Spider-man 3 on Wii...

[trebor]

looks pretty good to me.

http://wiimedia.ign.com/wii/image/article/778/778869/spider-man-3-20070405060201237-000.jpg

http://wiimedia.ign.com/wii/image/article/778/778625/spider-man-3-20070405104457819.jpg

And also sounds pretty fun to me.

http://wii.ign.com/articles/778/778869p1.html

So here's a question, to start off - what makes these graphics bad?

I mean, aside from the obvious in that the 360/PS3 will look better, but what makes THESE graphics bad? What about these graphics will make the Wii version not fun?

Also, here is a general statement about this game - the Wii version of Spider-man 3 is being built from the ground up for the Wii, by what is an strong developer, Vicarious Visions. This is isn't a stinky hand-me-down effort, by a C-List developer trying shoehorn the PS3/360 version into the Wii, nor is it a lazy port from the PS2 version. Yes, from the article it sounds like this version needs some polish and certain things tweaked, but nevertheless, it appears to me that Activision is taking the Wii seriously by putting in a solid effort.

Based on this, what do you all think? Should Wii owners be expected to buy just any crap from 3rd parties, or should 3rd parties start putting forth stronger efforts, like Activision is with Spidey 3? Or is it a Catch-22? Will 3rd parties generally keep releasing lazy and stinky crap because they don't believe they will generate the sales needed to support more serious efforts, while Wii owners don't buy 3rd party offerings on account they are generally lazy and stinky crap?

[ilnadmy]

Looks good so far, but we'll have to see how it handles on the Wii-mote.

Personally I don't think the Wii's graphics are bad. I still play games on the Xbox, and they look fine. Of course I haven't gotten any next-gen consoles yet, so maybe I'm not spoiled.

[GameLegend]

looks pretty good to me.
So here's a question, to start off - what makes these graphics bad?

I mean, aside from the obvious in that the 360/PS3 will look better, but what makes THESE graphics bad? What about these graphics will make the Wii version not fun?

Also, here is a general statement about this game - the Wii version of Spider-man 3 is being built from the ground up for the Wii, by what is an strong developer, Vicarious Visions. This is isn't a stinky hand-me-down effort, by a C-List developer trying shoehorn the PS3/360 version into the Wii, nor is it a lazy port from the PS2 version. Yes, from the article it sounds like this version needs some polish and certain things tweaked, but nevertheless, it appears to me that Activision is taking the Wii seriously by putting in a solid effort.

Based on this, what do you all think? Should Wii owners be expected to buy just any crap from 3rd parties, or should 3rd parties start putting forth stronger efforts, like Activision is with Spidey 3? Or is it a Catch-22? Will 3rd parties generally keep releasing lazy and stinky crap because they don't believe they will generate the sales needed to support more serious efforts, while Wii owners don't buy 3rd party offerings on account they are generally lazy and stinky crap?

I read the article a while ago too and I agree, those graphics are pretty cool for the Wii. Even so, we havent seen the Wii capabilities fully utitilized, perhaps all we saw up to this point were gamecube graphics (this applies to majority of Wii game out there).
If that whole run down simplicitc graphical comparison (Gamecube x 2 = Wii) holds true, then we definiately havent seen much.

I think u should evaluate the console based on its capabilities. I mean u dont see people constantly comparing NDS games with PSP games, theres no competition. Wii games, sadly up till this point are no competition with the other next gen systems. So when u compare Wii game graphics, u compare it to other Wii games up till this point.

Therefore, Spider Man 3 for Wii = Good graphics. Plus its x2.5 larger city than spider man 2 for GC.

[Mochan]

I guess I'm the only guy who believes in a more universal ranking for graphics. I mean I *will* compare graphics on the Wii to graphics on the 360, no avoiding it. Lesser graphics are lesser graphics. It doesn't mean the Wii game will be a worse game than the 360 or PS3 or whatever version, but lesser graphics are lesser graphics.

