Forums - Gaming Discussion - Best graphics from 7th gen

victor83fernandes said:
curl-6 said:

Yeah, The Conduit and its sequel Conduit 2 are probably the two most graphically advanced games on Wii, pushing a ton of effects rarely seen on the system like normal mapping, depth of field, fluid simulation, etc.

There's not as polished or artistically accomplished as the likes of the Galaxy games or Prime 3, but in terms of technology they pushed the system hard.

Are you guys serious? I love Nintendo, but wii games being in top graphically? They look beyond horrible, jaggies everywhere, bad textures, 480i resolution, which can be updated to 480p if you buy the cable for it, still very far from the typical 640p-720p last generation.

Mario galaxy looked decent, I still love it, but nothing like when Nintendo came with Mario 64 and it was a graphical marvel compared to the ps1, or even the gamecube when it had Mario sunshine and luigi mansion and graphics were really great compared to the ps2.

You misunderstand, we're not saying these Wii games are among the best looking games of the entire generation, just that they are the best looking on the Wii.

And i actually think the best looking Wii games still look quite nice even at 480p.



curl-6 said:
victor83fernandes said:

Are you guys serious? I love Nintendo, but wii games being in top graphically? They look beyond horrible, jaggies everywhere, bad textures, 480i resolution, which can be updated to 480p if you buy the cable for it, still very far from the typical 640p-720p last generation.

Mario galaxy looked decent, I still love it, but nothing like when Nintendo came with Mario 64 and it was a graphical marvel compared to the ps1, or even the gamecube when it had Mario sunshine and luigi mansion and graphics were really great compared to the ps2.

You misunderstand, we're not saying these Wii games are among the best looking games of the entire generation, just that they are the best looking on the Wii.

And i actually think the best looking Wii games still look quite nice even at 480p.

Oh ok, I thought we were talking all consoles from 7th generation.

Yeah those games still look OK, but just barely, I have to force my brain to adapt to the graphics every time I replay xenoblades or Mario, because on my ps4 pro and xbox X I get no jaggies at all, and your brain gets accustomed to it, specially as I play on a 100inch screen jaggies get really noticeable. It was fine when I got the wii back in 2006, and I played games on an SD TV with 26 inch, it actually looked way better than an HD projector at 100inch.

With that said, Xenoblade on the 3ds was really getting my eyes to bleed, almost unplayable as you cant make out what is a jaggie and what is a door. Everything was just messed together. That game was just too much for the 3ds.

On the other hand the wiiU was an HD console from the get go, and it looked beautiful from day 1, Zelda looks bad because its a big open world demanding game so they could not fix the jaggies, Wind waker and Twilight princess look better on wiiU because, as they were not demanding they managed to remove the jaggies.

The biggest example of wii vs wiiU is Xenoblade chronicles, and then you play xenoblades X, the graphics are like 5x better, even tough the world got much bigger. Amazing how they managed that on wiiU, because the world is bigger than Zelda, and there's a lot of stuff in the world and no jaggies, game looks sharp and clean. So clearly the developers knew how to take advantage of the hardware better than the Zelda developers, or maybe they just made it look bad on wiiU to make people buy a switch, you really notice the difference in jaggies from the switch Zelda.



victor83fernandes said:
curl-6 said:

You misunderstand, we're not saying these Wii games are among the best looking games of the entire generation, just that they are the best looking on the Wii.

And i actually think the best looking Wii games still look quite nice even at 480p.

Oh ok, I thought we were talking all consoles from 7th generation.

Yeah those games still look OK, but just barely, I have to force my brain to adapt to the graphics every time I replay xenoblades or Mario, because on my ps4 pro and xbox X I get no jaggies at all, and your brain gets accustomed to it, specially as I play on a 100inch screen jaggies get really noticeable. It was fine when I got the wii back in 2006, and I played games on an SD TV with 26 inch, it actually looked way better than an HD projector at 100inch.

