I can’t really tell if there is a huge difference between the two, graphically. Obviously Galaxy looks somewhat better, I’m just commenting on the fact that there isn’t a massive difference between the two. Not that the graphics matters to me that much, I’m sure it’s an amazing game. Graphics aside, since Galaxy doesn’t revolve around Mario cleaning graffiti off of walls it’s instantly ten times better…I was not a big fan of Sunshine.
The thing that doesn’t make sense to me is why Nintendo would not want to focus on making improvements in graphics as well as innovations in game play. I understand where Nintendo stands on the issue, game play first, graphics second, but why couldn’t the Wii have both and make everyone happy?
Why bother with graphics if you can still sell a ton of systems, right? I’ll tell you why: 3rd party support. Every developer that does make games for the Wii just wants to make cheap, quick party games or else they make a spin-off of their main series. If the Wii actually had good graphics I think companies would be more likely to take their main series on to the platform.
Take Final Fantasy for example. The Wii gets Crystal Chronicles (I hated that game so much, Thrasher disagrees), PS3 gets Final Fantasy XIII and Sony pushes tons of PS3’s. The Resident Evil series is another example. Wii gets a remake of Resident Evil 4 and Resident Evil: The Umbrella Chronicles, Xbox 360 and PS3 get Resident Evil 5. Which games are going to push more systems?
Sure, the Wii is selling a ton of systems now but I think in the long run, without cutting-edge graphics and good 3rd party support, the Wii’s sales won’t last. I guess it’s the same old story for Nintendo, they never have any 3rd party support.