The Last Story Official Topic

[Kav]

...A graphics score MUST include artistic direction, and where some games lack the polygons they MORE than make up for in art direction!!!

 

I was about to post this exact same thing. Of course a graphics score should encompass artistic direction.

Which in turn can make the whole "graphics can't be good on Wii" argument completely moot!

[madeinbeats]

Tell her she's an idiot, because she is.

 

Super Mario Galaxy 1&2 are definitely worth more than 7.5! They'd look at home on the HD consoles.

 

She's basically resorted to saying neither of us are wrong, it's her job to express her thoughts in her own fashion.

 

There's no denying that Wii games look smeared and terrible on a HDTV even using its highest resolution setting.

 

I just don't have that problem mate on my 32" 1080p HD TV with components. Your settings must be wrong!?!

[Sheikah]

I still think that wii games should be judged by its capabilities... If a car can do 100 mph but with a certain driver averages at 70 you can say the driver isnt the best... In the way that they aren't making the most out of the hardware... Same with wii games... I'm so bored of people slating wii GAMES for their poor graphics... Slate the console til the cows come home, but the games are a different animal. They are being made within a hardware limit so there are going to be good wii graphics and bad wii graphics... Whinging that they aren't in HD is pointless and unfair of you are scoring the games in a review... The wii is not capable of HD, so stop harping on about how the game isn't as pretty as HD...

 

Yes, as you say, they are being made with a hardware limit. Which is why you should question why, if a company is putting a lot of effort into pushing a system graphically, why oh why choose the Wii as your system of choice?

 

It doesn't matter whether you think it's unfair to judge this way or not, I honestly don't think we should judge the graphics on Wii relative to just other Wii games. By that logic we could say that a homebrew game for NES released yesterday has astounding graphics - of course, relative to other NES games!

 

As it stands, there is no game on the Wii will ever have graphics that I consider 'great', for the same reason that I imagine a man who has had his legs blown off would never be 'great' at running. The game is severely limited by its hardware, and after playing a lot of titles on 360 and PS3, it certainly shows.

 

I won't deny that Mario Galaxy has a great artistic style to it, but I can still clearly see the limitations (particularly resolution and smearedness on a large HDTV).

 

 

I just don't have that problem mate on my 32" 1080p HD TV with components. Your settings must be wrong!?!

Not a chance. I think it's more likely you're a little like my parents - someone that has to be pointed out the difference in quality between HD and SD! Also the fact your HDTV is 1080p is a rather moot point given the Wii outputs nowhere near that. Using a component cable with resolution set to max, there's still a massive difference between games I play on my PS3 and games I play on my Wii.

Edited February 26, 2012 by Sheikah

[madeinbeats]

Not a chance. I think it's more likely you're a little like my parents - someone that has to be pointed out the difference in quality between HD and SD! Also the fact your HDTV is 1080p is a rather moot point given the Wii outputs nowhere near that. Using a component cable with resolution set to max, there's still a massive difference between games I play on my PS3 and games I play on my Wii.

 

I don't need to be pointed out the difference in SD & HD. There's a massive difference as you say because the PS3 outputs in HD. As far as the Wii and its SD output goes, they are perfectly clear and crisp for me, not blured. You ever tried playing a PS3 with a scart lead? I did with COD and it was horrifying.

[Sheikah]

What you state is physically impossible - there is no way the Wii can be perfectly crisp on a 32" HDTV (coincidentally, the size of my TV too).

 

Perfectly crisp implies high resolution, which the Wii simply does not have and therefore looks rather smeared and stretched relative to HD resolution games on a HDTV.

[madeinbeats]

What you state is physically impossible - there is no way the Wii can be perfectly crisp on a 32" HDTV (coincidentally, the size of my TV too).

 

Perfectly crisp implies high resolution, which the Wii simply does not have and therefore looks rather smeared and stretched relative to HD resolution games on a HDTV.

 

I think you're confusing picture quality with texture resolutions and number of scanlines. By your assessment, DVD's on HD TVs look blury too, which is not true; Blu-Ray just contains more detail as do PS360 games.

