Support NeoGAF

[xxracerxx]

I was responding to people saying that their console running JC2 makes it more powerful than WiiU. A little late to that discussion I guess

Anyway, carry on.

I don't think people were saying that at all, just saying that the game is somewhat comparable to X in graphics and draw distance and was on PS3 and 360 years ago.

And I skimmed the thread you linked and so what if they used tricks, it flows extremely well in the game and most people won't notice that the tree in front of them is a tree just to the right. .

 

[Ydahs]

Compared to PC, it's not impressive.
Compared to PS3/360 its decent.
Compared to Wii. It's impressive.

The art direction really goes a long way. Look at Xenoblade. Fantastic looking game for Wii. Great art direction. Lovely environments, but the trailer for Xenoblade, as glorious as it does (just like the original) it's not technically impressive.

Xenoblade is technically impressive and so is X.

Why do you think it's only 'decent' compared to the PS3 and 360?

 

[LeleSocho]

Now the games look like high profile third parties ps360 games so now to this time they can be considered decent (not good, decent...maybe not even that maybe bare minimum. It's still a 2012 console that looks like a 2005 one), by the time these games will be out to be sold Nintendo will probably announce games that maybe will look better than ps360 first parties titles (Unch2-3/Killzone2-3/Halo4/Forza) but Durango and Orbis will be already showed making totally worthless any effort on graphics on wiiu.

Why do you think it's only 'decent' compared to the PS3 and 360?

Considering 7 years between the hardwares? Decent is the absolute best i can give.

 

[Margalis]

To truly be next-gen they need more screen tearing.

 

[JordanLMiller]

Now the games look like high profile third parties ps360 games so now to this time they can be considered decent (not good, decent...maybe not even that maybe bare minimum. It's still a 2012 console that looks like a 2005 one), by the time these games will be out to be sold Nintendo will probably announce games that maybe will look better than ps360 first parties titles (Unch2-3/Killzone2-3/Halo4/Forza) but Durango and Orbis will be already showed making totally worthless any effort on graphics on wiiu.


Considering 7 years between the hardwares? Decent is the absolute best i can give.

Well there you go, any graphical effort on the Wii u is totally worthless. Case closed!

 

[phosphor112]

Xenoblade is technically impressive and so is X.

Why do you think it's only 'decent' compared to the PS3 and 360?

No, Xenoblade is technically impressive, X is not.

What in that X trailer is impressive? There is grass pop in, poly count is EXTREMELY low. LOD for "accessible areas" at that distance are often rasterized into 2D backdrops and as you get closer LOD into 3D. SotC used the exact same technique. It worked extremely well. It worked extremely well in Xenoblade, and it works extremely well in X.

It's not a technically demanding feature.

Want to know why Skyrim looks like shit at a distance and runs like shit? Because they don't do these tricks.

JC2 also uses this trick IIRC.

 

[SteeloDMZ]

lol well i'll give you points for trying, maybe your next attempt will be a bit better.

What the fuck guys? Of course I was being sarcastic. Read my previous "X" related posts :S

X shits on Skyrim's visuals based on this early vid.

No, Xenoblade is technically impressive, X is not.

What in that X trailer is impressive? There is grass pop in, poly count is EXTREMELY low. LOD for "accessible areas" at that distance are often rasterized into 2D backdrops and as you get closer LOD into 3D. SotC used the exact same technique. It worked extremely well. It worked extremely well in Xenoblade, and it works extremely well in X.

It's not a technically demanding feature.

Want to know why Skyrim looks like shit at a distance and runs like shit? Because they don't do these tricks.

JC2 also uses this trick IIRC.

Please, instruct us ignorants more! We want the knowledge too.

 

[The Return of]

X is what I expect from a next gen game. Based on the trailer, I think it blows away everything we have seen from PS3 and 360 easily. It is quite impressive how well it looks especially with the scale

 

[CambriaRising]

Still looks like this gen. Be prepared for Sub-resing.

 

[Dion Blaster]

Considering 7 years between the hardwares? Decent is the absolute best i can give.

This is irrelevant. Just compare them straight up to determine how they look compared to eachother. Then afterwards feel free to make comments based on how long the systems have been out.

 

[Pikma]

No, Xenoblade is technically impressive, X is not.

What in that X trailer is impressive? There is grass pop in, poly count is EXTREMELY low. LOD for "accessible areas" at that distance are often rasterized into 2D backdrops and as you get closer LOD into 3D. SotC used the exact same technique. It worked extremely well. It worked extremely well in Xenoblade, and it works extremely well in X.

