Support NeoGAF

StevieP · Oct 29, 2011

Heavy said:
At the same time, don't you think there's a chance that what they're hinting at in these interviews might have some basis on reality? Why would they be discussing it at all if there wasn't some truth to it?

My whole complaint is the absolutes people talk with... I don't know if Samaritan or even near-Samaritan visuals will be possible, and neither do you or StevieP or whoever. Stop denouncing everything with such definitive statements.

Let me ask you a question. You are aware that the technology in consoles (and handhelds, and phones, etc etc) is based on existing technology - correct?

It may be customized to a certain degree, of course. But if you can agree with that, then you can easily see why I speak with a degree of certainty with the level of technology that will be going into consoles designed for 2012/2013 (or even 2014 in the worst case scenario) releases. All you need to do is to look at the roadmaps of the technology companies that license and re/custom-design their technology to the console manufacturers.

I can assure you there is no magic upcoming technology in that timeframe that will allow Epic's demo to run in a <200w thermal envelope.

Now, I concede that it's possible for one of those manufacturers to build a console that costs $700 and looks like this:

But that would defeat the entire purpose of a console - meant to be a streamlined device purchased relatively cheaply for half a decade of simple goodness under your television. If a

less exaggerated

massive console is unveiled and after the CG trailers subsides it produces the same images that an even more massive PC produces, I will gladly eat the associated crow. I just bet my dick that it isn't going to happen.

BurntPork · Oct 29, 2011

I want a LEGO console.

TheLastCandle · Oct 29, 2011

I'll pay 299 for a Wii U.

I'm glad they are decideing to re-unveil it. I'm as big a Ninty fan as you will find, but that showing this year was really lackluster, and that's being very generous.

It honestly seems like they understand where they fucked up recently. I hope they blow the doors off of E3 next year. Showing an HD Mario, Zelda, Metroid, or what have you will have me squealing like a school girl.

TunaLover · Oct 29, 2011

So many Gamecubes

Barack Lesnar · Oct 29, 2011

36 GCs taped together... now that's a beast.

Look, you may be right, you may be wrong. I'm not gonna say either way. What I find most confusing is why you're always at the forefront of the people who reject any notion of Samaritan-capable tech? As a gamer, wouldn't you WANT our next consoles to be able to run that or something close to it? This is why I pointed out that it seems like you always argue against the possibility of it because the Wii U's rumored specs are what they are so you want to make sure people don't believe PS4 and 720 are that much more powerful.

BurntPork · Oct 29, 2011

Heavy said:
36 GCs taped together... now that's a beast.

Look, you may be right, you may be wrong. I'm not gonna say either way. What I find most confusing is why you're always at the forefront of the people who reject any notion of Samaritan-capable tech? As a gamer, wouldn't you WANT our next consoles to be able to run that or something close to it? This is why I pointed out that it seems like you always argue against the possibility of it because the Wii U's rumored specs are what they are so you want to make sure people don't believe PS4 and 720 are that much more powerful.

Well, to be fair, there are gamers who want mid-budget games to continue to exist...

StevieP · Oct 29, 2011

Heavy said:
36 GCs taped together... now that's a beast.

Look, you may be right, you may be wrong. I'm not gonna say either way. What I find most confusing is why you're always at the forefront of the people who reject any notion of Samaritan-capable tech? As a gamer, wouldn't you WANT our next consoles to be able to run that or something close to it? This is why I pointed that it seems like you always argue against the possibility of it because the Wii U's rumored specs are what they are so you want to make sure people don't believe PS4 and 720 are that much more powerful.

There is not a single doubt in my mind that the Wii U will be the weakest console of next generation, and that's considering that we don't have any final specs for any of the 3 nex gen consoles. That simply comes down to timeframe of release and to a much smaller degree the size of the box (which could change).

As a gamer, I already have the capability to produce Samaritan-level visuals on my PC. As a gamer, if you wanted something that high level sooner you could also build yourself a PC as such.

Maybe I'm a cynic, but I'm also (fortunately or unfortunately) a realist. I know what to expect when I play on my consoles, and I know what to expect when I play games on my PC. I'm not being dismissive for the sake of being dismissive. The pie-in-the-sky expectations will not only lead to disappointment to many gamers (which I care far less about than my next point) but a lot more AAA-only games that are risk averse. In fact, if you say you read Mr. Capps' latest interview, there is an entire section as to how damanging this mentality is in the gaming industry. Which is ironic, because in the next paragraph he mentions how he had to spend way too much making Gears 3.

There have been far too many studio closures, mergers, buyouts, and massive layoffs this gen already. Having those expectations is a double-edged sword, certainly.

BurntPork said:
Well, to be fair, there are gamers who want mid-budget games to continue to exist...

And BurntPork sums all that up in 1 sentence... haha damn

bgassassin · Oct 29, 2011

Heavy said:
36 GCs taped together... now that's a beast.

Look, you may be right, you may be wrong. I'm not gonna say either way. What I find most confusing is why you're always at the forefront of the people who reject any notion of Samaritan-capable tech? As a gamer, wouldn't you WANT our next consoles to be able to run that or something close to it? This is why I pointed out that it seems like you always argue against the possibility of it because the Wii U's rumored specs are what they are so you want to make sure people don't believe PS4 and 720 are that much more powerful.

I focus on business strategy before anything else. That includes being a Nintendo fan. Wii U's "lack of power" isn't that relevant to me since I know it will be the weakest of the three and the games will be a huge improvement over Wii.

cajunator · Oct 29, 2011

I don't really want a huge upgrade in graphics. I want an upgrade in interfaces and interesting control options. I wouldl ike the 360/Ps3 successors to go that route as well.

GSR · Oct 29, 2011

BurntPork said:
I want a LEGO console.

Nintendo announces Wii U cases will be made entirely of Legos and can be customized by buying "family design packs", takes over development of Lego City Stories, integrates My Lego Network into the firmware. Stock triples overnight.

Gravijah · Oct 29, 2011

no one actually cares about lego anymore

what nintendo need to do is sell themselves to snapple.

iamshadowlark · Oct 29, 2011

Im fairly sure StevieP has no real idea of what he keeps trying to go on about. He's simply a pc enthusiast with simple knowledge of pc parts and manufacturing processes. Im pretty certain he has no idea of what samaritan really is and has no idea of why and why not its possible on next gen consoles.

Barack Lesnar · Oct 29, 2011

StevieP said:
There is not a single doubt in my mind that the Wii U will be the weakest console of next generation, and that's considering that we don't have any final specs for any of the 3 nex gen consoles. That simply comes down to timeframe of release and to a much smaller degree the size of the box (which could change).

As a gamer, I already have the capability to produce Samaritan-level visuals on my PC. As a gamer, if you wanted something that high level sooner you could also build yourself a PC as such.

Maybe I'm a cynic, but I'm also (fortunately or unfortunately) a realist. I know what to expect when I play on my consoles, and I know what to expect when I play games on my PC. I'm not being dismissive for the sake of being dismissive. The pie-in-the-sky expectations will not only lead to disappointment to many gamers (which I care far less about than my next point) but a lot more AAA-only games that are risk averse. In fact, if you say you read Mr. Capps' latest interview, there is an entire section as to how damanging this mentality is in the gaming industry. Which is ironic, because in the next paragraph he mentions how he had to spend way too much making Gears 3.

There have been far too many studio closures, mergers, buyouts, and massive layoffs this gen already. Having those expectations is a double-edged sword, certainly.

A good post Stevie, but this part I certainly don't agree with:

As a gamer, I already have the capability to produce Samaritan-level visuals on my PC. As a gamer, if you wanted something that high level sooner you could also build yourself a PC as such.

We will never get Samaritan quality visuals and production without it being a console port, meaning the consoles must be able to produce at least similar visuals. The reason is that the consoles are where the money is. There's a reason why we don't see expensive, high-tech games like Crysis 1 made anymore which are 100% built to take full advantage of PC hardware. So in that sense, as a gamer, you should certainly hope we get Samaritan-capable tech for next-gen consoles.

StevieP · Oct 29, 2011

iamshadowlark said:
Im fairly sure StevieP has no real idea of what he keeps trying to go on about. He's simply a pc enthusiast with simple knowledge of pc parts and manufacturing processes. Im pretty certain he has no idea of what samaritan really is and has no idea of why and why not its possible on next gen consoles.

Correct me, in that case.

So in that sense, as a gamer, you should certainly hope we get Samaritan-capable tech for next-gen consoles.

Well, aside from the fact that BF3, Witcher 2, Metro 2033, etc downports on console saying hello - I specified that if you want that level of fidelity *sooner* than console manufacturers can affordably give it to you, you can also build a more expensive PC to give it to you now. As time goes on, the expense becomes less. If you look at the projected roadmaps, 2014 parts at 20nm become the time where the thermal cost to that much horsepower is feasible on a single GPU.

In that same Mike Capps interview, we get this little nugget:

In a newly published interview with Develop, Capps said game revenue has moved to the service and microtransaction model, and console makers must adapt and allow developers greater control.

Right now were not even allowed to change the prices of virtual content, said Capps.

Were not even allowed to set the prices. I just dont think this protectionist approach is going to be successful in a world where the price of virtual items changes on a day-today basis.

Most mobile platforms allow developers to set their own pricing schemes, and Capps said the process of purchasing virtual goods on apps is far more flexible.

He added that double-A games will never come back unless manufacturers lose the notion of a game being $60 or not released, and that if it continues developers will move to PC to release their games.

While I highly doubt it will happen, his frustration is apparent.

Barack Lesnar · Oct 29, 2011

StevieP said:
Well, aside from the fact that BF3, Witcher 2, Metro 2033, etc downports on console saying hello -

The point is that a game like BF3 obviously wouldn't have been able to be such a huge undertaking encompassing $50million+ (whatever the cost was) and several years of development without the console market, so it's irrelevant that it was downported from PC. Like, if the current consoles were Wii-level in terms of power, there's no way BF3 would be what it is today -- just not financially viable.

iamshadowlark · Oct 29, 2011

StevieP said:
Correct me, in that case.

.

I correct you everytime with facts about Samaritan and why it could be possible on next gen consoles and you always post some vague spiel about how hardware limitations. I explained just a couple pages ago why a samaritan quality game won't require the ridiculous amount of power you keep spouting about and you again vaguely try to brush it off with some bullshit about nanobots.

If you know at all what you are talking about please provide me with an explanation , from a strictly developmental standpoint, on why a game of that quality will not be possible. You always seem so sure about what you say, so im positive there is some reason behind this cockiness.

IceDoesntHelp · Oct 29, 2011

Heavy said:
As a gamer, wouldn't you WANT our next consoles to be able to run that or something close to it?

Nope. Graphics mean shit all to me, sure it can be easier on the eyes, and easier to understand your surroundings, but we really don't need graphics like that. Not at all.

StevieP · Oct 29, 2011

Heavy said:
The point is that a game like BF3 obviously wouldn't have been able to be such a huge undertaking encompassing $50million+ (whatever the cost was) and several years of development without the console market, so it's irrelevant that it was downported from PC. Like, if the current consoles were Wii-level in terms of power, there's no way BF3 would be what it is today -- just not financially viable.

Well, the Wii was a blip. Using fixed (DX7-era) pipelines instead of DX9-era hardware put it in a place where scaling was almost impossible - games had to be rewritten entirely if they were built strictly for the DX9-spec hardware and for the most part third parties did not want to undertake that fairly substantial effort for what they deemed from the start of the generation to be little gain.

From here on out, the architectures will allow for scaling if third parties choose to undertake that effort. It's why games like BF3, which (on Ultra) requires a 750w+ dual-GPU beast to fully take advantage of still looks respectable on hardware far less powerful (the consoles). It's why I can play Valve's latest game on my beast, or on my integrated-GPU work laptop.

Whether third parties choose to scale their games across all upcoming hardware is a different story, but it will certainly be possible to. That's not to say they don't have to set a baseline (they absolutely do) but I'm pretty certain a game that looks like Epic's certain scripted cutscene would be expensive enough that they'd port it to Vita if it's feasible to do so. Thing is, a console released any time within the next couple years would also get the shorter end of the scaling-stick in that regard. Visual trickery ("smoke and mirrors", as per the previous page) and "optimization" can only take it so far. Yes, you code far closer to the metal on a console, but the laws of physics/thermal walls are the still the real enemy in this equation.

I correct you everytime with facts about Samaritan and why it could be possible on next gen consoles

"Optimization" - the discussion was already had. And dismissed. Read blu's post. Someone with actual experience in said optimization

Barack Lesnar · Oct 29, 2011

IceDoesntHelp said:
Nope. Graphics mean shit all to mean, sure it can be easier on the eyes, and easier to understand your surroundings, but we really don't need graphics like that. Not at all.

lol

Yeah, they provide nothing, just make things a bit easier on the eyes. Should've stopped at SNES, imo.

IceDoesntHelp · Oct 29, 2011

Heavy said:
lol

Yeah, they provide nothing, just make things a bit easier on the eyes. Should've stopped at SNES, imo.

Sorry, are you mocking me? Am I not aloud to have an opinion now?

Barack Lesnar · Oct 29, 2011

StevieP said:
Well, the Wii was a blip. Using fixed (DX7-era) pipelines instead of DX9-era hardware put it in a place where scaling was almost impossible - games had to be rewritten entirely if they were built strictly for the DX9-spec hardware and for the most part third parties did not want to undertake that fairly substantial effort for what they deemed from the start of the generation to be little gain.

From here on out, the architectures will allow for scaling if third parties choose to undertake that effort. It's why games like BF3, which (on Ultra) requires a 750w+ dual-GPU beast to fully take advantage of still looks respectable on hardware far less powerful (the consoles). It's why I can play Valve's latest game on my beast, or on my integrated-GPU work laptop.

Whether third parties choose to scale their games across all upcoming hardware is a different story, but it will certainly be possible to. That's not to say they don't have to set a baseline (they absolutely do) but I'm pretty certain a game that looks like Epic's certain scripted cutscene would be expensive enough that they'd port it to Vita if it's feasible to do so.

Honestly, I'm having a hard time seeing if this post really addressed my point, which was referencing your "just get a PC if you want Samaritan graphics" statement, which simply isn't true because devs won't spend the tens of millions of dollars needed to create those visuals on a platform whose financial return wouldn't be enough to justify the cost. Even if they scaled it down like you said, there's no way they would spend all that extra money on the PC version... it would be the same as this gen.

IceDoesntHelp said:
Sorry, are you mocking me? Am I not aloud to have an opinion now?

I was applying your logic. We might as well stick with last-gen systems if graphics mean nothing and don't add anything to games except making them "easier on the eyes".

cajunator · Oct 29, 2011

IceDoesntHelp said:
Sorry, are you mocking me? Am I not aloud to have an opinion now?

I agree with you. Having owned all three consoles and an HDTV for a little while now, it has been pretty apparent that it hasn't made a lot of difference to me in terms of enjoyment. The main benefit of HD has been to create more detailed worlds, but I'd like more creative control input ideas. Wii Motion+, Kinect, Sony Move were a great start and I want to see an evolution of that, far beyond an improvement of the visuals.

LOCK · Oct 29, 2011

I will be satisfied with a next gen console that can run the Witcher 2 on its highest settings with ease. Thats about it. So get to work Nintendo.

IceDoesntHelp · Oct 29, 2011

Heavy said:
I was applying your logic. We might as well stick with last-gen systems if graphics mean nothing and don't add anything to games except making them "easier on the eyes".

And that would be perfectly fine with me, honestly what makes a game for me is the controls, story, innovation and the replay value, not the graphics.
Sorry if you disagree with my opinion.

StevieP · Oct 29, 2011

Heavy said:
Honestly, I'm having a hard time seeing if this post really addressed my point, which was referencing your "just get a PC if you want Samaritan graphics" statement, which simply isn't true because devs won't spend the tens of millions of dollars needed to create those visuals on a platform whose financial return wouldn't be enough to justify the cost. Even if they scaled it down like you said, there's no way they would spend all that extra money on the PC version... it would be the same as this gen.

Maybe I'll reply with a story this time:

A friend of mine who hasn't seen me in years paid me a visit a year or so back. He said "holy crap, you have Modern Warfare 2"

I said "yeah, unfortunately I spent $30 on that turd - I can't believe they took out dedicated servers and put in the console p2p system. And as per usual with CoD, it doesn't look that great"

As a console-only gamer, he replied with the look a dog gives you when you say something funny.

He said "does it work with that 360 pad you have there?"

