Many developers have been saying that the wii cant do realistic graphics so the make an art style "suited" for the system. Now i am not saying that a bad thing, in some places its a good thing, like red steel 2. But what i dont get is the realistic games on the wii dont even look like xbox games, so which one has more power. The conduit doesnt look as good as halo 2 but they say they are pushing the system. The only games i could see that are more powerful are mario galaxy and metroid prime 3, but they are not realistic, more of an art style. I dont get it, are developers lying when they say that are pushing the hardware, or the wii cant handle realistic graphics?

*cracks knuckles*

I have one acronym for you TEV. The TEV is a "different/awkward" unit that has amazing capability of giving advanced Shader Technology LIKE performance while maintaining an insane texture fill rate. The problem is that a majority of developers either don't understand the TEV or feign knowledge about it. Instead claiming that the Wii isn't capable rather than saying "we are too lazy to understand awesome technology".

The Wii or GC is an amazingly designed system that was(GC) more capable that the XBox. The difference was that the XBox could be considered a linear to understand and develope for, while the GC/Wii is more of a curve. Not so much in difficulty, but time to understand and effort.

As for the Conduit. HVS built the Qauntum 3 engine to take advantage of the Wii hardware. For that they are succeeding. They made the claim not that The Conduit is the best looking game, but more along the lines of providing rendering techniques that are on par with HD consoles. This is fact. "rendering technique" being the importance of the statement. This does not mean anything in regards to high poly count or high texture. Also HVS has mentioned that since TC Q3 has advanced since then. TC only handles about 10-20 bad guys on screen at a time. The Grinder will be able to handle 65. The company has even continued to say that they haven't come to full Wii potential, but feel that they are statrting to really take advantage of it.

Give HVS and other companies some time with Q3(if anyone else ever bothers) and you will eventually see somthing amazing.

The Conduit looks better than Halo 2 actually, if anything it lacked budget and time so the lvls were smaller. and the Wii can handle it, but won't look as nice as the current HD consoles even though it'd look better than XboX if devs tried.

Its wierd eh. I think, no wait, I KNOW it can handle realistic graphics. Devs just dont seem to get it, yet. RE Darkside Chronicles, sure its an on-rails but I believe the Wii could handle a 3D game with visuals like that. Wii is like gamecube 1.5 (well actually about 1.7 cause it uses faster, more efficient memory and stuff), so think RE4 and Rouge Squadron and RE Zero with 70% more detail and polygons. The wii can do it, they (devs) just havent learned to take advantage of its hardware. I think the wii can do Darkside Chronicles graphics in 3D free roaming if they code games right.

They both have the same processing speed of 733MHZ. Don't know about the ram or graphics card, though.

the Wii is only a little more powerful then the original Xbox, but it does do things a bit better, and lets not forget that technology as a whole is improving, if a developper in 2009 tried to make an NES game they could do things with it that would be considered impossible in the late 80's and early 90's

Oh yeah, look at Silent Hill Shattered Memories. Thats just a taste of what the Wii can do, did the Xbox have a game as good looking as that?

No game on the looks better than The chronicles of RIddick on xbox.
I would say the xbox and wii are on equal power, but since the wii has to process the motion technology which requires a little of processor we see a graphical dip.

Didn't we do this yesterday?

Didn't I already explain to you in a thread once that the PowerPC CPU in the Wii > Modded Intel P3 in the Xbox? by a lot?