darksnowman

NEW! Super Mario Bros. U

Recommended Posts

@Burny, I think @dazzybee means Mario in general. Poor fella is farmed out to prop up any old rubbish nowadays.

 

The first NSMB was great, it was a nice little throwback, i'd even go so far to say that the Wii version showed promise but the lack of online is a major set back for the series; I actually think had NSMB2 and Wii had online components you'd forgive some of the weaker aspects to the games, but as it stands they're enjoyable but forgettable romps.

Problem is that platformers don't really work well online. If they are online, there's a lot of lag.

 

Most online games like racers, RTS, FPSs extrapolate positions, trajectories etc which is why when things lag, things jerk back and forth.

 

Platformers require constant pinpoint precision which is not that possible at the moment due to latency

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Problem is that platformers don't really work well online. If they are online, there's a lot of lag.

 

Most online games like racers, RTS, FPSs extrapolate positions, trajectories etc which is why when things lag, things jerk back and forth.

 

Platformers require constant pinpoint precision which is not that possible at the moment due to latency

 

Not only that, but as far as platformers go, the NSMB games are particularly problematic because players can interact with each other too!

 

NSMBU online suffers from the same issues as 2D fighting games, only amplified by about 10x further thanks to having twice as many players (meaning twice the number of lost packets and bandwidth issues - not to mention that P2P code couldn't be used, meaning that those same techniques used in fighters wouldn't work here) as well as all the enemies and interactive stage objects (as opposed to a static background image with fighting games).

 

Certain types of games lend themselves better to online play because lag isn't a big issue. Nobody really cares if a player jerks around a bit in a racing game, or really notices if a few bullet

hits aren't detected in a FPS game. In a Mario game however, the slightest bit of lag means guaranteed death for you and utterly kills the experience dead.

 

2D fighters only just about barely work online (and even then, the lag makes a lot of combos and techniques impossible) NSMBU is just completely infeasible - and even if they manage to break the laws of physics and make it work, it still wouldn't be nearly as fun as local multi anyway.

 

Pikmin 3 is also near impossible to get working online but for very different reasons (primarily down to having 202+ directly controlled characters being tracked simultaneously being practically impossible online). The fact that the game allows direct control of every character means that the prediction tricks that are used in typical RTS games will not work here at all.

 

Nintendo Land could be made online fairly easily, but doing so would miss the point of the game entirely. Nintendo simply add online play where it makes sense to do so (SF64 3D perhaps being the only exception where it should've really been there - but the team were working to a tight schedule and couldn't get online play working in time)

Edited by Dcubed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure myself... case in point, Smash Bros.

 

That has 4 players all interacting with each other. It has independant items on screen too that each player can manipulate. The stages certain aren't static thanks to highly dynamic locales that can be influenced not just by the clock but by player interaction. You have the Super Mario Bros 1-1 and 1-2 stages showing pretty much how this game would work in multiplayer.

 

That was 4 years ago and Nintendo's first ever attempt at an online game - if they can't get this working, then they aren't really trying. Heck, if they can't get this working I'd argue they've taken a step backwards.

 

And people care about it in racing games almost as much as fighting games - it just tends to be that fighting game fans are the hardest of "hardcore". This game is ultimately a co-operative game, despite the chance to go for glory, and so if you don't make it, that your partner can is ok. You don't get that in fighting and racing games. In those, you either win or lose. Here, I might not win, but the team still can.

 

And whilst PC RTS games may employ tricks, all units are still capable of performing individual actions - it's not like the Pikmin are bless with hundreds of unqiue moves and their AI isn't remarkable either. They can still be categorized, grouped and predicted - they are all employing the same path finding rountines etc. I personally think it would be capable... which is not to say I think it's something the game needs because I don't. However I feel that this game has a lot more the benefit from its inclusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not sure myself... case in point, Smash Bros.

 

That has 4 players all interacting with each other. It has independant items on screen too that each player can manipulate. The stages certain aren't static thanks to highly dynamic locales that can be influenced not just by the clock but by player interaction. You have the Super Mario Bros 1-1 and 1-2 stages showing pretty much how this game would work in multiplayer.