I laughed and said "yes, but you should really play with a keyboard and mouse - you'd get creamed online, even with the autoaim you get with a controller" but seeing as how he wasn't accustomed to KBM I handed him the 360 pad.

While he was getting absolutely creamed, he was still in awe. He said "holy SHIT it looks SO much better than on 360!" and I said... "uh... really? Not really... I mean the image quality is better because it's 1080p and it's got all the AA/AF/texture rez cranked I guess... but it's not really a looker of a game"

Then the Rundown map loaded and I think he jizzed in his pants.

My point? Well, the money's already being spent on AAA games, and scaling allows for wonderful benefits to that money spent - even on aging modified Quake 3 engines. The economies of scale also, however, have diminishing returns to contend with at the higher end - as you'd already mentioned. This gets us back to Samaritan in a funny way, doesn't it?

MDX · Oct 29, 2011

Medalion said:
I really would love to settle once and for all how they intend to address the fact that Wii-U has this fancy tablet and can we get a 2nd tablet controller to work with it, and everybody else who plays locally is restricted to Wii-motes?

The WiiU is a next gen Wii.
Meaning its a motion control console
that brings to the table a new touch screen controller.

The Wii, the original motion control console,
brought to the table the balance board.

Like the balance board, the new touch screen controller can
work alongside the wiimote and nunchuck for specific games.
There might even be the possibility to use multiple touch screen controllers at the same time.

Like the balance board, the new touch screen controller
is intended to get a new consumer group to buying the Nintendo console.
That consumer group are future core gamers.
That group tends to be solitary players at home (This is why the focus is on ONE touch screen controller).
who, tend to play multi-player games online.

Therefore, to ensure that Nintendo can keep core gamers to their console, they will also have to provide a robust online service on the WiiU, and, get third parties to bring their AAA games to the console that cater to these core gamers.

This means, that Nintendo has to future proof the WiiU in graphics and processing capabilities to the point that whatever Sony or MS launches a year or two after, will provide no to minimal differences for consoles priced under $400. Or scale easily to still get ports, for powerful consoles priced higher. However, consoles priced above $400 will generally be sold to a niche market in today's economy.

We will truly know the power of the console, based on the performance of their first party games. Traditionally, Nintendo likes to show off with their 60fps games. Will these games run at 60fps at 720p or 1080p? For the WiiU, Nintendo will have to work harder to attract their new target audience: the core gamer. Will the effort be worth it?

BowieZ · Oct 29, 2011

Anyone raised the potential of New Super Mario Bros. Mii being WiiU-3DS interconnective?

Holiday '12 would be a good time for a new 2D Mario game on both systems.

LowEndTorque · Oct 29, 2011

I don't understand why it's totally fine and ok that Sony and MS were bleeding money for years while Nintendo made profit hand over fist for most of this gen. But the minute Nintendo's profits start declining then it's all doom and gloom.

Naked Prime · Oct 29, 2011

So, if MS is really going for another box in 2013. How much of a gap can we honestly expect between in and Wii U, possibly being released within a year of each other?

EricDiesel · Oct 29, 2011

Heavy said:
We might as well stick with last-gen systems if graphics mean nothing and don't add anything to games except making them "easier on the eyes".

Sounds good to me. More money to spend on games!

In all seriousness, though... Yeah, sure, I'd LOVE most console games to look like that five minute Samaritan tech demo. But when you factor in how many man hours it would take to produce graphical details like that for a 20+ hour game... Is that a realistic expectation? In my opinion? FUCK no. Unless you want to buy $70-$80 games, that is. PS2 games were $50. PS3 games are $60. Do you think that extra $10 was for laughs? No. It's to cover the necessary extra work required for HD visuals, among other things.

I mean hey, expect all the "Avatar level visuals" you want, if it makes you happy. But in my own humble opinion, you're in for a letdown. Maybe you want a repeat of "599 US DOLLARS", but most people (including MS and Sony themselves, I'd wager) don't.

I could very easily be very wrong, but I'm not expecting a huge leap, especially regarding the next XBox. I'm expecting an incremental leap in power from that of the Wii U. And as someone that intends to buy all 3 at some point, I'm 100% fine with that.

