-
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.
Game Informer: " Why Xenoblade Chronicles Makes Me Want To Punch a Kitten"
- Thread starter anaron
- Start date
FieryBalrog
Member
I clicked it twice to make sure.
VindicatorZ
Member
I agree with you here. The shadows, textures and character models in Xenoblade are completely lazy/shitty. Testament to how awesome the game is that is does nothing to detract from the game.
I'm enjoying Xenoblade so far. Its practically miraculous for the Wii. Yeah its quit ugly in many spots. The texture resolution on the characters...has much to be desired. Oh...oh how I would love a spiritual successor looking more like Witcher 2. I think my brain would melt.
Yea, I'm amazed noone has mentioned the Wiis' shitty graphics up until now. Bravo for stepping up to the plate, sir!
Night_Trekker
Member
Another quality article from a paragon of quality gaming journalism.
Every time someone tells me, in the future, that Game Informer isn't a shitty rag anymore, I'll link them to this article. Still glad I canceled that subscription I was talked into at GameStop!
Every time someone tells me, in the future, that Game Informer isn't a shitty rag anymore, I'll link them to this article. Still glad I canceled that subscription I was talked into at GameStop!
Metal Gear?!
Member
I think the question is, given how much (little?) it sold, could Xenoblade have been made at "HD GRAPHICS" standards on PS360PC and still made any money? Or would it have been a financial disaster?
I mean if you're just complaining about the Wii image quality with the assets it has that's a reasonable complaint but you can just play it on PC with an emulator.
I don't think you can make an argument that anyone would have funded Xenoblade with the exact same assets but rendered at a higher resolution for release on the PS360/PC however.
I mean if you're just complaining about the Wii image quality with the assets it has that's a reasonable complaint but you can just play it on PC with an emulator.
I don't think you can make an argument that anyone would have funded Xenoblade with the exact same assets but rendered at a higher resolution for release on the PS360/PC however.
No need for speculation:
It is just an opinion piece dude.
MaxwellGT2000
Member
From what I've seen, a real mixed bag. Beautiful, gorgeous landscapes, vistas, huge open scenery... the character models/textures seem positively repulsive, though. If I Google Xenoblade and check images, I get beautiful stuff, but I also get:
I'd love to see someone post some representative shots of different elements of XB both from the Wii and from Dolphin (in higher res).
I'd always argue... if they did have the horsepower and it still looked like that only with higher resolution... would that take anything away from the final product? Not really lol
Like I still think Legend of Zelda Link to the Past is amazing to look at, I find PS2 games beautiful if done right, and I can see 360 games looking like ass while still being far superior in technology and likely even work put into how it looks... yet nothing really takes away from Xenoblade looking amazing, huge world that makes you feel like you're on a giants body and you can see other parts off in the distance.
I've not seen environments such as those come from PS3/360/PC games, I fear the high development costs actually prevent that... so really, I don't know how to tackle this idea, higher costs have killed ambitious unique ideas especially from third parties, yet if they had that hardware, kept the same modeling, slightly higher res textures, and better draw distance... it really wouldn't change too much and people would begin to complain it didn't look up to par with the likes of Crysis 2 or Red Dead Redemption... while forgetting one is a linear FPS game and the other has practically barren environments that don't come close to matching the design of Xenoblade in all honesty.
DL
R version: Leave games as they are, if to do your vision means it'll cost too much to be fancy, people just need to embrace that not every game is going to be shiny and being shiny doesn't make them good... typically good artistic direction comes from limitations. Also if it's simply a 1080p problem... well the emulation on Wii-U might take care of that!
Night_Trekker
Member
Opinions can be shitty and lame. So can game magazines.
do you mean that people will pick up a wii version of prince of persia: forgotten sands instead of the 360 version because it's $10 less expensive or something?
billy beane
Banned
He doesn't even work for the magazine though. Game Informer isn't the greatest magazine out there, but this one piece isn't really a good reason to hate on it to be honest.
Its annoying how some members here just lable people as "nintendo fans" whenever a group of posters happen to have in common being against an article criticizing a nintendo game.
I'm a nintendo fan, but you dont have to be one to "defend" one of their games from silly arguments.
What's there to understand? Graphics are part of a package, and most nintendo made "packages" are well worth the similar price point, regardless of how limited one of its aspects is when compared to the competition.
I'm a nintendo fan, but you dont have to be one to "defend" one of their games from silly arguments.
What's there to understand? Graphics are part of a package, and most nintendo made "packages" are well worth the similar price point, regardless of how limited one of its aspects is when compared to the competition.
Because he s suggesting that Nintendo should have just launched the Wii and made no games for it.
Bitching about Wii games not looking as good as HD games is like bitching about apples not tasting like oranges.
