Yes the PS2 can handle all Wii games in some form, minus the control, but as long as the PS2 hangs around we will see mediocre (from a graphics standpoint) Wii games.

You just have to look at the previous generation of systems, exclusive titles nearly always have the best graphics on a system. Developers who are releasing a multi format game are forced to find the middle ground for all systems.

 Please read what i said before jumping the gun.

"Yes the PS2 can handle all Wii games in some form"

 I never said without downgrades so please don't put words in my mouth.  Twilight Princess or any of the other games could be ported to the PS2 and still be basically the same game, with the exception of the control.  I agree that the Wii is definately more powerful than the PS2 but not to such an extent that if affords new gameplay opportunities, that's what the wii-mote is for.  

If a game must be downgraded, then the system cannot handle that game as is.  Splitting hairs about what it means to be able to "handle" games is kind of silly though... especially after seeing that remake FF7 for the NES.

Who is splitting hairs? If that's your arguement then the Cube and the PS2 couldn't 'handle' most Xbox games because last gen most multi format games were technically superior on Xbox and had to be downgraded in some regard, whether it be lighting, textures, or AA, on the other two systems.

To me, handle means you can play the game and technical limitations don't hinder the game play experience. If you are really asking if PS2 can handle Wii games unchanged then of course it can, as long as you don't mind playing games at 10-15 frames/sec, anyone who says otherwise is just naive.

 Sorry , but tthe op of the thread was obviosly talking about without downgrades as is, and twilight princess ran at 30fps on the gamecube, it would do 20 fps on the ps2 , and would be unplayable imo. 

So then do you really assume that all effects on one console are doable on another with only a hit to FPS? 

Is that really what you meant to say?

This is going around in circles a little, i think our difference of opinion is based in semantics rather than in system disparity. From what you've said i think we can all agree (correct me if you think i'm wrong) that most games coded properly will definitely look better on the Wii than the PS2 and furthermore the Wii can generate effects that simply can't be done on the PS2.

My stance is the game play experience of Mario Galaxy could be emulated on PS2 but of course it wouldn't look nearly as shiny. If you say that means the PS2 can't handle Wii games, ok, i see your point. It begs the question however, do you think that the PS2 'handled' Resident Evil 4?

no.

Sorry for being a dumbarse earlier I do get it! if you take a Photo at 1024x768 and a photo at 640x 480 and display it on your tv the higher res picture will look better on the the same tv!

the Ps2 granturismo 4 does do 1080i output and it looks cleaner then 480p still the image quality from the PS3 granturismo hd is apples and oranges

just because its dispalyed at a higher res doesnt mean its original source is HD!

Still if Nintendo used polygon count like MS and sony did with thier product would have been veiwed differently!

also everytime a 66 million polygon or 125 million polygon count was claimed it was always qualified with we've never seen a it in a real world game! so I new it was over inflated! or unatainable at the time!

and the gamecube PS2 post was a good read! its funny the guy in the posts said the cpu in the PS2 was more powerful then gamecubes even though theres a higher clock for the gamecube!

kinda like amd 2000 cpu's running at 1200 mhz and comparing itself to a pentium 2000! higher clock isnt nescessary for more power always unless its the same cpu manufacturer!

also there were 2 gamecube version correct?? they upgradeed the cpu and gpu's core clock the article above stated 405 mhz then some other places had it at 490??

so is that possibly why it was quoted at 12 million originally and 20 million later??

also if the cpu on the wii is 750 mhz and the gpu still around 233mhz when they say the wii is 1 1/2 time more powerful then the gamecube! still doesnt account for all the bells and whistles the gpu has on the wii over the gamecube!

for instance screens of MP2 compared to MP3 you can see a big difference in lighting and effects!

I would say wii has better graphics then original xbox even though the specs are the same MHZ wise! still if the 360 is 10x more powerful then the xbox how close realistically can the wii be to the 360?

keep in mind they are both using ibm cpu's and ati graphics unless you go back to the superior design so its better card! what do you tink the raw polygon count is on these systems??

someone earlier said the wii was around 30 million! just wondering?

Sorry again for being rude and stupid all at once!