 

"Perfectly crisp implies high resolution" Does it?!? Says you

[Mokong]

If we're talking about display sizes and such, then for the record, I have a 50 inch HDTV, playing the Wii with component cables and I love how my Wii looks on it. I don't think anything looks "smeared" at all. Games such as Last Story and Xenoblade (not to mention the Marios, Zelda hell even my COD games) look great to me. Even with teh CoD games, sure I know they are not as good as the PS3 and 360 counterparts but that causes me no issue at all.

[madeinbeats]

If we're talking about display sizes and such, then for the record, I have a 50 inch HDTV, playing the Wii with component cables and I love how my Wii looks on it. I don't think anything looks "smeared" at all. Games such as Last Story and Xenoblade (not to mention the Marios, Zelda hell even my COD games) look great to me. Even with teh CoD games, sure I know they are not as good as the PS3 and 360 counterparts but that causes me no issue at all.

 

For the record, I haven't got access to the Thanks button.

[Fierce_LiNk]

I think it does mean that. What you're probably referring to is artistic style of the game as opposed to graphics. Essentially put, imagine any Wii game with a nice art style (Mario Galaxy, Okami, etc). Put this game on a PS3 or 360 with the exact same art style and it will be guaranteed to look at least twice as good. That's what I'm getting at when I say the Wii is a poor console for graphics.

 

 

I already mentioned artistic style in my post, where I said "Yes, it is subjective, and there is the art style to take into account." Art style is important, but quite often (like Deku_Nutz said), a team might go with a particular art style to make best use of the hardware. If you can't go all Michael Bay with it, you have to find a creative way around it. I don't see the problem with that.

 

When I think of these systems, it reminds me of a drum kit, or a guitar, but reduced. So, maybe the HD systems would be a fully blown Tool style kit. Yet, the Wii would be just simple snare, bass, hi-hat. If you've got the tools, you have the potential to do more. No denying that. But, to say that you can only make mediocre sounds with a bass, snare and hi-hat is just wrong.

[Sheikah]

I think you're confusing picture quality with texture resolutions and number of scanlines. By your assessment, DVD's on HD TVs look blury too, which is not true; Blu-Ray just contains more detail as do PS360 games.

 

"Perfectly crisp implies high resolution" Does it?!? Says you

 

*facepalm*

 

Yes it bloody well does. If you have a PS3 or 360, try change the display resolution from 1080p to some SD resolution and tell me you don't notice a clear lack of crispness on your 32" TV - even on the menus, it will be extremely clear. If you don't bother doing this, don't bother replying.

 

A component cable allows the best resolution you can get with Wii with a HDTV - 420p (or 576i). So this comes out as 720?480 pixels (480p) or 720x576 pixels (576i)

 

Compare this to a 1080p game - which outputs at 1920 x 1080 pixels.

 

 

Essentially, you are stretching out those 720 pixels horizontally to fit the width of your 32" HDTV when playing on the Wii. On the same TV, playing a 1080p game, you have nearly 3 times as many pixels in width - which your 1080p HDTV can more than happily display.

 

tl;dr - of course the Wii will not look crisp on a relative scale. Even if it looks fine 'to you', the fact other consoles have managed to completely obliterate this in terms of 'crispness' highlights the machine as a bit of a relic for which retirement can't come soon enough.

 

If you've got the tools, you have the potential to do more. No denying that. But, to say that you can only make mediocre sounds with a bass, snare and hi-hat is just wrong.

 

I would consider sound vs picture to be two completely different things. Retro sounds can actually be pretty cool. But going from HD, crisp visuals back to the Wii when a half decent title is released never fails to disappoint.

 

Whatever the art style, I can't see how it could be anything but better in HD.

Edited February 26, 2012 by Sheikah
Automerged Doublepost

[madeinbeats]

*facepalm*

 

Yes it bloody well does. If you have a PS3 or 360, try change the display resolution from 1080p to some SD resolution and tell me you don't notice a clear lack of crispness on your 32" TV - even on the menus, it will be extremely clear. If you don't bother doing this, don't bother replying.

