mario galaxy's graphics are amazing

is it me or do the games graphics almost look as if it can be on the 360 i mean nintendo really showed off the wii's power if u look close at some screens u can see the texture they added and the shadowing around every cornerits quite amazing.

Read that to know why the graphics are so good. If only more companies were following in

Read that to know why the graphics are so good. If only more companies were following in

vnc20100

That's a really good read. Its so sad that the wii is getting games that look half as good as Rouge Squadron. I think I'm going to go play that game on my wii right now. Ha, it'll be the best looking game my Wii has played.

[QUOTE="vnc20100"]

Read that to know why the graphics are so good. If only more companies were following in

Arc2012

That's a really good read. Its so sad that the wii is getting games that look half as good as Rouge Squadron. I think I'm going to go play that game on my wii right now. Ha, it'll be the best looking game my Wii has played.

Lol, so true

Read that to know why the graphics are so good. If only more companies were following in

vnc20100

the article has a point but i dont agree with alot of it to be honest.

first i do agree with the fact that alot of devs should be hanging their heads in shame. the TEVs can do some really nice stuff when used properly. factor 5 and rare really knew how to use them well and it shows. mario galaxy is also looking the business. the wii has twice the amount of TEV units as the GC. and yet many devs are releasing games that would make a GC look bad. no excuses here....thats bad development. i would go so far to say that galaxy still isnt pushing the wii to its limits. one thing nintendo hardware has a tendency to do is surprise ppl. whod a thought RE4 or zelda TP (or even the last RS) was possible on the GC? i certainly found it hard to believe that my little GC was outputting those kind of graphics. i would love to see what a company like the creative assembly, factor 5, crytek or rare could do with the wii.

[QUOTE="vnc20100"]

Read that to know why the graphics are so good. If only more companies were following in

osan0

the article has a point but i dont agree with alot of it to be honest.

first i do agree with the fact that alot of devs should be hanging their heads in shame. the TEVs can do some really nice stuff when used properly. factor 5 and rare really knew how to use them well and it shows. mario galaxy is also looking the business. the wii has twice the amount of TEV units as the GC. and yet many devs are releasing games that would make a GC look bad. no excuses here....thats bad development. i would go so far to say that galaxy still isnt pushing the wii to its limits. one thing nintendo hardware has a tendency to do is surprise ppl. whod a thought RE4 or zelda TP (or even the last RS) was possible on the GC? i certainly found it hard to believe that my little GC was outputting those kind of graphics. i would love to see what a company like the creative assembly, factor 5, crytek or rare could do with the wii.

however there are bits i dont agree with but i wont say here as this is not system wars.

were you joking about crytek? cos yes crisis looks good, but come on, it requires a dual core 3.4 GHz processor and 2 nvidia 1950X graphics cards to look good... not brilliant GOOD! even that can't push the thing to it's limits!

they aren't good at making good graphics on bad hardware they're good at making good graphics on AMAZNG hardware

[QUOTE="osan0"][QUOTE="vnc20100"]

Read that to know why the graphics are so good. If only more companies were following in

monty_4256

the article has a point but i dont agree with alot of it to be honest.

first i do agree with the fact that alot of devs should be hanging their heads in shame. the TEVs can do some really nice stuff when used properly. factor 5 and rare really knew how to use them well and it shows. mario galaxy is also looking the business. the wii has twice the amount of TEV units as the GC. and yet many devs are releasing games that would make a GC look bad. no excuses here....thats bad development. i would go so far to say that galaxy still isnt pushing the wii to its limits. one thing nintendo hardware has a tendency to do is surprise ppl. whod a thought RE4 or zelda TP (or even the last RS) was possible on the GC? i certainly found it hard to believe that my little GC was outputting those kind of graphics. i would love to see what a company like the creative assembly, factor 5, crytek or rare could do with the wii.

however there are bits i dont agree with but i wont say here as this is not system wars.

