The ps3 and Xbox' s GPU' s both clock in at double what the Wii' s does.

The ps3 and xbox have 3 times the ram available.

The ps3 and xbox can display double the resolution of the wii.

The ps3 has 50gb of storage on discs, the wii has 7gb.

The ps3 can store 117 times as much as the Wii without memory cards, and the xbox can store 40 times as much as the Wii without memory cards.

Add in the fact that Live is the best online service to date, and that Sony is bringing home in, which could be an amazing service itself, while Nintendo restricts online until 2008 and you see an even bigger problem.

When its all said and done, the ps3 and Xbox are consistently 3 times better if not more(2x for display). Yes they cost twice as much, but when doubling performance, the price often triples or quadruples. So, value for money goes to the Xbox and then the PS3, or if you really want blu ray movies, then it' s the ps3 followed by the Xbox.

Sure the Wii is cool, but after what I pointed out, you need to stop arguing its a good deal, and a good price. It' s cheap in comparison price wise, but its also cheap hardware wise, and thats not something I want my new console to be.

Dagashi what the hell was the point of all that? Who was arguing that the Wii was as capable graphically as the 360 or ps3. Are you still trying to convince yourself or something because posting tech specs we already knew LAST YEAR. Are you actually following the argument? Your comment was the most useless excuse for a pissing contest i have ever seen. When did my argument ever discuss consoles graphical/multimedia capabilities?

The Wii' s not a good deal aye? So 5-6 million Wii users are so stupid they are incapable of figuring out for themselves what is a ' good deal' , or what they want. Thanks for pointing that out, maybe you should tell everyone how they should spend there money because only you know what a ' good deal' is. What a crock of $#!t. If the Wii wasn' t a ' good deal' then NO ONE WOULD BUY IT, plain and simple. thats how the market works. But (unfortunately for you) the Wii is still selling pretty well at the moment and has been selling better then both the well established 360 and the brand backed ps3, so your argument is ridiculous. As i said i am not predicting the future saying the Wii will win, i merely said it has the POTENTIAL. Obviously you & others don' t see it that way, thats your decision.

All you have proved is that you don' t think the Wii is worth it, nothing more.

The Wii is obviously expensive for us consumers since Nintendo manages to make money from it right form the start. That means the hardware is cheap.
Sony and MS are selling their consoles for a high price but they still don' t manage to make any money.
The price for a new Wii-mote and nunchuck-attachment is outrageous. Nintendo are greedy bastards.
I was very disappointed by the Wii' s high price so I see no reason to buy it right now when the games aren' t very good.
Thus, a 360 or PS3 becomes a more valuable purchase since you at least get the raw power and media capabilities if you don' t happen to find any good games.

Dagashi what the hell was the point of all that? Who was arguing that the Wii was as capable graphically as the 360 or ps3......................................long post ensues

I posted the specs because a lot of what this whole thread is about is what the console is capable of bringing about, whether it be gameplay, graphics, ai, or unique styles of games. Console capabilities have a lot to do with each of those aspects.

If you read my post I say

Sure the Wii is cool, but after what I pointed out, you need to stop arguing its a good deal, and a good price. It' s cheap in comparison price wise, but its also cheap hardware wise, and thats not something I want my new console to be.

so to answer you saying " Dagashi what the hell was the point of all that?" is already answered, which you actually go on in your post to acknowledge

I posted specs because they are facts, and I didn' t want to get into the whole back and forth banter of opinions. It' s a fact that compared to the Xbox or ps3 the wii isn' t good value for money. *Not to mention that the games which are significantly easier to develop, and of less quality(zelda excluded), cost as much as the other consoles. *(that last bit is open to interpretation I guess, and I shouldn' t claim it as fact)

To me, I view games like Mass Effect, Bioshock, Assassins Creed, GTA 5(possibly), Fable 2(without a doubt), MGS 4, FF13, ES: Oblivion, Forza 2, Little Big Planet, Mercenaries 2, etc, as titles that are going to offer more innovation, enjoyment, lasting appeal, unique gameplay, and change within the industry than what I have seen from the Wii, or what it has coming in the future. The argument that many people keep making for the Wii is that it will offer these things in spades. However, I, like many others, see very few, if any titles from Nintendo now, or in the future, that will offer these things.

Last of all, please show some respect. I have never gotten after you for any of your posts, no matter how much I disagreed with them. This forum has been very respectable as of late, and even Masterchefbkw and I get along well enough even after bugging eachother countless times in many threads.