IrishNinja · Oct 29, 2011

Medalion said:
3DS looks promising by the day but Wii is just a barren wasteland after Zelda for 1 freakin year, that is insane

it's funny; we wax nostalgic about nintendo vs sega in the day, but this is absolutely a page from their book. current console in a lull (or even doing well)? PULL THE PLUG AND SELL NOTHING FOR A YEAR, that'll hype them on the next one!

bgassassin · Oct 29, 2011

IrishNinja said:
it's funny; we wax nostalgic about nintendo vs sega in the day, but this is absolutely a page from their book. current console in a lull (or even doing well)? PULL THE PLUG AND SELL NOTHING FOR A YEAR, that'll hype them on the next one!

I personally want to see consoles getting back to five-year (six at most) cycle. Keep hardware costs down and access newer tech sooner. The world's attention span is too short now to build consoles to last near a decade before their successor is released, and the large early losses taken don't justify that route IMO. Losing billions to make millions is not smart to anybody.

iamshadowlark · Oct 29, 2011

StevieP said:
"Optimization" - the discussion was already had. And dismissed. Read blu's post. Someone with actual experience in said optimization

Dude I have experience in optimization. And lol at my argument being "dismissed". I called out the immense faults in blu's logic and he has yet to even respond back.

In any case it still doesn't change the fact that you parade around here ,trying smugly shoot things down while having extremely little practical knowledge of what you talking about. Please stop the act my friend, someone who actually knows there shit wont buy it.

H_Prestige · Oct 29, 2011

LowEndTorque said:
I don't understand why it's totally fine and ok that Sony and MS were bleeding money for years while Nintendo made profit hand over fist for most of this gen. But the minute Nintendo's profits start declining then it's all doom and gloom.

You have to spend money to make money. MS and Sony already invested in the tech/software/infrastructure that are now paying dividends and will carry them into next gen smoothly. Nintendo is making the investments now and is trying to catch up. The Wii was kind of a miracle in that they spent so little and made so much profit.

Übermatik · Oct 29, 2011

Gravijah said:
no one actually cares about lego anymore

what nintendo need to do is sell themselves to snapple.

YOU SHUTUP!

bgassassin · Oct 29, 2011

iamshadowlark said:
If you believe that a game, with the fidelity of Samaritan , requires "4500" spus at any given instance and you've been working in the industry for 9 years, I dont know what to tell you. IIRC the most intense gpu function in the demo was the image based reflections, which honestly could be toned down as they have little practical use, was fully dynamic and in real time. Any competent developer can tell you that only certain objects need cpu/gpu cycles spent on dynamic reflections and "free" static reflections could've been used without any visible degradation. And thats just the tip of the iceberg as far as real optimizations go. Do you think most scenes need to have 145 lights at any given time? Do you think you need to write that extreme amount of data everytime to the FB? Do you think they needed to shade the whole scene when only certain parts are visble? Remember Epic made a pretty tech demo, not a game.

I guess it's just me, but you all have been saying the same thing from different perspectives.

mugurumakensei · Oct 29, 2011

H_Prestige said:
You have to spend money to make money. MS and Sony already invested in the tech/software/infrastructure that are now paying dividends and will carry them into next gen smoothly. Nintendo is making the investments now and is trying to catch up. The Wii was kind of a miracle in that they spent so little and made so much profit.

Sony's still in the red from the PS3. I don't know if I'd classify that as carrying them into the next gen smoothly.

ItWasMeantToBe19 · Oct 29, 2011

IrishNinja said:
it's funny; we wax nostalgic about nintendo vs sega in the day, but this is absolutely a page from their book. current console in a lull (or even doing well)? PULL THE PLUG AND SELL NOTHING FOR A YEAR, that'll hype them on the next one!

If they don't release Xenoblade in America (which they won't), there will have been like two major games released in America between DKCR (Or Epic Mickey if you count that) and the WiiU which could be 24 months, totally ridiculous.

apana · Oct 29, 2011

Every Wii U should come with a wii remote and nunchuk inside.

bounchfx · Oct 29, 2011

Wii U will need a full Pokemon RPG at launch to get their shit back together.

and i fully welcome it.

Hero of Legend · Oct 29, 2011

bounchfx said:
Wii U will need a full Pokemon RPG at launch to get their shit back together.

and i fully welcome it.

