the ps3 is trying to look that "cool" at all. Actually I find it pretty ugly. I have a ps3 as of very recently and have been happier than expected with it. Haven't had a console since the old sega genesis, but I am really enjoying the multi functionality of the ps3. It is fantastic as a DVD and Blu ray player with the blu ray remote.

I have been what you would call a hardcore PC gamer for quite some time, spending alot of money on it over the years. I'd have to say I've been enjoying playing games on the ps3 more than I thought I would, since I bought it primarily as a Blu ray player.

However i could care less about what other people think of it as a status symbol or how "next gen" it is. It does what I had hoped it would do and does it well. In the end thats what people should be buying things for.




RE: Ps3
By piroroadkill on 8/8/2007 11:37:51 AM , Rating: 2
You could care less? Then why don't you


Analysts Are Nothing Special
By Dactyl on 8/2/2007 10:43:36 PM , Rating: 2
Analysts are useless.

They are no more accurate than the average forum poster at THG.

They have no special training or knowledge. No crystal ball.

They get paid to make predictions about the future, but their predictions are no more accurate than anyone else's.

It's best to ignore them.




By tkSteveFOX on 8/4/2007 9:04:53 AM , Rating: 2
Everyone is forgetting that the Wii`s graphics due to the lower resolution do look good.See Super Mario Galaxy.It looks next gen as the PS3 and X360 games look.It has all sorts of shading and very nice blur effects and lightning.And Corruption also looks very nice.And these are the first generation Wii games.Developers will find out a way to get even more out of the system.To all who say that the Wii is just a vamped gamecube see SM Galaxy and you will know that an upgraded frequency wise console couldn`t produce such graphics.My guess is that nintendo will come out with a new console in the next three years and it will be more powerful than the PS3 and the X360(to my opinion the 360 is superior in graphics to the PS3).


THX Nintendo
By SaintSinner1 on 8/2/2007 9:47:13 AM , Rating: 2
hehehehe OK I'm not going o buy Wii I will wait :)




Sweet
By EnderJ on 8/2/2007 12:05:42 PM , Rating: 2
Hi-Def mushroom hunting while enjoyin the Wii-HD(Weed)




they should
By ttnuagadam on 8/2/2007 1:42:35 PM , Rating: 2
they should implement it if for no other reason than for the internet tv portion of the console. the wiimote finally makes TV web browsing something thats doable.




By firewolfsm on 8/2/2007 5:36:30 PM , Rating: 2
The only possible improvement I see for the Wii's graphics is an updated unit with an upscaler, which, unfortunately, won't do much. Anything else is impossible. The DS Lite brought some physical improvements for weight, backlights, etc, but changing the actual hardware would require new code, and would be incompatible with older Wii systems. This "analyst" has no idea what he's talking about. The graphics won't get better for at LEAST 4 more years when the next gen comes out.

The Wii is a successful system, why would they bother updating it?




Wee2
By Anonimous on 8/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: Wee2
By bkm32 on 8/2/2007 12:19:10 PM , Rating: 1
No, it's the Wii-Wii.


RE: Wee2
By InsaneGain on 8/2/2007 12:52:39 PM , Rating: 1
I'm sure people will be playing with their Wii-Wii's all day.


"If they're going to pirate somebody, we want it to be us rather than somebody else." -- Microsoft Business Group President Jeff Raikes

Related Articles










botimage
Copyright 2013 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki