The Zelda demo looked great, and I really hope that's what they go for with the next Zelda. I couldn't get into the two the where released this gen.

Looking at specs it's should, but it won’t hold that title of best looking for long, and gloating over little things like puddle, is kind of pointless. The game looks fantastic on vita as well. But it isn't a fun game to play.

Sorry, I'm just not impressed with the Wiiu's graphical capabilities, yet. I’ll know for sure next month. I’m half temped to pick up a multi-platform game on both Wiiu and PS3 just the see the difference for myself.  

Who knows why, maybe to say see we can look good too. To build hype and get people believing that it’s more than what it is. Besides it’s a focused demo, It know what’s it going to render and when, Several ticks could have been used to make that video look fantastic, but if you added game play to it, it would crumble. That’s why it matters.

The Forbes one is a great example. Try reading the update. Troll journalism at its finest.

I can definitely agree to that, the Wii U will be the weakest of all next gen console, but I have the hope that the graphical differences won't be as big as the Wii and the HD twins, at least enough to get some decent third party support.

I was looking at the photo of batman and the wii U make him look like a plastic toy.

From the digital foundry link

"There are so many changes in this particular engine-driven cut-scene that we do wonder quite why the developers had to make them. There are both improvements and cutbacks compared to the existing versions."

Those were negative intepretations by the writer. From the day it was announce every change was automatically interpretted as a flaw or downgrade by journalists when all in depth reviews showed that they were in fact upgrades cuppled with simple redesigns.

There were some who not only claimed the armored suit was a downgrade but that the Wii U couldn't run the game with the old suit...when its still the default suit for the Wii U version. On top of that, all of that was BETA footage. They took every crappy screenshot they could and used it to it to make every negative accessment imaginable while completely ignoring all overt improvements.

They ignored all picture like that and instead chose to focus on bad screen captures like these

http://s.pro-gmedia.com/videogamer/media/images/wiiu/batman_arkham_city_armored_edition/screens/batman_arkham_city_armored_edition_4_605x.jpg

http://gamingshogun.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Batman-AC-Armored-Edition-ScreenShots_C1_300_2-460x360.jpg

They always use those two horrid screen caputres taken far out of context to make negative comments off of. You never sees these pop up with them.

http://media.nintendo.com/nintendo/bin/zVzBVM0z3nNKrec94Jwc7ZRVYc9GcCg3/Mn16oZ2NLbyysPdizI7QpHKYHiOdl4ou.jpg

http://s.pro-gmedia.com/videogamer/media/images/wiiu/batman_arkham_city_armored_edition/screens/batman_arkham_city_armored_edition_5_605x.jpg

And you keep stating that kind of thing in almost every thread you create... why?

It's a given that the Wii U will be able to achieve more than the current systems running on 6-7 years old tech.  I don't know why you feel the need to focus on that so much. 

Need to compensate much?

Wipeout HD on PS3 is graphically intensive and it runs at 1080p, 60FPS.

You're grasping at straws. The PS3 isn't really that much more powerful than the XBox 360. Slightly, probably, but not a XBox vs PS2 difference.  
Now, I didn't take the Dreamcast in account, but even if I did, I'd advise you to go get your eyes checked.

Sure, the leap is smaller from N64 to the Dreamcast, but it is gigantic compared to what the Wii U is compared to the PS3.

Here's a quick reminder:

Among the N64's best:

Among the Dreamcast's best:

It's not even comparable.  The leap between the 2 was the "normal" gen leap.

You still don't get it. Why are you showing me the Dreamcast's best? Have we seen the Wii U's best? Show me a Dreamcast launch title.

I don't see what the power difference between PS3 and 360 has to do with my argument at all.

Those screen do look pretty good, Do we have comparison shots yet?

First, having no gameplay doesn't mean the system can't accomplished that, and second, you doubt that the video wasn't in real time, which makes no sense, why would Nintendo showed a pre-render cutscene? If it was pre-render even the Wii could do it...There's also the Zelda tech demo (which looked amazing imo) and that was definitely in real time because you could change the camara and the lights.

Almost all developers have praised the graphical capabilities of the console (comparing it the current gen mind you), the only thing negative they have mentioned is the "processing power", because it almost pretty certain the processor have a low clock speed, that's why the system have a GPGPU which will comprise for the low clock speed and will help in other stuff, it's something new for the devs so it takes time to get used to and make the most out of it.