yushire said: Anyway, many people here complains about third parties didnt optimize Wii's hardware compatibility. But what should Wii's graphics standard graphics looks like? I'll point out first what shouldnt be done on the Wii when graphics are concerned: No N64 graphics No PSX/PS1 graphics No PS2/or even high end PS2 graphics unless its a Xenossaga 3 or God of War 2 graphics quality What should be done: Atleast a high end XBOX/GC graphics If its high budget game it should be in level of SMG Needs Source engine graphics quality on the system, ITS MUCH NEEDED Now for examples, if its a small time developers, atleast copy the quality of their game with Medal of Honor Heroes 2 if its a straight 2-d game it must be a Super paper Mario quality, if its cell shaded it must be with boogie quality and if its cartoony it must be Mario kart quality. We know the Wii dont have a graphical quality of HD consoles but give atleast consideration on the quality of graphics on the Wii

 Wii owners seem to be the first to say that graphics don't matter and also the first to complain that graphics on the wii aren't good enough.  Maybe third parties don't optimize the graphics for their wii games because they think that wii owners don't care for graphics.

MDX said: In discussing the power of the Wii in relation to Xbox/360/PS3   Has anybody taken into consideration that the Wii's CPU can do out-of-order-processing while the HD machines can only do in-order-processing? Alot of the games from the HD consoles have framerate issues.  This could be a reason why.  Now truthfully I prefer lower resolutions and 60fps than higher resolutions at 30fps. because the more "realistic" a game looks, the more important that the framerate can convey life-like animation. Otherwise I feel sometimes Im playing games in stop motion, and I get taken out the immersion, and sometimes out of the "zone".    Another point is this: If a developer was given two years and 10 million to make a Wii game vs two years  and 10 million to make a 360/PS3 game, which game would be overall better? My bet would be the Wii game.   Now we know that a A class or B class HD game costs somewhere from 17 to 20 million dollars. But a Wii game from 5 to 10. Now here is the question.  How many publishers are really putting up 5 to 10 million dollars on their Wii titles?  I bet the aren't, they are probably spending no more than 2million, and porting PS2 or Gamecube assets.  Even though they have no problem spending up to 20 million for the HD consoles? 20 million dollars = 2 AAA Wii games vs 1 AAA PS360. Now, given that the Wii has the most units sold, and the fans are hungry for AAA titles, what would make more sense?   You can double, even triple your chances with a hit game investing into the Wii than the PS360.  Publishers are stupid.   The Wii could be one of the greatest consoles in history from a large game library of AAA third party games that will give Galaxy, MP3, and Smash a run for their money.

Something to keep in mind--in the last fiscal year, the vast majority of companies lost tremendous piles of cash when everything was over and done. Many had much higher sales than the previous year, but their losses were still higher. And when the last fiscal year ended, most third party companies had put most of their efforts into the HD consoles, not the Wii or DS. Personally, I'd much rather see two A games on the Wii from a company than just one AAA title on an HD console.

Imperial said: Look if Nintendo actualy cared about graphics then we wouldn't have the Wii we have today , not that they don't think graphics is important ( as they did make somewhat of a leap from PS2 > to Wii) but it's obviously not one of their priorites , if developers collectivley make poor looking Wii qualities then there is little to no altenative to buying into shovelware. It's one of the things you have to accept buying the most popular console , in order to apeal to the needs of the whole market it has to ignore the needs of many of it's segments hence graphics aren't always high on the list of priorities of the developers. Wheras the whole PS3/360 consumer prioritises graphics and we'd never tolerate anything below SMG quality unless it's gameplay was of GTA IV's quality , so more often or not developers understand they have to create graphical master pieces to interest this type of consumer.   yuishire said : You know, even Wii have a decent graphics its still par with 360/ps3 graphics you know the Wii isn't even on par with XBOX 360 launch games .

 Yeah it is. Perfect Dark Zero looks like ass. So does Kameo and Call of Duty 2.

 

Shut up you Sony Whore.

