Wii graphics really that bad?

Sandwich · 10-12-2006 03:46PM #1

I know you should never judge a game's graphics quality by the pictures on the back of the box - but - thats usually because they are deceivingly good.

Was in Game Stop browsing the few Wii games they had, and some of the pictures suggested appalling graphics capability - A GT driving game, and a 4x4 Truck one among them.

No joke, but they looked about Sega Saturn vintage! So whats up you lucky few who have the machines? Are they that bad. I see a few posts referring to not having the right cables straight from the box. Is this just a NIntendo booboo, scam to have everyone buy extra cables, or has the Wii a fundamental flaw on the graphics front? (Yes I know graphics isnt everything, its the gameplay that counts etc, but we do expect a certain standard).

Does anyone know how its graphics capability really measures up versus the Gamecube (which I always thought was very good, and better in general that the PS2).

Surely Nintendo hasnt actually gone backwards in this area in order to offer their innovative controllers and and a competition beating price?

MiloFoxburr · 10-12-2006 03:53PM

The Wii is apparently comparable to Xbox1 graphics. Tis not that bad to be honest..

whitetrash · 10-12-2006 03:57PM

I can't really compare graphics, the only wii-specific game I have is wii sports and play, Zelda alone though is better than any xbox 1 graphics I've seen, and that's a gamecube game :P

1huge1 · 10-12-2006 04:23PM

from what i seen better than x box but a fair bit off from x box 360
I can live with that
I think the graphics are gonna improve as the console gets older as with the case with most new consoles (e.g luigi's mansion on gamecube was terrible compared to what you seen later on like resident evil REmake which still blows me away btw)

as_seen_on · 10-12-2006 04:27PM

those games are really crap ones. Take a look at Zelda or red steel they look pretty cool, actually Far Cry is quite good too!!

Karmafaerie · 10-12-2006 04:33PM

It's similar to the original xbox alright.

White trash.
I have to disagree with what you said about Zelda being graphically better than any xbox game.
I was amazed with how similar the graphics on Zelda were to the graphics of Fable for the Xbox.
(Obviously the game play is better on Zelda)

Red Steel is graphically similar to any number of xbox/PS2 games.

I've seen those games you were talking about Sandwich.
I was actually considering buying the racing one for the free steering wheel untill I saw how bad the graphics were.
To be honest though, I reckon that they're novelty games aimed more at children.
The Wii is basically a Game Cube x 1.5.
Eventually the graphics will rise to being slightly more powerful than those of an original xbox.

Compared to the 360 or the PS3 though, it's an infant graphically, and while yes there's only so much that graphics can do, there's also only so much that game play can do. Otherwise we'd all still be playing pong and tetris.

The Wii will hold it's own for a while, but there's no way that third party publishers are going to develop as many games for it, as the other two.

If you could mix the Wii's control system with the power of the PS3 or 360 you'd never leave home!:D

10-12-2006 04:49PM

Karmafaerie wrote:

The Wii will hold it's own for a while, but there's no way that third party publishers are going to develop as many games for it, as the other two.

Why? Because of graphics? 3rd party support depends on a whole host of elements, including the cost of developing for the system. In fact I'd say graphics are way down on the list of things a developer looks for when deciding what games to make for what system.

Any software house creating games purely based on the graphical horsepower of a particular system seriously needs to reevaluate their strategy.

Matt Simis · 10-12-2006 04:50PM

Totally agree with Karmafaerie above, would just add that using the composite (RCA) connection provided in the Wii box with a large screen leads to a blurry mess, but given there are no Component or RGB Scart cables around, we have little choice for now.

Matt

RasTa · 10-12-2006 04:55PM

Who cares about graphics anyway? Maybe I'm getting old(23) but I only worried about graphics when i was 16. I dont want to be stuck in my room on my own playing single player Halo or Metal Gear. It seems nintendo is trying to bring fun back into gaming with this machine and i can't wait until Mario Party comes out for some 4 player madness.

hairball · 10-12-2006 05:17PM

Karmafaerie wrote:

The Wii will hold it's own for a while, but there's no way that third party publishers are going to develop as many games for it, as the other two.

thats pretty speculative, developers will make games for machines that are guarenteed to shift titles, regardless of system capabilities.
We'll just have to wait and see how the wii does sales wise, if it ends up with
a huge user base, developers while be falling over themselves to get on board, and while graphics do dictate some things (such as ,can you have 50,000 onscreen enemies at once) it's not the be all and end all.