I already complain about some offerings on the DS that aren't quite up to snuff. Let's just put it this way: the graphics of a game are there to do a purpose. For some games, lesser graphics suit the purpose of what the game is trying to do just fine. For example, Phoenix Wright doesn't need pixel-shaded real-time lighting and HDR to do what it does. It would be nice to see more animations but it manages to do what it needs to do with its paltry 2D sprites. The kind of game that it is -- a Japanese text-based adventure game with 2D sprites -- works perfectly fine with these kinds of graphics. For as much as I ragged on Electroplankton, I had no issues with its graphics, because its graphics did the trick for the game's purposes.

Compare this however to a first person extravaganza where the ante has been increased by other games in the genre to incorporate real-time soft shadows, HDR, etc. FEAR would not be so fearsome if its graphics looked like Tomb Raider 1 or putting out music on MIDI bloops and bleeps. All the shadowing and advanced 5.1 EAX HD effects contribute a lot to what's going on, as do the advanced physics of the environment. Some games, like Dark Messiah of Might and Magic, might have worked without the HDR but the physics were indispensable to the game. Gears of War would have been a flop if it looked like Socom, it'd just be like that PS2 game with the duck and cover mechanic (name eludes me).

At this moment I have no comment about the game at hand -- Spiderman Wii. I have no idea if the Wii has all the graphics and physics needed to pull it off. That's not the concern of my argument right now. My point is simply that I will take to point the graphics and technical capabilities of a system, especially if other systems offer something better.

It goes both ways... if the Wii manages to incorporate the Wiimoto in a way that really makes the game significantly better than the 360 or PS3 versions that don't have the function, are you expecting me to ignore this advantage for the Wii simply because the 360 doesn't have motion sensing? Of course not.

We could argue that some graphical capabilities are "gimmicks" or simply not too substantial or important, in many cases HDR falls into this mold though frankly a lot of people who found Oblivion to be "the best game evar" would probably be hard-pressed to honestly admit that it wasn't a substantial factor in their enjoyment of the game -- it may be subjective but I'm sure a lot of people really enjoyed the game more due to the HDR, and especially due to the normal and specular maps along with the lighting and the huge game world.

Regardless, under this theory of certain graphical improvements being insubstantial, we can likewise argue that certain controller gimmicks are also insubstantial. This is subjective just as with the graphical improvements, but if you were to ask me something like shaking your PS3 controller to fight off axis soldiers grappling for your weapon in COD3 qualifies as a cheap gimmick.

Again, is Spiderman's Wiimoto usage going to fall into this category of cheap controller gimmicks? I don't know. Will Spiderman Wii not having the kind of advanced pixel shading effects the other consoles/PC have be a significant difference? Or the lack of high pixel resolution, or lack of resources to create a larger game world? I don't know. I'll wait until I get to see and play the game myself before I judge that.

But my point is let's not fall into the trap of thinking that you can evaluate a console in a void without looking at its competition. If that were the case, everyone'd be praising the PS3 to high heaven because it didn't stink in comparison to say the 360.

[GameLegend]

IBut my point is let's not fall into the trap of thinking that you can evaluate a console in a void without looking at its competition. If that were the case, everyone'd be praising the PS3 to high heaven because it didn't stink in comparison to say the 360.

I can understand where u are coming from. However, the Wii is NOT next gen graphics, (that has yet to be refuted) , its next gen in control. Nintendo has stated that time and time after again, but that wont stop people from comparing it to other consoles.

So if u want to continue comparing it to the PS3 or 360, then u will always give Wii a rating of 1/10 on the graphics department which is unfair. There is only so much u can push the Wii, and even then it'll probably go 5/10 in your standards. The wii is not next gen graphics, it never claimed to be. So, there no point in treating it as one.

[Mochan]

Just because it's not about next gen graphics, doesn't mean it's exempt from being judged by its graphics. So if the PS3 said it's not about creating innovative games, you can't pan it for rolling out the same tired old games over and over?

[GameLegend]

Just because it's not about next gen graphics, doesn't mean it's exempt from being judged by its graphics. So if the PS3 said it's not about creating innovative games, you can't pan it for rolling out the same tired old games over and over?

