Skeptical about Wiis graphical ability.

From my perspective (viewing grainy videos over YouTube), Galaxy looked pretty much like Sunshine had been buffed up with a good dollop of Brasso. Smash Bros. trailer looked nice, Red Steel seemed a little blocky to me, and everything else looked functional.

At the very least, games that are expected to look sexy will look sexy. Developers are gonna squeeze as much juice from the machine as they can work out how. Their familiarity with GC's anatomy means they can quickly build upon that knowledge with Wii's 'GC 2.5' capabilities. It serves no purpose for them to release shoddy-lookin' software when they're theoretically gonna be able to coax decent visuals from Wii far more easily than they will from the 'alien'-tech-licious PS3, no?

I shamefully only got RE4 a month or two ago and I still can't quite believe how amazing it looks! And it's getting on for 18 months old! Just shows what can be done with the hardware when people develop specifically for it (damn those lazy ports!). Wii'll be getting plenty of system-specific titles that play to its strengths, graphical and otherwise.

( Edited on 18.05.2006 00:27 by artmonkey )

OK, my late night thoughts, as a final farewell.

I strongly agree and strongly disagree at the same time. As a seasoned gamer graphics always "wow" me when they push the envelope, it's just natural. Likewise I must admit that Wii so far has not lived to my personal expectations of the system, as refined and lovely as Zelda, Metroid and Mario are (and they really are looking good).

On that same note things like Gears of War are looking stunning and we are finally getting next generation looking games; something Wii is not quite hitting. Yes, it could be much, MUCH better, in terms of graphics.

On the other hand, as "Nintendo fed" and "holier than thou" as it can be seen, graphics simply don't maketh the game. Advance Wars DS is one of my favourite games, and frankly that has NES / SNES level graphics, not 360 / PS3 / Wii / GC or even N64 attributes.

Why is it one of my favourite games, simple intuitive controls (touch screen was MADE for AW!) mixed with - and shove a blue shirt on me and pile on the sweat - gameplay, gameplay, gameplay! Wii will be crammed full of the stuff.

Another point is just how unrealistic, realistic graphics are getting for me. PGR3, one of the finest looking racers ever, and the car has no attributes that look real, it looks like the car is floating on the road, and the shine is just NOT real, as much as it tries to be. Head down to your local strip, and you'll see.

FPS', again as a man who uses guns the "realistic" games just are not. Wind sheer, tracking / tracing, recoil and even the actual looks detract from the whole realism in the game.

I personally feel that games trying to be real are failing badly. I'd rather have a computer game being a computer created world, than a really piss poor attempt at realism. I suppose that's the crux of things for me, I don't play to be in, or simulate, real life situations, games are about playing a game and all the narrative and conceptual creations that allows.

Graphics are like that really fit bird you pull just to find out the intellectual rewards do not match the nice, tight, thighs

By now people, you should know not to judge games that are still in development. You actually think that Wii Tennis will look the same when it comes out in 5-? months? Of course not!

there has been lots of talk to why nintendo have 'skimped' on the graphics, but from what ive seen there more than good enough for this gen. besides according to a few websites ive read the Wii's graphics match the Xbox 360's although im not sure how reliable that is, i went on google news n searched for Nintendo Wii graphics and found it there

One thing i'm a bit dissapointed in with Wii is no proper Dolby Digital surround sound.

there has been lots of talk to why nintendo have 'skimped' on the graphics, but from what ive seen there more than good enough for this gen. besides according to a few websites ive read the Wii's graphics match the Xbox 360's although im not sure how reliable that is, i went on google news n searched for Nintendo Wii graphics and found it there

well its hardly surprising that the games that have been seen look crappy and like GC games its because the developers have only got GC powered Wii dev kits and the final dev kits dont come out til after E3 so well see then wont we!!

We better had do Tman, we better had do.

well its hardly surprising that the games that have been seen look crappy and like GC games its because the developers have only got GC powered Wii dev kits and the final dev kits dont come out til after E3 so well see then wont we!!

Graphics are like that really fit bird you pull just to find out the intellectual rewards do not match the nice, tight, thighs

I don't know if this issue has been brought up, but i'll say it anyway:

You do all realise that these are the the games developed off the very, very early dev-kits? The ones that were just a GC with the Wii remote, don't you? I'm aware that it's been said that the Wii dev-kits aren't even out yet, but that's not the point i'm trying to make.

A development cycle can take a very long time, depened on the game and resources, for these games to be in a playable form they would have had to have started development on them as soon as the kits were out, what was it, 6 months ago? I know Nintendo is boasting a fast development cycle but 6 months is kinda quick don't you think? Especially when Resident Evil 5 is said to have a 4-5 year development cycle.