AceCard Jones · 10-12-2006 05:25PM

The original X-Block can't even be compared to the Wii.
I have it and it has nothing on the Wii.You can't use games like Play or Sports as an example of good or bad graphics on the Wii as clearly they were not made with graphics in mind

But as said above Zelda and Red Steel etc look great.
And even with that give the console a chance to spawn a few more games before saying anything about the graphics.
It may not be on par with the X-Box 360 or the PS3 but it's not far off.

Pacifico · 10-12-2006 05:29PM

AceCard Jones wrote:

It may not be on par with the X-Box 360 or the PS3 but it's not far off.

Its miles off.....

hairball · 10-12-2006 05:30PM

well, i guess its just one of those things that either affect your gaming or not.
Yeh i like to see amazing graphics in games, but it's not everything, i 'm still playing battlefield vietnam , hardly cutting edge these days, but still a great game.
It won't be long before the PC whips the PS3s arse graphically.
At the end of the day you can get all caught up looking for better and better graphics, but where does that stop?....photorealism most likely, but what then?...oh my god, people will have to start looking at game playability and new ways to make games interesting again!!!!

Star Lord · 10-12-2006 06:17PM

Sandwich wrote:

Was in Game Stop browsing the few Wii games they had, and some of the pictures suggested appalling graphics capability - A GT driving game, and a 4x4 Truck one among them.

No joke, but they looked about Sega Saturn vintage!

Probably the two worst you could have looked at!

GT Pro (or whatever ya call it) was a japan only cube racing game (which never even looked great on the cube) which just has the new controls mapped. No upgraded graphics.

4x4 is worse again, a ps2 game with remapped controls!

I actually think that wii sports looks really good true, the textures are minimal, but there are some and they look good to me, like when you look at the grass in it, its textured and looks good, and the nice reflective woden surface in bowling.

Retr0gamer · 10-12-2006 06:38PM

There hasn't been a single game out for the Wii launch that was built from the ground up for the Wii other than possibly Red Steel. I'd say we should wait until we see Metroid Prime 3 and Super Mario Galaxy before we can even comment on the graphics. Both those games look gorgeous. However they won't be challenging the likes of Resisteance and Gears of War.

GrumPy · 10-12-2006 07:10PM

whitetrash wrote:

Zelda alone though is better than any xbox 1 graphics I've seen, and that's a gamecube game :P

Zelda looks like ass.

No where near as good graphically as splinte cell CT/Chronicales of riddick/halo2

o1s1n · 10-12-2006 07:37PM

Well, can you really complain when you look at the price? What I'm going to do is buy a Wii now and play its arse out while waiting for the ps3 to come down in price. I primarily want a ps3 for the Final Fantasy releases coming out on it.

I think games reached a point with the ps2 generation where advances in graphics were really just a sugar coating. After playing Farcry for 15 minutes the novelty of the prettyness just wears off and you're back to your bog standard FPS. Not saying its a bad game, but still.

I still regularly play my Nes, Snes and Megadrive. A good game is still a good game. I AM a whore for seeing the latest tech, I'm not going to lie. But after that novelty wears off. what then?

chump · 10-12-2006 07:52PM

Retr0gamer wrote:

Metroid Prime 3 and Super Mario Galaxy

When should we realistically expect these games?

dan_y · 10-12-2006 07:52PM

Karmafaerie wrote:

Otherwise we'd all still be playing pong and tetris.

I still play pong and tetris - in fact a new version of tetris has come out with nearly every handheld for the last 10 years. they are killer applications. hell, I still play mario, it just doesn't get old.

gears of war got old for me very fast. so did dead rising. so did nearly every title that came out for the 360 - and I worked in the XLGC so I played them all. in fact, the only title I was still playing by the end was halo - because the multiplayer is absolutely perfect. it's just good old fashioned fun - no difficulty, no 1080dpi graphics - just fun. that's what gaming is supposed to be. and that's what all of the real classics are.

gameplay will outlive graphics. how ****ing realistic do you want games to get? there is a real world out there...