I've never played a game and thought that I'd enjoy it more simply because it had better graphics. Especially Wii games. I'll never get that mentality.
I've never played a game and thought that I'd enjoy it more simply because it had better graphics. Especially Wii games. I'll never get that mentality.
MaxwellGT2000
Member
Very true... Opinion pieces from a published source should hold a certain standard if you want your opinions to hold any sort of credibility, which a lot of sites and magazines have lost a lot of... simply because they give hype machines 9's and 10's like they're candy on Halloween, while having poor reviews of good games where the reviewer obviously didn't put in the work to give a proper assessment, or opinions that don't hold true for the base they're writing for.
Look coming from a former reviewer/writer the system is set up to do this... writers are on strict deadlines because of embargos, if they don't meet the embargo lift date they miss out on many hits and funding from ads, if they don't get the funding they don't exist... then who provides the ad funding? Why of course the guys that make the games! So what appeals to a reviewer is a game they can beat within 10 hours and is an enjoyable experience for that time frame, as in it has flash to wow them, something that they don't have to come back and dwell on.
Once you think about how the system is set up to train reviewers to like that criteria, you start to realize they're no longer writing for gamers, they're writing for themselves and others like them. Thus their opinions would and should hold little value to the normal gamer... sadly most people don't see this because they refuse to put themselves into the reviewers shoes.
MoogleWizard
Member
Someone tell this guy that this game would probably be nowhere near as huge as it is with HD development costs, it's too much of a niche title with too small sales potential for that.
If it weren't for the Wii, we probably would have never gotten the game the way it is now.
If it weren't for the Wii, we probably would have never gotten the game the way it is now.
Coppertracks
Member
Temple of brown textures?! And what, Fallout 3 was the land of rainbows and sunshine?
I understand if you're coming from a HD system and start playing a game like Xenoblade... it's hard. Still, when I got it last year I got over it in a about two hours. The hyperbole in the article is just extremely lame. "Your games deserve better". Cringeworthy commentary if you ask me.
MaxwellGT2000
Member
Agreed, though from what I've seen of Final Fantasy Versus XIII it seems like it MIGHT be the first HD title we have for comparison, and it's been in the works for 6 years and at this point cost out the wazoo. If it was a square title it MIGHT have seen the light of day but at their current rate... who knows?!?
Didnt get that complaint. Skyward Sword was quite colorfull.
Maybe he was referring TP? But that was a GC game.
Night_Trekker
Member
1) The writer doesn't work for GI, but they gave him the platform for cheap controversy. Shameless.
2) Like I said, I had a subscription, and I have lots of reasons to hate GI. It's only successful because GameStop employees shill it so hard and because of the exclusives they get.
Good points.
Actually, I'm going to suggest that that's not quite the case. I'm going to suggest that it's because you're fed up that they do that *and it works*. You're frustrated with the fact that the gaming market as a whole doesn't match your idea of what gaming should be, and to make such a statement more palatable you dress it up in pleas about potential. You hate that people settle for what you see as mediocrity.
I'll invite you to consider one more thing. MonolithSoft was up for sale. The game you're envisaging could have happened had Microsoft or (more likely) Sony outbid Nintendo.
They didn't do so.
Why blame the company that *did* give them the money, rather than those who didn't think they were worthwhile?
(Of course, it helped that Nintendo had so much in the warchest. But then, think about why *that* was the case).
I really doubt the teams that make the amazing games for Wii would make the same games for a "HD" system. The industry just doesn't seem to work that way -- does anyone honestly think that Xenoblade Chronicles would have the same scope on a HD platform? A publisher wouldn't allow such a game to be made (Most likely.), and even the mentality of the development team wouldn't be the same.
I think Nintendo knew exactly what they were doing with the Wii. Perhaps they knew that with a HD console, the people making their games would be forced into the same pattern as the other HD console developers -- perhaps, even, that Nintendo themselves would change. The attitude and mentality of developers, along with all the pressure from gaming conventions, would change the way the games are made. Developers prove this time and time again on Xbox 360/PS 3 -- great developers constantly streamline their games and try to make them more 'universally acceptable' to appeal to a larger crowd.
Or maybe the developers of Xenoblade Chronicles are extremely unique, and would have made the same game, only graphically better, on a HD console. Unlikely however.
The Wii has an advantage when it comes to a couple of things, like not even trying to compete graphically. If it was, people, journalists alike would expect all their games to offer the best graphics all the time, which would seriously limit the size and scope of Xenoblade Chronicles -- ie; there'd be a push for better graphics, which would cost much more money, which would eventually result in a choice to settle for less overall to make the best with what they have. Because, most likely, they'd want to offer the 'best graphics' as opposed to more content overall, cause it's common knowledge that the public would feel that a lesser looking game on a platform with generally better graphics would be mediocre (And things like more content overall wouldn't be as important.).
