Support NeoGAF

[Thunder Monkey]

Did it? It came out months later so time for optimisation. And it lost 1/4 of the racers online...for nicer roads?

It probably lost 2 racers because Nintendo's online infrastructure is apparently like something from the late 90's.

They also changed the lighting model on top of putting higher res texturing in it among some set pieces. Given the PS3/360 versions would have taken priority it's disingenuous to assert an extra four months dev time would change the lighting model and load in PC textures.

In that one case WiiU was more suited. A good chunk of games will not be under similar conditions. This is why I'm excited to see the WiiU version of Watch_Dogs. I can see it having better all around texturing than either the PS3 or 360 versions while having noticeably simplified collision detection or spottier simplified AI.

 

[ASIS]

Nobody cares. It's just an opportunity for a good old Nintendo bashing thread. Again.

Enjoy.

Whether people like it or not his opinions are highly consequential. His opinion does matter, greatly.

 

[StuBurns]

Which is pathetic on Nintendo's part. They should, by now, have something to show that is better than 8 year old hardware, even with all the optimisation PS360 engineers have got out of that time period.


MY WiiU hasn't been switched on this year. There's nothing I want to play.

I've logged more hours on Simpsons tapped out then on ZombiU, NintendoLand, and NSMBU combined...

In a month you'll see Mario Universe, it will be Nintendo's first huge 'next-gen' project, and have the kind of polish and technical accomplishment we associate with the mainline Mario entries.

It's a shame Nintendo hasn't had anything impressive so far, but realistically we're still very early in the system's life.

 

[TheDrowningMan]

Uh huh. But these developers were also developing for a radically-different system than ever before. With a heterogenious multiprocessor like the Cell, they were working with a fundamentally new architecture. For engine developers, there was actually significant computer science taking place just trying to wrap their heads around working with the Cell in 2006-2007. The Wii-U, even with it's second screen and any wrinkles in the GPU, is based on core technologies that developers are very familiar with at this point.

Thing is, their struggles with PS3 didn't end in 2007. They continue to this day. For the most part, you accept that a PS3 multiplat will be slightly worse than the 360 version. It was only really 2010-11 than the downgrade stopped being significant in the majority of cases.

 

[Little Green Yoda]

Uh huh. But these developers were also developing for a radically-different system than ever before. With a heterogenious multiprocessor like the Cell, they were working with a fundamentally new architecture. For engine developers, there was actually significant computer science taking place just trying to wrap their heads around working with the Cell in 2006-2007. The Wii-U, even with it's second screen and any wrinkles in the GPU, is based on core technologies that developers are very familiar with at this point.

I don't dispute that. I'm just saying nobody here has the figures/info to say which of those factors was more dominant in determining the final quality of these early games. Never mind other factors such as time, talent, etc. Framing it in one fashion while ignoring the other is disingenuous at worst, oversimplification at best.

 

[googleplex]

The thing is, even if we take the Wii U to be less powerful than the PS3/360, does it really matter to Nintendo fans?
Will they care that it is technically inferior to those machines when playing the next 3D Mario, Zelda, Smash, Metroid, etc. in HD for the first time?
My guess is, probably not. And my guess is, that games from Retro Studios and Platinum will prove the Wii U is at least on par with those systems anyway.

The thing is, Nintendo fans care more about fun in games than graphics.
Wii and DS proved that already. Even the N64 sort of proved that, since it didn't have FMVs.
While most companies, including EA, bank on new tech to help sell the latest round of sports titles, Nintendo doesn't need the latest graphics to sell their games.
It's no surprise that 3rd party support has dried up, but they survived in the past without it, and even if the Wii U was a PS4-level machine I doubt the 3rd parties would suddenly jump on board with any gusto.

Every time some post this I want to punch a baby. Fun and technical achievement/graphics, are NOT mutually exclusive.

 

[StuBurns]

Thing is, their struggles with PS3 didn't end in 2007. They continue to this day. For the most part, you accept that a PS3 multiplat will be slightly worse than the 360 version. It was only really 2010-11 than the downgrade stopped being significant in the majority of cases.

Well, that's not really true, is it?

Three of the bigger games this year so far, Metal Gear Rising, BioShock Infinite, and Metro Last Light, are all better on PS3.

And mods have already told you to stop posting things like this.

 

[Skyzard]

It probably lost 2 racers because Nintendo's online infrastructure is apparently like something from the late 90's.

They also changed the lighting model on top of putting higher res texturing in it among some set pieces. Given the PS3/360 versions would have taken priority it's disingenuous to assert an extra four months dev time would change the lighting model and load in PC textures.