Sandwich · 10-12-2006 08:23PM

dan_y wrote:

I still play pong and tetris

Dont get me wrong - Im a great tetris fan myself, play MAME games regularly and started out in the early days of the Commodore 64. Am well aware that graphics on their own dont make the game. But I dont think its unreasonable to expect to at least have the standard of the previous generation of hardware maintained if not improved.
It was the shocking awfulness of the pictures that suggests a backward step. There were only 10 or 12 different Wii games on the shelves and to be able to pick up a few and have find them looking at least 10 years behind the times was a bit jarring. At best, a bad strategic decision from Nintendo to allow them published, when the console already has the reputation (correctly of course) of being less 'next gen' than its competitors. Such low quality only reinforces that perception. If they are even lower than the Wii is even capable of, then it could give a very bad impression - enough to harm the longer term success of the console. See how the gamecube suffered even though it was in no practical way inferior in power to the PS2 or xbox (in fact better than the PS2 imho, and equal with the xbox - i have all three)

Smellyirishman · 10-12-2006 08:42PM

When I first turned on Zelda I did think, ugh with more power they really could make something phenomenal, but that was in comparision to my lastest visual memory of games (GoW). Turning it on today and I just couldn't wait to play and on seeing the graphics again I was quite impressed. However the gameplay is beyond anything I have played on a next-gen system as of yet and graphics cannot spoil that (although there is no arguing that they could bolster it). The question is, how often will we see this quality.

I like the graphics in Wii Sports, and I think the lack of graphical power might allow developers to concentrate on other, more important, things.

To be honest, it's far too early to tell; come back in two years.

o1s1n · 10-12-2006 08:43PM

Well if it werent for the Wii mote I'd be of the same opinion as yourself. What's the point of making a new console if its not next gen compared to the previous one.

But, the focus of this console is basically to revolutionize how games are played. Actually they really should have stuck with revolution as the name. although thats a totally different discussion altogether.

Kanney · 10-12-2006 10:35PM

When I get a Wii it wont be for graphics, purely gameplay. Ill get a PS3 for GFX.

scrapland · 10-12-2006 10:42PM

as_seen_on wrote:

those games are really crap ones. Take a look at Zelda or red steel they look pretty cool, actually Far Cry is quite good too!!

FarCry on wii looks significantly weaker than the xbox 1 game.

Red Steel looks appauling. Early PS2 quality.

RasTa · 10-12-2006 11:27PM

Gamers who still harp on about graphics sound like the fat chick.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvkMp0JuyPQ

Gonzo · 10-12-2006 11:43PM

I spent the weekend playing with my friends wii and while the graphics were very average it was just so much fun in the gameplay and now im dying to get a wii altho I dont have one pre-ordered. I already have a 360 for fantastic looking games so I dont mind that the wii is not very graphic intensive, its got brilliant gameplay instead.

scrapland · 10-12-2006 11:48PM

I think serious gamers are going to have a 360 or PS3 and a wii as well.

Or like me you'll buy all three

o1s1n · 10-12-2006 11:50PM

All three? Pure insanity :P

I never did see any reason to buy any console made by Microsoft. Something...dirty about them.

scrapland · 10-12-2006 11:52PM

o1s1n wrote:

All three? Pure insanity :P

I never did see any reason to buy any console made by Microsoft. Something...dirty about them.

So do you use windows ?

rainbow kirby · 11-12-2006 12:13AM

Gameplay > graphics, which is something that an awful lot of people seem to forget.

I'm happy with my Wii, if I want amazing graphics I'll get an Xbox 360 when they go down in price, or get PC games.

o1s1n · 11-12-2006 12:18AM

scrapland wrote:

So do you use windows ?

Yes, a nice shiny er.... legally held copy of XP Pro

I leave Microsoft where they really belong, in the PC domain. They should leave consoles alone. I really cant see any point in them making consoles? other then the fact that there's a lot of money in it?

wait, this is about Wii graphics. woops. *jumps back on topic*

Cuddlesworth · 11-12-2006 12:23AM

If I wanted amazing graphics I would not bother with the x-box360 or Ps3 because as we speak they are outdated hardware compared to the pc market. And with 2-3 year cpu refreshes and 6 month gfx refreshes, pc's will be putting both consoles to shame in a very short space of time.

Nintendo saw a niche and they have gone for it. I have already seen more people worked up about getting one simply because they played it for 5 minutes then I ever saw with the ps2 or x-box.

