Enjoy that good gameplay? It wont be ANYTHING without graphics.

[QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="Kenshi_is_god"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="rowzzr"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"]

The wii graphics are crap. Nintendo wanted to make a profit unlike Sony or Microsoft (whom basically lost profits for their fans)

So they didn't make good hardware.

Kenshi_is_god

uhh that's dumb. of course they wanted profits, duh? would you create a company simply to lose money?
sony MS lost money for their fans? nope, that's not what they had in mind, dude. they lost money because they made wrong marketing/business/whatever moves.

If they wanted to make a big of a profit as Nintendo, then they would have never released their consoles with superior graphics in the first place?

You know nothing. Sony and Microsoft have business other than gaming, this loss is not that much. They believe that gaming is a investment for the future, or so I heard.

Anyways, SMG looks like crap. It won't look like that either, Wii is not in HD, yet the screenshots are.. Why?
You have to look at it this way, Kameo is NOT a 1st party game and yet it looks better than any Wii game as of now, and probably in the future. If you think giving the Wii time makes it a lot better, imagine the Xbox360 and PS3 with time. They are very potential consoles.

I know nothing eh?
First off, just because they can fall back on other divisions, does not mean they are happy to take a loss for you. You need to learn your business before you argue it.
Second, Kameo was worked on by Rare and MGS, therefore it is a first party title. You can argue its a second party title, but they are pretty much one in the same, being that that company would be owned by the first party title maker, they would have the same tools and help available.
Third off. SMG does not look like crap, and no those screens arent in HD, are you mentally retarded? apparently so. Notice how I say vids and you say screen shots. Watch a vid, it looks great in motion, but it's okay, I know you'll replace the word videos with screens, because you know you're wrong.
Obviously every console will evolve in time. IM not saying they will look better than 360 and ps3, find to me where i said that.
I said you're saying its bad with either no reason or terrible reasons(im beginning to get sick of reading your posts, thats how terrible they are), and you continue to deny you are wrong that with time they will look good, and it's even been proven by some game videos.

It's 1 AM. go ahead and report me for calling you retarded, I don't care, because I really think you must be. The only redemption you have right now is that you have maddox in your sig. again, it's 1 AM, im going to bed. later

[/thread]

I didn't call you a retard I said you know nothing because you were blatantly handing out false facts.

http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/kameoelementsofpower/tech_info.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary

Note how it says "Publisher Microsoft Gaming Studios"

"Developer: Rare"

Anyways, Microsoft is taking in a loss because they can afford it. I simply stated their gaming division was losing money, I never said "Microsoft as a whole is in debt because they love their fans"

Super Mario Galaxy looks like crap.
1) Perfect Dark Zero looks better than it
2) The developer screenshots were in HD
3) Jaggie land

Since when does this look good?

This is much better

Note how Kameo is a first generation title.. Unlike Gears of War, yet it looks much better than than what SMG has to offer.. And guess what?

Xbox360 games are going to look like this in MAY

The wii graphics are crap. Nintendo wanted to make a profit unlike Sony or Microsoft (whom basically lost profits for their fans)

So they didn't make good hardware.

The_Nemacyst

[QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"]

The wii graphics are crap. Nintendo wanted to make a profit unlike Sony or Microsoft (whom basically lost profits for their fans)

So they didn't make good hardware.

coolviper2003

[QUOTE="Kenshi_is_god"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="Kenshi_is_god"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="rowzzr"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"]

The wii graphics are crap. Nintendo wanted to make a profit unlike Sony or Microsoft (whom basically lost profits for their fans)

So they didn't make good hardware.

The_Nemacyst

uhh that's dumb. of course they wanted profits, duh? would you create a company simply to lose money?
sony MS lost money for their fans? nope, that's not what they had in mind, dude. they lost money because they made wrong marketing/business/whatever moves.

If they wanted to make a big of a profit as Nintendo, then they would have never released their consoles with superior graphics in the first place?

You know nothing. Sony and Microsoft have business other than gaming, this loss is not that much. They believe that gaming is a investment for the future, or so I heard.

Anyways, SMG looks like crap. It won't look like that either, Wii is not in HD, yet the screenshots are.. Why?
You have to look at it this way, Kameo is NOT a 1st party game and yet it looks better than any Wii game as of now, and probably in the future. If you think giving the Wii time makes it a lot better, imagine the Xbox360 and PS3 with time. They are very potential consoles.

