Wii on an HDTV, How does it look? [Text View]

mdym

12-27-06, 03:34 PM

rosh400

12-27-06, 03:53 PM

So far I have been very impressed by the Wii. Graphics is not what Wii is about. Immersive play is the point. While the graphics are not Hi Def, I think the quality on a larger screen is adequate and the larger screen enhances the immersion factor. We have it hooked up to a 46 inch rear projection and the size the display really helps one get into the game.

fugiot

12-27-06, 04:21 PM

Anyone who says the Wii graphics look "awesome, "incredible" and whatever else obviously have nothing to compare it to and/or don't own a HDTV. I own all thee of the next generation consoles and can say without a doubt that the Will graphics are weak (and thats being nice). They are no better than anything we have seen over the past 5 years on the GC. COD 3 looked like crap, you can't even tell if your shooting at a german or british soldier at a distance. The art direction in Zelda might be good, but low res textures and low polygon models certainly mute what you are seeing. Excite truck, fun to play, but looks no different than a GC launch title. Wii Sports is a blast to play, but the character models and detail are simply a joke, just look at the crowds in the stadiums. The Wii is nothing more than a GC with a different controller. The Wii is going to be a niche system that is at its best when games are built around the controller (Wii Sports). You will buy a Wii because of the types of games it caters to, much like the DS. I am not saying the Wii is a bad game console, and have enjoyed it quite a bit so far, but to say the graphics are great is just false.

I disagree. The Wii capabilities far outweigh the Gamecube's. I'd say it lands somewhere in between an Xbox and Xbox360. The Wii is a very well thought out system where the components seem to be a perfect marriage.

Most all of the games I've seen on the Wii so far(sorry, I haven't seen COD3 yet), are excellent at smooth, round, polygonal objects. This is a great advantage for Nintendo-style games where things are often meant to be smooth and round such as Kirby or Mario.

It doesn't fare too well with complex geometry, but overall, the Wii(and Gamecube) manages to put out a very clean, smooth image that is just pleasing to the eye. Nintendo did a great job putting together a low-priced, efficient piece of hardware that manages to look better than the sum of it's parts. Zelda could've been the graphical showcase the Wii needed, but we'll have to wait for a a non-GC port. In the meantime, I think Rayman has excellent graphics that end up looking a lot smoother and more robust than the Wii should be capable of.

That said, I believe the Wii and PS3 are the two consoles that will continue to evolve and impress. The X360 is designed with the same EXACT architecture as a PC, meaning most all developers know exactly how to get the most out of the DirectX-based hardware. The PS3, on the other hand, was designed to be the exact opposite. The 8-core Cell cpu was designed to be learned over time. Not one damned development studio has ever made a game designed to effeciently take advantage of 8 cores. This means in the launch period, the studios are still making games the way they know how. Last-Gen style. As they progress and learn how to optimize their graphic engines and physics engines for the Cell, the PS3's performance is going to sky-rocket leaving the 360 in the dust. I'm not saying the games are going to BE better, but they are going to LOOK lightyears better.

Same with the Wii, but to a lesser extent. Because, as you said, it is basically a Gamecube. Which is correct. The hardware is architecturally the same as a Gamecube, but the CPU and GPU clock speeds are much higher and memory is more than doubled. This is how the Wii is able to run any GC game flawlessly without emulation or a separate chipset. Most all major developers have made games for the GC and thus know very much about the Wii already, except for the controller. Once the Wii gets past the launch period, developers will be exploring more meaningful ways to utilize the controller and the Wii will end up with a ton of great, fun games that are impossible on any other system. Or maybe semi-possible on the PS3's sixaxis.

Anyway, what I was trying to say with this whole big splurge, is that the Wii's graphics are going to evolve more dramatically than the 360's. So expect more than what we have now. And watch out for the PS3...that thing is going to get CRAZY.

CPanther95

12-27-06, 04:54 PM

It looks fine on an HDTV. Graphics are nothing like the 360, but for the most part, the games I've played are obviously designed with the capable resolution in mind. That's a big difference from downconverting HD graphics to 480 i/p and ending up with a crappy picture.

Similar to Ice Age looking fantastic in HD compared to SD - but a show like South Park would look great in 480p, and not much improved in HD.

rickalamo02

12-31-06, 09:49 PM

Does anyone have any recommendations/suggestions on what is the best/optimum TV you should use for the Wii?

Vr.Rice

12-31-06, 09:52 PM

How much money do you want to spend?

hjd17

12-31-06, 09:59 PM

Looked horrible for me, i couldnt make out the eyes in zelda.

Irunnoft

12-31-06, 11:27 PM

nbuubu

01-01-07, 03:52 AM

I disagree. The Wii capabilities far outweigh the Gamecube's. I'd say it lands somewhere in between an Xbox and Xbox360. The Wii is a very well thought out system where the components seem to be a perfect marriage.

Most all of the games I've seen on the Wii so far(sorry, I haven't seen COD3 yet), are excellent at smooth, round, polygonal objects. This is a great advantage for Nintendo-style games where things are often meant to be smooth and round such as Kirby or Mario.

It doesn't fare too well with complex geometry, but overall, the Wii(and Gamecube) manages to put out a very clean, smooth image that is just pleasing to the eye. Nintendo did a great job putting together a low-priced, efficient piece of hardware that manages to look better than the sum of it's parts. Zelda could've been the graphical showcase the Wii needed, but we'll have to wait for a a non-GC port. In the meantime, I think Rayman has excellent graphics that end up looking a lot smoother and more robust than the Wii should be capable of.

That said, I believe the Wii and PS3 are the two consoles that will continue to evolve and impress. The X360 is designed with the same EXACT architecture as a PC, meaning most all developers know exactly how to get the most out of the DirectX-based hardware. The PS3, on the other hand, was designed to be the exact opposite. The 8-core Cell cpu was designed to be learned over time. Not one damned development studio has ever made a game designed to effeciently take advantage of 8 cores. This means in the launch period, the studios are still making games the way they know how. Last-Gen style. As they progress and learn how to optimize their graphic engines and physics engines for the Cell, the PS3's performance is going to sky-rocket leaving the 360 in the dust. I'm not saying the games are going to BE better, but they are going to LOOK lightyears better.

Same with the Wii, but to a lesser extent. Because, as you said, it is basically a Gamecube. Which is correct. The hardware is architecturally the same as a Gamecube, but the CPU and GPU clock speeds are much higher and memory is more than doubled. This is how the Wii is able to run any GC game flawlessly without emulation or a separate chipset. Most all major developers have made games for the GC and thus know very much about the Wii already, except for the controller. Once the Wii gets past the launch period, developers will be exploring more meaningful ways to utilize the controller and the Wii will end up with a ton of great, fun games that are impossible on any other system. Or maybe semi-possible on the PS3's sixaxis.

Anyway, what I was trying to say with this whole big splurge, is that the Wii's graphics are going to evolve more dramatically than the 360's. So expect more than what we have now. And watch out for the PS3...that thing is going to get CRAZY.

I have to disagree, at least for the time being. So far, the Wii's graphics match or (in the case of Far Cry ... ugh) are a step down from Gamecube graphics. To my eyes, the vast majority of the Wii launch titles are rushed and incomplete.

As everyone knows the Wii specs are just a boosted Gamecube, putting it about on par with the original Xbox. Though it surpasses the Xbox 1 in certain areas, it's lacking in others, such as the Xbox 1's lighting effects. Which means some games will look better than Xbox 1 games and others will look worse, depending upon implementation.

None of the launch titles come even close to surpassing the Gamecube visually, and that shouldn't be a big surprise, only a mild disappointment. The Wii's flagship title, Zelda, is a ported Gamecube game after all and aside from the different control quirks and a curious lack of widescreen support on the Gamecube version, they're identical. The rest of the launch software, to my eyes at least (and I had a Gamecube at launch in Japan) is either even or worse than Gamecube graphics. There are a group of seriously fugly games out for the Wii, but, like the bad PS3 and 360 launch games, you have to ignore them. It happens every launch with publishers rushing titles to meet the deadline. I'd trade the blurry mess that is Excite Truck for a straight port of Waverace with Wii controls in a heartbeat.

I really don't think we'll see the Wii's graphical advantage over the Gamecube until Nintendo themselves releases some major games specifically tailored to and created for the Wii, probably with the release of the new Mario. That game, at least from the videos, seems to be doing things graphically that couldn't be done on the Gamecube and should be a step forward.

But nothing in the end is going to cure 480p jaggies and blurred textures. It's just the nature of the Wii beast. On the AVS forum, where most members have HDTVs and digital sound setups, the Wii looks awfully quaint. But to the general public it's quite obviously a hit (so far). We'll see if Nintendo can keep up a steady stream of innovative games in the months and years ahead. As someone who's owned an N64 and Gamecube from the beginning, I've experienced the now-trademarked Nintendo drought time and time again.

To the original poster, I'd recommend upgrading your sound system (not knowing how big of a jump you're taking) and waiting for a Black Wii to match all your new components. The Wii can be a lot of fun now, but if you've got other games you're enjoying, or more importantly an HD system like the 360 or PS3, you can probably wait for something like Mario or Metroid. Aside from Zelda and Wii Sports, both of which are relatively disappointing graphically on an HDTV, you'll probably enjoy the enhanced sound more.

Twylight

01-01-07, 12:06 PM

As long as they stick to the cheapo flash games - they look good - the second it tries to emulate something you recognize (far cry, racing game, etc) it looks like 10 year old hammered ass from a early ps2 rush job...

That being said my non gamer wife and kids play the hell out of sports right now it - so its a bigger success than my sweet 360 will ever be as far as they are concerned...

its VERY fun ps2 IMHO - its not ever remotely comparable to 360 titles or PC titles.

MY 360 hasnt been booted up since we took the Wii from under the tree...so take my graphics complaint with a grain of salt.

For those of you who know games and how to set things up here is how games look - top to bottom:

1. 2nd gen 360 games (gears of war)
2. 1st gen 360/1st gen ps3 (launch titles)
3. xbox 1 games in HD mode on xbox 1
4. wii in 480p mode
5. ps2 in 480p
6. wii standard def
7. ps2 standard def

I truely hope that wii titles go along big budget stuff like Zelda = im sure the second gen will have better graphics.

btw all are setup on 120" HD72 in 720p - all calibrated for HDDVD (Toshiba) and HD cable (time warner upconverting losers who need new cameras GRRR)

I did calibrate the 360 connection, but not the others (they are on a pelican switcher)

Im still playing with the wii sensor placement and tuning...other than that im good.

Gamedev123

01-01-07, 09:59 PM

I think I've finally come to realize that Wii graphics will never be anything special. Just when they reach their peak, we'll be seeing DirectX 10 games under Vista, 3rd gen Xbox 360 and 2nd gen PS3 games. Wii graphics will always be the butt-end of this generation...

It will mainly be up to game designers and visual designers (not graphics programmers) to keep the Wii's games playing and looking interesting. If I were producing a Wii game now, I'd limit my spend on graphics technology and put most of my funds into game design and 'innovative' visual design.

Any 'realistic' or 'graphics intensive' game for the Wii will be judged against the very high bar set by PS3 and 360. Trying to achieve visual parity on the Wii is a losing proposition. Even my favorite Wii game, Excite Truck, looks like @$$ if you analyze the graphics. Thankfully, its so much fun you don't stop to look at visual flaws.

That said, I'm sure it is possible to develop a decent, 'approaching photorealistic' graphic engine for the Wii. Especially if the framerate is reduced to 24fps. Games such as Oblivion are pretty playable at 24fps. And many RTS games don't need high framerates.

I think the crossplatform game that really shows how great the Wii is will be Will Wright's game SPORE.

...and I'm still waiting for a puzzle action game (along the lines of Tetris/Bejeweled) that can only be played with a Wiimote.

nbuubu

01-02-07, 12:41 AM

That said, I'm sure it is possible to develop a decent, 'approaching photorealistic' graphic engine for the Wii. Especially if the framerate is reduced to 24fps. Games such as Oblivion are pretty playable at 24fps. And many RTS games don't need high framerates.

Personally, I'd prefer they not even try for "photorealistic" from 480p, at least judging from the performance thusfar. As others have stated, the Wii will look adequate/good when it focusses on simple, bright and clean visuals. The more textures and filtering they try to do, at least from the example set by the Gamecube, the worse things are going to end up looking.

Maybe it's just me, but the crown jewel of the Wii launch, Zelda, doesn't look like anything special. The game itself is fantastic, but whenever I read reviews that talk about how gorgeous the graphics are I have to wonder what the reviewers are seeing.

I'm excited by the potential of the Wii, expecially all the excitement out of the gate, but I was excited by the N64 with Mario 64 too. The potential of an analog stick, and the rumble pack that came with StarFox64 ... everything in that first year looked so promising. But, as Nintendo has proven over the last decade, they just couldn't sustain the system on their own. As with the Gamecube years later, releases dried up and I ended up buying a Playstation.