Pristine20 said: yushire said: Anyway, many people here complains about third parties didnt optimize Wii's hardware compatibility. But what should Wii's graphics standard graphics looks like? I'll point out first what shouldnt be done on the Wii when graphics are concerned: No N64 graphics No PSX/PS1 graphics No PS2/or even high end PS2 graphics unless its a Xenossaga 3 or God of War 2 graphics quality What should be done: Atleast a high end XBOX/GC graphics If its high budget game it should be in level of SMG Needs Source engine graphics quality on the system, ITS MUCH NEEDED Now for examples, if its a small time developers, atleast copy the quality of their game with Medal of Honor Heroes 2 if its a straight 2-d game it must be a Super paper Mario quality, if its cell shaded it must be with boogie quality and if its cartoony it must be Mario kart quality. We know the Wii dont have a graphical quality of HD consoles but give atleast consideration on the quality of graphics on the Wii  Wii owners seem to be the first to say that graphics don't matter and also the first to complain that graphics on the wii aren't good enough.  Maybe third parties don't optimize the graphics for their wii games because they think that wii owners don't care for graphics.

See my guide for graphics whoring. You insist that is a literal phrase, when it means "having the greatest processing power for graphics doesn't matter". It does not mean "It doesn't matter if developers make cheap and shoddy graphics." So those developers are just being lazy.

There was a study a while back stating that only a very small % of console owners owned more than one of the 3 current-gen systems.

If:

(A) The software available sells the console

and

(B) the AAA 3rd party titles are available on the X360/PS3 and not the Wii.

then

(C) there's an implication that the demographic interested in the majority of AAA titles (which tend to be targeted at a very specific demographic) own a X360 or PS3, and NOT a Wii. As such, The number of available buyers, for your typical AAA title, and in the Wii's demographic set, is likely lower than it is for X360/PS3 -- especially if you combine the latter two platforms' owners as a potential audience.

That alone explains why there are no AAA "gamer" titles available on the Wii, and even if the Wii hits 50% market share, then by nature of there being no AAA titles for it (other than Nintendo stuff), there are going to be far fewer current Wii owners interested in those kinds of titles.

You buy a console for its software. Some may find it hard to believe that Wii owners *want* billiards, poker, etc., or Nintendo titles only, but... The Wii is selling like crazy, and there's supposedly not much system overlap. I find it hard to believe that a whole bunch of would-be Wii gamers went and purchased a Wii in *hopes* of getting some AAA titles. If they wanted typical-demographic, AAA titles, it seems likely that they went out and bought a X360 or PS3, and *not* a Wii -- buying a system in hope of their being some 3rd-party "AAA" titles for it someday is... not something any buyer is likely to do, in any situation.  Because the Wii sells alot, says nothing about its demographics, but the titles available for it, and its higher-end competition, and the relative lack of overlap in console ownership does say something.  I would say that, because (A) above is pretty well accepted as true, that Wii owners are actually, as a majority, *not* interested in AAA games, but instead are much more interested in Nintendo games and license titles from movies, etc -- i.e. the titles it has available.

Wii Sports?  Win.  Wii Play?  Win.  Wii Fit?  Win (or soon to be).  Wii Call of Duty 4?  No, and the publishers seem to agree.  Putting CoD4 on the Wii would be like M$ bundling a AAA shooter in their Windows Game Packs -- it just won't be popular in the common demographic, or so the history of "casual gaming" tells the publishers.  Sparkle Gems Puzzle Treasure Finder 8?  Super Vegas Reno Ultra Blackjack Bet-it-all edition?  Oh yeah, those are popular -- and they doesn't require much investment either.

Thus the publishers aren't "dumb" for not spending AAA title money on the Wii. They're targeting the intended audience, on the intended platform. Anyone who thinks otherwise, apparently believes themselves a lot brighter than an awful lot of well-educated busniess folks who run those companies... any failings those companies are currently undergoing probably has way more to do with the bad recession in the US than the publishers being "dumb".

