what is this and why does it look so bad?
No one said is bad but where are finished the texture details, for example?
what is this and why does it look so bad?
It depends on what kind of conversation you're interested in. If you're simply invested to the point where you look at a screen in passing, shrug your shoulder, and think it looks good without caring about the technical aspects, then sure. Even in the hypothetical situation where the tech gurus come in and tear a game to shreds, that's hardly in and of itself an indication that end users still won't think it's good looking game. In that regard, I agree with what you're getting at.
But if you want to venture into the realm of tech enthusiasm, then no. You can't just shrug your shoulders and agree that the games look good and move on. There's a lot of depth in the conversation that can be traversed if one so desires. There's nothing wrong with comparing and contrasting in great detail nuances that may go unnoticed by most of the public.
The only problem that arises is when people don't understand the parameters of the conversation. In a conversation about what looks good to the casual observer, in-depth tech analysis can be unnecessary and obnoxious. In a conversation about technical merit, reactions that amount to "I don't know; looks good to me" can be considered substantively lacking.
No one said is bad but where are finished the texture details, for example?
I was skeptical about Pikmin 3's graphics but when I saw that gameplay trailer they put out a few months ago I was sold. The world looked so lively and well thought out, I honestly couldn't care if the ground texture looked flat, because everything else looked gorgeously done.
what is this and why does it look so bad?
"Sire! I have found the shores of Toblerone Beach!"
The ground textures/objects in Pikmin 3 were designed with a camera in mind that is pulled way back about 99% of the time. Same deal with the NPC's in W101. Why waste a bunch of detail on things you're hardly ever going to be close enough to see?
Dude, it's definitely a really nice looking game. I said in my first post that it might well be a whisker above PS3/360 capabilities (I'm not really sure). My 'Toblerone Beach' comment was just a light-hearted jibe.Come on Dave! I've been a lurker for years and I've always had, a lot of disagreements with a lot of what you've said, to say the least. And that's fine, right? But surely we can both agree that this is a pretty looking game right? Whether its 'next-gen' or not is another argument, but surely you can agree that its a good looking game with glimpses of great texture work and big draw distance's that's nothing to scoff at?
It is definitely an attractive game and I'd happily play it if I didn't have a complete aversion to JRPGs.And even in the light of something along the lines of Agni's Prophecy, its still a game that you could play without feeling that its ugly and primitive? And for many of us Nintendo fans, its a breath of fresh air, and even for none Nintendo fans and JRPG fans, its something that's attractive and graphically promising?
Dude, it's definitely a really nice looking game. I said in my first post that it might well be a whisker above PS3/360 capabilities (I'm not really sure). My 'Toblerone Beach' comment was just a light-hearted jibe.
It is definitely an attractive game and I'd happily play it if I didn't have a complete aversion to JRPGs.
It doesn't blow me away though. I don't look at it and think "fuck me, I've never seen anything that looks that good!". I just don't get that dropped jaw that I got the first time I saw a Dreamcast game or a 360 game. It's really promising for Wii-U owners to see a high-end current gen standard game this early on though, there'll certainly be more juice to squeeze out of that box.
M°°nblade;46849691 said:Compared to infamous 2, X does look pretty empty, has way less interactivity and physics going on. Characters and textures look better though.
You have 10 secs of small compressed footage of a game in development. If you want to start talking about aliasing, lighting, and texture resolutions then you are going to just be wasting time.
Windfallout
That might be true, if you couldn't zip around that city at high speed grinding power lines, but you can, which sort of flattens that argument.
Not sure how one might take the position that "more stuff" is easier to calculate than "open vista".
Looks like shite. Did you see the flat textures on that dinosaur's dick? Unacceptable.
That might be true, if you couldn't zip around that city at high speed grinding power lines, but you can, which sort of flattens that argument.
Not sure how one might take the position that "more stuff" is easier to calculate than "open vista".
At this scale, you can't expect more. They could improve the edge on the water to be less obvious, though.Very low polygonal terrain
Sun height doesnt affect shadows at all. Here sun is about in 30 degree, but shadow is cast from 80 degree. So lighting is static, mostly prebaked. Shadow resolution looks like 1024k.
Water rendering is very simple, there is no refraction or distortion and no reflections from objects. Also next example of very low resolution alpha textures.