I can't be the only one who noticed how much better smash brothers brawl looked than the other games, even though it's the game that should be the one least focused on graphics? Look at Snake's model for example, unless that's pre-rendered he has per-pixel shading, soft shadows and all sorts of techniques plastered on his body. This could be due to the fact that development started with a better dev kit. It was also unplayable though which links back to my point about dev cycles.

The issue of the Wiimote being a peripheral is a tough decision. Even if it is basically just a peripheral being tacked onto the Gamecube then it would still make sense to repackage the system. The first issue is that it would be a large risk to rely on a peripheral to increase the Gamecube's userbase, which already has a throng of issues, such as a bad image, media space, and so on. The second issue is that of the Virtual Console, which can not be accomplished on the Gamecube hardware.

So it would have been in Nintendo's best interest to re-release it on a new console where the idea wont just be over looked. That is if they were doing it, but i don't see why they would waste so much money on R&D for Broadway and Hollywood. So I don't think that what we're seeing is the "final product", so to speak.

That being said I don't really think that the graphics for the games at E3 are going to change alot. Though I think the next gen Wii games are gonna take a jump that's larger than what would be seen in the other systems due to the large number of dev-kits released.

Graphics are like that really fit bird you pull just to find out the intellectual rewards do not match the nice, tight, thighs

Brill.

Personally, I don't actually need vastly different graphics than the GC. You look at the 8bit to 16 bit jump and you understand why the new consoles were needed. The jump to 3d was needed. Even the refinement of 3d gaming was needed. But the leap here is so minor that I'm not bothered.

Anyone going on about devs getting GC kits and shit like that and expecting a big change in the final harware are just kidding them selves.
The console is way to small and way to cheap(if it ends up at $200-$250) to have that kind of horse power. Even at SD it's not gonna have 360/PS3 graphics.
I'm sure all games will look a lot beter at launch but not vastly diffrent.

A bunch a graphics whores

Im sorta pleased with the Wii's graphical ability. They are playable arent they. Nintendo have stated so many times that they arent selling these machines to people because they can pump out super-computer graphics. Sure its nice now and again to play a nice looking game but it is quite "shallow" .

When did games become about realism rather than escapism....

1994 thats when...

Personally, I don't actually need vastly different graphics than the GC. You look at the 8bit to 16 bit jump and you understand why the new consoles were needed. The jump to 3d was needed. Even the refinement of 3d gaming was needed. But the leap here is so minor that I'm not bothered.

Well looking through some of the news articles on google in the past few days its been speculated that the wii is graphically the eqaul to xbox 360 and in some aspects greater than it.... but as much as this excites me i dnt think it will better it theres more than a chance that it could be its graphical equal which would rock after all the other fan boys said that the wii was pathetic!

Oh god I knew this thread would deteriorate into another medon't kare aboot teh grphx iz all gameplay cos ninty sez loads of iwant nez grphx allteh ps3 fanboyz thread. get over it people! Everyone agrees that graphics are not as important as they were but it's perfectly alright to expect graphics better than on the GC, as that's what Nintendo claimed and that's the nature of technology.

Stop being so bloody annoying!!!

( Edited on 18.05.2006 15:09 by Brenda )

^ yes.

The Wii is blatantly tiny, everyone knows that. But then look at the PSP. Look what kind of horse power that has, running off a fucking battery.

Considering how consoles dont have seperate "cards" like PCs do, you cleary do not need much space at all. Just solder the fucking GPU chip onto the main board which also houses the CPU chip, Sound Chip, and if rumors are correct, the Physics chip as well.

You dont really need THAT much space anyway. The drives/heatsinks are where some degree of space is needed.

For it's size the Wii should have considerably better graphics that the GameCube, but still at a dirt cheap price.

( Edited on 18.05.2006 15:17 by f | j | D )

Yay! Rationality!

What!? I thought the GC even had it! I'm sure Nintendo said it would support proper surround sound.

Theres still hope.

Wheres the Wii?

There could be a slight chance that really, all the games played were on the gamecube.

MP3 and MP2 hardly had any differences at all, its like the same game.
Besides you never see a Wii whilst playing a game in E3, it was always focused on the wiimote.

Gasp!Excite Truck footages... They look pretty damn sexy I thought... Cool in any case

I was gonna wright a better post but I don't wanna waste my time on you lot

YOUR ALL DELUDING YOUR SELFS!!

I agree, Excite truck has sweet grpahics compared to most of the games.

you may be wondering why red steel looks like a real new-gen game whereas the other games in this feature look like gamecube titles. That's because many third party developers are working form dolphin development kits which are basically gamecube devkits. Final development kits are expected just after E3 - ONM issue 5

Wii is no proper Dolby Digital surround sound.

Noooooooooooooo! i was hoping for this so much, pro logic II just cant satisy me enough. (how do you know that anyway?)

Well it wasn't exactly confirmed but I think on most games there (MetroidPrime: 3 specifically) had the Dolby Pro Logic II start up to it.

Pro Logic II is shit... I wanted Digital.