The Wii.

[Flannel Boy]

Retro did a lot with the GameCube, would you not rather see what they could do with a powerful system? Would you rather hear Mozart through mono speakers or 7.1 Dolby digital?

[Himu]

I'd like to see what they could do, but ultimately, I don't give a rat's ass. I'm fine with how current gen games look.

[Flannel Boy]

Deleted by user

[Himu]

The graphics do matter, but Dreamcast and up was the first time we actually got great playable 3d games that have good controls and graphics. It's the 16 bit generation for 3d. Also, psx games have more than just bad graphics. They also have terrible controls and gameplay, something that has since been fixed as technology has grown.

I'll be able to go back to MANY games from this era years from now while I probably won't do the same for psx, saturn, or n64 unless it was sprite based.

Correlating this gen to the psx era is not only silly, it's just ill founded and a bad comparison in general.

[APF]

How can you argue against better resolution and actual antialiasing, for starters?  Power is important even if you're not busting against the technology walls with your graphics--I have a very hard time even looking at current-gen games nowadays, even pretty ones like Okami.

[Van Cruncheon]

64 MB of RAM in the Wii is gonna hurt the potential for gameplay innovation more than it will the graphics.

[Himu]

How can you argue against better resolution and actual antialiasing, for starters?  Power is important even if you're not busting against the technology walls with your graphics--I have a very hard time even looking at current-gen games nowadays, even pretty ones like Okami.

I don't give a shit about resolution. They look just fine on my tv.

[Oblivion]

Yeah, I echo most of the sentiments in this thread. The worst part is that Nintendo could have easily had more power if they just made the case bigger. The problem is Nintendo INTENTIONALLY made Wii as weak as possible, making sure to keep dev. costs down for EVERYONE. I can understand why, considering Nintendo's software sales on the GC were a great deal lower than previous generations, so they didn't want to keep eating higher costs for lower payoffs.

Course, doesn't mean I like what they're doing. Honestly, though, a  game like Mario is okay with Xbox level power, since you don't need to do much, and clever art can go a long way. HOWEVER, if anything, I was at least hoping the hardware would be strong enough to do a next gen. Zelda justice. Mario doesn't need Xbox/PS3 level power, but Zelda does. Don't really care about most other Nintendo franchises utilizing that power either.

[Phoenix Dark]

Yeah, I echo most of the sentiments in this thread. The worst part is that Nintendo could have easily had more power if they just made the case bigger. The problem is Nintendo INTENTIONALLY made Wii as weak as possible, making sure to keep dev. costs down for EVERYONE. I can understand why, considering Nintendo's software sales on the GC were a great deal lower than previous generations, so they didn't want to keep eating higher costs for lower payoffs.

Course, doesn't mean I like what they're doing. Honestly, though, a  game like Mario is okay with Xbox level power, since you don't need to do much, and clever art can go a long way. HOWEVER, if anything, I was at least hoping the hardware would be strong enough to do a next gen. Zelda justice. Mario doesn't need Xbox/PS3 level power, but Zelda does. Don't really care about most other Nintendo franchises utilizing that power either.

Exactly. Nintendo seems to think that the Wii could only EITHER be as powerful/expensive as the PS3/360 OR slightly more powerful/weaker than the Xbox. They could have included shader support. They could have offered far more RAM. They could have made the system slightly bigger. But instead they chose to take the Gamecube, slap on waggle support, and sell it for $250.

[brawndolicious]

At least be thankful it doesn't have a bluray drive for people to bullshit over.

[Van Cruncheon]

I just wish they'd bumped the 64 MB GDDR3 RAM to 256 or 512 MB and eaten the cost. I'd have a much harder time bitching -- even with the DX7-grade graphics features -- if the system had enough to RAM to support for next-gen "epic" game mechanics and concepts.

[Flannel Boy]

RAM is dirt cheap so it doesn't make much fucking sense.

[Van Cruncheon]

GDDR3's somewhat pricey in terms of manufacture, but 256 would have added what -- $30? -- to the cost of manufacture?

[Flannel Boy]

Deleted by user

[Saint Cornelius]

Doug woould complain about a Ninty product if it was free and blew him every time that Blue light came on. It doesn't exactly seem democratic.

[Van Cruncheon]

not true, Corny -- I wub wub WUB my GBA SP.