Why does the Zelda wii graphics look so bad?

to be honest, I'm annoyed by the wii fanboyism in this thread

attacking him because he doesn't like the graphics

I like Link's look, but the enemies look silly

there's not enough that i saw for me to get excited, except that I love Zelda, and looking forward to the next Zelda game

lundy86_4

BEAUTIFUL... I don't see how people can say this game looks bad... it's absolutely gorgeous... some ppl cannot appreciate the colorful art.. it's not supposed to be realistic like Killzone, Gears, etc...

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

Scoob64

BEAUTIFUL... I don't see how people can say this game looks bad... it's absolutely gorgeous... some ppl cannot appreciate the colorful art.. it's not supposed to be realistic like Killzone, Gears, etc...

No one is saying it should be. Look at those trees, that floor, that huge HUD. It's the same zelda you've been playing since ocarina of time with the same look since zelda 1 and it doesn't even look great.

[QUOTE="Scoob64"]

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

Chemical_Viking

BEAUTIFUL... I don't see how people can say this game looks bad... it's absolutely gorgeous... some ppl cannot appreciate the colorful art.. it's not supposed to be realistic like Killzone, Gears, etc...

No one is saying it should be. Look at those trees, that floor, that huge HUD. It's the same zelda you've been playing since ocarina of time with the same look since zelda 1 and it doesn't even look great.

same look since zelda 1? granted, it is a little blurry- but i still think it looks gorgeous, and better than TP :) plus the game won't be out till next year- i'm sure they will work on the graphics some till then.

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"]All wii games look bad... It's old tech.i5750at4Ghz

There is much more than technically looking better. Artistic direction can be just as important, and can even make up for the technical limitations.

Okami and Muramasa say your opinion is fail

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"]

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

There is much more than technically looking better. Artistic direction can be just as important, and can even make up for the technical limitations.

Half-Way

Okami and Muramasa say your opinion is fail

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"]

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

There is much more than technically looking better. Artistic direction can be just as important, and can even make up for the technical limitations.

Half-Way

Okami and Muramasa say your opinion is fail

Okami was a PS2 game ported onto Wii though. :?

Muramasa has a great art style.

Huh? The visuals look excellent. Did you put your glasses on today? Also, this is even before the graphics are even finished.

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"] No type of art style will bridge that large a technical gap. Only my opinion of course, but all Wii games are ugly.

Okami and Muramasa say your opinion is fail

It looks worse then the gamecube zelda

GramDubs

suuuure

Instead of fussing over the game's visuals, maybe you should be more concerned about how it'll play.
I say that but I remember, this is system wars...

No one is saying it should be. Look at those trees, that floor, that huge HUD. It's the same zelda you've been playing since ocarina of time with the same look since zelda 1 and it doesn't even look great.

Chemical_Viking

So, Thunderdrone, which part of that looks significantly better than any GC game?

So, Thunderdrone, which part of that looks significantly better than any GC game?

Chemical_Viking

So, Chemical_Viking, which part doesn't?

Instead of fussing over the game's visuals, maybe you should be more concerned about how it'll play. I say that but I remember, this is system wars...Doom_HellKnight

Besides the improved motion controls, it's most likely going to play like previous Zelda games. Not much room for concern.

[QUOTE="Chemical_Viking"]

[QUOTE="Scoob64"]

BEAUTIFUL... I don't see how people can say this game looks bad... it's absolutely gorgeous... some ppl cannot appreciate the colorful art.. it's not supposed to be realistic like Killzone, Gears, etc...

Scoob64

No one is saying it should be. Look at those trees, that floor, that huge HUD. It's the same zelda you've been playing since ocarina of time with the same look since zelda 1 and it doesn't even look great.

same look since zelda 1? granted, it is a little blurry- but i still think it looks gorgeous, and better than TP :) plus the game won't be out till next year- i'm sure they will work on the graphics some till then.

