Teppo Holmqvist Posted May 10, 2007 Posted May 10, 2007 Unless you want to claim "he's lying" then he states flat out that a Nintendo source told him it's a Gamecube 1.5, simple as that. Well, at least Wii's GPU is physically twice bigger than overclocked / shrunk Cube's GPU should be, and it has also far more transistors, which means it isn't simply overclocked Flipper like certain people want us to believe (simple overclocking wouldn't add thousands of transistors or double size).
system_error Posted May 10, 2007 Posted May 10, 2007 Well, at least Wii's GPU is physically twice bigger than overclocked / shrunk Cube's GPU should be, and it has also far more transistors, which means it isn't simply overclocked Flipper like certain people want us to believe (simple overclocking wouldn't add thousands of transistors or double size). Importantly a die shrink involves some cost aswell so do transistors and Nintendo won't do something just for the fun if they lose money. So I guess the Wii GPU/CPU are upgraded within certain limits ... the problem so far is that no developer yet took the rist to heavily invest into their technology department for the Wii. What I still don't get is that the technology Nintendo is using is again outdated ... as if a decent modern GPU would cost a fortune.
pedrocasilva Posted May 10, 2007 Posted May 10, 2007 Unless you want to claim "he's lying" then he states flat out that a Nintendo source told him it's a Gamecube 1.5, simple as that.This is not the thread for this, but here it goes... He is reffering to architecture, not measuring the power of the system. It's a simpleton way of putting it, since the system uses the same architecture, it's gamecube and then some more, but if you just throw GC code in you won't push the system, for the obvious reasons. That article is a mixed bag, to be honest. Knowing Nintendo there's a lot of documentation a regular dev lacks, otherwise; if all developers had it, cube documentation would have been leaked long ago, same for the Wii. On GC Capcom and Factor 5 (and rareware before them) had access to documentation no other 3rd parties had (Factor 5 even shared shader codes with Capcom). Nintendo always was like that, on N64 only Nintendo, rareware and Factor 5 could run their own microcode on the console, others had to use the SGI one. There's stuff in that hardware that unless Nintendo gives out for everybody to use (and implement easily) only a handful of studios will do. I knew that since more last November that the TEV had 16 stages now: "A hardware-accelerated recirculating programmable texture blender/shader arrangement circulates computed color and alpha data over multiple texture blending/shading cycles (stages) to provide multi-texturing and other effects. Up to sixteen independently programmable consecutive stages, forming a chain of blending operations, are supported for applying multiple textures to a single object in a single rendering pass... ...The number of recirculations may be limited in a particular implementation in view of real-time rendering timing constraints, but a reasonable number of recirculation stages (e.g., fifteen) can provide great flexibility in implementing a variety of complex shading models." That patent is from 2002, btw. It imples a "glorified" Shader Unit, not a simple TEV pipeline anymore. There's also new GPU diagrams of the TEV pipeline, the only patent modification in comparison with the original one is that the TEV has under it another rectangle with a "shader" indication. If it was just TEVx2 they wouldn't make that diferentiation, why do so if it worked the same way and did the same stuff? Hint: because it's more than that? but they wouldn't know since they lack documentation about that. You might be doing them diferently from Shader Model x.x, but they're programmable shaders just the same. That article is completly wrong putting Geforce 2 and Flipper/Hollywood in the same phrase, Geforce 2 hadn't got anything close to a TEV pipeline in there, meaning you couldn't program shaders in there, indeed, fixed function. If GC was like that you'd never seen volumetric fog, cell shading (like that of wind waker), light scattering, bloom, skining and other effects. It's a bold statement to say TEV pipelines could be used to multiple texture passes just the same, but it ends up not doing justice to the TEV's, that or Geforce 2 being insanely versatile despite it's age. (and it isn't). In the end you could question developers knowledge about the matter, since matt cassamassina was somewhat told Wii couldn't do normal maps (despite being possible to do on PS2), that the console was a souped up xbox just from the specs, comparing MHz "heh, if it's 729 MHz then it's as powerful as Xbox" this guy says it's very similar to Gefore 2... I guess ubisoft's Far Cry Instints team would say the same (they even said the console didn't do shaders). In the interview there's 2 insiders even, one says stuff like "Wii=GC 1,5" without going into detail; he was just told that, sure; the other goes on to explain but shows that he's guessing some stuff as it's not documented (which backs my claim about Nintendo documentation): an apparent increase in fixed-function "texture environment stages"--also known as TEV stages--from 8 in the Gamecube to 16 on the Wii. (The source stressed "apparent" because this feature wasn't described in the Wii's graphics overview documentation He's still putting doubts on something we knew a while ago, and if it's not documented and is more than TEV was, how is he supposed to use it any different? "However, each additional TEV stage use slows down the graphics chip more and more, so it is a trade-off. You can do more powerful pixel operations and you'll bottleneck the chip and not be able to do as many of them, nor as many vertex operations (since the pixel and vertex systems are tightly coupled on fixed-function graphics chips.) Eight additional stages mean more complex operations are possible The patent I gave above also puts this somewhat to rest: number of recirculations may be limited in a particular implementation in view of real-time rendering timing constraints, but a reasonable number of recirculation stages (e.g., fifteen) can provide great flexibility in implementing a variety of complex shading models. 