I genuinely feel that even Star Fox 64 3D is a better looking game than this. Like mentioned before, it's not just the graphics. It's the art direction. It's an ugly game through and through. If the game had low quality graphics, but the art direction was strong enough to cover it up, the game would be seen as another Wind Waker. But it's not, because it isn't just the graphics. It's just ugly. The Wii U's TP, if not, worse. People are going to look back in 10 years and say SM3DW, MK8, and Zelda U aged pheonominally. Zero has already aged terribly, and it isn't even out.

We probably don't see same game, I think look OK, it not ugly but certainly not best looking Wii U game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6PEecNY0Sc

They are not bad and the system is rendering the game twice with a locked 60FPS. That's actually mighty impressive.

After playing Mario Kart 8, Bayonetta 2 and even Hyrule Warriors, I don't know how this game can look so poorly graphically speaking. Water is the only thing that looks decent on it.

None of those games are rendered twice taking twice the resources of the hardware.

Game performing well =/= Game looking great.

Both things can exist. Unfortunately not the case for this starfox

Or people had expectations and Nintendo fell below it? Not every criticism makes people a hater

I played the original starfox and thought it was great. Looking at this new one hurts given how rushed it feels. The textures themselves are really hard to look at.

And this isn't me not having interest, this is the game killing the interest I had.

If mario kart 8 looked like its gamecube counterpart, it certainly would have killed my interest.

Starfox just won't live if this game is a huge failure. Games such as Mario can have less-successful titles because more than one game comes per console generation.

the last starfox game(besides 3D remake) was the one on the 64. Starfox isn't fortunate enough to have multiple chances.

Starfox Wii U failure= rapid decline of starfox.

How much more clear does this have to be? The Wii U is rendering every texture double. Every polygon. It's not just the game on the TV like a normal game.

When SEGA Genesis had 2 player for Sonic 2 it rendered the game twice and kept the same visuals but reduced the framerate a ton. WHen Hyrule Warriors in in mutliplayer with Gamepad it renders the game twice and both visuals and framerate take a hit. The visuals in Starfox are not bad. Just not impressive on it's own, there is a difference. Considering what the hardware is doing it is impressive however.

Besides why does it matter everyone who played it said it plays great. All I care about because I'm not shallow.

I honestly don't think there's much of an excuse for the graphics regardless of FPS. especially when we consider that a lot of this game appears to be a rehash of the Nintendo 64 iteration in terms of art design

   it's not like they appear to have rushed out this Star Fox game, I don't understand why it looks so mediocre. I actually think it looks appealing to the eye, it's just that it certainly isn't top of the line for the Wii U and you sort of expect a Star Fox game to have fairly advanced graphics for its generation when looking back at some of the titles in the series (Star Fox Adventures, love it or hate it, had great graphics for that generation and the same can be said for SF 64 on the N64)

   in the end I guess gameplay is king but I'd like to see things pushed a bit more. it gets concerning when we think back to the Metroid Federation Force trailer and its god awful graphics (although early in development), because it makes you wonder if Nintendo is aware that a bulk of their fans to care about graphics at least a LITTLE bit, at least fans expect it to look good in comparison to other Wii U games which it doesn't really