Grooseland

Exclusively to the PS4, XOne, and PC..... not really exclusively lol.. I think that term is used wrong by Rocksteady. Kind of annoyed by that to be honest. It would of been easier to say NO in reply to the person but I digress.

Exactly... kind of like saying "if you have a Wii U, you're screwed"... a simple no was enough. Stupid Rocksteady...

• NintendoReport likes this

It's a shame if it doesn't come to Wii U... I really liked Arkham City Armored Edition

 

If Retro said it was a powerhouse... the it's a powerhouse

Mass Effect 3

 

 

 

Wind Waker HD

 

 

Batman Arkham City

 

 

Trine

 

 

I was going to wait a little longer for my Wii U purshase but since my Wii doesn't read discs anymore, I decided to buy the Windwaker bundle...

 

And I'm very happy with it! The only thing I didn't like is that you have to update the console which can take more than an hour. After that, you have to download the game... which can take even more!!!

 

But I'm very happy with it! truly an amazing console.

So the Wii U version is like the PC version in 720P? if so...

 

We all know syks is a troll. 

 

This generation is really going to be very close when it comes to graphics. You can't really go wrong with any of the three. Hopefully in the near future we'll be discussing story, gameplay, music, art style etc...

 

 

Wishful thinking of course 

 

^ Nope, that was Desert Punk although it is very easy to confuse them

Eh... did anyone watch the Ubisoft conference? They demoed AC3 on PS3 and it looked terrible... They showed the snow level and there are a lot of texture pop-in and the shadows look blurry... well everything looked blurry.




PS3 left, Wii U right

Keep in mind that the Wii U version is off screen and the PS3 is direct feed... Wii U version look a lot better if you ask me.

It certainly didn't prove that. I think Retro did an amazing job with Metroid Prime 3 but the graphics lack textures and have a fairly cartoon look to them in metroid prime. The wii can't really do realistic graphics. If you ever want a game to compare between original xbox and wii look at the difference between conker's bad fur day and mario galaxy. Remember the original xbox has 32bit colour not 24bit so has a lot of great transparency effects etc that the wii can't do that you see in Conker. It also has true 5.1 sound in almost all games. The built in hard drive allows for more complex games too. Its not hard to show the original xbox is more powerful than wii.

Forza for example totally outclasses anything on wii visually.

I keep reading people think the wii is more powerful but the reality and the specs say otherwise. This doesn't mean the wii doesn't have brilliant games but the wii just isn't more powerful. Games like Half Life 2 would be impossible on wii without the support of a hard drive. Some xbox games support 720p and 1080i graphics which again is impossible on wii.

I think you're missing an important factor here, and that is: Gamecube.

Both the Gamecube and Xbox were similar in terms of graphics, but they were very different when developing for them. But in theory, (and I can't stress that enough), in theory they were both capable of making the same graphics.

Let's take a look at the most important launch titles for both consoles:

Rogue Leader for Gamecube and Halo for Xbox... yes, they are very different: one is an arcade space shooter based on a movie franchise and the other is a sci-fi FPS. But those were the games to identify with those consoles, and also were the best graphically.





Rogue Leader runs at 60FPS, has bump mapping, self-shadowing, millions of polygons etc...

Halo runs at 30FPS, has bump mapping...

Remember: Rogue Leader is a third party game while Halo is first party.

Which one looks better?

Now, if you go to forums discussing Gamecube vs Xbox, the majority of the time when mentioning the best graphics for each console are Rebel Strike and Doom 3.

Again, both games are different but utilize each system's strengths:



60FPS, high polygon count, bump mapping, self-shadowing, greater draw distance etc...


Wow, it's difficult to find a decent Doom 3 Xbox pic out there... sorry:



Xbox could do shadowing and self-shadowing very well and in a enclosed environment, they work very well.  

Now let's compare two games that share some important similarities: Starfox Adventures and Conker Live And Reloaded.

1:They were both developed by Rare (Rare knows how to get the most out of the hardware they are working on)

2:Both games started out as Nintendo 64 games: SFA was an original late N64 game but it was pushed to the Gamecube and Conker Live was a remake of Conker's Bad Fur Day for N64. They're basically two remakes of N64 games.

3: The main characters have fur therefore they use fur shading:





Both games share similar graphical effects, but SFA runs at 60FPS with no loading screens and it was released in 2002 (early Gamecube game). Conker runs at 30FPS, lots of loading screens and it was released in 2005 (very late Xbox game)

What I'm trying to say is that the Gamecube was more efficient than the Xbox, a lot more and it could look the same if not better than Xbox best games graphically.

The Wii is more powerful than the Gamecube, but also you have to think that the Wii was not pushed as hard as the Gamecube when it came to third party games.

Seriously, High Voltage Software made the most impressive graphics engine on Wii... let that sink in for a while, High Voltage... It wasn't EA, Capcom, Activision, Konami, Ubisoft... all of the big developers... it was High Voltage.

As far as "The wii can't really do realistic graphics" have you played Silent Hill Shattered Memories? I don't think the Xbox could do that game, at least not at 60FPS like the Wii does.