Mifely said: There was a study a while back stating that only a very small % of console owners owned more than one of the 3 current-gen systems. If: (A) The software available sells the console and (B) the AAA 3rd party titles are available on the X360/PS3 and not the Wii. then (C) there's an implication that the demographic interested in the majority of AAA titles (which tend to be targeted at a very specific demographic) own a X360 or PS3, and NOT a Wii. As such, The number of available buyers, for your typical AAA title, and in the Wii's demographic set, is likely lower than it is for X360/PS3 -- especially if you combine the latter two platforms' owners as a potential audience. That alone explains why there are no AAA "gamer" titles available on the Wii, and even if the Wii hits 50% market share, then by nature of there being no AAA titles for it (other than Nintendo stuff), there are going to be far fewer current Wii owners interested in those kinds of titles. You buy a console for its software. Some may find it hard to believe that Wii owners *want* billiards, poker, etc., or Nintendo titles only, but... The Wii is selling like crazy, and there's supposedly not much system overlap. I find it hard to believe that a whole bunch of would-be Wii gamers went and purchased a Wii in *hopes* of getting some AAA titles. If they wanted typical-demographic, AAA titles, it seems likely that they went out and bought a X360 or PS3, and *not* a Wii.  Because the Wii sells alot says nothing about its demographics.  I would say that, because (A) above is pretty well accepted as true, that Wii owners are actually, as a majority, *not* interested in AAA games, but instead are more interested in Nintendo games and license titles from movies, etc. Thus the publishers aren't "dumb" for not spending AAA title money on the Wii. They're targeting the intended audience, on the intended platform. Anyone who thinks otherwise, apparently believes themselves a lot brighter than an awful lot of well-educated busniess folks who run those companies... any failings those companies are currently undergoing probably has way more to do with the bad recession in the US than the publishers being "dumb".

You can't use sales of a constantly sold out console to dertermine what games people will buy. The Wii has sold AAA games.

LordTheNightKnight said: Mifely said: There was a study a while back stating that only a very small % of console owners owned more than one of the 3 current-gen systems. If: (A) The software available sells the console and (B) the AAA 3rd party titles are available on the X360/PS3 and not the Wii. then (C) there's an implication that the demographic interested in the majority of AAA titles (which tend to be targeted at a very specific demographic) own a X360 or PS3, and NOT a Wii. As such, The number of available buyers, for your typical AAA title, and in the Wii's demographic set, is likely lower than it is for X360/PS3 -- especially if you combine the latter two platforms' owners as a potential audience. That alone explains why there are no AAA "gamer" titles available on the Wii, and even if the Wii hits 50% market share, then by nature of there being no AAA titles for it (other than Nintendo stuff), there are going to be far fewer current Wii owners interested in those kinds of titles. You buy a console for its software. Some may find it hard to believe that Wii owners *want* billiards, poker, etc., or Nintendo titles only, but... The Wii is selling like crazy, and there's supposedly not much system overlap. I find it hard to believe that a whole bunch of would-be Wii gamers went and purchased a Wii in *hopes* of getting some AAA titles. If they wanted typical-demographic, AAA titles, it seems likely that they went out and bought a X360 or PS3, and *not* a Wii.  Because the Wii sells alot says nothing about its demographics.  I would say that, because (A) above is pretty well accepted as true, that Wii owners are actually, as a majority, *not* interested in AAA games, but instead are more interested in Nintendo games and license titles from movies, etc. Thus the publishers aren't "dumb" for not spending AAA title money on the Wii. They're targeting the intended audience, on the intended platform. Anyone who thinks otherwise, apparently believes themselves a lot brighter than an awful lot of well-educated busniess folks who run those companies... any failings those companies are currently undergoing probably has way more to do with the bad recession in the US than the publishers being "dumb". You can't use sales of a constantly sold out console to dertermine what games people will buy. The Wii has sold AAA games.

