A Great Year for Nintendo

[Fafnir]

The only one of those shots that looks pre-rendered is Samus' ship. The other two have other screenshots to prove otherwise. However, I'm a bit skeptical on Samus' ship being pre-rendered. It's not quite FMV-quality. And in comparison to the pre-rendered images of Samus, it looks down right terrible.

 

[mgbenz]

um.... i hate it :p imo soul calibur is like one of the worse fighting games ever -.-

Uh no, if you want worst Fighting game ever try Pit Fighter.

 

[Vash]

http://www.smashbros.com/en_us/stages/i ... 802b-l.jpg[/IMG]

Graphic looks fine to me.

 

[Prexus]

TREG: You do realize that Metroid Prime 3, a Wii Exclusive, has the best console FPS controls to date?

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Who-...oid-Prime-3-Wii-Best-FPS-Controls-59783.shtml

But back to Metroid Prime 3 and our beloved Samus Aran. I don't need to tell you that if it's coming from gaming sites such as IGN, it's true. Here's what they say about the overall gameplay experience with Metroid Prime 3: Corruption:

"It plays better than any first-person console game ever... really. And it's one of Wii's best lookers, too."

http://wii.ign.com/articles/732/732737p1.html

 

[Prexus]

Yes but you realize that Red Steel was a launch title, and one of the first games to make use of the Controller Scheme? IT'S BRAND NEW for god's sake. Let people learn how to use it before you pass biased judgements.

 

[Fafnir]

Are you kidding me? They're all on render backgrounds, Bowser's on a fucking white and blue sheet and there's nothing behind the ship at all. I MIGHT give you the first one, but it still looks like an FMV/prerendered shot to me.

Now look at the SSBM screenshots with bowser. Same model.

Besides, since when is MARIO a good example of the graphical quality of a system? It's not exactly hard to make a Mario game that looks okay because it's not serious graphics.

I'd take creative, 'not serious' graphics over ZOMG I CAN SEE THEIR NOSE HAIRS!!11!!1 Anyday. And besides, they're still well done, especially in lighting. Anyone who ignores that just because they're not sereious graphics is a fanboy who's just trying to bash the Wii for the sake of bashing it.

Cruelty it was on G4 (I never watch it, but I was flipping through). The Wii did 20-30% worse on standard benchmark tests in comparison to the GCN and was less powerful than the original Xbox. It's barely more powerful than the PS2, which was a joke of a system in terms of graphics. The Wii is incapable of rendering vertex shaders, current-gen shadow effects, or complex physics objects (meaning every level will be prerendered! yay, I love every FPS and action game feeling like it's from 2003!).

First of all, it's G4. Second of all, as said above, the Wii uses a completely different system for its graphics. That may have... y'know... had an effect on the tests... Thirdly, if the Wii was weaker then the GCN, then I wouldn't be able to play my GCN games on my Wii. Especially later ones. Either that, or with lots of slow down and very long load times(and it plays just like my GCN when I have a GCN game in). I'm pretty sure the guys who know what's inside the Wii know better then G4 the system's strengths. Hell, look at the SSBB model of Link, and the TP model of link. Despite the fact that they're the same design, the SSBB Link looks much better, simply because they've done him specifically for the Wii. If Nintendo says their system(not microsofts, not sony's, their system, no other company's) system is stronger then the original Xbox, I'll trust them on that, especially over G4TV.

It's shitty last-gen hardware combined with a poor games selection (OH LOOK WE HAVE MARIO GAMES AND OLD GAMECUBE ZELDA GAMES AND A LOT OF MINIGAMES [YEAH YOU LIKE MINIGAMES??? WELL YOU'LL LOVE THE WII]) and a crappy controller system that makes FPSes and action games irritating to play.

