I disagree. I play so many games and see slowdown or a dip in FPS. Wii just isn't that much more powerful then the gamecube, and devs know that, so when they max out Wii games, they do it so when games do show slowdown, it's masked very well.

XenoBlade slows down for example when you fight big enemies or bosses and the boss, you, and a party member all use an "art" or basically visually pleasing attack, at the same time. However FPS don't jump, they show down and increase gradually, so it just looks like your characters are moving a bit slow. Also when the game slows down, sometimes the console doesn't pick up attack selections.

Mario Kart Wii shows slowdown on some tracks when playing with multiple players via splitscreen.

Donkey Kong Country Returns also shows slowdown, but not often, and unually only at the start of the level (for me) or when you're running and platforms are falling.

In all cases the drop in FPS is gradual, smooth, and hard to notice. You never teleport because of slowdown, and your game never lags.

Also I don't think games like XenoBlade, The Last Story, and Skyward Sword are possible on the Gamecube. XenoBlade looks epic, and has draw distances that put Elder Scrolls in SD to shame. It's a really well designed game, plays smart with the limitations of the console (low texture details, except on characters, pologons suplemented with well drawn textures, and facial emotions being texture changes instead of actual facial polygon shifts like in HD games), and I would argue pushes the system.

If it didn't push the system, I think it would have higher texture or screen resolution (it can be very pixelated at times, more so then other Wii games both by texture and overall resolution).

Maybe. Apparently the PS3 and XBox360 haven't maxed out yet.

Edited.

There is a difference between using up all of the system resources and maxing something out. Maxing out requires optomization. You can max out resources with a single simple program.

There are Dreamcast games that look far better than Xenoblade. F-zero came no where near close to touching Rogue Leader. Rogue Leader was the second highest graphically performing games last gen much less on the GC. The only game that surpassed it was Rebel Strike so you were right on that front.

The only games that have come close to truly utilizing all the Wii has too offer are Overlord: Dark Legend, Resident Evil: Darkside Chronicles and Zangeki no Reginleiv. The latter is definitely the closest to maxing out the Wii.

It had texture effects on the characters and the environment, dynmaic lighting and shadows, destructible environments, enemy dismemeberment and over a hundred fully detailed enemies and allies on screen at once, with 4 player online multiplayer. Zangeki No Reginleiv is the most technically impressive game I have even seen on the Wii.

that game runs at 10 fps
Metroid Prime runs at 60 fps
does it count?

And also, which Dreamcast game looks better than any Wii game?
of course if u pick up the worst looking Wii game maybe
last time i checked Shenmue 2 was the best looking Dreamcast game
there are tons of games that look better than that on Wii

Shiiit, I forgot my beer in the freezer! Anyways, where were we?

Oh hey, nothing changed between begining of gen 6 and beginning of gen 7. In neither case did 3rd party devs want to work with Nintendo. That didn't stop the Capcom 5, Factor 5, Silicon Knights, the tri-force (Sega-Namco-Nintendo).

Remember, the Wii broke records after 3rd parties had already set their course for gen 7. They were not ready for a shift in any way, multiplatforming and defaulting to the xbox was their better bet. In fact, the twins ended up having a greater marketshare than the Wii almost all along the generation. So what then?

Pretty impressive that a game from way back in 2001 looks better than 99% of Wii titles despite the extra power it has, with the exception of Galaxy and Prime 3 arguably for their artistic merits.

Too bad F5 wasn't around to make Rogue Squadron 4 for the Wii. I bet they could have made the game look like it was for one of the HD consoles at first glance.

I know, and that's true. It still doesn't answer the question, why the different approach to partnerships for the Wii, when the cube got them. The philosophy must have been different, it seems to be the best answer we honestly have.

For the HD twins, here is a worldwide graph of the curves between them and the Wii, for discussion:

But since this seems to be a more American phenomenon I provided the US version:

Are we talking about the same 3rd parties? Capcom, Namco, Sega, Factor 5, Silicon Knights. I know that the last 2 went a different route for reason much more important than Nintendo shunning. But I don't remember either of the 1st three publicly talking down on the Wii, its owners and certainly not Nintendo.

Are you maybe blurring things a little?

The difference between Playstation and Nintendo coming into gen7 is that the PS was the undisputed dominant leader of the industry, while Nintendo was a shameful loser (let's call it what it is), despite the huge money they made off the GBA and its golden pokemon brand.

Sony was in a position to bargain with 3rd parties, Nintendwasn't.