Skeptical about Wiis graphical ability.

Ever since Nintendo's E3 conference I've been puzzled but not by the controller at all.

I'm talking graphically. I just don't understand how the games we've seen so far from Wii just don't look graphically up to scratch...

Metroid Prime 3 looks like it's basically had nothing done to it since MP2. Considering how the GameCube's Flipper chip is getting on 6 years old now, I just do not understand the lack of advancement?

Cube launched in 2001, and it's 2006 now, so basically 5 years of graphical improvement is what we should be seeing in the Wii. I'm not talking HD either, because HD does not mean better graphical effects/polygon counts.

In PC gaming 5 years is a VERY long time.

In 2000, the Nvidia Geforce 2 series was released and I believe the PS2's capability lies here graphically (considering the non HD).

By 2005/6 we're already onto the Geforce 7 series.
These cards are designed for "Extreme" HD resolution gaming. Basically we're talking up and over 1600 x 1200 resolutions and graphics like this (running at very playable framerates):

Now considering that Wii is running at 640x 480 max (I think) How exactly is it chucking out such piss poor graphics? from what I've seen, my 2 years old

I share your thoughts. The games we've seen are fucking pathetic. I thought that since the experience with the GC's chips carried over to a degree, we'd get some really advanced graphics out of the Wii. This simply isn't the case. The games at e3 were nowhere near the standard of RE4, which runs on hardware half as powerful and is nearly 2 years old.

( Edited on 17.05.2006 20:39 by Brenda )

I'm very skeptical as well. Some games, like Mario Galaxy, look pretty kick arse, while some look like they could've been done on N64. Now I know graphics aren't the important thing to some of the games, like Wii Sports, but something does feel a bit amiss.

I just don't think the hardware is quite finished - or rather, the graphics card isn't. On the Wii website, under specifications, I believe it said 'the graphics card is BEING developed by ATi', which suggests it's in progress and isn't finished (the processor, for example, said 'IS by IBM' as though it was finished).

On top of this, it's now being rumoured that at least some of the demos were running on a Gamecube + Wiimote set up, rather than Wii hardware. Twilight Princess was definitely one of these - somebody's demo pod crashed and it had to be reset, but rather than unlocking the case and pressing a button on the Wii, they opened the whole stand and reset a Gamecube/Gamecube development kit inside. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the simpler games, like Wii Sports, were running on this set up too. I do think that some, like Mario Galaxy and possibly Red Steel, were on actual Wiis, though; could be about a 50/50 split, unless Twilight Princess was an isolated incident.

Now I'm not suggesting we should be expecting visors, or stereoscopic 3D (though I wouldn't be surprised if they pulled that out at the last minute, with the GC supposedly having some 3D peripheral in the works behind doors at E3...2004 I think...). I just don't think it's as finished as we think, and they'll show us something a bit later on that will show a marked improvement in visuals.

Two things, you must have heard Nintendo theory on gameplay over graphics?
And secondly, theres a good chance these games are still in developement.
I think from what we have been shown, the graphics are very presentable, not mind blowing, but then how good does a fat little man in blue overalls need to look?

Also I think only a selected few developers actually have finalised dev kits. Ubisoft probably being one of them.

( Edited on 17.05.2006 20:43 by SKI )

Soz ps3 fanboy. Who cares about graphics when you have control I think nintendo are doing the wright thing by showing people that a game isnt just about looks.

Two things, you must have heard Nintendo theory on gameplay over graphics?

Soz ps3 fanboy.

I swapped my PS2 for Dreamcast last year.

Also, I have no intention of buying a PS3, because to be perfectly honest it looks pretty fucking boring.

Interesting points; indeed, we can all stick our noses in the air and snort that 'graphics don't matter, it's the gameplay that counts' and all that, but at the same time, it's not unreasonable to expect - as you say - a notable degree of graphical improvement over what has gone before. There has to be some significant sense of improvement and evolution, to mirror the swiftly-moving pace of technology. I know Nintendo is trying to appeal more to the casual market who don't care about all that techno-crap - but the casual market does come equipped with expectations regarding visuals - after all, we've all seen Shrek and Toy Story; we know what we 'expect' computer graphics to be like, however unrealistic that might be. If the machine isn't demonstrating on such basic levels its superiority over its predecessors, surely all the Wii's novelty controller and such might as well have been add-on peripherals for the Gamecube...
Even the Mario Galaxy graphics weren't even close to as amazing as some have made out...

That said, these are still earlyish days, and perhaps the Wii is keeping its visual tricks up its sleeve for launch. I guess I'd rather see dismal graphics now and then be pleasantly surprised at launch, rather than seeing glitzy demo videos that turn out to bear no reflection whatsoever on the actual game...

Final development kits are not in the hands of anyone. Most of the third-parties have developed their games on modified GC systems.

Look back to E3 2005 coverage and tell me which looks better, Perfect Dark Zero then or Mario Galaxy now.

Then you should understand why Nintendo isnt plugging a fortune into horsepower?
Anyway, who's shutting the fuck up?

SKI said:
Then you should understand why Nintendo isnt plugging a fortune into horsepower?Anyway, whos shutting the fuck up?

Anyway, to add to that; Nintendo said a while back that when we see the Wii's[sic] graphics, we'd say wow...

I said "eh?".

