PS2 games that have better graphics than Some Wii games.

[Tekken Fan]

there are some PS2 games that have better graphics than Some/Most Wii games.

Shadow Of The Colossus
http://cdn.inquisitr.com/wp-content/2010/09/shadow-of-the-colossus-top.jpg

Metal Gear Solid 3 Snake Eater
http://www.buy3dsgames.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Metal-Gear-Solid-3-Snake-Eater-Review.jpg

God of War 2
http://static.videogamer.com/videogamer/images/ps2/god_of_war_2/screens/god_of_war_2_6.jpg


Gran Turismo 3
http://ui15.gamespot.com/654/img0003_2.jpg

this proves that some PS2 games has better graphics than most/some Wii games.
NOTE:i know graphics don't make the games but if the PS2 can get Amazing graphics in 2004(Gran Turismo 4),than the Wii should by 2011.and im not saying these games are better than Some/Most Wii games but im stating that they have better graphics than Most/Some Wii games.

and P.S. i still love the wii

 

[Splash_King]

Im a bit suprised people are still comparing Wii graphics to anything, with the WiiU announced...

Good on ya for listing Shadow of the Colossus, hopefully some poor soul who's yet played it looks into it out of curiosity, and gets a taste of heaven.

But anywho, I'm gonna go ahead and say that plenty of NOTABLE, HIGH QUALITY Wii games, recent or otherwise, look better than those you listed... Unless you're comparing those shots to something really old like Twilight Princess; and even then, I'm going to go as far as to say you'd be wrong there if that were the case.

I can agree with the "better than most" statement, though... The shovelware never ends, for all consoles. /end unnecesarry post

 

[Maldo]

Graphics can be an issue in some cases if it's a port of a major hit title:
look at Need For Speed HP on PS3/X360, then look at the Wii version and you'll see the difference. There are Wii titles that have pretty good visuals (and gameplay) for what the system can do, but here's the problem the system has that some ppl seem to notice...

SHOVELWARE!!! AND LOTS OF IT!!

And the amount of it we get is FAR worse than on Gamecube & PS2 (and nonoftheless PS3 & X-Box 360). The reasion: because many developers wanted to make a really quick buck on the Wii because of it's rapidly growing sales and popularity. And they figured they make games that appeal to familys who own Wii consoles that are looking for something they could all play, EVEN IF THEY DIDN'T KNOW HOW TO MAKE A LOUSY GAME!!!

And thus, we got popstar megabombs like NinjaBread Man, Ambious II, Spider Man 3 (ported from PS2), Action Girlz Racing (2??), Order Up, Surfs Up, various titles based of board games, and so on.

Though we got some bad titles from other big name developers, they started upping the antie just recently and delivered us some impressive standouts like the force unleashed 1 & 2, COD Black Opps, Monster hunter III, Goldeneye and many others.

So basicly, GAMEPLAY MATTERS alongside graphics and knowing what your developing and programing for the Wii.

Nuff said....

 

[Aiko]

Two of the problems with shovelware on the Wii (the shitty controls and bad graphics) can actually be traced backed to Nintendo.

The shitty controls? Easy, when the Wii launched with Wii Sports, you got a game that was not only fun, but it was also easy to pick up and play. But underneath that, you had five (it's five, right?) separate games, each with there own physics, decent (if simple) graphics, and the amount of polish you expect from a Nintendo game. Third party developers simply notice the "pick up and play" and relegate development to their worst developing team.

The graphics? Once again, we visit Wii Sports, and other games in the Wii series. With the games in this series, Nintendo shows that you don't need to have ultra detailed or even realistic looking graphics to have a fun game. You can have simple graphics. But, once again, third party developers only notice the "Hey, these Wii Sports games have simple graphics, let's make a game with garbage graphics, same thing right?"

Oh, and here's another PS2 game that looks better than most Wii games.

 

[Tekken Fan]

Im a bit suprised people are still comparing Wii graphics to anything, with the WiiU announced...

Good on ya for listing Shadow of the Colossus, hopefully some poor soul who's yet played it looks into it out of curiosity, and gets a taste of heaven.

But anywho, I'm gonna go ahead and say that plenty of NOTABLE, HIGH QUALITY Wii games, recent or otherwise, look better than those you listed... Unless you're comparing those shots to something really old like Twilight Princess; and even then, I'm going to go as far as to say you'd be wrong there if that were the case.