In that one case WiiU was more suited. A good chunk of games will not be under similar conditions. This is why I'm excited to see the WiiU version of Watch_Dogs. I can see it having better all around texturing than either the PS3 or 360 versions while having noticeably simplified collision detection or spottier simplified AI.

Yeah I agree really, including that

I think their setup of stronger GPU + weaker CPU works well for Nintendo types of games as well.

Watch Dogs will be interesting, definitely.

 

[Coolwhip]

Every time some post this I want to punch a baby. Fun and technical achievement/graphics, are NOT mutually exclusive.

Yes they are. The focus on high production values and realistic graphics leading to high budgets made publishers avoid risk and innovation. Which leads to stale, cookiecutter, cinematic gameplay in a lot of cases. I know they're not literally mutually exclusive, but most of the times the games with simple graphics are more pure fun. (Minecraft is a good example)

 

[speedpop]

And no one bought it despite all that time and effort Criterion Games put in it. Can't blame EA bailing the fuck out after seeing the sales.

I don't know whether I should feel pride or shame in stating that I haven't touched a Need for Speed game beyond the moments when society were freaking out over a plausible Y2K bug.

 

[AOC83]

The thing is, Nintendo fans care more about fun in games than graphics.

An yet they keep fighting for every single gflop advantage the WiiU may or may have not over PS3/360.
Doesn´t fit together somehow.

 

[Uncle Rupee]

Every time some post this I want to punch a baby. Fun and technical achievement/graphics, are NOT mutually exclusive.

Obviously. I didn't make that claim.
But having "worse" graphics didn't make Mario Galaxy any less fun, now did it?

 

[ASIS]

Yes they are. The focus on high production values and realistic graphics leading to high budgets made publishers avoid risk and innovation. Which leads to stale, cookiecutter, cinematic gameplay in a lot of cases.

but not all cases, hence they are not mutually exclusive.

 

[AOC83]

Yes they are. The focus on high production values and realistic graphics leading to high budgets made publishers avoid risk and innovation. Which leads to stale, cookiecutter, cinematic gameplay in a lot of cases.

PS3 and 360 have better games in higher quantity then the Wii or WiiU.

 

[Mileena]

Yes they are. The focus on high production values and realistic graphics leading to high budgets made publishers avoid risk and innovation. Which leads to stale, cookiecutter, cinematic gameplay in a lot of cases. I know they're not literally mutually exclusive, but most of the times the games with simple graphics are more pure fun. (Minecraft is a good example)

Holy shit.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Yes they are. The focus on high production values and realistic graphics leading to high budgets made publishers avoid risk and innovation. Which leads to stale, cookiecutter, cinematic gameplay in a lot of cases.

I see. So Zelda games haven't been recycling the same core gameplay since Ocarina of Time?

 

[Coolwhip]

but not all cases, hence they are not mutually exclusive.

I added a second sentence before you posted

I see. So Zelda games haven't been recycling the same core gameplay since Ocarina of Time?

I did not say that did I?

 

[Pristine_Condition]

I don't dispute that. I'm just saying nobody here has the figures/info to say which of those factors was more dominant in determining the final quality of these early games. Never mind other factors such as time, talent, etc. Framing it in one fashion while ignoring the other is disingenuous.

But framing it your way, with the "oh they tried harder for PS3," will always come off sounding like "lazy devs" whining. Which doesn't convince anybody that your system has some sort of hidden power waiting to be unleashed, and it probably doesn't fire up third party devs either.

 

[StuBurns]

The graphics argument is moronic. At best it should only mean Nintendo are just seven years late at achieving the shitness the rest of the industry is at.

 

[goomba]

I see. So Zelda games haven't been recycling the same core gameplay since Ocarina of Time?

Far from it, see Skyward Sword.

 

[Uncle Rupee]

I see. So Zelda games haven't been recycling the same core gameplay since Ocarina of Time?

You don't fix what ain't broke.
Ocarina of Time is considered one of the best games of all time.
I'd like to know how Nintendo could make any drastic improvements over it (since apparently motion controls don't count).

 

[Forkball]

The Wii U should be the final nail in the coffin for Nintendo, then it's Mario on everything.

Their coffin must be riddled with nails.

