KyanMehwulfe said:You can dig as a wolf in Zelda eh?
+50 to Potential Secrets... Mmmmm.
PG2G said:I don't get it
KyanMehwulfe said:You can dig as a wolf in Zelda eh?
+50 to Potential Secrets... Mmmmm.
PG2G said:You could just compare COD3 on PS3/360 and Wii, that should make it pretty damn clear. Nobody is saying the games look like shit, they sure as hell aren't impressive though.
Jokeropia said:The best of these screens are as close to X360/PS3 as the PS2 is to GC/Xbox. Yes, graphics whores will consider this a crazy standpoint but to me it's 100% truth. I have an Xbox 360 (no HD TV) and the only times I really notice a clear improvement over Xbox is in Oblivion when there's a sunset in a fairly large area or something. Playing Call of Duty 2 and the demo of Prey I don't see much of a difference from Xbox/GC games.
Really, people claiming that these games look like shit are nothing more than trolls. (Who I suspect would never have bitched so much about the Wii's power had Nintendo not openly stated that they weren't focusing on it to begin with.)
Logan Cano said:Crazy talk. I'm hardly a troll, the graphics bar has been increased significantly and Wii's hardware isn't good enough. Simple as that. Of course, fanboys tend to justify and accept whatever their favorite company is doing, so they have adjusted their expectations, and now suddenly GCN graphics for the next 5 years are good, and worth circle jerking for.
As for yur other point, maybe the best Wii titles could compare to some of the very worst X360/PS3 titles, but not to the good looking titles. It's also painfully obvious this is GCN level hardware, so I don't get what you are talking about there either.
PolyGone said::lol thou doth protest too much, and your transparent trolling merely feeds our love of all things wii
Logan Cano said:Crazy talk.
.Jokeropia said:Yes, graphics whores will consider this a crazy standpoint but to me it's 100% truth.
Logan Cano said:Aren't you the guy that believes that there isn't a big difference between Wii visuals and X360/PS3?? I suppose criticizing isn't going to change anything at this point, but old hardware is old hardware. I don't see why anyone has to like just because Nintendo has gone "different" this time around.
beelzebozo said:i hope no one actually believes this, because it's not true.
but these games still look like a blast.
Jokeropia said:.
IMO, best looking Wii games = average looking X360 games.
Logan Cano said:I remember a thread where I discussed with him something like that, so it's not a surprise. Anyway, the games look...fun, but in terms of graphics, they are pretty bad. That's what I'm refering to.
Logan Cano said:I remember a thread where I discussed with him something like that, so it's not a surprise. Anyway, the games look...fun, but in terms of graphics, they are pretty bad. That's what I'm refering to.
Louminater said:The lack of decent games is disturbing........ Espicially for a Nintendo system, I can't believe they didn't release more suprises (game-wise).
I'll get my Nintendo Wii once Zelda, Mario, and SSBB are all ready to go and when the system is down to at least $200.
How is there a lack of "decent" games? Going by people that have played the games, it seems there are actually a number of potentially decent to good to great games coming... and that's just for launch. Plenty of hands-on reviews contradict the notion that only the obligatory Nintendo big franchises are worth playing.Louminater said:The lack of decent games is disturbing........ Espicially for a Nintendo system, I can't believe they didn't release more suprises (game-wise).
I'll get my Nintendo Wii once Zelda, Mario, and SSBB are all ready to go and when the system is down to at least $200.
PolyGone said:On the other hand, I can honestly tell you that despite the fact Kameo might be technically superior to Zelda TP, Zelda TP still looks better in my opinion.
nincompoop said:The best looking Wii games look much better than the average X360 game, imo. Call me crazy, but I think the classic Nintendo style holds much more visual appeal than a generic bald buff space marine in giant armor shooting at space aliens at sub-30 frames per second.
PantherLotus said:Both sides of this silly argument are being shortsighted. What none of the people debating here realize is this really is first-gen Wii software that are almost all ported from GC stuff on GC engines. Now go back and look at the progression of graphics between the first GC games and some of the best (Resident Evil). The Wii's games aren't close to that level yet, but pretending that the Wii isn't capable of doing that AND THEN SOME is absurd.
PolyGone said:On the other hand, I can honestly tell you that despite the fact Kameo might be technically superior to Zelda TP, Zelda TP still looks better in my opinion.
Know what? Your right. Wii is setting a new standerd for videogame consoles. It will be the first one, that I can think of, where the games will improve, but only ever so slightly, and will ALL look as good as Mario Galaxy, NEVER signifigantly better.Logan Cano said:Doubtfull. Unless Wii's GPU actually has new graphical features, it won't improve much. A big part of a system's graphical progresion is that generally, a new architecture is underneath it, and because of that, a learning process is needed to properly code for the plattform.
