Serebii Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 I'm not sure how many times you need to be told or have it pointed out - but this is the WiiU thread, for a Nintendo console, and thus discussion in here will focus upon the WiiU and Nintendo more than Sony/MS. Criticisms of the others and games on the others get made in their respective threads in their respective forums. It may also just be the genuine case that a majority of people find the WiiU less favourable to themselves than the other consoles - tbh that's perfectly valid too. However back to the WiiU - one reason for Nintendo not to get a pass - they've had more time than anyone to get down and dirty with their hardware. 3rd parties can't be expected to utilise the systems excellently off the bat(especially when reporting it is difficult to develop for), but I'd expect 1st party developers to be ahead of the curve with their own hardware. Yet, as I mentioned a while ago, a number of WiiU owners will tell you the game that has so far made best use of the Gamepad and system was ZombiU - a 3rd party launch title. Where's the progression? It's had the jump on the competition yet to many appears to be in the worst position of the three. With your logic, Microsoft and Sony had more time than anyone to get down and dirty with their hardware, yet their first party software output is as "unfresh" as Nintendo's, and far less in quantity within the first year. So, why pray tell, do they get a free pass?
Retro_Link Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 So... Nintendo Direct next week then? Have you heard something?
Goron_3 Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 With your logic, Microsoft and Sony had more time than anyone to get down and dirty with their hardware, yet their first party software output is as "unfresh" as Nintendo's, and far less in quantity within the first year. So, why pray tell, do they get a free pass? 1. They aren't getting a free pass, they can just rely on getting every 3rd party title (and the best versions) on their systems. The first 9 months of the PS4, in the eyes of most gamers, has been much better than the Wii U's. And before you play the 'I don't like those games' card, well good for you, but that's not what the discussion is about. Also, it's a bloody Wii U thread. 2. 'Sony have had more time than anyone to get down and dirty with their hardware'. The console has been out less than a year and even then they've had to build new engines to run games on the significantly more powerful hardware, which takes time. Also, can you verify when you believe the developers of each console were given their respective devkits? Because I think your timing is slightly off. They haven't been given 'more' time; the amount of time first and second party developers have had with the devkits up until the consoles launch is similar in both cases.
RedShell Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 Have you heard something?Nothing other than loads of people expecting there to be a Direct in August.
Retro_Link Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 With your logic, Microsoft and Sony had more time than anyone to get down and dirty with their hardware, yet their first party software output is as "unfresh" as Nintendo's, and far less in quantity within the first year. So, why pray tell, do they get a free pass?Has anyone said their first year first party line-up hasn't been lacking?As far as I'm aware it's come up several times in the PlayStation 4 thread, with people actually telling other members it's worth waiting to buy the console over the first 9 months. Now however, things are about to really kick off!
Hero-of-Time Posted August 22, 2014 Author Posted August 22, 2014 With your logic, Microsoft and Sony had more time than anyone to get down and dirty with their hardware, yet their first party software output is as "unfresh" as Nintendo's, and far less in quantity within the first year. So, why pray tell, do they get a free pass? In regards to the quantity point, the difference is that the other two don't need to depend on 1st party output to push their sales due to the strong 3rd party offerings. The 360 was a fine example of this. Very few exclusives but a beast when it came to third party games. Nothing other than loads of people expecting there to be a Direct in August. Liar! Spill dem beans.
Serebii Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 1. They aren't getting a free pass, they can just rely on getting every 3rd party title (and the best versions) on their systems. The first 9 months of the PS4, in the eyes of most gamers, has been much better than the Wii U's. And before you play the 'I don't like those games' card, well good for you, but that's not what the discussion is about. Also, it's a bloody Wii U thread. 2. 'Sony have had more time than anyone to get down and dirty with their hardware'. The console has been out less than a year and even then they've had to build new engines to run games on the significantly more powerful hardware, which takes time. Also, can you verify when you believe the developers of each console were given their respective devkits? Because I think your timing is slightly off. They haven't been given 'more' time; the amount of time first and second party developers have had with the devkits up until the consoles launch is similar in both cases. Has anyone said their first year first party line-up hasn't been lacking?As far as I'm aware it's come up several times in the PlayStation 4 thread, with people actually telling other members it's worth waiting to buy the console over the first 9 months. Now however, things are about to really kick off! In regards to the quantity point, the difference is that the other two don't need to depend on 1st party output to push their sales due to the strong 3rd party offerings. The 360 was a fine example of this. Very few exclusives but a beast when it came to third party games. Liar! Spill dem beans. All I'm saying is that people were trashing Nintendo for it last year, even people here, and now it's happening for Sony and Microsoft this year, they get a pass. It's hypocritical.