It's not a technically demanding feature.

Want to know why Skyrim looks like shit at a distance and runs like shit? Because they don't do these tricks.

JC2 also uses this trick IIRC.

Haha I bet they didn't even know that trick existed, that or their shitty engine doesn't support it.

The game looks fucking fantastic for me, better than most 3rd party efforts on 360/PS3 and maybe on par (even a little bit better in my opinion) with with Sony's 1st party titles.

 

[phosphor112]

Haha I bet they didn't even know that trick existed, that or their shitty engine doesn't support it.

Their shitty engine (that they SWEAR isn't gamebryo) is just that. Shitty.

 

[LeleSocho]

Well there you go, any graphical effort on the Wii u is totally worthless. Case closed!

The ones after Durango/Orbis are, isn't it worthless to spend enormous amount of cash on graphics just for the sake of saying "yeah that's better than ps360"? if people are interested in graphics of course will have one of the other consoles and/or a PC...

also i'm sure that the fact of this being worthless won't stop them to do so, so don't worry about your pretty games on the system.

This is irrelevant. Just compare them straight up to determine how they look compared to eachother. Then afterwards feel free to make comments based on how long the systems have been out.

Irrelevant? Why would i compare them in such a restrict case? to make people happy so that they will have their purchase justified? ok then there you go... between all the games released solely on the console wiiu without taking any other sample or considering any other external factor they look very good.
If you compare to others factors like any other human would do like when the console was released, how the technology advanced and how good games on 7 y/o hardware looks they look at the very best decent.

 

[googleplex]

Really nice looking. And judging by the Monolith Soft game, more capable than PS3/360. Finally a game on Wii U that looks better than anything on PS3 and Xbox 360.

No, not Really.

 

[MisterHero]

The ones after Durango/Orbis are, isn't it worthless to spend enormous amount of cash on graphics just for the sake of saying "yeah that's better than ps360"? if people are interested in graphics of course will have one of the other consoles and/or a PC...

also i'm sure that the fact of this being worthless won't stop them to do so, so don't worry about your pretty games on the system.

Nope. People still bought Xenoblade on Wii.

Albeit, it was wasn't a blockbuster game. Now that more people know how awesome Xenoblade was, I hope Nintendo shows X off a lot more.

 

[ozfunghi]

Compared to PC, it's not impressive.
Compared to PS3/360 its decent.
Compared to Wii. It's impressive.

The art direction really goes a long way. Look at Xenoblade. Fantastic looking game for Wii. Great art direction. Lovely environments, but the trailer for Xenoblade, as glorious as it does (just like the original) it's not technically impressive.

If you feel that way, i'm completely baffled why you would post these gifs in the only WiiU "tech" thread left while boasting how pretty you think they were. Doesn't make any sense. If you just wanted to show appreciation for the artstyle, there were plenty of other topics to do that. Yet you pick the one topic that is about hardware and technology. Does not compute.

 

[WrenchNinja]

SMT x Fire Emblem looked amazing.

 

[phosphor112]

If you feel that way, i'm completely baffled why you would post these gifs in the only WiiU "tech" thread left while boasting how pretty you think they were. Doesn't make any sense. If you just wanted to show appreciation for the artstyle, there were plenty of other topics to do that. Yet you pick the one topic that is about hardware and technology. Does not compute.

I think the games showed today look fantastic, but it's nothing technically impressive.

And here is a video of Shadow of the Colossus using that rasterizing technique.

http://youtu.be/gF2iwOsfpTI?t=1m32s

 

[Margalis]

I love the idea that something that looks bad is more technically impressive than something that looks good because they choose technically sophisticated techniques that translate into worse graphics and worse performance - for some reason.

It looks bad on purpose!

All games use tricks. Halo 4 uses a ton of tricks and people seem to believe it looks almost like a different generation than other 360 games.

Talk about grasping at straws.

When people play games they don't see the technical implementation, they see the game. And if what Xenoblade and X do is so easy why doesn't anyone else do it? They just - choose not to? Like, they sit around a table and say "hey guys should we make our game look a lot better?" "Naw, let's not!" Ok...

 

[Thunder Monkey]

If you feel that way, i'm completely baffled why you would post these gifs in the only WiiU "tech" thread left while boasting how pretty you think they were. Doesn't make any sense. If you just wanted to show appreciation for the artstyle, there were plenty of other topics to do that. Yet you pick the one topic that is about hardware and technology. Does not compute.

