[shinobi602]

that's an old article - from june 2012 - probably important to mention OP

The article was old the same day it was posted? Dayum.

[Gahiggidy]

Be honest, shinobi652, you had this thread bookmarked and waiting to bump the day the Sony thing happened, right?

[krypt0nian]

Man, the responses from the bump tell me it's going to be a long gen for Nintendo fans, if they're still saying there is no jump in visuals.

It's easier if you just focus on great Nintendo 1st party, and just don't worry. You all didn't care about graphics with the wii, so just keep that up. Denying it is rather silly, and drives the focus to "lol crazy Nintendo fans" instead of games.

[KillGore]

lol can't believe people are saying there was not much of a difference.

Internet being internet I guess

[Meelow]

Man, the responses from the bump tell me it's going to be a long gen for Nintendo fans, if they're still saying there is no jump in visuals. It's easier if you just focus on great Nintendo 1st party, and just don't worry. You all didn't care about graphics with the wii, so just keep that up. Denying it is rather silly, and drives the focus to "lol crazy Nintendo fans" instead of games.

No Nintendo fan is denying that PS4 looks better graphically than Wii U, they are really just saying the difference isn't Wii to PS3.

[krypt0nian]

No Nintendo fan is denying that PS4 looks better than Wii U, they are really just saying the difference isn't Wii to PS3.

Did you read this thread? Because yes they are.

[shinobi602]

Be honest, shinobi652, you had this thread bookmarked and waiting to bump the day the Sony thing happened, right?

Bookmarked? No. It is in my thread history though :P

[Deadstar]

No Nintendo fan is denying that PS4 looks better graphically than Wii U, they are really just saying the difference isn't Wii to PS3.

It clearly is. I have Zombi U and I love the game but it looks nothing like the ps4 games we've seen (if those are true in game footage shots). The killzone footage is miles ahead of anything I've seen in Zombi U.

[Shion]

Going from some comments I have read/heard from other sites, mainly facebook, but also chat some "gamer" people (ie, they own a 360/ps3), I still think Iwata is right. The most common reaction to the games showed yesterday is "they look good, but, is not that big difference with current gen game X". Only time will tell, maybe this time next year.

Certain people said the exact same thing back in 2005 when the saw the first wave of Xbox 360 games.

[jaz013]

Certain people said the exact same thing back in 2005 when the saw the first wave of Xbox 360 games.

In this case, not the same people. Even NfS:Carbon was "amazing", and Tomb Raider looked "way better", according to them.

[ozfunghi]

It clearly is. I have Zombi U and I love the game but it looks nothing like the ps4 games we've seen (if those are true in game footage shots). The killzone footage is miles ahead of anything I've seen in Zombi U.

Dude, nearly all WiiU launch games looked better than ZombiU. The gap is obviously not Wii-PS360 huge. There was not one high-profile, big budget, tech-centered WiiU exclusive game at launch, there still isn't.

[BlueTsunami]

Dude, nearly all WiiU launch games looked better than ZombiU. The gap is obviously not Wii-PS360 huge. There was not one high-profile, big budget, tech-centered WiiU exclusive game at launch, there still isn't.

I guess Nintendo needs two more years to 'learn HD'!

[timetokill]

A FPS will still freaking play like a FPS isn't it??? maybe enemey/player count will increase, AI will get better, maps will get bigger/complex but nothing revolutionary will happen unless you go the VR route. That's where the PC gaming has been stuck with games only getting prettier.

Okay, since you brought it up -- think of the improvements we've seen in FPS gameplay since DOOM. There's a ton of them, I'm sure you can name them on your own.

What we saw yesterday was not to that nature. It was purely about how pretty everything looks. And I'm simply not interested.

Maybe AI will get way better -- that would be great, actually. Maps getting bigger/more complex isn't necessarily a positive.

I'm not even saying there has to be a revolution, but even a serious evolution to JUSTIFY THE NEW CONSOLE'S POWER would be great to me. But I'm not seeing that. Killzone showed me chest-high walls, explosions, and on-rails shooting segments that, gameplay-wise, could have easily been done last gen or even the gen before that. It all looked pretty but there's no meat to it.

