Rumor Control - IGN's Nintendo Voice Chat

[Hellfire]

Surely if Prime and Galaxy were dumbed down like Resi 4 was for PS2 they could be on xbox.

 

And when you say they show misinformation, care to give an example?

 

Dumbing down Prime and Galaxy to work on Xbox would be a tremendous effort which would probably result in completly different games. Although RE4 is breathtaking it doesn't feature any thing that was impossible for last gen, for example, they reused lots of assets, the pallete is all very brown and most textures suck up close. But, redoing textures, reducing polygons, removing most of the lighting and physics and handling FOV and the number of things on screen to port MP3 or Galaxy would be basically making a game from scratch.

 

Misinformation? Hell, they make lots of mistakes when it comes to game features and history and whenever they talk hardware they're talking out of their asses.

[...]

Ok, I don't know much about graphics from a developer's point of view, but I believe that the Wii is much more powerful than the average Joe Blow thinks/says it is. Everyone knows what Factor 5 did with the gamecube FIVE years ago and that no one else actually did it.

 

Now, why don't devs know how to work on the GC and Wii's architectures? Shouldn't it be Nintendo's responsability, and in their best interests, to teach devs how to do it? A few devs have made their thoughts public about what they think are Wii's weaknesses. Now, if they are wrong (and I believe they are) why don't Nintendo just say so and take them into some seminars and teach them how to maximize Wii? Afterall, isn't it in Nintendo's best interest that everyone out there should know how to program for their hardware? Isn't it their job to educate 3rd parties, to guide them by the hand?

 

These are all honest questions, I'd appreciate an honest reply rather than sarcasm, thank you.

[Cube]

But I probably am the only one who thinks the Wii-graphics don't look half-bad.

 

You're not the only one. I want games that are easy on the eye. Nothing more.

[Retro_Link]

Ok, I don't know much about graphics from a developer's point of view, but I believe that the Wii is much more powerful than the average Joe Blow thinks/says it is. Everyone knows what Factor 5 did with the gamecube FIVE years ago and that no one else actually did it.

 

Now, why don't devs know how to work on the GC and Wii's architectures? Shouldn't it be Nintendo's responsability, and in their best interests, to teach devs how to do it? A few devs have made their thoughts public about what they think are Wii's weaknesses. Now, if they are wrong (and I believe they are) why don't Nintendo just say so and take them into some seminars and teach them how to maximize Wii? Afterall, isn't it in Nintendo's best interest that everyone out there should know how to program for their hardware? Isn't it their job to educate 3rd parties, to guide them by the hand?

 

These are all honest questions, I'd appreciate an honest reply rather than sarcasm, thank you.

I wouldn't say no other devs pushed the GC, Capcom did with it's Resi games, Rare did with Starfox Adventures etc... but yes I get what you're saying!

 

Yeah I think it is up to Nintendo in some ways to motivate third parties, and hopefully the fantastic looking 1st party games will show to other developers and to the public just what the Wii is capable of and so general expectations will rise!

 

However, I think one problem the Wii has was revealed by Ubisoft the other day when they said they are using the profits they can make on Wii to fund their larger projects...

It just shows that a number of developers are lazy! and if they see they can make a good bit of profit from games with short dev. times or from quick ports, they will do!

The problem is these types of games are currently selling on Wii because of the wide range of people currently buying the console. Developers are getting games out quickly to capitalise on the Wii uptake!

 

Maybe once the Wii userbase stabalises more and the console clearly establishes itself as the front runner, those developer will dedicate more time to Wii games!

 

But I probably am the only one who thinks the Wii-graphics don't look half-bad. I see the hyper-realism of the 360 and especially the PS3, and all I can think about is "too bad they don't have that Nintendo-interface."

But indeed, that lack of energy coming from some 3rd parties is just appalling.

I agree!

I think Wii Sports looks fantastic! and the likes of Metroid, Mario and SSBB are just awesome!

 

The 360 and PS3 sometimes look like they are overcomplicating things, as though they are striving for a level of photorealism that in actuality doesn't quite exist yet!

I'd much rather have gameplay and a great art style over flash graphics!

 

However it's incredible frustrating when we know what the Wii is capable of a third parties still have the nerve to delivering the likes of Cruis'n!!

It's those times when you look at third party efforts on the 360 and PS3 and just think *sigh*!

[Mikey]

I'm with 'Cube on this. I don't really care that much for HDR lighting and other stuff like that. Games which are clean, and crisp appeal to me more.

 

Galaxy looks like this, and I think it looks stunning because of it.

[...]

Yeah, Rare have a history of knowing Nintendo's systems as well as Nintendo themselves.

[Mikey]

Rare were much better than Nintendo when it came to getting amazing graphics out of a system.

[pedrocasilva]

Every week matt and bozon say they love the graphics on Wii and they think it looks great; they don't care it's underpowered. Grow up people; you act like they're taking the piss out of the console.

If they do why do they still go out of their path commenting how it could be done on Xbox? they are doing Wii a disservice.

 

Of all consoles this gen we are the ones that don't need this kind of comments, specially when they have no reason to be made.

 

For the record I don't consider Wii weak for what it is, so I really dislike this misleading titles, it's giving X360/PS3 fans fuel to the flame "see wii doesn't beat Xbox" kind of stuff... And it's simply not true.

Surely if Prime and Galaxy were dumbed down like Resi 4 was for PS2 they could be on xbox.

 

And when you say they show misinformation, care to give an example?

Thing is... we're talking about exclusive games who pushed the hardware, so even last gen a port to other platform would suffer; for example... Metroid Prime 1/2, yeah could be done dumbed down when it came to geometry and locked at 30 frames... But same for Halo 2 on GC if we go by those standards (except then, we'd probably have a dumbed down version when it came to textures due to RAM constraints, but running easily at 60 frames whereas on Xbox it's 30 frames).

 

Neither would be ideal, and if we set to push either with both versions... We'd end up with different games.

 

But when it comes to Galaxy and Metroid Prime 3... And we realize GC's handycaps (like lack of RAM) have been resolved and even upped beyond Xbox 1... No, it's not even doable anymore, doesn't make sense to realisticaly suggest that.

Who really cares either way? I don't care about how powerful the Wii is, the only thing that bothers me is when devs don't push a console and port old games with no graphical upgrades at all. Like Twilight Princess and Resi 4 Wii Edition.

 

Am I the only one who is far more impressed by seeing how much a developer can get out of a console than seeing better looking games on a more powerful console which don't push the unit?

I do care when I know they're wrong.

 

I agree with you, thouh. What I like to see most in consoles is games pushing hardware boundaries.

Correct me if I'm wrong (Pedro), but I think Resi 4 did have advantages over the GC version (graphically). Doesn't it do 16:9?

Wii versus GC version?

 

Pretty marginal ones, they pretty much just trown the code in the console, but still zones where the game had framerate hickups should be fine (kinda like with zelda tp gc/wii)

 

Real anamorphic 16:9 could be done on GC, it just wasn't, and to my knowledge (I still don't have the game) the game's internal resolution wasn't bumped when compared to the original. (I might be wrong on this one, just something I've heard as of now)

Rare were much better than Nintendo when it came to getting amazing graphics out of a system.

Different philosophies I think, Nintendo always goes for sustainable framerates and doesn't overly detail stuff; I've never seen, for example a polygon pusher coming from them... But I've constantly seen games coming from them that push the system reasonably all around...

 

Rareware often had N64 games with almost constant slowdown, they were awesome graphically, but where also paying a price for that... It's just that rareware though it was worth it for that little extra.

 

Zelda OoT was always kind of a environment pusher for me because of that, it's not like Nintendo didn't knew how to do the same stuff, more like they didn't want to make that many compromises and therefore going with something in the middle; kinda balanced.

 

Actually, same for Retro Studios, imagine they were using the Metroid Prime 3 engine locked at 30 frames?

[jammy2211]

It's all well and good saying Nintendo should be telling third parties how to unlock the best in their system, how to do all these graphical techniques and stuff, but the truth is, are any of them actually going to listen?

 

I mean, at the moment alot of them all seem keen on the mentality that a Wii game can be made on the lowest budget possible and graphics can be forgotten as important, which well, is probably correct looking at sales. I'm pretty sure people like EA and Ubisoft don't care if their games don't look as good as Nintendo's, provided they can cut their developement spans and costs in half by doing so.

 

However, the Wii is really starting to build up a third party library of good games, many of which use great and vivid art styles, the sort of which I've really been hoping to see. I think we're seeing some third parties step up and be ready to compete, while others still try and flog the visuals in games like Nitro Bike and Cruis'n.