All you'll accomplish by comparing Wii graphics to PS3 and 360 is a continual boring dribble of the graphics being inferior, which has been stated since day one.

I can imagine your blog:

06/11/11
Wii graphics are inferior. Zelda inferior graphics.

06/12/31
Wii graphics still inferior

07/01/05
Guess what i'm thinking?
Hint : inferior graphics

[folken001]

I don't even consider Wiimote as next gen.......

I think it would be more unfair to 360 or PS3 by not comparing the graphics. Your argument can really go both way. Is it Sony or M$'s fault for Nintendo's inability or lack of will to give its users a better experience? What kind of sense would it make by saying "oh, it's wii. therefore, crappy graphics is acceptable. No deduction should be made to the score?" While, on the other hand, 360 and ps3 games have to be judged through every single existing category known to mankind?

You don't do critics using the lowest standard. It's the opposite. Otherwise, I would be a genius simply because of the facts that there are retards out there.

[Mochan]

One: I don't write blogs, and two: I'd still say the graphics were meh. That wouldn't stop me from playing a good game, but that doesn't stop the graphics from being meh.

[Glockstar]

looks pretty good to me.

http://wiimedia.ign.com/wii/image/article/778/778869/spider-man-3-20070405060201237-000.jpg

http://wiimedia.ign.com/wii/image/article/778/778625/spider-man-3-20070405104457819.jpg



Yeah but are you sure that those are in-game screenshots?

[trebor]

The gist of what I'm getting here is that a few of you can't get over what the Wii isn't, instead of what it is. Sorry but, I don't expect my Corolla to be the same as a Escolade and I don't expect a Wii to be the same as a PS3.

Frankly, I find it somewhat assinine to make comparisons between the graphics of the Wii and the 360/PS3 - we know who will always lose here, so what's the point? Gamelegend has the right idea here - since Nintendo didn't position the Wii to fight a graphics battle, it really should only be compared to itself. Spidey 3 so far looks better than most Wii games, therefore it has good graphics - for the Wii.

Some of you really need to get over yourselves. Making retarded claims like "the Wii's graphics should be compared to 360/PS3 graphics because they're graphics" only makes you look like a simple-minded snob.

[PapaSmurf]

I think about this arguement and all I can think about is

PS2 vs Xbox...

PS2 vs Xbox...

PS2 vs Xbox...

Get the gist trebor? I enjoyed the PS2 alot more than the Xbox but the graphics were just better. I owned a GC and I bought most games that were multiplat for it (except sports games). You can't honestly expect us not to knock it down on the graphics no matter what. I get what you're saying about it being something different and it's like comparing apples and oranges, but at the end of the day you can still compare them. Say I like the taste of an apple (graphics) more than I like the taste of an orange (Wiimoto) and that's what it really come down to. Wiisports is fun and all but I'd really rather just sit down and play some Gears or Battlefield 2142 with surround sound and all that jazz.

We'll see what the Wii pulls out of it's hat come fall.

[Mochan]

Indeed. Everyone knocked the PS2 for worse graphics last gen. I don't see what's wrong with knocking the Wii for it this gen.


The Escolade vs. Corolla isn't exactly a good comparison. Yes the two would have different roles and are aimed at two entirely different market segments, but which one would you rather be riding in? I thought so. And besides, you seem to think that I am a one-minded gamer looking only to game in one way, and are attacking my argument as if I had tunnel vision.

But hello! I got the PS2 and the PC last gen to complement each other, because the PS2 filled one role and the PC another, and it is not entirely unlike Wii + PC this gen, or Wii + 360 or what not. However that said I do have less confidence in the Wii because of several factors, which I have stated throughout this board and do not see fit to repeat right now, though I will if I have to. Let's just say I do recognize the Wii's merits, but that won't stop me from whining about its graphics, same way I whined about the PS2's graphics back in the day.

To not do so is hypocritical and reeks of double-standards, and I tolerate no such intellectual dishonesty. I call it as I see it. The Wii may be a fun system and it may be the PS2 of this generation, but let's face it, it's graphics just aren't as good as the rest of the pack's.