were you joking about crytek? cos yes crisis looks good, but come on, it requires a dual core 3.4 GHz processor and 2 nvidia 1950X graphics cards to look good... not brilliant GOOD! even that can't push the thing to it's limits!

they aren't good at making good graphics on bad hardware they're good at making good graphics on AMAZNG hardware

it still requires alot of talent and skill to even get crysis up and running on any hardware in the first place. not only from a graphics perspective but from everything else as well. the game does some nuts things. the level of optimization this game will require to run well on lower end hardware will be nuts. also i think ure going a bit overboard on the specs there. itll still look ace on a single ati x1950 card and a much slower dual core chip (2GHz core 2 duo should be fine). wont be max or anything but should still look very perty and run quite nicely.

i reckon crytek could do some pretty kewl things with the wii. wouldnt be crysis or anything but could still look very nice and play well. certainly alot better than the poor attempt made by ubi with far cry.

they are as good as the 360 i thinkStarSlayer97

[QUOTE="monty_4256"][QUOTE="osan0"][QUOTE="vnc20100"]

Read that to know why the graphics are so good. If only more companies were following in

osan0

the article has a point but i dont agree with alot of it to be honest.

first i do agree with the fact that alot of devs should be hanging their heads in shame. the TEVs can do some really nice stuff when used properly. factor 5 and rare really knew how to use them well and it shows. mario galaxy is also looking the business. the wii has twice the amount of TEV units as the GC. and yet many devs are releasing games that would make a GC look bad. no excuses here....thats bad development. i would go so far to say that galaxy still isnt pushing the wii to its limits. one thing nintendo hardware has a tendency to do is surprise ppl. whod a thought RE4 or zelda TP (or even the last RS) was possible on the GC? i certainly found it hard to believe that my little GC was outputting those kind of graphics. i would love to see what a company like the creative assembly, factor 5, crytek or rare could do with the wii.

however there are bits i dont agree with but i wont say here as this is not system wars.

were you joking about crytek? cos yes crisis looks good, but come on, it requires a dual core 3.4 GHz processor and 2 nvidia 1950X graphics cards to look good... not brilliant GOOD! even that can't push the thing to it's limits!

they aren't good at making good graphics on bad hardware they're good at making good graphics on AMAZNG hardware

it still requires alot of talent and skill to even get crysis up and running on any hardware in the first place. not only from a graphics perspective but from everything else as well. the game does some nuts things. the level of optimization this game will require to run well on lower end hardware will be nuts. also i think ure going a bit overboard on the specs there. itll still look ace on a single ati x1950 card and a much slower dual core chip (2GHz core 2 duo should be fine). wont be max or anything but should still look very perty and run quite nicely.

i reckon crytek could do some pretty kewl things with the wii. wouldnt be crysis or anything but could still look very nice and play well. certainly alot better than the poor attempt made by ubi with far cry.

Didn't Nintendo say that they were going to show what the Wii's graphics can really do in the next Zelda game? (which won't be coming out in awhile.)

Yeah, Mario Galaxy looks awesome. I'm surprised at just how good it looks. From screenshots it looks decent but the vids show just how great the graphics are. The draw distance is pretty amazing as well as the speed of the game. There's so much action on screen and the game never slows down at all.

Hopefully when third parties see just how good this gameis when it's released they'll think twice about simply porting PS2 games on to the Wii and startreleasing games that actually push the hardware.

Didn't Nintendo say that they were going to show what the Wii's graphics can really do in the next Zelda game? (which won't be coming out in awhile.)

Maskedgamer1

cant say i heard anything about that but they probably will be pushing it as hard as it can go by then. im not expecting another major zelda for another couple of years though.

maybe ninty should start licencing their engines and tools for 3rd parties. red steel 2....built on the mario galaxy engine. that could be kewl.

[QUOTE="Maskedgamer1"]

Didn't Nintendo say that they were going to show what the Wii's graphics can really do in the next Zelda game? (which won't be coming out in awhile.)

osan0

cant say i heard anything about that but they probably will be pushing it as hard as it can go by then. im not expecting another major zelda for another couple of years though.

maybe ninty should start licencing their engines and tools for 3rd parties. red steel 2....built on the mario galaxy engine. that could be kewl.