With that said, Xenoblade on the 3ds was really getting my eyes to bleed, almost unplayable as you cant make out what is a jaggie and what is a door. Everything was just messed together. That game was just too much for the 3ds.

On the other hand the wiiU was an HD console from the get go, and it looked beautiful from day 1, Zelda looks bad because its a big open world demanding game so they could not fix the jaggies, Wind waker and Twilight princess look better on wiiU because, as they were not demanding they managed to remove the jaggies.

The biggest example of wii vs wiiU is Xenoblade chronicles, and then you play xenoblades X, the graphics are like 5x better, even tough the world got much bigger. Amazing how they managed that on wiiU, because the world is bigger than Zelda, and there's a lot of stuff in the world and no jaggies, game looks sharp and clean. So clearly the developers knew how to take advantage of the hardware better than the Zelda developers, or maybe they just made it look bad on wiiU to make people buy a switch, you really notice the difference in jaggies from the switch Zelda.

I don't play on a projector or 100 inch screen or on PS4 Pro/Xbox One X/PC, so I guess my frame of reference is different.

My TV is 42 inches and my primary platform is the Switch. But I'm still able to fire up, say, Mario Galaxy or Sonic Colours and while they do have noticeable jaggies, I still think they look visually appealing overall.



Uncharted 3, by far. The set pieces mind blowing.



victor83fernandes said:
curl-6 said:

Yeah, The Conduit and its sequel Conduit 2 are probably the two most graphically advanced games on Wii, pushing a ton of effects rarely seen on the system like normal mapping, depth of field, fluid simulation, etc.

There's not as polished or artistically accomplished as the likes of the Galaxy games or Prime 3, but in terms of technology they pushed the system hard.

Are you guys serious? I love Nintendo, but wii games being in top graphically? They look beyond horrible, jaggies everywhere, bad textures, 480i resolution, which can be updated to 480p if you buy the cable for it, still very far from the typical 640p-720p last generation.

Mario galaxy looked decent, I still love it, but nothing like when Nintendo came with Mario 64 and it was a graphical marvel compared to the ps1, or even the gamecube when it had Mario sunshine and luigi mansion and graphics were really great compared to the ps2.

I don't think Nintendo will ever again be on top of graphics with their new approach. But I thought that's what people want, portability instead of graphics.

With that said the wiiU was the first time I saw beautiful graphics from Nintendo on an HD TV. Games like pikmin 3, Mario 3d, wonderful 101 all look amazing, but then again breath of the wild looks horrible with jaggies being very noticeable. The switch has even less of a chance because even tough its barely any more powerful than a wiiU (which was several times less powerful than ps4), now it competes with xbox X graphics and soon with ps5 graphics, so Nintendo wont even compete in graphics for the foreseeable future.

If your argument is that the Graphics on the Wii are terrible because more powerful consoles existed...

Then by extension the visuals on all consoles -forever- are shit because the PC exists.

Rather that isn't what the discussion is about, the discussion is about the best graphics on -each- individual system rather than the entire 7th gen collectively.

The Switch has proven to be a far more capable system than the Wii U... And we aren't even at the point where the Switch will get it's best looking games yet, in saying that, it still obviously falls short of it's 8th gen competitors.

curl-6 said:

I don't play on a projector or 100 inch screen or on PS4 Pro/Xbox One X/PC, so I guess my frame of reference is different.

My TV is 42 inches and my primary platform is the Switch. But I'm still able to fire up, say, Mario Galaxy or Sonic Colours and while they do have noticeable jaggies, I still think they look visually appealing overall.

I am surprised how well Wii games hold up on a CRT to be honest.
But on my 75" home Television? Not so much.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

victor83fernandes said:

The biggest example of wii vs wiiU is Xenoblade chronicles, and then you play xenoblades X, the graphics are like 5x better, even tough the world got much bigger. Amazing how they managed that on wiiU, because the world is bigger than Zelda, and there's a lot of stuff in the world and no jaggies, game looks sharp and clean. So clearly the developers knew how to take advantage of the hardware better than the Zelda developers, or maybe they just made it look bad on wiiU to make people buy a switch, you really notice the difference in jaggies from the switch Zelda.