I'm bored of it, that's all. Show me something exciting and new to play with. Show me how playing on your new system is going to CHANGE THE WAY I PLAY. They like to trot that line out time and time again but I'm not seeing how hiding behind cover points and playing whack-a-mole for the millionth time is "changing" anything.

[BGBW]

I guess Nintendo needs two more years to 'learn HD'!

To learn that you don't need to pump out the best graphics in the world for a game to be fun?

I think they learnt that back in the 80s.

[TheGreyHulk]

No Nintendo fan is denying that PS4 looks better graphically than Wii U, they are really just saying the difference isn't Wii to PS3.

it's wii to ps3 to me.

PS4 is bringing effects seen in CG to video games. The capcom tech demo alone was absolutely mind numbing. The skin, the lighting, the particles were insanely beautiful.

Wii U doesn't come close to getting that level of fidelity. I own a Wii U, but i love me some gfx and the difference in IQ is very large.

[Digital-Hero]

it's wii to ps3 to me. PS4 is bringing effects seen in CG to video games. The capcom tech demo alone was absolutely mind numbing. The skin, the lighting, the particles were insanely beautiful. Wii U doesn't come close to getting that level of fidelity. I own a Wii U, but i love me some gfx and the difference in IQ is very large.

The texture detail and normal mapping on that mud. My mind was blown.

[BGBW]

I think the difference is/will be smaller mostly because the Wii U doesn't look bad on people's HD teles.

[Poimandres]

To learn that you don't need to pump out the best graphics in the world for a game to be fun? I think they learnt that back in the 80s.

A lot of studios struggled with moving into HD development. The need for more detailed assets because of the added clarity, the extra complexity that rendering at higher resolutions bring etc. It's expensive and time consuming.

Nintendo certainly knows that you don't need "the best graphics", but they recognize that people want games that are aesthetically appealing. A lot of that is art direction, character design etc but these are still very much "graphical" concerns.

[big_erk]

It clearly is. I have Zombi U and I love the game but it looks nothing like the ps4 games we've seen (if those are true in game footage shots). The killzone footage is miles ahead of anything I've seen in Zombi U.

As fun as Zombie U is, it is in no way indicative of what the Wii U can do. The game was rushed with more attention paid to gameplay systems than visuals. No, the Wii U is no PS4 but it is also much closer to the PS4 than the Wii was to PS3.

[Apophis2036]

Let's give Ubisoft the same sort of budget and time to make a ZombiU game on WiiU as GG have to make Killzone 4 and we can compare.

I'm sure the Ubisoft CEO was quoted as saying it had a tiny budget compared to things like AC, I'm guessing under $5 million. God knows what KZ 4's budget is, $100 million ?. GG are also one of the most talented first party developers on the planet.

I would actually LOVE to see a ZombiU remake or sequel on PS4.

[Poimandres]

Let's give Ubisoft the same sort of budget and time to make a ZombiU game on WiiU as GG have to make Killzone 4 and we can compare. I'm sure the Ubisoft CEO was quoted as saying it had a tiny budget compared to things like AC, I'm guessing under $5 million. God knows what KZ 4's budget is, $100 million ?. GG are also one of the most talented first party developers on the planet. I would actually LOVE to see a ZombiU remake or sequel on PS4.

Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if ZombiU had a longer development cycle than Killzone 4. After all, it did start its life on the PS3/360 a few years ago right?

Budget though, yeah, the two are worlds apart.

Still, these are launch titles we are talking about and outside of very rare treats like Rogue Squadron launch games rarely give a true sense of a machines capabilities.

[Shion]

Let's give Ubisoft the same sort of budget and time to make a ZombiU game on WiiU as GG have to make Killzone 4 and we can compare. I'm sure the Ubisoft CEO was quoted as saying it had a tiny budget compared to things like AC, I'm guessing under $5 million. God knows what KZ 4's budget is, $100 million ?. GG are also one of the most talented first party developers on the planet. I would actually LOVE to see a ZombiU remake or sequel on PS4.

That's another problem with Wii U.

Just like the Wii, not only it's underpowered, but most publishers aren't going to make any serious investment in Wii U development.

Wii U is basically a different a market, publishers invest big money only on multiplatform games not exclusives.

Personally, I don't expect to see many (if any) Wii U games that match the graphical fidelity seen in AAA productions such as The Last of Us or Killzone.