 

[IrishNinja]

Sega Genesis and SNES games incoming.

at least one person shares my thoughts on this mess

The Wii U should be the final nail in the coffin for Nintendo, then it's Mario on everything.

yeah i'd hold my breath on that one...they make handhelds too, is the thing

An yet they keep fighting for every single gflop advantage the WiiU may or may have not over PS3/360.
Doesn´t fit together somehow.

it shouldn't; i love nintendo's offerings but some of the fanbase moves the goalposts a lot.
during the rough (sales-wise, but not game-wise, for me) gamecube days, it was about better games & graphics than NPD #'s; the DS & wii took off and that flipped.

no idea why anyone goes through those gymnastics, you don't have to do so to enjoy nintendo stuff

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Every time some post this I want to punch a baby. Fun and technical achievement/graphics, are NOT mutually exclusive.

They aren't.

Very simply, very true.

But we do tend to see one aspect take priority over the other. Especially early on. So much focus on making the world of Assassin's Creed seem real that they forgot to put a game in there.

But this, especially when you're talking about that large of a change in development, is a necessary evil in part. Videogames at their core are programmed software. They are intrinsically experiments in design.

If you don't have the foundation you'll never have the game. Assassin's Creed was just apparently a huge undertaking at the start of the generation.

 

[googleplex]

Yes they are. The focus on high production values and realistic graphics leading to high budgets made publishers avoid risk and innovation. Which leads to stale, cookiecutter, cinematic gameplay in a lot of cases. I know they're not literally mutually exclusive, but most of the times the games with simple graphics are more pure fun. (Minecraft is a good example)

Bull shit. Even if you take just the games on PSN and Xbox Live, those games completely shit on Wii's game quality wise. And I dare say you'll find more "innovation" on the PS3 and 360 then you'd find on the Wii.

 

[ASIS]

I see. So Zelda games haven't been recycling the same core gameplay since Ocarina of Time?

oh god, you really had to go there didn't you.


No, Zelda's gameplay is not cookie cutter. Not by a long shot.

 

[Margalis]

Edit: Eh, never mind.

 

[Catchpenny]

Bull shit. Even if you take just the games on PSN and Xbox Live, those games completely shit on Wii's game quality wise. And I dare say you'll find more "innovation" on the PS3 and 360 then you'd find on the Wii.

You're not making much sense and I can still tell you're wrong. Go to sleep.

 

[-Setsuna-]

I see. So Zelda games haven't been recycling the same core gameplay since Ocarina of Time?

You should try Majora's Mask, Phantom Hourglass or Skyward Sword.

 

[Coolwhip]

Bull shit. Even if you take just the games on PSN and Xbox Live, those games completely shit of the quality of Wii ha games. And I dare say you'll find more "innovation" on the PS3 and 360 then you'd find on the Wii.

Well I didn't mention any consoles in my post. I just replied to your claim that great graphics and fun go hand in hand. Of course it's possible and done many times. But a lot of games show that putting in the time and effort in complex or realistic graphics didn't do the gameplay any good.

 

[Uncle Rupee]

Bull shit. Even if you take just the games on PSN and Xbox Live, those games completely shit on Wii's game quality wise. And I dare say you'll find more "innovation" on the PS3 and 360 then you'd find on the Wii.

But by the way you talk about the Wii U, those PS3/360 titles you so love will suddenly become crap once the PS4/Durango are out because DURR THE GRAPHICS.

 

[Little Green Yoda]

But framing it your way, with the "oh they tried harder for PS3," will always come off sounding like "lazy devs" whining. Which doesn't convince anybody that your system has some sort of hidden power waiting to be unleashed, and it probably doesn't fire up third party devs either.

Good thing I'm not trying to convince anybody of any hidden power or secret sauce in a particular console then? I'm just tired of the fanboy conclusions that comes from extrapolating every minor comment that gets posted in interviews or Twitter. Especially comments from sources that are clearly biased one way or another wrt the subject matter.

For the record, I think it's more of a "risk averse pub" problem more than a "lazy dev" problem since most devs don't have the final say over what they make or how many resources to put behind a particular SKU.

 

[Margalis]

You're not making much sense and I can still tell you're wrong. Go to sleep.

Games with huge budgets for graphics can still have a lot of innovation. Check out XBLA!

Obviously technical achievement and gameplay are not mutually exclusive. They are however often at odds, in terms of things like budgets making design more conservative, design being watered-down to achieve necessary sales, focus on great animations leading to laggy controls, etc.

 

[StuBurns]

Well I didn't mention any consoles in my post. I just replied to your claim that great graphics and fun go hand in hand. Of course it's possible and done many times. But a lot of games show that putting in the time and effort in complex or realistic graphics didn't do the gameplay any good.