The reason Xenoblade Chronicles X has less jaggies than BOTW on Wii U is because the former is fixed at 720p with post-process anti-aliasing while the former has a dynamic resolution than can drop to 648p under load, and while I cannot confirm, may not use anti-aliasing.

The reason is simply that Zelda is a more demanding game than Xenoblade Chronicles X, in a number of ways.

In XCX, water reflection are static cubemaps, basically a fake effect, while Zelda employs proper real time reflections.

In XCX, world shadows are fixed in place and don't move with the sun; in Zelda everything from trees to characters cast dynamic shadows that shift with time of day.

In XCX grass is rendered as flat 2D tufts; in Zelda its rendered down to individual blades.

Basically, Zelda uses more complex techniques that take up more processing power, meaning less for resolution and anti-aliasing.

victor83fernandes said:

The switch has even less of a chance because even tough its barely any more powerful than a wiiU 

The Switch is actually quite a bit more capable than the Wii U. It has three times as much RAM available to games, twice as much main RAM bandwith, and a much more modern GPU capable of more advanced visual effects.



curl-6 said:

The Switch is actually quite a bit more capable than the Wii U. It has three times as much RAM available to games, twice as much main RAM bandwith, and a much more modern GPU capable of more advanced visual effects.

I got Witcher 3 for the Switch, and while it's obviously going to look a lot better on a X1X, the Switch port is perfectly competent, runs pretty solidly, and really doesn't look bad. CD Projekt and Saber did a commendable job of stuffing the whole thing into a 32GB cartridge. 

With that said, at this stage of the graphics game, artistry impresses me a lot more than raw polygons or anti-aliasing. I've seen AAA games that look like ass despite being high-end on a technical basis, and indie games with a lot of visual flair. 



SanAndreasX said:
curl-6 said:

The Switch is actually quite a bit more capable than the Wii U. It has three times as much RAM available to games, twice as much main RAM bandwith, and a much more modern GPU capable of more advanced visual effects.

I got Witcher 3 for the Switch, and while it's obviously going to look a lot better on a X1X, the Switch port is perfectly competent, runs pretty solidly, and really doesn't look bad. CD Projekt and Saber did a commendable job of stuffing the whole thing into a 32GB cartridge. 

With that said, at this stage of the graphics game, artistry impresses me a lot more than raw polygons or anti-aliasing. I've seen AAA games that look like ass despite being high-end on a technical basis, and indie games with a lot of visual flair. 

Yeah Witcher 3 is a remarkable port, and a great example of a game that simply wouldn't have been possible on Wii U.

And yeah, art goes a lot further than raw technical grunt for me too; I still reckon Muramasa on Wii is one the most beautiful games I've ever laid eyes on.



curl-6 said:

The reason Xenoblade Chronicles X has less jaggies than BOTW on Wii U is because the former is fixed at 720p with post-process anti-aliasing while the former has a dynamic resolution than can drop to 648p under load, and while I cannot confirm, may not use anti-aliasing.

Breath of the Wild is 720P on Wii U, 900P on Switch.
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-the-legend-of-zelda-breath-of-the-wild-switch-vs-wii-u-face-off

Both 30fps.

Not aware of any dynamic scaling? I did complete it on Wii U and the Switch version that I have looks identical, just slightly sharper. (As expected when you go from 1280x720 to 1600x900)

Game could have benefited greatly from some slight AA, even if it's a cheap post-process AA.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

I see Tomb Raider 2013 mentioned a few times and I wholeheartedly agree. I swear that game was just nice to look at. Even now I play it on a fairly regular basis on my 8th gen consoles and it still looks absolutely stunning to me. Never played Rise on 7th gen hardware but if it looks better than its predecessor, then that's a hell of a feat.

I'm really partial to Enslaved, too. People tell me "Oh, it doesn't look that good because _____" but it's one of those 7th gen games that just leaves me in awe every time.



mZuzek loves AA batteries