Somewhere between "Pretty bad" and "Terrible".

I'll go with "Nice, but a bit outdated." The thing is though, this game is at least trying something new with its control scheme, and whether or not it's worth the sacrifice in graphics remains to be seen for me.

Regardless, the game looks good enough and I'm still getting it. It's whatever.

They look better obviously but still very mediocre. Definitely not N64 but probably up to the gen after that. I've recently completed ratchet and clank ps2 classic on my ps3 and this game looks pretty similar to this with a bit more shine and draw distance.

While not graphically impressive if you like star Fox you'll probably still enjoy this unless you're put off by the controls. So don't worry about the graphics too much.

The game does indeed look better.Just a question...Why do you have to shoot the giant robot directly into his butt?

I was thinking not too bad till I saw the ratchet and clank game compared to it. Omg.. I know there is a gen apart kinda but that is still pretty bad. Just seeing how flat and barren the game is makes it worse. Games like captain toad and Mario kart blow this out of the water. Since the game is supposed to look real blocky they could have used higher res textures.

When did I ever say that it looked like a good game? It doesn't. It looks like an outdated game from an era of growing pains that aged terribly, and then threw in a new control scheme that takes the entire campaign to either maybe get used to or hate trying unless you're playing co-op. And that's when only talking about the gameplay.

Eh, it's actually the other way around. We point SF0 because we have seen other games been impressive on Wii U. This one is not. We wouldn't been saying anything if it wasn't for those great looking games to compare with.

I agree with this.

It's ok, nothing impressive but not as horrible as some people think.

these comments are from people that care so much about graphics,Yet, they play minecraft all time.....