[axisofweevils]

I think the difference is/will be smaller mostly because the Wii U doesn't look bad on people's HD teles.

Yep. The Wii U and PS4 will both be HD consoles. We won't see another leap like SD - HD.

Plus, the Wii U is capable of some pretty good stuff. I'd argue that the Wii U Bird / Japanese Garden Tech Demo (two screens!) is comparable visually to anything PS4 showed.

[A.R.K]

Okay, since you brought it up -- think of the improvements we've seen in FPS gameplay since DOOM. There's a ton of them, I'm sure you can name them on your own. What we saw yesterday was not to that nature. It was purely about how pretty everything looks. And I'm simply not interested. Maybe AI will get way better -- that would be great, actually. Maps getting bigger/more complex isn't necessarily a positive. I'm not even saying there has to be a revolution, but even a serious evolution to JUSTIFY THE NEW CONSOLE'S POWER would be great to me. But I'm not seeing that. Killzone showed me chest-high walls, explosions, and on-rails shooting segments that, gameplay-wise, could have easily been done last gen or even the gen before that. It all looked pretty but there's no meat to it. I'm bored of it, that's all. Show me something exciting and new to play with. Show me how playing on your new system is going to CHANGE THE WAY I PLAY. They like to trot that line out time and time again but I'm not seeing how hiding behind cover points and playing whack-a-mole for the millionth time is "changing" anything.

and I pointed you to VR (like occulus rift) ... thats the next revolutionary thing to come to gaming if it in fact really becomes mainstream. That would be like going from 2D to what Doom did and started a whole new era for gaming. Apart from that, it will be same old stuff with prettier graphics and more stuff on screen. Maybe you are expecting something which is not there.

[Glorified G]

This thread bump is almost as brutal as the Edge requesting 8GB Ram thread.

Almost

[roddur]

Bookmarked? No. It is in my thread history though :P

you're truly cunning, aren't you? :)

[krypt0nian]

To learn that you don't need to pump out the best graphics in the world for a game to be fun? I think they learnt that back in the 80s.

I thought this obviousness would go the way of the dodo. Of course you do not NEED best graphics for a great game, but you can have a great game with the best graphics (you know both at the same time?), and that's preferable.

Let's retire this wii-ism, shall we?

[Foffy]

I think the claim Iwata made about needing more manpower for the newer systems to be a potential issue is a sound one. I'm not going to argue the visual differences but Nintendo has had an issue with the technical arms race in the industry since 2005, and Iwata has made some very good business points as to why Nintendo is not playing a big role in that space anymore. I don't think anyone here can really refute the idea that if a system by default requires more and more people to make a game just to take advantage of fancier specs that these types of projects continue to climb in cost. It was that climb that caused a lot of Japanese developers to migrate to handhelds in the last few years. For players, that extra demand for manpower is often ignored, but on a business level it's why we had the West and East basically do entirely different things in terms of what platforms were heavily embraced over the seventh generation. I think Nintendo tries to keep their platforms as the weakest for costs of the platform and making it an easier pill for companies to finance projects compared to the bigger, more massive holes Sony and Microsoft make.

It's quite a shame that the West jumps into those holes whereas Japan doesn't even bother with any of this most of the time anymore.

[CadetMahoney]

Thread needs some serious kaz gifs.

Iwata's right though. If it's one thing developers are consistently asking for, it's less power and more gimmicks.

heh

[Medalion]

Iwata

wata u talking about

[Andrex]

sounds like you have a low-res imagination.

omg

this was absolutely flawless

[Schnozberry]

Iwata wata u talking about

He's talking about living in an age where increased computer graphics quality doesn't really impress people all that much. Core gamers lose their collective minds, but not a lot of fucks are given otherwise.

His point about developers shouldn't get completely dismissed either. The graveyard of game studios has expanded rapidly over the last several years.

My biggest fear about these new PC equivalent consoles is that we are going to get technically brilliant, yet unoriginal games because studios and production houses can no longer afford to take risks.

[superbank]

People don't understand perspective or reflections..LOL It's obvious it's inside looking out towards where the photo was taken. The camera's perspective is obviously outside, and the WiiU tablet is inside. I'm a graphic artist and photographer though....maybe we expect too much of people, lol.

