By Jorge Ba-oh 
28.02.2009 
37
GameTrailers recently put together a comparison video between the Wii and the Xbox 360 versions of Dead Rising.
Fans have been in two camps after seeing screens/video footage from the Wii version, and to make the distinction even clearer, the differences are sat side by side for your viewing pleasure.
Do you think Capcom have done a good job in porting it over? Could the Wii outing have been done better?
I can barley tell the diffrence! GOOD JOB CAPCOM!
Was that sarcasm? 
Seems like that VGCats comic was fairly accurate. XD
( Edited 28.02.2009 03:08 by Ikana )
The 360 version looks too..... cartoonish. I like the Wii version.
Man, the Wii version is so EXPLODING with zombies he doesn't even have time to go on a joyride! Good job Crapcom!
/facepalm
LOL at the lawn mower bit.
I don\'t see the need for why this game to be ported to the wii?
( Edited 28.02.2009 05:36 by L )
What L said, Capcom are porting this game to people who didn\'t buy Okami when they asked, begged, petitioned for it. Didn\'t buy Zack and Wiki.
I honestly don\'t know who will buy this on Wii when there\'s a better looking by a milestone version. It\'s not like the PS3/360 comparisons where people have to squint, zoom x1000 to see which game is HD or not. It a terrible port running on a 6 year old engine. What was they thinking
/facepalm
nah Capcom deserve facePencil \"How bout a magic trick?\".
( Edited 28.02.2009 06:26 by Simez )
This is what people have been complaining about? The biggest difference I see is in the lighting. Yeah, there are less zombies. But according to IGN\'s review (which I trust over anything at this site right now because they actually PLAYED THE GAME instead of sitting around here complaining about the graphics since the announcement of it) there are still plenty of moments where the zombies were absolutely suffocating.
Why make the port? Here\'s why:
Because I\'d much rather pay $50 for this game than dish out over $350 for an Xbox and the original for graphics that are better. A $310 difference isn\'t worth better graphics, to me. Especially considering the original version (which is apparently SOOOOO amazing) is one of the most linear games around. That was the fans\' biggest complaint, and it has been fixed for this version. They\'re not making this game for people who own the original. It\'s for the people who don\'t. I don\'t have an Xbox, so I\'m really glad they brought this game to the Wii.
\"Crapcom?\" Seriously? You people are so freaking clever. Let\'s make fun of the entire company, like all they make is crap. Oh wait... what was that one game... that one by Capcom... topped tons of lists... won more awards than almost any other game ever made... considered by most to be one of, if not THE greatest game of all time... Resident Evil 4? Nah, couldn\'t be, because Capcom is so easy to make a crap joke out of.
\"I honestly don\'t know who will buy this on Wii when there\'s a better looking by a milestone version...\" how about people who buy games to play them, not to look at them? Seriously. Nintendo fans, of all people, should know that graphics aren\'t the most important thing a game can have going for it.
At the very LEAST, it would be great if a lot of people bought this game, just to encourage more companies to make real games geared toward serious, M-rated gamers.
In the end, I\'d rather enjoy playing a game with inferior graphics than looking at one with superior graphics but not having a lot of fun.
( Edited 28.02.2009 06:50 by justonesp00lturn )
This comparison is pointless... Well let's put MGS on the SNES and PS3 side by side. You barely notice the difference like REALLY.
Yes, justone, the "Crapcom" joke is quite easy, but that's why I made it. I don't dislike Capcom at all, actually, it was just a silly bit of fun.
But you can NOT say this game (literally) looks good. RE4 looked better than this, and you'd think that they might've tweaked the engine a bit by now, made it run smoother and maybe allow some higher resolution textures, no?
I agree with your point about this being more for the people that don't want to fork over a shitload of money to get a 360 and this game with it, but they really could've done a better job on it because this really isn't up to Capcom standards.
Yeah, this must be from Crapcom, that other company that sort of looks like Capcom, but makes shit games.
\"This comparison is pointless... Well let\'s put MGS on the SNES and PS3 side by side. You barely notice the difference like REALLY.\" - because the Wii is TOTALLY graphically equivalent to the SNES 
Faust - I agree. It could be better. I mean, get on Nintendo Channel and watch the trailer for Dead Space Extraction. It looks just as good as the Xbox game. And this is after being in development for, what, a few weeks?
