Support NeoGAF

[Danjin44]

Ok but how is Nintendo puts everything into games??? I mean what are the new IP from them? Horizon is a new IP. I was thinking it was going to be like Killzone Shadow fall a mediocre game and i was surprised by it. The last of us is a new IP now the part 2 is coming sometime but to me putting everything into games is to bring new IP too not just the usual games from always.

Are we forgetting Splatoon and ARMS here? Last time I checked those two games were new IP.

 

[Shini42]

Are we forgetting Splatoon and ARMS here? Last time I checked those two games were new IP.

Splatoon was new in 2015. And, yes, we are forgetting about ARMS. No reason not to.

 

[Danjin44]

Splatoon was new in 2015. And, yes, we are forgetting about ARMS. No reason not to.

The person quoted mentions The Last of Us that came in 2013 as part of the new IP.

 

[Shini42]

The person quoted mentions The Last of Us that came in 2013 as part of the new IP.

As an example, yes. And since then we had new IPs from Sony studios every year.

 

[Virex]

Why do you own a Switch then?, considering you knew its performance well before its release. Don't see why any game should be limited either, Switch has shown that because of its architecture, at worst, a game just needs to be scaled down in resolution and a few effects to work on the system.

Again there are plenty of games that show the potential of the system, but apparently if a game comes out that doesn't run amazing that is held as the guideline for its performance..

I own a Switch for Nintendo games

 

[Fbh]

Zelda BOTW is my personal GOAT and Mario is in my top3 list of 2017 games but again, we are not talking about "how good a game is" but "how good it looks".

Then I think we both misunderstood eachother since I'm not talking about how good the games look.

Yes, graphically they are notoriously behind. Just compare Breath of the Wild with horizon even on a standard PS4 and the difference is like night and day.

My point is, does it matter?
Yes they are graphically inferior but Nintendo has shown again and again that they can make games that are as good or better than those made on more powerful hardware (as a game, not visually).

The only way in which weaker hardware affects a 6-7 year lifecycle is if you want tons of multiplatform games to run on the Switch. Which was probably never going to be the case.
It doesn't affect the ability of Nintendo and third parties to support the system in the same way that 128mb of ram and a super low resolution didn't keep them for supporting the 3DS for just as long

 

[tassletine]

Then I think we both misunderstood eachother since I'm not talking about how good the games look.

Yes, graphically they are notoriously behind. Just compare Breath of the Wild with horizon even on a standard PS4 and the difference is like night and day.

My point is, does it matter?
Yes they are graphically inferior but Nintendo has shown again and again that they can make games that are as good or better than those made on more powerful hardware (as a game, not visually).

The only way in which weaker hardware affects a 6-7 year lifecycle is if you want tons of multiplatform games to run on the Switch. Which was probably never going to be the case.
It doesn't affect the ability of Nintendo and third parties to support the system in the same way that 128mb of ram and a super low resolution didn't keep them for supporting the 3DS for just as long

It's interesting though. I went back to playing Witcher 3 after BOTW and was kind of shocked at the animation, or lack of it. Try riding a horse against a fence in The Witcher and it'll keep on running in an extremely fake way, whereas in BOTW the horse behaves realistically. I'd go so far as to say BOTW has the most complete animation/physics system for any open world game and that counts for a hell of a lot in the graphics dept.

Horizon is much better than Witcher in that dept but still feels dead and pretty empty. So if we're talking actual shaders etc. the Switch is inferior but they sure make up for it in other areas.

 

[Shini42]

Then I think we both misunderstood eachother since I'm not talking about how good the games look.

Yes, graphically they are notoriously behind. Just compare Breath of the Wild with horizon even on a standard PS4 and the difference is like night and day.

My point is, does it matter?
Yes they are graphically inferior but Nintendo has shown again and again that they can make games that are as good or better than those made on more powerful hardware (as a game, not visually).

The only way in which weaker hardware affects a 6-7 year lifecycle is if you want tons of multiplatform games to run on the Switch. Which was probably never going to be the case.
It doesn't affect the ability of Nintendo and third parties to support the system in the same way that 128mb of ram and a super low resolution didn't keep them for supporting the 3DS for just as long

To answer your question: yes it does matter. The fact that they’re making games, that you and many others consider “as good or better”, despite hardware limitations isn’t a good thing. It’s like someone would paint a picture blindfolded. It might look OK, or even “as good”, but what can he do when he’s on level ground with other painters?
If visuals in video game doesn’t matter, than why didn’t they support WiiU, or Wii for that matter? Put BOTW on it, Mario Odessy, Metroid and everything else. And if they make you buy a new device, than why didn’t they put modern hardware in it? Why use 3y.o. mobile SoC? $300 is more than PS4 costs, than why do we see games like Bayonetta looking almost like on Xbox360? Does this “almost portable, but not really” gimmick worth it?

