Topic: Wii stronger then the first Xbox ?

[Smash_Brother]

Oddly enough, it looks as though the first company to really push the envelope with graphics on the Wii will be Sega, with Sonic: SR.

Don't know about how it plays yet, but the game looks gorgeous.

[NWR_pap64]

Quote
Originally posted by: Darc Requiem

Quote
Originally posted by: Blue Plant
Big fat ego.

Ego? He's telling the truth. Factor 5 did things with the GC that no one else did and the fact that developers can't equal what they've done on the GC with the Wii points to their laziness. Ubisoft I'm looking at you!!

That's a rather unfair statement.

Simply because Factor 5 knows how to push the envelope in terms of graphics it doesn't mean that ALL developers should too.

It's true that some of the Wii games been unimpressive in terms of graphics, but its unfair to say that ALL developers are lazy, since some are truly putting a lot of effort into their games, and some, SHOCK, actually care about gameplay more than graphics!

So again, its stupid of Factor 5's behalf to say that because they were able to push the envelope with graphics every developer should follow suit.

Besides, the developers are the ones that decide how far they should push the graphics. Capcom did some amazing things with RE 4 on the GC and Square could be making a game for the most technically unimpressive console and they would STILL make a simply beautiful looking game.

[segagamer12]

I dont querstion other devs either but I still say Factor 5 knows what they are saying. If every dev did push the systems then we wouldnt have thread liks this wondering why wii doesnt look better than gc at times.  

[BlackNMild2k1]

Quote
Originally posted by: pap64

Quote
Originally posted by: Darc Requiem

Quote
Originally posted by: Blue Plant
Big fat ego.

Ego? He's telling the truth. Factor 5 did things with the GC that no one else did and the fact that developers can't equal what they've done on the GC with the Wii points to their laziness. Ubisoft I'm looking at you!!

That's a rather unfair statement.

Simply because Factor 5 knows how to push the envelope in terms of graphics it doesn't mean that ALL developers should too.

It's true that some of the Wii games been unimpressive in terms of graphics, but its unfair to say that ALL developers are lazy, since some are truly putting a lot of effort into their games, and some, SHOCK, actually care about gameplay more than graphics!

So again, its stupid of Factor 5's behalf to say that because they were able to push the envelope with graphics every developer should follow suit.

Besides, the developers are the ones that decide how far they should push the graphics. Capcom did some amazing things with RE 4 on the GC and Square could be making a game for the most technically unimpressive console and they would STILL make a simply beautiful looking game.

But the problem is that even though developers don't have to put in 110% effort to push the wii graphically, they aren't even putting in enough effort to push the GC and the Wii is atleast 2-3 times more powerful. 60% of the games look like 1st Generation GC games if you leave out RS from F5 which looked like a 4th Gen GC that came out at launch. F5 was using 8 layers of effects at launch on the GC, but the best Ubisoft can come up with on the Wii is a graphical presentation that would push the PS2 into slowdown at moments.

I'm not a graphics whore or anything, but I think its fairly obvious that most games so far have been extremely lazy(graphically) or just ports of existing games, and not even ports of the most graphically enhanced version of those games, but ports from the PS2 version.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Glad you realized Wii and game makers suck.

[Mario]

Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
Oddly enough, it looks as though the first company to really push the envelope with graphics on the Wii will be Sega, with Sonic: SR.

Don't know about how it plays yet, but the game looks gorgeous.

Banana Blitz (single player) looks great too.

[Adrock]

Quote
BlackNMild2k1 wrote:
I'm not a graphics whore or anything, but I think its fairly obvious that most games so far have been extremely lazy(graphically) or just ports of existing games, and not even ports of the most graphically enhanced version of those games, but ports from the PS2 version.

Yeah... I know.... It's looking up though. Metroid Prime 3 is going to blow our faces off and that shouldn't be too far off... or at least it better not be considering it was supposed to be a launch title... then not a launch title... then a launch title again... then a "sometime after March 2007" release.

Quote
Four days ago, Mario wrote:
...this is my last post in this thread.

Sorry... *happy face emoticon* lolololololololooloolloloollklllopkl;z

[jasonditz]

Quote
Originally posted by: oohhboy

Rare on the other hand is a different story as they have fallen from grace. Their N64 games are so good that I am still playing them today. Having played their newer games I wonder what happened..

Not to oversimplify, but Free Radical Design happened.  Rare lost too many good people in a short period of time and they never really recovered.  

[BranDonk Kong]

I don't think Sonic looks all THAT great. Sonic Heroes looked better, or at the very least just as good as the new one, on the Xbox. Oh, and it sucked miserably too, just like every 3D Sonic game EVER MADE.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: Brandogg
I don't think Sonic looks all THAT great. Sonic Heroes looked better, or at the very least just as good as the new one, on the Xbox. Oh, and it sucked miserably too, just like every 3D Sonic game EVER MADE.

I have to agree, not to mention that most of the visuals may be more of an illusion since not a whole lot is going on "underneath" the hood and the enviroments are limited in size. Which is why I don't care much for visual debates, because some games aren't requring as many resources so they can pretty things up (Take Fight Night for example).  

[Adrock]

It'll probably look a lot better in action, especially since you'll rarely see much of the scenery beyond a few seconds anyway.

[Smash_Brother]

Sonic in glorious 480p.

First of all, some of the draw distances are HUGE, rendering objects WAAY off in the distance (ironically, this was FarCry's claim to fame, and yet it looked awful). They're not taking advantage of a small memory footprint to do these visuals.

Second, look at some of the lighting and particle effects, like the dust flowing through the light filtering in from the windows in the Evil Foundry video.

I don't know how this game plays but it's pretty damn apparent that a substantial amount of love went into its graphics.

[ShyGuy]

Sonic VS Sonic! Is one of them truly superior? Is it Atari 2600 vs NeoGeo or is it closer to PS2 vs Xbox?

[Smash_Brother]

I'm not sure it matters.

The only issue here is that I find it surprising that Sega was the first company to put some graphical effort into their games on the Wii.

[Ceric]

The Eyes and the body is better on the left and the shoes are better on the right.

[IceCold]

Quote
I don't think Sonic looks all THAT great. Sonic Heroes looked better, or at the very least just as good as the new one, on the Xbox. Oh, and it sucked miserably too, just like every 3D Sonic game EVER MADE.

From the videos I've seen of Sonic Heroes (Xbox), Secret Rings looks much better..