 

I'm getting the impression you would argue the sky was green until you were orange in the facepalm. You seem to be clasping onto a very specific and pedantic point.

 

Everyone here agrees that the PS360 outputs a more detailed picture, how can we not, but what we are saying is the picture on the Wii on an HDTV looks most agreeable to us and nothing like how you're trying to make it sound.

 

My HDTV has a Game Mode, and a PC mode which calibrates the picture accordingly... I can pass on the name of my TV supplier you're looking to upgrade :p

[Kav]

So I've been playing for around 3 hours now and the game isn't doing anything in the way of grabbing my interest.

I don't know what chapter I'm on, it's still early, I've only just given some lad medicine.

 

I'd have thought that by now the game would have done something of interest to me. By this time in Xenoblade (still REALLY early) I was absolutely engrossed.

Of the two "Project Rainfall" titles out so far Xenoblade is streets ahead of this one.

[Sheikah]

Specific and pedantic point? What planet are you on?

 

I have given you a technical explanation as to why the highest resolution of the Wii looks blurred to me relative to HD games (nearly 3 times lower horizontal resolution). And yeah, like I said, many people on this forum will be fine with it (hence why they still like and play their Wii; most people like me have mostly fucked off to HD consoles by now), but I'm not.

 

Passing on TV manufacturer is ultimate lol. Because your TV is so great because of the 'brand', amirite? ;-)

 

Sorry, but having a technical conversation with you is almost like trying to have one with my grandmother.

[Fierce_LiNk]

I would consider sound vs picture to be two completely different things. Retro sounds can actually be pretty cool. But going from HD, crisp visuals back to the Wii when a half decent title is released never fails to disappoint.

 

Whatever the art style, I can't see how it could be anything but better in HD.

 

They are different, but not a million miles away. The point is that you can only work with the tools that are available. It would be nice if such and such was in HD, but right now it isn't. So, it just seems like a pointless exercise wondering when it isn't. The games might look better in HD, but I still argue that it doesn't mean anything below HD looks terrible. That's the point I think people are trying to make here.

 

Anyway, now this discussion is getting into the "technical" region, which I find boring. So, I'll leave my point at that.

[Deku-Nutz]

Yes, as you say, they are being made with a hardware limit. Which is why you should question why, if a company is putting a lot of effort into pushing a system graphically, why oh why choose the Wii as your system of choice?

 

It doesn't matter whether you think it's unfair to judge this way or not, I honestly don't think we should judge the graphics on Wii relative to just other Wii games. By that logic we could say that a homebrew game for NES released yesterday has astounding graphics - of course, relative to other NES games!

 

As it stands, there is no game on the Wii will ever have graphics that I consider 'great', for the same reason that I imagine a man who has had his legs blown off would never be 'great' at running. The game is severely limited by its hardware, and after playing a lot of titles on 360 and PS3, it certainly shows.

 

You're... strange.

 

You DON'T think we should judge Wii games on the graphical capabilities of the Wii? That simply does NOT make sense... It's like saying a reviewer can mark Radiant Historia down for having fairly bad sprites, when the PSP can render fantastic 3D character models... it doesn't matter what else is out there, if you are judging a game on Wii then I'm afraid you are limited to looking at the Wii in terms of what it can do. I don't even mean "Awwww well it's just the little Wii... give it a 8 for trying" because there ARE great looking games on Wii! There just are, denying it is pointless.

 

A reviewer can lament that a game has appeared on a graphically inferior console all they like, as you can (and clearly do) but the Wii exists, so it's a development option... it's an option people will choose for a variety of reasons... the control input, the fact it's Nintendo... oh and of course the fact that the User Base is HUGE! And deveopment is CHEAP and clearly people are stilll buying millions of Wii titles despite the graphical inferiorority... there are other reasons... The Last Story (just to bring us slightly back on topic here) appeared on the Wii because of the relationship between the director and also a big wig in Nintendo... also the low budget restraints...