I know nothing eh?
First off, just because they can fall back on other divisions, does not mean they are happy to take a loss for you. You need to learn your business before you argue it.
Second, Kameo was worked on by Rare and MGS, therefore it is a first party title. You can argue its a second party title, but they are pretty much one in the same, being that that company would be owned by the first party title maker, they would have the same tools and help available.
Third off. SMG does not look like crap, and no those screens arent in HD, are you mentally retarded? apparently so. Notice how I say vids and you say screen shots. Watch a vid, it looks great in motion, but it's okay, I know you'll replace the word videos with screens, because you know you're wrong.
Obviously every console will evolve in time. IM not saying they will look better than 360 and ps3, find to me where i said that.
I said you're saying its bad with either no reason or terrible reasons(im beginning to get sick of reading your posts, thats how terrible they are), and you continue to deny you are wrong that with time they will look good, and it's even been proven by some game videos.

It's 1 AM. go ahead and report me for calling you retarded, I don't care, because I really think you must be. The only redemption you have right now is that you have maddox in your sig. again, it's 1 AM, im going to bed. later

[/thread]

I didn't call you a retard I said you know nothing because you were blatantly handing out false facts.

http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/kameoelementsofpower/tech_info.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary

Note how it says "Publisher Microsoft Gaming Studios"

"Developer: Rare"

Anyways, Microsoft is taking in a loss because they can afford it. I simply stated their gaming division was losing money, I never said "Microsoft as a whole is in debt because they love their fans"

Super Mario Galaxy looks like crap.
1) Perfect Dark Zero looks better than it
2) The developer screenshots were in HD
3) Jaggie land

Since when does this look good?

[QUOTE="Strider212"][QUOTE="flamingschmoes2"][QUOTE="Strider212"][QUOTE="flamingschmoes2"]I've seen the sheep make a ton of hypocritical statements over these past few moinths. Thats why I keep coming back. to laughThe_Nemacyst

[QUOTE="coolviper2003"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"]

The wii graphics are crap. Nintendo wanted to make a profit unlike Sony or Microsoft (whom basically lost profits for their fans)

So they didn't make good hardware.

The_Nemacyst

The Wii does have graphic issues though. COD3 is comparable to an N64 title.chester706

The Wii does have graphic issues though. COD3 is comparable to an N64 title.chester706

[QUOTE="Kenshi_is_god"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="Kenshi_is_god"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="rowzzr"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"]

The wii graphics are crap. Nintendo wanted to make a profit unlike Sony or Microsoft (whom basically lost profits for their fans)

So they didn't make good hardware.

The_Nemacyst

uhh that's dumb. of course they wanted profits, duh? would you create a company simply to lose money?
sony MS lost money for their fans? nope, that's not what they had in mind, dude. they lost money because they made wrong marketing/business/whatever moves.

If they wanted to make a big of a profit as Nintendo, then they would have never released their consoles with superior graphics in the first place?

You know nothing. Sony and Microsoft have business other than gaming, this loss is not that much. They believe that gaming is a investment for the future, or so I heard.

Anyways, SMG looks like crap. It won't look like that either, Wii is not in HD, yet the screenshots are.. Why?
You have to look at it this way, Kameo is NOT a 1st party game and yet it looks better than any Wii game as of now, and probably in the future. If you think giving the Wii time makes it a lot better, imagine the Xbox360 and PS3 with time. They are very potential consoles.

I know nothing eh?
First off, just because they can fall back on other divisions, does not mean they are happy to take a loss for you. You need to learn your business before you argue it.
Second, Kameo was worked on by Rare and MGS, therefore it is a first party title. You can argue its a second party title, but they are pretty much one in the same, being that that company would be owned by the first party title maker, they would have the same tools and help available.
Third off. SMG does not look like crap, and no those screens arent in HD, are you mentally retarded? apparently so. Notice how I say vids and you say screen shots. Watch a vid, it looks great in motion, but it's okay, I know you'll replace the word videos with screens, because you know you're wrong.
Obviously every console will evolve in time. IM not saying they will look better than 360 and ps3, find to me where i said that.
I said you're saying its bad with either no reason or terrible reasons(im beginning to get sick of reading your posts, thats how terrible they are), and you continue to deny you are wrong that with time they will look good, and it's even been proven by some game videos.