If graphics were that important to people then why would the Wii be sold out across the world?

o1s1n · 11-12-2006 12:29AM

Well i mean come on, to keep up constantly with the latest cutting edge PC hardware is going to cost you an absolute fortune. And even still, new games dont use that hardware to its utmost potential. So basically the ps3 Will keep up with PC games for the near future. Sure we wont even see it reach its potential game wise for a few years.

But, I wouldnt buy one till they knock well over a third off the asking price. ridiculous at the moment.

the corpo · 11-12-2006 12:31AM

i just wish it weren't so damn blurry

o1s1n · 11-12-2006 12:33AM

I have yet to play one. I saw loads and lots of screens/video for TP. There seemed to be quite a bit of aliasing in any of the images i saw. Didnt wow me, but didnt look overly shabby either. Basically as someone said earlier, this is only the first few games. Not a reflection of the consoles potential in the slightest.

Gonzo · 11-12-2006 12:36AM

the blurryness is to do with the crap connection that nintendo has supplied wiht the machine, when I was in the Toys for Big Boys show at the RDS I thought Zelda looked alot crisper running on their HDTV setup, more than likely they were using component cables outputing at 576p giving the best possible output from the machine instead of the composite output I had on my SD 100hz tv which had alot of flicker and grubby textures.

bk · 11-12-2006 01:16AM

You can easily tell the people who haven't played with the Wii yet, they are the ones complaining about the graphics.

Honestly, when I first turned on the Wii, yes I did notice that the graphics weren't ground breaking, but after 5 minutes of Wii Sports with some friends, I can honestly say that I completely forgot about the graphics and I honestly have been having more fun with the Wii over the last few days then I have had in years of gaming.

Every person who calls him or herself a gamer MUST own a Wii. Sure you can have a 360/PS3 also, but you must also have a Wii for playing with your girlfriend/boyfriend/wife, etc. and with your mates after you come home from the pub or with your parents over Christmas.

The Wii is an incredible, social, multiplayer machine and it is by far the most fun to play games with family and friends. Over the last few days I've been playing with all the above people and I'm absolutely delighted to finely get family and friends who never played games and could never understand the fun of it, to finally play and they all loved it completely, are having great fun playing it and they all now want one!!!!

And you know what, I never once heard a single complaint about graphics, they were simply having too much fun.

Forget about all this talk of graphics, If you call yourself a gamer, you must get a wii and you must play it with friends, you will not be sorry.

Cuddlesworth · 11-12-2006 09:25AM

o1s1n wrote:

Well i mean come on, to keep up constantly with the latest cutting edge PC hardware is going to cost you an absolute fortune. And even still, new games dont use that hardware to its utmost potential. So basically the ps3 Will keep up with PC games for the near future. Sure we wont even see it reach its potential game wise for a few years.

But, I wouldnt buy one till they knock well over a third off the asking price. ridiculous at the moment.

Is keeping up with pc tech really that expensive? I believe that after initial outlay, a good pc will cost around 1,000 a a year. On the other hand the Ps3 costs around 1,000 dollars to make, so price drops are not likely. And with demand for both the gfx, ram and cpu it is made from outside of Sony orders, means that component price is not going to go down in the short term either.

Thats a lot of money to spend on something that is already obsolete in the graphics department, and losing the edge on gameplay.