 

I think by the start of early 2008 the competition will be too much for games which are clearly a rushed cash in. Much praise to companies like THQ, Capcom, EA (sort of), Grasshopper, Konami and Square Enix who are stepping up their Wii budgets already. (there's quite a few more too, mind you.)

[...]

 

Real anamorphic 16:9 could be done on GC

 

But of course, GoldenEye did it on the N64.

[DCK]

It's all well and good saying Nintendo should be telling third parties how to unlock the best in their system, how to do all these graphical techniques and stuff, but the truth is, are any of them actually going to listen?

Technically speaking, I think developers know everything required to make Mario Galaxy-grade visuals; they are just not skilled with the system. There are many Wii and GameCube ports that are completely stripped from lighting effects because developers can't use the Wii's alternative shaders, for example. The documentation should be there (seeing Dewy's Adventure), but as no-one has an online tutorial for it like with the DirectX Shading Language, they don't try.

 

Secondly, the Wii has a big problem that the middleware a lot of developers use (ready made engines and the likes) are not optimised for Wii but for GameCube or PS2 instead. Many popular middleware engines like Gamebryo and Renderware don't even have a Wii implementation; the GameCube implementation runs directly on Wii.

[harribo]

I like how IGN are always wrong and evil.

[pedrocasilva]

I like how IGN are always wrong and evil.

I wouldn't say always, they have good informers and such, when it comes to games it is what it is (unless Matt talks Halo DS), they just suck when they go taking conclusions themselves on hardware issues, because they don't really know what they're talking about, but think they do..

[darksnowman]

I like how IGN are always wrong and evil.

 

Its a dilemma, cos I like IGN and I like Pedro too...

[Gizmo]

<3 IGN.The shit stirrers that they are.

[James McGeachie]

What I find funny now is how you guys always pick IGN up for the specs thing, when virtually every other big gaming site does the exact same thing, yet they talk about it in a far more negative view than Matt or Bozon ever do.

 

Pedro unless you ever get Wii hardware yourself and make a game with it that surpasses anything on the Xbox by far I'd like to think you fall under how you just described IGN. After all for all the facts and figures you spew, matter is unless you've got the hardware and test it yourself, you're as "in the know" as they are.

[DCK]

IGN presents wrong facts out of sheer arrogance. The editors don't know hardware, but think they do. Examples are the comparing of Wii and Xbox clock speeds and 'Wii can't do normal mapping'. They're great at games, but they're not at hardware reports.

 

Pedro's conclusions are based on open knowledge, and they make more sense than the proven limited knowledge Bozon and Cassamina have.

[pedrocasilva]

What I find funny now is how you guys always pick IGN up for the specs thing, when virtually every other big gaming site does the exact same thing, yet they talk about it in a far more negative view than Matt or Bozon ever do.

I don't see them (big gaming sites) speaking out of their asses on how Mario Galaxy could be done on Xbox, that's something I don't even expect from a dedicated xbox website.

 

It's not me that picks on them, but when they say what they did... They need to be corrected before public assumes it to be as is.

 

Basically they think that, because they have sources and status in the gaming sites business they have credibility to give their own opinions about the matter and they'll be credible as well... Thing is... they don't; even if the source is credible (Wii final specs for example)... that's the source, not them.

 

We are always going to square one with this one, but when IGN says; "according to our sources Wii's CPU performance is double that of GC" (something like that), that's already the same as stating it has more than double the power Xbox had in that area, yet then they look at the MHz and sprout "souped up Xbox"... That's the kind of confusion they did, and it's simply wrong.

 

They're game reviewers, not tech freaks, and quite simply... Half of the times they end up saying something silly or untrue. I'm not saying they have ill intentions, but I'm saying they should keep their mouth shut, because it's hard to clear their misunderstandings. And Wii is the platform on the market that doesn't need comments like that at all... We know Wii is not comparable to X360 and PS3, but the Xbox comments... are just pissing all over it and dragging it under.

Pedro unless you ever get Wii hardware yourself and make a game with it that surpasses anything on the Xbox by far I'd like to think you fall under how you just described IGN. After all for all the facts and figures you spew, matter is unless you've got the hardware and test it yourself, you're as "in the know" as they are.

I don't need to prove it myself (doing a game who surpasses Xbox) as I've have given facts in the past, polycounts comparisons and even interviews with guys who pushed the cube architecture and are third party, whether you want to believe them or EA... It's your call.