That depends on what the gameplay is. Crysis with low settings is a worse game, it lacks the atmosphere, the sense of being a super powered hunter in a real jungle.

However, the real thing people are referring to is cost, not good graphics. High cost means you need to attract a larger audience, which means a more 'streamlined' design philosophy.

 

[Chris23235]

And no one bought it despite all that time and effort Criterion Games put in it. Can't blame EA bailing the fuck out after seeing the sales.

Nobody bought Medal of Honor (2010), didn't prevented EA from making MoH: Modern Warfighter.

 

[-Setsuna-]

(Deleting this comment would be wise.)

Why should I ?

Isn't it pretty obvious what this thread has become ?

 

[Thunder Monkey]

An yet they keep fighting for every single gflop advantage the WiiU may or may have not over PS3/360.
Doesn´t fit together somehow.

No, it always has fit.

It's bunk.

If everyone could have realtime Pixar/ILM caliber 3D for $299 right now they would. That includes all the real ray tracing (not approximations), super sampled down from an insanely high resolution, and billions of polygons per frame.

Everyone would gladly take that.

But then reality sets in. Realtime rendering is far far far away from any of that. Adding to that the costs involved in asset creation would be astronomically high. And hardware capable of achieving that at $299... is only in the realm of fantasy currently.

We take what we can get. This in no way says someone can't look at a Wii game and say "Beautiful." I still can. But it's not like there isn't tech out there capable of a loooot more.

 

[Skyzard]

No, it always has fit.

It's bunk.

If everyone could have realtime Pixar/ILM caliber 3D for $299 right now they would. That includes all the real ray tracing (not approximations), super sampled down from an insanely high resolutions, and billions of polygons per frame.

Everyone would gladly take that.

But then reality sets in. Realtime rendering is far far far away from any of that. Adding to that the costs involved in asset creation would be astronomically high. And hardware capable of achieving that at $299... is only in the realm of fantasy currently.

We take what we can get. This in no way says someone can't look at a Wii game and say "Beautiful." I still can. But it's not like there isn't tech out there capable of a loooot more.

What he's really saying is they downplay the importance of graphics on other platforms yet scratch and claw for every pixel gained on their own.

 

[Cromat]

Bull shit. Even if you take just the games on PSN and Xbox Live, those games completely shit on Wii's game quality wise. And I dare say you'll find more "innovation" on the PS3 and 360 then you'd find on the Wii.

Definitely. Is anyone really arguing that the Wii has a better library than the PS3/360? Really?

Also, about Mario Galaxy - it was good despite being on last-gen hardware, not because of it. The vast majority of the Wii's best games (Smash, Mario Kart etc) would have benefited more from prettier graphics and modern online infrastructure than they did from motion controls, and I suspect the same would be true of the Wii U gamepad.

 

[Into]

Why should I ?

Isn't it pretty obvious what this thread has become ?

Because moderators here have explicitly said they do not want thread bashing, if you think a thread is not to your liking, just do not post and ignore it, plenty of other, perhaps more positive threads out there.

Evilore: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=502586

We're at the point now where people are preempting someone else's hypothetical claim that a new thread isn't thread-worthy. It's the point of madness.

By replying claiming that a thread isn't thread-worthy (or any insane meta versions of this) you are stifling new thread creation, derailing what threads do get posted, and further encouraging people to make ridiculous, bloated, all-encompassing megathreads for every possible subject just to avoid the whiners.

This is over.

Do not whine about a thread not being thread-worthy, or that you saw it on Reddit, or that someone else is about to whine about it not being thread-worthy, or anything along those lines. If something is not up to your standards, just don't reply, and it will fall off the first page within a few seconds, as it is supposed to.

The constant meta-discussions need to end. Address subjects and arguments, and participate straightforwardly or don't at all. Your commentary on someone's posting habits isn't welcome. Your commentary about someone being banned in the thread or some previous unrelated thread isn't welcome.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

What he's saying is they downplay the importance of graphics on other platforms yet scratch and claw for every pixel gained on their own.

And that is a real problem with modern Nintendo hardcore.

Visual excellency is downplayed by a good chunk but when it comes to titles on Nintendo platforms they look for every minuscule improvement. When half the time there's nothing to see. NFSMW is a win. But you have to remember... this is a visual/technical win against consoles that launched in 2005 and 2006. It is a win, but that's grading on a hell of a curve.

In no way is that me mocking anyone. But the truth is the truth. And that in no way will stop truly beautiful pieces of design appearing on WiiU. There just will be better out there. Soon enough a lot better.