IMO many of them are the same people because they are the types to make or believe hyperbolic claims that don't make sense from a technical POV. The same people who are ignorant about technology are generally the same people who actually believe things like the Zelda tech demo is beyond PS360 level graphics.
It doesn't blow me away though. I don't look at it and think "fuck me, I've never seen anything that looks that good!". I just don't get that dropped jaw that I got the first time I saw a Dreamcast game or a 360 game. It's really promising for Wii-U owners to see a high-end current gen standard game this early on though, there'll certainly be more juice to squeeze out of that box.
To be honest, I'm pretty happy with where the Wii U stands now. With the PS4 and 720, I'll get my fair share of Uncharteds, Halos, God of Wars, etc. They'll scratch that itch for me like the PS3/360 this gen and blow my brains out graphically, and I can get my "mature" experiences from there.
With my Wii U, I'm stoked for games like Pikmin 3, W101, Mario Kart, Wind Waker HD, "X" game, the Yoshi game, etc. And they all look great to me. Happy to finally get HD Nintendo games, and with solid efforts put into them. My Wii U will easily fill in that void I've been missing for a long time. Good old colorful Nintendo games with a huge visual boost over the Wii, and we haven't even seen the true efforts by Nintendo's internal studios yet.
My Wii U, PS4 and 720 will all sit comfortably under my TV
Ask me again when Sony and Microsoft reveal their new tech. Perfect Dark Zero looked amazing back in 2005.
it's literally a gamecube game they they stuck a new lighting system on
Its obviously more than that, higher resolution textures, better lighting, I wouldn't expect them to go overboard with a remake.
NOT static lighting. Definitely not prebaked (I don't even know what that's supposed to mean when it comes to shadows on dynamic objects). All games with a moving sun lock shadows at some point. A setting sun can cast shadows hundreds of feet long, and this uses gigabytes of RAM for the shadow maps. So all games limit the max angle a shadow can be at. Just look at a time-lapse videos for GTA or RDR to see what I mean.
No it really didn't
Nope.
The shadow right here, is several times longer than the building.
http://youtu.be/i5TQDeoump4?t=1m37s
Hindsight is 20/20. It looked great back then.
So Wii U is not disappointing after all?
It is for a next generation console. The games look fine to me, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't want it to be in the same range as the other two consoles. But yes, I am content with visuals like this. I don't particularly need incredible graphics. And no, this doesn't somehow invalidate my ability to be amazed by the visuals in future games.So Wii U is not disappointing after all?
I consider a new console that is on par with 7 year old hardware disappointing.
Don´t know about you.
TP only has excess bloom in the Twilight which is a stylistic choice. I never understood why people talk as if the whole game is like that.Wind Waker HD is nothing compared to Twilight Bloomcess.
I consider a new console that is on par with 7 year old hardware disappointing.
Don´t know about you.
Ok, time to open some eyes i think.
------
Very low polygonal terrain
Sun height doesnt affect shadows at all. Here sun is about in 30 degree, but shadow is cast from 80 degree. So lighting is static, mostly prebaked. Shadow resolution looks like 1024k.
Particles quality is on pair with pre PS2 era, alpha texture resolution 64x64?
Water rendering is very simple, there is no refraction or distortion and no reflections from objects. Also next example of very low resolution alpha textures.
Foliage is completely sprite based, same as in Xenoblade
LOD is very aggressive, even for sprite based foliage and that means bandwidth problems of WiiU
Yeah, its on pair with midtier current gen open world games, but even that is generous. What is good in this footage? Characters/NPCs models, materials and HDR.
nice post. Could you do one for the good stuff (npc/modesl, materials and HDR). I like learning (not being sarcastic).
nice post. Could you do one for the good stuff (npc/modesl, materials and HDR). I like learning (not being sarcastic).
So, your position is that we have just enough to go on that we should all clearly agree that it looks "good," but not enough to engage in any sort of technical discussion? Keep in mind, my position here is not that I think technical discussion of graphics is an enthralling and meaningful conversation to have, just that it's one that interests people. I can certainly understand why a lot of normal people would look at this and conclude "what a fucking waste of time." But your own attempt to stop the potential meandering just seems kind of flimsy.