He never begged for approval. He tweeted that he was waiting, but he had no idea what the usual wait time was.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Game Informer: " Why Xenoblade Chronicles Makes Me Want To Punch a Kitten"
- Thread starter anaron
- Start date
He never begged for approval. He tweeted that he was waiting, but he had no idea what the usual wait time was.
I dunno man. Uematsu is awesome and all, but the battle themes in Xenoblade are incredible.
It's from GI. Their editors chose to run it.
They could have instead pointed out that pieces like this were old 4 years ago, that it brought nothing new or interesting to the table with zero fresh perspective, that 360 games look bad compared to PC games, and that doing Xenoblade in "HD" would probably increase sales much less than costs.
But they did none of those things.
aliencowz7
Member
A quick look at his twitter feed that was linked showed that the senior editor or whatever at GI is his friend / in his band so I doubt it had as much to do with gaming journalism integrity as just running a little piece a friend put together.
Begging was an exaggeration, incorrect as it may be. At least now he knows how long most people typically wait for account approval.
It's a harmless opinion piece.
As for Kluwe's...er....behavior.
I think he's handled himself decently on GAF, with the exception of finding Andrex's post trolling when it clearly wasn't. Some of his initial GAF responses where much better articulated than his article, which I think was poorly toned and styled. He was asking for trouble with some of those statements.But if that's his....um....style....than whatever floats his boat, not like it's his day job.
Kai Dracon
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
One could observe that there seems to be a bit of hypocrisy here, in that you openly state you love to write hyperbole, but behave archly towards hyperbolic responses to your hyperbole. Eh?
But more to the point; I think, honestly, the reason why your article is getting this reaction is probably in part subconscious.
Had a game like Xenoblade been released during the first 3 or 4 years of the Wii's shelf life, your uh, feelings ('rant'), would have actually seemed more contextually sensible to a lot of people. The Wii would be in its prime, and 'hardcore' games like Xenoblade would have been attempting to go toe-for-toe against the best games the HD consoles had to offer.
But all this is about a game which, however epic in scope for the hardcore enthusiast niche gamer, isn't even a widespread release in the US. Nintendo's next console, which has dem pretty HD graphics is just around the corner. Wii is a done deal. It's over.
So, such a rant about Wii ruining real gaming for real gamers seems pretty late to the party. Like the guy who shows up to make a point long after everyone has settled it no matter which side they landed on, and moved on to other things.
It comes across as attention seeking and pot stirring for no reason other than "look at me! I got opinions!"
Because, the plea to Nintendo to stop "punishing" its own games, and the people who play them, doesn't seem to have a solid hook in 2012. The offending console that so pained True Gamers is over, and as observed, we're practically in the eve of its replacement. A console that, even if it isn't precisely as powerful as Xbox Next Or Playstation Up Da Nose, will have the speed, resources, output, etc, to match modern technology more properly. (And modern displays.)
Picking nits with that further before we've even seen the final form of the damn thing is also, well, picking nits.
ChrisWarcraft
Neo Member
I like you.
Rahxephon91
Banned
I'm really late to this thread so I'll put my thoughts here, and some other random observations.
First, Chris's post was basically about Xenoblade ,being played on a Wii, looking awful and could have looked better on stronger more relevant hardware if Nintendo had chosen to do so. Personally on my TV, Xenoblade does look rather bad and the jaggies are out in full force just as Chris said. Thanks to the game being good I played something like 15 hrs before taking it to my PC where it looked much better
Back to Chris, unfortunately after his initial comments he goes on a bit of a rant that sort of distorts his original topic and imo his rant is what most people are (for some reason) are mad and annoyed by. I can't comment on his rant because..........it's a rant.......Then again opinion articles usually turn into rants......./shrug
Xenoblade could have looked better on stronger HD hardware, this is fact. But as others have said, it would also require a bucket load of more money to accomplish and lots of other considerations. I am sure everyone who has played Xenoblade is anxiously waiting to see what Monolith can do with the WiiU. Nintendo's plan with wii wasn't wrong obviously, it landed a ton of money which is why they are still in the business. But I can easily see why some may be upset with it despite Nintendo's decisions.