I look at the 2007 release list for the Wii and there are some bright spots to be sure, but I'm still wary of the Nintendo drought. All these kids and parents and people who never play games but are attracted to the Wii ... I wonder what's going to keep them playing after Wii Sports gets boring. Are they really going to buy more games and keep the platform going? There's a reason most non-gamers don't play games, and a big part of me doubts that those people are going to suddenly buy multiple titles over the next year. I'd love to be proven wrong. But I have a feeling that by April there will be the same layer of dust covering Wii systems all over the country that's currently covering my Gamecube.

Which brings me back to the OP. I have to recommend you buy the surround sound system, assuming you're just running with stereo now. Unless you've got a major hankering to play Wii Sports or get lost in Zelda, I'd wait and see on the Wii. There are bound to be some great, amazing games for the system, but I seriously doubt it has the long-term potential of the 360 or PS3. Just a Nintendo fan's hunch, after being burned by Nintendo systems for a long time.

The Wii is great for what it is. Just don't expect it to be your primary console. Especially on an HDTV.

FiveMillionWays

01-02-07, 01:16 AM

That said, I believe the Wii and PS3 are the two consoles that will continue to evolve and impress. The X360 is designed with the same EXACT architecture as a PC, meaning most all developers know exactly how to get the most out of the DirectX-based hardware. The PS3, on the other hand, was designed to be the exact opposite. The 8-core Cell cpu was designed to be learned over time. Not one damned development studio has ever made a game designed to effeciently take advantage of 8 cores. This means in the launch period, the studios are still making games the way they know how. Last-Gen style. As they progress and learn how to optimize their graphic engines and physics engines for the Cell, the PS3's performance is going to sky-rocket leaving the 360 in the dust. I'm not saying the games are going to BE better, but they are going to LOOK lightyears better.

Same with the Wii, but to a lesser extent. Because, as you said, it is basically a Gamecube. Which is correct. The hardware is architecturally the same as a Gamecube, but the CPU and GPU clock speeds are much higher and memory is more than doubled. This is how the Wii is able to run any GC game flawlessly without emulation or a separate chipset. Most all major developers have made games for the GC and thus know very much about the Wii already, except for the controller. Once the Wii gets past the launch period, developers will be exploring more meaningful ways to utilize the controller and the Wii will end up with a ton of great, fun games that are impossible on any other system. Or maybe semi-possible on the PS3's sixaxis.

Anyway, what I was trying to say with this whole big splurge, is that the Wii's graphics are going to evolve more dramatically than the 360's. So expect more than what we have now. And watch out for the PS3...that thing is going to get CRAZY.

Well normally I would agree with this, however due to my owning both the 360 and the PS3 I do not think it will be light years ahead of what the 360 can produce. As we stand now the 360 does more things better then the PS3. I could care less about the false promises of what Sony claims will be done. Show me Killzone the way it looked back in 05 @ E3. If it were possible on this system then why have they not shown anything about the game since then? Sorry dude but I believe it's going to tank due to low sales. The world isn't ready for a 600.00 gaming machine. Plus as it stands right now the 360 is far more capable of producing 1080P gaming then the PS3. What are you saying exactly as far as light years ahead of what the 360 can produce? Are you saying the graphics are going to be life like? I doubt that neither of the next gen systems are capable of doing this. In fact it will take many generations before we get to the point where you are seeing something that looks that realistic. Sadly you are waiting on a dream machine that just isn't nor will be produced for quite a while. Wish it were true though.

FiveMillionWays

01-02-07, 01:22 AM

Wii games will and still look horrible on anything that produces more then 854 by 480 pixels. Take your gaming machine to your local Best Buy and ask them to let you hook it up to see how it will look. Don't take anyone elses opinion other then your own eyes. I game on a High Def Projector @ 15.5 feet and I'm telling you the missing pixels are so visible it makes the game none playable. I don't care how fun it is to play if it isn't atleast 720P on any hd set you won't like it. If I put it on my 1080P set it won't fill the screen unless I get an out board scaler but who wants to spend that kind of money? They should be more then capable of making their games 720P or 1080i. They are just lazy if you ask me! When will Nintendo learn?

FiveMillionWays

01-02-07, 01:24 AM

Oh yeah I forgot to say that I'm still getting one. I plan on getting a 480P projector.

GreenMonkey

01-02-07, 03:36 AM

ddanont

01-02-07, 03:58 AM

I have both the PS3 & Wii. As for the Wii, I have not gotten the component cables, so I have been playing Zelda with composites through my 34" CRT HDTV from Sony.

So far, I am already very impressed with Zelda's image (even though it wasn't designed specifically to take advantage of new graphical capabilities of the Wii, so I hear) & can play through the whole game without complaints, & expect component cables to further enhance the visuals.

The image looks sharp, clean, with very little jaggies, break-up, & pop-up. Texture is low resolution, so it is generally blurry. Characters are bubbly shaped, not meant for realism. With such a story-book game, graphics seem just fine coming out of the Wii into my CRT HDTV set.

Now I can't wait until a game like Resident Evil 4, which was written specifically for the GameCube & arguably its graphical showpiece, to be written specifically for the Wii. There, I would expect to see much more graphical improvements, hopefully over Resident Evil 4's level with the GameCube. Then we should have a real idea of what the Wii is capable of (fingers crossed)

Gamedev123

01-02-07, 09:33 AM

I searched for some 'actual resolution' screenshots from Gears of War, to have an example of what the 'high bar' is for graphics this generation. There are 7 pics located at this address:

http://www.tothegame.com/sshotfeat.asp?screen=6970&pic=1

Compare this to the 360 launch title COD3:

http://www.gamersdaily.net/wp-content/uploads/2006/07/call-of-duty-3-screenshots-20060711000701204.jpg

;-)

I can only hope second generation Wii games show as much of an improvement (though COD3 isn't bad-looking by any means).

SixkillerNYC

01-02-07, 10:32 AM

The thing about the Wii is since that it's basically a Gamecube, developers already know how to get the most out of it. There's not a lot of untapped potential there. Ports from other systems are always going to look inferior.

Exclusives will look better as long as deelopers concentrate on making simple, colorful games with style, rather than trying to compete with the other two systems. Wii Sports looks fine even on the biggest HD screens, and that's the kind of thing they should be shooting for. Twighlight Princess on the other hand is what they shuld be avoiding.

nbuubu

01-02-07, 12:53 PM

Xbox1 - 733mhz Celery chip, 64MB RAM, 233mhz Nvidia graphics

Gamecube: 485mhz PowerPC chip, 43 RAM (some faster than the Xbox, some slower), 162mhz ATI graphics

The numbers are slower, but most of the time, Gamecube games hung right up with the Xbox1 games as far as snazzy graphics. Despite being quite a bit slower by the numbers game.

Labeling it halfway between a 360 and an Xbox1 sounds about right to me. I hope we see some games with better anti-aliasing. I could care less about the resolution, I just want some damn AA!

I don't see how you guys place the Wii halfway between an Xbox 1 and a 360. I've played tons of games for the Gamecube and Xbox, and very, very rarely did the GC meet/surpass the Xbox.

The Xbox 1 did 720p in a bunch of games. Anti-aliased or not, 720p is much closer to the native resolution of an HDTV than 480p. I seriously doubt the Wii will ever match the visuals of Soul Calibur 2 running in HD on the Xbox 1. I'd love to be proven wrong, but the boost you get from going to an HD resolution, when talking about being displayed on an HDTV, isn't going to be beaten by many 480p games.

At best, and this is being generous, I'd say the Wii will match and sometimes surpass the Xbox 1. And as the previous poster reiterated, the Gamecube/Wii archetecture is already pretty familiar to developers. There's not much new, untapped potential in there. At least from my point of view anyway.

It's how those developers incorporate the new control schemes that's going to be impressive and worth getting excited about. But this thread is about Wii visuals on an HDTV. And that's it's biggest (some might say only) fault.

I really hope Nintendo can continue to keep all those non-gamers who are excited about the Wii excited in the months and years ahead. I'm skeptical, based both on this "new" market of gamers and Nintendo's poor track record of supporting their previous two consoles with a healthy supply of games.

Love to be proven wrong though.

Hierax

01-03-07, 10:05 AM

Gamedev123

01-03-07, 10:47 AM

I think the graphics look fine - given that the expectation is not for HD. I've only played Wii sports, Zelda, Marvel Alliance so far . The PS3 sitting next to it certainly gives a sharper picture - but that's not what the Wii is about-

I have a 720p Sony KLF50A10 LCD projection and it looks fine.

HOWEVER - despite reading and reading on getting Zelda and the Wii to output 16x9 - I have been unable to do so to this point.

I am still having to set my TV to widen the picture manually to fill the screen.

The Wii has been set to 480p, to 16x9 widescreen - and I'm using component cables into the TV - I'm going to post for a solution elsewhere as well.

I'm GUESSING this is the way its supposed to be. Anamorphic wide screen sends a horizontally compressed image that your display has to stretch to 16x9. This is a 720x480 signal rather than 852x480 which is a 16x9 pixel count. To compound this, its possible your display doesn't detect 'anamorphic widescreen' (mine doesn't) and thinks its getting 640x480, forcing you to manually set it to horizontally stretch the image. If your display saves settings for each input type, you can set horizontal stretch and forget it...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anamorphic_widescreen#DVD_video

I was a little miffed that I wasn't getting a full widescreen pixel count with the Wii, and still haven't determined if anamorphic widescreen introduces horizontal softness on fixed pixel displays due to its nonsquare pixels. But then again, I guess the Wii is 'not about the graphics...'

;-)

You will probably also notice overscan black bars around the image. This is 'normal' as well.

;-(

Hope this actually helps a bit.

rickalamo02

01-03-07, 01:45 PM

How much money do you want to spend?

No more than $700

Caswell

01-03-07, 02:37 PM

...And as the previous poster reiterated, the Gamecube/Wii archetecture is already pretty familiar to developers. There's not much new, untapped potential in there. At least from my point of view anyway...

The architecture is familiar, but you're dealing with faster components and more RAM. That's going to remove limitations that developers were used to dealing with on the Gamecube.

The "untapped potential" bit is a double-edged sword. The Sega Saturn was a powerful console for its day, but one that's power was difficult to utilize. It didn't have the market share to warrant developers learning how to fully realize its potential.

fugiot

01-03-07, 03:23 PM

Well normally I would agree with this, however due to my owning both the 360 and the PS3 I do not think it will be light years ahead of what the 360 can produce. As we stand now the 360 does more things better then the PS3. I could care less about the false promises of what Sony claims will be done. Show me Killzone the way it looked back in 05 @ E3. If it were possible on this system then why have they not shown anything about the game since then? Sorry dude but I believe it's going to tank due to low sales. The world isn't ready for a 600.00 gaming machine. Plus as it stands right now the 360 is far more capable of producing 1080P gaming then the PS3. What are you saying exactly as far as light years ahead of what the 360 can produce? Are you saying the graphics are going to be life like? I doubt that neither of the next gen systems are capable of doing this. In fact it will take many generations before we get to the point where you are seeing something that looks that realistic. Sadly you are waiting on a dream machine that just isn't nor will be produced for quite a while. Wish it were true though.

The world IS ready for a $500-600 Playstation. It's being proven right now with the nationwide sell-outs. Sure, most of the launch PS3s were bought by eBay scammers, but all of the PS3s hitting stores now are being bought by gamers. The eBay scammers know that the golden profit age is over. PS3s are on ebay now for a mere $20-$50 more than they're worth.

And as far as the graphics go, they're not going to end up life-like, but they are going to progress more dramatically than the 360's. Why? The 360 is a PC! Every developer on the planet has been working on Direct-X games since 1998! The Cell is brand spanking new and overly complicated. All games made for the PS3 right now are relying on it's raw power to pump out acceptable "next-gen" games. Mark my words, one year from now, the PS3 will have an installed base at LEAST equal to that of the 360's(it's already put a 20% dent in the 360's 1-year market share in about a month[including shortages]) and there will be no question in the community as to which machine is the most capable. I'm not saying the PS3 will have better games or better online play, but one year from now, when you ask any non-360 fanboy which machine packs a more powerful graphical punch, there will be no contest.

fugiot

01-03-07, 03:25 PM

The architecture is familiar, but you're dealing with faster components and more RAM. That's going to remove limitations that developers were used to dealing with on the Gamecube.

The "untapped potential" bit is a double-edged sword. The Sega Saturn was a powerful console for its day, but one that's power was difficult to utilize. It didn't have the market share to warrant developers learning how to fully realize its potential.

EXACTLY! Everyone's saying that all the developers know how to write for the Wii because it's a GC on steroids. Yeah, this would be true IF ANYONE MADE ANY GAMES FOR THE GC. The only ones who truly know the GC are Nintendo and Capcom. The Wii has a LONG way to go, much more than the PC360.

kktx

01-04-07, 12:18 AM

Wii games will and still look horrible on anything that produces more then 854 by 480 pixels. ... I game on a High Def Projector @ 15.5 feet and I'm telling you the missing pixels are so visible it makes the game none playable. ... When will Nintendo learn?

