superspiffy
CAGiversary!
Is it possible to connect two TVs to the Wii to avoid those annoying splitscreens when you play two players?
Connecting 2 TVs?
- Thread starter superspiffy
- Start date
Not possible with one system, no.
But it would be possible via a LAN setup, where each person has their own Wii setup on TV and a copy of the game.
It is thought that the Wii is capable of wireless LAN, as said was occurring during the Leipzig gaming conference. There, IGN editors said on a few occassions that local multiplayer games of Battallion Wars 2 were being played between show attendees wirelessly.
If this is true, wireless LAN would kick ass. Then we could have awesome FPS multiplayer matches without annoying split screens.
But it would be possible via a LAN setup, where each person has their own Wii setup on TV and a copy of the game.
It is thought that the Wii is capable of wireless LAN, as said was occurring during the Leipzig gaming conference. There, IGN editors said on a few occassions that local multiplayer games of Battallion Wars 2 were being played between show attendees wirelessly.
If this is true, wireless LAN would kick ass. Then we could have awesome FPS multiplayer matches without annoying split screens.
superspiffy
CAGiversary!
[quote name='rickonker']Didn't Sony say the PS3 can do this? Or was that cancelled too...[/quote]
i think the ps3 was originally gonna come up with 2 hdmi ports, but that was scrapped to lower cost and how many people actually have 2 hdtvs?
i think the ps3 was originally gonna come up with 2 hdmi ports, but that was scrapped to lower cost and how many people actually have 2 hdtvs?
It *IS* possible, I'm just not sure how.
You know how at some concerts and such, you'll see one image displayed on several TVs that are mounted together to form one huge picture?
I read an article a long time ago about how someone did using whatever the device was that did this, four TVs and a Nintendo 64 (I said it was awhile ago!). They used it to play Mario Kart and GoldenEye. The device cut the image being output by the N64 into quarters, which lined up with what the N64 divided the screen into for 4-player games.
*edit* A google search for 'Mario Kart Nintendo 64 split screen "4 TVs"' gave me this!
http://kontek.net/davidwonn/4tvs.html
You know how at some concerts and such, you'll see one image displayed on several TVs that are mounted together to form one huge picture?
I read an article a long time ago about how someone did using whatever the device was that did this, four TVs and a Nintendo 64 (I said it was awhile ago!). They used it to play Mario Kart and GoldenEye. The device cut the image being output by the N64 into quarters, which lined up with what the N64 divided the screen into for 4-player games.
*edit* A google search for 'Mario Kart Nintendo 64 split screen "4 TVs"' gave me this!
http://kontek.net/davidwonn/4tvs.html
superspiffy
CAGiversary!
that's an interesting story, but it still doesnt tell me what device i have to get in order to split that signal between tvs
PenguinMaster
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 2 (100%)
[quote name='superspiffy']i think the ps3 was originally gonna come up with 2 hdmi ports, but that was scrapped to lower cost and how many people actually have 2 hdtvs?[/QUOTE]
I would've used it to connect to 2 computer monitors.
I would've used it to connect to 2 computer monitors.
[quote name='UncleBob']It *IS* possible, I'm just not sure how.
You know how at some concerts and such, you'll see one image displayed on several TVs that are mounted together to form one huge picture?
I read an article a long time ago about how someone did using whatever the device was that did this, four TVs and a Nintendo 64 (I said it was awhile ago!). They used it to play Mario Kart and GoldenEye. The device cut the image being output by the N64 into quarters, which lined up with what the N64 divided the screen into for 4-player games.
*edit* A google search for 'Mario Kart Nintendo 64 split screen "4 TVs"' gave me this!
http://kontek.net/davidwonn/4tvs.html[/QUOTE]
That is a low end form of video wall or a 'dumb wall' in the business.
http://9xmedia.com/Pages-products/2000 - Xwall.html
For a dumb wall the image is scaled up and sections of it sent to different monitors. A smart wall can switch on the fly to having independent images on each display.
This sort of stuff isn't cheap but it is possible to build your own. If you have a PC with two video card and a video in, you just need smart drivers for the cards. Still, not a trivial expenditure for the desired result.
For games supporting LAN play, getting additional Wiis or just requiring people to bring their own makes more sense. Now that LCD TVs are dropping to reasonable prices the effort to gather several displays in one place is reducd.