For one thing you're asking everyone to separate two integral pieces of a whole.

Xenoblade was impressive both on artistic merits and technical usage of the hardware constraints designed under. Two parts of a whole. Just because you don't see something ground-breaking or new in the technical design does not mean you can't have an appreciation of what it renders. This is my stance on most of these recent WiiU software reveals. "Visually stunning, but technically very much grounded in the current class of consoles."

I'm sure we'll see improvements, but I doubt any of it will be completely out of the reach of either the 360 or PS3.

 

[LeleSocho]

Nope. People still bought Xenoblade on Wii.

Albeit, it was wasn't a blockbuster game. Now that more people know how awesome Xenoblade was, I hope Nintendo shows X off a lot more.

You said it yourself, the game didn't light up the charts and graphics isn't (luckily) the only factor to make people buy games there are such things as gameplay, music, art style, story and whatnot to make people buy Xenoblade... not graphics.

 

[jmood88]

X looks like a game I want to play period!

It is really embarrassing that people on both sides of the fanboy coin are so into arguing about wii u graphics now.

What else are people supposed to talk about? They aren't going to be playing those games anytime soon and it's not like there's going to be that much information released until E3.

 

[Darryl]

You said it yourself, the game didn't light up the charts and graphics isn't (luckily) the only factor to make people buy games there are such things as gameplay, music, art style, story and whatnot to make people buy Xenoblade... not graphics.

i bought xenoblade for the graphics :lol

 

[Branduil]

I think the games showed today look fantastic, but it's nothing technically impressive.

And here is a video of Shadow of the Colossus using that rasterizing technique.

http://youtu.be/gF2iwOsfpTI?t=1m32s

If it looks good, it looks good. Also, SotC was ridiculously advanced for its time, and they kind of pushed the PS2 farther than they should have, resulting in some horrible framerate problems at times. Even so, it's extremely barren compared to X or even Xenoblade. It still looks good because the art direction accounts for that, but X is obviously more complex than SotC.

 

[A More Normal Bird]

Yeah no shit, we are talking about the vanilla version because then any game can look good.

Also, it being an RPG has no bearing on its graphics and there are plenty other open-world games that look better than it.

I was mentioning the modded Skyrim as I (and others) have played that and still think X looks impressive. Even so, vanilla on a high end PC can look stunning. The fact that it is an RPG has a huge bearing on the number of unique world assets, AI etc... Can you name some of these visually advanced open world titles because I love just messing around with them, exploring and trying to make them look pretty. GTA, Skyrim and even New Vegas can produce some amazing results. Some names to look out for at the next steam sale would be nice.

 

[FuturusX]

I like these graphics. I expect more graphics later.



Because I'm Bad, I'm Bad-
Come On
(Bad Bad-Really, Really Bad)
You Know I'm Bad, I'm Bad-
You Know It
(Bad Bad-Really, Really Bad)
You Know I'm Bad, I'm Bad-
Come On, You Know
(Bad Bad-Really, Really Bad)
And The Whole World Has To
Answer Right Now
Just To Tell You Once Again,
Who's Bad . . .

Some kind of Michael Jackson game?

 

[USC-fan]

Meh- very short trailers. I like to see some X HD game play that isnt a trailer. I couldnt really find a good hd version. The HD youtube version was a very bad feed.

These games are very early so its not very fair comparing to system that been out for 7 years. Wait 2 years and it should be a lot better for the wiiu. Most likely when most of these games are releasing.

 

[jmood88]

That's the issue. They are impressive, i've played games on PC on the maximum settings and they still impress me. I have a feeling once the other two drop, you'll be first to say how amazing they are despite the obviously superior experiences on PC available today.

Dude its okay to admit its impressive, no one will jump on you or you won't lose cool points. Just like things on PS4 will be impressive, despite me playing on a high end PC.

Playing on a high end pc today has nothing to do with what the games will look like on the other consoles. Even the most demanding pc versions of games use the 6 and 7 year old consoles as a base.

 

[phosphor112]

I love the idea that something that looks bad is more technically impressive than something that looks good because they choose technically sophisticated techniques that translate into worse graphics and worse performance - for some reason.

It looks bad on purpose!

All games use tricks. Halo 4 uses a ton of tricks and people seem to believe it looks almost like a different generation than other 360 games.

Talk about grasping at straws.

