It's a fair question given that you honestly do not seem to know what money is, or at least how it relates to the production of video games. Yes, it's possible that Japanese people are genetically limited to producing 512x512 textures. But that's a little less likely than that higher quality assets take more time and money to produce.
-
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
It's a fair question given that you honestly do not seem to know what money is, or at least how it relates to the production of video games. Yes, it's possible that Japanese people are genetically limited to producing 512x512 textures. But that's a little less likely than that higher quality assets take more time and money to produce.
Criminal Upper
Banned
Uncharted 3 doesn't look nearly as good as the Witcher 2 running on max settings on PC. So while Uncharted 3 is good I guess, playing it makes me want to punch a kitten.
Flachmatuch
Member
Errr...that is exactly what I'm talking about. The "pushing the envelope" crap cost billions of dollars for Sony and MS (it was a good strategy of attrition for MS btw) and fucked up the conventional games economy quite a bit. You want good looking games, but overall, the money that people who play games can afford and want to spend is simply not enough to support that. There are genres or franchises or individual games that sell enough but not all (or even most) of them. It's not that difficult really.
More work put into better graphics or more features etc cost more money but better developers also cost more money than worse ones. The "quality" of the developer counts too, but better developers will, in a market economy, (should) cost more than bad ones, about as much as their productivity is higher, compensating for quality, so what you actually mean is the *rate of exploitation* of the developer, not the quality. A better developer, according to your logic, is someone who is willing to work more for less. That is all your argument boils down to. What does this lead to?
LaserBuddha
Member
I never suggested anything resembling what you're describing here. I guess it must be more enjoyable to invent ridiculous arguments to argue against. If assets beyond the level of the Wii are too much for a game with a relatively high pedigree, then it exemplifies the sad state of affairs in the Japaense development scene, and that has been my point. When someone talks about how the limitations of the Wii are perfect for making this game possible, what comes to mind for me is how sad it is that that's true.
Ever invested in handheld gaming? There's a reason that the DS was one of the best video game platforms of all time - right up there with the PS2 if not surpassing it.
I wouldn't use Skyrim as an example of anything to make your point.
1) its budget was vastly vastly higher in asset production and people, and the development cycle was longer as well
2) it looks far better than Xenoblade, sure, but even with hi rez texture packs and cranked PC settings it's... it's not the best looking game, to put it mildly.
3) The massive bugs, the "hey i've been in this building before" syndrome is rampant, and the "took an arrow to the knee" phenomenon perfectly exemplifies the necessary restraints put on budgeting (even with a game that expected a much higher ROI)
Why does it seem like people keep on using the same tired points over and over?
What's the point in bringing up PC graphics in a discussion about console graphics?
Also the difference between the witcher 2 PC and a high end PS360 game still isn't quite as large as xenoblade and a typical current gen game.
Seriously, why are you so bothered that some people wish a game looked better?
Why do defenders keep assuming that people are asking for the "best looking" when it comes to graphics?
What's the point in bringing up PC graphics in a discussion about console graphics?
Also the difference between the witcher 2 PC and a high end PS360 game still isn't quite as large as xenoblade and a typical current gen game.
Seriously, why are you so bothered that some people wish a game looked better?
Why do defenders keep assuming that people are asking for the "best looking" when it comes to graphics?
Meccanical
Member
If you don't want the best looking what the hell do you want?
If you don't want the best looking why bother at all?
Dusk Golem
A 21st Century Rockefeller
I always get a bit sad on the inside whenever a downright terrible and dumb article gets praise in it's comments section. Not saying I expect the Game Informer readership to be full of bright bulb and unbiased opinions, but I do suspect the comments might have been moderated somewhat.
Because not everything is black and white. Because there's still a very relevant difference between what can be done with the exact same budget on Wii and a high-end platform -- or even a mid-end platform such as the other current consoles.
Return question, why are people working so incredibly hard to come up with half-baked strawman arguments as to why anyone asking better IQ must be either a hypocrite, have unrealistic expectations or somehow "hate" any of the companies involved? Is it that utterly inconceivable that they'd really just rather play the game with better graphics?
Meccanical
Member
Then play a game with better graphics.
CambriaRising
Member
I think the game looks pretty good. I just wish it was in hd, that's all.
SkyMasterson
Member
Holy hell....
Not every game can look like Uncharted or Gears of War and I'm fine with that and so are a lot of other people.
Super Mario Galaxy still looks great to me. A lot of that has to do with it's art style. I think Deadly Creatures still looks very good. Hell I'm one of those weirdos that thinks sprite based games still look sexy(Super Castlevania IV gives me a boner, seriously).