 

Well, its entirely possible that Wii Madden '09 or '10 and beyond might be pretty dang good, for the Wii.  I suppose if you qualify big sports franchises as "AAA"-gamer type titles, the Wii might someday get some.  I can't really think of any serious AAA titles, beyond those published (and many developed) by Nintendo themselves, that have done really well, given the number of Wiis in households at this point.  The only ones that stand out (I exclude Mario + Sonic at the Olympics, because... its basically a pseudo-Nintendo title) are basically exactly the kind of casual gamer type game I was talking about, with possibly the sole exception of the Wii version of RE4.

Anything that fits the "mass market appeal" prereq may someday have decent graphics.  At this time, that pretty much amounts to Cards, Puzzles, Nintendo stuff, Sims/Tycoon stuff, and Sports titles (including racing).  You can't deny that those genres have some appeal to the stock "gamer" that might be interested in "AAA" RPGs, Action Adventure, Shooter, etc. genres (they have appeal to all, of course), but... except for the Sports and Nintendo 1st party titles, they don't tend to be big-budget.

Even in the Sports dept., Madden '08 X360 kicks Madden '08 Wii to the moon in sales, despite the huge numerical advantage of the Wii (yes, I know, its a sport that's really only popular in America, but even in America, the X360 version of Madden slays the Wii version in sales).  Remember that, supposedly, most console owners *don't* own more than one of the 3 current-gen consoles, and so despite having no choice of platform, Wii owners didn't buy Madden '08 in America, or anywhere else.  I'd say that this strongly suggests that, for the most part, they didn't want it -- they are casual gamers.  Sports devs also don't tend to branch out -- so the chances of the Wii ever really getting some other cool AAA titles in its lineup is... not as pleasant as many "gamer" Wii owners are hoping, I think.  I think if you can call yourself a fan of most of the genres that tend to qualify for "AAA" expenditures (Shooters, Action, RPG, etc.), you're going to have a deep desire for a X360 or PS3 not too far in the future.  Mario is awesome... but Nintendo games are only gonna hold you over for so long.

i just wanted to put my comment on here and say that i agree with some of the people. Nintendo still up to today has never given out the entire full specs of what the WII is really capable of doing graphically. One thing i do remember is that one of the questions that it was asked when the system came out was if the WII was able to do HD graphics, and their response was that technically, it is possible for the WII to do HD graphics.

Sure, people may scoff "hah!, who wants COD on the wii. Plus, it'll probably be a PS2 port."
Well, the sales are talking. As of today, it seems that the PS2 version has been canceled, and the COD4 engine is running on the wii. Thus, it is not that the wii cannot run COD4, it is that IW does not like the wii. Now, "HD only" games are being made for the wii, and it's probably going to be changing even more. Top spin 3, Cod5, James Bond:Quantom of Solace, and even Facebreaker. They might not be AAA but it's starting. If Companies like Ubisoft don't get off their ass, they'll be paying soon when Activision gets record profits thanks to the wii.

@Mifely

Upstreaming sais hi!

Value isn't something you view through a bottleneck - go find out what upstreaming is an smile. =)

Also he who has the largest user base = he who can shift what sells where.

From past knowledge I'd say that CoD5 will be a 1 million seller in month 2; Wii version. In one year I'd figure it around 2 million or 3 million. (I'm looking at you Red Steele!)

I'm sure they will make huge profit off this.

--------
Life as a married man w/o Wii.

1.*Wiifit Commercial*
2.*The best night of shag ebar!*
3.*She demands you get Wiifit, which means get a Wii*
4.*You remember the shag and fork up to 350, that was for your PS3.*
5.*You get a call at work and she sais she bought a Wii, what do you want.*
6.*Your friend get's you a few gritty games.*
7.*You hate the Wii, and long for the forbidden fruit of PS3*
8.*Summer rolls around and you still can't afford to get that PS3*
9.*But the shag is still good*

Conclusion: Wii leads to getting some, so get some Wii! Actually it's that a lot of guys need a shooter fix, specially the Socom crowd, CoD5 may just do it.