Also, I really wish people would not bring up Dolphin as an ultimatum to everyone, obviously Chris has the money for this but many do not(I'm a avid PC gamer/builder so I know what the costs are). The Dolphin stuff is irrelevant to Chris's opinion and is not how 90% of the people played the game and obviously not how he played it and nor is it the assumed way somebody played the game. Dolphin alleviates the AA deficiency and the low resolution but not the low poly character models, low res textures, or many flat plane trees in the distance. These problems bring down the game even when played on Dolphin and hurt the games graphics.
The scale of the game, the thing everyone has been using to defend the graphics is impressive. It's the one thing that graphically I was impressed by even with playing it on my TV with a billion jaggies. But in some areas the scale can be a bad thing, one of the worst areas in the game graphically is the Colony 6 area before you help rebuild it. There's a giant ugly brown mess of a ground texture mixed with some terrible low res debris, that area made me gag. I don't know who anyone can say Xenoblade graphics are anywhere near flawless or some of the best this gen. Art wise is something different, I think the game artstyle is fine but graphically it was definitely hurting by the weak Wii and/or maybe the lack of more time/money.
PS. Still around 50hrs into the game as im on a hiatus.
First, Chris's post was basically about Xenoblade ,being played on a Wii, looking awful and could have looked better on stronger more relevant hardware if Nintendo had chosen to do so. Personally on my TV, Xenoblade does look rather bad and the jaggies are out in full force just as Chris said. Thanks to the game being good I played something like 15 hrs before taking it to my PC where it looked much better
Back to Chris, unfortunately after his initial comments he goes on a bit of a rant that sort of distorts his original topic and imo his rant is what most people are (for some reason) are mad and annoyed by. I can't comment on his rant because..........it's a rant.......Then again opinion articles usually turn into rants......./shrug
Xenoblade could have looked better on stronger HD hardware, this is fact. But as others have said, it would also require a bucket load of more money to accomplish and lots of other considerations. I am sure everyone who has played Xenoblade is anxiously waiting to see what Monolith can do with the WiiU. Nintendo's plan with wii wasn't wrong obviously, it landed a ton of money which is why they are still in the business. But I can easily see why some may be upset with it despite Nintendo's decisions.
Also, I really wish people would not bring up Dolphin as an ultimatum to everyone, obviously Chris has the money for this but many do not(I'm a avid PC gamer/builder so I know what the costs are). The Dolphin stuff is irrelevant to Chris's opinion and is not how 90% of the people played the game and obviously not how he played it and nor is it the assumed way somebody played the game. Dolphin alleviates the AA deficiency and the low resolution but not the low poly character models, low res textures, or many flat plane trees in the distance. These problems bring down the game even when played on Dolphin and hurt the games graphics.
The scale of the game, the thing everyone has been using to defend the graphics is impressive. It's the one thing that graphically I was impressed by even with playing it on my TV with a billion jaggies. But in some areas the scale can be a bad thing, one of the worst areas in the game graphically is the Colony 6 area before you help rebuild it. There's a giant ugly brown mess of a ground texture mixed with some terrible low res debris, that area made me gag. I don't know who anyone can say Xenoblade graphics are anywhere near flawless or some of the best this gen. Art wise is something different, I think the game artstyle is fine but graphically it was definitely hurting by the weak Wii and/or maybe the lack of more time/money.
PS. Still around 50hrs into the game as im on a hiatus.
Nah, I like way more than 3. I'd list them but I'm not out to prove opinions right or wrong.
Pyrrhus
Member
I loved Xenoblade, but let's be honest. That opening scene looked more like two guys in plastic costumes stomping around in a wading pool than two continent sized gods having a monumental battle. The lack of detail to the character models, the flatness of the ocean, and the simplistic lighting all worked against the scene. You could tell what they were going for, but I don't think they quite sold it.
Q
qizah
Unconfirmed Member
I do not understand this.
You prefer them to take advantage of better hardware that doesn't exist? The Wii is their current platform, the Wii U is coming out in the fall and Xenoblade is two years old now. How can you fault the game for something like that? I understand the desire to have the game running on hardware that is more capable, but that's not an option. To that point, I'd simply tell you 'too bad'.
Xenoblade does not give a flying fuck that it is on the Wii. I dunno about you, but there have been plenty of times where I've stopped and just looked around the environments in the game. Given the hardware, I'd rather see the graphics take a slight hit for the amount of scale and scope we see in the game. It'd be nice to have both, but that's not the hardware it's on -- It's stupid to put a game up against unfair expectations like that imo.