 

[Danjin44]

To answer your question: yes it does matter. The fact that they’re making games, that you and many others consider “as good or better”, despite hardware limitations isn’t a good thing. It’s like someone would paint a picture blindfolded. It might look OK, or even “as good”, but what can he do when he’s on level ground with other painters?
If visuals in video game doesn’t matter, than why didn’t they support WiiU, or Wii for that matter? Put BOTW on it, Mario Odessy, Metroid and everything else. And if they make you buy a new device, than why didn’t they put modern hardware in it? Why use 3y.o. mobile SoC? $300 is more than PS4 costs, than why do we see games like Bayonetta looking almost like on Xbox360? Does this “almost portable, but not really” gimmick worth it?

I disagree with that. As I got older start to appreciate great aesthetic over high tech graphics. Most of the best games I played last year didn't have so called "PS4 graphics" like NieR Automata, Persona 5, Xenobalde 2, Gravity Rush 2, BotW and Mario Odyssey. But they all had fantastics art direction and great gameplay. Horizon in other hand really pretty graphics but once the novelty of that shiny graphic wore off, the open world felt sooo limiting and boring, especially compare to BotW which was made much weaker system. Honestly if choose having much more interactive and fun gameplay over shiny graphics any day. Bayonetta might not have high end graphics but has strong art direction hand fantastic gameplay and end of day thats most what I care about in my games.

 

[Shini42]

I disagree with that. As I got older start to appreciate great aesthetic over high tech graphics. Most of the best games I played last year didn't have so called "PS4 graphics" like NieR Automata, Persona 5, Xenobalde 2, Gravity Rush 2, BotW and Mario Odyssey. But they all had fantastics art direction and great gameplay. Horizon in other hand really pretty graphics but once the novelty of that shiny graphic wore off, the open world felt sooo limiting and boring, especially compare to BotW which was made much weaker system. Honestly if choose having much more interactive and fun gameplay over shiny graphics any day. Bayonetta might not have high end graphics but has strong art direction hand fantastic gameplay and end of day thats most what I care about in my games.

Firstly, Gravity Rush 2 does have a PS4 graphics. It’s heavily stylised, but still leagues beyond what is possible on an outdated mashine like Nintendo Switch.
Secondly, there has never been a choice between fun gameplay and good graphics. I hope you realize, that BotW feels fun for you not because it looks worse than HZD, but despite of it. Bayonetta might not have high end graphics but it’s strong art direction would benefit greatly from higher resolution, better textures and more stable frame rate.

 

[Danjin44]

Firstly, Gravity Rush 2 does have a PS4 graphics. It’s heavily stylised, but still leagues beyond what is possible on an outdated mashine like Nintendo Switch.
Secondly, there has never been a choice between fun gameplay and good graphics. I hope you realize, that BotW feels fun for you not because it looks worse than HZD, but despite of it. Bayonetta might not have high end graphics but it’s strong art direction would benefit greatly from higher resolution, better textures and more stable frame rate.

Yes in a perfect world all developers have big budget for their games and all time in world and powerful system to work with but that’s not how world works.

Edit: Also I know Gravity Rush 2 had great graphics but when it first came lot of people complained why the game doesn't run in 60FPS like the HD remaster of the first game.

 

[Fbh]

To answer your question: yes it does matter. The fact that they’re making games, that you and many others consider “as good or better”, despite hardware limitations isn’t a good thing. It’s like someone would paint a picture blindfolded. It might look OK, or even “as good”, but what can he do when he’s on level ground with other painters?
If visuals in video game doesn’t matter, than why didn’t they support WiiU, or Wii for that matter? Put BOTW on it, Mario Odessy, Metroid and everything else. And if they make you buy a new device, than why didn’t they put modern hardware in it? Why use 3y.o. mobile SoC? $300 is more than PS4 costs, than why do we see games like Bayonetta looking almost like on Xbox360? Does this “almost portable, but not really” gimmick worth it?

