ProfessorLobo
Banned
Captain N said:
No one can justify making fun of the way this guy's camo looks. With a get up like this, he can blend in with any MW Wii backdrop. It's actually more effective than what you would find on the 360.
-
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.
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare: [R E F L E X] (Wii) Screens
- Thread starter Captain N
- Start date
No one can justify making fun of the way this guy's camo looks. With a get up like this, he can blend in with any MW Wii backdrop. It's actually more effective than what you would find on the 360.
DownLikeBCPowder
Member
Zing! Nice!
Man, this looks horrible. I remember refreshing the original thread announcing this version of the game waiting for screens. What a waste of my life.
Also, just want to point out how amazing Silent Hill looks on the Wii, making this so much harder to understand. These being the two Wii games being discussed on GAF's front page makes this so much worse.
Also, just want to point out how amazing Silent Hill looks on the Wii, making this so much harder to understand. These being the two Wii games being discussed on GAF's front page makes this so much worse.
well, about 8-16 months more development time and ground-up engine work will typically do that for the game. i do hope they get the lighting in. i'll be buying it one way or another, since i already put a few days into WaW, and this should provide better variety and enjoyment.gabe90 said:
its probably all sad till now but i just needed to express my frustration with those screenshots. i played the WAW on my Wii and after 2 missions stopped playing it as it looked like SHIT + a lot of bad textures and clipping. Now this... well this looks like even bigger SHIT. damn it i feel so disappointed and powerless... i wish Wii games did got more attention than this BS.
Dash Kappei
Not actually that important
I've already have my preorder for MW2 paid in full, I'm selling at the moment my Cod4 X360 and unless it ends up being really crappy I'll probably pick this up.
I'm confident it'll look 200% times better in motion (so, in the end, decent), Wii games should always be bullshotted I guess, that way it's way similat to what will show up on your tv.
Almost on par with anti-aliasing if you play on a CRT SD TV, plus razor sharp awful jaggies if you play on a Plasma/LCD HDTV... like I do, damn.
I'm confident it'll look 200% times better in motion (so, in the end, decent), Wii games should always be bullshotted I guess, that way it's way similat to what will show up on your tv.
Almost on par with anti-aliasing if you play on a CRT SD TV, plus razor sharp awful jaggies if you play on a Plasma/LCD HDTV... like I do, damn.
J-Rock said:
you're welcome. I'll try to get more in-depth details from the development team itself, it really worked last year.
I'm happy about the "highly above the expectations" data about online connections. It's funny Monster HUnter Tri's producer told me something similar that morining. Let's hope this gets heard more and more.
Oh, and what I saw was first level and that "orange" one which starts with the fireworks at night, one single player, the other squad mate mode. The TV set looked horrible, but knowing WaW, I think those screens are only doing bad for the game...
Frencherman
Member
CaVaYeRo said:
Okay cool, than ask them please if the TEV Instructions are missing in their Wii development-manual...
boiled goose
good with gravy
Shogmaster said:
shame 360 and ps3 keep limiting the potential on the superior PC version...
ah hypocrisy
Bending_Unit_22
Member
Everytime I wonder if I'm too critical of 3rd party Wii efforts, the 3rd parties make the best case they can that I'm not critical enough.
Or maybe ask if they have the manuals in the first place.Frencherman said:
Now, now, everyone should get to enjoy CoD4, no matter how outdated the graphics and controls are.amtentori said:
Dabookerman
Member
amtentori said:
Haha, what an argument.
Mr. Pointy
Member
If Treyarch just retextured the character models, there wouldn't be so many complaints.
boiled goose
good with gravy
Dabookerman said:
i had considered buying it if it had effort put in.
would buy this for wii and MW2 for PC. I already played MW1 on xbox when it came out.
reasons why wont buy:
no wii speak
no new content.
no split screen (would be biggest draw as i have no wii split screen fpses)
assy graphics dont help. they would need to be at least better than wii WAW.
the bad graphics are not the only things that indicate lack of effort. If HVS can get wii speak support, then so should activision.
sevenchaos
Banned
I wish they'd release some sort of video. I never did buy Modern Warfare and shit graphics or not I would totally buy it on the Wii for the controls.
Seriously?soco said:
Frencherman
Member
[Nintex] said:
Better colours and sharper carmouflage against more polygons. You decide!
Wait ! What does it mean ?
http://gamescom.gamespot.com/story/6215731/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-wii-impressions
Third bold held my attention.
http://gamescom.gamespot.com/story/6215731/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-wii-impressions
Third bold held my attention.