I couldn't disagree more. I took some time off over the holidays and played plenty of Wii sports, some Madden and lots of Excite Truck on our fairly high-end 720p projector in a dedicated HT and I think it looks damn good. If you want photorealism, go drive a real truck across a field. If you want to have a blast with graphics that are certainly good enough in the context of a gaming experience that is simply a blast, then get the Wii. Anyone afraid to match the Wii with a high-end HT should relax and prepare to enjoy the ride.

KK

FiveMillionWays

01-04-07, 01:06 AM

Does anyone have any recommendations/suggestions on what is the best/optimum TV you should use for the Wii?

Spend 600.00 on a 480 P projector and you can also play your regular dvds in native format so it would need no scaling and still be the best possible resolution for the Wii!

FiveMillionWays

01-04-07, 01:10 AM

I couldn't disagree more. I took some time off over the holidays and played plenty of Wii sports, some Madden and lots of Excite Truck on our fairly high-end 720p projector in a dedicated HT and I think it looks damn good. If you want photorealism, go drive a real truck across a field. If you want to have a blast with graphics that are certainly good enough in the context of a gaming experience that is simply a blast, then get the Wii. Anyone afraid to match the Wii with a high-end HT should relax and prepare to enjoy the ride.

KK

While I commend you for voicing your opinion in such a well written and capable way. Unless you have eye problems you have to see the missing pixels. Those gaps are not screen door. Not saying don't get a Wii because it is on my list of things to purchase when they are more available. Still I will get a 480P projector just so I can play the thing and have it do a 1 to 1 pixel match without using a outboard scaler to increase the resolution.

Phaffendorf

01-04-07, 11:56 AM

I couldn't disagree more. I took some time off over the holidays and played plenty of Wii sports, some Madden and lots of Excite Truck on our fairly high-end 720p projector in a dedicated HT and I think it looks damn good. If you want photorealism, go drive a real truck across a field. If you want to have a blast with graphics that are certainly good enough in the context of a gaming experience that is simply a blast, then get the Wii. Anyone afraid to match the Wii with a high-end HT should relax and prepare to enjoy the ride.

KK

I was worried about this for my setup.... 10 foot diagonal screen paired with Optoma HD6800 projector. (720P native)

What size of screen are you using kktx??

kktx

01-04-07, 03:12 PM

I was worried about this for my setup.... 10 foot diagonal screen paired with Optoma HD6800 projector. (720P native)

What size of screen are you using kktx??

I have a 110" diagonal (16:9) screen. PJ is a Samsung H710AE. Obviously every 720p native display device will scale up a 480p signal, and my projector does fine with its internal Faroudja processor.

My previous comment in response to 5millionways' post was in response to the prior remarks that the picture from Wii to HD display looks "horrible" and "non-playable." I think those comments might frighten off someone considering mating a large high-resolution display (front projection or otherwise) with a Wii. The immersion possible with a FP setup is simply amazing.

KK

JoshuaL

01-05-07, 02:15 AM

The immersion possible with a FP setup is simply amazing.

Totally agree. I have 'only' a 92" screen with a front projector (Sanyo Z4) but every game I've played looks fine to me. I have a PS3 too and from watching Blu-Ray movies I know what great video looks like. The Wii looks plenty good enough; as long as you go in expecting good 480p video you'll be satisfied.

GreenMonkey

01-05-07, 07:19 PM

I don't see how you guys place the Wii halfway between an Xbox 1 and a 360. I've played tons of games for the Gamecube and Xbox, and very, very rarely did the GC meet/surpass the Xbox.

The Xbox 1 did 720p in a bunch of games. Anti-aliased or not, 720p is much closer to the native resolution of an HDTV than 480p. I seriously doubt the Wii will ever match the visuals of Soul Calibur 2 running in HD on the Xbox 1. I'd love to be proven wrong, but the boost you get from going to an HD resolution, when talking about being displayed on an HDTV, isn't going to be beaten by many 480p games.

At best, and this is being generous, I'd say the Wii will match and sometimes surpass the Xbox 1. And as the previous poster reiterated, the Gamecube/Wii archetecture is already pretty familiar to developers. There's not much new, untapped potential in there. At least from my point of view anyway.

I went through my Xbox games recently to test my flaky Joytec 240c A/V switch. I wanted to test a 720p Xbox game. I found only one out of IIRC I have 18 of them : Bloodrayne 2.

I still don't care much about the resolution. I consider it a VERY small piece of the graphics pie. UT2004 on my PC at 1920x1200 isn't that much better than UT2004 @ 1280x960 IMO.

I agree that there were very few companies that could squeeze much out of the GC. And most all of the multiplatform games look pretty similiar. Whenever I would read a cross-platform xbox vs gamecube version review, they would normally comment that it looked almost the same on both consoles. It generally came down to something else: sound, controller preference, loading times, etc.

GC and Xbox were on par IMO. I'd take RE4 graphics over Halo 2 any day. :D

fugiot

01-05-07, 07:50 PM

GC and Xbox were on par IMO. I'd take RE4 graphics over Halo 2 any day. :D

Hellz jyeeahh

siddavis

01-05-07, 07:57 PM

The world IS ready for a $500-600 Playstation. It's being proven right now with the nationwide sell-outs. Sure, most of the launch PS3s were bought by eBay scammers, but all of the PS3s hitting stores now are being bought by gamers. The eBay scammers know that the golden profit age is over. PS3s are on ebay now for a mere $20-$50 more than they're worth.

And as far as the graphics go, they're not going to end up life-like, but they are going to progress more dramatically than the 360's. Why? The 360 is a PC! Every developer on the planet has been working on Direct-X games since 1998! The Cell is brand spanking new and overly complicated. All games made for the PS3 right now are relying on it's raw power to pump out acceptable "next-gen" games. Mark my words, one year from now, the PS3 will have an installed base at LEAST equal to that of the 360's(it's already put a 20% dent in the 360's 1-year market share in about a month[including shortages]) and there will be no question in the community as to which machine is the most capable. I'm not saying the PS3 will have better games or better online play, but one year from now, when you ask any non-360 fanboy which machine packs a more powerful graphical punch, there will be no contest.

I could pick up a couple for you if you want, every store that I've been in the past week has MANY in stock :p

And just because common folk on the street "think" something doesn't make it so. It just means that marketing and hype have kicked in nicely. I think both HD systems have great qualities about them. Why does one have to be BETTER than the other?

In any case, the Wii on my 42" Panasonic plasma looks much better than I thought it would. Even moreso considering I'm still running it with composite.

Vr.Rice

01-05-07, 08:25 PM

No more than $700

For another $100 you can get a Emerson 37'' HDTV.Nice set for the price.DVD and Game consoles look great on it.

tipstir

01-05-07, 08:35 PM

Emerson EWL3706 is the best bet for now!
Clear Pixel Engine gives this huge 37" Widescreen Vivid Picture!

fugiot

01-05-07, 09:37 PM

I could pick up a couple for you if you want, every store that I've been in the past week has MANY in stock :p

And just because common folk on the street "think" something doesn't make it so. It just means that marketing and hype have kicked in nicely. I think both HD systems have great qualities about them. Why does one have to be BETTER than the other?

I agree completely. The market has proven itself to have just enough room for 3 platforms and I don't think the 360 will or should fail. Just making the point, from a technological standpoint, that the PS3 is graphically more powerful.

But, I'm sure my friend is having just as much fun with his 360 as I am with the PS3. Actually, if it wasn't for Blu-ray, I'd say his choice is more enjoyable so far.

nbuubu

01-05-07, 10:04 PM

I went through my Xbox games recently to test my flaky Joytec 240c A/V switch. I wanted to test a 720p Xbox game. I found only one out of IIRC I have 18 of them : Bloodrayne 2.

I still don't care much about the resolution. I consider it a VERY small piece of the graphics pie. UT2004 on my PC at 1920x1200 isn't that much better than UT2004 @ 1280x960 IMO.

I agree that there were very few companies that could squeeze much out of the GC. And most all of the multiplatform games look pretty similiar. Whenever I would read a cross-platform xbox vs gamecube version review, they would normally comment that it looked almost the same on both consoles. It generally came down to something else: sound, controller preference, loading times, etc.

GC and Xbox were on par IMO. I'd take RE4 graphics over Halo 2 any day. :D

It's a shame the only game you have to test with is Bloodrayne 2. Soul Calibur 2 in 720p is stunning. I agree that UT2004 doesn't look much different at 1920x1200 than 1280x960 (on a CRT monitor anyway), but I think you'll agree that the difference between PC games at 1280x960 and 640x480 is significantly more pronounced.

Some of the best Xbox games, like Soul Calibur 2, were rendered at 1280x720. The Wii is presently only capable of 704x480. That's a pretty big difference. Almost 3 times the resolution.

I find the resolution difference is most pronounced on fixed, flat-panel displays. I've had a 1080p LCD for a long time and though it does a decent job scaling 480p material, it's still night and day with 720p. I've played Metroid Prime Corruption, and though it's definitely the "best" looking Wii game so far, I can't personally rate it higher than Halo 2. It was the first Wii game I played after enjoying and getting used to the 360, and it was the first time I realized how inferior the Wii's visuals were.

Just like RE4 did, the Wii Metroid has a lot of tight, enclosed spaces. Those are always less taxing to render than wide open areas with tons of enemies. Much like how Gears of War gets a lot of praise for its graphics which are similarly constrained to small areas, I am personally more impressed by games like Halo 2 and Resistance which generally have larger, more open areas. Guess it's just personal preference.

I've yet to see anything on the Wii that can rival Soul Calibur 2 at 720p or even Halo 2 at 480p. Hell, even the Tony Hawk games that ran in 720p on Xbox look better than the Tony Hawk game on the Wii.

Could be just me though. To me the Wii will always be barely a step above the Xbox visually. Maybe because I consider the difference between the 360 and PS3 and the last generation of consoles to be pretty vast. And by only supporting SD, the Wii will always be grouped in that last generation visually.

Control/interface-wise, now that's another story. :)

nomad139

01-06-07, 01:38 AM

I think this thread has started to move away from the question...

The bottom line here is that any discussion of the Wii graphics will have the Wii come up short compared to the graphics of the "other systems" which stress high-end graphics as a part of the reason for their existence. This is simply not what the Wii is about. Nintendo engineers did not think "how can we get away with 480p & not have anyone notice", it was a conscious decision to approach the system as a market maker, not a market-share taker.

For those who expect 480p from their Wii (as I do), the graphics are fine. For they who expect it to compete graphically with the other systems, it won't win any of the time. You're basically asking how an SD DVD will stack up against a Blu-ray/HD-DVD disk......

If you keep the discussion framed around "Wii on an HDTV, How does it look?", then I say it looks great. The same way that Finding Nemo, Cars, Lion King, etc. look great in 480p, projected at 720p (not 1080p).

nbuubu

01-06-07, 03:15 AM

The original question was should the OP get a surround sound system or a Wii ... asking specifically about how it looks on an HDTV.

I think he should get the sound system and wait for the Wii to mature, or get one of the two systems actually designed for HD. Finding Nemo and Cars are 480i sources that look good scaled up, but they're nothing like the Wii at 480p. You can't really compare non-interactive movies created by supercomputers and scaled by electronics specifically designed to scale motion video ... to a consumer-level gaming system with tweaked but aging hardware.

If the Wii could make graphics even remotely close to Cars at 480i I don't think anyone would be complaing about its visuals.

From my perspective, the answer to the "Wii on an HDTV, how does it look?" question is "like an Xbox 1, sometimes better, sometimes worse ... kind of mediocre."

The Wii is about more than just graphics, but if that's all the question is, I say get a surround sound system. The Wii has looked like a Gamecube every time I've played it, from projected on a 100 inch screen to in the "optimal" screens set up at the Nintendo World Store in Manhattan. Hope there's some magic in the box somewhere.

And we'll have to see if Nintendo is going to be successful as a market maker ... I hope all those grandparents and stock brokers who never play games but got a Wii this Christmas stick around for Metroid, Mario and Warioware once they get bored of swinging at a tennis ball. But I doubt it. Hopefully Nintendo has some property no one's ever thought of that's going to appeal to those people, like Brain Age did on the DS.

JoshuaL

01-06-07, 08:46 AM

Finding Nemo and Cars are 480i sources that look good scaled up

Well, actually all DVDs are 480p sources. Standard DVD resolution is 720x480.

Bailey151

01-06-07, 09:28 AM

I agree completely. The market has proven itself to have just enough room for 3 platforms and I don't think the 360 will or should fail. Just making the point, from a technological standpoint, that the PS3 is graphically more powerful
Um....read the processor comparison (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=758390) before making such blanket statements. If anything you've got it reversed, just on the surface 360 = DX10 GPU, PS3 = budget level DX9 GPU.

And before you add any labels I own neither = not any kind of "fanboy".