It's 1 AM. go ahead and report me for calling you retarded, I don't care, because I really think you must be. The only redemption you have right now is that you have maddox in your sig. again, it's 1 AM, im going to bed. later

[/thread]

I didn't call you a retard I said you know nothing because you were blatantly handing out false facts.

http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/kameoelementsofpower/tech_info.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary

Note how it says "Publisher Microsoft Gaming Studios"

"Developer: Rare"

Anyways, Microsoft is taking in a loss because they can afford it. I simply stated their gaming division was losing money, I never said "Microsoft as a whole is in debt because they love their fans"

Super Mario Galaxy looks like crap.
1) Perfect Dark Zero looks better than it
2) The developer screenshots were in HD
3) Jaggie land

Since when does this look good?

This is much better

Note how Kameo is a first generation title.. Unlike Gears of War, yet it looks much better than than what SMG has to offer.. And guess what?

Xbox360 games are going to look like this in MAY

and in an earlier post you you played wii sports and you said you were having fun. would that game have been fun at all if you had been using a regular controler? the answer is almost asuradly a big fat NO.

[QUOTE="coolviper2003"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"]

The wii graphics are crap. Nintendo wanted to make a profit unlike Sony or Microsoft (whom basically lost profits for their fans)

So they didn't make good hardware.

The_Nemacyst

You are correct, but again it's /your/ opinion that Wii graphics look like crap, beacuse I honestly don't think they are. That pong example is stupid, almost as if the Wii might as well be a computer from the late 70's. :roll: The Wii isn't a powerhouse, but who cares? Oh..Wait.. you seem to. Why? Who knows, maybe your trying to prove a point that in the end is just your opinion. No one really cares, sorry.

If it bothers you that much go cry to Nintendo. Games are games. If a particular game is fun, then you know what? IT'S FUN! And if it's fun I'm going to play it, regardless of what graphical bells it sports or is lacking.

Xbox360/PS3/PC can have more much much more polygons than the Wii.The_Nemacyst

[QUOTE="chester706"]The Wii does have graphic issues though. COD3 is comparable to an N64 title.taker42

[QUOTE="MaTT2011"][QUOTE="Gaming4_Life"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"][QUOTE="Gaming4_Life"]I concur, to some extent. The Wii is yes a breath of refreshing air and its going to go along way and it will push the industry even further,but at the same time so will the X360 and PS3. To all the naysayers who said graphics have hit there limit......HAHAH....thats a joke. The_Nemacyst

LOL. I love how Nemacyst was like "bu-bu-but....those SMG are in HD!!! (although you can go to IGN and see that all of them are clearly ripped straight from a gameplay video). He subsequently compares a poor picture (with an awful angle to boot) of SMG with the best HD screens he could find of Kameo and Mass Effect. Pathetic.Tristam22

[QUOTE="taker42"][QUOTE="chester706"]The Wii does have graphic issues though. COD3 is comparable to an N64 title.The_Nemacyst

[QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"][QUOTE="Gaming4_Life"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"][QUOTE="Gaming4_Life"]I concur, to some extent. The Wii is yes a breath of refreshing air and its going to go along way and it will push the industry even further,but at the same time so will the X360 and PS3. To all the naysayers who said graphics have hit there limit......HAHAH....thats a joke. Japanese_Monk

[QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="taker42"][QUOTE="chester706"]The Wii does have graphic issues though. COD3 is comparable to an N64 title.Hoffgod

[QUOTE="Hoffgod"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="taker42"][QUOTE="chester706"]The Wii does have graphic issues though. COD3 is comparable to an N64 title.The_Nemacyst

Ignore Strider212, he thinks he looks like Brad Pitt. but he has a Zelda signature and is 100x as nerdyflamingschmoes2

[QUOTE="Japanese_Monk"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"][QUOTE="Gaming4_Life"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"][QUOTE="Gaming4_Life"]I concur, to some extent. The Wii is yes a breath of refreshing air and its going to go along way and it will push the industry even further,but at the same time so will the X360 and PS3. To all the naysayers who said graphics have hit there limit......HAHAH....thats a joke. The_Nemacyst

[QUOTE="GundamGuy0"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"]

I am tired of fanboys. Especially sheep. Who claim " Gameplay is better than graphics"

But before you flame, read my whole post.

Fanboys usually have retarded reasons why gameplay is better than graphics.. Like

"LoLz, if you think gameplay is worser than graphics, then go watch a movie.."

My comeback? "Well, if you have no graphics whatsoever, enjoy playing Zelda when your screen is off"

I also hate it how sheep act as if the Wii makes the gameplay better than the other consoles. The gameplay is the same. It's not like Xbox360/PS3 = Only graphics.