[Mochan]

BTW, the review you posted also had this to say about Spiderman Wii's graphics:


Spider-Man 3 for Wii holds a lot of promise, but it hasn't quite come together just yet. Mostly that's because the game's visuals not only fall well short of their next-generation counterparts, but also lack any polish. The fluidity, which dips below 30 on a regular basis, is troublesome. The camera system occasionally hiccups and offers an inappropriate angle of the action. And some of the character animation transitions are jarring.

While I'm sure the game will be plenty playable by the time it comes out, and while the graphics will be serviceable, it seems I'm not the only one concerned about the Wii's power under the hood, and even pro reviewers understand the significance of the graphical discrepancy.

[ilnadmy]

That's probably because developers are trying to push a lot more out of the Wii than it can handle. Probably because of people like you who are trying to compare it to 360 and PS3 graphics.

Nothing wrong with that, but if developers try to work the Wii too hard, they'll end up killing it with a bunch of lackluster, poorly performing games.

[Mochan]

Dude, you're plenty spoiled on your monster rig PC!

[trebor]

To not do so is hypocritical and reeks of double-standards, and I tolerate no such intellectual dishonesty. I call it as I see it. The Wii may be a fun system and it may be the PS2 of this generation, but let's face it, it's graphics just aren't as good as the rest of the pack's.

And what I don't tolerate is a lack of comprehension in someone who responds to me about arguments I've posed. I've acknowledged the fact that the Wii doesn't have the graphical horsepower of the 360 or PS3, so what would be the point of whining about it constantly, Mochan?

There is not "double-standard" here - THE WII GRAPHICS DO NOT COMPARE TO THE PS3 OR 360 - PERIOD. Thus constantly comparing between the two is a fruitless debate, because the THE OUTCOME WILL ALWAYS BE THE SAME. Therefore, the only way to state a Wii game has "good graphics" is to compare it to other Wii games, as comparing it to a PS3 or 360 will always yield the same result - INFERIOR GRAPHICS.

Apples might be your favorite fruit, in fact you might just LOVE apples, but if you're eating an orange, don't ***** about it not tasting like an apple. I mean, you can, as your right, ***** about an orange not tasting like an apple, but that would be a complete waste of time. You might be making a statement true to your own opinion if you claim that apples taste better than oranges, but what if said orange is better tasting than all the other oranges you've tried? What does it mean if it's the best tasting orange you've ever eaten - even if it doesn't taste better than an apple to you? Does it negate the fact that it is a great orange, even if an apple is better?

Damn dude.

[ilnadmy]

I've only really been playing WoW and a little bit of LotRO on the PC. Sad but true. I don't really have much time for gaming recently.

As far as the comparison though, it depends on what your mindset is. I have friends who will compare Wii graphics to PS3/360 graphics because their frame of mind is that they want the latest, greatest console games. I have other friends who see the Wii as a unique system that shouldn't be compared to other systems - it's a supplement to other forms of gaming. And then you have people, like me, who have certain genres they're interested in, and will follow those genres to whichever consoles carry them.

I'll get a Wii eventually if they get enough games I'm interested in. Same with the PS3/360 (although it's no secret I'm rooting for the PS3). However, I don't blame people who compare the Wii to other consoles and the PC. It's inevitable, and you just have to learn to live with it.

[Mochan]

I've acknowledged the fact that the Wii doesn't have the graphical horsepower of the 360 or PS3, so what would be the point of whining about it constantly, Mochan?

There is not "double-standard" here - THE WII GRAPHICS DO NOT COMPARE TO THE PS3 OR 360 - PERIOD.

So what's the problem? That's all I've been saying!

It's not that I will constantly whine about the Wii always having inferior graphics: yes that is indeed a given! But we're not talking about "just the Wii" here, you were the one who started this topic saying, "Here is Spiderman Wii's graphics, how is this bad?" as if you were on the defensive from the losing edge of the precipice, trying to push back against a world that felt your system looked uglier.