First of all, the 360 had a shitty game selection in its first year. The PS3 has an even shittier line up then the Wii right now. At the end of this year, all those 'irritating to play' FPS and action games that are coming out for the Wii are going to tell devs that those crappy ports and mini game compilations just won't fly any more. Besides, Mario, despite how much I don't like him, is no reason to hate a system. It's like saying that the Xbox only has Master Cheif. Or that the PS3 only has Kratos. They're what can be said as mascot characters. And abandoning Mario would be kind of stupid. I mean, why abandon a character more popular then MICKY MOUSE? Yes, we like to throw away money.

As for action and FPS games being irritating, it's new technology. Rome wasn't built in a day. When companies get an idea of how to properly use the Wii, then the good times will roll. But wait, we all know that one crappy game by one second-string team of a semi-decent developer means that every single game within a similar genre will be crap. It's only logical!

 

[Andy6000]

I like how the only decent examples of anything on the Wii are two first party games. And I still don't want to play them, because I really, really don't want to be swinging a wand around. Oh look, we can replicate keyboard and mouse controls! Why not just use a fucking keyboard and mouse then? I mean yeah, it's a step forward for console control in an FPS (if it's true, which it won't be for me, because I do-not-like-swinging-my-arms-around).

And Mario: impressive lighting effects? IT IS SIMPLISTIC GRAPHICS. I'm not bashing Mario for not looking like a realistic middle aged plumber, it's an art style and they should stick to it. BUT, people feel the need to point out that 'mario looks just right' as a fucking indication that the Wii is just as good as any other system in terms of graphics. That's the point people try to make about Mario, it shouldn't be upheld as 'WII=GOODGRAPHICS'.

Also I like how everyone's like 'good games will come next year!', why not now? Didn't the Wii people release their development kits a good while before the PS3 did?

Oh and at the 'Wii still has a better lineup than the PS3' comment: I just decided to run over to gamespot just to check this out. I'll just use 'above 8.0' as a benchmark.

Wii: 21 above 8.0

PS3: 22 above 8.0

Doesn't look much different huh? But then we take into account that out of the Wii 21, 12 of them are virtual console games. Classics like Zelda: Ocarina of Time, Link to the Past, etc. Two of them were ports from other systems, like Resident Evil 4(GC) or Mercury Meltdown(PSP), and there were a couple shared releases. The PS3 has 4 ports (Rainbow Six: Vegas, Ninja Gaiden Sigma, Elder Scrolls 4, Tekken 5: Dark Resurrection [ironically much better on the PSP]), and I don't know how many shared releases because I don't recognize half these names, but I know it's more shared releases than the Wii.

Any claim that the Wii has a better lineup at the moment is: A. Wrong or B. opinion. It's not false to claim that there are more 'fun games' on the Wii, but it is completely subjective, and can't be asserted as fact anywhere. (Why did I spend like 20 minutes looking this up) EDIT: oh and I forgot this: PS3 looks even better when you consider it can play every PS2 and PS1 game out there, so don't say 'virtual console IS the Wii' if you were thinking it.

EDIT: oh but I would say they're equal on above 9.0 games, both have 3: Wii has one port and a virtual console game while PS3 has all ports (rainbow six is... not really a port in my opinion, but I list it as such because it's more accurate than shared release). Wii: Resident Evil 4, Warioware: Smooth Moves, and Paper Mario, PS3: Elder Scrolls 4, Ninja Gaiden, Rainbow Six: Vegas

ADDITIONAL EDITING FOR YOUR READING PLEASURE: Vash that picture doesn't look bad, but it's not impressive beyond nice texturing, all the geometry is extremely simple, there's practically no anti-aliasing, etc. But hey, the textures are beautiful.

Also hey I have to agree with the original topic: this has been a great year for nintendo, they outsell like EVERYTHING EVERYWHERE without having to actually release anything good! Pretty cool!

FURTHER EDITING: @ Fafnir's comment: Why should I trust Nintendo to accurately portray their console versus an unbiased third party? That almost seems silly, it's not like Nintendo has an agenda or anything... like to sell consoles by making them look pretty...