CiDeRmAn · 11-12-2006 09:30AM

Got the Wii, currently have Wii Sports (of course), Wii Play, Zelda TP, Call of Duty 3 and Super Monkey Ball BB, so far so good, the graphics on both Wii Sports and Wii Play are clean and functional, just as it should be, what would the point have been to have cluttered the screen up with textures and sophisticated lighting? Instead they produced and excellent selection of mini games to get a player used to new controller.
Zelda looks great but then it is a AAA gamecube title, aside from the controller it is the same as the GC edition. All big releases in the final year or so of a consoles lifespan look great, why should this be any different, the thing to remember is what will games look lik when the power of the Wii is used to its full potential.
COD3 looks fantastic, I have played and finished COD2 on my 360 and while its not the same as that in HD glory it still plays really smooth, the smoke effects, a selling point of the 360 COD2, are spot on, the controls get you far more in touch with the combat so a big thumbs up there.
Super Monkey Ball Banana Blitz is very very cool, Monkey Ball as it was meant to be played, the controller is made for this, tilting the world about the hero, rolling and jumping your way through, very nic indeed, and the inclusion of 50 minigames, of varying quality it has to be said is nice too, plenty to recommend there.
So there you have it, the Wii is a certainly capable machine in term of graphics while there is no doubt now as to its gameplay potential.
We will have to wait 'til 07 to see the truely impressive titles pop up, the Super Mario Galaxies and Metroid Prime 3's of this world, also when we begin to see Wii only editions of the great franchises like Burnout, Virtua Tennis and Fight Night we could expect something that surpasses the PS3 and 360 in terms of sheer fun, thing is no one should be jumping to judge any console on what is lacking in launch software on any machine, their true potential, the games we will be playing the most, the games most gamers will see as their favourites in years to come haven't even been developed yet.
As an example see the 360, a year from launch we have gone from tripe like Perfect Dark Zero to Gears of War, who knows what we can expect from the machine in the next 4/5 years, same goes for the Wii and PS3, just because Red Steel stinks like a week old nappy and the launch line up for the PS3 does it no favours differentiating it from the 360 doesn't mean in a years time they won't be taking our breath away.
Roll on Mario Kart Wii, hmm, lovely.

RE*AC*TOR · 11-12-2006 09:44AM

The graphics are last generation, whether or not there is any more power in there over the gamecube remains to be seen. For all I know it could be a repackaged gamecube. Either way I don't care, this weekend I had fun playing video games with my fiancée and my mother. Anything that makes that possible is a winner in my book.

Plus Zelda is absolutely brilliant.

Zombrex · 11-12-2006 11:30AM

Anyone who is focusing on the graphical power of the Wii is really really missing the point.

It is not an accident or an over sight that the Wii is not nearly (not even slightly) as powerful as the Xbox 360 or the PS3. Nintendo has purposely taken themselves out of the graphics/CPU power race. On purpose

Why?

Because they weren't going to win. It costs a small fortune to research, develop and sell a next-gen graphics system, and you still aren't going to know if you have won or not (look at the fanboy arguments between the Xbox 360 and the PS3). This is money that you cannot then use to research develop and sell a completely new controller system. Nintendo choose to do the later. On purpose

The core system of the Wii is really a GameCube 1.5 It is a cooler, faster more efficent GameCube. So the graphics aren't going to look like a PS3. That is simply never going to happen. The graphics will look better than a GameCube though.

But again that is missing the point.

If you want next-gen high definition graphics, buy a PS3 or an Xbox 360. In fact that is exactly what Nintendo want you to do. They have already stated, a few times, that they hope hardcore gamers will buy a Wii along side one of the other consoles. They don't want or expect you to buy a Wii instead of an Xbox or a Playstation, because as I've stated Nintendo are taking themselves out of the race. The Wii was kept cheap (relatively speaking) on purpose All the research as gone into the controller, and all the hope has gone into the controller.

The very fact that people are still missing the point and getting all worked up about the graphics power of the Wii shows to me that Nintendo made the right decision. Nintendo were never going to win the graphics arms race, dropping out completely was always the best option. And this was always going to cause trouble with people who can't see passed their GPU, but the term "sooner rather than later" springs to mind.

The Wii of course is still not a sure fire success. A lot of developers seemed to have no idea how to use the DS properly, and I worry that a lot of developers will have no idea how to use the Wii-mote system.

But, as in 1985, Nintendo are taking gaming down a brave new road. And it might be the wrong road. But as mainstream gamers become more dissillusioned with the graphics arms race (does the new graphics on the Xbox 360 make its games any better than the Xbox?) it is a breath of fresh air the industry needed.

The Wii might be a complete failure from a gaming point of view (VirtualBoy anyone) but the fact that it has been taken up so quickly by hundreds of thousands around the world sends a message to the other industry players, the other console makers and publishers, that a new direction is not only needed, but wanted. Ultimately it will be up to them, not Nintendo, to decide if the Wii, and this new direction, will be successful.