[QUOTE="locopatho"][QUOTE="Chemical_Viking"]

Let the mods do their job then. As is stands, I'm not a fake, and I'm not impressed by the graphics either. I don't even think it looks good for a wii game. I expect they will work on it but it certainly wont be the generation defining game people were hoping for.

Chemical_Viking

Honestly? I didn't expect it would define a generation. But people have been building this game up ever since they showed an art poster last year. As ridiculous as that is, people are expecting this game to do something revolutionary, just because its zelda. I didn't think it would break the graphics mark set by HD consoles, of course not. I just expected there would be something new or special about the game. As it stands, if this didn't have the zelda name attached people wouldn't care about it at all right now. The graphics look decidedly average, particularly the backdrops, and the controls didn't work. Now, both of those things will be worked on, but don't get offended by people if they don't find this game impressive, I suspect many people who do are convincing only themselves that it is zelda and ultimately, they wont be let down.

It's still very early but I think the graphics look good and will probably be better over time. i mean Super Mario Galaxy didn't have the impressive visuals at the beginning but at the end it certainly did. The game looks fine.

[QUOTE="Chemical_Viking"] No one is saying it should be. Look at those trees, that floor, that huge HUD. It's the same zelda you've been playing since ocarina of time with the same look since zelda 1 and it doesn't even look great.

Thunderdrone

This is a useless stock answer with no meaning whatsoever.

Incidentally, I used the word "look" because I couldn't use the word I wanted. Due to GS issues, certain words (starts in S, ends in Tyle) are now filtered. That game there, is the same in essence to the very first. The game mechanics have moved on, but not a great deal since OoT, on the N64.

So, Thunderdrone, which part of that looks significantly better than any GC game?

Chemical_Viking

[QUOTE="Chemical_Viking"]

So, Thunderdrone, which part of that looks significantly better than any GC game?

789shadow

So, Chemical_Viking, which part doesn't?

All of it? I had about 25 GC games including Zelda and none of them were particularly dwarfed by this.

[QUOTE="locopatho"][QUOTE="Chemical_Viking"]

Let the mods do their job then. As is stands, I'm not a fake, and I'm not impressed by the graphics either. I don't even think it looks good for a wii game. I expect they will work on it but it certainly wont be the generation defining game people were hoping for.

Chemical_Viking

Honestly? I didn't expect it would define a generation. But people have been building this game up ever since they showed an art poster last year. As ridiculous as that is, people are expecting this game to do something revolutionary, just because its zelda. I didn't think it would break the graphics mark set by HD consoles, of course not. I just expected there would be something new or special about the game. As it stands, if this didn't have the zelda name attached people wouldn't care about it at all right now. The graphics look decidedly average, particularly the backdrops, and the controls didn't work. Now, both of those things will be worked on, but don't get offended by people if they don't find this game impressive, I suspect many people who do are convincing only themselves that it is zelda and ultimately, they wont be let down.

"As it stands, if this didn't have the zelda name attached people wouldn't care about it at all right now."

Its not the name that defined its fame. IF the game was called The legend of Hoopla it still would hae the same audience that Zelda has. its the game itself that made the name famous, not the name that made the game famous. Saying that If it wasnt called Zelda then the game would suck is not exactly a very good point.

Im not going to argue about teh graphics because its obvious that ur not a fan of the toon look and thats why u keep bashing the looks, but u say that "the controls dont work", and thats absolutely not true. Many Hands-on previews have already confirmed that the controls are flawless, and that the issue which occured at the meeting was only a "glitch"

I respect ur opinion and that you may not like the art style, but it bothers me when ppl make assumptions about the controls when many have already siad it works. it just seems liek a cheap attempt to bash on the wii. Thats why poeple get offended. It only requires a little reading, and then you will know. IF you dont want to read and not inform urself on a topic then dont bother making a comment about it because that just creates ignorance. Im going to give you the benifit of doubt and assume you couldnt find an article regarding the controls. Here is one so you can read. "Skyward Sword's one-to-one sword motion was more satisfying and more engaging than flailing ever was, and that bodes well for the adventure to come."-Gamespot

[QUOTE="789shadow"]

[QUOTE="Chemical_Viking"]

So, Thunderdrone, which part of that looks significantly better than any GC game?