 

That was 4 years ago and Nintendo's first ever attempt at an online game - if they can't get this working, then they aren't really trying. Heck, if they can't get this working I'd argue they've taken a step backwards.

 

Smash Bros Brawl's online is absolutely terrible.

 

One would think that Nintendo wouldn't want to repeat that mistake (especially on the launch of their new console, where haters would use its failings to spread FUD saying that Nintendo's online is broken because NSMBU online sucks...)

 

 

And whilst PC RTS games may employ tricks, all units are still capable of performing individual actions - it's not like the Pikmin are bless with hundreds of unqiue moves and their AI isn't remarkable either. They can still be categorized, grouped and predicted - they are all employing the same path finding rountines etc. I personally think it would be capable... which is not to say I think it's something the game needs because I don't. However I feel that this game has a lot more the benefit from its inclusion.

 

The difference between Pikmin and a typical RTS like Starcraft is that Pikmin utilises direct control (where the Pikmin can all turn on a dime and move/act/die independently at any moment the player decides to move them), while Starcraft has the units controlled indirectly (where the game can predict where they're moving, when they'll get to their destination and what's gonna happen to them well in advance - with the only thing needing to be transferred being the player's desired menu action)

 

Getting 2 player Pikmin online would be the rough equivalent of getting a 202 player FPS working online...

Edited by Dcubed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lag is an issue across the board; but ultimately people are a little forgiving, you accept a stay bullet, you accept a recalculation of race win and you'd accept a few errors in Mario online (yes, all those fatal bullets in MW3 were strays). NSMBWii/2/U are all on a 2D plane, characters have limited actions - as long as your position is 100% accurate locally, and shared to the best of network capability there should be little problem. Heck, Little Big Planet with 4 online players works marvelously (dare I say faultlessly), sure there is tons going on in NSMB but then, I wold argue most people would be pretty forgiving on certain aspects.

 

I'll mount a defense for the online component on Smash, the only time I have had any significant problem with Smash is when a player has a poor connection and then is was, admittedly, fucking terrible. However, if I recall correctly, it was regularly displayed who had a less than robust connection and I would avoid playing them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well firts of all, Smash Bros is over 4 years old and will be much closer to 5 by the time this game ships... so the netcode underpinning it won't exactly be as impressive as it could be from more modern techniques. Secondly, it was one of NIntendo's first real attempts at something on this scale back when they really didn't care about online - if they are serious about it, I think they would have been working on improving their knowledge base over the past four years to improve results. Third, I doubt the Wii CPU had many spare clock cycles left to decode the information it was recieving and update the screen in a timely mannor such is the effect that even the smallest of blips causing big problems.

 

But even then, to call the online play terrible is a gross over exageration. I've had many, many, many flawless battles that the bad ones hardly even register and they are normally tied to one individuals connection slowing it down for everyone which is unavoidable really. When they drop out, even comes back to full speed.

 

The Pikmin may not effectively be able to have their actions plotted in advance, unless they are following an order to build/attack/carry something in which case, it's exactly the same, but their actions are tied to the player. Consequently, you only need to know the position of Olimar(whoever it is) and how many/which types are following him. The CPU can then calculate their position real time without even needing to track them independantly since they all follow the same rules. The thing that hurts Pikmin is a potentially iffy CPU because AI isn't something that translates too well to GPGPU code.

 

An MAG on the PS3 handles over 200 people online in one game so it's not even outside the limits of a console 6 years old, let alone a modern one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
An MAG on the PS3 handles over 200 people online in one game so it's not even outside the limits of a console 6 years old, let alone a modern one.

 

I don't mean to be patronising, but you do know the difference between peer-to-peer online play and server based online play?

 

Peer-to-peer play is like a COD game. The best host is decided by a server which is just used to match make. Then the best host's console is used to 'host' the game. All the other players connect to the host's console, hence if the player who hosts isn't up to it or if another player has a bad connection to the host there is lag.

 

Server based play is totally different. The game is played on a server which hosted by the company that published the game. This means everyone connects to the same stable server and any lag is simply confined to players with poor connections.

 

Peer-to-peer play is much more limited than server based play. That's why on the Wii COD is 5 vs 5 as it's running off an individual's system. However Medal of Honor Heroes 2 on the Wii was 32 player - more than the COD or Battlefield games on the 360 or PS3. That's because games took place on EAs server and it wasn't a peer-to-peer game.

