Far Cry Vengence Wii

[The Bard]

Actually, RS2 only ran at a consistent 30fps.

[pedrocasilva]

Actually, RS2 only ran at a consistent 30fps.

No, mostly not.

 

Rogue Leader runs at 60 frames in some levels and at 60 / 30 in others.

Source: http://cube.ign.com/articles/165/165337p1.html

 

Mostly at 60 frames with some (few) 30 frames stages... same for RSIII actually.

 

So yeah, GC did 15 million polygons per second at 60 frames per second on launch.

 

Framerates where locked unless you forced the engine in ways it was not supposed to. (like dives when flying over the water, those were running at 30 frames though). What permited such high polycounts was that you actually don't need as much geometry in space levels

 

The game was developed under 6 months though, RSII could run all those in 60 frames, easily.

 

Interview about RSIII:

 

NP: I'm not sure if it's possible but in what ways has Rogue Squadron 3 been visually improved?

 

BT: Rebel Strike has a new atmospheric lighting engine, which simulates the distribution of light in a more or less physically correct way in real-time and the amount of streaming we are doing. A brand new engine was developed in order to support the multiplayer. The bonus side effect of that is we are now able to push twice the number of polygons in the single player mode, thus greatly improving the model detail. The engine is also able to stream in data at a high rate allowing us to have a greater variety of textures and models.

Source: http://web.archive.org/web/20040218064441/www.n-philes.com/php/epypuyazfuevkavvvyep.php

[Gaijin von Snikbah]

Oh wise one. Explain to me how the Wii can have as little as 24 MB of RAM please? And why its still better than the Xbox wich has 64 MB of RAM?

[pedrocasilva]

Oh wise one. Explain to me how the Wii can have as little as 24 MB of RAM please? And why its still better than the Xbox wich has 64 MB of RAM?

Wii doesn't have 24 MB of RAM, it has a 1T-SRAM bank of 24 MB like GC had, just clocked higher and then it has 64 MB of GDDR-3... that makes 88 MB.

 

Bare in mind that there's no 16 MB RAM cost for Z-buffer providing that there's almost twice as RAM available than on Xbox.

 

Plus the GPU on-die RAM.

 

We still don't know that much about Wii's GPU though.

[Zechs Merquise]

I like you man, but you're wrong.

 

Well, there is little point debabting this 'fact', the sad truth of it all is that Wii is meant to be a more powerful console and have greater graphical abilities than the XBOX, yet we're seeing games like GT Pro Series, Far Cry, COD 3 etc which frankly look a mess.

 

I think the fact we're seeing games which look sub-Gamecube standard is appalling.

[flameboy]

Well, there is little point debabting this 'fact', the sad truth of it all is that Wii is meant to be a more powerful console and have greater graphical abilities than the XBOX, yet we're seeing games like GT Pro Series, Far Cry, COD 3 etc which frankly look a mess.

 

I think the fact we're seeing games which look sub-Gamecube standard is appalling.

 

I think it can only be expected though for launch, especially one close to xmas, as people rush to get the games out in time. it won't be like this forever just something early adopters are gonna have to put up with,

[Hellfire]

Well, there is little point debabting this 'fact', the sad truth of it all is that Wii is meant to be a more powerful console and have greater graphical abilities than the XBOX, yet we're seeing games like GT Pro Series, Far Cry, COD 3 etc which frankly look a mess.

 

I think the fact we're seeing games which look sub-Gamecube standard is appalling.

 

Again, developers' fault.

[Zechs Merquise]

Again, developers' fault.

 

Well, I would agree with you, but it's happening so often, is this just a 'developer thing' or is Wii somehow difficult to get decent graphics out of?

[The Bard]

I don't care, these days I play Goldeneye and OoT and am perfectly happy with the graphics. Not to mention the SNES games like Contra. Don't whine so much.

[Hellfire]

Well, I would agree with you, but it's happening so often, is this just a 'developer thing' or is Wii somehow difficult to get decent graphics out of?