This is true of not only every Wii game but every game period, and as such is really not interesting or worthy of a piece.
Personally if I was going to "fix" something about the game it would be stuff like adding a hard mode, making random quests give less XP, making party members not in your main party gain less/no xp, etc. Actual game fixes, not graphics crap.
I just got to the point where I got a 4th party member and I was hoping they would gain no XP while not in my party, so I could rotate them around to keep my levels somewhat low. But it looks like they still gain XP. The game has some structural issues around difficulty and level curve, which to me is far more problematic than Wii graphics.
MisterHero
Super Member
I was going to joke in my slightly earlier post that they could've compensated with FMV.
To stretch the joke a bit further, what are the chances some people ragging on hardware capabilities would've ragged on the capable N64 because there wasn't room for FMVs, whilst petty games like Ocarina of Time relied solely on game-engine cutscenes?
As inelegant as it may have been, I think this is his point.
He's not faulting the game, he's faulting Nintendo for not bothering to put out a competitively-powered machine and how it's affecting games now. If the Wii U isn't competitive with Sony/Microsoft's next-gen efforts, the same thing is going to happen - albeit less pronounced, as they should all be on a more-or-less equal HD footing as a base.
For all the complaints about 'graphic whores' now, I recall a whole pile of gamers back at launch that swore up and down that everyone needed to get component cables for their Wii, to get the most out of it.
I'm waiting for the follow-up where he lashes out at Namco for selling Monolith Soft to Nintendo because if they hadn't Xenoblade Chronicles would've been made for 360/PS3/PC.
TheBaldEmperor
Member
Welcome to the party, pal. Didn't see you mention it, but have you finished the game yet? If not, do you plan to?
FieryBalrog
Member
Jesus Christ yeah.
Though I think Chris Warcraft must've known something of that when he wrote his fairly over-provocative article ;P
Just...stop. please.
Q
qizah
Unconfirmed Member
Yes, but why does it matter? It's not a HD game. Like it or not, it's a Wii title. More or less I'd just say deal with it.
To me it seems like complaining about something that doesn't matter because it's not like it'd be on a HD platform anyway. It was designed for the Wii.
aliencowz7
Member
Obviously he is going to have to deal with it regardless of his opinion, that doesn't mean its wrong though. opinions are funny like that.
I'm not going to win the lottery, but I can still bitch about money. GI needs to fill pages. Let the guy write his piece. You're right. Who gives a fuck? Why are people in arms about this? Do his issues lessen anyone's experience here? Let's move the fuck on.
Good points as usual though, Xenoblade was a "4th year Wii game".
It was released in 2010, so it should've been in development since at least 2008 and in 2008 we were still getting PS2 games.
Even on 2010 we got God of War: Ghost of Sparta which looked quite great, but many said "for a PSP game". In that aspect, Xenoblade looked great "for a Wii game".
If anything, kinda shows how bad it was that NOA decided to take so long for a release. Even Disaster (from the same developer) looks quite good, but it will definitely draw comparisons to other games in similar genres and across HD platforms released today..even when the game was originally released in 2008.
Q
qizah
Unconfirmed Member
To some people that actually happens; which is weird to me.
Though, I will say I have often times not seen an issue/problem with a game until it was explicitly mentioned on forums or in reviews. Skyward Sword was one of those games, where people complained about something small (I honestly can't remember right now - it's pretty late here) but I never took notice until I read reviews and general comments on game boards.
I never said it was wrong. I just don't understand why it'd matter as it wasn't designed for HD consoles. I feel like that puts the game against an unfair expectation.
Like I said earlier, I'd be nice to have it in great visuals and the large scope, but you obviously can't have both on the Wii.
This is largely my stance as well, but nothing wrong with his opinion that games like this would be better if the Wii had such capabilities, even knowing such a thought is purely hypothetical.
K
kittens
Unconfirmed Member
Just read the article, and holy shit. Any sort of point the author may have had is buried in immaturity and hyperbole.
Funny, I feel the same way about FFXIII.
Seriously Xenoblade's soundtrack is amazing.
That seems to be his point - it's not an HD game, because of the decisions Nintendo made. He's not criticizing the game, he continually says it deserves better in fact, he's criticizing Nintendo.
Why does it matter? It's his opinion. Like it or not, it's his opinion. More or less I'd just say deal with it.