But my point is that Dead Rising doesn\'t look so absolutely horrible that it\'s not worth anybody ever purchasing it. Everyone\'s asking \"what\'s the point\" and that\'s what it was: to bring a game to an audience that may not be able to experience it. If you have the Xbox verison, fine and dandy; if I had the Xbox version, I wouldn\'t want this one either. But I don\'t have it. And no, the game isn\'t beautiful. But it\'s not terrible. It\'s about the same as most Wii games are, graphically.
Think about what everyone is complaining about. You\'re on a Nintendo site, so I assume that means you care enough about their products to have signed up. So I\'ll assume most of you have a Wii. Now there\'s no way short of retardation that you didn\'t know the Wii isn\'t as powerful as the Xbox 360 when you bought one. So, in essence... you\'re complaining that the Wii isn\'t as powerful as the Xbox 360. Any port from Xbox 360 to the Wii is going to have to suffer a lot. But like I said; if you have the Xbox 360 version, then don\'t bother with the Wii version.
But that doesn\'t mean that there\'s absolutely no point in making the game at all, because for some people, it is worth it. Capcom *probably* could\'ve done a little bit better. But unfortunately, they didn\'t. Again, it\'s a sacrifice that myself, and probably a lot of people in the same position, are more than willing to make. The game looks fun. It doesn\'t look beautiful, but it looks fun. And that\'s what games really should come down to.
( Edited 28.02.2009 07:41 by justonesp00lturn )
Lol, thats funny as hell because I live in Colorado lol. O great Mutant animals.
( Edited 28.02.2009 08:04 by Wolvesgod )
I think they did a pretty decent job - it's not like they could have got it much closer and this'll still turn out to be one of Wii's better games.
I don't think they did too badly, honestly. Yes, the lighting is much weaker, and there are obviously less zombies, but overall I think they handled it okay. It won't win any awards, but it looks to me like they've captured enough of the original game.
Noone's gonna buy this due to the clear lack of effort gone into it. Lots of the best things from the Thrix version are missing, and the visuals are just, kinda awful.
Crapcom shall remain Crapcom until they localise Gyakuten Kenji, and only then.
It won\'t win any awards, but it looks to me like they\'ve captured enough of the original game.
No they haven\'t because it was supposed to have hundreds of zombies on screen, that was the essence of the original game.. Also, $350 for a 360? 360\'s are CHEAPER THAN WIIS now. You can get an Elite and Halo 3 for £200 here. Which is $286. That\'s for an Elite AND Halo. And it\'s not just lighting + number of zombies. What about the total lack of ANY variation in death animations? You can cut anyone in half and every zombie falls back in the same way.
( Edited 28.02.2009 12:12 by knighty )
Justone I hope when you said Dead Space looks identical to the Xbox version you was talking about the youtube video we saw? If 360 version then no, just no.
I think it's a decent enough effort, but given Capcom's effort in the past (say with Resi4 and Monster Hunter Tri), it could have been done better. It looks like a good port, but there could have been more variety in animation, and definitely better texture/lighting work.
It's good that they brought it over, there's no disputing that, but we know Capcom could have spent a little more time on the game's presentation.
"RE4 looked better than this"
Thats because it had a heck of a lot of work put into the textures.
It wasnt the engine making it look good, but the assets.
Dead Rising on any format had less effort put into it then Re4 did.
Personaly, its more the missing gameplay features we should complain about (camera) not graphics.
TheStratMan said:
I think they did a pretty decent job - it's not like they could have got it much closer and this'll still turn out to be one of Wii's better games.
Exactly. As good as the original or not, at least we have a serious game and not another piece of shovelware like most companies are putting out. If you like having good games on the Wii, Dead Rising is at least worth supporting for that reason.
"Noone's gonna buy this due to the clear lack of effort gone into it. Lots of the best things from the Thrix version are missing, and the visuals are just, kinda awful.
Crapcom shall remain Crapcom until they localise Gyakuten Kenji, and only then."
People who don't have an Xbox will. And judging an entire company based on the prospect of a single game is pretty irrational and unproductive.
