Is orginal x-box graphics too much to ask for for wii

[QUOTE="BubbyJello"]

How is it getting ripped off?

I think the Wii was more then worth my $250, but that's just me.

gamecubepad

No, no. I'm more than happy with the Wii. Don't read me wrong. I said this...

"It's called getting ripped off when most developers are too lazy to even equal GC graphics."

I didn't say the Wii was a rip off, or any of the 20 games I own. I'm talking about developers being lazy. That's a ripoff.

Well that have more to do with the price of the games, not the system.

And I'm going to guess most of your Wii games don't have graphics as good as the average GCN game, yet you don't feel ripped off. I wonder why.

Nintendo would do well to reinstitute the Seal of Quality and send these crap games packing.

gamecubepad

The "seal of quality" had nothing to do with whether a game or peripheral was good or not. It only meant that it wouldn't damage your console.

[QUOTE="BubbyJello"]

Well that have more to do with the price of the games, not the system.

And I'm going to guess most of your Wii games don't have graphics as good as the average GCN game, yet you don't feel ripped off. I wonder why.

gamecubepad

You have a point about the price of games. Most of my games do have as good or better graphics than the GC. I don't feel ripped off concerning the Wii because I prefer 1st party Nintendo games, I love the VC, and I love the Wiimote. There's no reason I can't demand GC quality games out of 3rd party developers.

GCN quality sure, but GCN graphical quality... whats the point?

It's people like you who cement the idea that the Wii should have PS2 graphics and with shoddy Wiimote support tacked on.

Sure, why not. NO! :evil:

Nintendo would do well to reinstitute the Seal of Quality and send these crap games packing.

Bold

I'm not going to keep going in circles like this. I'll sum it up.

I think the Wii should have equal graphics to Xbox games.

You think the Wii should have equal graphics to the PS2.

We disagree. It's alright. Have a nice day.

gamecubepad

No I don't, now you're putting words in my mouth. I don't care what the graphics are equal too.

So, if anything, I think Wii should have equal graphics to N64, PS2, Dreamcast, Gamecube, Xbox, Xbox 360, or PS3.

[QUOTE="Master_Hermes"]

The Wii's raw tech specs are around the same but it lacks a lot of the texture mapping capabilities the Xbox had. Some of those techniques can be done through software, like what High Voltage Software is doing with the Conduit, but it takes a lot more work. On top of that, most devs aren't even trying on Wii. Recently I was playing F-Zero GX for the Cube on my Wii and I was stunned by it, most Wii games don't even come close to looking that good, and we're talking about a mid-gen GameCube title!

I don't blame them, though, If Wii Play can be butt ugly and sell 4 million units why even bother?

gamecubepad

Wii Play came bundled with a control, it wouldn't sell like that if it was standalone and $29.99.

What about Carnival Games, did that come with a controller too?

I agree. The Wii is capable of xbox graphics, just look at the games Nintendo or Capcom is delivering.

Third party devs have to take the Wii more serious,JLF1

[QUOTE="gamecubepad"]

I'm not going to keep going in circles like this. I'll sum it up.

I think the Wii should have equal graphics to Xbox games.

You think the Wii should have equal graphics to the PS2.

We disagree. It's alright. Have a nice day.

BubbyJello

No I don't, now you're putting words in my mouth. I don't care what the graphics are equal too.

So, if anything, I think Wii should have equal graphics to N64, PS2, Dreamcast, Gamecube, Xbox, Xbox 360, or PS3.

PERIOD.

[QUOTE="ThePlothole"][QUOTE="gamecubepad"]

Nintendo would do well to reinstitute the Seal of Quality and send these crap games packing.

gamecubepad

The "seal of quality" had nothing to do with whether a game or peripheral was good or not. It only meant that it wouldn't damage your console.

Not originally to my knowledge. Here's an excerpt from wikipedia concerning the Original Seal of Quality...

"Gamers understandably were wary of game makers when the Nintendo Entertainment System came out in 1985. The 10NES lockout chip solved the problem of controlling access to the console (for the most part), but there was the issue of customer confidence. So Nintendo introduced the Seal of Quality to show gamers that the games had met quality control standards in terms of basic programming and that the games would be suitable for the entire family and thus free of objectionable content. It was mainly a marketing ploy, but it worked – consumers were reassured, and the NES became a great success. Publishers were encouraged to create high-quality titles in other ways as well. Each publisher was only allowed five releases per year (with certain exceptions), so effort was put into making those few titles successful."

became this...