And we'll have to see if Nintendo is going to be successful as a market maker ... I hope all those grandparents and stock brokers who never play games but got a Wii this Christmas stick around for Metroid, Mario and Warioware once they get bored of swinging at a tennis ball. But I doubt it. Hopefully Nintendo has some property no one's ever thought of that's going to appeal to those people, like Brain Age did on the DS.
Seems correct to me - they've got them started.....can they keep them? Graphics are one thing but game(s) and gameplay are what keeps people playing.

nbuubu

01-06-07, 02:00 PM

Well, actually all DVDs are 480p sources. Standard DVD resolution is 720x480.

Not to be rude, but that is incorrect. You're right that standard DVD resolution is 720x480, but that's an interlaced signal. All DVDs are 480i.

Here's a post about whether DVDs can record in progressive scan, which answers that question:

http://hometheater.about.com/od/dvdrecorderfaqs/f/dvdrecgfaq13.htm

It's been that way from the beginning. 480i is the standard for DVD video, and when running to an HDTV users typically have the option of letting their TV do the conversion to progressive, or letting their DVD player do the conversion to progressive. Generally whichever has the better scaler.

The whole progressive scan feature was generally a marketing gimmick designed to get consumers to buy another, "better" player, and a lot of those cheap progressive players have poor scalers. It led to the confusion that DVDs are 480p. The fact is all DVDs are 480i.

JoshuaL

01-06-07, 11:11 PM

Not to be rude, but that is incorrect. You're right that standard DVD resolution is 720x480, but that's an interlaced signal. All DVDs are 480i.

OK, I wasn't quite accurate with my statement. However, film source DVDs generally can have the original progressive 480p video recreated using a proper setup (and many / most folks around here probably have such a setup). As an HTPC enthusiast I can tell you that I certainly get 480p from most of my movie DVDs. Thanks for helping clarify the point though.

mkoesel

01-07-07, 12:49 AM

While I commend you for voicing your opinion in such a well written and capable way. Unless you have eye problems you have to see the missing pixels. Those gaps are not screen door. Not saying don't get a Wii because it is on my list of things to purchase when they are more available. Still I will get a 480P projector just so I can play the thing and have it do a 1 to 1 pixel match without using a outboard scaler to increase the resolution.

What you are saying doesn't really make much sense.

Oh sure, a 480p display device would be fine for the Wii. I mean, its all you'd really need, that's fore sure. But adding more pixels to the display will not degrade the picture by any large measure unless the display has a grossly incapable scaler. And most displays don't - most do pretty well. This is why you hear about people raving about how good DVD looks on the 65" Panasonic plasma or 70" Sony SXRD. These displays are far from 480p, but they still do a spectacular job of displaying a 480i source.

mkoesel

01-07-07, 01:12 AM

If the Wii could make graphics even remotely close to Cars at 480i I don't think anyone would be complaing about its visuals.

Probably true.

And this emphasizes what we already know - even when displayed at only 480p a game like Gears of War is going to absolutely decimate any Wii game graphically. And the reason is simple - the game has a much higher polygon count and much more advanced 3D engine. Same thing for animated movies like Cars, whose polygon count would probably dwarf Gears as War by the same margin that game dwarfs Zelda's.

Conversely, if we took a game like Pac-Man or the orignal Super Mario Bros or even DOOM and redid all the graphics for HD resolution, guess what? They'd still look like total crap by today's standards.

DaverJ

01-07-07, 02:51 AM

I would say the Wii looks "acceptable" on a large screen HDTV... about the same as the original Xbox (non-720p games of course). The gameplay is really good, so if you can get your hands on a component cable and lower your expectations a bit, it's not half bad.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/132/338630196_b474c4598a_o.jpg

BBS G35

01-07-07, 03:03 AM

Like this without component cables:

http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i142/krissy1969/Zelda001.jpg

Like this with component cables $20 from walmart

http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i142/krissy1969/Zelda005.jpg

nbuubu

01-07-07, 02:07 PM

If anything's going to convince the OP to get a surround sound system those pics will. Ouch.

Thanks for posting.

rickalamo02

01-29-07, 03:34 PM

Well thinks for tips/advice guys...i actuall wound up buying the Samsung 32" LN-S3251D for with 2 years no interest. Once i get my hands on the Wii then i will be able to see how it looks. Did you know that MadCatz is selling a cable with S-Video for the Wii for only $15. Doesn't the S-Video give you a better display than component?

DaverJ

01-29-07, 03:39 PM

Doesn't the S-Video give you a better display than component?

Nope.

Better than composite, but not component.

Column

01-29-07, 09:20 PM

Wii looks pretty good on my hdtv...much better then I thought is was going to look..still wish it had 1080p settings hehe

jblank74

02-06-07, 01:00 PM

Wii looks good on my 720p HD72 projector @ 115". Zelda and a few other games are Jaggie heaven. I wish Nintendo would dump in a little anti-aliasing already! But most non-aliased games suffer from this: console games simply aren't designed with 115" in mind.

Also, that said, the damn thing is so fun. I think games like Zelda probably look better when they're not blown up so big.

Classic games at 480p over component are soooooo nice. Because NES over composite looks awful, trust me.

BTW:

Xbox1 - 733mhz Celery chip, 64MB RAM, 233mhz Nvidia graphics

Gamecube: 485mhz PowerPC chip, 43 RAM (some faster than the Xbox, some slower), 162mhz ATI graphics

The numbers are slower, but most of the time, Gamecube games hung right up with the Xbox1 games as far as snazzy graphics. Despite being quite a bit slower by the numbers game.

Labeling it halfway between a 360 and an Xbox1 sounds about right to me. I hope we see some games with better anti-aliasing. I could care less about the resolution, I just want some damn AA!

Guys, I'm not trying to start a war here or anything, heck, I love my Wii, but the Wii is not in between a 360 and original XBOX. The processor is on par with what the XBOX had and it produces similar video quality. The difference is that the original XBOX could support 1080i and 720p.

From the Wii Wiki page:

Criticism of the Wii Remote and the Wii hardware has also surfaced. Jeff Gerstmann of CNET has stated that the controller's speaker produces low-quality sound.[75] Factor 5 President Julian Eggebrecht criticized the hardware audio as being substandard for a seventh generation console, saying "It's essentially GameCube 1.5."[76] An executive for Frontline Studios expressed that major publishers are wary of developing exclusive titles for the console due to the perception that third-party companies are not strongly supported by consumers.[77] The online connectivity of the Wii was also subject to criticism, as Matt Casamassina of IGN felt that the service is "entirely unintuitive."[78]

temeone

02-07-07, 12:22 AM

The Wii looks very nice on my friends 52" CRT projection which upscales to 1080i using the composite in.. I was surprised. Looks worlds better than every pic I see on here using composite.

I have it hooked up to my 720p projector using nintendo component cables via an x2vga 2 component -> vga transcoder and it looks ok at ~90" the Wii menu is a little fuzzy but all gameplay looks fine. I'm sure the transcoder degrades the image quality a tiny bit. Its still a far cry from 720p content which looks stunning, but I'm not worried about graphics though since everything is so awesome on a huge screen :)

twelvepbrs

02-07-07, 07:41 PM

Did anyone here buy their wii from compusa? They are bundling it with a two year extended warranty for 45 bux, just wondering if anyone got one from compusa without being forced into the warranty

dagware

02-08-07, 11:08 AM

the Wii menu is a little fuzzy
I agree. When I look at other screens from various games and such, it's obvious that it can look much better than what the main Wii menus show. I mean, they look cool and all, but they *are* fuzzy (at least on my PJ at 80-108"). I think they could have done a better job with the menus.

Still, I love my Wii! I'm surprised how good Legend of Zelda: A Link To The Past looks, considering it was designed for the SNES.

-Dan

twelvepbrs

02-08-07, 03:08 PM

Caswell

02-08-07, 03:13 PM

The closest I've come to that problem is having the unit lock up twice when selecting a Wii game from the disc channel. In both cases I had to unplug the unit to recover.

twelvepbrs

02-08-07, 03:38 PM

dagware

02-08-07, 05:59 PM

slightly off topic; but, i bought zelda twilight princess with my Wii, and havent opened it yet, my bro-in-law has it for gamecube so i think i might borrow his first, is it worth keeping the Wii copy for any particular reason? (thinking of trying to exchange it for warioware or rayman, or something else...)
That depends on your taste. The Wii version makes use of the motion-sensitive remote and nunchuck, as well as using the pointer for things like shooting arrows. The GC version is a button-masher and aiming requires using the analog stick. Also, the GC version is "mirrored", which means that East is West and visa-versa, which can make it interesting to use FAQs.

I personally like the Wii controls so I'd keep the Wii version.

-Dan

dagware

02-08-07, 06:01 PM

has anyone here had a problem with thier wii shutting down while in the middle of game playing? The LED on the Wii unit is even off, i had to disconnect/reconnect the power plug on the back to get it to come back on, unit gets pretty warm, but is properly vertically mounted and not in a confined space (i think im gonna see if i can get Nintendo to ship me a new one)
I haven't had this happen, but there are plenty of reports of Wiis overheating -- even when they're not in a confined space. However these incidents seem to be related more to using WiiConnect24 and stand-by mode. Look around for other threads on the subject, if you're interested.

-Dan

twelvepbrs

02-08-07, 07:04 PM

I haven't had this happen, but there are plenty of reports of Wiis overheating -- even when they're not in a confined space. However these incidents seem to be related more to using WiiConnect24 and stand-by mode. Look around for other threads on the subject, if you're interested.

-Dan
Took a closer look and the fan on the back of my Wii wasn't spinning, called Nintendo, and they had a repair center that was only a mile away from where i live, swung by the repair place and the just did a quick unit swap, but pulled all my data off the old Wii (only took 5 minutes), now if only i could ditch work early to go home and make sure the fan in the new one works ;)

FoolintheRain

02-13-07, 05:43 PM

Have used the Wii on the following setups:

Sammy 480p plasma (40") via regular video cables
Sammy HLN507W DLP 720p set (50") via regular video cables
720p DLP projector (Optoma H77) on 90" screen via component cables

Looks very good to me. Its amazing how good tv upconversion and projector upconversion can make things look. I would also mention that DVDs are 480p. So it should look pretty much the same as they do. Like I said, on my things it looks great. I'm sure experiences my vary, but I'm not displeased at all. Actually pleasantly surprised after hearing eveyone complain about 480p for so long.

And I do know what Hi Def looks like (i have feeds on all my tvs via componant) and OTA and HD DVD for my projector via componant. I can't see why so many people are complaing. Looks great and fun to play.

thelead

02-13-07, 06:00 PM

DaverJ

02-13-07, 06:04 PM

Its amazing how good tv upconversion and projector upconversion can make things look. I would also mention that DVDs are 480p.

Yes, a well setup display can make 480p look decent.

However, the bulk of the people complaining about the lack of HD output from the Wii have been gaming with an Xbox360, or even the original Xbox with it's handful of HD games. Going from a sharp 720p or 1080i/p on a large display to a 480p image is hard to do. Does it make the game less fun? No. But it's still noticeable to us HT enthusiasts who strive for the best image and sound, which is what this forum is for.

btw, the DVD comparison is true but doesn't pertain to gaming as much because film or video material doesn't exaggerate the imperfections as much as computer graphics, particularly aliasing. On the other hand, I wish DVDs looked as good on my setup as WarioWare does on the Wii! ;)

FoolintheRain

02-13-07, 07:38 PM

Yes, a well setup display can make 480p look decent.

However, the bulk of the people complaining about the lack of HD output from the Wii have been gaming with an Xbox360, or even the original Xbox with it's handful of HD games. Going from a sharp 720p or 1080i/p on a large display to a 480p image is hard to do. Does it make the game less fun? No. But it's still noticeable to us HT enthusiasts who strive for the best image and sound, which is what this forum is for.

btw, the DVD comparison is true but doesn't pertain to gaming as much because film or video material doesn't exaggerate the imperfections as much as computer graphics, particularly aliasing. On the other hand, I wish DVDs looked as good on my setup as WarioWare does on the Wii! ;)

I would count myslef as a HT enthusiast as well (you can check out my setup in my profile if you like :) I know that after watching an HD DVD or HDTV signal in my theater room, the upconverted DVDs and Wii don't look as sharp, but they still look pretty darn good. I am new to gaming, so maybe Im just used to my old NES and SNES, but it was pretty much what I expected. Also of note is that the Wii isn't really aimed at HT enthusiasts either. Anyway, it was just my 2 cents.

T2k

02-13-07, 07:58 PM

Zelda looks like crap here on 52" LCD, not so bad on 32" or lower LCDs, with or without component.

DaverJ

02-13-07, 08:29 PM

I would count myslef as a HT enthusiast as well (you can check out my setup in my profile if you like :) I know that after watching an HD DVD or HDTV signal in my theater room, the upconverted DVDs and Wii don't look as sharp, but they still look pretty darn good. I am new to gaming, so maybe Im just used to my old NES and SNES, but it was pretty much what I expected. Also of note is that the Wii isn't really aimed at HT enthusiasts either. Anyway, it was just my 2 cents.

I liked hearing your thoughts and agree that the Wii isn't aimed at HT enthusiasts. I knew that going in and wasn't disappointed. There are other here that think differently, and those are the vocal ones saying the Wii looks like "crap" or whatnot.