If there is a photo of an outside foresty scene it's natural to think it is a direct photo if there are no visual cues it's a reflection. Add a window grid and it implies the photo was taken from the inside looking out to the forest. Further, if this photo was taken from the outside why is the window grid completely dry? There's an abundance of water sprinkled on the windows themselves, but nothing on the supporting grid. I would say this photo was taken from the inside, with the lens focusing on the window, blurring the outside scenery.

edit: Also if this was a shot of a reflection we would see the cameraman's reflection. From the perspective info we can observe from the window grid this is a straight-on shot.

A front-facing WiiU gamepad was photoshopped onto the scene that is partially transparent. Since the existing photo implies it's a shot from inside and WiiUs are not naturally transparent then this must mean we are seeing the WiiUs reflection. Now, since this is a gaf photoshop it's possible the artists idea may not be perfectly executed here. Maybe he meant for the Wii to be inside and the camera perspective outside. Maybe he meant for the perspective to be from the inside, we're seeing the WiiUs reflection but that's not entirely possible at this angle without seeing the actual WiiU as well. With that in mind it looks to me like we are seeing from the WiiUs perspective in first person, The WiiU is inside and it's looking outside towards the forest, also catching a glimpse of it's own reflection.

I'm also a graphics artist and photographer, not that that's important.

[demidar]

If there is a photo of an outside foresty scene it's natural to think it is a direct photo if there are no visual cues it's a reflection. Add a window grid and it implies the photo was taken from the inside looking out to the forest. Further, if this photo was taken from the outside why is the window grid completely dry? There's an abundance of water sprinkled on the windows themselves, but nothing on the supporting grid. I would say this photo was taken from the inside, with the lens focusing on the window, blurring the outside scenery. edit: Also if this was a shot of a reflection we would see the cameraman's reflection. From the perspective info we can observe from the window grid this is a straight-on shot. A front-facing WiiU gamepad was photoshopped onto the scene that is partially transparent. Since the existing photo implies it's a shot from inside and WiiUs are not naturally transparent then this must mean we are seeing the WiiUs reflection. Now, since this is a gaf photoshop it's possible the artists idea may not be perfectly executed here. Maybe he meant for the Wii to be inside and the camera perspective outside. Maybe he meant for the perspective to be from the inside, we're seeing the WiiUs reflection but that's not entirely possible at this angle without seeing the actual WiiU as well. With that in mind it looks to me like we are seeing from the WiiUs perspective in first person, The WiiU is inside and it's looking outside towards the forest, also catching a glimpse of it's own reflection. I'm also a graphics artist and photographer, not that that's important.

I thought that was obvious. Wii U inside looking out, camera inside looking out. The give away is the Wii U is partially transparent.

-If the camera is inside looking out, and the gamepad is outside looking in, then why is the gamepad transparent?
-If the camera is outside looking in, and the gamepad is also outside looking in, why is the gamepad transparent? Even on reflection the gamepad would be completely blocking the reflection of the background.
-If the camera is outside looking in, and the gamepad is inside looking out, then it's actually a plausible interpretation... except the grid is completely dry meaning the camera is inside looking out.

Therefore both the camera and the Wii U is looking out into the rain. Now we got that stupidity out of the way, carry on.

[BGBW]

I thought this obviousness would go the way of the dodo. Of course you do not NEED best graphics for a great game, but you can have a great game with the best graphics (you know both at the same time?), and that's preferable. Let's retire this wii-ism, shall we?

I don't recall saying that. All I said was that just because Nintendo chose to put out NSMBU with that look doesn't mean they still need to learn HD. They know the art style they want for these games and it's not one that pushes HD to the limit. They were also concerned aboout performance hence the 720p cap to ensure a solid frame rate (something that other HD veterans still seem to forget when their too busy pushing the graphical envelope). Graphics were not the focus of that game (and not for Nintendoland either but it still looks nice) so it's kind of hard to say because of it they still need to learn HD.

[Vagabundo]

It is not the same jump.

The Wii ->HD twins was about x10-x20. The jump this time Wii U-Nextbox/PS4 is x4-x6 and you're already hitting diminishing returns. So, for some people, the perceived difference won't even be that big.

It will certainly noticeable in graphics and should be noticeable in game area, animation, framerate etc, but it's not the SD-HD leap, not even close. It's like HD+.

EDIT: lol at the thread bump picture derail.