I guess the initial wave of games isn't that impressive from Nintendo's part so the Wii isn't too much overshadowed by a portable graphically.

We've seen what it can do with Resident Evil and DoA.

fixed

I'm only going to say one thing. Every system I've ever known launched with games whose graphics only scratched the surface of what that system would do a few years down the line.

Than you have extremly low standards for great graphics

Yeah, probably. That is, I don't care much about graphics. That's maybe why I still enjoy NES games. :P

So you began gaming on the PS2 era? Because DS offers about  the same graphics as a PSone/N64. 

There was no  video game system with better graphics back in those days. Today (15 years later) i excpect graphics to improve (see:PSP) and DS is the weakest system BY FAR

I am so confused. When I entered this thread, I was expecting screens, or something....

Do you own a PC that is less than 1 year old with two top of the line graphics cards?

While everyone would agree that better looing graphics are an appealing feature, the extent that it factors into people's purchasing decisions is very minimal; and most people are entirely happy with "low quality" graphics when the system and its games are appealing for other reasons.

For someone like me, who began playing videogames on the collecovision, besides the low resolution I don't have a problem with the graphics on systems like the SNES or N64; and I have difficulty seeing games that are (roughly) in line with the PS2/Gamecube/XBox as "looking bad" simply because they're not that technically advanced.

It's somehow nonsensical to judge the 3DS graphics from 2D screenshots. Surely, it gives an impression regarding polygons and some light effects etc., but the perceived graphic while playing in 3D will be another league, imho.

And no, i haven't seen a 3DS in real life, but with a little bit logical imagination this is a obvious.

But who cares? Let's bash it.