This mentality also gets proven on the Xbox 360/PS 3 all the time, where games that don't offer the best graphics get lower review scores, or are the exception that proves the rule.
It's an innate human desire in each individual not to settle for mediocrity, and in a large scale production like games development, this may actually result in a mediocre product, since it's the result of the work of many different kinds of people.
Perhaps you would argue that someone settled for mediocrity in the case of the Wii, but I think the makers of Wii realised this desire, and how it presents itself amongst developers making games for the 'best' consoles.
In a world where games like Uncharted, Gears of War, Call of Duty, Halo, etc are considered absolute classics and make the biggest bucks in gaming, and how the platform 'enabled' this, I'd say the makers of the Wii made the right choice for gaming, or atleast it should point out how unlikely it is that games like Xenoblade Chronicles would be made on a HD platform.
They've established a market for themselves where they have to make excellent games based solely on it being an excellent game, not because of a shallow thing like graphics.
I think Nintendo knew exactly what they were doing with the Wii. Perhaps they knew that with a HD console, the people making their games would be forced into the same pattern as the other HD console developers -- perhaps, even, that Nintendo themselves would change. The attitude and mentality of developers, along with all the pressure from gaming conventions, would change the way the games are made. Developers prove this time and time again on Xbox 360/PS 3 -- great developers constantly streamline their games and try to make them more 'universally acceptable' to appeal to a larger crowd.
Or maybe the developers of Xenoblade Chronicles are extremely unique, and would have made the same game, only graphically better, on a HD console. Unlikely however.
The Wii has an advantage when it comes to a couple of things, like not even trying to compete graphically. If it was, people, journalists alike would expect all their games to offer the best graphics all the time, which would seriously limit the size and scope of Xenoblade Chronicles -- ie; there'd be a push for better graphics, which would cost much more money, which would eventually result in a choice to settle for less overall to make the best with what they have. Because, most likely, they'd want to offer the 'best graphics' as opposed to more content overall, cause it's common knowledge that the public would feel that a lesser looking game on a platform with generally better graphics would be mediocre (And things like more content overall wouldn't be as important.).
This mentality also gets proven on the Xbox 360/PS 3 all the time, where games that don't offer the best graphics get lower review scores, or are the exception that proves the rule.
It's an innate human desire in each individual not to settle for mediocrity, and in a large scale production like games development, this may actually result in a mediocre product, since it's the result of the work of many different kinds of people.
Perhaps you would argue that someone settled for mediocrity in the case of the Wii, but I think the makers of Wii realised this desire, and how it presents itself amongst developers making games for the 'best' consoles.
In a world where games like Uncharted, Gears of War, Call of Duty, Halo, etc are considered absolute classics and make the biggest bucks in gaming, and how the platform 'enabled' this, I'd say the makers of the Wii made the right choice for gaming, or atleast it should point out how unlikely it is that games like Xenoblade Chronicles would be made on a HD platform.
They've established a market for themselves where they have to make excellent games based solely on it being an excellent game, not because of a shallow thing like graphics.
I think that's actually a big clue that the constraints were due to money, not due to hardware. It'd make perfect sense for that sequence to be an FMV. It's separate from the game, there's absolutely no reason to render it in the game engine, and it consists of a viewpoint of the world you see extremely rarely in the progression of the story. A highly-detailed FMV would be perfect for that spot. And yet, they chose not to use one.
If you want to punch a kitten, you are an immature douchebag who does not treasure life - getting Xenoblade on other systems or on a more powerful N system should be the least of your worries.
With that out of my system, I can follow this up with simply saying: I do not think there are lost opportunities in the gaming sphere. With systems like Kickstarter starting to kick in, with the growing quality of every indie game, and the easier and cheaper solutions for 360/PS3 development also (when you are not aiming to be AAA+), if there is an idea strong enough, one could get what he wants.
The only thing that might be frustrating is the delay between manifesting an idea and creating a game for that. Xenoblade is bold in many ways. But I am not sure that in 3-4 years, we wont have something similar for stronger consoles.
With that out of my system, I can follow this up with simply saying: I do not think there are lost opportunities in the gaming sphere. With systems like Kickstarter starting to kick in, with the growing quality of every indie game, and the easier and cheaper solutions for 360/PS3 development also (when you are not aiming to be AAA+), if there is an idea strong enough, one could get what he wants.
