My thoughts on what's Wii's standard graphics should look like

[LordTheNightKnight]

Mifely said:

Viper1 said:

Mifely said:

The Wii will have some decent 3rd party engines after a while, but they'll never be truly spectacular in the graphics sense. They won't suck as bad as most of the shovelware does though. Nintendo has consistantly set the high bar for their games with their 1st party titles. There really aren't engines that ever outdo them on their platforms, ever. Some come close now and then (RE4 on the GC, for example), but Nintendo will always be king. You can't ever expect more out of the Wii than Nintendo provides. Their games are fun to look at, but not astonishing in the graphics department. I would argue that "fun to look at" is what really matters to the typical Wii user, and Nintendo knows that.

You've been pretty spot on until here. Many 3rd parties outclassed Nintendo graphically on the SNES and N64. Squaresoft, RAREWare, Factor 5 and others. On GC, Factor 5 continued that trend right out fo the gate. Rare also held up their talents again for a game. In fact, Nintendo at one point during hte N64 days admitted that Rare had better tools than they did.

While these are certainly exceptions and not the rules, they are THE bar for which other 3rd parties should strive for.

 

I would disagree that Starfox: Adventures (Rare's only GC game that I recall) was better, graphically, than Super Mario Sunshine, Zelda: The Wind Waker, Zelda: Twilight Princess, Metroid Prime 1/2 (2nd party) etc. On par, or pretty close, but not really better. I think I'd have to say the same about Rogue Squadron/Rebel Strike -- good stuff, but not really better than Nintendo's 1st/2nd party titles.

If had had mentioned Rare on the GC, that would be valid. He didn't, so that is not a valid counter. He mentioned Factor 5 on the GC.

On the N64 and SNES... sure I suppose, but the relative differences weren't really spectacular. Nintendo is always a contender for #1 on their own consoles (just like Sony and MS are on theirs... go figure), so if you take a look at Super Mario Galaxy, Metroid Prime 3, etc., you have a pretty accurate picture of what the Wii can do, and will ever be capable of. Those games are good... but they aren't on par with the X360/PS3... they are, however, pretty close to the what the Xbox was capable of (like it or not). Sure, a little better -- I'm not argueing that.

What I'm getting at, is that if graphics is what you're looking for, the Wii will just never compare, due to a huge number of reasons, technical (hardware comparison with 360/PS3), financial (publishers don't want to sink money into a game which may not appeal to a large portion of the Wii's audience... pool/poker/tennis/kiddie title is a better bet for them), and otherwise. The focused demographics of the X360 and the PS3 make them much more viable platforms for risking a large project on... at least you have some guarantee of appeal to many of the console owners. With the Wii, you have to appeal to everyone from Grandma, to Uncle Bob to little Johnny, and have no guarantees whatsoever of a target audience.

Solitaire/Billiards/GemTetrisWhatever/Sudoku/Sims/BassFishingSuperPro have always reigned supreme on the PC -- financially those kinds of games are without peer. If you're a "real" gamer looking for good stuff out of your Wii... well... welcome to "mass appeal". Nintendo will always be your hero, in that regard.

The rest is just belief with no proof. There is not guarantee of a hit on HD consoles. Publishers has just wanted it to be so for a while.