Lol, and having the hero flying from planets to planets :P

But seriously, that would be a great idea, or give the companies a how-touse-Wii-hardware 101 course

Didn't Nintendo say that they were going to show what the Wii's graphics can really do in the next Zelda game? (which won't be coming out in awhile.)

Maskedgamer1

No.

yes they are.

*Insert possitive comment here*

Anyways, I'm just waiting till more games with the magnitude of mario galaxy's graphix show themselves......MP3 is really really good, but not quite there

And that new table tennis game by R* shows some potential......But I really think it's gonna be the devs who are working on their 2nd games will do a better job **RED STEEL 2!** because they wont worry about the controls as much now that they're more used to them

is it me or do the games graphics almost look as if it can be on the 360 i mean nintendo really showed off the wii's power if u look close at some screens u can see the texture they added and the shadowing around every cornerits quite amazing.

bullettime22

i think that the wii's graphical power is much better than xbox i been hearing alot that the wii is just slightly better than xbox but the problem is that developers are freaken lazy and just dont want to put the time in the graphics deparment and focus on the controllergrim653

and your basing your assumptions off of what? just wanting it to be that way?

[QUOTE="grim653"]i think that the wii's graphical power is much better than xbox i been hearing alot that the wii is just slightly better than xbox but the problem is that developers are freaken lazy and just dont want to put the time in the graphics deparment and focus on the controllerBlk-Gnome

and your basing your assumptions off of what? just wanting it to be that way?

Its like any other program. For example someone who paints in photoshop and has been doing so for so long goes and tries to use painter for their work. More than likely it will be different and they will find photoshop superior. But in reality painter is capable of reproducing photoshop effects just not in the same manner as it would be done in photoshop. The writer of that article is correct when he stated that if devs go try to program for the wii expecting it to work like a pc/xbox360 then they will be disappointed and come out with a lackluster product.

They need to learn how to use the Wii's tools in order to push their games graphical limits. Do you know how easy and lazy it is to port a ps2 engine to Wii because you don't have any knowledge of the Wii development kit? In terms of power Wii can produce very nice graphics in the hands of a good developer. And yes the system is a lot more powerful than the original xbox. Thats pretty obvious.

[QUOTE="Blk-Gnome"]

[QUOTE="grim653"]i think that the wii's graphical power is much better than xbox i been hearing alot that the wii is just slightly better than xbox but the problem is that developers are freaken lazy and just dont want to put the time in the graphics deparment and focus on the controllerRamadear

and your basing your assumptions off of what? just wanting it to be that way?

Its like any other program. For example someone who paints in photoshop and has been doing so for so long goes and tries to use painter for their work. More than likely it will be different and they will find photoshop superior. But in reality painter is capable of reproducing photoshop effects just not in the same manner as it would be done in photoshop. The writer of that article is correct when he stated that if devs go try to program for the wii expecting it to work like a pc/xbox360 then they will be disappointed and come out with a lackluster product.

They need to learn how to use the Wii's tools in order to push their games graphical limits. Do you know how easy and lazy it is to port a ps2 engine to Wii because you don't have any knowledge of the Wii development kit? In terms of power Wii can produce very nice graphics in the hands of a good developer. And yes the system is a lot more powerful than the original xbox. Thats pretty obvious.

go look at some specs kay?

[QUOTE="Ramadear"][QUOTE="Blk-Gnome"]

[QUOTE="grim653"]i think that the wii's graphical power is much better than xbox i been hearing alot that the wii is just slightly better than xbox but the problem is that developers are freaken lazy and just dont want to put the time in the graphics deparment and focus on the controllerBlk-Gnome

and your basing your assumptions off of what? just wanting it to be that way?

Its like any other program. For example someone who paints in photoshop and has been doing so for so long goes and tries to use painter for their work. More than likely it will be different and they will find photoshop superior. But in reality painter is capable of reproducing photoshop effects just not in the same manner as it would be done in photoshop. The writer of that article is correct when he stated that if devs go try to program for the wii expecting it to work like a pc/xbox360 then they will be disappointed and come out with a lackluster product.

They need to learn how to use the Wii's tools in order to push their games graphical limits. Do you know how easy and lazy it is to port a ps2 engine to Wii because you don't have any knowledge of the Wii development kit? In terms of power Wii can produce very nice graphics in the hands of a good developer. And yes the system is a lot more powerful than the original xbox. Thats pretty obvious.

go look at some specs kay?

Lackluster reply yes? If you are one of those idiots who tries to compare the specs of the wii cpu to the xbox1 360 or ps2 or ps3 then you are lacking in the intellect department.

sorry for the double post

the wii's specs are not way better than the original xbox's the wii is about a gamecubex 1.75 or so. its about the power level of the xbox.

im not saying the graphics suck, but everyone like to pretend the wii is more powerful than it really is.

im sick of the ps2 ports, im sick of the GC ports, where are my Wii developed games that are going to pushing the system.

dev kits are nice, but specs are as far as a system can be pushed.

[QUOTE="Ramadear"][QUOTE="Blk-Gnome"]

[QUOTE="grim653"]i think that the wii's graphical power is much better than xbox i been hearing alot that the wii is just slightly better than xbox but the problem is that developers are freaken lazy and just dont want to put the time in the graphics deparment and focus on the controllerBlk-Gnome

and your basing your assumptions off of what? just wanting it to be that way?

Its like any other program. For example someone who paints in photoshop and has been doing so for so long goes and tries to use painter for their work. More than likely it will be different and they will find photoshop superior. But in reality painter is capable of reproducing photoshop effects just not in the same manner as it would be done in photoshop. The writer of that article is correct when he stated that if devs go try to program for the wii expecting it to work like a pc/xbox360 then they will be disappointed and come out with a lackluster product.

They need to learn how to use the Wii's tools in order to push their games graphical limits. Do you know how easy and lazy it is to port a ps2 engine to Wii because you don't have any knowledge of the Wii development kit? In terms of power Wii can produce very nice graphics in the hands of a good developer. And yes the system is a lot more powerful than the original xbox. Thats pretty obvious.

go look at some specs kay?

It's not that simple. Wii has complicated texture environmental units that are better than shaders in that they can be upgraded but require devs to keep making different "Blends." A lot of the Wiis architecture is complicated like this so most devs will just use an old engine because it's easier that's why not all games look like Metroid Prime 3 or Galaxy.

Lackluster reply yes? If you are one of those idiots who tries to compare the specs of the wii cpu to the xbox1 360 or ps2 or ps3 then you are lacking in the intellect department.

Ramadear

you seem to lack intellegence if you dont think specs matter, specs are as far as a system can be pushed. they can get similar effects by using diffrent tools, but in no way can the Wii stand up to a 360/ps3. you can make a game look good, but just because i have a good dev kit doesnt mean i could put crysis on the wii and still have it look the same.

dont forget about how the Wii is also limiting AI compared to its next gen counterparts.

[QUOTE="Blk-Gnome"][QUOTE="Ramadear"][QUOTE="Blk-Gnome"]

[QUOTE="grim653"]i think that the wii's graphical power is much better than xbox i been hearing alot that the wii is just slightly better than xbox but the problem is that developers are freaken lazy and just dont want to put the time in the graphics deparment and focus on the controllerDuckman5

and your basing your assumptions off of what? just wanting it to be that way?

Its like any other program. For example someone who paints in photoshop and has been doing so for so long goes and tries to use painter for their work. More than likely it will be different and they will find photoshop superior. But in reality painter is capable of reproducing photoshop effects just not in the same manner as it would be done in photoshop. The writer of that article is correct when he stated that if devs go try to program for the wii expecting it to work like a pc/xbox360 then they will be disappointed and come out with a lackluster product.

They need to learn how to use the Wii's tools in order to push their games graphical limits. Do you know how easy and lazy it is to port a ps2 engine to Wii because you don't have any knowledge of the Wii development kit? In terms of power Wii can produce very nice graphics in the hands of a good developer. And yes the system is a lot more powerful than the original xbox. Thats pretty obvious.

go look at some specs kay?

It's not that simple. Wii has complicated texture environmental units that are better than shaders in that they can be upgraded but require devs to keep making different "Blends." A lot of the Wiis architecture is complicated like this so most devs will just use an old engine because it's easier that's why not all games look like Metroid Prime 3 or Galaxy.

yes the wii has some new tools, but you can still only get so many polygons out of the system. in the end thats why Gears of war looks so good, its detailed, high polygon count characters and structures.

[QUOTE="Duckman5"][QUOTE="Blk-Gnome"][QUOTE="Ramadear"][QUOTE="Blk-Gnome"]

[QUOTE="grim653"]i think that the wii's graphical power is much better than xbox i been hearing alot that the wii is just slightly better than xbox but the problem is that developers are freaken lazy and just dont want to put the time in the graphics deparment and focus on the controllerBlk-Gnome

and your basing your assumptions off of what? just wanting it to be that way?

Its like any other program. For example someone who paints in photoshop and has been doing so for so long goes and tries to use painter for their work. More than likely it will be different and they will find photoshop superior. But in reality painter is capable of reproducing photoshop effects just not in the same manner as it would be done in photoshop. The writer of that article is correct when he stated that if devs go try to program for the wii expecting it to work like a pc/xbox360 then they will be disappointed and come out with a lackluster product.

They need to learn how to use the Wii's tools in order to push their games graphical limits. Do you know how easy and lazy it is to port a ps2 engine to Wii because you don't have any knowledge of the Wii development kit? In terms of power Wii can produce very nice graphics in the hands of a good developer. And yes the system is a lot more powerful than the original xbox. Thats pretty obvious.

go look at some specs kay?

It's not that simple. Wii has complicated texture environmental units that are better than shaders in that they can be upgraded but require devs to keep making different "Blends." A lot of the Wiis architecture is complicated like this so most devs will just use an old engine because it's easier that's why not all games look like Metroid Prime 3 or Galaxy.

yes the wii has some new tools, but you can still only get so many polygons out of the system. in the end thats why Gears of war looks so good, its detailed, high polygon count characters and structures.

Umm, okay......that was totally not my point at all.

[QUOTE="Ramadear"]

Lackluster reply yes? If you are one of those idiots who tries to compare the specs of the wii cpu to the xbox1 360 or ps2 or ps3 then you are lacking in the intellect department.

Blk-Gnome

you seem to lack intellegence if you dont think specs matter, specs are as far as a system can be pushed. they can get similar effects by using diffrent tools, but in no way can the Wii stand up to a 360/ps3. you can make a game look good, but just because i have a good dev kit doesnt mean i could put crysis on the wii and still have it look the same.

dont forget about how the Wii is also limiting AI compared to its next gen counterparts.

Interesting news

[QUOTE="Ramadear"]

Lackluster reply yes? If you are one of those idiots who tries to compare the specs of the wii cpu to the xbox1 360 or ps2 or ps3 then you are lacking in the intellect department.

Blk-Gnome

you seem to lack intellegence if you dont think specs matter, specs are as far as a system can be pushed. they can get similar effects by using diffrent tools, but in no way can the Wii stand up to a 360/ps3. you can make a game look good, but just because i have a good dev kit doesnt mean i could put crysis on the wii and still have it look the same.

dont forget about how the Wii is also limiting AI compared to its next gen counterparts.

Its great when a individual lacks the ability to express themselves properly so they try to the words of who ever they are replying to and merely reflect them back. Anyhow..

You have a reading comprehension, where did I say specs didn't matter? I said the two specs can't directly be compared, I didn't say Wii was more powerful than the 360 or ps3 but rather more powerful than the ps2 and xbox but capable of producing excellent visuals. A developer who knows how to express its artistic visions on a a system is a good developer, THAT means everything. As far as Crysis, it has good graphics but its just another fps for pc. But I'm sure other people are looking forward to it.

Wii has limiting AI? So does ps3 according to the devs of splinter cell, which is why the system won't be getting conviction.

sorry for the double post

the wii's specs are not way better than the original xbox's the wii is about a gamecubex 1.75 or so. its about the power level of the xbox.

im not saying the graphics suck, but everyone like to pretend the wii is more powerful than it really is.

im sick of the ps2 ports, im sick of the GC ports, where are my Wii developed games that are going to pushing the system.

dev kits are nice, but specs are as far as a system can be pushed.

Blk-Gnome

You are judging from merely comparing numbers. In accordance to your limited understanding a Pentium 4 3.0ghz would be faster than a Athlon64 4000+(2.4ghz) since the Pentium has higher clock speed. The point is, you can't compare the specs by numbers alone since their architecture is entirely different. The Gamecube and Wii work nothing like Xbox or the 360.

[QUOTE="Blk-Gnome"]

sorry for the double post

the wii's specs are not way better than the original xbox's the wii is about a gamecubex 1.75 or so. its about the power level of the xbox.

im not saying the graphics suck, but everyone like to pretend the wii is more powerful than it really is.

im sick of the ps2 ports, im sick of the GC ports, where are my Wii developed games that are going to pushing the system.

dev kits are nice, but specs are as far as a system can be pushed.

Ramadear

You are judging from merely comparing numbers. In accordance to your limited understanding a Pentium 4 3.0ghz would be faster than a Athlon64 4000+(2.4ghz) since the Pentium has higher clock speed. The point is, you can't compare the specs by numbers alone since their architecture is entirely different. The Gamecube and Wii work nothing like Xbox or the 360.

I'm just throwing this out there but AMD>Pentium.

[QUOTE="Ramadear"][QUOTE="Blk-Gnome"]

sorry for the double post

the wii's specs are not way better than the original xbox's the wii is about a gamecubex 1.75 or so. its about the power level of the xbox.

im not saying the graphics suck, but everyone like to pretend the wii is more powerful than it really is.

im sick of the ps2 ports, im sick of the GC ports, where are my Wii developed games that are going to pushing the system.

dev kits are nice, but specs are as far as a system can be pushed.

Duckman5

You are judging from merely comparing numbers. In accordance to your limited understanding a Pentium 4 3.0ghz would be faster than a Athlon64 4000+(2.4ghz) since the Pentium has higher clock speed. The point is, you can't compare the specs by numbers alone since their architecture is entirely different. The Gamecube and Wii work nothing like Xbox or the 360.

I'm just throwing this out there but AMD>Pentium.

Hah I like AMD too(Using a Athlon64 x2 5200+) but I will admit, the core2duo got the Athlons beat this time around. But not to point where AMD isn't a option to buy. They are still good.

[QUOTE="Duckman5"][QUOTE="Ramadear"][QUOTE="Blk-Gnome"]

sorry for the double post

the wii's specs are not way better than the original xbox's the wii is about a gamecubex 1.75 or so. its about the power level of the xbox.

im not saying the graphics suck, but everyone like to pretend the wii is more powerful than it really is.

im sick of the ps2 ports, im sick of the GC ports, where are my Wii developed games that are going to pushing the system.

dev kits are nice, but specs are as far as a system can be pushed.

Ramadear

You are judging from merely comparing numbers. In accordance to your limited understanding a Pentium 4 3.0ghz would be faster than a Athlon64 4000+(2.4ghz) since the Pentium has higher clock speed. The point is, you can't compare the specs by numbers alone since their architecture is entirely different. The Gamecube and Wii work nothing like Xbox or the 360.

I'm just throwing this out there but AMD>Pentium.

Hah I like AMD too(Using a Athlon64 x2 5200+) but I will admit, the core2duo got the Athlons beat this time around. But not to point where AMD isn't a option to buy. They are still good.

Yeah, I've always like AMD.

back to my original point, the Wii is on par with the original xbox. why some of you dont want to accept that is beyond me. the hardware limits the Wii to where it is, roughtly the power of 1.75 gamecubes.

now that what i had to say has been blown completly out of purportion back to the post i was retorting to when all of you suddenly felt the need to explain how despite what the specs say the Wii is way mroe powerful than the original xbox.

grim653 wrote:i think that the wii's graphical power is much better than xbox i been hearing alot that the wii is just slightly better than xbox but the problem is that developers are freaken lazy and just dont want to put the time in the graphics deparment and focus on the controller

looking to his post what i was arguing was how he is using an opinion, "i think the wii's graphical power is much better than xbox". it clearly isnt, it might have tools the xbox didnt have, but it hoesnt have the power of 1.75 xboxs now does it.

why are fanboys so irritating?

edit: irronically enough, im at AMD right now...

[QUOTE="Blk-Gnome"][QUOTE="Ramadear"]

Lackluster reply yes? If you are one of those idiots who tries to compare the specs of the wii cpu to the xbox1 360 or ps2 or ps3 then you are lacking in the intellect department.

vnc20100

you seem to lack intellegence if you dont think specs matter, specs are as far as a system can be pushed. they can get similar effects by using diffrent tools, but in no way can the Wii stand up to a 360/ps3. you can make a game look good, but just because i have a good dev kit doesnt mean i could put crysis on the wii and still have it look the same.

dont forget about how the Wii is also limiting AI compared to its next gen counterparts.

Interesting news

and i guess you missed the discussion as you felt the need to link that out?

crysis the game could come to the wii if they chose, but it wouldnt come over with graphics intact.

[QUOTE="monty_4256"][QUOTE="osan0"][QUOTE="vnc20100"]

Read that to know why the graphics are so good. If only more companies were following in

osan0

the article has a point but i dont agree with alot of it to be honest.

first i do agree with the fact that alot of devs should be hanging their heads in shame. the TEVs can do some really nice stuff when used properly. factor 5 and rare really knew how to use them well and it shows. mario galaxy is also looking the business. the wii has twice the amount of TEV units as the GC. and yet many devs are releasing games that would make a GC look bad. no excuses here....thats bad development. i would go so far to say that galaxy still isnt pushing the wii to its limits. one thing nintendo hardware has a tendency to do is surprise ppl. whod a thought RE4 or zelda TP (or even the last RS) was possible on the GC? i certainly found it hard to believe that my little GC was outputting those kind of graphics. i would love to see what a company like the creative assembly, factor 5, crytek or rare could do with the wii.

however there are bits i dont agree with but i wont say here as this is not system wars.

were you joking about crytek? cos yes crisis looks good, but come on, it requires a dual core 3.4 GHz processor and 2 nvidia 1950X graphics cards to look good... not brilliant GOOD! even that can't push the thing to it's limits!

they aren't good at making good graphics on bad hardware they're good at making good graphics on AMAZNG hardware

it still requires alot of talent and skill to even get crysis up and running on any hardware in the first place. not only from a graphics perspective but from everything else as well. the game does some nuts things. the level of optimization this game will require to run well on lower end hardware will be nuts. also i think ure going a bit overboard on the specs there. itll still look ace on a single ati x1950 card and a much slower dual core chip (2GHz core 2 duo should be fine). wont be max or anything but should still look very perty and run quite nicely.

i reckon crytek could do some pretty kewl things with the wii. wouldnt be crysis or anything but could still look very nice and play well. certainly alot better than the poor attempt made by ubi with far cry.

you obviously haven't read the technical requirements then

minimum is what you were saying, and crytek themselves have said that the highest of high end computers won't be able to handle this on full at it's release, which means that it's recommended requirements AREN'T at full capacity