They didn't support the WiiU because it was a failed concept that no one wanted with truly horrible marketing. A console designed to catch up with the PS3 and 360 mere months after their next gen was about to be launched.
Because unlike the Switch, and arguably the Wii, it had weak hardware but gained nothing of value from it aside from an ugly tablet controller you couldn't even take outside of the room where the console was placed . A controller that was so useless that not even Nintendo knew how to implement it in most games.

They didn't put "modern hardware on it" because it would have limited the portability of the Switch. You can't make a PS4 (much less a pro) with the size and battery life of the Switch, specially not for $300.
It's not all just about the prize , it's about size, power consumption and the intended use for the device in the same way that an iPad pro is weaker than a PC you can build for a similar price (or at least could before GPU's skyrocketed in price) or the fact you can get a gtx1060 gaming laptop for the same price as a Surface Pro with Intel HD graphics.

And while we are talking about portability, I have no idea what you mean by "portable but not really". It is 100% portable. I take it to work every day, I took it on a longer work trip late last year and I will be taking in on another one next month.
Not only does the portability allow me to take it with me but it will also allow Nintendo to focus on a single console for the first time since...the NES?. It's going to be the first time we have a Nintendo console that's going to have the main 3D Zelda and Mario game but also the next main Pokémon and Fire Emblem. And I find that way more exciting than a more powerful console, specially since I already have a non portable and power focused PS4 Pro under my TV.

 

[Shini42]

Yes in a perfect world all developers have big budget for their games and all time in world and powerful system to work with but that’s not how world works.

Edit: Also I know Gravity Rush 2 had great graphics but when it first came lot of people complained why the game doesn't run in 60FPS like the HD remaster of the first game.

That’s definitely not how Nintendo works.

 

[ThatStupidLion]

I feel like i need to mention that i don't own a Switch, XBOX or PlayStation. My last console purchase was a PS3/Vita.

What i am trying to say here is that it's okay with me that Nintendo puts everything into games instead of hardware. There are enough people using the console and enjoying the experience while Nintendo is making money.

I am aware that photorealism/real-time global illumination is still not achievable and that graphics definitly can be improved so that the even casual users will percieve it. If players want better performance or better graphics today they have the freedom to buy other consoles. No one is forcing anyone to buy anything.

Youre a good person. I play games 1-3 yrs post hype/release but i dont think i could handle being a full console behind.

 

[Shini42]

They didn't support the WiiU because it was a failed concept that no one wanted with truly horrible marketing. A console designed to catch up with the PS3 and 360 mere months after their next gen was about to be launched.
Because unlike the Switch, and arguably the Wii, it had weak hardware but gained nothing of value from it aside from an ugly tablet controller you couldn't even take outside of the room where the console was placed . A controller that was so useless that not even Nintendo knew how to implement it in most games.

They didn't put "modern hardware on it" because it would have limited the portability of the Switch. You can't make a PS4 (much less a pro) with the size and battery life of the Switch, specially not for $300.
It's not all just about the prize , it's about size, power consumption and the intended use for the device in the same way that an iPad pro is weaker than a PC you can build for a similar price (or at least could before GPU's skyrocketed in price) or the fact you can get a gtx1060 gaming laptop for the same price as a Surface Pro with Intel HD graphics.

And while we are talking about portability, I have no idea what you mean by "portable but not really". It is 100% portable. I take it to work every day, I took it on a longer work trip late last year and I will be taking in on another one next month.
Not only does the portability allow me to take it with me but it will also allow Nintendo to focus on a single console for the first time since...the NES?. It's going to be the first time we have a Nintendo console that's going to have the main 3D Zelda and Mario game but also the next main Pokémon and Fire Emblem. And I find that way more exciting than a more powerful console, specially since I already have a non portable and power focused PS4 Pro under my TV.

Limited the portability? Just by using more modern SoC like X2 they could have make it truly portable (not “2,5 hours portable”) with the same processing power on the go, and much more powerful in dock. Would’ve it skyrocketed the price of the Switch? Probably not, but it would make their profit from each sold device much smaller.

 

[xviper]

this has to be the worst Remaster ever alongside the likes of Silent hill HD

 

[Danjin44]

this has to be the worst Remaster ever alongside the likes of Silent hill HD

But its not remaster, Nintendo never advertise this as a remaster.

 

[Fbh]

Limited the portability? Just by using more modern SoC like X2 they could have make it truly portable (not “2,5 hours portable”) with the same processing power on the go, and much more powerful in dock. Would’ve it skyrocketed the price of the Switch? Probably not, but it would make their profit from each sold device much smaller.