"No they haven't because it was supposed to have hundreds of zombies on screen, that was the essence of the original game.. Also, $350 for a 360? 360's are CHEAPER THAN WIIS now. You can get an Elite and Halo 3 for £200 here. Which is $286. That's for an Elite AND Halo. And it's not just lighting + number of zombies. What about the total lack of ANY variation in death animations? You can cut anyone in half and every zombie falls back in the same way."
I don't live in the U.K., but where I am, the cheapest I'm going to get an Xbox (other than the Arcade, which I'd have trouble taking in even if it was FREE) is still over $250, and that's not including the game (which I did include in my other figures.) And even still, $250 is not worth it for one game, no amtter how many more zombies are in it. Basically, the only way it would be more worth it for me is if I could get the Xbox and the game for the same price as I could get the Wii version. Any more than that, and it's not worth it at all.
"Justone I hope when you said Dead Space looks identical to the Xbox version you was talking about the youtube video we saw? If 360 version then no, just no."
No idea what you're talking about. I've played Dead Space for the 360 and I've seen the trailer for extraction... I doubt the final version will be identical to the Extraction trailer (it'll most likely be just a little bit under it), but what I saw in that trailer looked just as good as what I saw on the 360.
The idea that Wii games can't compare to Xbox games is an absolute myth. Hell, Resident Evil 4 looks almost as good as most of the games I've seen for the 360, and that was a Gamecube game. It's all in the amount of time and effort a developer is willing to put into the game. Same reason why I think Resident Evil 5 would work just fine on the Wii... having played the 360 demo, it doesn't look a whole lot different from 4... the lighting is better and it runs more smoothly, and the textures are a little bit better. But 4 was a GCN game, and the Wii is a lot more powerful than that... And from the reviews I've read, RE5 is shorter than RE4. So I think something like that would be relatively simple (and, frankly, almost a necessity for Capcom, at this point; if they don't want to get hatemailed to hell and back) and it's also the reason I think they could've done a bit better with Dead Rising. But for all we know, they did everything they could. It's easy for us to sit here and assume it could be better. Maybe they wanted it to be, but weren't willing to put a whole lot more into the budget for it. Maybe they were focused on other projects (like Street Fighter and RE5, for example) and maybe they just plain ran out of time and couldn't do a lot more with it. In the end, they did a decent job making a game geared for people who aren't able to play the original, and they made a game that far outshines a lot of the recent Wii efforts, so all in all, I'd say Dead Rising for the Wii is a success for Capcom.
After seeing that footage, I have to admit Capcom didn't do too bad a job on this conversion. If not for the (almost) complete lack of Zombies, I would actually give this a go. 
justonesp00lturn said:
People who don't have an Xbox will. And judging an entire company based on the prospect of a single game is pretty irrational and unproductive.
The Gyakuten series has a very consistent level of quality (and I fukken love it =D), sometimes I forget it's made by the same Crapcom that anally won't produce any more Viewtiful Joe or Okami games but still wanna make average stuff like Lost Planet.[/minirant]
SuperLink said:justonesp00lturn said:
People who don't have an Xbox will. And judging an entire company based on the prospect of a single game is pretty irrational and unproductive.
I wouldn't buy it even if I didn't have an XBOX (Thought to be fair I'm not ecstatic on the 360 version either). I just refuse to support games with a clear lack of effort, especially on Nintendo consoles. I mean games like this just scream "We spent £10 on this so we can make a huge profit harharhar", and that kind of development doesn't get my respect I'm afraid.The Gyakuten series has a very consistent level of quality (and I fukken love it =D), sometimes I forget it's made by the same Crapcom that anally won't produce any more Viewtiful Joe or Okami games but still wanna make average stuff like Lost Planet.[/minirant]
Then why bother getting on here and complaining about it? it seems like there's a pretty even division of people who hate it, and people who think it's okay. I wouldn't call that a "clear lack of effort," especially if you've never had the experience of porting a game or know what it's like. It could look identical to the Xbox version, and you'd still complain if you already don't like the game for what it is, so it's pretty much a given that you won't enjoy a port of it.
justonesp00lturn said:
Then why bother getting on here and complaining about it? it seems like there's a pretty even division of people who hate it, and people who think it's okay. I wouldn't call that a "clear lack of effort," especially if you've never had the experience of porting a game or know what it's like. It could look identical to the Xbox version, and you'd still complain if you already don't like the game for what it is, so it's pretty much a given that you won't enjoy a port of it.