To me it seems like complaining about something that doesn't affect you because it's not like you care about whether the game is HD or not. It's good enough for you.
Couldn't resist
So.... where does handheld gaming fit in all of this. 60 million PSP's, something like 150 million DS's. Im sure I already know the answer, but Im going to throw it out there anyway.
They sure don't, but that hasnt stopped everyone from feigning outrage at the response to something irrational. So its fair game IMO.
chickdigger802
Banned
opinions don't have to be rational or logical.
And they always say it's nice to want things.
FieryBalrog
Member
Have you seen any of these threads about Nintendo lately?
I agree with wanting to see games in higher quality, that's not unusual at all. The anger I mostly see is how it was presented and responded with, on both sides. Sorry, but posting pictures of "haters gonna hate" makes me less likely to take someone's side even if I agree with the general statement or idea in a message board discussion.
Serious consequences? I would love to hear what you think are serious consequences from the idea of huge open worlds on a HD console.
Are we talking added cost toward the development? Something that takes away from the game? The extra strain on the gaming engine or framework? Lack of snowmen on Panau?
Serious consequences? I would love to hear what you think are serious consequences from the idea of huge open worlds on a HD console.
Are we talking added cost toward the development? Something that takes away from the game? The extra strain on the gaming engine or framework? Lack of snowmen on Panau?
Q
qizah
Unconfirmed Member
That seems to be his point - it's not an HD game, because of the decisions Nintendo made. He's not criticizing the game, he continually says it deserves better in fact, he's criticizing Nintendo.
Why does it matter? It's his opinion. Like it or not, it's his opinion. More or less I'd just say deal with it.
To me it seems like complaining about something that doesn't affect you because it's not like you care about whether the game is HD or not. It's good enough for you.
Couldn't resist
I see that point as well - but I still don't really understand the thinking behind it. It's been almost 6 years now, everyone knows that the Wii isn't a HD platform. Even though the game would probably be good on a HD platform, I think the game speaks for itself about it's quality and the fact that it didn't actually need to be on a HD platform to be a superb game.
It is his opinion and hey - that's cool, everyone has an opinion and is free to it. I just don't really see why it's a big deal, but like you said it might not be good enough for him. Still though - I don't think it's fair to put the game up against expectations like that. At least we can all agree, Xenoblade is damn good lol.
Funny, that's what most of us were saying with his 2006 argument of "Wii hardware sucks for grafix."
Although I really enjoy what you have to offer in the board game thread, all you've done in this thread is ask people to stop or move on. Why are you sticking around in this thread if all you're doing is telling people to not discuss their own opinions?
Rahxephon91
Banned
Funny, I feel the same way about FFXIII.Seriously Xenoblade's soundtrack is amazing.
I don't know what XIII has to do with anything.
If you want to start something, allow me to play the music that plays when anything dramatic happens.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHmEort4KSc
Windom Earle
Member
Xenoblade has lots of problems but graphics are not one of them.
Though I do think he was extreme, I don't disagree entirely with the things he talks about. I would like Nintendo to 'catch up' and, sure, the Wii U will do this but only about 5 years too late, because the PS4 and '720' will overtake it once again. In this case I don't think the disparity in power will be that strong and hamper development as much as the Wii's power in comparison to 360 and PS3, I assume, could (when we're talking about cross-platform content in particular). Even though I won't disregard a game because of its graphics, I do feel that with the Wii a lot of games could have been better (technically) if only the platform was more powerful.
Of course a prettier game is preferable if possible, but in some cases it would be nice if the game would just play better. One such game that I can recall right now is Monster Hunter Tri, which, all things considered, is a pretty great looking game that could have done with a complete lack of loading times in between zones (or even having one big world, but that would kind of change the gameplay). Some more variety in the environments and monster AI would've been nice too. Still, a good amount of content packed in there.
In regard to Xenoblade, I haven't played it myself but going by the screens and gameplay videos I do wonder what this could have looked like on 'contemporary' hardware, but it doesn't seem like they had to compromise the grandeur of the game or gameplay to accommodate the Wii. As long as the gameplay is solid I don't mind the graphics to be lacking, but at some point the platform's deficiencies in power won't just affect the shininess of the game but bleed into technical limitations of a more severe level and I don't doubt that's been an issue with a lot of third parties not choosing to go cross-platform on Wii. As most buyers of Nintendo platforms I only really go for the first party stuff anyway and Nintendo's games are always tailor made for their platforms, so it hasn't been apparent on the Wii as much in that respect.