I'm sure you take all forum postings with many grains of salt, but I was just trying the re-iterate the flavor of this forum.

Go Bucks! :D

Phaffendorf

02-14-07, 12:41 PM

Zelda looks like crap here on 52" LCD, not so bad on 32" or lower LCDs, with or without component.]

T2k are you trying to get banned from this thread as well?? I'm tired of hearing your bickering.... you have shared your thoughts on the Wii.... many... many times. As much as you may think people want to hear your opinion..... WE DON'T! Please take yourself to another forum and cry there.

PS- Your comment is totally irrelevant, Zelda looks fantastic on my 10 foot high def. screen. It's obvious your out to trash the wii for w/e reason.

dagware

02-14-07, 06:38 PM

PS- Your comment is totally irrelevant, Zelda looks fantastic on my 10 foot high def. screen. It's obvious your out to trash the wii for w/e reason.
I haven't read his other posts, so I can't comment on that. However, the way the Wii looks can vary wildly from set to set, depending on how well the set handles 480p (or 480i) signals. On my projector, it looks awesome. However, on some HDTVs, it doesn't look nearly as good. So I can understand some people thinking the picture leaves something to be desired, while other people think it looks great (because on their set, it does).

-Dan

T2k

02-14-07, 08:50 PM

]

T2k are you trying to get banned from this thread as well??

?
I wasn't banned from anywhere, you're pretty misinformedl.

Sorry for the OT, everybody but seems to be a tendency here: as soon as you start pointing out shortcomings of Zelda you suddenly become a persona non grata - it's like you cannot post negative, you should "go and cry somewhere else" and adhom attacks by bullies. Let me get this straight now, once and forever.

In the other topic - subject was whether Wii is just a novelty, now defunct - I made a post about why I resent Zelda's poor, aliased graphics, GC-based graphics, subsequently defending Wii and praising its newly invented control system. A person with poor understanding of my point wrote me back disagreeing with things I didn't say.:)
After this fairly confused yet a bit condescending first post I replied in a very restrained manner that HD has nothing to do with AA (sans the opposite of his opinion), he's confused and I do believe aliased Zelda is unacceptable in 2007. Then another person came back with a harsher, direct adhom style - the now familiar "go somewhere else to whine!", pretty similar to your style, I must note this.
I left unanswered after reading it last night, thinking perhaps Mods go to bed early but today Moderator action was still missing so I replied in the 'appropriate' manner, nailing him for his backyard bully-styled, incoherent rant on me, let alone the apparent misunderstanding of my OP.
Suddenly Moderator arrived and posted a blast against me - completely irrational, uncalled post - then closed the topic.
I tried to PM him but I'm full so I used the Report Post function to answer him.
So far I haven't received any reply from any Mod.

I'm tired of hearing your bickering....

Unfortunately it's an open forum and I posted a valid opinion - rest is subjective, I believe.

you have shared your thoughts on the Wii.... many... many times.

Really? I am not aware of that - you have links, right? I estimate my total in this N forum could be somewhere around 20 posts, most of them answers or questions here and there, in topics like this, only a handful were about Zelda's poor graphics.

As much as you may think people want to hear your opinion..... WE DON'T!

I hope you notice the irony of your own post... this is downright hilarious - priceless irony. :p

Please take yourself to another forum and cry there.

Seriously, I'm really tired of hearing fan boyish idiocies like this.
This is a topic about how Wii looks and I posted my impressions.

Your provocation should have been moderated already but I have a feeling you got the same free 'fan' pass like that bully in the other topic.

PS- Your comment is totally irrelevant, Zelda looks fantastic on my 10 foot high def. screen.

How does that render my comment irrelevant? You're not making sense.

It's obvious your out to trash the wii for w/e reason.

Ehhh what? :eek:
I stated many times that I despise all the consoles except the Wii which I so admire I bought one... you're confusing me with somebody.

I never trashed Wii or anything here. I don't like Zelda and the ridiculous false hype about its pretty mediocre graphics, I openly said it few times but that's all.

In fact I have just opened earlier today a topic about upcoming "real Wii-games" and their supposed graphical superiority over these current GC-ports - if you have something to say about Wii graphics, come over, stop wasting the php here. :)

T2k

02-14-07, 08:52 PM

I haven't read his other posts, so I can't comment on that. However, the way the Wii looks can vary wildly from set to set, depending on how well the set handles 480p (or 480i) signals. On my projector, it looks awesome. However, on some HDTVs, it doesn't look nearly as good. So I can understand some people thinking the picture leaves something to be desired, while other people think it looks great (because on their set, it does).

-Dan

Exactly, just as I said - on smaller ones it doesn't look bad, on a big one LCDs like the Fall 2006-series Samsung 52"here it looks pretty ugly.

T2k

02-14-07, 08:58 PM

Probably true.

And this emphasizes what we already know - even when displayed at only 480p a game like Gears of War is going to absolutely decimate any Wii game graphically. And the reason is simple - the game has a much higher polygon count and much more advanced 3D engine. Same thing for animated movies like Cars, whose polygon count would probably dwarf Gears as War by the same margin that game dwarfs Zelda's.

I'm still not convinced we have seen anything that pushed Wii anywhere close to its capabilities. IIRC almost everything we have seen was developed on GC SDK, only the last few months they had fully funtional Wii to test it.
Let's wait at least another 4-5 months and we should start seeing something... ;)

Conversely, if we took a game like Pac-Man or the orignal Super Mario Bros or even DOOM and redid all the graphics for HD resolution, guess what? They'd still look like total crap by today's standards.

Well, Wii's or even GC's graphical skills are much closer to GoW than to SMB, so thankfully it's not exactly the case here. :)

twelvepbrs

02-14-07, 09:03 PM

all i can say is warioware, and monkeyball look pretty good on my mitsu 62" DLP, and that's still using the composite cables (component cables are in the mail, so i'm told), esp since i paid retail for my wii, i'd say it's definitely worth half the price of a 360 or ps3 (although i might not get one of those now that BR and HDDVD DRM has been cr@cked)

reaper

02-15-07, 09:01 AM

Here is how it looks on my 92" projection screen. There are jaggies but I still find it fun and enjoyable. Tossed in an image of Gandalf and my rack for fun...

Some Wii images from my theater. Gandalf looks a bit washed out with the flash... he looks cooler in person. Also, I left a little light on so you could see the theater a bit...

http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/7254/theaterupdate0008ht6.jpg

http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/5521/theaterupdate0010zi9.jpg

http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/8387/theaterupdate0012aa7.jpg

http://img408.imageshack.us/img408/8110/theaterupdate0013bu9.jpg

http://img408.imageshack.us/img408/9733/theaterupdate0017ww6.jpg

http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/5867/theaterupdate0019tn4.jpg

DaverJ

02-15-07, 09:34 AM

Great pics Reaper... albeit HUGE! :eek:

btw, the Rayman game is designed for a 4:3 screen. I don't know if you are a stickler for correct AR, but I thought I would mention just in case.

reaper

02-15-07, 09:39 AM

I do 90% of my Wii gaming on a 4:3 SDTV. I was surprised when it came up 16:9 on the projector and did notice it looking stretched in some areas. I didn't even see an option to make it 4:3, though. Do you set that through the Wii options interface? That's silly. The Wii should know what my screen is and the game should display correctly. Anywhoo... with crazy Rabbids as the focal point, I don't care. If it was Zelda or something more interesting I would.

ps. sorry about the large images. I forgot to downsize them when I put them on imageshack and was too lazt to go back and do it again :(

DaverJ

02-15-07, 09:47 AM

I do 90% of my Wii gaming on a 4:3 SDTV. I was surprised when it came up 16:9 on the projector and did notice it looking stretched in some areas. I didn't even see an option to make it 4:3, though. Do you set that through the Wii options interface?

No, a pretty major flaw in the Wii interface IMO. We can set up the Wii for a 4:3 or 16:9 screen, but the Wii doesn't send any widescreen flag, nor does it know which AR the game was designed for.

This means we have to investigate and switch our display accordingly. :( I wish it was automatic. But I would bet this is more of an AVS gripe: most Wii users don't care... if they notice at all.

dagware

02-15-07, 03:29 PM

But I would bet this is more of an AVS gripe: most Wii users don't care... if they notice at all.
The funny thing is, on a couple of games, I wasn't really sure which was correct and it took a while to figure it out. For example, Super Swing Golf looks pretty good stretched -- I didn't even realize it was stretched until I saw a post that said it was 4:3. Rayman may be similar because the characters are so strange anyway.

-Dan

dagware

02-15-07, 03:31 PM

all i can say is warioware, and monkeyball look pretty good on my mitsu 62" DLP, and that's still using the composite cables (component cables are in the mail, so i'm told)
Some people report that when they go from composite to component, they notice the jagged (aka aliased) edges a lot more. That was true for me, however I prefer the crisper image even if it does make aliasing more obvious. I'm just warning you so when you get your cables, you won't be disapointed.

-Dan

FiveMillionWays

02-20-07, 01:33 PM

DaverJ

02-20-07, 02:32 PM

Does anyone else notice that in games and menus when the screen fades to black there's faint black boxes, or part of boxes, that form around objects during the fade?

dagware

02-20-07, 03:21 PM

Well that all depends. If you sit far enough back to play it then it won't look to bad, but if you game on a projector in my opinion it sucks. You see every jaggie. It looks like last gen on hdtv! That should explain it!
Looks great on my projector. I suppose I'm more forgiving of the jaggies. The immersive experience of a large screen outways the drawbacks, as far as I'm concerned. To each their own.

-Dan

Slordak

02-20-07, 04:07 PM

The whole thing about using the Wii on an HDTV is that Nintendo promised full widescreen support from the beginning, i.e. every single title would be 480p and 16x9. They had to back away from this promise as the console got closer to launch, but that was part of the core pledge to users early on.

What happened here?

FiveMillionWays

02-20-07, 05:47 PM

Looks great on my projector. I suppose I'm more forgiving of the jaggies. The immersive experience of a large screen outways the drawbacks, as far as I'm concerned. To each their own.

-Dan

Is your projector 854 X 480 or 1388 X 788 like the one I'm using? It will look great on 480P projectors, but in hi def it just blows. Sorry to say but it does. It's all grainy and the loss of so many pixels! Well the only way I can enjoy it is to do a 1 to 1 match which would just waste the image space. I enjoy playing with it, but I know over the long haul so 3 years or more then I will say it will collect lots of dust. There is no way this thing will look good on a 1080 P set which is the direction we are going with all hdtv's now. So it may look good to you now, but after I'm done playing with my 360 and my PS3 I don't want to see the grainy graphics of the Wii! That being said I still enjoy the experience of the Wii mote! It's a keeper but barely considering for me it is only a part time gaming experience! A novice device is a much better suited name. It does not look good on HDTV sets PERIOD! No matter what these guys are telling you. Better yet take your Wii to any Best Buy or Circuit City and ask them to set it up because you are in the market for a new set. Then you can see for yourself what I mean!:rolleyes:

Troubleshooter

02-20-07, 05:59 PM

mkoesel

02-20-07, 06:31 PM

Is your projector 854 X 480 or 1388 X 788 like the one I'm using? It will look great on 480P projectors, but in hi def it just blows. Sorry to say but it does. It's all grainy and the loss of so many pixels!

How will it "look great on 480P projectors"?

Reducing the pixel count is not going to help one bit. A 480i or 480p source displayed 100"+ with 852x480 pixels will look just as poor as it does at 100"+ with 1366x768 pixels. You cannot make the jaggies go away by reducing the resolution.

dagware

02-20-07, 06:50 PM

Is your projector 854 X 480 or 1388 X 788 like the one I'm using?
Mine is 480p, and that does seem to make a difference. Who knew that having a lower-def projector would end up being an advantage?

How will it "look great on 480P projectors"?

Reducing the pixel count is not going to help one bit. A 480i or 480p source displayed 100"+ with 852x480 pixels will look just as poor as it does at 100"+ with 1366x768 pixels. You cannot make the jaggies go away by reducing the resolution.
I'm not an expert. But I've read posts from other 480p projector owners who think it looks fine. Maybe we're used to looking at jaggies more, although in my case I doubt that's true. I'm just far enough away from my screen (2x width) that the resolution difference shouldn't make much difference. YMMV.

-Dan

mkoesel

02-20-07, 07:03 PM

Mine is 480p, and that does seem to make a difference. Who knew that having a lower-def projector would end up being an advantage?

But I don't think you've compared side-by-side to a higher resolution projector with the same projected screen size, have you?

I'm just far enough away from my screen (2x width) that the resolution difference shouldn't make much difference. YMMV.

Bingo. Same reason why people choose as ED plasma over an HD one. But there is nothing magic about the lower resolution display in these cases. You simply cannot make the image look less jagged by reduing the pixel count. The reason for this is absolutely elementary - the jaggies are caused by the resolution of the _source_ not by the _display_.

JoshuaL

02-20-07, 10:47 PM

Mine is 480p, and that does seem to make a difference. Who knew that having a lower-def projector would end up being an advantage?

