fazz said: Griffin said: Is it just me or have we had these threads before, and i think we had the same posters in those that we have in this thread. I'm pretty sure Fazz said that the wii might be possible to have games better looking then some of the PS3/360 games. It's just you, as I've said that some PS360 games could be ported to the Wii with some downgrading. That's different

It can never be "some". The minimum degree of downgrading would at least suck the soul out of the game, even magically from the HD versions, which is why a port to the Wii must never happen.

If you ask me we should have a game to see who can post the worst screenshot they can find.  I'll go first, as we all can tell this appears to be an image of SMG, i'm not sure why it looks so bad

@griffin Well for one thing, it's low rez, so it can't show much.

" One of the big issues the team over at Capcom is facing is the fact that the PS2's texture memory capacity is far smaller than the Gamecube's. In the Gamecube version of Resident Evil 4, players were treated to 24 bit textures. However, in the PS2 version, expect 8 and 4 bit textures, which is quite a downgrade.

But no sir, it doesn't end there.

Leon's polygon count, in order to run on the inferior PS2 hardware, will have to drop from the original 10,000 polygons to a mere 5,000, slightly more than Snake from Metal Gear Solid 3.

The PS2, does however, have a large Direct Memory Access bandwidth, which will allow the developers to provide a high amount of textures into the game. But, if they choose to do this, the game's framerate will drop substantially, this is due to the PS2's, as stated before, limited texture memory capacity. And, of course, any extra lighting or texture layers will slow down the framerate more. It is expected, that if all the Gamecube features are included, the PS2 version will run at less than the Gamecube's framerate."

"The PS2 version of the game has lower-quality textures than the GC original, but to me the biggest presentational differences between the two are that

1) The GC version has more and nicer lighting effects
2) The GC version's cutscenes are rendered in real-time."

"Spong is reporting that Capcom's version of RE4 for the PS2 will suffer significant graphical setbacks. What's that? You want actual numbers, you say? Well, sources have reported that Leon's polygon count will be sliced in half, from 10,000 polygons to a "mere" 5,000, while each villager featured in the game will consist of around 4,000 polygons. But Resident Evil fans/PS2 owners need not fear, for Capcom is assuring us that the PS2's enhanced texturing capabilities will help to make up for the loss in detail.

However, that's only half the graphical battle. When remarking its visual finesse, most reviewers revered RE4's smooth framerate just as much as they adored its devotion to detail. Whilst perusing the Spong article, it is reavealed that:

"Up to ten villagers and 'associated components' can appear on screen in the PS2 re-work without causing the game to drop frames."

" Textures. The PS2 attempts to make up for lack of memory by giving some absolutely insane memory bandwidth. This allows you to swap textures out in memory, but you will not be able to hold nearly as many as the GameCube can. GameCube also has the advantage of 6:1 texture compression. This all results in the color depth of the PS2 textures being greatly reduced. Once again, this is probably going to be related to level size."

And a pic of the textures...

Right PS2...

24 bit, 8 bit, and 4 bit refer to color depth. It's comparable to pics of identical resolution, say 400x300, but one pic is a bitmap, one is a jpeg, and one is a gif. The GC can run the pic as a jpeg, so all details would still be there, but with some artifacts (and they do show up in the GC version, just rarely). Since the PS2 can only run bitmaps and gifs (or pngs), it would either have to drop the resolution of a bitmap just to keep the color depth, or stick with a lower color gif, which would still be the same resolution.

Thus the color is lower, but the resolution is the same. You can see that in some of the comparison pics if you look close enough.

I'm not disputing the polygon count, so that's irrelevant.

And I'm not disputing the framerate drops in the PS2 version. Yet it can happen in the GC version, just with 12 or more enemies instead of eight to ten.

Do you want a stable framerate, just don´t drop a granade to a bunch of ganados :P

Sorry for the poly count, but I didn´t wanted to cut it...

And, about the texts, so, what happen, did the reviewers took the lost of detail like lower res textures???Because the damn floor lack of some details

Again, you have to play both versions yourself. Go around looking at everything you can, or safely can, with any weapon with a zoom. The textures have the same resolution. It may not be clear to you from those pics, but then you have to see in the game yourself. 

Sorry just tired of all the bad screen shots for Wii

Not quite. The PS2 was the weakest system of its gen. RE4 proved that quite well.