Many sheep say you don't need to have good graphics to have a good game, yet every great amazing game also was backed up with great amazing graphics, examples include:

• The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time - Considered one of the best, if not the best, game of all time, and of course had incredible graphics.
• Metroid Prime - Praised for its atmosphere, which was due to the power of the GameCube.
• Grand Theft Auto III - The Grand Theft Auto series wasn't popular until they went to full 3D instead of bird eye's view, which was due to the PS2's power.
• Resident Evil 4 - Because of the power of the GameCube, this is the first Resident Evil (at least I think) to use fully 3-dimensional in-game graphics, of course is considered one of the best games ever.
• Halo: Combat Evolved - The most praised Xbox game had some of the best graphics when it first launched.
• Metal Gear Solid (series) - Due to its amazing graphics, it immerses people into the game like no other games.
• Final Fantasy VII - The series amazing graphics and videos got RPG's popular outside of Japan, and forever changed the console industry.

These are just a few examples of great games that are great partly due to their graphics. Of course this is not always true. The Bouncer had amazing graphics but trash gameplay, while Katamary had trash graphics but amazing gameplay. But the general rule is still the same. This is why instead of getting games like Assassin's Creed and Resident Evil 5 Wii gamers get Prince of Persia: Rival Swords and Resident Evil: Umbrella Chronicles. Since most of the Wii powered is realized due to the fact it's just an overclocked GameCube, don't expect games to look much better than Xbox games, and because of this expect less amazing games.

Nintendo thought they could just overclock a GameCube, add a laughable online scheme and use a primitive controller as an excuse to make it cost $249, but hopefully they fail. Sure, the Wii is a success right now, but that's only because we are transitioning from the last generation, and are still used to last generation games, however the status quo is changing and the Wii will be left in the dust. The Wii is for gimmicks like Wii Sports and WarioWare: Smooth Moves, while the Xbox 360 is for real games like Mass Effect and Halo 3.

[QUOTE="Pangster007"]Are you serious? Or is this a joke thread?[/QUOTE]

I am dead serious.

[QUOTE="Pangster007"]Are you serious? Or is this a joke thread?[/QUOTE]

I am dead serious.

[/QUOTE]
Which would explain why the graphically strongest system has always lost? :roll:[/QUOTE]

The consoles were not generation behinds. Could the PS2 have won with N64 graphics?

I dont think the graphics have anything to do with the wii's failure.

indeed. i think that lends to lack of game support.  

[/QUOTE]

And this is due to the lack of power.

[QUOTE="Rahnyc4"]and then i look at the nintendo DS success... this TC put no thought into his thread. graphics dont make a successful console, games do, and the ability to play many different kinds of game adds to that success. [/QUOTE]

The handheld wars are totally different from the console wars, especially since most of the DS' games are pretty much MADE for handhelds, unlike PSP games. If anything, your post proves how right I am.

The Wii is trying to be like the DS console wise while the PSP tried to be like the PS2 handheld wise, and we knew how that turned out.

The DS WAS an improvement over the GBA, while the Wii is WORSE than the GameCube.

[QUOTE="Idonomeus"][QUOTE="Rahnyc4"]and then i look at the nintendo DS success... this TC put no thought into his thread. graphics dont make a successful console, games do, and the ability to play many different kinds of game adds to that success. [/QUOTE]

DS had better looking games than GBA from day one.[/QUOTE]

Exactly, good point. The DS WAS an improvement over the GBA, while the Wii is WORSE than the GameCube.