( Edited on 17.05.2006 21:00 by Brenda )

Also if we look at past E3's games always end up having a visual make-over by release.
Besides, why would Nintendo attempt to compete in that department when their E3 slogan was "playing is believing"
You can be sure they wont be releasing a home machine unless the games look the part, they never have they never will.

This is the games industry too, its not very often you get to have your cake and eat it, if you want HD graphics theres are other options, if you want to sacrifice that for gameplay there is Nintendo, or better still, do both!

You didnt think Mario looked pretty "wow" though? C'mon, he looked cool man!

( Edited on 17.05.2006 21:06 by SKI )

( Edited on 17.05.2006 21:13 by SKI )

Yes it looks quite good, probably the best looking of the lot, but I didn't say wow. Looking at the graphics I thought: oh look there are some nifty reflection effects.

I think think Nintendo skimped on the graphics and put all there money into developing the controller.
They probably feel they can pull off just about any game with fairly nice graphics. Plus pushing graphics to 360 or PS3 levels won't make the slightest diffrence to non gamers.

I'm not expecting any sort of amazing announcement that nintendo has been hiding the graphical capabilities, ATI or whoever is in charge of the chips were probably being paid to optmize them for low power consumption, shrinking there size etc.

Looking at the graphics I thought: oh look there are some nifty reflection effects.

That's what I think when I see XBOX360 graphics.

You do have a point thought fjd, nothing we have seen has been as good as it should be, or as good as we have been led to believe by Nintendo. I believe, as Setup said, that not many people have actually recieved the real Wii dev kit, which would explain a lot.

If this thing is about twice as powerful as a Cube, and the games aren't even looking as good as Re4, the only explanation is that the developers are being lazy, or that they have not yet recieved the true dev kit. My guess is that its the second.

I'm worried that since decent graphics are taboo within the Nintendo fanboy community, developers might get the impression that they can get away with any old N64 shit.

Mario Galaxy did look good, but graphically, it's nothing spectacular - and there wasn't a huge amount that the Cube couldn't have handled on a good day. The significant 'enhancements' mainly seemed to be regarding the control method, which again goes back to my point that - if this is to be the case accross the board - could the Wiimote not just have been a Gamecube peripheral, rather than a whole new machine?
I know that's not financially viable though; even if it could have worked, the Wii is as much about ressucitating Nintendo's home-console presence via a rebrand as anything.

( Edited on 17.05.2006 21:19 by Raindog )

could the Wiimote not just have been a Gamecube peripheral, rather than a whole new machine.

I think it was at one point, but with the new console it does bring the added benifit of Wifi out of the box, proper online support, Virtual console, standerdizing the controller so ever one gets it who gets the console, instead of having an eye toy situation whre it was never really used and intead mostly got gimmiky games.

It would have probably been copied by now, it give nintendo a great advantage and diffrientiates them although that could possibly be a dissadvantage but everthing is looking positive for the moment.

( Edited on 17.05.2006 21:26 by Blade2t3 )

While I definately don't think that Mario Galaxy and Smash Bros Brawl look as good as GC games I agree to some extent... I mean even if we take IGN's old 'leaked' specs they're about twice as good as the GC's specs, and quite frankly Mario Galaxy just doesn't look twice as good as RE4... It looks good, yes, but not that good. Plus you'd think that Nintendo would be able to optimise what seems to be generally the same technology even more by now, so it should look even better than twice as good...

There are still loads of people who think that developers have been asked to make all their games so far on slightly upgraded GC dev kits, to make Wii look insanly underpowered, and then shock us all later with some uber-graphics... I'm not really too sure how I feel about that theory...

Thats the thing you see. Nintendo say "It will be about 2-3 times the power of the GameCube".

'Power' could mean anything, and is more likley to do with processing power.

You can run a slower proccessor with a cutting edge graphics card and easily play the latest games... This could be exactly what Nintendo means.

The stuff about physics hardware being part of the Wii would mean that the processor does not need to be anywhere near "The Cell"'s standards, yet still have a decent GPU and be able to throw out kickass looking titles.

Bear in mind that these games have months of development to go. On most games ive seen the textures are clearly a mile better than Cube, as is the lighting.

Its still early days for the graphics, even though the games have a few months left before they are released most of the graphical effects are added after the games been completed. The games will probably look alot better in the comming months.

They better look better. I don't know about you lot, but the first game I played on the GC was Mario Sunshine, and I was very impressed, especially the water.

I want the lower graphical games to be around the area of Mario Galaxy. I really wasn't that impressed at all with what I saw. About all I saw was, ooh, shiny. Is that it? I don't think it's much better than the GC at all.
But I dunno, I can certainly live with graphics like that if the games are fun.

Mario Galaxy looked AMAZING. Any idea of the number of polygons to make the planets as smooth as they are in SMG? It's a lot...

http://img.gamespot.com/gamespot/images/2006/127/932528_20060508_screen009.jpg

^ Personally I think that looks awesome, and this is coming from someone who has a 360. While not in the calibre of Perfect Dark, it still looks awesome, especially the lighting.

edit by GR: if you want to show a large image like that, please link to it.

( Edited on 18.05.2006 19:09 by GR781 )

Theres a vey high quality video of the prime 3 demo on IGN, it's in HD for insiders but you can still watch it on the crapper resolution free, there is a noticable diffrence in the graphics. Not gaint leap but the lighring really pretty amazing looking in it.
One thing i'm a bit dissapointed in with Wii is no proper Dolby Digital surround sound.