I have an HD projector (Sanyo Z4, 720p) w/ a 92" screen and all the Wii games I have (Zelda, Wii Sports, Excite Truck) look just great to me. I think you can get good visuals from the Wii with an HD display, since I can. :)

FiveMillionWays

02-20-07, 11:02 PM

Mine is 480p, and that does seem to make a difference. Who knew that having a lower-def projector would end up being an advantage?

I'm not an expert. But I've read posts from other 480p projector owners who think it looks fine. Maybe we're used to looking at jaggies more, although in my case I doubt that's true. I'm just far enough away from my screen (2x width) that the resolution difference shouldn't make much difference. YMMV.

-Dan

They become less noticeable. Still the image quality would be way better if he stuck to a 480P projector instead of a 720! 480 owners still think they are getting a true hi def experience as well, but that still doesn't make it the truth. Still I would get a 480 P projector to match up with it if I felt like it would be something I would enjoy playing everyday!

FiveMillionWays

02-20-07, 11:06 PM

I have an HD projector (Sanyo Z4, 720p) w/ a 92" screen and all the Wii games I have (Zelda, Wii Sports, Excite Truck) look just great to me. I think you can get good visuals from the Wii with an HD display, since I can. :)

LMFAO! Have you gotten a chance to see the 360 or PS3 on your unit? Do that and you will retract your statement. Shoot thats like saying standard def looks great on a high def unit when we know it looks like crap. Send a crappy image to a display and guess what? It displays a crappy picture! Not that the games are ugly, but they don't do anything to add to the experience. I see no real difference between 480i and 480P! This part concerns me the most. So from now on I guess I will just match it with the pixels instread of allowing my projector to do all the scaling! :D

JoshuaL

02-21-07, 02:33 PM

LMFAO! Have you gotten a chance to see the 360 or PS3 on your unit? Do that and you will retract your statement.

Sorry, but I have a PS3 also hooked up to this projector outputting 1080i over HDMI. I'm not retracting my statement. I said it looked great to me, I didn't say it compared with the PS3. The games look good enough that the visuals don't detract from the gaming experience. For me. This is all very subjective, obviously.

I will say that hooked up to a 30" HDTV tube TV the Wii image looks better, but that's only because it's not blown up as much (still 720p). Still, even at 92" it looks very nice to me.

modiGTI

02-21-07, 03:16 PM

I only have the composite cable hooked up atm to my DLP, so far it looks decent, much better than I expected. My Component cables should be here by friday.

FiveMillionWays

02-22-07, 01:31 AM

How will it "look great on 480P projectors"?

Reducing the pixel count is not going to help one bit. A 480i or 480p source displayed 100"+ with 852x480 pixels will look just as poor as it does at 100"+ with 1366x768 pixels. You cannot make the jaggies go away by reducing the resolution.

Well the Wii can scale it to its native resolution of 854 X 480 which is called enhanced defination. That will give it a perfect 1 to 1 pixel match and gives it the best possible picture.

FiveMillionWays

02-22-07, 01:35 AM

Wow fivemillionways, you're totally right....All that matters is how it looks on a particular display with a particular scaler. Who the heck cares about actual 'fun' if it isn't sublimely hidef beautiful. Pac Man, Space Invaders, Galaga, Super Mario, et al. were just pathetic in their 320x240ishness; and are moreso today. I guess I'm just dumb in the fact that I think that it's just fine for what it is on my pathetic display device that runs at 119". I won't go into how I play games on a PC and laugh at the uber capabilities of 'HDTV' for gaming on consoles....Nah don't matter one smidge.

Not so fast my friend. I said it was a total blast. I never once said it wasn't fun. I just think it could use a few extra horses to output a good 720 signal. Even most experts agree the Wii will find it difficult to stay in the fight after three or more years because it looks just last gen on hi def capable sets. And I'm not talking about 480P that is not hi def!

FiveMillionWays

02-22-07, 01:37 AM

I only have the composite cable hooked up atm to my DLP, so far it looks decent, much better than I expected. My Component cables should be here by friday.

You know something when I use the composite cables to connect it to my 1080P set it looks very good. Must be the scaler in my tv. Not to get off topic but has anyone heard anything about the gaming scaler DVDO was working on to properly upconvert video games?

mkoesel

02-22-07, 11:04 AM

Well the Wii can scale it to its native resolution of 854 X 480 which is called enhanced defination. That will give it a perfect 1 to 1 pixel match and gives it the best possible picture.

First off the Wii does not output 854x480. It outputs anamorphic 480i/p which is either 720x480 or 640x480. So its going to be scaled in the horizontal direction on your "ED" display anyway. However this fact is of secondary importance here.

You are correct a 1x1 correlation between source and display is desireable. No one will argue there. However, when we are speaking about visible jagged edges (aliasing), you absolutely cannot solve a thing by _lowering_ the resolution of the display to match the source. Having extra pixels is doing nothing to harm the picture, and if you have a reasonable scaler in the display, it should actually help. The jagged edges you see when viewing a Wii on a projector are a direct result of the fact that their are only 480 lines of resolution avaiable from the source. And that makes for some pretty damn huge pixels when shown at 100+ inches. You cannot change this fact by buying a projector that also happens to natively display 480 lines of resolution. You still get giant pixels either way.

FiveMillionWays

02-22-07, 11:58 PM

First off the Wii does not output 854x480. It outputs anamorphic 480i/p which is either 720x480 or 640x480. So its going to be scaled in the horizontal direction on your "ED" display anyway. However this fact is of secondary importance here.

You are correct a 1x1 correlation between source and display is desireable. No one will argue there. However, when we are speaking about visible jagged edges (aliasing), you absolutely cannot solve a thing by _lowering_ the resolution of the display to match the source. Having extra pixels is doing nothing to harm the picture, and if you have a reasonable scaler in the display, it should actually help. The jagged edges you see when viewing a Wii on a projector are a direct result of the fact that their are only 480 lines of resolution avaiable from the source. And that makes for some pretty damn huge pixels when shown at 100+ inches. You cannot change this fact by buying a projector that also happens to natively display 480 lines of resolution. You still get giant pixels either way.

Well unless the owners manual lying it outputs 854 X 480 Not 720 X 480. Please do your research before posting! The jaggies have nothing to do with image quality to me. It's just the fuzzy graphics of the Wii itself. I really do enjoy the games much more so then the graphics themselves. Still for my serious gaming I will stick to the big guns!

mkoesel

02-23-07, 07:50 AM

Well unless the owners manual lying it outputs 854 X 480 Not 720 X 480. Please do your research before posting!

I've read the manual before and saw no mention of it. If you provide a page number, I am sure we can clear up this misconception of yours.

Also, see this thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9177156&&#post9177156

It has a lot of details explaining why you are wrong.

The jaggies have nothing to do with image quality to me. It's just the fuzzy graphics of the Wii itself.

Sorry, but I honestly have no idea what you mean here. The statement itself does not make sense, since the jaggies go hand in hand with image quality. Was this meant to somehow be a response to my points about native resolution of the display device?

dagware

02-23-07, 05:37 PM

But I don't think you've compared side-by-side to a higher resolution projector with the same projected screen size, have you?
No, and I don't intend to. :p Ignorance is bliss! I'm happy with my PJ, and I don't want to look at something that might make me unhappy! :)

I've had this PJ a year and a half, and it's been great. The time will come when I'll purchase a higher resolution PJ. For instance, I could buy a higher resolution PJ for the price I paid for this one. But if I wait even longer, just think of what my money will buy!

Until then, I intend on living in ignorance, happy as a pig in the mud!

-Dan

PS: Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that I understand what you're saying, and it sounds reasonable to me.

modiGTI

02-23-07, 10:38 PM

My component cables (nintendo brand) arrived today so I tested it out real quick. No problems so far, everything looks great. The only thing I had to do was change my TV's picture to 16X9 since the Wii settings didn't seem to work.

DaverJ

02-24-07, 12:16 AM

The only thing I had to do was change my TV's picture to 16X9 since the Wii settings didn't seem to work.

Correct... the Wii doesn't output the widescreen flag, so the TV doesn't know if the Wii is 16:9 or 4:3. Also, the Wii isn't aware internally if a game is widescreen or not. So you will have to switch the TV's aspect ratio back and forth depending on if you are playing a widescreen game or not.

This design decision makes me go :confused: !

FiveMillionWays

02-24-07, 01:19 AM

I've read the manual before and saw no mention of it. If you provide a page number, I am sure we can clear up this misconception of yours.

Also, see this thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9177156&&#post9177156

It has a lot of details explaining why you are wrong.

Sorry, but I honestly have no idea what you mean here. The statement itself does not make sense, since the jaggies go hand in hand with image quality. Was this meant to somehow be a response to my points about native resolution of the display device?

I've read that junk before. I'm going to go with what I read. So many people on this site want to be called experts but are nothing more then guys like you and me. If this was the signal it was outputting my set would say it. Right now its saying 854 X 480P which is the same as my projector when I use it with that. The jaggies are there because of sloppy programming. I'm sure the Wii has a far better deinterlacer then what we are currently seeing.

mkoesel

02-24-07, 08:25 AM

I've read that junk before. I'm going to go with what I read. So many people on this site want to be called experts but are nothing more then guys like you and me. If this was the signal it was outputting my set would say it. Right now its saying 854 X 480P which is the same as my projector when I use it with that. The jaggies are there because of sloppy programming. I'm sure the Wii has a far better deinterlacer then what we are currently seeing.

Listen, its okay to be wrong man. Its really ok. :)

Nothing personal, I just want to make sure people reading the forum get the right info. Have fun with your Wii.

zingerhill

02-26-07, 11:21 AM

I just thought I would add my $.02 to this old thread. I just rented Zelda for Wii. Until now, I had really only used Wii for non-graphically intensive games (Wii Play, Wii Sports). As much as I like the Zelda game mechanics, going from 360 to Wii is like going back in time. The graphics are just weak. The lack of voice acting really takes me out of the experience. I have a lot of fun with the Wii, but I think I'll be sticking with games that can get by without good graphics.

Playing on an Vizio 42" plasma with Wii component cables.

FiveMillionWays

02-28-07, 09:42 AM

Yep I totally agree. I will only do Wii Sports type games. The rest of the way I can't stand looking at poo and the thing outputs games that look like poo!

FiveMillionWays

02-28-07, 09:46 AM

Listen, its okay to be wrong man. Its really ok. :)

Nothing personal, I just want to make sure people reading the forum get the right info. Have fun with your Wii.

Page 44 of the system instruction manual says it only does 480P. That means it's 854 X 480P. Since you say I'm wrong do a 1 to 1 pixel match with y our system and see if you have borders on your 480P setup. If you have borders then it's not 480P, but if it fills the entire screen it's 854 X 480P! I back what I say up while your post makes no sense at all! Yeah I'm glad you are okay with being wrong! It's good to know you understand that!

Slordak

02-28-07, 10:12 AM

As has been stated many times in many different threads, when discussing analog video signals, an output resolution of 480p does not definitively reveal anything about the resolution of the source material used to generate the signal. If the source was digital, as it is for game systems, it can be 640x480, 704x480, 720x480, 854x480, etc. Whether the signal is anamorphic or not is irrelevant; 16x9 is frequently represented using non-square source pixels without using a true 16x9 source resolution (e.g. DVDs).

twelvepbrs

02-28-07, 05:34 PM

Yep I totally agree. I will only do Wii Sports type games. The rest of the way I can't stand looking at poo and the thing outputs games that look like poo!
even wii sports graphics are kinda crappified, i think the cleanest looking graphics are warioware; but some of this is probably due to the huge variation in the graphics throughout the game, but since it's basically a 2-d cartoon, everything looks really crisp and kinda pops off the screen

FiveMillionWays

03-01-07, 01:43 AM

even wii sports graphics are kinda crappified, i think the cleanest looking graphics are warioware; but some of this is probably due to the huge variation in the graphics throughout the game, but since it's basically a 2-d cartoon, everything looks really crisp and kinda pops off the screen

True! But Wario isn't something that I would enjoy playing.

twelvepbrs

03-01-07, 02:12 AM

True! But Wario isn't something that I would enjoy playing.
you wouldn't enjoy playing warioware!?!?!? ..."of course if you have lost your sense of humor you can always become a writer for friends..." :p

FiveMillionWays

03-01-07, 04:14 AM

you wouldn't enjoy playing warioware!?!?!? ..."of course if you have lost your sense of humor you can always become a writer for friends..." :p

Okay now I have to try it just to see if I have not out most Nintendo games. Would you believe the only reason I bought the Wii in the first place is cause Wii Sports is so fun? That and I want to play Mario Sunshine from a few years ago. Well lets not leave out the possibility of playing R.C. Pro Am Racing again!!! That game is totally a blast and never truly gets old.

mkoesel

03-01-07, 07:57 AM

Page 44 of the system instruction manual says it only does 480P. That means it's 854 X 480P.

If you have borders then it's not 480P, but if it fills the entire screen it's 854 X 480P!

