Thanks. I could do better, but my point is the same as yours, but it gets hard to tell when people forget that Wii has some good looking core games and upcoming ones except Super Mario Galaxy which always has to represent Wii even if it is totally different kind of games, whitch it often is.

I keep forgeting how incredible Conker looks on Xbox

Damn.

@Tyrannical: I do know what AA is. You could argue would the game need more AA or not. Lighting effects are used practically at the start of the game and textures are what you'd call cartoony.

As i said about the different artstyles, basically you'd get better comparision with Twilight Princess or Starfox adventures for their artstyles.

All personal opinion here. No one has stated anything that really matters.

I'm going to have to throw a wrench into this debate.

Anyone else familiar with the image capture system for the GC/Wii and Xbox?

The built in capture in the dev kits and debug kits for each are very different. The Xbox captures MS's proprietary image format - .bmp

The GC/Wii capture images in a compressed jpeg format.

Anyone familiar with these two image formats know that .bmp's retain a higher level of source data and image quality than .jpg's do.

When a publication publishes screen shots form either content holder, the image quality will naturally favor the Xbox simply because of the image capture system utilized by their respective consoles.

I stand corrected looks like viper1 actually came up with something to throw away the argument of comparing screen shots.

Umm... actually JPEG compression will often tend to have the effect of pseudo "anti-aliasing" a screenshot -- making it look smoother.

The raw BMP images from the XBox would look worse/more pixelated, I think.

The loss of data in JPEG results in a combination of both blur and pixelation which make the image look like ass

I would hope that good review sources use decent capture hardware to make screenshots instead of these debug/dev kits.

Thinking about it now ...

I believe that the real problem wasn't with compression as much as it was with image capture. I don't remember the details but I think the XBox allowed reviewers to capture images directly from memory while the Gamecube didn't have anything similar and images had to be captured using a video capture card ... While a video capture card can give you the impression of what is happening on screen, the conversion of the image from digital in memory to analogue to be output from the Gamecube, and from analogue at the capture card to digital into memory greatly reduced the quality of the images.