It's easily at 3 hours of battery life unless you are playing with the screen at full brightness, with audio at max and WiFi on.

Also, if we enter the territory of "it could be much better if the manufacturer decided to take a big cut to its profits" then pretty much every product on the market is disappointing

this has to be the worst Remaster ever alongside the likes of Silent hill HD

It's not a remaster, it's a port.

Silent Hill 2 was also arguably worse than the original release. This one at least improves the performance over the previous sysyem

 

[Shini42]

Also, if we enter the territory of "it could be much better if the manufacturer decided to take a big cut to its profits" then pretty much every product on the market is disappointing

Sony and Microsoft are selling their consoles at a loss at the start of a new generation, aren't they?
Nvidia were selling Shield with the same tegra X1 SoC, as in Switch for $199 in 2015. So, yes, price/value of Nintendo console is disapointing.

 

[JimboJones]

Sony and Microsoft are selling their consoles at a loss at the start of a new generation, aren't they?
Nvidia were selling Shield with the same tegra X1 SoC, as in Switch for $199 in 2015. So, yes, price/value of Nintendo console is disapointing.

Actually I don't think they where this time around, at least when you factor in a game purchase or purchasing their online subscription when buying the console.
https://www.polygon.com/2014/5/23/5744344/ps4-already-profitable-for-sony-ceo-says

 

[Shini42]

Actually I don't think they where this time around, at least when you factor in a game purchase or purchasing their online subscription when buying the console.
https://www.polygon.com/2014/5/23/5744344/ps4-already-profitable-for-sony-ceo-says

Should we factor in a game for Switch, a “pro controller” for $80, a microSD card and a screen protector (cause Nintendo had to cut the cost on tempered glass, puting shitty plastic on the screen instead)?

 

[JimboJones]

Should we factor in a game for Switch, a “pro controller” for $80, a microSD card and a screen protector (cause Nintendo had to cut the cost on tempered glass, puting shitty plastic on the screen instead)?

I don't think you have to, aren't they profitable just on the system alone? The attach rate for Zelda and Mario is pretty high though so I doubt they are selling at a loss.

 

[Louis Cyphre]

I disagree with that. As I got older start to appreciate great aesthetic over high tech graphics. Most of the best games I played last year didn't have so called "PS4 graphics" like NieR Automata, Persona 5, Xenobalde 2, Gravity Rush 2, BotW and Mario Odyssey. But they all had fantastics art direction and great gameplay. Horizon in other hand really pretty graphics but once the novelty of that shiny graphic wore off, the open world felt sooo limiting and boring, especially compare to BotW which was made much weaker system. Honestly if choose having much more interactive and fun gameplay over shiny graphics any day. Bayonetta might not have high end graphics but has strong art direction hand fantastic gameplay and end of day thats most what I care about in my games.

That's fine and dandy but your argument comes across as I enjoy movies so i don't care if bluray looks much better than DVD. Moving forward this is going to keep being an issue for Nintendo as games get more demanding like Red Dead Redemption 2. This is exactly why Nintendo consoles keep attracting those looking for different games and a different way to play those games, while still abandoning third party. Nintendo has yet to prove in a long long time it can attract single platform owners.

 

[TheDuskwalker]

But its not remaster, Nintendo never advertise this as a remaster.

And the game doesn't run like total crap compared to the original along with other major downgrades.

By the way since I'm too knew to make topics, would someone mind making this for me? It's Digital Foundry on Dynasty Warriors 9 and I think it deserves its own topic just for being the new gold standard in Pro and X shittasticness.

 

[Revolutionary]

And the game doesn't run like total crap compared to the original along with other major downgrades.

You know what's "total crap"?
Over the course of ~8 years, Bayonetta console performance has had a marginal improvement (still not a perfect 60fps) while looking exactly the same (720p, low res shadows, poor AF, etc.).

By the way since I'm too knew to make topics, would someone mind making this for me? It's Digital Foundry on Dynasty Warriors 9 and I think it deserves its own topic just for being the new gold standard in Pro and X shittasticness.

Hate to break it to you, but no one cares about Dynasty Warriors. As that video should prove, even the developers don't give a shit lol
Edit: And someone posts it right after I make this post haha.

 

[Leonard Washington]

I was under the impression that the Wii u versions of both titles were the ultimate renditions? Guess not.

#reallydoe?