Call of Duty l Modern Warfare(Wii) Screens


Recommended Posts

So I'm the only one that thinks this looks good for a Wii?

I'm sorry but really? The Wii can produce some decent looking stuff for a standard definition console, this however looks like a 1st gen PS2 game.

k99p8o.jpg

The Wii is the most popular console ever, but nobody buys a Wii to play these kind of games. They buy a Wii so they can play with a couple friends in the same room. FPS games are designed for people who sit alone in their parents' baseroom 14 hours at a time.

Nobody buys a Wii to play these kind of games. They buy a Wii so they can play with a couple friends in the same room. FPS games are designed for people who sit alone in their parents' baseroom 14 hours at a time.

Actually I keep my parents in the basement and game alone in the house for 14 hours at a time. I find it works better this way.

Yeah, the Wii isn't really meant for this sort of thing. It's best used with a mix of casual gamers (cough girls cough) or with a bunch of kids. There is a ton of games that are free of violence, swearing, blood and sex.

Wii graphics are best on sillier cartoony-type of games. There are better consoles for "M"-rated, realistic FPS games and that's the end of the story as far as I am concerned.

Anybody who's even remotely trying to justify these graphics with "it's not suited for this console" really is talking something strong.

Metroid Prime 3:

test_Metroid_Prime_3___Corruption_3.jpg

Twilight Princess:

the-legend-of-zelda-twilight-princess-20060914082134302.jpg

The Conduit:

920890_20050520_screen002.jpg

Red Steel 2:

redsteel2_exclusiveubinintendo_jackaltank.jpg

These aren't exactly Gears of War 2 or anything, but it absolutely craps all over MW Wii. To say good looking (as in, not an eyesore) realistic visuals are not possible on Wii hasn't done their research. They may as well have ported MW to the PS2, it would probably have sold better there.

I think even PSP can do better job than that :laugh: but teej there's a difference between those games. COD has more things going on in a scene that the games you described, while most of the game on Wii you'll be fighting 3 to 4 Ai's in COD that will be around 15+ Ai's including your teammates.

So that will need more processing power that what Wii have, that?s why they need to tone down the graphics to help the game run smoothly. And AB I think they still have 2 months left to find the texture:laugh:h:

It'll be because they're pushing 60FPS.

The jump between 30/60 really puts limits on graphical quality for some genres. First Person Shooters always have a ton going on, something like KZ2 would never been doable at 60FPS on this current gen hardware (not locked anyway) for example, but that doesn't mean COD at 60FPS looks terrible in comparison, it looks great still, but you can definitely see a difference between KZ2 and COD4. Due to the power of the HD hardware this gen though, the differences aren't as extreme between COD4/KZ2 as the differences between MW and The Conduit here are.

I think these screens have to be an early build though, even at 60FPS they are absolutely ridiculous. The texture work on the models is an absolute joke, I refuse to believe that's how they'll ship.

I think these screens have to be an early build though, even at 60FPS they are absolutely ridiculous. The texture work on the models is an absolute joke, I refuse to believe that's how they'll ship.

Isn't this game is supposed to be released in November, if it's as you say they why are they releasing pictures of an early build.

I?m thinking that they know that?s the best Wii can do or Will is getting short end of the stick.

I think even PSP can do better job than that :laugh: but teej there's a difference between those games. COD has more things going on in a scene that the games you described, while most of the game on Wii you'll be fighting 3 to 4 Ai's in COD that will be around 15+ Ai's including your teammates.

So that will need more processing power that what Wii have, that?s why they need to tone down the graphics to help the game run smoothly. And AB I think they still have 2 months left to find the texture:laugh:h:

But... that doesn't matter. It looks worse then the original XBOX game, which is ridiculous. We all know the Wii is more powerful then the original XBOX, or at the *very* least, on-par.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I'm not unblocking my camera for this crapola. Sorry, Google.
    • Ummmm that is what is it supposed to do. Just turn if off in settings if you do not want it analyzing your open tabs. Chrome does the same thing with Gemini. Sarfari will do the samething after Apple's AI and even more so with the release of their 27 versions that is now powered by Googles LLM/ML models. Understanding why it is doing it and how it can help you vs jumping to some conspiracy theroy is a much better approach. As long as it can be turned off, all is good. Yes the default should be off but the a lot of people would never discover these features.
    • Just another reason (aside from many others) not to use Edge. Firefox 153.0b5 DEx64 has a similar feature added recently in prior builds that I will turn off at some point when I get around to it. It's the new "Something looks suspicious" page that pops up here and there. It cleverly hides itself between web pages that I've actually visited; as a result, you know, of selecting a web page and telling the browser where to go. The interesting thing is that it does not produce these warnings from pages that I, as the only intelligent user of the browser in my system, have ever directed the browser to open! What seems to be happening is that the browser looks at all the goofy ad links on a web page I do actually open and selects one that "looks suspicious" and then creates the "something looks suspicious" web page, which is neatly inserted, as mentioned, between web pages my RB ("real brain") has directed the browser to load in a session. The thing is, I usually look at links I am considering to follow before I ask the browser to load them, and in cases I have noticed where the link does indeed look suspicious, most of the time I will choose to not follow the link at all. Doesn't everyone do this or something similar? I am picky about what I voluntarily load... (I don't like links that start off fine, with a site designaiton that seems normal enough but then is followed by indecipherable alphanumeric strings many, many lines long, etc. I tend to reject those because they look suspicious. They may not be, but I don't care... I'll stay with Firefox, of course, if for no other reason than they usually let you turn off the junk you don't like. And because it isn't Edge... But at some point Microsoft will come to realize that putting your bookmarks on the left side is a Good Thing for a lot of people, just as Microsoft discovered when it had the bright idea of nailing the Windows taskbar to the bottom of the screen, when for decades Microsoft browsers had left that placement up to the user. They have finally reversed the obscenity of that decision. Finally.
    • Google was using the old CATPCHAs data to train their LLMs. What is the say they won't use this camera data of users to train their LLM? these companies need some strict regulations!
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      BA the Curmudgeon earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Conversation Starter
      rosiecharles earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      KMilenkoski1202 earned a badge
      First Post
    • First Post
      carols23 earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      Tom Willson earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      513
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      259
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      151
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      94
    5. 5
      macoman
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!