 

Gaming is a buisness... money is a huge factor... I can't believe you even asked the question "Why oh why bring a game to Wii if you want to push graphics..." I don't ever remember Hironobu Sakaguchi saying he wanted to push the graphics of today... infact he specifically mentioned his desire to create a game outside of the heavy burden of HD...

 

and your NES analogy is so lame... it does your intellegence an injustice. i don't think it's unfair to judge a Wii game by Wii's capabilities, I just know that doing anything else is STUPID!

[madeinbeats]

Specific and pedantic point? What planet are you on?

 

I have given you a technical explanation as to why the highest resolution of the Wii looks blurred to me relative to HD games (nearly 3 times lower horizontal resolution). And yeah, like I said, many people on this forum will be fine with it (hence why they still like and play their Wii; most people like me have mostly fucked off to HD consoles by now), but I'm not.

 

Passing on TV manufacturer is ultimate lol. Because your TV is so great because of the 'brand', amirite? ;-)

 

Sorry, but having a technical conversation with you is almost like trying to have one with my grandmother.

 

Having this conversation with someone who openly admits they "f**ked off" to an HD console because of better graphics is like trying to explain modesty to Victoria Beckham.

 

I can only imagine you peruse these forums looking for antagonistic conflicts as an outlet for your autistic obsessions. So can you drop it now and not turn this thread into an irrelevance farce; your technical prowess is totally lost on my feeble grandparent mind.

[Sheikah]

Their available tools were vast had they chose to make it on a HD console in that case. The point is that making the game on the Wii, the graphics are limited to that of a very good, polished gamecube game. Of course they're not going to make your eyes bleed, but they're not going to wow you given that we've seen games look like this for ages.

 

Having this conversation with someone who openly admits they "f**ked off" to an HD console because of better graphics is like trying to explain modesty to Victoria Beckham.

 

I can only imagine you peruse these forums looking for antagonistic conflicts as an outlet for your autistic obsessions. So can you drop it now and not turn this thread into an irrelevance farce; your technical prowess is totally lost on my feeble grandparent mind.

 

Actually, reasons why I 'fucked off' away from the Wii (as I'm sure many did):

 

- Lack of great games, particularly from 3rd parties (a lot of great titles these days are PS3/360 multiplatform and not Wii)

- Piss poor online infrastructure

- Of games that are multiplatform, and therefore have the same gameplay on each version, the weakest console version graphically is almost certainly on the Wii.

 

So please don't jump to conclusions, as you have proven to be so good at doing.

Edited February 26, 2012 by Sheikah
Automerged Doublepost

[Nicktendo]

So yeah, thanks Sheikah...

 

The Last Story, impressions? Thinking about getting this.

[Sheikah]

You're... strange.

 

You DON'T think we should judge Wii games on the graphical capabilities of the Wii? That simply does NOT make sense... It's like saying a reviewer can mark Radiant Historia down for having fairly bad sprites, when the PSP can render fantastic 3D character models... it doesn't matter what else is out there, if you are judging a game on Wii then I'm afraid you are limited to looking at the Wii in terms of what it can do. I don't even mean "Awwww well it's just the little Wii... give it a 8 for trying" because there ARE great looking games on Wii! There just are, denying it is pointless.

 

Why on Earth would you rate poor graphics to be good because the console can't do any better? I'm sorry, that logic is baffling.

 

And why are game reviewers even including graphics as a breakdown that must be marked? I've played games that have had crap graphics, but have been great; simply put, they don't even need to give this a score. But if they really wanted to score Wii games, well...I certainly wouldn't be giving anything a 10 for graphics. Not as a multiformat review site anyway.

 

A reviewer can lament that a game has appeared on a graphically inferior console all they like, as you can (and clearly do) but the Wii exists, so it's a development option... it's an option people will choose for a variety of reasons... the control input, the fact it's Nintendo... oh and of course the fact that the User Base is HUGE! And deveopment is CHEAP and clearly people are stilll buying millions of Wii titles despite the graphical inferiorority... there are other reasons... The Last Story (just to bring us slightly back on topic here) appeared on the Wii because of the relationship between the director and also a big wig in Nintendo... also the low budget restraints...