Chemical_Viking

So, Chemical_Viking, which part doesn't?

All of it? I had about 25 GC games including Zelda and none of them were particularly dwarfed by this.

Such a broad answer devoid of actual details means........you have nothing.

[QUOTE="Chemical_Viking"]

So, Thunderdrone, which part of that looks significantly better than any GC game?

Thunderdrone

Like yours are! We're both a couple of objective observers.

Incidentally, that Donkey Kong sig does indeed look great. I have to say I love the look of it.

[QUOTE="Chemical_Viking"]

[QUOTE="789shadow"]

So, Chemical_Viking, which part doesn't?

789shadow

All of it? I had about 25 GC games including Zelda and none of them were particularly dwarfed by this.

Such a broad answer devoid of actual details means........you have nothing.

You still haven't actually answered my original question and no one else has. You have nothing either.

[QUOTE="Scoob64"]

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

Chemical_Viking

BEAUTIFUL... I don't see how people can say this game looks bad... it's absolutely gorgeous... some ppl cannot appreciate the colorful art.. it's not supposed to be realistic like Killzone, Gears, etc...

No one is saying it should be. Look at those trees, that floor, that huge HUD. It's the same zelda you've been playing since ocarina of time with the same look since zelda 1 and it doesn't even look great.

I'd say the characters look good but I don't like the backgrounds and the HUD is simply too much and too intrusive.

Get rid of the HUD completely, I don't care how, and make the backgrounds look as detailed and intricate as the characters, all things being relative, and I think it really would look special.

[QUOTE="Half-Way"]

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"] No type of art style will bridge that large a technical gap. Only my opinion of course, but all Wii games are ugly.

i5750at4Ghz

Okami and Muramasa say your opinion is fail

Okami isnt even 2D

well i guess no one can change your opinion, if you really belive that realism is the way to go, then okey

but that dosent mean that other people cant enjoy those looks.

just like you find artstyle and 2D not impressive, other people also dont care about realism.

[QUOTE="789shadow"]

[QUOTE="Chemical_Viking"]

All of it? I had about 25 GC games including Zelda and none of them were particularly dwarfed by this.

Chemical_Viking

Such a broad answer devoid of actual details means........you have nothing.

You still haven't actually answered my original question and no one else has. You have nothing either.

What original question? Both the TC and you have just said they look bad without saying why. This is not acceptable, and until something more detailed comes up, you are automatically wrong by mean of no support for your statement. Also, don't even think of throwing this back on me. You said it first, so the burden of proof is on you.

[QUOTE="Chemical_Viking"]

[QUOTE="Scoob64"]

BEAUTIFUL... I don't see how people can say this game looks bad... it's absolutely gorgeous... some ppl cannot appreciate the colorful art.. it's not supposed to be realistic like Killzone, Gears, etc...

amaneuvering

No one is saying it should be. Look at those trees, that floor, that huge HUD. It's the same zelda you've been playing since ocarina of time with the same look since zelda 1 and it doesn't even look great.

I'd say the characters look good but I don't like the backgrounds and the HUD is simply too much and too intrusive.

The HUD is not a part of the final game.

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"]

[QUOTE="Half-Way"]

Okami and Muramasa say your opinion is fail

Half-Way

Okami isnt even 2D

well i guess no one can change your opinion, if you really belive that realism is the way to go, then okey

but that dosent mean that other people cant enjoy those looks.

just like you find artstyle and 2D not impressive, other people also dont care about realism.

Like yours are! We're both a couple of objective observers.

Incidentally, that Donkey Kong sig does indeed look great. I have to say I love the look of it.

Chemical_Viking

Wind Waker destroys it!!!

I like it, thought it could use some nice texture.