I'd bet that even people who think it looks OK wouldn't deny the clear lack of effort here. Remember when this was announced? Less than a year ago, there's your answer right there. The visuals havn't gotten much better at all since the very first screens of the game, an even stronger sign that it was just a rush job.
Capcom ported RE4 to PS2, they did an excellent job with it too. Have they suddenly lost it? They're the experts here, so they should act like it.
No, it\'s just harder to take your opinion seriously when you don\'t like the game to begin with. It gives the impression that the Wii version could look better, and you\'d still find something to rag about. But like I said, there\'s a pretty even division here. So to each his own. It just seems to me that if you want Capcom or the Wii to succeed, you\'d show some support for them. I\'m not saying go get the game, but you don\'t have to be on here trying to influence others not to (and I mean this generally, not just at you in particular.) half of us don\'t see it as a lack of effort, so there\'s no reason to portray that opinion as a fact. As many have said, this game looks to be one of the better Wii titles, regardless of its comparison to the original, so it should at least get points for that.
As for the PS2 RE4... it took a big graphical hit and an enemy count hit, too. Some people might be inclined to call that a poor effort. the fact is, if you weren\'t there working on the game personally, you have no idea what effort did or didn\'t go into it. You can\'t tell just by looking (if you disagree, count the number of replies with people saying it looks like a decent or a good enough effort versus those saying it doesn\'t.)
I\'m not trying to call you out or anything... I just think it\'s a bit of an unfair assessment to assume they did a bad job when you don\'t even like the game to begin with. Could they have done a better job? Maybe. Maybe not. But you weren\'t there, so you don\'t know, and you shouldn\'t be claiming that you do.
As for it not being a port... again, you have no way of knowing that. It isn\'t that different... the locations are the same, the cinematics are the same... it just has worse lighting and a different enemy count. That\'s not so much difference that it eliminates the posibility of the game being a port and not ground-up.
( Edited 28.02.2009 22:49 by justonesp00lturn )
justonesp00lturn said:
N
As for it not being a port... again, you have no way of knowing that. It isn't that different... the locations are the same, the cinematics are the same... it just has worse lighting and a different enemy count. That's not so much difference that it eliminates the posibility of the game being a port and not ground-up.
t 'technically isn't a port as said in a developer interview.
It really doesn't look too bad, still though, it's more of the lighting and colours that make it look worse, there was alway going to be less of a zombie count, but the zombie's in the game are pretty much more aggresive than the 360 version, but the AI of the people you have to save is pretty poor.
Subscribe to this topic
Features
koROBO Hits Initial Crowdfunding Target
European Union Petition Launches to Prevent Online Video Games from Being Destroyed
Celebrate Pokémon Go’s 7th Birthday with Merchoid T-Shirts
CRKD Launching Nitro Deck for Nintendo Switch
Glasgow Anime and Gaming Con 2023!
Picross returns with a new title and a sale!Show More
Sign In
Game Details
Screens
n/a
Out now 
Out now 
Out now 
Out now 
Mario_0 
Link to this post: 
Review: Broken Sword: Shadow of the Templars Reforged (Nintendo Switch)
Review: Before the Night (Nintendo Switch)
Review: Silent Hill 2 (PlayStation 5)
Review: Days of Doom (Nintendo Switch)
Review: Rune Factory 5 (Nintendo Switch)
Review: Touch Detective 3 + The Complete Case Files (Nintendo Switch)
Review: Ys X: Nordics (Nintendo Switch)
Tech up! HP Omen 34C Monitor and Omen 17 Gaming Laptop (2024)
Review: Shin-chan: Shiro and the Coal Town (Nintendo Switch)
MusiCube | The Warehouse Project Season is ON!
Review: Bloomtown: A Different Story (Nintendo Switch)-1km6aTH.jpg){kind=small}
Review: Super Mario Party Jamboree (Nintendo Switch)
News: Super Mario Bros Movie Direct 9th March 2023
News: Professor Layton and the New World of Steam announced!
Upcoming: Comic Con Scotland NE
News: Official PlayStation Internal SSD launches in partnership with Western Digital
Tech News: Pioneer DJ Launches New DM Series Models
News: Out Run-Inspired Arcade Racer Slipstream Out Apr 7th
Feeds
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Top
