Decent Wii footage from Leipzig

[sega saturn x]

You're right that IS an unfair comparison so lets try red steel with mass effect a game I think has crazy awesome potential. Although I think Bwii looks like way more fun than red steel, it is the best looking game for the wii thus far.

 

Both look good to be sure, but mass effect just looks better in every way.

Edited September 5, 2006 by sega saturn x

[AtariJr]

not the best pic ive seen of red steel but much better thank you

[sega saturn x]

not the best pic ive seen of red steel but much better thank you

Yeah, when I was looking for them I got a lot of pics like this and muzzle fire that made it impossible to see details on the characters. Oh well, I foudn a decent one enyway. What's a bummer is the wii will never see games liek assasins creed no matter how great they would work with the controller because of this very reason. And i'm worried this trend will continue.

[n8littlefield]

Mass Effect looks alot like a PC game to me. I think it's my old age, but I can honestly say I'll take good artistic style and creative game design over realism any day of the week. I think I've reached the point where I'm simply not the target audience anymore. I'd take Alien Hominid over Mass Effect or Trauma Center over Warhawk. I just want to have good fun without having to invest a significan portion of my life per session just to advance the story.

 

Unless it's really good of course - I just bought Shadow of the Colossus and am REALLY excited to play it.

[sega saturn x]

SotC has a terrible camera sadly, it pretty much ruined the game for me. The level or realism isn't just why mass effect look good it's like kotor to the next level. Everything looks fully realised and amazing, I'm a hardcore sci-fi wank though so YMMV.

[n8littlefield]

I tried and tried but couldn't enjoy KOTOR. I just didn't like the art style or the gameplay mechanics that much. I realize the graphics in Mass Effect look nice, but I can't help but feeling like it's the same old game with pretty graphics. I'm not a huge fan of the genre either.

 

The only games I've seen so far on the 360/PS3 that really have me impressed are Dead Rising, Assasin's Creed, Lair and Viva Pinata. Those games really seem to offer gameplay that I've never seen done well in other games (Viva Pinata I simply love the look of the game).

[sega saturn x]

Like I said though I have a history of going ape shit for anything sci-fi especially star wars looking stuff like this.

[Atari Master]

That pic of Gears of War, was that a live pic or was that one of the pre-rendered E3 pics?

 

Either way, one thing we're forgetting here is that the Wii's current library of games were created on a lower end dev kit. I think they just got the real deal a few weeks ago.

 

The Wii isn't being pushed. But I bet if you push it, you'd be surprised.

 

Take a look at Twilight Princess. That game looks beautiful with just it's Gamecube graphics. If they had decided to update it, just think.

 

Either way, take a look at MMOs. World of Warcraft is the most unrealistic game ever and it's owning every other MMO around. : |

Edited September 5, 2006 by Atari Master

[sega saturn x]

Either way, take a look at MMOs. World of Warcraft is the most unrealistic game ever and it's owning every other MMO around. : |

Meh, mmo games suck anyway IMHO. And I'm not saying art style isn't important okami is one of the best looking games ever bar none. But I think this is really going to hurt the wii in the long run with multiplatform releases.

[n8littlefield]

It's really hard to say what will happen with multiplatform releases. Nintendo's basic attitude seems to be that they are trying to expand the marketplace and that the audience that is willing to pay for the hardware to play something like Mass Effect is getting smaller and smaller.

 

Nintendo's approach is an interesting one that will be curious to see how it plays out. While they are sacrificing the port of stuff like Mass Effect, they are offering developers a familiar environment to program, a much lower cost of entry to both consumers and publishers, and the chance to try something new. It worked with the DS - especially in Japan - it will be an interesting battle to say the least.

 

I'm especially interested to see how they compare once all three consoles get past their first generation glut of FPS and racers!

[sega saturn x]

But alot of people can only afford one console and with say the ps2 unless it was a microsoft or nintendo game you woudl most likely see a ps2 release. Would it look or play the same? For the most part, you can't get that with the wii and it will most likely force me to buy another console. (looking to be the 360 due to price and mass effect)

[AtariJr]

But alot of people can only afford one console and with say the ps2 unless it was a microsoft or nintendo game you woudl most likely see a ps2 release. Would it look or play the same? For the most part, you can't get that with the wii and it will most likely force me to buy another console. (looking to be the 360 due to price and mass effect)

more and more people now adays have more than one console in a given generation. If they only get one I think nintendo is trying to persuade the people that dont have endless funds to get their cheaper system. and there are already, and will be many in the future, ports of Wii games to the other two consoles, so i dont think it will be so secluded as you think. Granted games like GTA arent going to be coming Wii shore, but you can expect games to be still multiplatform, or even built off the wii version. In the same respect, i dont believe the other two competitors making thier systems so high priced is really helping people into looking at buying more than one system, at least not at first. I'll probably get the 360 as a second system to the Wii just because of its price. I'm also figuring that if everything is like this current generation, most of the titles I want will be multiplatform or for the microsoft system. I was disspointed that Sony in the last year has steered away from making the cheaper hardware. Remember the first playstation, it was pretty cheap and I think that and the abundant amount of software made it a no brainer for people to buy. Starting with the psp i just dont see sony following its old routine and its not really helping people who dont have 1200 dollars for all 3 systems (without games).