The Xbox has 13 times the processing power as the Wii, while the ps3 has 31 times the processing power.

Wow, how did you get 13 times and 31 times that of Wii for the 360 and PS3. You need to get it through you thick skull that the 360 and PS3 are very close and if anything the 360 has the edge in the areas that count. Are you only looking at clock speeds and multiplying that with the amount of proccessors? If this is the case I have to say, that' s retarded.

You simply can' t compare them directely this way. Clock speed only matters when looking at a component of the same architecture.

Look at it this way:

All three consoles have Power PC cpus. I know that the PPE unit in the PS3 is the same as it is in the 360 except Xenon (360) has twice the cache as Cell as well as three PPE cores while Cell uses 7 SPE' s instead of the two extra PPE cores. The SPEs in CELL look interesting but they are certainly overhyped like everything from Sony. Personally I think CELL was a waste of money and I' m sure Sony only added them in the PS3 for much of the same reason as they added BluRay. Sony developed CELL with IBM and they intend to put it in other devices. So by having them in the PS3 they can start to cost reduce the technology. The fact is the SPEs in a console are not as beneficial as having four PPE cores as opposed to the three that the 360 has would have been, simply because they are such a pain to use.

Wii uses a single, possibly a 750CL PPE core which can' t be too different with the 970 core, of course in addition to it only being one core it' s clocked at a much lower speed. I still want to know more about the difference between the 750CL (wii) and 970 (ps3 and 360) PPE core. The CPU in the 360 is probably 6-12 times more powerful then Wii while it' s too difficult to say with the PS3.



The GPU in the PS3 is basically a 7800gtx with a few modifications, pretty good for a console actually. While the GPU in the 360 seems to be a bit better is based on ATIs R600 architecture that will be in their next DX10 GPUs with Unified Shaders coming out in a few months. Nintendo simply slapped into Wii the same fucking GPU they used in the GameCube only overclocked. Pathetic next to RSX and Xenos.

The 360 and PS3 both have the same amount of RAM except the PS3 has it split in half with 256mb for CELL and 256mb for RSX, instead of having 512mb globally for anything. This gives a slight edge to the 360 here as it' s obviously more efficient and more flexible. The Wii has 88mb of split ram and the ram itself is much slower then what' s in the other two, giving it much less bandwidth. Not that it even needs the bandwidth considering the GPU and CPU Wii has.

The GPU in the PS3 is basically a 7800gtx with a few modifications, pretty good for a console actually. While the GPU in the 360 seems to be a bit better is based on ATIs R600 architecture that will be in their next DX10 GPUs with Unified Shaders coming out in a few months. Nintendo simply slapped into Wii the same fucking GPU they used in the GameCube only overclocked. Pathetic next to RSX and Xenos.

The GPU in the Xbox is what has always surprised me. When it came out, no PC cards were even close, yet they managed to keep the price of the 360 at a fairly reasonable level. Even in todays market, a comparable GPU for a PC can easily run you $350 CDN. This is why IMO, Sony screwed up. Imagine if they had stuck a GPU in their console that was comparable to what the Xbox360' s was to everything else in Nov/05. That sure would have changed the way things are going atm. They really did do a good job with the 360, other than its build quality.....that certainly left a lot to be desired.

I think their split ram is hurting them more then their GPU. Their biggest mistake was probably CELL though. Cell is expensive and it just doesn' t perform as well as it should. Furthermore videogames are never held back by the CPU, the thing people notice is the GPU. Even if CELL performed as good as they said it would they are still bottlenecked by the GPU and RAM. CELL and BLuRay were both added due to buisness strategies more then to directly benefit the PS3. Even though I like the idea of having BluRay built into the PS3. The year delay and the price is what' s killing them today.

I don' t think Sony is dead in the water though, I' m sure they' ll catch up with a price drop, and considering the PS3 dual strategy of PS3+bluRay player and looking at BluRay sales I' d say PS3 is already a success. They' re just not after the same marketshare as they were with the PS2.

Nintendo' s strategy is brilliant considering the position they were in, I just feel they are ripping us off with the specs. Wii isn' t a bit less capable, its severely crippled compared to the 360 or PS3. Wii is like a castrated mouse. I' m just going to call it Gimp from now on. Nintendo Gimp.

MS did everything perfectely with the 360 in terms of design. My only complaint is the build quality. Severe console failure and certain parts like the DVD drive is just too fucking cheap. I' ve never had such a love/hate relationship with a console. Looking at the games coming out I feel good about my decision of buying it but I' m extremely annoyed that I' m about to get my second 360 replaced.