 

Yes, the Wii is less powerful than a XBOX and very hard to develop for because god knows developers moaned about GC being too hard

[McMad]

I don't care, these days I play Goldeneye and OoT and am perfectly happy with the graphics. Not to mention the SNES games like Contra. Don't whine so much.

 

But when we bought those games they were certainly worth our money.

 

Ubisoft is expecting us to pay £40 pounds for a game that looks as bad as this but doesn't make up for it in any other departments apart from gameplay.

 

Unless this game has online play or there are some improvements to the graphics Far Cry is not worth our money.

[Hellfire]

 

Unless this game has online play or there are some improvements to the graphics Far Cry is not worth our money.

New controls and extra content?

It's not like I'm sold on the game, it's just a possibility, but it's not because graphics aren't excellent that I'd stop from buying a good game, I mean, it's not like it makes my eyes bleed.

[Zechs Merquise]

Yes, the Wii is less powerful than a XBOX and very hard to develop for because god knows developers moaned about GC being too hard

 

Well, it's REALLY proving itself at the moment isn't it? All I'm saying is that for a system which is meant to be easy to program for and a significant step up from Gamecube why are we seeing such trash?

[Kurtle Squad]

Well, it's REALLY proving itself at the moment isn't it? All I'm saying is that for a system which is meant to be easy to program for and a significant step up from Gamecube why are we seeing such trash?

Well I think you're going in circles now....It's just the developers.

[solitanze]

By the end of 2007 at the VERY earliest well hopefully start to see games fully utilising the capabilities of the Wii Mote. Live with the fact that for the next 12 months at least, during this experimentation phase, we'll see a much greater quantity of mediocre games than ever before while developers successfully familiarise themselves with the hardware and experiment as to whether there is a sufficient user base to maximise profits. The problem though is that with this unfamiliarity comes the trade off with developers feeling "forced" to tack on Wii Mote controls and thus shun out decent graphics in favour of control. Its funny, the purpose of Wii being technically inferior is to reduce development costs, but it seems to have not achieved this with developers feeling obligated to tack on Wii Mote controls, its taking developers more time to make games, this important resource is being drained and thus developers in order to maintain adequate efficieny, aren't polishing up their games graphics to an acceptable standard.

 

Its all well and good if there were a balance between the two, the problem is, even with the decent games that have released on Wii in the US, theres still too much of a sacrifice of gaming fundamentals in favour of a generally unintuitive control schemes that takes a step backwards instead of forward. In other words, gaming journalists want Wii games to maintain convential gaming fundamentals while having additional Wii Mote capabilities that enhances the game (I think the 1st Wii game to officially achieve this will be Super Mario Galaxy), rather than detracts from the experience which is what most Wii launch titles have done and with these second rate efforts comes dissatisfied gamers wanting better games and thus out of retaliation, consumers will not buy these games, although crucial early on in a consoles life and then you'll have developers thinking why should I go to the effort of making games if they won't sell? These 1st impressions (performance wise) are extremely important and must be mended with adequate sales figures in order to correct Nintendos damaged reputation amongst some of the worlds leading game publishers.

 

We must support the developers that attempt to support the Wii, for better or for worse if Nintendo are to have any chance what so ever in succeeding this generation.

[assofaman]

SOLITANZE:We must support the developers that attempt support the Wii, for better or for worse if Nintendo are to have any chance what so ever in succeeding this generation.

 

This coming from the man that preaches scorism and exclusiveism?

[flameboy]

By the end of 2007 at the VERY earliest well hopefully start to see games fully utilising the capabilities of the Wii Mote. Live with the fact that for the next 12 months at least, during this experimentation phase, we'll see a much greater quantity of mediocre games than ever before while developers successfully familiarise themselves with the hardware and experiment as to whether there is a sufficient user base to maximise profits. The problem though is that with this unfamiliarity comes the trade off with developers feeling "forced" to tack on Wii Mote controls and thus shun out decent graphics in favour of control. Its funny, the purpose of Wii being technically inferior is to reduce development costs, but it seems to have not achieved this with developers feeling obligated to tack on Wii Mote controls, its taking developers more time to make games, this important resource is being drained and thus developers in order to maintain adequate efficieny, aren't polishing up their games graphics to an acceptable standard.