When people play games they don't see the technical implementation, they see the game. And if what Xenoblade and X do is so easy why doesn't anyone else do it? They just - choose not to? Like, they sit around a table and say "hey guys should we make our game look a lot better?" "Naw, let's not!" Ok...

I don't think you understand.

The X trailer showed a whole lot of nothing.

I think it looks fantastic because Xenoblade + HD = awesome.

But once again, there is a whole lot of emptyness. It was technically impressive with Xenoblade because it was on the fucking Wii. X is very much the same stuff... and it's on hardware that exceeds the PS3 and 360 in terms of power.

It's not impressive. I know this sounds conflicting on my end, but there are only a few characters on screen and empty fields...

 

[SteeloDMZ]

I don'tthink you understand.

The X trailer showed a whole lot of nothing.

I think it looks fantastic because Xenoblade + HD = awesome.

But once again, there is a whole lot of emptyness. It was technically impressive with Xenoblade because it was on the fucking Wii. X is very much the same stuff... and it's on hardware that exceeds the PS3 and 360 in terms of power.

It's not impressive. I know this sounds conflicting on my end, but there are only a few characters on screen and empty fields...

What if, just what if, the lack if enemies on that particular area was a design choice. What if?

 

[StreetsAhead]

Meh- very short trailers. I like to see some X HD game play that isnt a trailer. I couldnt really find a good hd version. The HD youtube version was a very bad feed.

The Official Nintendo one @720P is the best on I can find.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GxUMMGyZcM

 

[QaaQer]

I think some people are forgetting that X is still deep in development. The trailer probably only consists of gameplay elements because Nintendo rushed Monolith to throw together a trailer in time for an urgent Nintendo Direct. I mean, you wouldn't expect a typical reveal trailer to name the lead character "Tester". There's also a lot of inconsistency with the environments, which screams 'still in development'.

I wanted to point out this GIF specifically:

If you look at the first sword swing animation, it's immediately apparent that it's a placeholder. Only his upper body is moving, the bottom half is completely still. There's also no smooth transition to the next attack, which even Xenoblade had. Another oddity to point out is the particle effects throughout the trailers, which are also low quality compared to almost everything else, meaning they might also be placeholders. There's still a while to go in this game's development it seems.

With that said, it's also one of the most impressive shots of any console game I've seen. The foliage is high quality and alive, the enemies shadows are soft, the models are insanely detailed and the draw distance is top notch. There's nothing to really fault here. It certainly has that next gen feel to it.

The backgrounds also look incredible. If it's anything like Xenoblade, chances are they're not just props, but actual explorable locations.


It's hard to compare with a game like Skyrim and RDR, since the art direction for the games are on opposite ends. I prefer the foliage of X over the foliage of RDR, but that's a matter of preferences since the foliage is meant to look more lush in X. Skyrim's foliage is worse than both RDR and X though, since it's not as dense and it doesn't draw foliage too far off into the distance.

If X manages to keep a steady framerate at 720p while preserving the insane draw distances and large worlds of Xenoblade, I'd personally rate it above any other open world game on the 360. But this argument matters very little anyway, since 'next gen' or not, it seems the vast majority are satisfied with what we have here. It's going to be an amazing game.

do we know for a fact all these things are being run on retail wii u's?

 

[phosphor112]

What if, just what if, the lack if enemies on that particular area was a design choice. What if?

....And? How does that make it look more impressive?

 

[StreetsAhead]

do we know for a fact all these things are being run on retail wii u's?

iwanttoseethereceipts.gif

Are you serious?

 

[Darryl]

What if, just what if, the lack if enemies on that particular area was a design choice. What if?

it was probably a design choice around the technical limitations. i don't see what about it wouldn't be considered next-gen though because it's clearly an ambitious title, reaching at the very high-end of what is being done in video gaming right now. outside of adding (crazy) particle effects, i'm at a loss of what extra technical features would even be feasible for a game like this

 

[SteeloDMZ]

....And? How does that make it look more impressive?

According to you, the "lack" of things on the map is what keeps X away from being "impressive", so you tell me.

 

[meta4]

Are people being serious that this game would not be possible on ps3/360? Is this a joke or are some actually saying with a straight face that this level of visual fidelity is not seen on current gen consoles.