And I swear they go easy on Wii games in reviews. Look at Madden 07, 7.9 on the PS3, and a 8.4 on the Wii. The Wii's 'good point' above the PS3 version was that the Wii controls worked. WORKED. Why does a game get a bonus like that for NOT fucking up its control scheme?

 

[Fafnir]

Probably because so many companies screw up the controls when they make crappy ports, that they will accept anything. In all truth, I'm just as dissapointed as the next guy at the Wii's current line-up. The whole reason behind the Wii not having any good games yet is because no one thought it would sell. When it does unbelievably well, everyone rushes whatever bull shit they can onto it. And that's why I only own a single Wii game outside of Wii sports(and the GCN version is better....).

However, I do have quite a bit of hope for the future. First of all, I couldn't care less about graphics so long as they are presented right(if it looks good, it doesn't matter how many polygons you used), No More Heroes looks great, Disaster sounds cool, SSBB is... well... SSBB...(and no, you don't have to use the Wiimote), Galaxy looks nice(although I could care less about it), MP3 looks cool, etc.

Of course, it seems that almost all the good games to look forward to are 1st or 2nd party... But Kojima is interested in the Wii, so atleast I can hope(with the exception of Lunar Knights, I have never played a game by him that sucked) *crosses fingers for ZoE3*

 

[Cruelty]

"And I swear they go easy on Wii games in reviews. Look at Madden 07, 7.9 on the PS3, and a 8.4 on the Wii. The Wii's 'good point' above the PS3 version was that the Wii controls worked. WORKED. Why does a game get a bonus like that for NOT fucking up its control scheme?"

AHHAAH. That's great.

The Wii's controller does ruin a lot of games *cough*marvelAlliance*cough*

 

[groudyogre]

Those are all prerendered shots.

The Wii is butt-fucking-ugly compared to the newer consoles and is fully incapable of running next-gen games. In benchmark tests the Wii has scored lower performance ratings than the Gamecube, which was already the weakest of the last generation of consoles.

Haha, ur not very intelligent are you? The GC was the middle console of last gen. It was less powerful than xbox, but more powerful than PS2 look on wiki if you don't believe me.

Running next gen-games has nothing to do w ith it. All games released now are considered 'next-gen' the wii is capable of some of the nex-gen effects the devs just havn't been using them.

I don't know about the metroid ship, but i know for a fact that the SSBB shot and the SMG shots are NOT pre-rendered. The bowser is in-game graphics believe it!

~ you were just ownd by groudyogre

"The Wii's controller does ruin a lot of games *cough*marvelAlliance*cough*" - Like I say; don't blame the Wii, blame the devs (Ubisoft).


Tell me these graphics aren't nice, not COMPARED to 360 or PS3, you would be lying if you said they weren't:
http://www.smashbros.com/en_us/characte ... ke/ike.jpg[/IMG]
NOT PRE-RENDERED

 

[Prexus]

Groudy, that is pre-rendered.

http://www.smashbros.com/en_us/characte ... 807a-l.jpg[/img]

This is what Ike looks like in game, notice the aliasing, the gloves, etc. It is pretty close to the pre-render but a bit of detail is lost. Although that may be just a resizing issue.

 

[Prexus]

Did you just.. Wow. TREG, you're so miserable.

Sidebar: You just indirectly said that a game with cartoony style graphics isn't worth buying. (Tell that to the 9 million active accounts of World of Warcraft.)

Just because a system is flooded with them, as long as they are good games, what does it matter how they look? Since when is it ENTIRELY about Graphics, eh? Just because PS3 games look good, haven't you noticed that they are all SHIT games? None of these even come close to the enjoyable playstyle of the 'Cartoony' games on Wii, like Twilight Princess and Mario Party. Not to mention pretty much every DS game that has released has been a cartoony style, and how well are those selling?

Bottom line is that the Wii is outselling the PS3 and 360, and the DS is still outselling the PSP. So apparently graphics aren't the most important thing to the majority. Good to know not everyone thinks the way TREG does.

 

[Prexus]

Wii has Resident Evil. 'nuff said.

 

[Prexus]

I meant that they are developing non-cartoony games for the Wii, it's not unheard of.

I don't understand the fascination with graphics, anyways. The reason video game consoles are so expensive is because of the technology in them. The reason video games themselves are so expensive is because of the cost of 3D Animators and all of the graphical aspects. The gameplay developers and writers are probably a penny in a pile, when developing a game.

 

[Prexus]

I wasn't bringing up the cost of games and units to mean that Wii was better off. I was saying that all next-gen systems and games cost more than they would if there wasn't such a huge stress on having the best graphics.

Your opinion about the Wii lineup is just that, opinion. Nobody is forcing you to buy or play the Wii so I really don't understand the argument. Your original argument was about graphics, which fine, yes. Statistically, the 360 and PS3 pump out better graphics. Did I ever try to argue that the Wii pumped out better graphics? I don't think I did. If I did, I musta been high. it's obvious that it doesn't. But the graphics is does pump out are enough to be competitive with the other two systems, so I don't really care.

 

[Cruelty]

Groudy, that is pre-rendered.

http://www.smashbros.com/en_us/characte ... 807a-l.jpg[/img]

This is what Ike looks like in game, notice the aliasing, the gloves, etc. It is pretty close to the pre-render but a bit of detail is lost. Although that may be just a resizing issue.

**noticed the blocky cape before anything

>__> sorry. I AAAM looking forward to that game. In fact, I'm going to buy a Wii just for that game.

And Prexus, graphics do matter to a degree. I can honestly say that I wouldn't enjoy a game like Rainbow Six Vegas, or Ninja Gaiden as much if it was dulled down for the Wii.

I ain't sayin that they're all that matters, but honestly, if they didn't keep making the consoles pump out better, and better graphics for each generation, then why bother even making new ones? Why would you want to look at the same dull, blocky graphics when you can be looking at beautiful, realistic graphics with great lighting effects and whatnot?

 

[Fafnir]

http://www.gametrailers.com/game/3242.html

Yeah, that's some real kiddy shit right there....

Anyway, if all consoles improved on was graphics, then games would get boring fast. If you don't evolve, you die. Same goes for games.

Whatever, anyway, if Suda51 can develop a good game for the Wii(and it looks very good so far...), then I'm sure that it can get alot of 'mature' titles. Hell, No More Heroes and SSBB are the top two titles I'm waiting for. Neither of those are 'kiddy' games. In fact, what makes a game 'kiddy?' That anyone can play it and have fun?

 

[Andy6000]

Firstly: @groudyogre - I suggest you read that link you put in the post before your last one before spouting off about how the Wii is so cool. Here it is again if you can't remember: http://revoeyes.blogspot.com/2007/07/wii-has-more-power-than-you-think.html

The article's obviously nintendo biased, criticizing the devs (it's never nintendo's fault, oh no), and praising the system, but IT can't even go so far as to say it's capable of graphical greatness. It says 'oh it can handle post-processing effects, but not many of them at the same time'. What? What's the point of having bump mapping if you don't have lighting effects? And if it can't handle things like that, what about a game like overlord, where there's a LOT of action going on onscreen? Is that just going to have to look like pikmin again? (btw overlord totally ripped off pikmin)

Well, now that that is out of the way... Nobody said graphics are the end-all of games. They're not. But what's important in a game is... ATMOSPHERE. For a serious, story based game. Give me a story based game off the Wii coming out. If you say Metroid Prime I'll break your knees. Considering the only two games people use to say the Wii is good are Super Smash Bros. and Metroid Prime 3, I'll just go ahead and say that for the moment, it's got nothing for the crowd that likes games like the Darkness.

But wait? What if someone wanted to port the Darkness to Wii? I gotta admit, it'd be pretty cool being able to stab someone with a bigass claw, then use the remote to hurl them at another enemy. But would the game be as atmospheric? If the wii couldn't handle the complex geometry and bump mapping (they'd obviously have to be doing the shadows, which apparently would take a HUGE chunk of the Wii's resources), or the detail on your girlfriend's face in that romantic scene early in the game... I would honestly be taken a little out of it. It wouldn't have as MUCH of an emotional effect if the graphics didn't look how they did, especially if I'd seen the graphics on another console first. I'd be distracted with graphical screwups, like Paulie's face looking like Goldeneye for the 64 but with shadows on it.

And then TREG has raised a point for me in an IM. The Wii port of Farcry. I'll just let a review I looked up do it for me.
* Mediocre visuals hamper the gameplay
* Dumb artificial intelligence
* Frustrating sniper controls
* Lame two-player multiplayer.

A 5.5, which is pretty bad for a game that got a 9.2 on a PC, and around an for all their other console ventures.

And now... To the WHY (in my opinion) that Wii is viciously outselling the Xbox360 and PS3.

A. It's cheaper. Parents buying games for their kids want something that isn't a huge chunk out of their monthly paycheck (of course they're probably not thinking of the cost to buy all of their kids controllers or whatever, but hey it's still cheaper than the others)

B. It's geared towards children. Another point for parents looking for something for their kids to play. It's cheap, it's child oriented, what could go wrong? We know Mario's good right?

C. It looks fun. Another thing parents are looking for, and also people that aren't really into video games can get behind. Playing a game with a controller, it doesn't look all that fun, it's just some guy, sitting there staring at a screen tapping buttons like a madman. Whereas the Wii has people smiling, swinging their arms around, etc. It's appealing for people that don't see the appeal in games. It also looks like something that would keep children occupied and un-bored.

D. It's Nintendo. We all know there are a lot of hardcore Nintendo fans. In Japan I'd say there's more than there are here in America, but we have our fair share too. More fans of Nintendo than the other systems too. People will buy it for the other reasons and this one, because it's Nintendo, they know they won't be let down, because Nintendo first party games are always good. They know they'll get those ones at least, right? (Honestly I don't understand this one, but I know people that honestly cannot argue why they bought the Wii beyond 'that it's nintendo, they're always good')

And all of those have worked. The Wii is practically STILL sold out around where I live, whereas the PS3 was only hard to find for about a month or two. (Oh my point with that was that none of those reasons were 'the games')

EDIT FOR FAFNIR: That game looks pretty damn gruesome! Well it would if A. the graphics made me think I was actually killing stuff, or B. there wasn't a guy wearing 80's clothes and wielding a light-sabre. It's definitely not kiddy, but it's definitely not 'serious' either. Doesn't make it uninteresting though, I find myself wanting to play it. But that brings me to... How the fuck is it gonna play? That video did NOTHING to describe how I would handle all that lightsabre and 80's hair-don't!

 

[Fafnir]

The reason why Farcry sucked on the Wii is because of Ubisoft. For the past year, they've been throwing out pile of trash after pile of trash. So much so that they even made an official apology.

 

[Andy6000]

The reason why Farcry sucked on the Wii is because of Ubisoft. For the past year, they've been throwing out pile of trash after pile of trash. So much so that they even made an official apology.

Again with 'blame the devs'. The graphics aren't what they were on PC because of the devs! The graphics weren't what they were on PC because the Wii COULD NOT HANDLE ANYTHING OF THE SORT. The draw-distance, the thing that was SO impressive about Farcry when it came out, was hacked to BITS so the Wii could play at a steady framerate.

So I'll use the reasoning I did last time. Why can no developer but Nintendo itself manage to use the Wii? Even Wii exclusive third party games can't figure the fucking thing out. Are they all lazy? Where's the laziness on the other two damn consoles? Why don't they look like ass?