Some people just want something that is easy on the eyes. I'm really loving Xenoblade, the story, characters, battle system, huge open worlds but it would be nice if it looked a little better.
I'm not saying I want it with Witcher 2 type visuals, just a tad cleaner than it is. Let me be clear, I'm sure Monolith Soft did all it could considering the Wii hardware and the games budget. I'm pretty simple, all I would like is it running in 720p or hell 540P with some AA.
It's not so bad that I would write an article about it though, the writer is clearly a tool and just looking for some hits.
Riposte
Member
lol, man. I don't even know how to mock this.
Can you prove this? I've heard otherwise, especially concerning shaders tech.
Stupid article, but I have to admit, on my 42" plasma Xenoblade was a very hard game to look at until I switched over to Dolphin. The game looks great but the resolution kills the visuals completely. That said, I think the same of 360/PS3 games, so personally it's not just a Wii problem to me.
H_Prestige
Banned
Dude, really? FFX? That game is just FFXIII with a few extra sidequests + backtracking. Yeah, no way anyone could pull that off on a ps3.
FFXII isn't that big either. It's not even one seamless world and only weapons are modeled. Dark Souls has a bigger scope in most ways.
"What's the point of bringing up HD graphics in a discussion about Wii graphics?"
Criminal Upper
Banned
I don't understand what's wrong with wishing for graphics that were just competent.
Go ahead and try to mock away. I've never understood the point in including PC and consoles in the same group. That's no different than putting consoles and handhelds in the same group, which is asinine IMO.
Yes, Witcher 2 is a DX9 game that uses DX9 tech.
The whole topic is about people wishing they could play Nintendo exclusives with closer to current gen graphics, why wouldn't I stay on topic.
Would it be better if I blindly defended Nintendo because some people want to take opinions to the extreme?
Great contribution, will read again.
CoffeeJanitor
Member
I think the correct answer was: "That's actually a reasonable stance to have. Good day to you."
And I smh whenever people bring up Dolphin. You're just proving the point...
Meccanical
Member
There is no point.
No, there's a point. Some people are just missing or ignoring it.
To be fair, the writer of the article probably didn't help by how he expressed his opinion. Seems like some people automatically went into the defense, which limited progression of the discussion.
cartman414
Member
There's nothing wrong with wishing a game could have better graphics, as long as there's a healthy sense of perspective. I mean, one can be disappointed with the graphics of Wii games such as Xenoblade, yet understand the circumstances. Accusing the developers of being lazy and/or inefficient is incredibly shortsighted, and yes, entitled. Let's face it, this generation has been a cluster f-bomb to developers.
Maybe Wii and HD consoles should be in "different groups," too? Maybe that's where these differences of opinion are coming from. Maybe to some people, wishing Xenoblade had the graphical prowess of something outside its "group" is "asinine."
Taken to extremes, of course, we could place every individual kind of hardware into its own group and then never have to think about comparing anything. I'm not even so sure this is a bad thing.
The issue is that the border lines sometimes seem to be drawn strangely. In this case, it's saying that Wii graphics are unacceptable because of what other consoles can do, yet not saying that those consoles themselves are unacceptable because of what PC's can do. It makes it sound like a post-facto rationalization, wherein one claims to want the best graphics, but is suspiciously willing to settle on less-than-best as long as this choice is inclusive of certain companies' hardware and not others'. Another example would be people who claim that Wii graphics are "good enough" and anything else is just pointlessly going past diminishing returns, while bristling at the suggestion that the industry should never have advanced past the SNES or something. Their preferences oddly single out the Wii as the perfect console, which is so coincidental that it seems like what's really happening is they're inventing reasons to prefer the thing.
Around here it seems to be the utmost sin to claim to like something for "objective" reasons which instead seem to point to preferences for certain companies or IP's or other "irrelevant" factors.
If the graphics didn't matter, so many of its fans wouldn't be hyping Dolphin. The game would've been more appealing off the wii. 720p and aa, wouldn't cost any more. Bringing PC graphics, handhelds, uncharted, etc. into it is just dick measuring levels of defensiveness. No one cares, and its not really relevant to the original complaint. Whats wrong with you?
They have a Wii-U now, and Nintendo owns the developers, so I'm sure they'll make something more bearable. Maybe they'll even try a cheap HD port of their own. Then you too can be a graphics whore when you finally realize how awful the original looked.
They have a Wii-U now, and Nintendo owns the developers, so I'm sure they'll make something more bearable. Maybe they'll even try a cheap HD port of their own. Then you too can be a graphics whore when you finally realize how awful the original looked.