'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.

1. What?? How would you know? Because you brought up that I did post those two kameo pictures in that other thread! so you must have seen it! You yourself just cited that post: "you posted in the next gen launch thread" so you obviously saw it! What the hell man :/

2. Ok. Again, I thought i was just confused but I was completely right, you STILL misunderstand what i was doing in here. God damn, phenom.

I'm making this extremely clear for you. 

My issue with him posting the GUN picture was not how he compared it to the one on the older consoles.  

My issue is he was trying to paint the whole 360 launch line up as looking bad, by using that screenshot. 

It is misrepresentative of the 360 launch lineup.

Because much better looking games launched alongside the 360. Such as kameo, which I believe is the best looking 360 launch game, hence why I would use screens of it in this thread.

That is why I brought it up. Nothing in that discussion is in reference to, or talking about, the previous gen versions of GUN or Kameo.

That is it. You have to understand by now, surely. 

I'm sure anybody reading this can understand. Maybe you don't want to because you want to get one up on me. Well, whatever your motive is, there it is explained clear as day for anyone to see. So simple. 

Actually is running games at 720p PLUS 480p for the gamepad. So is not the same resolution as the Xbox360.

The RAM available for games is higher (tiny bit more than twice), and the GPU is more up to date, it seem is a 2009 design vs a 2005 design, so it has to be better even working at the same clock speed. The only thing that seems to be around the same level is the CPU and is one of the reason they went with a GPGPU architecture.

Personally, I'm getting the impression that Sal is a 15 year old, and I doubt she will respond ...

She doesn't seem to fully grasp the difference between a exaggeration and/or speculation and a lie.

Had her argument been that I was being unfair to characterize Kameo as a complete game that only received graphical upgrades, or that Pikmin was being built from the ground up in a tight timeline, I would have agreed with her. But to accuse someone of lying for a vague speculative statement while trying to prove a point on a web forum seems rather childish.

1. I posted after you, that's why I was able to see your post obviously, what you are telling me here is to look through that thread to see your new comparison? Why not just post it here lol, maybe because you know I caught you cherry picking.

2. I know why you brought it up here, what I'm saying to you is, you haven't actually proved anything. That's one game which has no comparison on the Xbox. That's why its cherry picking. Now I'm talking about what you did in the other thread, why not compare Gun vs. Gun since they were actually finished products. I already know why you don't want to though. You don't want to admit you were cherry picking.

"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"

No, I'm just arguing against the economics of most studios pushing graphics beyond what the HD consoles can already do ...

By number there are far more games released to systems like the DS or 3DS than there are for high end devices because the average developer can produce a game for such a low budget that it becomes challenging to "fail". As an example, there is a local developer who has been very successful with DS games because they produced games using 3 to 5 developers in about 9 months; and they needed (on average) about 50,000 sales to be profitable.

In contrast, high end current HD console games are reported to have development teams of 100 (or more) people working for 3 (or more) years and they need millions of sales simply to break even. The average developer will never approach that budget because they could never see the sales to justify that budget; so they will never have the resources necessary to push these systems.

Will Call of Duty look awsome? Probably, but expect many smaller FPS games to survive by not pushing graphics in a similar way

Ah, now you sound more reasonable, thanks phenom. 

I did not compare GUN ports in that thread, because I was showing what the best xbox 360 launch title looked like, which I believe was kameo. Nowhere did I claim all 360 launch games looked as good as Kameo! There were ugly games like GUN, but I did not try to paint the whole 360 line up as being as ugly as GUN, like squirrel did, nor did I claim they all looked as good as Kameo! 

The argument in that thread from the OP, was that generational leaps in tech don't show in launch titles, and he used, among others, the 360 launch as an example. I used Kameo, a game from the 360 launch, to show that he was wrong, as I believed it WAS a game that improved significantly over last generation, and he ended up agreeing with me. I hope that's cleared up.

I doubt the tablets are the only thing keeping the Wii U from running games at 1080p. I believe the Kinect has multiple cameras capturing at 480p.

The GPU being more current argument doesn't hold much water. The Wii had a more current GPU than the original Xbox... but it didn't appear to put out superior visuals.

Personally, I'm getting the impression that Sal is a 15 year old, and I doubt she will respond ...

She doesn't seem to fully grasp the difference between a exaggeration and/or speculation and a lie.

Had her argument been that I was being unfair to characterize Kameo as a complete game that only received graphical upgrades, or that Pikmin was being built from the ground up in a tight timeline, I would have agreed with her. But to accuse someone of lying for a vague speculative statement while trying to prove a point on a web forum seems rather childish.