 

Its all well and good if there were a balance between the two, the problem is, even with the decent games that have released on Wii in the US, theres still too much of a sacrifice of gaming fundamentals in favour of a generally unintuitive control schemes that takes a step backwards instead of forward. In other words, gaming journalists want Wii games to maintain convential gaming fundamentals while having additional Wii Mote capabilities that enhances the game (I think the 1st Wii game to officially achieve this will be Super Mario Galaxy), rather than detracts from the experience which is what most Wii launch titles have done and with these second rate efforts comes dissatisfied gamers wanting better games and thus out of retaliation, consumers will not buy these games, although crucial early on in a consoles life and then you'll have developers thinking why should I go to the effort of making games if they won't sell? These 1st impressions (performance wise) are extremely important and must be mended with adequate sales figures in order to correct Nintendos damaged reputation amongst some of the worlds leading game publishers.

 

We must support the developers that attempt to support the Wii, for better or for worse if Nintendo are to have any chance what so ever in succeeding this generation.

 

I agree with you completely, just wanted to get that in there and recorded, couldnt think of a better way of saying things myself.

[Zechs Merquise]

By the end of 2007 at the VERY earliest well hopefully start to see games fully utilising the capabilities of the Wii Mote. Live with the fact that for the next 12 months at least, during this experimentation phase, we'll see a much greater quantity of mediocre games than ever before while developers successfully familiarise themselves with the hardware and experiment as to whether there is a sufficient user base to maximise profits. The problem though is that with this unfamiliarity comes the trade off with developers feeling "forced" to tack on Wii Mote controls and thus shun out decent graphics in favour of control. Its funny, the purpose of Wii being technically inferior is to reduce development costs, but it seems to have not achieved this with developers feeling obligated to tack on Wii Mote controls, its taking developers more time to make games, this important resource is being drained and thus developers in order to maintain adequate efficieny, aren't polishing up their games graphics to an acceptable standard.

 

Its all well and good if there were a balance between the two, the problem is, even with the decent games that have released on Wii in the US, theres still too much of a sacrifice of gaming fundamentals in favour of a generally unintuitive control schemes that takes a step backwards instead of forward. In other words, gaming journalists want Wii games to maintain convential gaming fundamentals while having additional Wii Mote capabilities that enhances the game (I think the 1st Wii game to officially achieve this will be Super Mario Galaxy), rather than detracts from the experience which is what most Wii launch titles have done and with these second rate efforts comes dissatisfied gamers wanting better games and thus out of retaliation, consumers will not buy these games, although crucial early on in a consoles life and then you'll have developers thinking why should I go to the effort of making games if they won't sell? These 1st impressions (performance wise) are extremely important and must be mended with adequate sales figures in order to correct Nintendos damaged reputation amongst some of the worlds leading game publishers.

 

We must support the developers that attempt to support the Wii, for better or for worse if Nintendo are to have any chance what so ever in succeeding this generation.

 

Good post! I suppose the Wii will be in a way very much like the DS in this regard. One other thing, the PS3 seems to be having a lot of graphical issues over Framerate.

[Hellfire]

Well, it's REALLY proving itself at the moment isn't it? All I'm saying is that for a system which is meant to be easy to program for and a significant step up from Gamecube why are we seeing such trash?

 

Not to mention prime and that some launch games, like Red Steel are above GC level. Is it really necessary to repeat 100000000000000 times that devs worked on GC kits for these first games?

[flameboy]

yeah it is worth remembering what Hellfire said alot of these titles were created using GC dev kits then the wiimote functions etc...were added on later. they didnt get wii development kits till quite late on compared to the PS3, where developers have has the kits for AGES.