 

All of which are very valid reasons to release your game on the Wii. But if somebody (can't remember who now) starts flapping that their favourite Wii game hasn't scored highly on graphics, don't expect any sympathy! There are pros, and certainly cons, to releasing a game on the Wii as opposed to a HD console.

 

Gaming is a buisness... money is a huge factor... I can't believe you even asked the question "Why oh why bring a game to Wii if you want to push graphics..." I don't ever remember Hironobu Sakaguchi saying he wanted to push the graphics of today... infact he specifically mentioned his desire to create a game outside of the heavy burden of HD...

 

No, no. This was a comment directed at the person complaining about the graphic review score. Nothing more.

 

and your NES analogy is so lame... it does your intellegence an injustice. i don't think it's unfair to judge a Wii game by Wii's capabilities, I just know that doing anything else is STUPID!

Absolute bollocks and you know it. I have no idea why we can't rate games between platforms; if we didn't, console manufacturers would have no reason to improve their console capabilities.

 

Not only that, people do it all the time. Take Final Fantasy XIII. When it came out for PS3 and 360, people were annoyed because the 360 version wasn't actually in HD and this was somewhat noticeable. Of course they are comparable, they are both games consoles intended to do similar things, and based on the sum of their positives consumers make their choice of console to purchase.

[Nicktendo]

Why on Earth would you rate poor graphics to be good because the console can't do any better? I'm sorry, that logic is baffling.

 

And why are game reviewers even including graphics as a breakdown that must be marked? I've played games that have had crap graphics, but have been great; simply put, they don't even need to give this a score. But if they really wanted to score Wii games, well...I certainly wouldn't be giving anything a 10 for graphics. Not as a multiformat review site anyway.

 

 

 

All of which are very valid reasons to release your game on the Wii. But if somebody (can't remember who now) starts flapping that their favourite Wii game hasn't scored highly on graphics, don't expect any sympathy! There are pros, and certainly cons, to releasing a game on the Wii as opposed to a HD console.

 

 

 

No, no. This was a comment directed at the person complaining about the graphic review score. Nothing more.

 

 

Absolute bollocks and you know it. I have no idea why we can't rate games between platforms; if we didn't, console manufacturers would have no reason to improve their console capabilities.

 

Not only that, people do it all the time. Take Final Fantasy XIII. When it came out for PS3 and 360, people were annoyed because the 360 version wasn't actually in HD and this was somewhat noticeable. Of course they are comparable, they are both games consoles intended to do similar things, and based on the sum of their positives consumers make their choice of console to purchase.

 

Cool story, bro. Why don't you 'f-off' back to your HD consoles so we can get on with dicussing the game in question, instead of amusing you as childishly pick fights over a 6-year old argument?

[Deku-Nutz]

Why on Earth would you rate poor graphics to be good because the console can't do any better? I'm sorry, that logic is baffling.

 

And why are game reviewers even including graphics as a breakdown that must be marked? I've played games that have had crap graphics, but have been great; simply put, they don't even need to give this a score. But if they really wanted to score Wii games, well...I certainly wouldn't be giving anything a 10 for graphics. Not as a multiformat review site anyway.

 

 

 

All of which are very valid reasons to release your game on the Wii. But if somebody (can't remember who now) starts flapping that their favourite Wii game hasn't scored highly on graphics, don't expect any sympathy! There are pros, and certainly cons, to releasing a game on the Wii as opposed to a HD console.

 

 

 

No, no. This was a comment directed at the person complaining about the graphic review score. Nothing more.

 

 

Absolute bollocks and you know it. I have no idea why we can't rate games between platforms; if we didn't, console manufacturers would have no reason to improve their console capabilities.

 

Not only that, people do it all the time. Take Final Fantasy XIII. When it came out for PS3 and 360, people were annoyed because the 360 version wasn't actually in HD and this was somewhat noticeable. Of course they are comparable, they are both games consoles intended to do similar things, and based on the sum of their positives consumers make their choice of console to purchase.