I can agree with the "better than most" statement, though... The shovelware never ends, for all consoles. /end unnecesarry post

Not trying to start an argument but SSBfreakCK,have you seen a Wii racing game with better graphics than Gran Turismo 4 or 3?. i haven't and most suck (excluding Mario Kart Wii). Example;Need for speed Hot Pursuit 2 for PS2 came out in 2002,Need For Speed Hot Pursuit for Wii came out in 2010.You would think that because the Wii version came out 8 years after the PS2 version it would be better.WRONG. PS2 version;better Cars,graphics,Levels,harder Cops, WAYY better Scenery, everything. Wii version Pure CRAP!
and Shadow of the colossus looks kinda(Kinda) like a Wii Zelda game.(Twilight Princess) and have yet to see a wii Action game with MGS3 Graphics(dosen't mean there isn't any)

I have played Madden Nfl 08 on the PS2 than played Madden nfl 11 on the Wii
and it felt like it was Lacking Something don't know what though.

Anyway i get what your saying SSBfreakCK

 

[WiiAssasin]

Even the gamecube version of NFS: Hot Pursuit 2 has better graphics and gameplay than the new game.

 

[Splash_King]

Not trying to start an argument but SSBfreakCK,

Hey hey, no problem dude, a debate is entirely different from an arguement. =)

But anywho, I think what your saying is rather misplaced for the Wii entirely; it's not a racing game console at all, lol. If you're going to compare racing games only, any other console wins out over the Wii, really. The Wii simply has no realistic-graphic, non-cartoony style exclusive racing games. It gets ports, like the aforementioned Need For Speed that the other same generation consoles got, but IMO, that doesn't count.

So really, it's better to encompass the graphics engines of the systems themselves, rather than a certain genre or type of artistry. It's like debating that shooting games on the 360 are better looking than Wii ones; there's no contest in that, lol.

Also, don't compare a console's worst games to another's better. That's just using obvious bias. Shovelware and high-profile, high quality games, 1st or 3rd party, should never have anything to do with eachother in any sort of quality discussion.

Anyways, my arguement basis is around said types of artistry. It's pretty hard to compare the graphics of Metroid: Other M to something like MGS 3, and even moreso for a good-graphics game that utilizes a cartoony style, like Mario Galaxy. It's an entirely different art style. So rather, it's more effective to compare graphical detail, pixelation, etc. etc.

So, I'll use the above games as an example for this.

Metroid: Other M - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXbZk66SG94

MGS 3 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wq1Fz2iqT78

MGS 3 has the more realistic graphics, sure, but does that make them better? I wholeheartedly say no, and I feel it should be an obvious conclusion. MGS 3's graphics have much less detail than Metroid: Other M; shadows and lighting are not constantly varying, which means static or undetailed graphics are being used. However, the lightning is constantly reflecting depending on the different angles in Other M, which shows high detail went into lighting at the least.

Also, many objects that aren't the characters themselves, like the logo on Snake's cigar, are a bit pixelated and/or blurry. Walls aren't as throroughly textured. You could effectively compare this sort of lesser graphic, pixelated detail to GTA San Andreas, where everything has said pixelated feel and very little (if anything) has a high amount of detail. These two paragraphs alone should win an arguement as to which graphics engine is putting in more detail.

But if you legitimatly feel this isn't convincing enough and want me to delve a bit more into this, just say the word and gimme a counter-thesis. =)


EDIT: Ahh, my first wall of text in ages. Feels good.

 

[Tekken Fan]

Not trying to start an argument but SSBfreakCK,

Hey hey, no problem dude, a debate is entirely different from an arguement. =)

But anywho, I think what your saying is rather misplaced for the Wii entirely; it's not a racing game console at all, lol. If you're going to compare racing games only, any other console wins out over the Wii, really. The Wii simply has no realistic-graphic, non-cartoony style exclusive racing games. It gets ports, like the aforementioned Need For Speed that the other same generation consoles got, but IMO, that doesn't count.

So really, it's better to encompass the graphics engines of the systems themselves, rather than a certain genre or type of artistry. It's like debating that shooting games on the 360 are better looking than Wii ones; there's no contest in that, lol.

Also, don't compare a console's worst games to another's better. That's just using obvious bias. Shovelware and high-profile, high quality games, 1st or 3rd party, should never have anything to do with eachother in any sort of quality discussion.

Anyways, my arguement basis is around said types of artistry. It's pretty hard to compare the graphics of Metroid: Other M to something like MGS 3, and even moreso for a good-graphics game that utilizes a cartoony style, like Mario Galaxy. It's an entirely different art style. So rather, it's more effective to compare graphical detail, pixelation, etc. etc.

So, I'll use the above games as an example for this.