As has been said, this isn't next-gen, this is new-gen.

dimerocks · 11-12-2006 12:22PM

sega saturn vintage? get real! i wasn't expecting much in line of graphics and with red steel and zelda i'm really impressed. Ain't really played Zelda yet but the lighting effects and explosions in red steel are fantastic! Games like No More Heroes and Mario Galazy look great too. That Gt game is meant to be a load of willy.

whitetrash · 11-12-2006 01:02PM

I've played Zelda for 10+ hours on a HD LCDTV now and I think it looks great. It is noticeably blurry/fuzzy, and I think this is in part down to the lack of component cables, but other than that it is a very pretty game.

It's art direction that counts over pure poly-pushing power and Zelda's is excellent and right up there with GoW. Wii-Zelda has been in dev for about a year now so maybe when that comes out people will quit complaining about nothing.

Shigsy · 11-12-2006 01:05PM

krazy_8s wrote:

If I wanted amazing graphics I would not bother with the x-box360 or Ps3 because as we speak they are outdated hardware compared to the pc market. And with 2-3 year cpu refreshes and 6 month gfx refreshes, pc's will be putting both consoles to shame in a very short space of time.

Nintendo saw a niche and they have gone for it. I have already seen more people worked up about getting one simply because they played it for 5 minutes then I ever saw with the ps2 or x-box.

If graphics were that important to people then why would the Wii be sold out across the world?

Couldn't have put it better myself. PC's are what push graphics boundaries, not consoles. Nintendo have gone their own route as usual, concentrating on gameplay rather than trying to compete with PC standard graphics. And as for the Wii graphics, you can't use Zelda: TP as an example as it was developed for both Gamecube and Wii, with very little extra effort put into the Wii version's graphics. Wait a few months for more games to be released, then you can form an opinion on the graphical power of the Wii. But as many people have already said, if its graphics your getting hung up on then the Wii is probably not for you as you have clearly missed the point.

I got mine on launch day and after 10 minutes, my whole family wanted a go. Within 30 mins my dad was hooked on Wii Sports and has now actually gotton really good at the Golf and Bowling. Thats the point of the Wii, getting non-gamers involved. The Wii-mote is fantastic, and playing games such as the Tennis game in Wii Sports feels so natural after about 15 minutes of playing, that you don't need to have played console games before to play it. In fact having played real Tennis is a bigger advantage

After playing it for a day, i woke up the next morning with my hamstrings aching from all the 'lunges' i had been doing in Wii Sports bowling, and my shoulders actually felt like i had played about 2 hours of actual Tennis. This is what Wii is about, so look elsewhere if your a Fifa/Halo type gamer, Wii is not for you.

scrapland · 11-12-2006 03:04PM

Wicknight wrote:

Anyone who is focusing on the graphical power of the Wii is really really missing the point.

It is not an accident or an over sight that the Wii is not nearly (not even slightly) as powerful as the Xbox 360 or the PS3. Nintendo has purposely taken themselves out of the graphics/CPU power race. On purpose

No your missing the point. People on here are not posting they want better graphics they want a better picture.

We are complaining about the lack of cables RGB Scart & Component, available, and the fact that composite phono makes an already weaker machine look even worse.

Nintendo's fault not ours.

:rolleyes:

And if your so correct about the purpose of wii (which I generally agree with you about) stop justifying it to people who have bought the machine, but tell ubisoft and other developers who are releasing piss poor last gen games like COD3 & Blazing Angels which are worse than the Xbox 1 graphically, albeit with Wii remote control tacked or hacked on.

Wii identity crisis ? Hell yeah but that's down to developers and publishers, not the consumer.

Originally Posted by scrapland
So do you use windows ?

Yes, a nice shiny er.... legally held copy of XP Pro

See that's where your going wrong, if you hate M$ so much, buy a mac

Originally Posted by krazy_8s
If I wanted amazing graphics I would not bother with the x-box360 or Ps3 because as we speak they are outdated hardware compared to the pc market. And with 2-3 year cpu refreshes and 6 month gfx refreshes, pc's will be putting both consoles to shame in a very short space of time.

The New DX10 ATI card due in January is actually based on the R600 chipset which has been used in the Xbox 360 since launch, so in this case the 360 was ahead of the pack GPU wise. Obviously this will change, but just thought I'd correct your assertion.

Also the reason why gaming on the pc is continuingly losing marketshare over the last number of years is the increase in people getting pig sick of having to spend €500+ every six months to get the latest GPU to run a game like it is in the screenshots.