 

OK it's clear you don't even have a firm grip on what it is you are even saying here... you dont think games should be graded on graphics???

 

You can't review games across all platforms because the platforms ARE architecturally different. It's as thick as dung to think OHHHH WELL I BETTER GRADE THIS LOW BECAUSE THERE IS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT MACHINE THAT CAN DOOOOO BETTER!!! the person has bought that machine, the game is on thar machine... it has NOTHING to do with the PS3...

 

The PC has and WILL always be superior to consoles, so WHY do I never see a review that says "Well the graphics on Skyrim are ok... OH but they are pretty SHIT compared to PC so... mark down..." and boy they ARE terrible in comparison! I mean a massive margin in quality!!! But you never hear people moaning, because it's a different animal, a different MACHINE...

 

Seriously get over it, getting boring now and you don't have any good points at all! Really, your argument is a mess.

[Sheikah]

OK it's clear you don't even have a firm grip on what it is you are even saying here... you dont think games should be graded on graphics???

 

OMFG? Not on graphics? What kind of maverick am I, to think that graphics may not necessarily need to be given a generic number that presumably means something to someone, somewhere.

 

You can't review games across all platforms because the platforms ARE architecturally different. It's as thick as dung to think OHHHH WELL I BETTER GRADE THIS LOW BECAUSE THERE IS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT MACHINE THAT CAN DOOOOO BETTER!!! the person has bought that machine, the game is on thar machine... it has NOTHING to do with the PS3...

 

The PC has and WILL always be superior to consoles, so WHY do I never see a review that says "Well the graphics on Skyrim are ok... OH but they are pretty SHIT compared to PC so... mark down..." and boy they ARE terrible in comparison! I mean a massive margin in quality!!! But you never hear people moaning, because it's a different animal, a different MACHINE...

 

Now I remember why normal folk typically stay out of the Wii boards. Fanboy, trollol cesspit. ;-)

 

Actually, the typical fanboy response can be endearing. First, they try to contain themselves, BUT THEN a few CAPITALISED words creep in, and before you know it there's Wiitards left and right marching forth under the banner of lord Nintendo because (dare I say it), somebody had something bad to say about 'their' console.

 

Well, yeah. I'd like to say it's been a fun debate, but really it's been diabolical. Definitely won't be coming back here, unless at gunpoint.

Edited February 26, 2012 by Sheikah

[Nicktendo]

Now I remember why normal folk typically stay out of the Wii boards. Fanboy, trollol cesspit. ;-)

 

Don't worry, I won't be revisiting this place unless ordered to at gunpoint. lulz.

 

Must be a real highlight of your day, coming into a thread you have no interest in other than to act superior.

 

Well done you.

[Fierce_LiNk]

Hmm, this has gotten quite over the top. No need for anyone to act childish over what started out as decent discussion.

[Deku-Nutz]

Now I remember why normal folk typically stay out of the Wii boards. Fanboy, trollol cesspit. ;-)

 

Actually, the typical fanboy response can be endearing. First, they try to contain themselves, BUT THEN a few CAPITALISED words creep in, and before you know it there's Wiitards left and right marching forth under the banner of lord Nintendo because (dare I say it), somebody had something bad to say about 'their' console.

 

Well, yeah. I'd like to say it's been a fun debate, but really it's been diabolical. Definitely won't be coming back here, unless at gunpoint.

 

Ahhh... yes. When ones argument begins to crumble, there is always the "FANBOY!" thing...

 

I think the worst thing about this guy was that he actually didn't really understand what it was he was trying to get across, hence his mixed signals and terrible arguments... but of course he can elevate himself above us 'Fanboys' now, when infact he was far worse... a troll

 

Nobody actually said the Wii could do no wrong, he merely tried to suggest that it could barely do right... but whatever. No one will be holding a gun to that freaks head and welcoming him back haha...

 

Back to The Last Story then...!