My "fanboyism" isn't the reason for me not focusing on the graphics, it's more my overall mindset and expectations from a game. Nintendo has a reason for keeping the graphics low and I am ready to say, that they maybe could have chosen another way to get around it, but I am more happy to see, that they are focusing on framerate and gameplay, instead of the aesthetics.

This whole thing reminds me a bit of F-Zero X, which sacrified graphics for a constant 60 fps. It also looked like shit, but it is still (for me atleast) one of the most kickass racing games. I'm not saying that you are wrong about expecting more from a current gen game, because you a right in that regard, it's more that I am stunned that everything everyone talks about when talking about Star Fox Zero is the graphics.

I never called you fanboyish, I said fan, big difference. And yes, framerate and gameplay matters, but so does graphics. The Wii U can handle 60fps with much better graphics as shown by Bayonetta 2. And Star Foz Zero isn't anywhere near that level of graphics. This is an absoutely lazy attempt at making a Star Foz game and fans like you are the reason they think they can get away with it.

No one would have complained if it even looked decent cause we don't expect great graphics in Wii U games, but this worse than some 2007 PS3 games like Uncharted: Drake's Fortune and MotorStorm or 360 games like Halo 3. This shold nt be defended by anyone, this would only promote more lazy overpriced games from Nintendo. They still have time to improve the graphics so I'll wait but right now it doesn't look worth buying for me.

Hyrule Warriors longer like balls to me. It still does, as a matter of fact. Still one of my favorite 8th gen games.

they are really terrible graphics for the Wii U. I was very surprised when i first saw the trailer running

Woah, you make it sound as if I commited some sort of crime. First of all, Nintendo doesn't give a shit, they'll always think they can get away with anything, because they're always doing their own thing. Second of all, it's not like the graphical quality of this game is the premise of all Nintendo games having put "less effort" into the graphics, as Nintendo usually atleast makes graphically-polished games.

Before E3 I had the fear of Star Fox Zero being, yet again not a real successor to Star Fox 64, so I was pleasently suprised by what I got to see.

And also, I would defend any game that's getting shat on solely for it's graphics and everything else about the game being ignored. As I said, I don't completely disagree and I understand your sentiments to some extent, but I think that all of this complaining is a bit too much.

for the most part, the wii u backgrounds look quite a bit better. But the ship graphics (arwing and otherwise) i think have a poorer art style this time around.

It doesn't look like Gamecube graphics simply for the fact that the Gamecube was locked to 480p.

Textures and shaders are also noticeably above GCN calibre. 

Yes, it looks horrid by Wii U standards, but let's not get carried away; it looks like a 2006 PS3/360 game, not a Gamecube game.

it was mentioned in the thread that it could have been run in dolphin emulator.  and someone also mentioned that GC is locked at 480p.  and Wii U is a prototype so really we can't compare it at the moment. 

it is a prototype, seems lacking a few here and there.  but feedback would be good to inform them what StarFox is lacking on their prototype.

I don't think the game looks bad at all. The opening cornerea level, to me, looks awesome. It's fast, fluid, colorful, and the world feels big. I'm super excited by it. Will it win an award for best graphics? No, But no wiiu title will. I seriously don't see what the whining and complaining is about... the game looks great to me.