GPU's in PC's are a blight because they make developers lazy, they cant be bothered making the most out of older hardwareand optimising it, simply because it's easier to offload a new fancy trick onto the GPU.

Console gaming will always be more mainstream than PC gaming.

Moojuice · 11-12-2006 03:54PM

I have an Xbox 360 and it is a fantastic system, really love it. I did have a Wii (gave it away but will be getting another soon, hopefully) and it is so much fun. While the 360 is good fun the Wii is a lot more fun. Gameplay is amazing and TBH despite having GOW I think the graphics on the Wii are pretty good. But who cares if they are not as good as the 360 os PS3! They are functional and the games are and will be a lot more inovative. Red Steel is loads of fun, reminds me of old arcade shoot-em-ups (glowing guns etc)

Nintendo are right in their approach, non-gamers will love the Wii: its fun and enjoyable and hard core gamers will get it along side one of the other two beasts. I hope the Wii kiscks the ass out of the other two as it might make developers and Sony and M$ wake up and stop concentrating so much on graphics and power. The inovation of the Wii with the power of the other two? Now that would be something...........plus the Wiimote is fantastic, I hate going back to the 360 contollers.

Zombrex · 11-12-2006 04:29PM

scrapland wrote:

No your missing the point. People on here are not posting they want better graphics they want a better picture.

We are complaining about the lack of cables RGB Scart & Component, available, and the fact that composite phono makes an already weaker machine look even worse.

Maybe you should read the original post ....

:rolleyes:

scrapland wrote:

but tell ubisoft and other developers who are releasing piss poor last gen games

Hold on while I get Ubisoft on the phone ....

scrapland wrote:

Wii identity crisis ? Hell yeah but that's down to developers and publishers, not the consumer.

Maybe you missed this point from my post in your mad dash to give out about component cables ...

"Ultimately it will be up to them [3rd party developers], not Nintendo, to decide if the Wii, and this new direction, will be successful."

Goodshape · 11-12-2006 04:31PM

I honestly think progressing much further than the last generations graphics (Cube/PS2/XBox) is a pointless endeavour. I mean, there's only so much you can do - and when you're making games that look like Metroid Prime, Wind Waker, Shadow of the Colossus and Resi 4 (to name but a few) then I think you've arrived at the pinicle of that perticular peak. Anything else bar some tweaking and adjustments is overkill imo, and not something I'd pay e500+ to experience.

Look at the SNES / Mega Drive -- these followed on from the NES / Master System and are still pretty much the standard for 2D side-scrollers (look at similar games on the DS and the graphics haven't improved drastically, because they simply don't need to). After reaching that peak something new was needed -- so in came the N64 and PS1 with blocky pixelated 'first-generation' 3D.

I didn't like that generation of consoles at all because they did look dreadful - but like I said, the PS2, Cube and XBox pretty much got it down when it comes to what's needed for 3D, just like the SNES did with 2D. And I think Nintendo has been in this business long enough (unlike their 'rivals') to know that what's needed now isn't more of the same.

I've had 10+ years of 3D, I'm impressed already, now give me something new to play with. Give me the Wii tbh.

A Gamecube 1.5 with a Wiimote for e250 and Wii Sports game included? Feckin' deadly.

thebman · 11-12-2006 05:09PM

Yeah the graphics should improve and we'll have to wait and see how far they get pushed on the Wii.

I don't have a Wii yet but I think we'll have to wait a few months before we find out if Wii is more fun or if the control systems just different and fun for a while before playing is just like the way we play now but with the same graphics of Xbox.

I mean it could just be a fad and only time will tell if it has long term appeal to people like parents and even gamers at the moment. Its the latest thing now but in a few months, it'll be interesting to see which console owners of Wii and 360 play more.

Biro · 11-12-2006 05:15PM

o1s1n wrote:

Yes, a nice shiny er.... legally held copy of XP Pro

I leave Microsoft where they really belong, in the PC domain. They should leave consoles alone. I really cant see any point in them making consoles? other then the fact that there's a lot of money in it?

wait, this is about Wii graphics. woops. *jumps back on topic*

Maybe we should just leave sony to do TV's and hi-fis aswell....

Bring back the Sega/Nintendo war... good honest competition, none of this trillion dollar backing and selling hardware at a loss to try and compete rubbish!

Wii graphics really that bad?

Comments