 

MAG isn't a peer-to-peer game either, it's server based - hence the large numbers of players. It's the same for MMORPGs on the PC, they're server based, as it's the 64 player BF3 on PC.

 

There was an interesting thread over on Neogaf the other day about this very topic and they concluded it'd be virtually impossible to have good online multi-player NSMB using a peer-to-peer system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Zechs Merquise

 

I understand the difference ok, don't worry, but Smash Bros used P2P to accomplish a very similar task as what is being asked from NSMBU and there's arguably more going on at any time in Smash than this. I'm guessing everyone over at Neogaf hated that online and won't ever bother to play the next version on the grounds that it still won't be good enough. Is anything less than absolute perfection, 100% of the time, not worth bothering with at all, is that it? I guess we've got another 5 years of people moaning about Nintendo's online policy again... that will be fun.

 

And concerning MAG, I was just highlighting the fact that it's not an impossible achievement with the right infrastructure to support a game of that size. But then, I don't believe it to be as near impossible as Dcubed believes it to be anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The first NSMB was great, it was a nice little throwback, i'd even go so far to say that the Wii version showed promise but the lack of online is a major set back for the series;

 

You people make it out to be a major set back. Sales certainly weren't set back. That's probably the influential measure for Nintendo, like it or not.

 

Is anything less than absolute perfection, 100% of the time, not worth bothering with at all, is that it? I guess we've got another 5 years of people moaning about Nintendo's online policy again... that will be fun.

Depends? If they invested additional resources into developing an online mode, what would be the reward? They would invariably end up with something imperfect, as there is no guarantee for latencies over the internet. So the reward is more whining from those people, who experienced issues due to lag, which is really not in Nintendo's power to eliminate. In return, they might not make launch, which is something Nintendo probably considers far more detrimental to their business than the whining, mockery and contempt they've been experiencing for some 20+ years now over various issues (Ctrl + F: "right wing garbage").

Edited by Burny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@Zechs Merquise

 

I understand the difference ok, don't worry, but Smash Bros used P2P to accomplish a very similar task as what is being asked from NSMBU and there's arguably more going on at any time in Smash than this. I'm guessing everyone over at Neogaf hated that online and won't ever bother to play the next version on the grounds that it still won't be good enough. Is anything less than absolute perfection, 100% of the time, not worth bothering with at all, is that it? I guess we've got another 5 years of people moaning about Nintendo's online policy again... that will be fun.

 

And concerning MAG, I was just highlighting the fact that it's not an impossible achievement with the right infrastructure to support a game of that size. But then, I don't believe it to be as near impossible as Dcubed believes it to be anyway.

 

Smash Bros did get an awful lot of complaints for lag though. I believe that many people had an enjoyable experience with it, but the problem is that all you needed was one person with a poor connection and the game was ruined. I've played a good few games of Street Fighter/MvsC2/TvsC to know just how bad fighting games can be - even on the 360.

 

Platform games are genre that requires real precision and due to that I can see the problems associated with it would be very tough to overcome. What's more, if Nintendo managed to do a servicable job evening then the complaints would be huge.

 

I've played COD online on the Wii, 360 and the PC and I've had many frustrating moments on all three. I first played it on the Wii and thought many of the problems would be gone when I played it on the 360. I was wrong. I watch far too many killcams where I was positioned totally differently from the point of view of the player that killed me to how I thought I was positioned on my screen.

 

One final word on MAG though - despite it having a very large player count the battles were never huge raging gun fights with dozens on each side. It was set up to have many smaller battles taking place all over the game field as people operated in small squads of 8 (I think), so in fact you'd actually end up seeing many small COD style battles raging at one time rather than one big battle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One final word on MAG though - despite it having a very large player count the battles were never huge raging gun fights with dozens on each side. It was set up to have many smaller battles taking place all over the game field as people operated in small squads of 8 (I think), so in fact you'd actually end up seeing many small COD style battles raging at one time rather than one big battle.

 

Yeah that's true. MAG doesn't have to keep perfect track of all 200+ players, just the ones in your immediate view.