 

[tassletine]

Every time some post this I want to punch a baby. Fun and technical achievement/graphics, are NOT mutually exclusive.

No they're not, but they have to be taken into consideration. A game like Bayonetta looks that way because the gameplay takes priority over graphics. God of war takes a hit in gameplay for better graphics. Some times things need to be graphically clear for the gameplay to work, and Nintendo always prioritise gameplay over graphics.

 

[Skyzard]

And that is a real problem with modern Nintendo hardcore.

Visual excellency is downplayed by a good chunk but when it comes to titles on Nintendo platforms they look for every minuscule improvement. When half the time there's nothing to see. NFSMW is a win. But you have to remember... this is a visual/technical win against consoles that launched in 2005 and 2006. It is a win, but that's grading on a hell of a curve.

In no way is that me mocking anyone. But the truth is the truth. And that in no way will stop truly beautiful pieces of design appearing on WiiU. There just will be better out there. Soon enough a lot better.

True, and there's no doubt people are looking forward to at least SEEing Mario 3D/Zelda/Smash HD-ified. I just hope Nintendo gives the games the time they need.

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

Yes they are. The focus on high production values and realistic graphics leading to high budgets made publishers avoid risk and innovation. Which leads to stale, cookiecutter, cinematic gameplay in a lot of cases. I know they're not literally mutually exclusive, but most of the times the games with simple graphics are more pure fun. (Minecraft is a good example)

NSMB U 2 is going to be so innovative...

 

[Uncle Rupee]

Also, about Mario Galaxy - it was good despite being on last-gen hardware, not because of it.

The Mario Galaxies aren't just "good". Those games have near-perfect scores on Metacritic.

It proves that the focus on Wii U's graphics/horsepower isn't as important as many detractors would like to think, except in the sense that 3rd parties aren't happy.

NSMB U 2 is going to be so innovative...

Nobody is making the claim that NSMB U or its ilk are more innovative.
We're saying you're less likely to see a company like Polyphony get to make another odd title like Omega Boost because their budget will be allocated to the next Gran Turismo.

 

[Game Guru]

I see. So Zelda games haven't been recycling the same core gameplay since Ocarina of Time?

What other games follow the 3D Zelda formula? I mean if I think about it, it's just Beyond Good & Evil, Okami, and Darksiders 1 & 2. Other games in the "Action-Adventure" genre don't follow Zelda's gameplay conventions exactly. There's a difference between a type of gameplay that only appears four times every generation, and a type of gameplay that appears at least twice a year as FPS games in the Call of Duty mold do.

I mean, I'm a fan of Street Fighter, but even I'll admit that the games do get rehashed a lot and I will avoid most except definitive versions at this point. Zelda doesn't get rehashed all that much.

 

[StuBurns]

The Mario Galaxies aren't just "good". Those games have near-perfect scores on Metacritic.

It proves that the focus on Wii U's graphics/horsepower isn't as important as many detractors would like to think.

As does GTA4, a game that could have never been produced on the Wii, SMG on the other hand could be almost identical on PS360, and look much better at the same time.

 

[Little Green Yoda]

And that is a real problem with modern Nintendo hardcore.

Visual excellency is downplayed by a good chunk but when it comes to titles on Nintendo platforms they look for every minuscule improvement. When half the time there's nothing to see. NFSMW is a win. But you have to remember... this is a visual/technical win against consoles that launched in 2005 and 2006. It is a win, but that's grading on a hell of a curve.

In no way is that me mocking anyone. But the truth is the truth. And that in no way will stop truly beautiful pieces of design appearing on WiiU. There just will be better out there. Soon enough a lot better.

I can't speak for anybody else but I think a lot of the anger is directed at the PR speak that tries to explain the lack of support for Nintendo consoles. If they honestly said that the ROI does not appear to be worth it for their company, I feel like people would be less upset than when they spout BS like "it can't even run the title screen of Game X". That's probably why people are lashing out whenever a counterexample to these claims arise. And of course, being less abrasive/blunt about certain things would probably quell a lot of the anger lol.

 

[JAYSIMPLE]

Maybe the hardware will speak for itself at E3 then no one will care but i doubt it

 

[DragonSworne]

The graphics argument is moronic. At best it should only mean Nintendo are just seven years late at achieving the shitness the rest of the industry is at.

But you forgot about the wiimote and Galaxies innovative use of it, oh.

I do find it funny that Nintendo jeopardized the Wii graphical capabilities so they could make the wiimote yet more often then not implemented conventional controls for their wii games.

Nintendo's use of the Wii u gamepad has been even more mundane so far.