You know how at some concerts and such, you'll see one image displayed on several TVs that are mounted together to form one huge picture?
I read an article a long time ago about how someone did using whatever the device was that did this, four TVs and a Nintendo 64 (I said it was awhile ago!). They used it to play Mario Kart and GoldenEye. The device cut the image being output by the N64 into quarters, which lined up with what the N64 divided the screen into for 4-player games.
*edit* A google search for 'Mario Kart Nintendo 64 split screen "4 TVs"' gave me this!
http://kontek.net/davidwonn/4tvs.html[/QUOTE]
That is a low end form of video wall or a 'dumb wall' in the business.
http://9xmedia.com/Pages-products/2000 - Xwall.html
For a dumb wall the image is scaled up and sections of it sent to different monitors. A smart wall can switch on the fly to having independent images on each display.
This sort of stuff isn't cheap but it is possible to build your own. If you have a PC with two video card and a video in, you just need smart drivers for the cards. Still, not a trivial expenditure for the desired result.
For games supporting LAN play, getting additional Wiis or just requiring people to bring their own makes more sense. Now that LCD TVs are dropping to reasonable prices the effort to gather several displays in one place is reducd.
[quote name='rickonker']Didn't Sony say the PS3 can do this? Or was that cancelled too...[/QUOTE]
At the time Sony was still working out the details from having to almost completely redesign the PS3. The original concept called for multiple Cell chips and no dedicated GPU. The idea was that the Cells would do everything and developers would allocate the capacity to different tasks as they saw fit. This tied in well with Sony's much hyped claimed about ganging together multiple Cells, even enlisting the help of Cells contained in other networked devices within the household.
This was utter nonsense in terms of latency issues, and worse, IBM was having trouble getting more than two Cells working together within a single system. There is an old saying in the world of high performance computing, "Massively parallel systems are highly resistant to programming." Cell was supposed to magically solve problems that had been facing such systems for decades. It still isn't clear why sony thought they could not only do this but bring it directly into consumer products.
On top of this, just making the Cell chips with mostly usable SPEs was proving very difficult. A system using multiple Cells would be horribly expensive. The iSuppli estimate for the Cell's cost (which is only based on the silicon cost and doesn't factor for poor yields) in the PS3 is $80. Imagine that multiplied by four but minus the RSX GPU. A big jump over the still expensive PS3 that finally resulted.
So Sony had to regroup and recruited Nvidia to help them out very late in the project. With E3 approaching there was nothing resembling an actual PS3 in existence. There were Cell board systems and Nvidia had prototype 7xxx silicon running in PCs. So Sony ran demos from the Cell and Nvidia ran the demos they were already preparing for the PC product.
Nvidia was naturally intending to have dual video outputs on their product and it would be their first with HDMI support. In a moment of desperation someone at Sony decided this would make a good feature for the PS3. That the feature was quietly dropped on the PS3 road to reality should surprise nobody.
At the time Sony was still working out the details from having to almost completely redesign the PS3. The original concept called for multiple Cell chips and no dedicated GPU. The idea was that the Cells would do everything and developers would allocate the capacity to different tasks as they saw fit. This tied in well with Sony's much hyped claimed about ganging together multiple Cells, even enlisting the help of Cells contained in other networked devices within the household.
This was utter nonsense in terms of latency issues, and worse, IBM was having trouble getting more than two Cells working together within a single system. There is an old saying in the world of high performance computing, "Massively parallel systems are highly resistant to programming." Cell was supposed to magically solve problems that had been facing such systems for decades. It still isn't clear why sony thought they could not only do this but bring it directly into consumer products.
On top of this, just making the Cell chips with mostly usable SPEs was proving very difficult. A system using multiple Cells would be horribly expensive. The iSuppli estimate for the Cell's cost (which is only based on the silicon cost and doesn't factor for poor yields) in the PS3 is $80. Imagine that multiplied by four but minus the RSX GPU. A big jump over the still expensive PS3 that finally resulted.
So Sony had to regroup and recruited Nvidia to help them out very late in the project. With E3 approaching there was nothing resembling an actual PS3 in existence. There were Cell board systems and Nvidia had prototype 7xxx silicon running in PCs. So Sony ran demos from the Cell and Nvidia ran the demos they were already preparing for the PC product.
