Now I'm getting sick and tired of seeing nieve or un-educated gamers parading around the internet claiming they know the power and potential of the Nintendo Wii. It's sickening that any of you could believe that only months into the new console war that you've seen the limits that the Wii has

Just a week or so ago a Microsoft exec claimed that the Wii was weaker then the X-Box. Now that is an illegal claim considering it is comming from an official competitor its slander and that is a crime. First off the Microsoft executive has no clue as too just how powerfull the Wii is, he can only possibly know from his own experiances which are very limited considering he works for a competing company! Secondly the GameCube which was often called inferior to X-Box had very good graphic's ground breaking and according to most developers we still haven't seen the limitation's of the GameCube's hardware. So if we haven't seen the limitations of the gameCube's hardware what gives anybody the idea that the Wii is so inferior even to the X-Box!What we have seen from third parties is nothing but rushed or cheaply developed games. Now before you tell me that third parties are putting so much effort in let me tell you the facts. In 2005 BandaiNamco stated that a big budget GameCube game would cost about 4-million USD that's a big budget game while at the same time EACanada claimed in the Province NewsPaper that a big budget PS3 game would cost about 30-million USD. Since then we have seen games like GearsOfWar which carried a budget of over 10-million USD compared to Wii games which according to Nintendo cost about the same to make a GameCube games! Now lets look at a 4-million USD 360 game a title published by KingGames. The Burger King games sold for 4USD each and cost King Games 4-million USD to develope the same budget that is given to many of today's Wii gamesSo what am I saying, I'm saying if third parties were to actually throw a big budget game our way we would be able to see a Wii game look just as good as alot of what we are seeing on the 360. I mean look at Doom3 or ResidentEvil4 on a normal TV they look almost as good as anything we've seen on 360 and they were developed on GameCube/X-Box. With the Wii being able to handle up to 3x the graphical power as the X-Box where is the Doom3's the ResidentEvil4's the GearsOfWars where are the big budget games. We aren't seeing these games not because the console is flawed, not because the hardware can't handle it but because third parties are taking a vacation. They know that consumers don't expect as much graphically as they do on other platforms. They know that their competition isn't giving us as much as they are on the other platforms so they feel they can justify giving their Wii games lower budgets then that which they give their PS3/360 games.In the end what am I saying, I'm saying that the Wii could handle games like GearsOfWar they just wouldn't be able to be played in HD. The Wii can handle most of what we are seeing today on the 360, the Burger King game is the perfect example given the same budget as a big budget Wii game and look what it looks like! The Wii has alot of potential and if we never even saw the end capabilities of a console like GameCube how can you believe that we have seen everything the Wii has to offer that you can judge the Wii based on some low budget games dveloped and published by third parties who aren't putting their money where their mouths are! So in the end its up to the developers to give us good graphic's you can't hide completely behind the hardware because the hardware is great! Now that being said from what I know the hardware can't handle the amount of NPC's or high definition other then that it should be more then capable of giving us some great looking games probubly close to what we see above (GearsOfWar). P.S each and every pic in this thread has gameplay video that you can look at just to see what I'm talking about!

Joelcool7 said: In the end what am I saying, I'm saying that the Wii could handle games like GearsOfWar they just wouldn't be able to be played in HD. The Wii can handle most of what we are seeing today on the 360, the Burger King game is the perfect example given the same budget as a big budget Wii game and look what it looks like! The Wii has alot of potential and if we never even saw the end capabilities of a console like GameCube how can you believe that we have seen everything the Wii has to offer that you can judge the Wii based on some low budget games dveloped and published by third parties who aren't putting their money where their mouths are! So in the end its up to the developers to give us good graphic's you can't hide completely behind the hardware because the hardware is great! Now that being said from what I know the hardware can't handle the amount of NPC's or high definition other then that it should be more then capable of giving us some great looking games probubly close to what we see above (GearsOfWar). P.S each and every pic in this thread has gameplay video that you can look at just to see what I'm talking about!

If you had a mind before...you have lost it. That RE4 screen looks horrible compared to Gears. Playing in HD provides a lot more can be on the screen! It's resolution! Change your monitor to 480p and see what the difference is! PLEASE. Finally, if the burger king games are the perfect example of what the Wii can do, you have no argument.

 

windbane said: Joelcool7 said: In the end what am I saying, I'm saying that the Wii could handle games like GearsOfWar they just wouldn't be able to be played in HD. The Wii can handle most of what we are seeing today on the 360, the Burger King game is the perfect example given the same budget as a big budget Wii game and look what it looks like! The Wii has alot of potential and if we never even saw the end capabilities of a console like GameCube how can you believe that we have seen everything the Wii has to offer that you can judge the Wii based on some low budget games dveloped and published by third parties who aren't putting their money where their mouths are! So in the end its up to the developers to give us good graphic's you can't hide completely behind the hardware because the hardware is great! Now that being said from what I know the hardware can't handle the amount of NPC's or high definition other then that it should be more then capable of giving us some great looking games probubly close to what we see above (GearsOfWar). P.S each and every pic in this thread has gameplay video that you can look at just to see what I'm talking about! If you had a mind before...you have lost it. That RE4 screen looks horrible compared to Gears. Playing in HD provides a lot more can be on the screen! It's resolution! Change your monitor to 480p and see what the difference is! PLEASE. Finally, if the burger king games are the perfect example of what the Wii can do, you have no argument.