 

If you tried doing that in Pikmin 3 however, you'd have Pikmin teleporting all over the place, ending up flying into water or electricity at a moment's notice - since you have to be able to see all of them at all times (they're not always gonna be split up)

Edited by Dcubed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You people make it out to be a major set back. Sales certainly weren't set back. That's probably the influential measure for Nintendo, like it or not.

 

I highly doubt that is an influential measure for Nintendo for the purposes of this discussion, ie online play. Market research (probably done by a select group of Japanese) will likely dictate when Nintendo put online into things.

 

The series needs its hook. Being a throwback was a nice for a while, but its become pretty stale - fast. Online play could add lots to the experience and whilst it does come with some problems I think most people are overestimating the impact of lag in a game of pretty simple game mechanics and underestimating people forgiveness of latency (sure, no game will be entirely perfect online, but everyone accepts that right?).

 

By Nintendo's own admission this will be the last time in a generation they have the opportunity to do it, so why waste it? We'll never see an online 3D Mario game for, as we've discussed the added complications of a 3D world - why miss it this time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got the are some Nintendo apologists n this forum. I'm sort of one of them in a lot of scenarios but this ones s weird. IT IS POSSIBLE TO HAVE MARIO ONLINE, AND PIKMIN ONLINE. Will it be perfect? No. Will most people gives fuck? No. Smash rows is bad online? I've nly ever had great fun online with it, and millions of people whostillplay it do. Gamers accept online isn't perfect. No game online is, but its snide to have the option to. And these games are no different.moh pikmin can be online ecause it couldn't do 100 pikmin - WELL DON'T FUCKING HAVE 100PIKMIN IN ONLINE PLAY THEN!

 

Nntendo and some people on here give very weak excuses for no online play. It's because Nintendo are archaic in this regards and only just starting to take it seriously, they are infuriating in this regard and always have done. Yeah maybe online in Nintendoland is missing the point, but why not give us the choice? Not everyone (in fact probably most) can get 5 people together, or eve anyone to play with locally.

 

Nintendo are still miles behind in their thinking. I hope they do some serious catchup with with wii u. The 3ds doesn't give me much hope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what people aren't taking into account is that Smash Bros. really doesn't require as much precision as 4 people interacting on a platform game would.

 

And also, do you seriously believe that Nintendo wouldn't have tested out making NSMB online? I'm sure if they could get it to work to the standards they want, they would do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...why miss it this time?

 

Compromises? Despite the overly popular assumption that the developers at Nintendo are lazy as can be, twiddling their thumbs all day instead of giving people on the internet the new hook they're crowing for, has it ever occured to you that they might be already pressed for time making launch? And that sales in excess of 20 million copies of NSMBW, which was already being lamented for not having online coop, haven't driven home the point "online or bust" (despite what hypothetical market research says)?

 

Concerning the effects of lag: I believe it's far easier to tolerate twitching around a bit on a mostly static level and possibly missing a target or getting shot, than having to restart a level, because the game determined your position from your last known movement vector placing you in a lava pit a handful of pixels from where you wanted to jump.

 

Yeah maybe online in Nintendoland is missing the point, but why not give us the choice?

For no other reason than to infuriate you, of course. ;) Weighing up the benefits (read: expected additional sales because of online) vs the cost (read: longer dev time due to a lot of added complexity) can't possibly have anything to do with it. :heh:

Edited by Burny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Got the are some Nintendo apologists n this forum. I'm sort of one of them in a lot of scenarios but this ones s weird. IT IS POSSIBLE TO HAVE MARIO ONLINE, AND PIKMIN ONLINE. Will it be perfect? No. Will most people gives fuck? No. Smash rows is bad online? I've nly ever had great fun online with it, and millions of people whostillplay it do. Gamers accept online isn't perfect. No game online is, but its snide to have the option to. And these games are no different.moh pikmin can be online ecause it couldn't do 100 pikmin - WELL DON'T FUCKING HAVE 100PIKMIN IN ONLINE PLAY THEN!

 

Nntendo and some people on here give very weak excuses for no online play. It's because Nintendo are archaic in this regards and only just starting to take it seriously, they are infuriating in this regard and always have done. Yeah maybe online in Nintendoland is missing the point, but why not give us the choice? Not everyone (in fact probably most) can get 5 people together, or eve anyone to play with locally.

