By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Mazty on 03 April 2010
Edit Thread
Roma said:
Mazty said:

No the graphics are far, far worse because wii games have no AA and a 480p resolution as well as no procedurals etc.

Hardware doesn't limit what genre the console can do, but it serverly limits it. Take FPS' for an example. In an FPS a key element for it to be good is to have good AI - the CPU limits this and as the wii CPU is attrocious, the AI is very limited, and therefore is likely not to present a challenge to hardcore players, therefore making the game boring, rendering the point of the game a waste.

The PS2 had hardcore games BUT gamers expectations have increased since last generation, meaning if you were to port a hardcore game to the wii, say Killzone, all hardcore gamers would say it's a pile of **** because the AI is bad, the graphics are bad etc. This is because games are judged to what is around them at the time of release and prior. So in that sense however, a game like Shadow of the Colossus is still amazing, although it is graphically pants, because there has not been a game like it since. However when Last Guardian is released, gamers expectations may again rise, therefore rendering Shadow of the Colossus, like many other games, good for their time.

No, Mario Galaxy is no way near the graphics of games like Heavy Rain, Gears of War etc. There's no point arguing this, the hardware speaks for itself.

True the Conduit is for hardcore gamers, but the wii seems to lack good games for quality gamers which is my point.

As for porting the an old ps2 game to the wii, see the third para.

I thought Killzone was a piece of crap from the start or so I’ve heard so of course they are going to say it is crap if it gets ported :P

If they ported OoT to the Wii It would still be one hell of a game.

So you admit that the Wii has hardcore games even though you said that it can’t handle hardcore games :P if that work in your head then sure whatever you say.

It is not me who is saying that Galaxy is comparable to some of the HD games it is the critics plus you should know better than to compare a cartoonish game to realistic ones. :P  

What you did with Vaios game list clearly show how ignorant and biased you are against Nintendo. If Sony did them you would love them :P

Nah Killzone wasn't a Halo beater, but by no means was it crap.

Hum, OoT would look awful and I couldn't think of a reason someone should play it over TP, but then I can't think of a reason someone should play TP over Oblivion etc.

Well the wii can try to appeal to the hardcore, but it simply doesn't have the hardware to meet the demands that hardcore gamers ask for such as advanced AI, good animation, long levels, good graphics (somewhat vital for an FPS when you take draw distance, object recognistion etc into account).

I've learnt to ignore critics after some of them say the most idiotic crap I've heard and are far from being unbiased. In any case, 480p and no AA is just going to look bad compared to any decent game on the HD consoles, but that's not to say the game is bad.

What I did with Vaios game list was to read through the games, and most were multiplatform, and very few benchmark games on the list. Considering I've played most of the games on that last, I can't really see how I was being ignorant - lazy, yes, ignorant, no.