WTH are poeple comparng specs?? and talking total shit like:

Wii isn' t a bit less capable, its severely crippled compared to the 360 or PS3. Wii is like a castrated mouse. I' m just going to call it Gimp from now on. Nintendo Gimp.

Crippled to who? Texture whores??? If anything feels crippled its trying to navagate through menu' s ECT on a normal pad now im used to using the wiimote.



When people are blasting through great games with good graphics and great gameplay, Who gives a shit? Havent people learnt anything from the DS / PSP situation?.


Aslo, Mr Hecker seems to have back tracked on himself and apologises .
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3157914

Probably after seeing Mr Miyamoto' s Keynote stating " great Developers don' t need super powered hardware to make great games" Super Mario Galaxy, put all the dumb Graphics whore devs Right in there place..

GO Mr Miyamoto!!

It' s not just about textures it' s about everything. Saying that I' m a graphic whore is like for me to call you a motion whore. It just doesn' t make sense. You probably didn' t even read my posts.

The RAM in Gimp is the biggest problem. 88mb, wtf are are you going to do with 88mb? The 360 has mini Arcade games that will use more then that, many of these games cost 5 bucks and still poeple consider them to be a rip off. Not only is the Wii an overpriced turd, but the games shouldn' t cost more then 20$. With a few exceptions.

Mr. Hecker retracted his statement because he was told to do so, not because he had some epiphany.

Graphically

360 > PS3 > Wii


Overall technically

PS3 > 360 > Wii


Online

360 > PS3 > Wii


Gameplay possibilities

Wii > PS3/360


Best current value for money

360 > Wii > PS3

F3 the Wii is at a distinct disadvantage to the other systems, mainly due to the fact that not one developer has pushed the Wii to it' s limits, however when that is the case, then it will still lack on the technical and graphical side of things, most of you have all said that texture this and graphical that, but when you are shelling out £30 to £50 on a game, playability is not the be all and all, you want something pretty to look at, and that is where the Wii finishes a very poor 3rd and at a price of £179.99 I know I would much rather spend an additional £20 for a core or £70 for a premium.

But when all is said and done the Wii needs a killer app to show what it can do.

Ha, Nintendo Gimp. Interesting. While the specs are low and the cost is High for what you get, Nintendo is a Company out to make a profit and from a business sense they are brillant, selling years old tech in a glossy box for about twice the cost to produce? I have give it to them, but then again, they have been doing that for years, gameboy advance then sp. The Ds then the Lite. Same tech just looks and feels nicer. Nintendo sell you the same stuff over and over, How many times have they re realised Super Mario Bros?. Part of me feels that they just cant deliever on fans expectations for new games, so they just repackage the old ones and sell them again.

I doubt they will ever make another Ocernia, Another Mario 64. 3d was new back then, our expectations where low and We really didnt know what we wated. Now in 2007 Ocernia was been out done 10 fold and Nintendo is looking for a way to find the new spark, they cannot compete but they can try to get something new, just like the way 3d was new and exciteing, Nintendo hopes the new motion controlls with Wii/ds will bring that similair excitement.

But No matter how crappy the hardware, no matter how old the games, I think people buy the Wii for something other than the Nintendo Logo on the side, Nintendo Gamers play for the Fun, and Nintendo games still have that, Dosent matter if their Gpu is a million times inferior to the competeiton, its the games that matter. As if nobody here never heard that before.


But Wii is getting no new good games untill Christmas. Thats it' s main problem.

One thing though is that a lot of the extra power from the 360 and PS3 has to be used for HD. Nintendo themselves said that games could look great on a regular tv if developers only did the effort. It would of course be in a lower resolution. But as things are now we haven' t seen much of an effort.

I played my Wii non stop since i got it until last week when I got Crackdown for the 360. I' m definately sticking to the 360 when I' m playing myself, but if I have any friends round it' s Wii time.

One thing though is that a lot of the extra power from the 360 and PS3 has to be used for HD. Nintendo themselves said that games could look great on a regular tv if developers only did the effort. It would of course be in a lower resolution. But as things are now we haven' t seen much of an effort.

Thats true. The thing is, I would hate having to run my PC at half the resolutions it is at now. Asking 3rd party developers to optimize their games for lower resolutions when they 360 and ps3 can do it just fine isn' t a good idea. It' s already hard enough to get dev' s to optimize console to console when the consoles are basically equal. Now they want them to optimize for a console that isn' t even close. I can see them optimizing for the Wii when its an exclusive title, but not if its coming to all the systems.