At this rate, Nintendo should reinstate the limit on the amount of games produced per-year. The Wii would have the best Library no questions asked. Instead we get crap.

[QUOTE="BubbyJello"]

No I don't, now you're putting words in my mouth. I don't care what the graphics are equal too.

So, if anything, I think Wii should have equal graphics to N64, PS2, Dreamcast, Gamecube, Xbox, Xbox 360, or PS3.

gamecubepad

I'm putting words in your mouth? Remember this...

Me- "It's people like you who cement the idea that the Wii should have PS2 graphics"

You- "Sure, why not."

I'm done talking to you. Stop trying to argue, you aren't very good at it. I get it, you don't care about the graphical quality of games on the Wii. I think they should be up to par with what the hardware has to offer. We disagree. That's fine.

Sure, why not = Doesn't matter

The Wii can go as low as it wants to, but it has a graphical upper limit. It cannot deliver 360/PS3/modern PC graphics.

PERIOD.

Dreams-Visions

Fine with me.

galaxy reached xbox levels of visuals

same for brawl

Shinobishyguy

GOOO Wiiiii....you did it!!!!!!

hahaha

[QUOTE="redmetal86"][QUOTE="BubbyJello"]

But wouldn't you rather devs just put alot of effort into the game itself, instead of the graphics?

BubbyJello

arent the graphics apart of the game too?

Is it possible to play graphics?

Why don't we just start cutting out those other useless elements? Take out the musical score, all sound effects, voice acting, etc. See what I'm getting at?

[QUOTE="BubbyJello"][QUOTE="redmetal86"][QUOTE="BubbyJello"]

But wouldn't you rather devs just put alot of effort into the game itself, instead of the graphics?

Dark_Knight6

arent the graphics apart of the game too?

Is it possible to play graphics?

Why don't we just start cutting out those other useless elements? Take out the musical score, all sound effects, voice acting, etc. See what I'm getting at?

Lets go back to playing NES games so devs can spend all the time they want on gameplay. Who cares about the graphics?

[QUOTE="angelkimne"][QUOTE="SER69"] And this is the Wii fault how?Haziqonfire

SMG and The Conduit show what the Wii is capable off. Conduit less so, its art direction is terrible, but on a techincal level, its still good ;).

Dont get me wrong i love my wii, i play brawl mario kart al the time with my friends, thosegames looks good as well as a handfull more, but everthing else seems below the orginal x-box in therms or grapgics. I know the wii is about the same as the orginal x-box why cant games look like orginal x-box games rather then ps2 gamesEmperorZeruel

Because it took many years for the best xbox games to arrive, developers get to know the hardware well first

[QUOTE="bc1391"][QUOTE="Blackbond"]

I still think DOAU was the best looking game Last Generation (for consoles anyways)

nintendog66

Ummm... NO...

[QUOTE="air_wolf_cubed"]What like Galaxy?Nisim19

CONEKR, NG1 , Riddick, HALO 2 say no

I disagree, if it weren't for the lighting in Galaxy I might agree, but to be honest Galaxy's lighting was much better. Plus Halo 2 has some dreadful pop in textures in cutscenes and Riddick is jags-ville on further away character models. NG is probably the best looking game out of them but I'd still say Galaxy looks better than it. This gen is all about lighting really, if you look at most of the games for 360 and PS3 the only really amazing thing is the lighting, the rest of the stuff is merely a slight upgrade, like removal of jaggies, better textures and more details.

[QUOTE="nintendog66"][QUOTE="bc1391"][QUOTE="Blackbond"]

I still think DOAU was the best looking game Last Generation (for consoles anyways)

Blackbond

Ummm... NO...

Background, textures, character models, flame effect, AA, runs at 60 frames per second. DOAU kills it.

RE4 has ALOT more geometry on screen, it has more textures, more complex lighting, superior fire effects, more enemies/characters, and the enviroments are not even comparable to a f*** fighting games box-limited scenarios.

Seriously, how can someone compare a fighting game to RE4???

[QUOTE="Blackbond"][QUOTE="nintendog66"][QUOTE="bc1391"][QUOTE="Blackbond"]

I still think DOAU was the best looking game Last Generation (for consoles anyways)

Fawlcon_Pawnch

Ummm... NO...

Background, textures, character models, flame effect, AA, runs at 60 frames per second. DOAU kills it.