And to answer your question, what makes these graphics bad? Well... not necessarily bad, but they're not exactly on par with how the bar has been raised. Low resolution, no HDR, no normal mapping, real-time self-shadowing is probably not in, low-res textures, the works.

Is this not fun? It may be fun, but it sure isn't as fun as it would be when I'd be playing WITH all that junk. Maybe it's fun, but it could be "funner." That's the question you asked. That is my answer.

Then you ask why could it be more fun? It's because I've experienced better. The bar has been raised and set. You can't ignore that. You can't talk about these things in a vacuum.

Yes, it has good graphics... <i>for a Wii game.</i> I'm not going to dispute that. But in the grand scheme of things its graphics are not as good as other offerings.

You can't expect someone to lower his standards just because the manufacturer has a disclaimer saying, "it only goes this far."

If I had a Kia Picanto with a 1.1 engine, and I know fully well that it is just a 1.1 engine, does that absolve me from comparing it to a BMW and saying, "Man I wish this thing had more horsepower!" Of course not. Because I know there are cars out there with stronger engines, I know this one has a weak engine, and I will always feel its weakness in comparison. That's all I'm saying.

I certainly wasn't saying anything to the effect that the Wii will always suck, period.




Apples might be your favorite fruit, in fact you might just LOVE apples, but if you're eating an orange, don't ***** about it not tasting like an apple.

You may not be looking for the taste of an apple in an orange, but both fruits have similar taste characteristics like sweetness. So if the orange is sweeter than the apple, you still notice that the orange is sweeter. Ditto the 360 and Wii. Sure they don't exactly play the same, but they have a similar characteristic - graphics (sweetness) -- and you will still notice that the 360's graphics are better.

And damn dude, why are you trying to steer the discussion towards the orange (Wii) tasting better than any apple (360/PS3/PC) I've had? Have I ever said that Spiderman Wii *won't* be better than the 360 version or what not? Have I ever definitively said outright that the Wii as a whole will be worse than the other systems as a whole? As you are talking in What If's, did I ever dismiss the possibility?

I may ride the Kia thinking, "I can't expect BMW speeds out of this" and that is correct, but I will still long for the BMW ride. Of course, it IS possible that the Kia may be a better overall ride... it could be, following your apples and oranges analogy. But again I *never* discounted that possibility so don't go attacking my argument with this kind of thinking.

Damn. Dude. Stop with the strawmen.

[GameLegend]

http://www.razaodiada.orcon.net.nz/Stupid%20thread.gif

[trebor]

You may not be looking for the taste of an apple in an orange, but both fruits have similar taste characteristics like sweetness. So if the orange is sweeter than the apple, you still notice that the orange is sweeter. Ditto the 360 and Wii. Sure they don't exactly play the same, but they have a similar characteristic - graphics (sweetness) -- and you will still notice that the 360's graphics are better.

Um, you know that phrase "comparing apples to oranges" stems from the fact that, while both are fruit, they are actually quite different? Way to over-analyze the data there, chief! :thumbsup:

[DrunkenThumbmaster]

In the long run the graphics of the Wii aren't going to matter at all. I've stated before I think we are at a point of Diminishing returns. I adore Fightnight RD 3 mostly because of the graphics. But when I played it at a co-workers house on Xbox sure it didn't look as good (it still looked good) but the experience was the same it was just as fun.

Now knowing this I can't see any reason for me to buy Fight Night Rd 4 for the 360(PS3) but god I'm salivating for a Wii verison hell if EA smartens up and release Fight Night RD 3 for the Wii I'd buy it today.

Now I'm not giving Nintendo the crown because there are a lot of issues I see with the Wii. But if anyone thinks that the Wii will wear down because of graphics you are crazy. That's not going to happen.

As for Spiderman the game doesn't look great on any platform I think. It barely looks next gen sure there may be more civilians and more levels but the game looks to play no differently than Spiderman 2 and Ultimate Spiderman but the Wii version will at least give you a different playing experience and if it's a good experience I'd probably get that version.