Crippled to who? Texture whores??? If anything feels crippled its trying to navagate through menu' s ECT on a normal pad now im used to using the wiimote.

The lighting that the 360 has right now adds a ton to a game. It sets mood, it can allow designers to draw attention to certain details, creates a sense of caution in dimly lit area' s etc.

Beyond that, physics and AI are playing an increasingly large part in todays games, and for good reason. There is no way I wan' t to play with AI from 7 years ago, or have physics that are at their very infancy. The ps3 and 360 both have very strong CPU' s to run this, with the wii stuck at 728mhz. AI and physics can add a lot of unique, engaging, and fun experiences, and the Wii will not be able to take advantage of what game designers have to offer today.

When people are blasting through great games with good graphics and great gameplay, Who gives a shit? Havent people learnt anything from the DS / PSP situation?.

That has yet to be proven so far though. We know the 360 can do some great stuff, the ps3 is starting to prove itself already, but the Wii has one great game, which is also on the Gamecube, and is hardly different at all. There are also next to no games coming in the future that interest me. Until there are quantifiable games that prove the Wii' s unique controller can make games as fun and long lasting as the 360 and ps3' s, you can' t really use that as an argument.

I would also really like it if you stopped comparing the DS/ PSP to the Wii/ps3/xbox. Handhelds are a very different market, and certain forms of games suit them much differently, and do not greatly reflect the home console industry.

Nintendo simply slapped into Wii the same fucking GPU they used in the GameCube only overclocked.

Actually that' s far from proved, an overclock would not give the Wii 2.5 or max 3 times the overall power of GCN. The Wii' s GPU is more than likely a reworking and enhancing of the GCN chip with perhaps more pipelines, greater TEV unit and a few other tweaks.

Whilst it' s considerably more powerfull than any launch game has shown us (Mario Galaxy and Metroid are what early Wii stuff actually looks like), it' s not anywhere near as powerfull as some people think or believe. The majority of devs won' t use the machines potential, seeing as it' s so much easier just to port PS2 code with enhancements rather than make an engine written to take full advantage of what the Wii has to offer.

I can expect to see 30 million poly' s with multi-pass texturing simulating shader effects, bloom lighting, impressive fixed-function lighting and shading, all at 60fps. Not too shabby at all.

Ok, wait a minute, what are we talking about?
Is this about the Wii being weaker than its competitors?
Is it about the Wii being less fun than its competitors?
Is it about the value of the Wii?
Or is it about the software for the Wii?

I kinda lost the thread somewhere

Developers aren' t going to try very hard to make a game look as good as it can on the Wii. The Wii is so weak that games don' t have a chance of looking even close to things Xbox 360 and PS3 can do. So developers think people who pay Wii games don' t care about graphics and put minimal effort in that area. So the games end up looking even worse than they should.

The thing is, Nintendo is in no rush to supply the third party developers with dev kits. This goes back to what I' ve always said about them, Nintendo doesn' t care about making a great platform they only want to have a " new" console so they can release Nintendo games on. A Wii is not hard to produce, they have no excuse for their shortage or lack of dev kits. Once they' re happy with how many copies of TP they sold they will start to hand out Dev kits. Nintendo is the most cowardly company in the entire industry.

Go back and play Chaos Theory, Black, Ninja Gaiden, Strangers Wrath and Dead or Alive Ultimate on Xbox, REmake, Resident Evil 4, Metroid Prime 2 Echoes and Star Wars Rogue Squadron III: Rebel Strike on Gamecube, and Gran Turismo 4, Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater, God of War II (when released), Tekken 5, Soul Calibur 3 and Devil May Cry 3 on PS2.

Then remember that Wii can produce better looking games than any of the previous generation of consoles.

If that' s not enough then you' re a graphics whore.

We all like our games to look nice but you can hardly complain that Wii can' t do Gears of War or Virtua Fighter 5 because you' re not paying a lot for the console.

Developers right now are porting from PS2 and rushing games to take advantage of a lack of competition. Later this year there will be nicer looking games and even better ones next year. The problem for many right now isn' t that the games don' t look good, it' s that there' s arguably only one good game and that was developed for Gamecube in and ported to Wii. Nintendo don' t need the games right now because demand outweighs supply, but once it evens out they' ll be desperate for them.