15 stages out of 16... not bad, not bad at all; really creative to use it all up to the 16th maybe, but the roof is not that low either. Factor 5's trick was said to be actually programing in assembly directly into the GPU's ISA (as you might figure that is not available or documented on a regular devkit where TEV is used as a combiner), and even (not confirmed) to have used the CPU to manipulate the TEV pipelines (also in asm). Both of these are viable ways/ideas to reach the 16th stage with performance I guess. (and even without going to the 16th getting better results with everything) "The Wii's GPU has fixed functions for vertex, lighting, and pixel operations," They are certainly still there in the documentation most likely in order to maintain perfect compatibility (just like the TEV pipelines), but because of the lack of documentation their guess is as good as mine, we don't know. the GC fixed function is diferent (again) from Geforce 2 though, it certainly has a fixed T&L engine, but has 8 stages before it totally programmable, so it makes up for it. Then you have what Teppo said, the GPU doesn't even (aparently) have more 1T-SRAM buffers embedded. so it it's double than what it should and the space taken by that alone wasn't taken... it means it has more to it than that; just 8 more TEV Stages and texture 4 pipelines don't warant that. What I still don't get is that the technology Nintendo is using is again outdated ... as if a decent modern GPU would cost a fortune. I think Hollywood is decent, as for why... that's simple, backwards compatibility, a regular GPU wouldn't suffice when GC is a custom GPU that does a lot of things diferently (and you'd have to emulate). This way you don't even have to retrain your personel and can expand your existing engines further on that hardware, it's effective not only when it comes to hardware cost but also software. It should be a pain in the ass to emulate all that to the point of running flawlessly those crazy things Factor 5 did in there. and adding a flipper would just raise costs Look at PS3's shipping with PS2's Graphics Synthetizer GPU embedded, Sony wants to get rid of it just the same (just like they already did with the Emotion Engine for PAL systems) Nintendo just avoided the problems from the start.
DCK Posted May 10, 2007 Posted May 10, 2007 It seems that the Hollywood chip is not more advanced than the Flipper not only in clockspeed. Based on the 162 MHz -> 243 MHz jump, you could say that it has a 50% raise in power; but that's not true. The transistor count has gone up significantly, the onboard texture cache has doubled to 2 MB and rumour has it the chip has gained additional pixel pipelines and texture units, which with the improved shaders should make a definite improvement. Not only the clock speed has risen, but (at least part of) the chip's capacity to do graphics has been doubled, effictively making it the '2-3x' GameCube Nintendo originally 'promised'. I don't see how it matters and why we keep on having this discussion in this thread though, it is clearly not the point of this game.
Cube Posted May 10, 2007 Posted May 10, 2007 This game makes me really makes me want another Pikmin game.
DCK Posted May 15, 2007 Posted May 15, 2007 Awesomeness. The third party exclusives really are starting to show off quality.
Excelle Posted May 18, 2007 Posted May 18, 2007 This has just been dated for the 26th July in Japan. If we take Eledees as a benchmark, that would give us a Christmas release date. They've finished it a lot quicker than I expected!! http://gonintendo.com/?p=18074
Slaggis Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 http://uk.media.wii.ign.com/media/882/882221/vids_1.html New trailer!
Owen Posted June 24, 2007 Posted June 24, 2007 September 4th for US, IGN state. November for Europe..maybe?
Teppo Holmqvist Posted June 24, 2007 Posted June 24, 2007 November for Europe..maybe? December at earliest, and even that is streching knowing how slow Konami's loc team is.
darksnowman Posted July 12, 2007 Posted July 12, 2007 Not sure if this was in other screen shots but up there in the first one Dante just posted, well with the wee pie charts above all the characters it reminds me of Pikmin!
pedrocasilva Posted July 18, 2007 Posted July 18, 2007 Famitsu review: Dewy’s Adventure: 8/7/8/8 - (31/40)
Cube Posted July 18, 2007 Posted July 18, 2007 Famitsu review: Dewy’s Adventure: 8/7/8/8 - (31/40) So, "A little bit better than Mario Party 8" (going off their MP8 score)?
Hero-of-Time Posted August 2, 2007 Posted August 2, 2007 Looks like this awesome looking game has finally got a date for us Euro peeps. Everyone’s favorite water drop has gotten a launch date in Europe. Dewy’s Adventure is scheduled to hit on November 23rd. Source:GoNintendo.
Goron_3 Posted August 2, 2007 Posted August 2, 2007 It didnt sell very well in Japan. I even heard 3 digits sales numbers...
pedrocasilva Posted August 3, 2007 Posted August 3, 2007 I even heard 3 digits sales numbers...did they advertise it? I find it hard to believe japs don't like typical japanese stuff :p (even if we know they're not titles meant to be million sellers)
jammy2211 Posted August 3, 2007 Posted August 3, 2007 It sold 1334 copies in 3 days according to the Japanese sales chart thingy people. I don't have a clue how it sold so poor, I mean theres poor and then there's abysmal. I can't even think of a logical explanation. I hope it fares better in the Us and Europe, cause I'd to have third parties scared off by this sort of thing. I guess it was just overshadowed by Dragon Quest Swords, Power Pro Baseball (A Konami game selling very well in Japan on the Wii!) and Mobile Suit Gundam, which are huge games in Japan. Look forward to seeing how this one fares in the US now, I'm still undecided on a purchase.
Recommended Posts