 Exaclty what i was saying in the thread, HD I've played Gears in HD its amazing I've played the Wii in HD not as good of course but then again their aren't any games built soully around the 480 resolution.  I never ever claimed that the Wii could handle Gears directly a direct port would be impossible what I said was that it would be possible to see a game with equally as good visuals to Gears on a normal TV.

Yes I've played 360 , PS3 and almost every game under the sun for the origional X-Box including the best of the X-Box visually Half-Life2 and Doom3. Their is no way that ResidentEvil4 is inferior to the likes of Doom3 or many of the other X-Box games. I look at great games like TwinSnakes and FinalFantasy Chrystal Chronicles and I see games with lush enviroments , great frame rates and impressive visuals!

 As for me making the argument that the Wii was capable of games like Burger King's yes it is. i was trying to show you that a game developed for 360 with the same budget given to the Wii's biggest budget titles is about just as bad visually to that of the Wii's. If studios put a ten million dollar budget behind a Wii game we would see something very impressive (depending on the developer). I simply said everybody comparing a 4-million dollar Wii game to a ten million dollar Gears of War is absolutely radiculous!

Now yes Wii could likely handle Gears without HD , a cut back on the shading and lighting and less NPC's. Visually the game would still look alot the same. Look for example at the port of RE4 to PS2, the crappiest hardware of the last generation was able to handle a died down version of RE4. Much like the Wii could likely give us similiar visuals to that of 360 on a regular TV if they had the same budget as the game being developed for 360.

Example I wanna see a 30-million USD Wii game alongside a 30-million USD PS3 title on a regular TV. Most of the budget for the PS3 title goes into making the game high def , all that money could be used to improve the Wii's title graphically include superior texturing spend more time on character models , architecture and visuals. 

 So before everyone says the Wii games loock bad keep in mind that they were all developed with crappy budgets of like 2-4 Mill the same kind of budget Burger King threw at their games. third parties are just givign us crap if they were to put their money where their mouths were I'm sure we could see games with visuals (on a regular TV) that could rival those of Gears!

Keep in mind I don't own an HD-TV and only a small number of American consumers do, so a game that looks great for 360 on a normal TV could easily be done on the Wii. However I'm not claiming that this will always be the case over time the 360 will get better and better to the point the Wii couldn't handle the games on normal TV's but that time won't arrive till likely 2008/2009!

 As for the specs its true they aren't as impressive as 360 and PS3 and what your paying for on PS3/360 is HD not normal TV. HD costs hundreds of dollars extra the hardware costs a heck of alot more. A 360 without any HD-support would likely cost only about 199.99-299.99 about the exact same price as a Wii. The Wii is far superior to anything we saw last generation anyone trying to say other wise is uneducated!

Every game in the last generation was made for 480. 

RE4 looked the same or better on the PS2 because the specs were MUCH closer than the Wii to PS3/360.

No matter the budget, if it's the same on the Wii and PS3/360, the PS3/360 game will look better.

I don't have an HDTV but I can tell the difference between last gen games and PS3 games.  You don't need a special TV for that.  A black and white 1950's TV would show you that.  You can simply do more with the PS3. 

Just stop it.  Accept that the more complicated games would have to be completely dumbed down and many of them probably won't be.   I am sick and tired of reading Wii fanboy after fanboy claim that the Wii could do FF13, Gears of War, MGS, etc.  The chances of games like that appearing on the Wii are slim to none because they would have to design them differently, and completely redo the graphics.  Screens I've seen of Metroid Prime look awful compared to Resistance.

People care about graphics.  Gears of War got ridiculously high ratings because it looked really good and the gameplay wasn't screwed up.  It's a short game, the multiplayer isn't groundbreaking.

It just boggles my mind that people can't accept that the games will just be different.  I'm getting a Wii at some point but I do not expect to be playing games that look anywhere near PS3 games.  Just accept it!

And for the sake of everything good in this world, STOP ACTING LIKE A HD TV IS REQUIRED TO SEE BETTER GRAPHICS. 

Finally, the Wii may be "far superior" to anything last gen if you are looking at the last gen only.  If you include the PS3 and 360 then the Wii is hardly better than last gen when compared.  Meaning, even if the Wii is twice as powerful as the gamecube, the PS3 and 360 are so much more powerful that the Wii just looks last gen anyway in comparison.  The fact that RE4 is being ported to the Wii is ridiculous, btw.  It was already on the gamecube and you can already play it on the Wii.  I consider that a waste of Capcom's time.  But I digress.