This is completely incorrect info - and now it just blatant since I've given you plenty of resources to read so you understand why. You can keep posting wrong information (its a free country) but I will keep correcting you. Again, I just want to make sure this forum isn't dragged down with misinformation - I am not out to get you personally.

I back what I say up while your post makes no sense at all! Yeah I'm glad you are okay with being wrong! It's good to know you understand that!

Backing up what you say does not mean reiterating your original, flawed hypothesis until people eventually just give in and believe you. Your persistence is admirable; your stubbornness is not.

Again, have fun! Cheers :D

FiveMillionWays

03-02-07, 01:48 AM

This is completely incorrect info - and now it just blatant since I've given you plenty of resources to read so you understand why. You can keep posting wrong information (its a free country) but I will keep correcting you. Again, I just want to make sure this forum isn't dragged down with misinformation - I am not out to get you personally.

Backing up what you say does not mean reiterating your original, flawed hypothesis until people eventually just give in and believe you. Your persistence is admirable; your stubbornness is not.

Again, have fun! Cheers :D

When you can show me how Nintendo is doing this and where you got your data from then perhaps I can trust what you say. Until then I'm going with what Nintendo is saying. End of convo! All this mumbo jumbo. That stuff you read on those other treads to me is all convo without hard evidence. Show me tests that you have done that say it is not 854 X 480! Can you provide me with this information? Show it to me and how you did it. That is one hypothesis I would love to see!!!! SHOW ME?

JoshuaL

03-02-07, 02:53 AM

Show me tests that you have done that say it is not 854 X 480!

If I'm following the discussion correctly, I don't think anyone is trying to say that it is not 854x480. The point is that while it might be, it doesn't have to be. The reasons why have already been listed, but it boils down to the ability to display a 480p 16:9 image using non-square pixels. In that case, 854 would not the exact number.

mkoesel

03-02-07, 08:54 AM

When you can show me how Nintendo is doing this and where you got your data from then perhaps I can trust what you say. Until then I'm going with what Nintendo is saying. End of convo!

Nintendo has not - anywhere or anytime - said that the resolution is 854x480. Not in the manual and not on page 44. It is you and only you that have said that. What Nintendo has said, is that it is 480p. Period. You insist that means 854x480p. It does not mean that - plainly and simply. It means 480p as defined by the ATSC and as supported by every single television on the market. That means that it is as specified in this chart:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATSC#Resolution

You aren't arguing with me - I'm just the mesenger. You are arguing with the very folks who defined the standard. Perhaps you should stop wasting time with me, and just take the debate directly to them. How does that sound?

All this mumbo jumbo. That stuff you read on those other treads to me is all convo without hard evidence. Show me tests that you have done that say it is not 854 X 480! Can you provide me with this information? Show it to me and how you did it. That is one hypothesis I would love to see!!!! SHOW ME?

This "mumbo jumbo" is actually very clear, concise information from reliable sources. I haven't performed tests on this myself just like I haven't performed tests to verify that my computer is really running at 1280x800 like it says it is. Have you? Or do you simply accept that the computer is genuinely running at its advertised resolution? I'll bet you do just that.

Let me remind you that you've presented plenty of untrue information in this thread. The discussion started as one about relative benefit of native display resolution vs. a lower resolution source. You've stopped replying to my queries about that, since you can do nothing but concede there. In addition, above, you failed to provide a retort when I pointed out your patently false statement:

"If you have borders then it's not 480P, but if it fills the entire screen it's 854 X 480P!"

This statement is incorrect at the most elementary level. It is proof - all the proof one could ever need - that you clearly do not understand the subject matter. I really suggest you read up on it again with an open mind. You _will_ learn if you do that.

Have fun with out there.

Rex Bills

03-02-07, 02:15 PM

This bears repeating: If you switch to component input, be sure to go into the Wii menu and change the resolution from 480i to 480p.

FiveMillionWays

03-03-07, 05:59 AM

I wonder if I can still find a cheapo plasma that is enhanced def in the 50 inch range??? This would be far better suited for the Wii in my current setup.

mkoesel

03-03-07, 08:59 AM

I wonder if I can still find a cheapo plasma that is enhanced def in the 50 inch range??? This would be far better suited for the Wii in my current setup.

There has never been any ED plasmas in that size. The biggest you will find is 46", and I don't believe that glass is manufactured anymore. The only thing the ED plasma will buy you is slightly better contrast ratio. But that is only if you buy a modern one, since an older one will have no better contrast ratio than today's HD plasmas. And you will max out at 42". I'll happily take the extra 8" over the slightly better contrast. YMMV.

But in any case, the resolution _absolutely will not be a factor in getting rid of the jaggies_. You cannot combat aliasing by lowering the resolution of the panel to match the already low resolution source. Its makes no sense to think otherwise. It is true that lowering the resolution of the panel could in theory minimize scaling artifacts. In practice though, I see no scaling artifacts whatsoever on my 50" HD plasma. I also see no softening of the image. The internal scaler is plenty good. The picture is quite spectacular - as good as you could hope for a non-HD source.

twelvepbrs

03-03-07, 12:41 PM

There has never been any ED plasmas in that size. The biggest you will find is 46", and I don't believe that glass is manufactured anymore. The only thing the ED plasma will buy you is slightly better contrast ratio. But that is only if you buy a modern one, since an older one will have no better contrast ratio than today's HD plasmas. And you will max out at 42". I'll happily take the extra 8" over the slightly better contrast. YMMV.

But in any case, the resolution _absolutely will not be a factor in getting rid of the jaggies_. You cannot combat aliasing by lowering the resolution of the panel to match the already low resolution source. Its makes no sense to think otherwise. It is true that lowering the resolution of the panel could in theory minimize scaling artifacts. In practice though, I see no scaling artifacts whatsoever on my 50" HD plasma. I also see no softening of the image. The internal scaler is plenty good. The picture is quite spectacular - as good as you could hope for a non-HD source.
our only hope against the jaggies, is better AA software in future games for the wii, help us nerdy programmers, you're our only hope. :rolleyes:

FiveMillionWays

03-03-07, 04:18 PM

JoshuaL

03-04-07, 02:43 AM

It's not the jaggies that bother me. It's the resolution that gets to me. I still see jaggies on ps3 as well as 360 games. I hate the way Wii looks on my hd setups. Makes these games unplayable. Well other then Wii sports!

OK, you keep posting this in several places. We get it. Personally, sending the Wii's 480p video to my Sanyo Z4 (720p) projector and viewing on a 92" 16:9 screen results in very nice-looking graphics. I've played 50 hours on Zelda, completed Excite Truck, and played lesser amounts of Wii Sports, Wii Play, and Elebits. I noticed the jagged edges on Zelda initially, but hardly ever notice them during regular game play. Things just move too fast normally to notice that stuff.

I've also played Ridge Racer 7 on the PS3 over the same display and can say that is clearly better than the Wii ... by a mile. However, for me the gameplay of the Wii isn't negatively impacted in any significant manner by the lower resolution. Obviously there are plenty of differing opinions, but I would highly discourage anyone from not picking up either a Wii or a specific game just because of a hesitancy to couple it with an HD display.

GreenMonkey

03-04-07, 11:30 PM

It's not the jaggies that bother me. It's the resolution that gets to me. I still see jaggies on ps3 as well as 360 games. I hate the way Wii looks on my hd setups. Makes these games unplayable. Well other then Wii sports!

I doubt it is the scaling causing problems. The wii does not look substantially different on my 720p Optoma HD72 than it did on my ~480p Infocus X1.

Take it from a guy than ran GC & Xbox in ED for years at 100".

The problem is simply no anti-aliasing. A lot of PS2 games have the same problem. 3D games on the Wii look a bit rough because of the no/little amount of AA.

FiveMillionWays

03-05-07, 02:40 AM

I hope so. It's still fun but needs lots of improvements in the AA department!

Slordak

03-05-07, 10:58 AM

In some cases, the Wii graphics are also hurt by the relatively low polygon count or relatively simple texturing. Elebits is lots of fun, but the graphics have to be kept incredibly simple in order to allow lots of different objects to move around (with realistic physics) at the same time. This doesn't necessarily get worse on an HDTV, but the "simpleness" is more apparent when viewed on a larger display.

And yes, we need more anti-aliasing. On the original Xbox, my opinion and that of my spouse was that Dead or Alive Xtreme Beach Volleyball looked better at 480i with S-Video than it did at 480p with component, simply because the 480i via S-Video added just a bit of blur which mostly eliminated the jaggies.

FiveMillionWays

03-06-07, 01:16 AM

I'm going to finish my research on the true resolution of the Wii by tomorrow. All I need to do is connect it to my 1080 P set which tells me the resolution being output from attatched devices. VCR's are so basic in the output departement. 720 X 480i! The good thing is that it gives you the exact resolution on screen so I can take a picture and post my findings!

twelvepbrs

03-06-07, 02:24 PM

anyone here playing ssx? my buddy picked it up and claims to be addicted, wondering if i should give it a whirl

dagware

03-06-07, 03:36 PM

anyone here playing ssx? my buddy picked it up and claims to be addicted, wondering if i should give it a whirl
There's another thread on this -- check it out. In short, yes get it, but be prepared for a steep and somewhat frustrating, but ultimately rewarding, learning curve.

-Dan

thelead

03-12-07, 01:09 AM

Wii with component cables:

http://img157.imageshack.us/img157/9868/img0607ul8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

FiveMillionWays

03-17-07, 02:19 PM

That is a nice pic. Samsung flat panels are awsome.

JDub_41

10-07-07, 01:16 PM

DaverJ

10-07-07, 02:22 PM

So what is the consensus? Im about to pick-up a 46" Samsung LCD for my new home theater set-up. I know the Wii isn't built for HD, but would like some feedback from you HDTV owners. Is it utterly unplayable on a TV that size?

Unplayable? No.

Hooked up with an the optional component cables, it looks as good as watching a DVD on your set, albeit with some jaggies (diagonal lines look like stair steps). Others prefer to use the composite cable, which results in a softer image but the jaggies are less pronounced.

It depends on your benchmark: if you are expecting it to look like an Xbox360 or PS3, it will disappoint. As you said, it's not HD -- but still looks reasonably good on a 60" set via component IMO.

SpeedyHTPC

10-08-07, 09:16 PM

Get a Gefen HTS . It may work better .

Bailey151

10-09-07, 12:50 PM

So what is the consensus? Im about to pick-up a 46" Samsung LCD for my new home theater set-up. I know the Wii isn't built for HD, but would like some feedback from you HDTV owners. Is it utterly unplayable on a TV that size?

thelead - what size TV is that?
See the picture above, that's a good 1st gen game example. Some of the games mentioned here like Zelda are gamecube games that have been ported over - 2nd gen games like Metroid look FAR better. It does suffer from a lack of textures & polygons...but that's the nature of the beast, it's not a 360. MP has some jaggies but generally they are on thin items & don't take away from the game in the least.

Dash33

10-10-07, 11:46 AM

Well I spent last week-end shopping for a new widescreen TV, I finally bought a Panny TC-32LX700 based on all the good reviews + it looked good. I brought it home and connected my Wii on it. My old set was a 4:3 EDTV 480p CRT from Samsung and it looked great with 480p games (only no widescreen).

I knew Wii games might look less than OK on my new set because the native resolution on that set is 1366 x 768. So I changed the config on my Wii to be 16:9 format and effectively, everything was less clear from the Mii channel to Zelda, to Brain Academy, less clear than on my CRT that is. I don't mean less clear as in blurry, just less defined. So I brought my Wii at best buy and connected it to every damn TV I could find and they all exhibited what I saw at home, my new TV having the best tracking motion of all other LCD screen.

So a light came up in my head, that's not the HDTVs that makes games looks less defined, it's the widescreen option of the Wii... so I changed it back to 4:3 and everything was as clear as my old TV set. To make sure, the problem was not the TV I connected the Wii to the old 480p CRT set, I changed the aspect ratio on this TV to be 16:9(with black bars, I never used it) then I booted the wii, set it to 16:9, booted my testing game: Big Brain Academy and everything was less defined, it's really clear looking at the graphic with all the categories (identification, maths, memory etc..) the word "identification" is really not well defined compared to 4:3 even though it takes the same space in the widescreen version and in the 4:3 version. And not just smaller, less defined, really I know what I'm talking about.

So my conclusion is Wii resolution on widescreen "must" be 640x480 or 720x480 with non-square pixels to fill the entire screen because the difference in definition is really obvious. If it was 852x480p, the image would be as well defined 4:3 or 16:9 but it's really not after hours of testing.

I hope it helps the discussion, widescreen on Wii looks worse than 4:3 format because of non-square pixel (or you could say missing pixels to make a square-pixel perfect widescreen ratio)

DaverJ

10-10-07, 12:01 PM

Dash... you are on the right track.

The Wii is a standard def, NTSC device. Much like a DVD player, the way it creates widescreen 16:9 from a 4:3 SD image is not to change the resolution (pixel count), but to change the image to compensate for stretching to a different aspect ratio. This is different than a computer which changes the number of pixels that is displayed.