RE4 has ALOT more geometry on screen at any time, it has more textures, more complex lighting, superior fire effects, more enemies/characters, and the enviroments are not even comparable to a f*** fighting games box scenario.

Seriously, how can someone compare a fighting game to RE4???

Agreed, the best looking Xbox game is probably this though,

for the record...Conker does NOT look better than galaxy

for the record...Conker does NOT look better than galaxy

Shinobishyguy

Can I Help? :)

[QUOTE="BubbyJello"][QUOTE="redmetal86"][QUOTE="BubbyJello"]

But wouldn't you rather devs just put alot of effort into the game itself, instead of the graphics?

Dark_Knight6

arent the graphics apart of the game too?

Is it possible to play graphics?

Why don't we just start cutting out those other useless elements? Take out the musical score, all sound effects, voice acting, etc. See what I'm getting at?

I don't mean completely cut them out. But I don't really care about the quality of the "useless elements(as you call them).

Who cares, at least the Wii has got some good games. The original Xbox had none.XenoNinja

Nintendo said that the Wii was like twice as strong as the Gamecube. When they used to do head to head roundups at IGN, the xbox and gamecube version of a game would usually be considered a tie in terms of graphics. I haven't seen any Wii game that looks twice as good as a gamecube game. Even Nintendo titles just look like what a gamecube game would look like if there was still active development. And most titles actually look worse than gamecube launch games.

splinter cell chaos theory on xbox looks better then evey game onwii, i recently played it and completed for the gazillionth time and seriously it even makes some of 360 game look notso next gen

Nintendo said that the Wii was like twice as strong as the Gamecube. When they used to do head to head roundups at IGN, the xbox and gamecube version of a game would usually be considered a tie in terms of graphics. I haven't seen any Wii game that looks twice as good as a gamecube game. Even Nintendo titles just look like what a gamecube game would look like if there was still active development. And most titles actually look worse than gamecube launch games.

Senor_Kami

Agreed, if its twice the GC we havent see it yet, or anything close.

[QUOTE="Senor_Kami"]

Nintendo said that the Wii was like twice as strong as the Gamecube. When they used to do head to head roundups at IGN, the xbox and gamecube version of a game would usually be considered a tie in terms of graphics. I haven't seen any Wii game that looks twice as good as a gamecube game. Even Nintendo titles just look like what a gamecube game would look like if there was still active development. And most titles actually look worse than gamecube launch games.

lolkie_81

Agreed, if its twice the GC we havent see it yet, or anything close.

I believe what Nintendo meant was, the Wii is twice as strong as half of the Gamecube.

[QUOTE="lolkie_81"][QUOTE="Senor_Kami"]

Nintendo said that the Wii was like twice as strong as the Gamecube. When they used to do head to head roundups at IGN, the xbox and gamecube version of a game would usually be considered a tie in terms of graphics. I haven't seen any Wii game that looks twice as good as a gamecube game. Even Nintendo titles just look like what a gamecube game would look like if there was still active development. And most titles actually look worse than gamecube launch games.

BubbyJello

Agreed, if its twice the GC we havent see it yet, or anything close.

I believe what Nintendo meant was, the Wii is twice as strong as half of the Gamecube.

lol i just think that 2x power =/= 2x graphics

RE4 says what's up?-Wheels-

Right...like RE4 graphics can't be done on Xbox...

lol i just think that 2x power =/= 2x graphics

crunchUK

2x power = 1x graphics?

[QUOTE="-Wheels-"]RE4 says what's up?AvIdGaMeR444

Right...like RE4 graphics can't be done on Xbox...

exactly wii fans kill me i bet the wii cant run HL2 the xbox sure could ran perfectly besides the frequent loading

Its pretty pathetic how new gen hardware can't compete with a platform that's almost 7 years old.

SMG looks nice, but I still think Splinter Cell: CT stomps all over it.

RE4 has ALOT more geometry on screen, it has more textures, more complex lighting, superior fire effects, more enemies/characters, and the enviroments are not even comparable to a f*** fighting games box-limited scenarios.

Seriously, how can someone compare a fighting game to RE4???

Fawlcon_Pawnch

Because a fighter only has 2 characters on screen at a time which makes it easy for the characters to have high polygon counts and graphics as there isn't more then two things going on during play.

Fighting games usually have the highest polygon counts for invidual characters as well man. Come on use sense man. DOAU also runs at a silky smooth 60FPS which RE4 does not.