[Zechs Merquise]

yeah it is worth remembering what Hellfire said alot of these titles were created using GC dev kits then the wiimote functions etc...were added on later. they didnt get wii development kits till quite late on compared to the PS3, where developers have has the kits for AGES.

 

Yes, I take that point, but these games look poor even for the Gamecube. I would just like to see these developers making A LOT more effort.

[James McGeachie]

the thing about GC dev kits means absolutely nothing to be honest, because the first thing developers get before then even is like a specs sheet giving them an idea of what to aim for with their games, a rough goal to aspire to and make games they know will run on that hardware.

 

To be honest the standout Wii games visually mainly look good because of their distinct visual styles. It's like the Nintendo games are able to get really good lighting and some fairly good texture work, mainly because they have low polygon models that don't focus on realism but a nice creative style....which is good, but it means with developers that go for total realism, you cant see things pulled off as impressively due to the much higher polycounts required...and hence why you have games just now like Far Cry, Call of Duty etc.....

 

Well, this is where I'm starting to feel the problem might lie anyway.

[Cube]

To be honest the standout Wii games visually mainly look good because of their distinct visual styles. It's like the Nintendo games are able to get really good lighting and some fairly good texture work, mainly because they have low polygon models that don't focus on realism but a nice creative style....which is good, but it means with developers that go for total realism, you cant see things pulled off as impressively due to the much higher polycounts required...and hence why you have games just now like Far Cry, Call of Duty etc.....

 

To be honest, I think that is a good thing.

[Flaight]

Sounds like the devs just "ported" PC code into Wii without specific optimization. Personally I'm not bothered so long as the gameplay is good. (still leaning towards CoD3 though, for Wii remote controls)

 

Optimization wise, it feels like a typical crossplatform launch game. PS3's Tigar Woods seems to be suffering from the same prob. Many people are comparing it against 360 counterpart and they do look the same. Devs just ported it and didnt optimize it specifically for the console.

 

I agree that it's upsetting, but I expect some devs to do this in early days (and later days for some).

[fukudasolokomalakikenanze]

By the end of 2007 at the VERY earliest well hopefully start to see games fully utilising the capabilities of the Wii Mote. Live with the fact that for the next 12 months at least, during this experimentation phase, we'll see a much greater quantity of mediocre games than ever before while developers successfully familiarise themselves with the hardware and experiment as to whether there is a sufficient user base to maximise profits. The problem though is that with this unfamiliarity comes the trade off with developers feeling "forced" to tack on Wii Mote controls and thus shun out decent graphics in favour of control. Its funny, the purpose of Wii being technically inferior is to reduce development costs, but it seems to have not achieved this with developers feeling obligated to tack on Wii Mote controls, its taking developers more time to make games, this important resource is being drained and thus developers in order to maintain adequate efficieny, aren't polishing up their games graphics to an acceptable standard.

 

Its all well and good if there were a balance between the two, the problem is, even with the decent games that have released on Wii in the US, theres still too much of a sacrifice of gaming fundamentals in favour of a generally unintuitive control schemes that takes a step backwards instead of forward. In other words, gaming journalists want Wii games to maintain convential gaming fundamentals while having additional Wii Mote capabilities that enhances the game (I think the 1st Wii game to officially achieve this will be Super Mario Galaxy), rather than detracts from the experience which is what most Wii launch titles have done and with these second rate efforts comes dissatisfied gamers wanting better games and thus out of retaliation, consumers will not buy these games, although crucial early on in a consoles life and then you'll have developers thinking why should I go to the effort of making games if they won't sell? These 1st impressions (performance wise) are extremely important and must be mended with adequate sales figures in order to correct Nintendos damaged reputation amongst some of the worlds leading game publishers.

 

We must support the developers that attempt to support the Wii, for better or for worse if Nintendo are to have any chance what so ever in succeeding this generation.

 

I pretty much agree, its an unproven format with uncertainty in success unlike the greater liklihood of PS3 success due to brand loyalty so the developers current attitudes are "lets test the waters and see how things pan out..."