 

[Jarsonot]

Games looked great. Looking forward to them. X in particular, still on the fence for Pikmin and W101... Just don't know enough about them - will they be fun? =)

They look good though. We've achieved a level where I think all games from now on (high profile anyway) will look good enough for me. I welcome better graphics of course, but at this point it's not the graphics of a game I'm worried about if I'm making a purchasing decision, it's the gameplay. Graphics started astounding me this last gen and haven't stopped yet.

 

[phosphor112]

According to you, the "lack" of things on the map is what keeps X away from being "impressive", so you tell me.

...It's not rendering anything. Empty fields aren't impressive. Sure, Hyrule Field in Ocarina of Time was mind blowing, the sense of scale was nuts and amazing, but at the same time, it had fucking nothing in it.

 

[Wishmaster92]

Well, i am hoping by the time the Monolithsoft game comes out it would look as good as the tri-ace demo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cuXgRVMvZ0

 

[Pikma]

No matter how "low poly" those enviroments look or how many tricks Monolith uses, the game still looks fantastic, and it will look fantastic when it comes out, no matter what, because the tech is there and at worst case scenario it's good enough, something that couldn't have been said about Wii, not even at launch, so yeah, PS4/Durango will obviously look better than X, but that doesn't mean X will wake up one early morning and feel like "looking like shit", nope, the game will look great. That's pretty much more than acceptable to me.

 

[Branduil]

So before we were comparing X to SotC, and now it's deteriorated to Ocarina of Time. LOL

 

[specialguy]

Looks pretty good all around, solid to high current gen level.

I think this is what I'm leaning towards.

They look really good, but I cant decide if I'm seeing anything 360 couldn't do. I'm really just not sure.

It makes me excited for Durango/Orbis, that's for sure. When current gen looks this good next gen is just gonna be stupid.

 

[phosphor112]

So before we were comparing X to SotC, and now it's deteriorated to Ocarina of Time. LOL

Yes, I'm directly comparing X to SotC and OoT.

Congfuckingrats.

 

[SteeloDMZ]

...It's not rendering anything. Empty fields aren't impressive. Sure, Hyrule Field in Ocarina of Time was mind blowing, the sense of scale was nuts and amazing, but at the same time, it had fucking nothing in it.

....... Who gives a flying fuck? Like someone said, if it looks good, it looks good.

There are many parts on God of War 3 where there's a bunch of nothing. Also that game has a lot of tricks thanks to the camera angles and such.

According to this ridiculous logic, that game (and many others that do similar things) aren't also impressive, right?

 

[i-Lo]

I did not want to nitpick this but one thing that bugged me in "X" can be found in the beginning of the trailer when the guy is running by the shoreline. That shoreline was nothing but straight lines and angles. Hopefully the devs will remedy this. On the plus side, the alpha effects look great as can be seen by the lack of horrendous aliasing when the first dinosaur like creature appeared in the foreground against the waterfall (and you could see the shimmering around its long neck).

And, overall, the first generation WiiU games look very much like the very best of mid to mid late gen releases on 360/PS3.

Sword slash effect is too angular, would not buy.

The first that came to my mind (and you will get the reference if you have watched UK top gear), "From the makers of Cadillacs..."

 

[MisterHero]

So before we were comparing X to SotC, and now it's deteriorated to Ocarina of Time. LOL

Xenoblade 2 is Robotech 64 at last

 

[Screamapillar]

Better. Obviously better. Not that the graphics in the launch titles were poor, just that this second wave of games have had sufficient development time to utilize the horsepower of the machine in order to take advantage of whatever "tricks" can be done, instead of porting over 360/ PS3 game engines.

Monolith game (as expected) looks great. A bit too similar to Monster Hunter, though. I hope they brighten it up some more and add some color.

Wonderful 101 looks exceptional as always, that game is coming along very nicely.

Yoshi Yarn looks amazing. I mean, it's just breathtaking. It looks like a Tim Burton movie. Good-Feel and HAL are doing some amazing things in that game to get it looking that good. I can't wait for gameplay footage at E3. Again, just incredible-looking.

 

[ShineALight]

...It's not rendering anything. Empty fields aren't impressive. Sure, Hyrule Field in Ocarina of Time was mind blowing, the sense of scale was nuts and amazing, but at the same time, it had fucking nothing in it.

We don't have a lot of gameplay but aside from the opening shot near the beach and the mecha flying over the valley, there are several densely populated shots that retain the same sense of scale.

 

[MooseKing]

Post them at 720p or 1080p. Everything looks superior when you shrink the size.

Looks shit compared to PC, but as good as current gen consoles. However they are all tiny as hell.