 

Nintendo are still miles behind in their thinking. I hope they do some serious catchup with with wii u. The 3ds doesn't give me much hope.

I'm not being an apologist, I'm being factual here. I'd do it too if someone was complaining about a Sega platformer not being online

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Got the are some Nintendo apologists n this forum. I'm sort of one of them in a lot of scenarios but this ones s weird. IT IS POSSIBLE TO HAVE MARIO ONLINE, AND PIKMIN ONLINE. Will it be perfect? No. Will most people gives fuck? No. Smash rows is bad online? I've nly ever had great fun online with it, and millions of people whostillplay it do. Gamers accept online isn't perfect. No game online is, but its snide to have the option to. And these games are no different.moh pikmin can be online ecause it couldn't do 100 pikmin - WELL DON'T FUCKING HAVE 100PIKMIN IN ONLINE PLAY THEN!

 

Nntendo and some people on here give very weak excuses for no online play. It's because Nintendo are archaic in this regards and only just starting to take it seriously, they are infuriating in this regard and always have done. Yeah maybe online in Nintendoland is missing the point, but why not give us the choice? Not everyone (in fact probably most) can get 5 people together, or eve anyone to play with locally.

 

Nintendo are still miles behind in their thinking. I hope they do some serious catchup with with wii u. The 3ds doesn't give me much hope.

 

Speak for yourself here. Where am I defending the lack of online play in SF64 3D!? If they couldn't get it done in time, they should've delayed it (it's especially egregious considering that SF Command had online play!)

 

But historically speaking, they haven't ignored online play. They just simply add it in where it makes sense.

 

Games like Mario Kart, Smash Bros (despite the significant challenges involved), Starfox, Advance Wars, Kid Icarus Uprising, Pokemon, Mario Tennis, Metroid Prime Hunters, Puzzle League and the like should (and do!) have online play.

 

Games like Pikmin, NSMB and Four Swords that rely on precise timing and player co-ordination should not until we all have connections that can make those experiences work properly.

 

Games like Wii Sports, Wario Ware, Just Dance, Pacman VS, Nintendo Land and Mario Party also shouldn't have online play because the experience simply relies on that atmosphere that you get from sitting within punching distance of the guy you just dicked over (Think how boring it would be to wait your turn in an online match of Mario Party!)

 

The Nintendo games that are conductive to an online experience are usually actually given online play (cough, except Starfox 64 3D, cough!)

Edited by Dcubed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's certain things that Nintendo gets right and certain things it gets wrong. The biggest mistake it's made with its online to date is not effectively shutting down loopholes that allow the homebrew software to work. Due to this hackers have basically ruined the online experience on the Wii. Nintendo should have worked harder to eliminate hackers and cheats.

 

Online NSMB isn't something they've got wrong, it's something that they couldn't get right. If it was soooo easy to do this then why didn't Rayman Origins have online multiplayer? Or Sonic the Hedgehog 4? These were both released on more powerful systems and they didn't have online co-op.

 

It's not Nintendo being lazy, it's just something that that is extremely hard to get right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not being an apologist, I'm being factual here. I'd do it too if someone was complaining about a Sega platformer not being online

 

So why can little big planet handle 4 player online in a platformers?

 

Speak for yourself here. Where am I defending the lack of online play in SF64 3D!? If they couldn't get it done in time, they should've delayed it (it's especially egregious considering that SF Command had online play!)

 

But historically speaking, they haven't ignored online play. They just simply add it in where it makes sense.

 

Games like Mario Kart, Smash Bros (despite the significant challenges involved), Starfox, Advance Wars, Kid Icarus Uprising, Pokemon, Mario Tennis, Metroid Prime Hunters, Puzzle League and the like should (and do!) have online play.

 

Games like Pikmin, NSMB and Four Swords that rely on precise timing and player co-ordination should not until we all have connections that can make those experiences work properly.

 

Games like Wii Sports, Wario Ware, Just Dance, Pacman VS, Nintendo Land and Mario Party also shouldn't have online play because the experience simply relies on that atmosphere that you get from sitting within punching distance of the guy you just dicked over (Think how boring it would be to wait your turn in an online match of Mario Party!)