 

In the end of the day... We're talking about two Wii exclusives here, who couldn't, no matter what... be done on Xbox; and we won't even argue they could have a source on this one, they're simply toying with the idea and convincing themselves that's the case. And... It's simply untrue.

[Goron_3]

well tbh after listening to it, the way they say it it sounds to me that they are just making a point by saying it (as in, we know its not as powerful as Ps3, but you shouldn't care).

 

I don't see why people give em stick considering they stuck up for the Wii during every podcast featuring Peer seeing as all he says is 'it can be done on Cube'.

[Meo]

What I find funny now is how you guys always pick IGN up for the specs thing, when virtually every other big gaming site does the exact same thing, yet they talk about it in a far more negative view than Matt or Bozon ever do.

 

Pedro unless you ever get Wii hardware yourself and make a game with it that surpasses anything on the Xbox by far I'd like to think you fall under how you just described IGN. After all for all the facts and figures you spew, matter is unless you've got the hardware and test it yourself, you're as "in the know" as they are.

 

True, its very easy to pick IGN, and the reason is very simple. Other media outlets have come to accept the machine (well, most of them) for what it is. Matt on the other hand, trying to show himself not biased/fanboy, still continues the bashing. And that's fine by me, bitching about graphics is a good thing specially when it brings it to the attention of the developers. But the problem is he doesn't stop there, he actually adventures himself in a realm he doesn't understand; the technical one. And the bullshit rolls from there on, even when he is proven wrong by developers.

 

"Spewing" facts and figures isn't the wrong atitude, because they are supported by real world facts and numbers; making outlandish remarks is.

 

And believing developers who have never worked on the platform until now; developers who don't know that a shader is a glorified name for combiners and can pretty much be achieved in any (fairly) recent hardware; is just as bad.

 

EDIT: beaten.

[Hellfire]

 

Pedro unless you ever get Wii hardware yourself and make a game with it that surpasses anything on the Xbox by far I'd like to think you fall under how you just described IGN. After all for all the facts and figures you spew, matter is unless you've got the hardware and test it yourself, you're as "in the know" as they are.

You mean something like this

 

or this

 

 

It's a FACT that the XBOX couldn't do Metroid Prime 1 how the hell could he do 3? That's ridiculous.

 

And we're talking about IGN, bexause this is an IGN thread, it's as simple as that.

[pedrocasilva]

^ And images don't do them enough justice, Mario Galaxy is pretty hard to judge just how much stuff is going on by screenshots alone and the latter Metroid Prime 3 one is heavily compressed. (and runs at 60 frames, something that can't be translated into a screenshot)

well tbh after listening to it, the way they say it it sounds to me that they are just making a point by saying it (as in, we know its not as powerful as Ps3, but you shouldn't care).

Didn't hear the podcast, but that's more bearable... Still it's their habit of going after a flashy headline, we get it it's no X360/PS3 (we got it ages ago) but the way it put it, it's bad.

[Mikey]

I really don't know about tech specs much. I admit it, I'm ignorant, but what I want to know is, is the Wii really capable of doing graphics noticibly better than the GameCube while also supporting widescreen? Because really, I'd be happy with just cleaned up GC graphics with widescreen support.

[pedrocasilva]

I really don't know about tech specs much. I admit it, I'm ignorant, but what I want to know is, is the Wii really capable of doing graphics noticibly better than the GameCube while also supporting widescreen? Because really, I'd be happy with just cleaned up GC graphics with widescreen support.

It is, problem for some, is that it won't turn GC games horrible by comparison... Other brands felt obliged to go into HD for a reason, you can push, say... double the polygons in Standard Definition and if the object look was already rounded... well it's only a improvement, not miles and bounds better; however if you bumped the resolution it would be instantly crispier, so it's easier to make a difference from last gen.

 

No Wii game will embarass RE4 on GC (and others), just like IMO high-end gamecube/xbox can still hold their own as good graphics, but we can perfect it, with better textures, widescreen, more enemies/polygons on screen... you name it, the hardware is simply better while proposing to do the same. So in that sense it's not unpowered; that's the way I like to think of it, it has a higher ceiling when used right, meaning you can do more.

[Mikey]

To explain myself better. In Twilight Princess for example some areas look better than others. The Castle Town looks stunning, while some parts, like certain areas of Hyrule Field, look significantly worse because of it's size. Is the Wii basically powerful enough to make games like TP look as good as the Castle Town all the way through?