Nvidia was naturally intending to have dual video outputs on their product and it would be their first with HDMI support. In a moment of desperation someone at Sony decided this would make a good feature for the PS3. That the feature was quietly dropped on the PS3 road to reality should surprise nobody.
A Happy Panda
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 61 (100%)
[quote name='epobirs']
For games supporting LAN play, getting additional Wiis or just requiring people to bring their own makes more sense. Now that LCD TVs are dropping to reasonable prices the effort to gather several displays in one place is reducd.[/QUOTE]
This question is not just for epobirs, but if he knows he's welcome to answer. When playing the Wii via LAN (I'm assuming you can do this? I haven't read entirely too much about the specs), do you have to exchange friend codes or will the Wii's recognize each other on the network and play together?
For games supporting LAN play, getting additional Wiis or just requiring people to bring their own makes more sense. Now that LCD TVs are dropping to reasonable prices the effort to gather several displays in one place is reducd.[/QUOTE]
This question is not just for epobirs, but if he knows he's welcome to answer. When playing the Wii via LAN (I'm assuming you can do this? I haven't read entirely too much about the specs), do you have to exchange friend codes or will the Wii's recognize each other on the network and play together?
rickonker
CAGiversary!
[quote name='epobirs']At the time Sony was still working out the details from having to almost completely redesign the PS3. The original concept called for multiple Cell chips and no dedicated GPU. The idea was that the Cells would do everything and developers would allocate the capacity to different tasks as they saw fit. This tied in well with Sony's much hyped claimed about ganging together multiple Cells, even enlisting the help of Cells contained in other networked devices within the household.
This was utter nonsense in terms of latency issues, and worse, IBM was having trouble getting more than two Cells working together within a single system. There is an old saying in the world of high performance computing, "Massively parallel systems are highly resistant to programming." Cell was supposed to magically solve problems that had been facing such systems for decades. It still isn't clear why sony thought they could not only do this but bring it directly into consumer products.
On top of this, just making the Cell chips with mostly usable SPEs was proving very difficult. A system using multiple Cells would be horribly expensive. The iSuppli estimate for the Cell's cost (which is only based on the silicon cost and doesn't factor for poor yields) in the PS3 is $80. Imagine that multiplied by four but minus the RSX GPU. A big jump over the still expensive PS3 that finally resulted.
So Sony had to regroup and recruited Nvidia to help them out very late in the project. With E3 approaching there was nothing resembling an actual PS3 in existence. There were Cell board systems and Nvidia had prototype 7xxx silicon running in PCs. So Sony ran demos from the Cell and Nvidia ran the demos they were already preparing for the PC product.
Nvidia was naturally intending to have dual video outputs on their product and it would be their first with HDMI support. In a moment of desperation someone at Sony decided this would make a good feature for the PS3. That the feature was quietly dropped on the PS3 road to reality should surprise nobody.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the post, that was very informative.
This was utter nonsense in terms of latency issues, and worse, IBM was having trouble getting more than two Cells working together within a single system. There is an old saying in the world of high performance computing, "Massively parallel systems are highly resistant to programming." Cell was supposed to magically solve problems that had been facing such systems for decades. It still isn't clear why sony thought they could not only do this but bring it directly into consumer products.
On top of this, just making the Cell chips with mostly usable SPEs was proving very difficult. A system using multiple Cells would be horribly expensive. The iSuppli estimate for the Cell's cost (which is only based on the silicon cost and doesn't factor for poor yields) in the PS3 is $80. Imagine that multiplied by four but minus the RSX GPU. A big jump over the still expensive PS3 that finally resulted.
So Sony had to regroup and recruited Nvidia to help them out very late in the project. With E3 approaching there was nothing resembling an actual PS3 in existence. There were Cell board systems and Nvidia had prototype 7xxx silicon running in PCs. So Sony ran demos from the Cell and Nvidia ran the demos they were already preparing for the PC product.
Nvidia was naturally intending to have dual video outputs on their product and it would be their first with HDMI support. In a moment of desperation someone at Sony decided this would make a good feature for the PS3. That the feature was quietly dropped on the PS3 road to reality should surprise nobody.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the post, that was very informative.
bread's done