Yes! You already brought this up! This is a different thread!

And I already posted: "I will gladly do that in the other thread. Kameo is still a significant and noticeable generational leap over original xbox games."

So go there to post to avoid confusion with this one, and tomorrow I will gladly compare last gen games to Kameo on 360 with you! THANKS. 

If I can't make a speculative comment you have to provide a link to every quote you use

Yes! You already brought this up! This is a different thread!

And I already posted: "I will gladly do that in the other thread. Kameo is still a significant and noticeable generational leap over original xbox games."

So go there to post to avoid confusion with this one, and tomorrow I will gladly compare last gen games to Kameo on 360 with you! THANKS. 

What are you talking to me for?

We're done.

You made up information, you lied.

I'm talking to phenom now.

If you're salty about me calling you out on your made up crap, contact a mod or something and get me banned for a day. I don't argue with liars. 

" How am I suppose to go to another thread you haven't even told me the title of?  "

In your own post: 

"This is all from page 3 of the "Next Gen Launch Games" thread."

Tada!

But since you're trying your very best to get one over me, I'll stay here for now, it seems to be a trend. Both those photos, of Kameo on the 360 and original xbox, I found on a post on Neogaf, and thought they were a great comparison. That's because they were both games with the same art style, same character model etc, and so no one could argue 'oh but the art style is different, it's cartoony and saturated but (for instance) half life on the xbox is realistic, so its not a proper comparison!' as I have seen others do. It is much easier to demonstrate that difference in capability when the games use exactly the same art style, hence why my comparison in that thread, I felt was so useful (and the OP agreed). 

It was not an attmept to decieve, by painting the Kameo on the original xbox as if it was the best looking game on the system. I'm sorry if it came off that way! 

I already explained this briefly in this thread, but you ignored: 

 "Kameo! it llustrated the massive jump in quality at launch, but with the benefit of having the same character designs/ art style so people couldn't bitch about them being different or Kameo not counting because it was cartoony/oversaturated (an argument I've seen posted before to wriggle out of those comparisons.) "

Technically Pikmin is a 3D game and the other two are 2.5D games, being that 2.5D game meains a game that is a 2D game that is rendered in 3D. See Viewtiful Joe

I don't doubt that there are similar looking PS3 games ...

Now answer the question 'Which one is showing that it is suffering from a lack of processing power?'

That's the point, if you can't say that they look like they're suffering from lack of proccessing power then obviously there really is no point in pushing graphics technology for these games beyond this point.

Everything comes to an end ...

Nintendo can spend 4 times as much money making sure that the stitches in Mario's over-alls are rendered with appropriate detail, or they can continue releasing games that look (essentially) like New Super Mario U, and in either case they will get roughly similar sales.

With the recent official news regarding Wii U, and in addition to all the rumors of processor type, speed, GPU, embedded RAM etc.  How powerful do you think the Wii U is in contrast to X360/PS4?  I know early release games are only marginally better in terms of visuals (I am still holding on buying DS2 for Wii U, instead of the 360 version), but early builds are not a good indication of system potential.  One thing is for certain, the Wii U has 4x more total RAM compared to the PS3 and 360; with a more modern GPU and CPU (with Watson type architecture).  I have been asked several times by casuals who want to know about the system and the best comparison I could say is comparing the PSP vs the Vita in terms of capability.  What would you say to a casual who might ask the same question?

1. How would I know you even posted in that thread lol. So Fail.

2. In your word. "That's because they were both games with the same art style, same character model etc, and so no one could argue 'oh but the art style is different"

So his comparison of Gun on Xbox and 360 are more valid since its FINISHED product vs. FINISHED product lol. So Fail again! You knew what you were doing, you cherry picked Kameo to prove a point you couldn't. You were caught plain and simple. Deal with it.

1. How would I know you even posted in that thread lol. So Fail.

2. In your word. "That's because they were both games with the same art style, same character model etc, and so no one could argue 'oh but the art style is different"

So his comparison of Gun on Xbox and 360 are more valid since its FINISHED product vs. FINISHED product lol. So Fail again! You knew what you were doing, you cherry picked Kameo to prove a point you couldn't. You were caught plain and simple. Deal with it.

'Which one is showing that it is suffering from a lack of processing power?'

Suffer?  No 2D games in the last 2 generations have suffered for a lack of graphical prowess.  But honestly they could always look better in some way, and it would actually be nice to have a native 1080p NSMBU game.  What you're essentially arguing is that games never need to look better.  And people have made that same argument every generation.  'Diminishing returns', 'the human eye can't see any better', etc.  I have no doubt that there will be many great-looking games on Wii U.  But when the other two consoles come out and there is a marked difference in graphical quality and immersiveness, there will be new things to appreciate. There are always new things to appreciate from the newest round of more powerful consoles.  And I'm not trying to say that the next PS or Xbox will have better games than Wii U, but technical advances yield new gameplay experiences.

Your moot argument about graphics never having to get better is only being used to overshadow the fact that Wii U games don't look any better than PS3 and X360 games.  And within the next year or so, they could look slightly better, too.  But there's no plateau that gaming will hit where everything just stops.  There will be 4KTVs, and with those advancements in technology will come immersive games we can't imagine.  All of those advancements matter. 

For the moment, all of those 2.5D games will satisfy us.  But in 2-3 those games will inevitably look behind the times, just as the games for Wii did.  And once again, it will be Nintendo's older graphics and unique controller vs. Sony and MIcrosoft's more powerful systems.  Every kind of game can look better, and every 6 years or so we're reminded that those screenshots we used to oggle (*hint*) now don't look so great.