One thing that's cool about the Wii's relative lack in power is that game development probably doesn't cost as much and results in developers on a budget being attracted to the platform, especially considering it has a pretty big userbase though I hear the software attachment rate (or w.e its called) is pretty low, but the people who don't buy other games than Wii Sports aren't the target audience anyway. I believe this was the reason MH3 development shifted from PS3 to Wii in the first place.
Of course a prettier game is preferable if possible, but in some cases it would be nice if the game would just play better. One such game that I can recall right now is Monster Hunter Tri, which, all things considered, is a pretty great looking game that could have done with a complete lack of loading times in between zones (or even having one big world, but that would kind of change the gameplay). Some more variety in the environments and monster AI would've been nice too. Still, a good amount of content packed in there.
In regard to Xenoblade, I haven't played it myself but going by the screens and gameplay videos I do wonder what this could have looked like on 'contemporary' hardware, but it doesn't seem like they had to compromise the grandeur of the game or gameplay to accommodate the Wii. As long as the gameplay is solid I don't mind the graphics to be lacking, but at some point the platform's deficiencies in power won't just affect the shininess of the game but bleed into technical limitations of a more severe level and I don't doubt that's been an issue with a lot of third parties not choosing to go cross-platform on Wii. As most buyers of Nintendo platforms I only really go for the first party stuff anyway and Nintendo's games are always tailor made for their platforms, so it hasn't been apparent on the Wii as much in that respect.
One thing that's cool about the Wii's relative lack in power is that game development probably doesn't cost as much and results in developers on a budget being attracted to the platform, especially considering it has a pretty big userbase though I hear the software attachment rate (or w.e its called) is pretty low, but the people who don't buy other games than Wii Sports aren't the target audience anyway. I believe this was the reason MH3 development shifted from PS3 to Wii in the first place.
I don't know, I disagree with this sentiment. I have loved playing PS2 and now PSP games remastered in HD on my PS3. Those games were designed for systems less powerful than the Wii and yet they are much better on and HD system and still look fantastic even though they were not originally designed for HD platforms.
Even when replaying games i have beaten many times over i continually find myself being amazed and thinking "I am finally experiencing this the way it was meant to be played" and finally seeing what the designers really intended. I guess I'm just a graphics whore though?
Its probably more because the article has a point. A minor one, thats already been well discussed, wrapped in what is very very VERY clearly incendiary language and digs, followed by him asking mods for a specialized quick account approval, that he was granted, and led to a few 'oh so hilarious' GIFs.
The article had its share of extremely obvious baiting, and he was rewarded with an account, where he came here and did a bit more baiting with a bit of "You Mad" sprinkled on top. The article itself isnt upsetting people that much with the exception of a few. Its not like we didnt see this 5 years ago in droves, its everything that followed it. From the digs on twitter to the stuff he posted once he entered the thread.
MisterHero
Super Member
And before PCs today there was the arcades. Console games took off because people wanted to play games specifically made for consoles. People who liked Arcade games were never going to be completely satisfied on a console, same with PC fans.
Raising standards is good thing, but amazingly, PS3's failure to justify how much they pushed their hardware still hasn't made people ask if this generation was too much too fast.
"Waggle" with Kinect was the last push 360 needed to be a successful console. The HD twins were both fighting for the same 3rd party exclusives. It wasn't even about the interface, they wanted the expanded market because SURPRISE good graphics couldn't justify everything Sony, MS or 3rd Parties did.
DCharlie
And even i am moderately surprised
and the argument is that some of us, right or wrong, don't want to be having the same arguments a few years after 2012 again either.
I'm used to where abouts i think the Wii U is going to be in comparison to current and next gen - i've had my rant and i've "gotten over it" but i can't hide the fact that i want, in an ideal world, the Wii U to be able to go toe to toe with the HD twins coming later.
It -is- a factor for people who have multi-consoles/PC - perhaps the OP rant is a bit over the top and, yes, we've heard it before but hey - i don't think it's trolling to want a company you care about to blow you away in all departments again.
Criminal Upper
Banned
Articles like these make it seem as if all games from the PS2/GameCube/Xbox era were all worthless because they're graphics weren't amazing.