[Starscream]

 

Because "looking good" is always more important to a game than being "fun".

 

I honestly don't understand this amazing amount of negativity toward the Wii.

 

No, but why should one be more important than the other? If I can have both, that's what I want. I always get a kick out of anyone (not aimed at you specifically Jbanes) who acts so derogatory about nice graphics. The ability is there to have both, on any system, so I really see no need to settle for either or. But you are right, a game needs to be fun, which leads me to the wii.....

 

I have been watching videos for months now, gameplay videos, controller videos, etc, and damn if I don't find I am asking myself "so.....where's the fun in that?" every single time. I like FPS games, so Red Steel was interesting to a degree, but the controller ain't gonna save that one. I think this whole controller thingy is a real big nothing. It seems to me that Nintendo has caused a nice distraction with that controller to cover up how sucky every game looks to be, that most really aren't fun games but you won't notice because of how you control it, and they really have no plan with this system, they are just going to wing it.....again. I like the controller idea, to an extent, but I see way too much emphasis being put on how you control instead of really great games.

 

Seeing this whole wii thing play out so far, I think I prefer how MS and Sony have done it. Price up front, future plans up front, online plans up front, etc. Much better than being strung along like a little puppy given just some little bones to nibble on, while really being told nothing except how you can control whatever they throw at you.

[n8littlefield]

First of all, MS has everything upfront because they've already launched.

 

Sony has not revealed even close to everything - we actually know less for launch titles than the Wii, we don't know the price points for games for the PS3, we have no idea what they're online plans are except "basic service for free" which is almost meaningless without knowing what "basic" means, we have no real launch date, and we know they haven't started production.

 

With Nintendo we know the features of the system, we know the highest price point that could happen, and we know the launch lineup, which I would argue if it really happens will be one of the strongest launch lineups ever.

 

I know what you're saying, that if Nintendo had put more empathesis on graphics maybe the Wii could have been the best of both worlds, however I think that we'll have to wait and see what happens. It will be interesting to see what a souped up Gamecube can do for graphics when they don't have to worry about high-def.

[jbanes]

No, but why should one be more important than the other?

Fun always trumps graphics. If the cost of the graphics is so prohibitive the game isn't fun, then why bother with super-realitic graphics? Hell, you're talking to a forum of people who play Ataris, Intellivisions, O2s, and Colecovisions despite the availability of modern, graphically-superior consoles! And the games were still more fun back then!

 

For me, price is important as well. I don't want to be paying for amazing HD capabilities that I have absolutely no plans of using. I own no moden console, and had plans to keep it that way. Sony and Microsoft offer more "fun" in the same way that Doom III isn't. (Apologies to Doom III fans, but I found it pretty dull. Like work rather than play.) The Wii changed my mind about the "next generation" stuff.

 

The new control scheme of the Wii is very appealing. It looks like "fun". The games look like fun. But Nintendo isn't going to get a dime of my money unless the console is around $200. The Wii may not have HD graphics, but that's okay. Again, I have no plans to get an HD set. So its low price makes it more attractive to me despite any perceived or real difference in graphical quality. Thus history repeats: TurboGrafx, Jaguar, Sega Master System, Colecovision, etc. were all beat out by graphically "inferior" systems.

 

You ever hear the saying, "Fast, cheap, quality, pick any two?" Nintendo bucked conventional wisdom and made different tradeoffs than Sony and Microsoft made. I'm betting that Nintendo's decision is about to pay off.

 

If I can have both, that's what I want.

Well, your choices are the 360, PS3, or the Wii. Which one has the most fun AND the best graphics?

 

See, I think that the Wii's graphics will be just as good as the non-HD graphics produced by the 360 and PS3. All the developers need is time to get up to speed with the Wii's GPU rather than the GameCube they've been developing for. So to me, that's the best choice, and it will probably be the best choice for the lion's share of the console market.

 

I have been watching videos for months now, gameplay videos, controller videos, etc, and damn if I don't find I am asking myself "so.....where's the fun in that?" every single time.

*shrug* Everyone has different tastes, I suppose. Me? I think it all looks great. Especially the sports games, and I HATE sports games!

 

I think it's interesting that the sports games are so appealing. When I ask myself why, I come up with one primary reason: You get to actually play the game rather than hitting buttons on a controller. Rather than imagining you're in a baseball game (boring, I hate watching sports) I can actually swing the bat! Rather than mashing the swing-o-meter button on the controller at the right time, I can actually hit the golf ball! That's what's appealing to me.

[sega saturn x]

If the cost of the graphics is so prohibitive the game isn't fun

What the hell are you talking about. I can't think of a gme ever where having good graphcis actually made the game less fun.