[QUOTE="Chemical_Viking"]

Like yours are! We're both a couple of objective observers.

Incidentally, that Donkey Kong sig does indeed look great. I have to say I love the look of it.

Thunderdrone

Wind Waker destroys it!!!

Well, that alone destroys the TC.

[QUOTE="Half-Way"]

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"] Or just different. 2D will never impress me.

i5750at4Ghz

Okami isnt even 2D

well i guess no one can change your opinion, if you really belive that realism is the way to go, then okey

but that dosent mean that other people cant enjoy those looks.

just like you find artstyle and 2D not impressive, other people also dont care about realism.

dont be silly. My opinion > yours

The Wii was created with the casual consumer/cartoon style games in mind.

I will admit RE4 looked damn nice when I played it, but technically the WII just hasn't got the hardware to outpeform the ps3/xbox.

I think it looks great actually:

lundy86_4

Looks good to me :D

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"][QUOTE="Half-Way"]

Okami isnt even 2D

well i guess no one can change your opinion, if you really belive that realism is the way to go, then okey

but that dosent mean that other people cant enjoy those looks.

just like you find artstyle and 2D not impressive, other people also dont care about realism.

Half-Way

dont be silly. My opinion > yours

Who cares about graphics not everything needs to look realistic. Why cant we have cartoonish graphics this gen. I wish ps3 had more cartoonish games.

Who cares about graphics not everything needs to look realistic. Why cant we have cartoonish graphics this gen. I wish ps3 had more cartoonish games.

Respawn-d

i wish i had PS3 :P

btw i lol'd at ur sig. he truly does look pissed

Not gray enough?OreoMilkshake

Needs more brown too.

Graphics tend to look bad when you have goggles on. Fanboy goggles to be precise.

[QUOTE="OreoMilkshake"]Not gray enough?LordQuorthon

Needs more brown too.

[QUOTE="Half-Way"]

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"] Yeah.... I know. But at the end of the day my opinion is the only one that matters.i5750at4Ghz

dont be silly. My opinion > yours

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"]

[QUOTE="Chemical_Viking"]

No one is saying it should be. Look at those trees, that floor, that huge HUD. It's the same zelda you've been playing since ocarina of time with the same look since zelda 1 and it doesn't even look great.

789shadow

I'd say the characters look good but I don't like the backgrounds and the HUD is simply too much and too intrusive.

The HUD is not a part of the final game.

I bet you it will still be way too much though.

Personally I'd rather developers got rid of HUDs completely or at the very least made them as non-intrusive as possible.

I mean even this is superior imo:

Or this:

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

I think it looks great actually:

Advid-Gamer

Looks good to me :D

[QUOTE="OreoMilkshake"]

Needs more brown too.

[QUOTE="OreoMilkshake"]Not gray enough?LordQuorthon

Needs more brown too.

[QUOTE="Chemical_Viking"]

[QUOTE="789shadow"]

Such a broad answer devoid of actual details means........you have nothing.

789shadow

You still haven't actually answered my original question and no one else has. You have nothing either.

What original question? Both the TC and you have just said they look bad without saying why. This is not acceptable, and until something more detailed comes up, you are automatically wrong by mean of no support for your statement. Also, don't even think of throwing this back on me. You said it first, so the burden of proof is on you.

My original question, and our very first correspondance, was "So, Thunderdrone, which part of that looks significantly better than any GC game?" There is no burden of proof here on either side, we're not the hitchen brothers. There was a question, you threw it back to me. I ask you, what in that looks significantly better than a GC game?

[QUOTE="789shadow"]

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"]

I'd say the characters look good but I don't like the backgrounds and the HUD is simply too much and too intrusive.

amaneuvering

The HUD is not a part of the final game.

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"][QUOTE="789shadow"]

The HUD is not a part of the final game.

oldkingallant

I can't recall them saying there won't be a HUD but if you say so.

I agree that HUDs can totally ruin the immersion with many games.