Just give me Stadium 3 by the Stadium series team. I'd jump to the moon!

iamshadowlark · Oct 29, 2011

bgassassin said:
I guess it's just me, but you all have been saying the same thing from different perspectives.

Yeah I can see how you could think that, regarding downgrades and stuff like that, but its a bit different. Samaritan is a tech demo, its only purpose is to look good. In no way does it employ real word game design practices. Its very "sloppy" if thats a good word, and in the post you quoted I gave a few reasons why. You don't design actual games like that.

Thats why me and the people at epic seem to think it is very likely that they could achieve a game around this tech on the next gen hardware, without it costing an arm and a leg. There are other reasons also, in why games will look alot better next gen while at the same time not becoming much more costly and complex.

Gravijah · Oct 29, 2011

bounchfx said:
Wii U will need a full Pokemon RPG at launch to get their shit back together.

and i fully welcome it.

developed by who? genius sonority? looool.

RPGamer92 · Oct 29, 2011

Gravijah said:
developed by who? genius sonority? looool.

Monolithsoft maybe?

Gravijah · Oct 29, 2011

PSFan said:
Monolithsoft maybe?

bwahahahahahahahaha

:/

Sciz · Oct 29, 2011

LowEndTorque said:
I don't understand why it's totally fine and ok that Sony and MS were bleeding money for years while Nintendo made profit hand over fist for most of this gen. But the minute Nintendo's profits start declining then it's all doom and gloom.

Sony and Microsoft are enormous businesses with multiple revenue streams in several different markets. Nintendo has their games business and very little else.

lunchwithyuzo · Oct 29, 2011

Hero of Legend said:
Just give me Stadium 3 by the Stadium series team. I'd jump to the moon!

Wasn't Battle Revolution BW really heavily rumored for Wii recently? What happened to it?

bgassassin · Oct 29, 2011

iamshadowlark said:
Yeah I can see how you could think that, regarding downgrades and stuff like that, but its a bit different. Samaritan is a tech demo, its only purpose is to look good. In no way does it employ real word game design practices. Its very "sloppy" if thats a good word, and in the post you quoted I gave a few reasons why. You don't design actual games like that.

Thats why me and the people at epic seem to think it is very likely that they could achieve a game around this tech on the next gen hardware, without it costing an arm and a leg. There are other reasons also, in why games will look alot better next gen while at the same time not becoming much more costly and complex.

To me it's because the debate was can we expect consoles to have the hardware necessary to run the Samaritan demo and what is optimization. Others said you'd have to remove things to optimize it to run on the hardware. You're saying through optimization things would be removed because they aren't needed for an actual game. In the end both sides are saying things will be removed, just for different reasons. The debate to me should have been about the degree of removal to achieve the optimization to run on affordable console hardware. e.g. How close would a 20hr game look to the original 3min Samaritan demo on a console retailing for $400? It was somewhat in this direction, but not totally.

I think we all agree that games don't look as tech demos that do a whole bunch of stuff to show off "what could be done" with the hardware. Nintendo though tends to be the odd ball with their Zelda demos, but that's another story. For me they say it could be run on one 580, but that's only a small piece of the puzzle they haven't share. The only thing that I've seen that gives a full picture is that they said it was run on an expensive PC with components that could bought today. I can go out and buy components to build a PC for $500 or $5000. They only focused on the GPU. From what I understand the difference your CPU makes becomes more noticeable when games are at lower resolutions, which it what we'll see on consoles. So knowing the CPU used is very important for me. Same with the amount of DDR3 it had. Even the HDD would be something we'd need to know.

I just get the feeling that what they are asking for would be too expensive both now, and a few years from now.

AranhaHunter · Oct 29, 2011

Re-unveil suggests that they rushed unveiling it at this year's E3 due to poor Wii sales. It wasn't ready and it showed, even though some people kept arguing otherwise.

bgassassin · Oct 29, 2011

E3 2005 - Wii tease
E3 2006 - Wii full unveil

E3 2011 - Wii U tease
E3 2012 - Wii U full unveil

To me it wasn't rushed, just poorly executed.

Support NeoGAF

Nintendo: Wii U Re-Unveil At E3 2012, Working On Strong Launch, No Pokemon?

Banned

Banned

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Similar threads