I just so badly wish that people would just accept the graphical differences and move on.  You can argue budgets all you want but once a developer has tools in place on the console they will be able to work faster on much superior graphics.  Trying to fit that into what is relatively last gen is not fun I would imagine. 

windbane said: RE4 looked the same or better on the PS2 because the specs were MUCH closer than the Wii to PS3/360.

no.  That was one of the very few games that was made to optimize the gamecube, and then ported to PS2.  The difference is pretty obvious if you've played both.

johnsobas said: windbane said: RE4 looked the same or better on the PS2 because the specs were MUCH closer than the Wii to PS3/360.   no. That was one of the very few games that was made to optimize the gamecube, and then ported to PS2. The difference is pretty obvious if you've played both.

I know it was ported.  "The game suffers little in the transition to the PS2, unless you're willing to sit with the GameCube version side-by-side. Even then, despite some dithered textures and loss of geometry, the PS2 trumps the GameCube original with Progressive Scan and true widescreen mode (the GameCube version faked that funk). If you listen to the game in Dolby Pro Logic II, you'll jump out of your seat every 15 seconds when you hear a villager shouting behind you."  --1UP.com

So was Oblivion to the PS3 and they made enhancements.  Ninja Gaiden Sigma was enhanced a lot for the PS3.

windbane said: STOP ACTING LIKE A HD TV IS REQUIRED TO SEE BETTER GRAPHICS. The fact that RE4 is being ported to the Wii is ridiculous, btw. It was already on the gamecube and you can already play it on the Wii. I consider that a waste of Capcom's time. But I digress. I just so badly wish that people would just accept the graphical differences and move on. You can argue budgets all you want but once a developer has tools in place on the console they will be able to work faster on much superior graphics. Trying to fit that into what is relatively last gen is not fun I would imagine.

It is, without an HD TV Gears really doesn't look all that much better then say halo2,Doom3 or Half-Life2. Since you do not actually have an HD TV have you actually played them in HD and then on a normal screen their is a massive differance. HD TV also uses alot of power and disk space without HD the 360 isn't all that much better then X-box if you look at games side by side.

Infact you yourself just tried to defend the crappy RE4 port to PS2 by qouting 1.Up who said other then the loss of numerous graphical features it was still the same great game possibly better. So why couldn't the same happen with Wii. Don't claim the differance between GameCube and PS2 compared to Wii and 360 is way different. Why because the PS2 was complete crap last generation it was barely superior to DreamCast if at all and totally blew visually. Many PS2 games came off all pixely not even having all that better graphics of the N64. Of course towards the end of the generation we did see amazing PS2 games considering how crappy the hardware was in comparison to X-Box and GameCube!

Much like the PS2 the Wii has extremely crappy hardware (Graphically)in comparison to the 360/PS3 but that doesn't change the fact that with a bigger budget we could see Wii games looking almost as good despite the hardware differances.

As for argue about the budgets! You argue that once the developer has the tools, well aren't those tools often bought or developed within their budget's. Don't use that excuse Unreal3 was liscensed and developed for Wii back in 2005 with it being officially made availible to developers shortly after E3 2006. That same engine is what is used in many of todays biggest PS3/360 games yet it is nowhere to be found on Wii. Why not because the tool isn't availible but because the budget doesn't alot for it. A graphics engine built from the ground up for the Wii could really take advantage of the Wii's hardware but other then Nintendo nobody else is building any new tools for the Wii their just using the same ones they had for PS2!

In other words budget's do affect it, if the tools aren't in the budget and nobody budgets their games to include the developement of new tools such as Physic's and graphics engines then all were going to continue seeing is crap! You can't possibly argue that budget's don't improve graphics and gameplay a game that is rushed looks bad its glitchy and suks. A game with a bigger budget is perfected polished and often includes its own graphics engine often the company sends its best to work on it.

Just look at Majesco, visually most of their games are complete crap. Then came Phsyconauts and it showed that when the right budget is applied they could do so much more. With the right budget a Wii game could look an awfull lot like a 360 game visually.

Joelcool7 said: With the Wii being able to handle up to 3x the graphical power as the X-Box...

Hey now I think that's a litte off. I hear it's more like a supped up x-box not 3x as powerful. 

Edit: I see you said graphically, but that is up in the air right now.

This thread is all mindless banter. The bottom line is that Nintendo chose to go the route of inexpensive, off the shelf hardware, and knew they wouldn't be competing graphically with the 360 and PS3. It's as simple as that. The Wii can't and won't be competing graphically, ever, with the other 2. I was highly interested in a Wii until I saw and played one first hand (Excite Truck) and was floored at how "average" the graphics were. I would have bought one in a heartbeat if they had even put 1/2 the graphical horsepower in the Wii that is in either of the current gen systems. I will probably still buy a wii but not until there are a few games the wife and kids want to play on it. Until then, I'm waiting for the 360 or PS3 to reach a 299 price point and that system will be my next gen. Until then, I'll continue to play my PS2 and 'Cube.