AFAIK, Wii is scarily similar to GCN's architecture, so an actual progression is very unlikely to happen.
Of course, the arguement that stated that third parties never really payed attention to GCN and thus graphics will still improve from them is valid, but I'd be very surprised to see something clearly surpass Metroid Prime 2 or RE4.
Logan Cano said:Of course, the arguement that stated that third parties never really payed attention to GCN and thus graphics will still improve from them is valid, but I'd be very surprised to see something clearly surpass Metroid Prime 2 or RE4.
moku said:Know what? Your right. Wii is setting a new standerd for videogame consoles. It will be the first one, that I can think of, where the games will improve, but only ever so slightly, and will ALL look as good s Mario Galaxy.
It just wont stop.
Logan Cano said:Of course, the arguement that stated that third parties never really payed attention to GCN and thus graphics will still improve from them is valid, but I'd be very surprised to see something clearly surpass Metroid Prime 2 or RE4.
Logan Cano said:Ermmm...since when was I talking in terms of "art"?? Zelda's art is much more appealing than Gears', but it still looks like crap when compared on technical terms.
PolyGone said:Even if that were true, we're not talking about a system where graphics are its primary selling point. Feel free to spend time arguing the finer points of PS3/360 graphics and let us enjoy these for what they are; great looking games for the system they will be played on.
beelzebozo said:see: metroid prime 3.
if we were all looking for games purely on technical graphical prowess, we'd be playing this:
No, I agree with you.Logan Cano said:So...basically you say I'm a liar?? That the reason games improve isn't because of optimization and getting used to a new plattform?? And that a machine that has tiny differences to the one before, a plattform where developers already know how to maximize resources and performance, will still see big jumps like on a new plattform with a completely different architecture??
beelzebozo said:if we were all looking for games purely on technical graphical prowess, we'd be playing this:
DarknessTear said:Oh snap, I had no idea that was a video game.
H.A.M.M.E.R. also seems to be a "real" Wii-game, not a Gamecube-port. It looks very promising - and it has sparks!PantherLotus said:To be fair, many of these screens are from games that really are ports of GC/PS2 level stuff, including Legend of Zelda. Answer this: what is the best looking game graphics-wise that we've seen so far in this thread? That's right--Super Mario Galaxy. Guess what. It was designed from the ground up on Wii hardware.
Virtually everything else you see started out on GC kits (or another platform) and have since been upgraded to wii-status. I think the people that are saying "hey these look great" really mean to say: "that actually looks great, considering that's a gamecube game." That simply must not be translated to "huh huh huh itz a gaymkube terboW!" because that's ridiculous. On the same note, the people out there using these screens to judge what the Wii is capable of are really just blatant trolls afraid of seeing their precious system of choice drown in the sales of hardware maybe half as powerful.
Both sides of this silly argument are being shortsighted. What none of the people debating here realize is this really is first-gen Wii software that are almost all ported from GC stuff on GC engines. Now go back and look at the progression of graphics between the first GC games and some of the best (Resident Evil). The Wii's games aren't close to that level yet, but pretending that the Wii isn't capable of doing that AND THEN SOME is absurd.
So both sides of this argument: give it a freakin' rest. Most of these screens suck but some of the original content really shows the difference between gen's and it will only continue to improve.
More screens as they are available.
moku said:No, I agree with you.
You obviously have worked with the hardware, as you know that its just a marginal improvment over the Gamecube. Why argue with you? If you say so, it has to be true.
Thanks for stopping by and clearing that up for all of us! Whew! What a load off.
Who are you arguing with? I already said, I agree with you.Logan Cano said:Ok, so, according to you, clearly hardware that doesn't emulate through special hardware, nor isn't powerfull enough to emulate through software, and that its main CPU can process GCN code as is, doesn't mean the CPU is very similar to GCN tech. Gotcha.
Obviously, since you seem to have reading comprehension issues, I stated that, UNLESS ATI's NEW GPU OFFERS NEW GRAPHICAL FUNCTIONS OVER GCN's, the difference would be slight. So, it could still offer graphical leaps.
moku said:Who are you arguing with? I already said, I agree with you.
But hey, I had forgotten what you said 5minutes ago, so the refresher post was helpfull.
Know what? I may forget what you said again, in, oh, about 2minutes, so go ahead, and regurgetate it again.
Thanks man. BTW, I agree with everything you have said.Logan Cano said::sigh:
Man, sarcasm isn't worth shit if you don't any arguement to counter with.
moku said:Thanks man. BTW, I agree with everything you have said.