Shogmaster
Member
As if. If not for 360/PS3, there won't be a MW2 in the first place (no one makes games of this budget for PC onlyamtentori said:
). Also, PC "superiority" formula = 360 game @ higher display and texture resolution. That's just settinge in the options! :lol
This is a serious question, and I'm not defending the texture work of the screens that were released here, but has anyone actually gone through CoD4 and W@W on the consoles and just paid attention to the textures around the game? A lot of them can be pretty god damned awful looking. W@W especially.
D
Deleted member 30609
Unconfirmed Member
oh my god
I don't buy this at all. The PC basically delivers higher fidelity console games (higher resolution and framerate, generally). There has yet to be anything done on the PC in the last few years that couldn't be handled on the consoles.
Crysis is still the most impressive PC title out there and CryTek is trying to deliver that on consoles with Crysis 2. The consoles are not limiting what can be done, however, and it's easy to introduce improvements on the PC side.
scitek said:
Well whether you thought the original scene was "impressive", it was still an infinity times billion better looking than that horrendous trash in the images. And then on top of that, I mean, you go to previews as evidence the game clearly doesn't look exactly as bad as World at War (Wii).
You might be a fanboy, but previews are bad for games on all consoles. They are unreliable, notoriously effusive in praise for traditionally horrible games. As I said in the other topic, I read extremely glowing previews for Superman 64.
We know what the game is going to look like. A very slightly improved World at War Wii. Which was already a very ugly game on Wii, so it's good to have your expectations low.
Of course "wiimote bounding box FPS-with-gestureslol" blah blah and all. We know. It is still completely correct to gasp "oh my god" at the images, because they are gross. You do this a lot so I have to assume you're overly defensive because you have some intense interest in the platform Wii succeeding. A company white knight for the Wii.
My advice: ignore people who are truthful in saying something is ugly and just enjoy games with whatever "standards" you have.
dark10x said:
We have not seen the final game running on the consoles so we simply don't know that, for all we know the since designing for consoles the type of level they are designing might be different, they might be smaller and have less objects in them or less destructible terrain, but just from the video's alone you can tell there is a massive different in texture and terrain quality from the console to the PC
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
Didn't Crytek already say they were looking to make the most impressive (visually) title on consoles, specifically wording and pointing out that it's not to be a PC comparison?
Crysis 2 will look better on PC, not just in resolution and performance. Crysis 1 will likely look better on PC maxed out, again not just resolution and performance.
Crysis 2 will look better on PC, not just in resolution and performance. Crysis 1 will likely look better on PC maxed out, again not just resolution and performance.
Amir0x said:
What kind of irritates me though is that we have a 13 page thread of people who make fun of the graphics yet they don't accept that the Wii is not capable of more. So when a preview comes around saying it looks better than W@W, people dismiss it like its not true. They probably forgot how W@W looked on Wii. As someone who doesn't play games for the graphics, I didn't mind at all but I guess some people are still not over the fact that the Wii is underpowered.
ksamedi said:
Well the reason they make fun of these images is because it is clear the Wii IS capable of more than the images show. In a thread about images, the discussion is going to be about the graphics. So, everything here is on-topic.
But the genuine jokes come more from the place of "WHY WOULD ACTIVISION RELEASE SUCH CLEARLY UNREPRESENTATIVE IMAGES" then "the game is actually going to look like a souped up N64 game and will look way worse than World At War Wii!"
We know the game will look slightly better than World At War Wii (so still, it's going to be ugly), but it's not going to look like it was developed by my scrotum.
I don't think you're building a valid argument in this post. It basically goes "there haven't been PC games that couldn't be handled by consoles" (highly arguable in itself, eg. I still doubt console Crysis will be as open-ended as the first part) --> "the consoles are not limiting what can be done". I hope you see the problem with that.dark10x said:
Bluemercury
Member
dark10x said:
So higher framerates and resolution doesnt count when compared to PC?
Also i really doubt those are the only things, what about shaders?heck there are vga cards more expensive than 360 and ps3 combined....
DodgyGeezerFella
Member
dark10x said:
Most games from the past couple of years are being developed for gamepads though, which can restrict whats possible with gameplay. Games like CoD arent really affected (still plays just as slick as the original), and they even keep the Lean function in the PC version. Crysis reminded me of exactly whats possible when a game is designed primarily for the keyboard and mouse. Aiming is sharp and responsive, switching between suit powers is a breeze, and it feels damn tight. Try it with a gamepad (it has a setup ready for the 360 controller), and it becomes very restrictive, pulling off the same moves as on the KB/Mouse is either very hard or impossible (for example, speed boosting off a high rock, shooting some enemies in mid flight and switching to strength mode before you land). Most shooters these days go for the Halo style of control (which works perfectly for the controller), but then directly translate that to keyboard without any real adjustments to gameplay. Crysis reminded me what a PC game feels like. I also think people are forgetting it too because of the gamepad focus over the years. Hasnt Carmack said hed love to focus on making a game with the keyboard/mouse because of the stuff that can be pulled off with it ?
Graphically, yes the PC could pull off some significant stuff, Crysis shown that, but devs simply cant justify it when most people on the PC wont have the power to do it anyway, and obviously these days everything has to be multiplatform. I would say consoles have sort of benefitted PC gaming as its now more relaxed in terms of system requirements (if you bought an 8800 all those years ago, its still capable of running everything with High graphics).
GrotesqueBeauty
Banned
How is it possible to be so oblivious in the face of all the examples to the contrary? People know what the Wii is and isn't capable of, which is how the rest of us are able to recognize how shitty this looks for a Wii game. For fuck's sake, the PS2 had better looking FPS games.ksamedi said:
AppleBlade
Member
I wish more devs just used Unreal 2 or ID tech 3 for Wii games. Both engines were used with the GameCube so it shouldn't be hard to use it for Wii games and instead of having horribly gimped 360/PS3 graphics you can make enhanced GC/PS2 graphics.
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
MrVargas said:
I still think Red Steel is really quite a graphically impressive game. Had it been refined more (visually) and had a more stable framerate it would look even better. It has some really nice lighting and texture work, as well as some great geometry.
EatChildren said:
I had very little problems with Red Steel in the graphics department; it was quite a nice looking game. The controls and level design - somewhat rushed for launch - were where the problems lay.
It is a shame that we seem to be going backwards on the Wii. I have to wonder what is going on in some of these studios.
I LOVE the fact that PC games offer gamepad support. Those that don't just piss me off.
I generally play PC games on my 50" plasma in the living room where a mouse and nostromo (better than a keyboard) are just not all that comfortable. I've tried many solutions in regards to tables and lap desks but it makes no difference.
I do appreciate the mouse and keyboard, but these days, I just don't enjoy using it for comfort reasons. There is very little that can't be accomplished with a gamepad. Crysis actually works pretty damn well with a gamepad. The only issue is the level of precision required for aiming, but this could have been improved through use of auto aim when the gamepad is engaged. Yes, it may be viewed as "cheating", but it totally compensates for the decreased accuracy.
Sitting at a desk playing on a shitty LCD is not the way I want to experience my games.
The PC games I've picked up which require a mouse and keyboard end up sitting on my shelf simply because I really have no desire to sit down and use the mouse and keyboard during a game. As long as developers continue to provide options for both, I'll be happy.
Call of Duty is an interesting case as it has become a huge console game yet the PC versions continue to omit gamepad support. Drives me crazy. I received a free copy of CoD5 on the PC and haven't yet played through it simply due to the lack of pad support. Not even Pinnacle Game Profiler could save that one (just couldn't get the aiming to feel right).
More importantly, great performance is the norm. In the past, PC games were often designed to push the hardware so that even the high-end machines struggled to deliver smooth framerates. Crysis sure seemed to piss a lot of people off (and resulted in them labeling it as un-optimized). When games are designed for consoles you generally get a rock solid 60 fps and fantastic image quality. The games are still beautiful, but you get fantastic performance along with them. I enjoy being able to pick up new PC games and receive that. Of course, there are exceptions (where the PC ports kind of suck), but in general, this has been the rule.
Small budgets? The fact that the average Wii fan seems to have very little problem with poor visuals? Why spend what little money you have on technology most people won't care about? It will never compare to the other consoles or the PC, so perhaps they take a "why even try?" approach? Obviously this won't apply to ALL developers, but it still seems like something that is happening.
Amir0x said:
So you know me well enough from my posts to call me a Wii fanboy. Just because you see my name popping up in threads like The Conduit's and saying I enjoyed the game doesn't make a Wii fanboy, nor do I consider myself some "white knight" for the company. But you're right on one front, of course I have a personal interest in seeing the Wii succeed, I paid fucking money for it. How could you NOT want something you paid money to own to succeed? I have a vested interest in seeing every company succeed, and I hope they all do. As such, I'll never root for one particular company over another.
And I SAID these screens look like shit. In fact, I've been the only one so far as I've seen that took enough initiative to actually e-mail Treyarch about them voicing my concern. What have you done other than downright insult me by accusing me of being a fanboy?
I'm saying everyone should calm the fuck down and not pass final judgment on the game over just SIX incredibly poor-looking screenshots.
Similar threads
- Poll