Metroid: Other M - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXbZk66SG94

MGS 3 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wq1Fz2iqT78

MGS 3 has the more realistic graphics, sure, but does that make them better? I wholeheartedly say no, and I feel it should be an obvious conclusion. MGS 3's graphics have much less detail than Metroid: Other M; shadows and lighting are not constantly varying, which means static or undetailed graphics are being used. However, the lightning is constantly reflecting depending on the different angles in Other M, which shows high detail went into lighting at the least.

Also, many objects that aren't the characters themselves, like the logo on Snake's cigar, are a bit pixelated and/or blurry. Walls aren't as throroughly textured. You could effectively compare this sort of lesser graphic, pixelated detail to GTA San Andreas, where everything has said pixelated feel and very little (if anything) has a high amount of detail. These two paragraphs alone should win an arguement as to which graphics engine is putting in more detail.

But if you legitimatly feel this isn't convincing enough and want me to delve a bit more into this, just say the word and gimme a counter-thesis. =)


EDIT: Ahh, my first wall of text in ages. Feels good.

Okay SSBfreakCK,if you compare the Wii's best racing game graphics to GT4 it still Loses to it.and the Wii or any other system for that matter are'nt a Racing game system,they just have a decent amount of games in that Genre
and look,the Gamecube was aimed for kids like the Wii but it still got good versions of the racing games that was on the PS2 and Xbox.like NFSHP2,it was on the PS2 Xbox and Gamecube and the Gamecube got a pretty Damn good Port. for that matter any NFS game on the PS2 and Xbox,the Gamecube version was really good(not better than the PS2 version but still really good)why can't the Wii make racing games like they did on the Gamecube instead of the Crappy excuse of a Racing game they make on the wii now?
why could'nt they make NFSHP for Wii with the same 4 player,Power-ups,mini games,but with NFSHP2 GC graphics.is nintendo saying that if a racing game has Awesome graphics but with
the same four-player split screen power-ups action it's not a Family racing game?

 

[WiiAssasin]

OMG a wall of text. whatever you said, it must be wrong.

 

[Splash_King]

OMG a wall of text. whatever you said, it must be wrong.

FFFFFFFF-- thwarted again! Damnit!

Okay SSBfreakCK,if you compare the Wii's best racing game graphics to GT4 it still Loses to it.and the Wii or any other system for that matter are'nt a Racing game system,they just have a decent amount of games in that Genre

Yeah, that's my point. Law of averages, friend. The fewer games in a genre you've got, the less likely you'll get one that did a damn-good job on the graphics. There isn't a single, notable first or third party racing game on the Wii that attempts to boggle our minds with amazing graphics, unfortunately. That's why it's not exactly fair comparing JUST Wii racing games to every other console's racing games. =P

And, by calling the 360/PS3 racing consoles, I was implying that they had a ton of racing games on them. Not that they were built for racing games, of course. =P Similar to how people refer to the 360/PS3 as a shooter console.

and look,the Gamecube was aimed for kids like the Wii but it still got good versions of the racing games that was on the PS2 and Xbox.like NFSHP2,it was on the PS2 Xbox and Gamecube and the Gamecube got a pretty Damn good Port. for that matter any NFS game on the PS2 and Xbox,the Gamecube version was really good(not better than the PS2 version but still really good)why can't the Wii make racing games like they did on the Gamecube instead of the Crappy excuse of a Racing game they make on the wii now?
why could'nt they make NFSHP for Wii with the same 4 player,Power-ups,mini games,but with NFSHP2 GC graphics.is nintendo saying that if a racing game has Awesome graphics but with
the same four-player split screen power-ups action it's not a Family racing game?

The Wii doesn't have the same graphics engine capabilities or so much as similar programming to other consoles. It's not as simple as it was before to take a Microsoft or Sony game, and port it to Nintendo's console. Not only that, but unless there's been some crazy-expensive cooperative effort for development teams to go work for nintendo in an organized fashion in the past, I don't recall development teams going from Sony/Microsoft to Nintendo very often. Since the same great developers most likely don't handle ports from the 360/PS3, when they're toned down because it's mandatory, the game will never come out the same.

Like with the original Kingdom Hearts: Chain of Memories, and not the PS2 remake. It was entirely different from the original Kingdom Hearts not only because the game play was an entirely different sort, but because Jupiter handled development, and not Square Enix, who had handled all other major Kingdom Hearts titles. From a fan of the series, I can say I could feel the game was produced by another company from the dialogue, the story's progression, etc.

In short, if a company develops a game and it gets ported to, or a sequel/prequel to another company's console, it's almost-guaranteed the game isn't going to be the same in many different aspects, and quite possibly worse than the original.