[AtariJr]

If the cost of the graphics is so prohibitive the game isn't fun

What the hell are you talking about. I can't think of a gme ever where having good graphcis actually made the game less fun.

i think what hes trying to say is that fun is better than graphics alone... that the controller will open doors to "fun" that systems like the DS did that others cannot emulate. I agree with Starscream in that you can have both worlds (fun and graphics) with the 360 and Ps3 though. But then again I dont think the Wii's graphics are that bad. And the controller that has provides a "fun" that the others will not. Its all about what you want , what pleases you, what games you like, and what options you want. The 360 is a nice machine and as is the Wii, both are just aimed at differnt audiences (not meaning adults vs kids, more like traditional vs non traditional, ie: people who like japanese type games).

Edited September 5, 2006 by AtariJr

[sega saturn x]

ie: people who like japanese type games

You had me up until there, japanese =/= good.

[AtariJr]

ie: people who like japanese type games

You had me up until there, japanese =/= good.

Im not sure what =/= means... and i didnt say that it was good, i just said it was very japanese. For instance I see the american way of thinking of things as more and more power is good, bigger the better, and the bloodier the better. I see the japanese way as being smallest and most economical is the best, and the most out there design and the most out there/artsy game design is best. Maybe im not describing it right, but there is a difference in the games and the systems that play them that companies like Microsoft provide, versus companies like sega and nintendo provide.

[Starscream]

First of all, MS has everything upfront because they've already launched.

 

Sony has not revealed even close to everything - we actually know less for launch titles than the Wii, we don't know the price points for games for the PS3, we have no idea what they're online plans are except "basic service for free" which is almost meaningless without knowing what "basic" means, we have no real launch date, and we know they haven't started production.

 

With Nintendo we know the features of the system, we know the highest price point that could happen, and we know the launch lineup, which I would argue if it really happens will be one of the strongest launch lineups ever.

 

I know what you're saying, that if Nintendo had put more empathesis on graphics maybe the Wii could have been the best of both worlds, however I think that we'll have to wait and see what happens. It will be interesting to see what a souped up Gamecube can do for graphics when they don't have to worry about high-def.

 

MS revealed their price, online structure, and all relevant system details about 6-8 months before release (the only one to announce a release date way ahead of time). Sony has announced online structure, system price, and features (well except that super-secret one ) right around E3 of this year. Nintendo just keeps jacking everyone off, as if some attempt to keep interest going. Not a bad thing maybe, but I really prefer to be told straight out. MS and Sony appear to be much more confident in their products, Nintendo has this supermegahellasecret price and a controller oh and the Virtual console. Real hard to get exited about a whole bunch of nothing to this point. Release day games? Bleh, never believe those until the games hit the shelves. I hear on the 14th Nintendo will tell all.

Edited September 10, 2006 by Starscream

[sega saturn x]

Honestly I see no reasons not to get the best of both worlds and go with a wii60 combo. And =/= means doesn't equal just so you know. West makes a glut of war games japan makes way to many craptastic RPGs. You have to find a happy medium.

[CPUWIZ]

And =/= means doesn't equal just so you know.

 

Where?

 

The only one I know is != which means not equal.

[AtariJr]

Here are a couple better pics for you ssx of red steel:

 

 

Still not like the other game admittedly, and you shouldnt expect them to be.. but a bit better looking shots none the less.

[n8littlefield]

MS revealed their price, online structure, and all relevant system details about 6-8 months before release 9alos the only one to announce a release date way ahead of time). Sony has announced online structure, system price, and features (well except that super-secret one ) right around E3 of this year. Nintendo just keeps jacking everyone off, as if some attempt to keep interest going. Not a bad thing maybe, but I really prefer to be told straight out. MS and Sony appear to be much more confident in their products, Nintendo has this supermegahellasecret price and a controller oh and the Virtual console. Real hard to get exited about a whole bunch of nothing to this point. Release day games? Bleh, never believe those until the games hit the shelves. I hear on the 14th Nintendo will tell all.

 

Ok - so Sony gave online structure at E3 - so did Nintendo, they discussed WiiConnect.

 

Sony gave a definite price - Nintendo didn't, but they've said no more than $250 - no big secret there. Nintendo has said they don't see games going over $50 - haven't heard that from Sony.

 

Sony discussed features - so did Nintendo, the controller, the classic controller, the Virtual Consoles, the new speaker in the controller - everything was shown at E3. Nintendo even let people PLAY their system, which from what I've heard wasn't something Sony was ready to do.

 

Sony showed behind closed door a few titles - Nintendo showed a bunch for public play and then surprised with Smash Bros later on.

 

What exactly is Nintendo not telling other than the exact suggested retail price and exact launch date? I mean, Sony hasn't given their launch date either to my knowledge.

[AtariJr]

Wasnt the ps3 playable? I thought games like Warhawk *or whatever its called* were playable at least, cause I remember reporters complaining about the last minute implemented control... how would they know how it controlled if they didnt play it?

 

In addition to n8littlefield's statement, Nintendo not only has said all that but is expected to release their price and release date info on the 14th of this month (i believe thats the date, dont quote me).