Dash33

10-10-07, 12:15 PM

I just wanted to end the argument that Wii was a 852x480 device but I'ts really a deception that it isn't because 16:9 aspect ratio is cool in Wii games at the expense of definition. At least movie DVDs are encoded at 720x480, even 4:3 DVDs so it's less of a stretch to display them without too much of a definition problem (ideal would be 852x480 but it's not a standard). It's more and more obvious for me that the problem with Wii in widescreen is it's 640x480 and not 720x480 so it's really obvious that it is missing pixels on a widescreen format. I really thought for a moment that the Wii was using it's extra horse power over the Gamecube to actually display more pixels to do a well-defined widescreen aspect ratio, silly me ;-)

mkoesel

10-10-07, 01:47 PM

I just wanted to end the argument that Wii was a 852x480 device...

Actually that argument is very old and it has been well known and accepted for some time that the Wii does not output 852x480.

But your comments were still appreciated.

At least movie DVDs are encoded at 720x480, even 4:3 DVDs so it's less of a stretch to display them without too much of a definition problem (ideal would be 852x480 but it's not a standard). It's more and more obvious for me that the problem with Wii in widescreen is it's 640x480 and not 720x480 so it's really obvious that it is missing pixels on a widescreen format

If you can tell the difference between 640x480 and 720x480, then you have some uncanny vision. I know I would not be able to tell.

Anyway, I think the Wii looks great on my plasma - at either 16x9 or 4x3. I think maybe a lot of what you are seeing is the difference in contrast ratio and black level between your CRT and LCDs.

Bailey151

10-10-07, 03:45 PM

Interesting information. I'll have to try the 4:3 test but I seriously doubt given my display it will be much different......given it's a non-square display (1024x768 @ 42") - 720 lite as I like to say :D

Dash33

10-10-07, 04:08 PM

Like I said I compared 4:3 and 16:9 on the CRT too, and could easily notice the difference in definition looking at certain words and even on Mii channel, and the difference is not TV-based for this particular problem because I tried it on every TV set known to man ;-).

640x480 looks great when it is displayed on a 4:3 aspect ratio (square pixels) and not too great when using those same pixels to display on a 16:9 format. it's like trying to emulate a 852x480 fictional display with only 640 pixels width for 480 pixels height you are sure to lose definition on the way when graphics assets are the same for the two aspect ratios.

640 is 25% less pixels than the fictional 852 it's trying to emulate to go along the 480 height to produce an aspect ratio of 16:9 so , yes it is showing, I could show it to you how to test it and I explained it a little on my long post. Sorry for all the babbling.

720 to 852 is only 15% but I can't compare the Wii to a DVD player playing a movie, apples and oranges. I am a resolution freak, sorry.

I dont say the Wii looks horrible either at 16:9, just less defined than when the Wii is configured to 4:3. I still play on 16:9 though but it's a minor gripe nonetheless.

DaverJ

10-10-07, 04:17 PM

720 to 852 is only 15% but I can't compare the Wii to a DVD player playing a movie, apples and oranges. I am a resolution freak, sorry.

Have you played WarioWare in widescreen 16:9 on an HD set? It's a 2d game (or at least the cut-scenes are), so it compares to DVD "apples to apples" I would say.

IMO the resolution playing this game on the Wii widescreen is as good, if not better, than anamporphic DVDs on my HDTV.

Dash33

10-10-07, 04:29 PM

Yes I've played that game and if I remember correctly the cut-scenes are generated through some mpeg codecs (not real-time rendering) with streaming audio etc... I dont't know if those particular scenes are encoded at 640x480 or other resolution. I was trying to say I could not compare real-time rendering graphics with movie-based content because the source is not really the same. Anamorphic mpeg2 is a much harder format to compare across sources and output resolutions because of many variables. It's easier for me to compare the Wii with the Wii using realtime graphics as a reference ;-). I was merely trying to pinpoint the difference between 4:3 and 16:9 definition of Wii games and I don't think I'm crazy (actually I am but not in the sense I thought I was)

Kingcarcas

10-10-07, 05:49 PM

RE4 doesn't fill my TV, i have the component cables and it's set to widescreen:confused:

dmaul1114

10-10-07, 10:59 PM

RE4 doesn't fill my TV, i have the component cables and it's set to widescreen:confused:

A lot of Wii games have underscan, so you'll get small black bars around all sides of the picture in games like Metroid. Unless your TV has overscan, in which case they might no be displayed, or be small enough to not really notice.

mkoesel

10-11-07, 09:07 AM

Like I said I compared 4:3 and 16:9 on the CRT too, and could easily notice the difference in definition looking at certain words and even on Mii channel, and the difference is not TV-based for this particular problem because I tried it on every TV set known to man ;-).

Well I guess you really do indeed have some great vision then. :) I am curious what size the CRT is, and how far back you are from it when doing the comparisons?

I sit about 10' from my 50" screen typically, so I think that's partly why its not something I notice. Plus, I'm used to the look of anamorphic widescreen picture now, since I rarely switch it to 4x3.

I dont say the Wii looks horrible either at 16:9, just less defined than when the Wii is configured to 4:3. I still play on 16:9 though but it's a minor gripe nonetheless.

Cool. Yeah, I'd rather have anamorphic widescreen than no widescreen at all. But yeah, I understand your gripe. It will be nice when Nintendo finally goes HD. I think that has got to happen with their next generation console, since the novelty of the Wii Remote as an input device will have worn off by then, and the competition will likely have similar controllers by then also.

Bailey151

10-11-07, 10:04 AM

It will be nice when Nintendo finally goes HD. I think that has got to happen with their next generation console, since the novelty of the Wii Remote as an input device will have worn off by then, and the competition will likely have similar controllers by then also.
That should be ideal - HD & Wiimote controls = perfect console. I'd say the Wiimote has proven one thing - that being the dual sticks time has passed.

nexxium

10-11-07, 11:39 PM

would anyone be able to give me a heads-up on the lag time I will be dealing with, using the Wii(480p) with a sammy HP-T 5054(720p) ? Will Guitar Hero 3 be unplayable, or does the gaming mode actually work?

-posted this over in the 54/64 forum, but I just stumbled on this post and figured someone here would be able to point me in the right direction, and hopefully that doesn't have me taking the sammy back to BB :(

darklordjames

10-12-07, 01:42 AM

On a Samsung under "game mode" running 480p, responses should be very fast. Guitar Hero 3 will probably have a delay compensation option as well (just like GH2).

Shizelbs

10-15-07, 06:25 PM

I play our Wii on a 61 inch 1080p DLP. I think it looks good. Obviously the graphics aren't cutting edge or state of the art, but they look fine. Its not like watching regular cable on a HD TV. Its not that kind of bad. Some games look better than others. Oh, also I am using the component cables at 480p.

Juicyjucie3303

10-16-07, 10:51 PM

dmaul1114

10-17-07, 12:09 AM

Yeah, and the main thing is the game has a lag adjustment. So game mode + lag adjustment should make it perfectly fine for you guys.

Oddly, on my Sony KDF50-2000E (LCD RPTV) I get zero lag in the PS2 GH2 running in 480p via component (calibration test comes out to 0ms every time). I did get some lag when I just had it hooked up via S-video in 480i while waiting to get component cables. But it still wasn't that bad, something like 10ms.

Guess my set upconverts stuff pretty quickly.

remotecontrol

10-17-07, 03:59 AM

We play mostly Sports on our 50" Samsung DLP. It's fine except for the jaggies as everyone notices.. They're really annoying, and once you start noticing you can't stop..

TheCrackedJack

10-25-07, 03:32 AM

On a decently sized TV, and sitting a reasonable distance back it looks fine.

On a large projection screen, 80+ inches, it looks pretty damned terrible. But then so does everything non HD at that size.

hyrule

10-25-07, 02:58 PM

Hi,

Yesterday I tested Wii with Optoma HD80 and I didn´t like the image. I previous tested Wii with Panasonic AE900, but with HD-80 the image seems to be more "blurry".

Thanks

Mauricio

Slordak

10-25-07, 04:41 PM

My experience is (and continues to be) that using the component cables along with a nice HDTV doesn't necessarily produce a blurry image, it just produces a very accurate representation of very low resolution data. This means that there are jagged edges everywhere, and the graphics basically look uninspired (e.g., lots of flat shading and low-polygon models).

A few games, such as Legend of Zelda, intentionally add blur, to try and reduce the appearance of sharp edges, so yeah, one would indeed see this effect in such games. And of course, if one uses "Full" mode for 4x3 titles, the HDTV itself is making the graphics worse via the stretch...

WaveBoy

08-29-08, 07:56 PM

Here's the thing.

I have my Wii hooked up to a Sony 32" Wega Trinitron CRT SDTV using Component Cables and it looks and plays Perfectly, simply put it looks gorgeouse, i guess it helps having one the best CRTs ever made...But then again, I am missing out on 'Progressive' and 'Widescreen', hich is the only real advantage to playing the Wii on an HDTV.

Because besides the fact that you do get Progressive and Widescreen I've heard it doesn't look quite as good as its should on an SDTV, but because of the progressive it does make it look better in ways.

I've only seen the Wii played on my friends friend crappy LCD.
And like i said the Widescreen and Progressive were nice, but the Upscaled image which showed Jaggies looked inferior. But it's possible the TV had a ****** scaler.

CJMiller

08-31-08, 04:48 PM

My friend James has a 60" Samsung rear-projection HDTV and his Wii looks perfect in 1080p... with composite cables.

jwebb1970

09-02-08, 11:14 AM

In laws have thier Wii running into an Olevia 40-ish in LCD, with original composite/480i. Looks pretty decent.

Other in laws run Wii @ 480p/component to a Sony Bravia LCD - very nice.

I run my Wii to a Hitachi CRT RPTV (51F59A) via component @ 480i (letting TV's built in "scaler" convert that to either 540p/1080i). Looks fabulous.

3dmuses

12-11-08, 01:27 PM

I too have ours plugged into a ScreenPlay 5000 720p projector shooting onto a 120" screen. It looks great.
GB-)

FreeEnterprise

12-22-08, 10:33 AM

I bought component cables for my wii from ebay for $1.99! plus $1.99 shipping.

Then I run it into my onkyo 606 which upconverts it.

It doesn't fill my screen all the way, but it looks much better than the standard signal that comes out of a wii with regular cables and not upconverted. The upconversion is critical on the wii to look decent.

PS.

If you still have a nintendo 64 and hook it up to the regular video input on your 606 and play mario kart 4 player... It will be in widescreen and it looks pretty good!

robertbg007

12-27-08, 06:29 PM

forgetting how it looks, how does it play on a plasma or LCD. any lag etc???

mproper

12-27-08, 10:13 PM

Well, I spent the money for the quote HD unquote cables. Got the wii for our kid for Christmas, and I'm pretty disappointed with how it looks

For instance, we played it at a friend's before, and they were running 480i composite cables. The pins in the bowling game in Wii Sports were very jaggy. Was hoping 480p would help that, but it doesn't seem to at all. Lots of things like that all over.

Mario Galaxy looks better though (although I never played it at 480i).

But it's still fun, so I don't care that much. Mario Galaxy is especially fun to play...that's the Nintendo originality/innovation coming through.

GobbityGotz

12-28-08, 09:06 PM

mkoesel

12-29-08, 12:22 PM

I still cannot fathom how Nintendo did not make this system HD. Seems to be truly meant for that little 24" crt in kids rooms. OTOH I can deal with the resolution which looks less than stellar on my 60" Pioneer for the sheer fun of this freakin' thing! Damn you Nintendo!

I think that you answered your own question - they did not do HD because they new they had an addictive experience on their hands even without it. That said, I wish it were HD. But, I think that next generation it will be for sure. Better motion detaction and control will surely be part of the next system too. Should be a winner.

FreeEnterprise

01-02-09, 09:37 AM

We had a family Wii party yesterday. What a blast! Everyone of all ages had fun. We even had trophies for the "winners".

I took some pics so you can see what it looks like on my 130 inch screen, using the wii component cables, and upconverting the signal through my Onkyo 606.

It looks WAY better than standard cables, or even component cables without upconverting...

Upconversion is the key to decent Wii.

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j29/GlennMehltretter/IMG_0044.jpg

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j29/GlennMehltretter/IMG_0041.jpg

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j29/GlennMehltretter/IMG_0039.jpg

You can see the size difference (boarders) on the widescreen, it is a bit smaller than the standard hd video signal.

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j29/GlennMehltretter/IMG_0033.jpg

Here is the winner for the "Best Mii Likeness".
http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j29/GlennMehltretter/IMG_0057.jpg

Here is the winner of the "Wii Bowling Champion 2009"
http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j29/GlennMehltretter/IMG_0056.jpg

You can get little imitation wii controllers at walgreens that dispence candy... Or make great wii trophies!

As far as accuracy, I've tested a bunch of places for my wii sensor.

I've found that the absolute best is to mount it pretty low to the ground, with nothing in front of it. I have mine on the top of my receiver, sticking out a tiny bit so none of the sensing area is blocked. It works great. Every time I mounted it to the top of my tv, it seemed to be less accurate...