 

The Nintendo games that are conductive to an online experience are usually actually given online play (cough, except Starfox 64 3D, cough!)

 

They simply put online in games were it would be truly idiotic not to. When its a choice they always say no. And even when they do its usually lame attempts (mario tennis?).

 

And the argument that mario party, wii sports eft are better local so they shouldn't be online again is just such a cheap excuse. You know what, mario kart local is a thousand times better than online, but its still fun online, same with mario party, and wii sports, and Nintendoland etc etc.

 

To same games like four swords and pikmin etc wouldn't work online is just insanely ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So why can little big planet handle 4 player online in a platformers?

 

I don't think you can compare the two, Mario is far more reaction based and twitchy than LBP which whilst creative at times, always seems rather pedestrian compared to Mario.

 

I think Nintendo has dropped the ball a few times with online though - and not just on the hacking issue. They really screwed up when it came to StarFox on the 3DS.

 

I also think the argument that some games are better locally than online because of the atmosphere may be true - but it's still no reason not to have them online. Playing online is my only real chance of playing multiplayer. Mario Party might be bette with 4 players in one room, but that's no reason why 4 players who can't get together shouldn't be able to play together in today's world!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think you can compare the two, Mario is far more reaction based and twitchy than LBP which whilst creative at times, always seems rather pedestrian compared to Mario.

 

I think Nintendo has dropped the ball a few times with online though - and not just on the hacking issue. They really screwed up when it came to StarFox on the 3DS.

 

I also think the argument that some games are better locally than online because of the atmosphere may be true - but it's still no reason not to have them online. Playing online is my only real chance of playing multiplayer. Mario Party might be bette with 4 players in one room, but that's no reason why 4 players who can't get together shouldn't be able to play together in today's world!

 

Exactly. It'll still be good to play online. Like wii sports bowling would have been good to play online. Like starfox would. Like new super mario bros would. It may not be perfect, but I don't believe for a second it would be unplayable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends? If they invested additional resources into developing an online mode, what would be the reward? They would invariably end up with something imperfect, as there is no guarantee for latencies over the internet. So the reward is more whining from those people, who experienced issues due to lag, which is really not in Nintendo's power to eliminate. In return, they might not make launch, which is something Nintendo probably considers far more detrimental to their business than the whining, mockery and contempt they've been experiencing for some 20+ years now over various issues (Ctrl + F: "right wing garbage").

 

I'm not suggesting for a second that the game would be worth delaying from launch for it. All online play has an element of lag to it but to rule this out because of it when they put out more demanding games on less capable hardware in past to a standard that was fairly good when kept in perspective makes makes me wonder. They should be able to achieve better this time around and they've had plenty of time to work on the their online components to improve the experience - though sure, it's not entirely in their hands. Why is it ok for Nintendo to drop the Wii U dev kits in the hands of third party devs and us expect the world and yet let Nintendo, who known about it longer and should know the thing backward, get away with less.

 

I just like to think they could have got a fairly reasonable version of it up and running that would have sufficed for a great deal of people. Yes some will complain but then they were always going to complain anyway. This could have been a great title to demonstrate a commitment to online play with from day one and they've chosen not to. I too think the impact on sales would be negligible but thats not really the issue.

 

Online would never have been as much fun as playing it with people in the same room but that goes for virtually every game in existance - but it's just not feasible for a lot of people. If this was a MS or Sony first party game, there is no way it would have shipped without it if at all possible - and if it wasn't, it would be safe to assume it would come as a free download when ready after the game launched. Trine 2 on the eShop will have online play and that has a great deal of interaction within a physics heavy environment (resulting in a far heavier drain on the system) - you can also interact with each other and some parts do ask for precision on the part of the player. So you have to give them credit for that. They done the best job possible with the hardware they have and we accept that - is it too much to ask the same from Nintendo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nintendo have confirmed that this game will run in 1080p. I'd expect no less, seeing as it's not exactly a tour de force of the Wii U system. Can't wait :zzz:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case it will look rather eye-popping!

 

"Experience Mario like never before... in full 1080p HD, only on the Wii U console!"

 

It may disappoint you but some of us are actually looking forward to playing this :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites