What swrong with developers? Why can't they replicate this?

I really don't understand what's wrong with Wii developers. The Wii is not graphically superior compare to the competition but it is sitll capable of amazing graphics when put in the hands of the apropiate developers. Almost every third party game looks like crap, inferior to most Xbox games and even the GameCube ones. The only ones doing a great job are Nintendo Specially with Mario Galaxy and Galaxy 2. I'm not a person obssesed with graphics but after watching some Mario Galaxy 2 videos i can't understand what's wrong with these developers. Why can't third party developers recreate these kind of graphics?

Take a look at this awsome video from game trailers:

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/exclusive-world-super-mario/65197

Personally, I think all wii games should go for cell shading not realism, Okami, Viewtiful joe, Monster hunter, metriod, mario galaxy.. etc... Colorful games hide the wii's horrible graphical power.Fightingfan

Well of course it is expected to for Nintendo to have the best visuals. It would be an absolute embarassment if a 3rd party title had better visuals than any of Ninty's other products on the same system. Shameful I say!wiifan001

The answer would be an almost total disinterest in creating the best possible Wii games and looking for a way to make a quick and easy buck instead. It's the same problem the Wii has had since it launched, and I doubt little is going to change it at this point, unfortunately.

We all know the Wii is capable of more than what 95% of the games offer. There just aren't many developers outside of Nintendo's influence that are willing to push the thing.

[QUOTE="wiifan001"]Well of course it is expected to for Nintendo to have the best visuals. It would be an absolute embarassment if a 3rd party title had better visuals than any of Ninty's other products on the same system. Shameful I say!soulreaper-4

It's more profitable if they don't take the time to develop great graphics when it comes to Wii

[QUOTE="soulreaper-4"][QUOTE="wiifan001"]Well of course it is expected to for Nintendo to have the best visuals. It would be an absolute embarassment if a 3rd party title had better visuals than any of Ninty's other products on the same system. Shameful I say!wiifan001

More like they're lazy over not having the talent. It's not like the Wii is this incredibly difficult system to develop for. Sure, it presents it challenges, particularly as far as being a system with motion controls being the standard, but tapping into the Wii's power shouldn't have been something take took 2-3 years to manage. Nintendo had the advantage of knowing the hardware sooner, sure, but that doesn't excuse the fact that most Wii games wouldn't even classify as great looking GameCube games. That's hardly a talent issue, since we've seen what the GCN is capable in the hands of major third party developers (somewhat) and what the Wii is capable of.

This is just what happens when you first assume a system isn't going to last very long, only to rush out games when you find out it's going to be successful, only to get burned and then decide experiment with demographics, instead of putting your best and brightest on the best selling system, only to eventually find yourself completely out of touch with the system's userbase at the end of the day. It's a series of mistakes that most major third party Wii publishers have made, and now they find themselves not wanting to develop for the system and really only have their previous negligence to blame for such.

i agree. wii is capable of more, but the devs are lazy. Gc games looked better than current Wii games.

[QUOTE="Fightingfan"]Personally, I think all wii games should go for cell shading not realism, Okami, Viewtiful joe, Monster hunter, metriod, mario galaxy.. etc... Colorful games hide the wii's horrible graphical power.soulreaper-4

Look at Call of duty then look okami... Whats easier on the eyes? Mayb it was my bad word choice "art style"

Not to turn this into system wars but...

Anyone notice Metal Gear Solid 3 a game made in 2005 looks better then mayb 90% of all 3rd party games it has better graphics then the conduit..

( not that graphics matter )

I'm just sayin..

[QUOTE="soulreaper-4"][QUOTE="Fightingfan"]Personally, I think all wii games should go for cell shading not realism, Okami, Viewtiful joe, Monster hunter, metriod, mario galaxy.. etc... Colorful games hide the wii's horrible graphical power.Fightingfan

Look at Call of duty then look okami... Whats easier on the eyes? Mayb it was my bad word choice "art style"

Not to turn this into system wars but...

Anyone notice Metal Gear Solid 3 a game made in 2005 looks better then mayb 90% of all 3rd party games it has better graphics then the conduit..

( not that graphics matter )

I'm just sayin..

well forget the graphics, im looking for better games!!!

and yes it still would be better if they could make the graphics a little better, but im not one to complain since i stil play a lot of retro games.

theres a few reasons 1) lack if investment. yes the wii is cheaper to develop for than the other consoles...but its not cheap. the likes of galaxy and xenoblade still would cost 10-15million dollars to make which is not a trivial expense. 2) lack of portability. one of the things devs love about the HD consoles and PC is that they can reuse the vast majority of the code..even the low level stuff..accross all 3 platforms. they cant do that for the wii. everythign has to be custom built for the wii at the low level. custom shader code needs to be written and its useless on the other platforms. this makes 3rd parties hesitant to actually make that investment...they just use the wiis grunt and leave out the clever tricks. HVS and maybe frontier games and square enix...and capcom are probably the only publishers that have a solid tech base on the wii. 3) lack of skills. the wii is essentially an overclocked GC with some extra ram. so why are devs not using such an old design to its full potential? well the GC was a disaster and the number of devs who knew how to make the best og the GC could be counted on one hand (ninty, rare, factor 5, RE4 devs in capcom and the FFCC team at square). funnily enough its these same companies (bar factor 5 since they jumped ship and rare since MS own them) that are setting the standard on the wii. i remember old interviews with AV and such like in the NGC mag and the general consensus was that the GC was easy to develop for but hard to master. very few devs know the low level stuff and few are willing to learn...they would rather learn newer tech for the other consoles. 4) publishers are not bringing their A game to the wii. there best teams, the IDs, cryteks, epics, infinity wards and such like, are only developing for the other platforms. most of the devs working on the wii are devs with alot less experience and there not given the time or resources to really get up to speed. we have seen what happens when they do....MH3 is awesome and FFCC TCB is also an excellent game from a technical standpoint on the wii (dissapointing for other reasons sadly). but sadly its very rare.osan0

^

THIS ppl

[QUOTE="soulreaper-4"][QUOTE="Fightingfan"]Personally, I think all wii games should go for cell shading not realism, Okami, Viewtiful joe, Monster hunter, metriod, mario galaxy.. etc... Colorful games hide the wii's horrible graphical power.Fightingfan

Look at Call of duty then look okami... Whats easier on the eyes? Mayb it was my bad word choice "art style"

Not to turn this into system wars but...

Anyone notice Metal Gear Solid 3 a game made in 2005 looks better then mayb 90% of all 3rd party games it has better graphics then the conduit..

( not that graphics matter )

I'm just sayin..

There's no real mystery. It is a matter of a single word. The word starts with 'B' and ends in 'T'. The middle of the word is 'udge'.so_hai

lol nice twist

it's also the fact that pushing the graphics won't boost sales enough to compensate for the resources put in to do so, on the Wii.

it's actually a waste of money, to improve graphics.