The Xbox360/PS3 = Next generation graphics, plus gameplay that we all love since last gen. I mean, I hate it how sheep hate games without motion sensing, when less than 2-3 years ago they were loving Resident Evil 4, SSBM etc.

The Wii is not new revolutionary gameplay. Games like WarioWare/Cooking Mama/Trauma Center are not game changing gameplay. There are hundreds of better games.

Gameplay depends on the actually gameplay of the game, not just the controller. The Wii also has bad graphics.

The_Nemacyst

[QUOTE="Japanese_Monk"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="Japanese_Monk"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"][QUOTE="Gaming4_Life"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"][QUOTE="Gaming4_Life"]I concur, to some extent. The Wii is yes a breath of refreshing air and its going to go along way and it will push the industry even further,but at the same time so will the X360 and PS3. To all the naysayers who said graphics have hit there limit......HAHAH....thats a joke. flamingschmoes2

[QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="Japanese_Monk"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"][QUOTE="Gaming4_Life"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"][QUOTE="Gaming4_Life"]I concur, to some extent. The Wii is yes a breath of refreshing air and its going to go along way and it will push the industry even further,but at the same time so will the X360 and PS3. To all the naysayers who said graphics have hit there limit......HAHAH....thats a joke. Japanese_Monk

Let's get back to the normal subject.

[QUOTE="Japanese_Monk"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="Japanese_Monk"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"][QUOTE="Gaming4_Life"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"][QUOTE="Gaming4_Life"]I concur, to some extent. The Wii is yes a breath of refreshing air and its going to go along way and it will push the industry even further,but at the same time so will the X360 and PS3. To all the naysayers who said graphics have hit there limit......HAHAH....thats a joke. flamingschmoes2

[QUOTE="Japanese_Monk"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="Japanese_Monk"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"][QUOTE="Gaming4_Life"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"][QUOTE="Gaming4_Life"]I concur, to some extent. The Wii is yes a breath of refreshing air and its going to go along way and it will push the industry even further,but at the same time so will the X360 and PS3. To all the naysayers who said graphics have hit there limit......HAHAH....thats a joke. The_Nemacyst

You want to see how graphics exceed realism?

Art. Wonder why Gears of War got only a 9 while Okami got a 10 in graphics? Same reason.

Imagine a game that looks photorealistic, but has art features in which you can not see in real life. That's better than realism for you.

Photorealism in video games will be easily achieved, although the art part is the harder one.

You want to see how graphics exceed realism?

Art. Wonder why Gears of War got only a 9 while Okami got a 10 in graphics? Same reason.

Imagine a game that looks photorealistic, but has art features in which you can not see in real life. That's better than realism for you.

Photorealism in video games will be easily achieved, although the art part is the harder one.

 

The_Nemacyst

[QUOTE="GundamGuy0"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"]

The wii graphics are crap. Nintendo wanted to make a profit unlike Sony or Microsoft (whom basically lost profits for their fans)

So they didn't make good hardware.

The_Nemacyst

This is an good example, of how art can really express better than realism.

But what do I know?

This is an good example, of how art can really express better than realism.

But what do I know?

The_Nemacyst

[QUOTE="Japanese_Monk"][QUOTE="flamingschmoes2"][QUOTE="Tristam22"] You do realize that "ideal" beauty was (and is) completely subjective?flamingschmoes2

What the hell are you babbling about? I feel like I'm talking to a little kid. Really, I cant be bothered with your bonehead concepts Wii is more appreciated by artists? :lol: Stopped reading right there

Wii does not equate to abstract art or modern art. That was your first misstep. I never said a Michelangelo is better than a Pollack, you assumed that.

My POINT was there was a calculated effort by Michelangelo and other Renaissance artists, to faithfully ressurrect the beautiful, IDEALIZED, Greek art. Men and women are represented as more heroic and noble and beautiful than real life can show. It does not mean better or worse or anything, it just means the artist intentionally created that effect. Countless books have been written on this, it's not subjective that Leonardo intentionally bent his efforts and skills towards this.

I'll go read a real book on art rather than read your chickenscratch that isnt worth my time.

Wii doesn't equate to abstract art. But does that matter? Wii isnt capable of producing grphx that are on par with 360. So my point still stands. Who says leo is better than michael? Or vice versa. ( you do understand that when I write artist names, Im making a direct correlation between wii and 360 right? You seem to be missing that) Its all relative. Oh and Leo made idealised (what he thought was perfect) depictions of people. So his art in itself was subjective.