The only thing that might be frustrating is the delay between manifesting an idea and creating a game for that. Xenoblade is bold in many ways. But I am not sure that in 3-4 years, we wont have something similar for stronger consoles.
jump_button
Banned
M°°nblade;37302378 said:
yeah when N64 was around they where no games on PS1 anyone would feel sorry for missing out...... oh wait is that bull shit I smell same with DS who would play that when you could have a PSP? only best out of some of the best games this gen but fuck it, its not as powerful
dragonlife
Member
What were the numbers?M°°nblade;37302378 said:
If I CAN'T enjoy it, what exactly am I missing out? Nothing.
Never bought a DS for the same reason.
PS1 games like Vagrant story, Tekken 3, FFVII-XIII, Wipeout were still acceptable after the N64 launched because they weren't an entire hardware generation behind. Plus, they had pretty FMV's.
I don't have exact numbers but I don't remember Xenoblade doing nice numbers in media-create, NPD threads.
jump_button
Banned
M°°nblade;37302603 said:
Why dont you just go and watch a Film then? if you don't play games for the game part
Thunderbear
Mawio Gawaxy iz da Wheeson hee pways games
It's not being a graphics whore, like the OP claimed. It directly affects gameplay. I completely agree with the Game Informer editor and applaud him for getting his message out. I don't really need to say anything else because he summarized it well enough. We deserve to play Zeldas, Marios, Smash Bro's et all with the wonder that todays technology can give us.
I am completely taken out of the world and can't enjoy a game after playing Uncharted 3 and then trying to play anything on the Wii.
I desperately want the Wii U to be powerful, but I suspect it won't be. And if it's really true that it's barely as powerful as a Xbox360 or PS3 then that just really sucks.
Visuals ARE a part of gaming. Plus what you and people similar to you don't seem to understand is that it doesn't just limit graphics. It limits gameplay. Physics, animations, scope of the worlds etc. etc.
I am completely taken out of the world and can't enjoy a game after playing Uncharted 3 and then trying to play anything on the Wii.
I desperately want the Wii U to be powerful, but I suspect it won't be. And if it's really true that it's barely as powerful as a Xbox360 or PS3 then that just really sucks.
Visuals ARE a part of gaming. Plus what you and people similar to you don't seem to understand is that it doesn't just limit graphics. It limits gameplay. Physics, animations, scope of the worlds etc. etc.
M°°nblade;37302603 said:
Not doubting that Xenoblade isn't selling gangbusters (I'm expectin 100K first month) but you do realize April NPD results is next month right? Just sayin'
Also, you're missing out on the DS if you're seriously skipping it just because it's not very powerful
Every time I buy a new console I hope it brings back those SNES days. Then I meet reality about a year later.
Yep I know. The thing is ... I'm not skipping platforms just because they're not very powerful.
I skip them because I know I can't enjoy technically outdated games.
You, sir, know correctly!I know Moonblade is very focussed on pretty pictures.
Plus ->
This a thousand times!
Night_Trekker
Member
Define irony: Xenoblade does a vast, sprawling world better than almost any game I can think of.
lol @ caring about fucking physics in a JRPG. You're reaching there.
But its not missing out to him because he seemingly doesn't care for the system in the first place. "Missing out" is relative.
You have a point but .... Dark/Demon's souls!
Spieler Eins
Member
Xenoblade doesn't feel limited though. Especially in scope, and gameplay is pretty deep when it comes to combat. There were several moments that wowed me, even after I've seen Uncharted 3. I'd take Xeno over that game any day.
M°°nblade;37302378 said:
Not only did it decent in Japan and exceeded expectations in Europe (NPD with Xeno isn't even out yet, lol), but sales were never the only, nor the biggest indicator of quality...
M°°nblade;37302874 said:
Calling the Souls games traditional RPG's is a stretch. Even worse if you consider them J-RPGS.
And the physics in those games is pretty bad. Shit flies all over the place as if it has no weight and enemies twitch and clip all over the scenery after they die.
Quite a few JRPGs this gen seem to have decent physics.
They aren't traditional but they are JRPGs.
jump_button
Banned
Dont see how anyone can say Xenoblade is a bad looking games and Visuals in Xenoblade are jaw dropping in more ways then one
As for limits yeah i know that but then them limits are part of the game you make they are always limits and RPG dont need over top Physics and dont think anyone would say the scope of this game is limited
Easy, people just came from playing a game on the PS3 or 360.
I'm not saying Xenoblade is a bad game because it sells poor.
I'm saying that it's a shame that a game that seems of high quality to (relatively speaking) few gamers, won't get the enjoyment or sales it deserves because it falls below the standards of many gamers.
Yes, they have RPG elements and they were made in Japan.
They do not, however, share enough characteristics with what is still currently considered a traditional JRPG to be labled as such.
Would you recommend this game to the Final Fantasy/Tales/Chrono Trigger/Breath of Fire/Golden Sun/etc.. loving crowd as a JRPG and not expect negative feedback?