MP3 is pretty too and GI gave it game of the month with a 9.75 and 8.75. Very good scores IMO.

They also rated GHIII the same as the 360/PS3 version that month even with lower quality graphics and no DLC.

I think Wii owners are overreacting IMO.

This month Kung Fu Panda recieved an 8 across all platforms (PS3/360/Wii), even though they made their digs at the graphics on the Wii version.

Game Informer is pro Sony and Microsoft (high -def) and is biased. It only gives GREAT Nintendo games good scores because it has to or they wouldn't be in the business anymore. The fact that this thread exists shows that there is a group of people that feel the same way that I do. I am sick of hearing that Halo or God of War look better than a game like MP3 because that is just blind fanboyism. Those games looked great when they came out but aren't of that caliber. Look at shots of those games next to each other. It would be like me saying that MP3 looks the new Gears of War or Killzone. It would be a lie. If you enjoy lying then go right ahead. Yeah fanboyism!!! I'm out of here. Feel free to talk crap about me now.

See, thats my point, that games that are good for the Wii have been reviewed justly by GI.  The metacritic score for MP# is 90.  Again, right in line with all the other reviewers.

If you don't like GI then don't read it. If you looking for a Pro-Nintendo mag then I suggest Nintendo Power.

What is more likley here, that GI looks at all the other reviewers and goes, well they reviewed this game good so we better give it a high mark or we will go out of buisness. Or, perhaps they actually played the game and gave their honest opinion.

I agree.

Bull. I think one thing of GI and that is that they are too easy on games. Bad games get high scores.

Of course, there are rarieties like NMH and Jeanne d'arc. But I think it's becoming a standard to hate the PSP and Wii.

mad world ONLY ON wii the conduit only on wii.......... what other hardcore games will be only on wii? god of war isn't as good as MP3 period and everyone knows it not to say sony didn't try to make a game since they only made about 5 games last year compared to nintendo making about 12..............

thats just to bad sony ALWAYS relied on 3rd parties because their all on microsofts side since atleast microsoft makes a reasonable amount of games although I do like sony better because their products come with 98% quality to assure that their systems will not break once they come out of the box.........

The Wii is a substantially powerful system that no one is trying to optimize for, except for High Voltage's team working on The Conduit--a game which is showing off graphical capabilities exceeding most (If not all) PS2/Xbox/GameCube games.  I don't remember Halo 2 looking quite as sharp as The Conduit looks now.  The thing is, Factor5 employees stated that the "GameCube could do anything the Xbox could."  Essentially, the Xbox was technically powerful but not very effecient, while the GC looked less powerful, but was highly optimized as a game machine.  The original Xbox was essentially a gutted PC with "non-gaming necessary" parts removed.  The problem was, since the PS2 was the popular system, the vast majority of 3rd party/multi-platform games were made on the PS2 and then just ported to the much more powerful GC and Xbox.  Neither of these two systems were ever fully utilized, neither had their full potential tapped.  Aside from a few titles here and there (Aplinter Cell, Halo 2, Metroid Prime, Star Wars Rogue Leader), there was little on either system to differentiate it from the PS2.

The Wii, being twice the power of the GC, and built around the same highly-optimized, effecient design, has plenty of potential for giving us impressive graphical showpieces.  Doom3 would still sit fairly nicely in line with a lot that this generation does--it's not totally on-par, of course, but the Wii should be able to handle graphics as good if not better than those of Doom3.  The games wouldn't look as high-tech as on Xbox360 or PS3, but they'd still look better than last-gen.  In it's simplest form, developers could get a lot more out of the Wii (graphically) simply by improving the lighting and shadows considerably--this wouldn't require a ton of extra work.  High-quality dynamic lighting and shadows can make some of these lower-poly (last-gen equivalent) games look better than last-gen.  Not on par with the HD consoles, again, but respectively closer.

^ I agree with everything you said.

The Wii is more powerful than anything last gen but is nowhere close to 360/PS3.