I'd have to disagree right back.

Conker was second party.

RE4 beat TP in terms of character models, textures, lighting, particles, and animation.

See my last post for Xenoblade vs Jett Rocket/Conduit.

you might be right
last game Nintendo really pushed really hard was Starfox adventures, turned out to be a masterpiece
oh boy. that game was awesome wasnt it?

The graphics of SA were indeed very impressive. Though I wouldn't say it was the last game they made that pushed their systems; after that there was Mario Galaxy 1 & 2, Metroid Prime 3, etc.

No such thing as 2nd party. Nintendo owned 49% of Rare. Either way, I'll still challenge that, Majora's Mask looks the best for N64.

As for RE4 and Jett Rocket, find me an article that quantifies this. The field of vision in XenoBlade is huge, it's bigger then anything else on the Wii. Not to mention the total area of the game is bigger then Elder Scrolls IV (Not V).

---

As for the rest, I assume you agree? Super Mario RPG and Starfox are simply the most graphically capable SNES games on the market. N64 has Zelda, and Conker. NES well.....Nintendo just owned.

Nintendo still had a minority share in Rare.

You don't need an article to make an analysis of a game's tech if you know what to look for.

Xenoblade was possibly the most RAM-intensive Wii game, but as a result of its huge worlds it had no memory to spare for GPU tricks, and hence was PS2-level in terms of individual assets, and did little in the way of effects.

And I'd argue Doom with its textured 3D levels outdid Starfox. It used a faster upgrade of the Super FX chip. (Ah, Starfox SNES... still one of my fav games of all time)

Nintendo had the biggest share in Rare.

XenoBlade pushes the system more then Jett. Okay the bulk of the power goes to making ridiculous draw distances, but that's one of the reasons why it's the most graphically intense Wii game IMO. I don't consider something like Turok (N64) with the short draw distances, but great textures, a good looking game. Same logic applies for Jett Rocket. Plus look at the game, all the textures are re-used extensively. There is no depth to the game. Where something like XenoBlade, there is so much depth. From all the individual blades of grass to the unique textures on all the models.

I'm sorry, XenoBlade could almost pass off as a 360 game, it looks insane.

As for SNES, Super Mario World uses the SNES FX 2 chip......I don't consider that a powerful game at all. Super Mario RPG IMO is definately the best looking game, and Starfox/Vortex are the most graphically impressive.

Jett is closer to a 360 game than Xenoblade because it uses many of the kind of effects 360 games do, like global illumination. Xenoblade doesn't. It's vistas are truly stunning thanks to excellent art direction and memory usage, but in GPU terms its essentially just throwing out textured polygons without any advanced effects.

And Super Mario World does not use the FX2 chip; only Doom, Winter Gold, and Yoshi's Island do, and of those, Doom pushes it the hardest as it  actually features 3D worlds with textures.

So what? XenoBlade still looks better. Virtua Tennis 3 is one of the only PS3/360 gaves to run native 1080p, does that make it better looking then God of War or Mass Effect? Heck no. Same applies here, it pushes the Wii much harder to make a large environment then it does to make a small one with some added effects.

I meant Super Mario World 2* uses the FX 2 chip, and it's not that impressive. SMRPG is the clear cut best looking SNES game.

This isn't about what the best looking though, it's about what is the most processor intensive.

On the Wii, doing effects like normal mapping stress the system more than wide open environments. Hell, just to get these effects to work at all you have to essentially hack the GPU and "trick" it into doing things it was never designed to do. 

Same for the SNES; it was never meant to do 3D at all, and Doom not only does 3D, but unlike other FX chip titles, it pushes textured environments instead of mostly flat shaded ones. Doom is essentially a 5th gen game running on 4th gen hardware. 

Yes, and I think XenoBlade Chronicles is the most processor intensive game on the Wii. The texture level might not be high, but to render all those blades of grass, all those polygons (in the mechonis), all thos unique character models.....that game blows my mind.

Doom for SNES was a 3D game, but nearly every texture was flat, 2D, and heavily pixilated. Take something like Star Fox 2, and there are a lot of true 3D polygons to render. Similar story for Super Mario RPG, while it's sprite based 3D, it's still the best looking 3D SNES game. I dunno if Doom uses more processing power, but in terms of graphical output it's nowhere near Star Fox 2 or Super Mario RPG.

----

If you're going to argue Jett Rocket and Doom take up more processing power, but don't look as impressive....that's just a fools arguement. Can't punish Nintendo devs for getting more out of games, while asking less from the CPU. I have no way of measuring the CPU stress of a game, but I can say that Star Fox 2 doesn't emulate well on PSP. Either way, Nintendo's made the most graphical output out of any dev for their consoles (except maybe GCN with RE4, but it's a close call with Zelda)