Retro_Link Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 And all I'm saying, and that you're just glossing over, is that they aren't getting a pass in their respective threads. Members on this forum had been actively recommending people wait to buy the console unless a bargain comes along. I'd quote you saying: 'twisting words to suit your argument', but I can't be bothered to look for an example.
Hero-of-Time Posted August 22, 2014 Author Posted August 22, 2014 All I'm saying is that people were trashing Nintendo for it last year, even people here, and now it's happening for Sony and Microsoft this year, they get a pass. It's hypocritical. That's because there was sod all else to play. People complain about the lack of Nintendo games to play because that's essentially all there is to play. The other two have a host of 3rd party stuff to keep people busy until the next exclusive hits. Unfortunately Nintendo doesn't have this luxury. Another point that I've made before on here is that most of Nintendos games are single player offerings. I know you're very much like myself in that you can blitz a game in a weekend. There's then no incentive to go back to it, at least not for a while. So once again you're left waiting for the next game, whenever it may arrive. On the flip side the other two are pushing online gaming more. When you are finished with a game you usually have a multiplayer mode to keep you busy. There's also things like trophies and achievements ( that's if you enjoy them ) to nab. One of the things I loved about Super Mario World 3D was its replay value. Had there been no stamps then the game would have been finished a hell of a lot quicker.
Goron_3 Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 All I'm saying is that people were trashing Nintendo for it last year, even people here, and now it's happening for Sony and Microsoft this year, they get a pass. It's hypocritical. But there is loads of content on the PS4 that the large majority of gamers want to play. Just because you don't like those games, it doesn't mean that your opinion is correct. God damn.
Serebii Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 But there is loads of content on the PS4 that the large majority of gamers want to play. Just because you don't like those games, it doesn't mean that your opinion is correct. God damn. I wasn't talking in terms of quality. I was talking in the bizarre term that Sheikah concocted for them of not being "fresh".
Sheikah Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 The negativity seems to be reaching crazy levels here, it's a big shame. When it comes to their sequels feeling fresh, Nintendo trumps Sony and Microsoft easily. Amusing to imagine the reaction if Nintendo owned LittleBigPlanet and revealed number 3 that is exactly the same as number 2 just with more characters. The only reason Pikmin 3 might look fresher than LBP3 is because of the huge gap between Pikmin 2 and 3. Honestly, from playing Pikmin 3 it really does feel like a HD Pikmin 2, so I'm not sure how you can really say Nintendo sequels are more fresh. With regards to the NSMB series, that has to be one of the most stale series or all time.
Fierce_LiNk Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 Tbh, it's not a very good game. It's not fantastic, falls short of the promise they hyped, but I'm enjoying it more than I am The Last of Us after roughly equal amount of game time with each. Ewwwwww. Fair enough. Each to his own. I'm pretty hit and miss with open world games. And then dumb shit like not being able to shoot out of your car or being able to look directly up at helicopter to hack them. I actually really like a lot of the gameplay like escaping the police in a car (it feels like the movie Drive) but the core narrative is a fucking mess. I'm going to stick up for Watch Dogs here. :p I really, really like it. I've also not spent THAT much time on the story itself. There's just tons to do, I've easily spent more time on the gang hideouts and fixer contracts than the story. It's not perfect and no doubt Ubisoft will make a better game when they inevitably create the sequel, but it's still a very, very good game in my opinion. You could easily spent hundreds of hours on this if you wanted to see everything...I dread to think of how much time I spent on this. We're talking anything from 3-7 hours playthroughs at a time. Oh dear. :p Anyway, this thread is negative. Why is it negative? Well, quite easy really. Are things going well? If everything is going well and there are tons of games to play and lots to talk about and admire, then the negativity is at a minimum. When things go wrong, people complain. Pretty simple stuff really, not sure at all why people are so surprised that there happens to be gamers who aren't happy with what Nintendo have or haven't done with this console. I still feel ripped off by the £200 I put down for this.
Daft Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 Maybe I should give it another couple hours and try and get stuck into it.
Kav Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 The multiplayer in Pikmin 3 is what brings about the freshness in that game. When you go online and group up with... oh no, wait.
Fierce_LiNk Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 Maybe I should give it another couple hours and try and get stuck into it. Seriously, the criminal convoys, digital trips, chess games, gang hideouts and fixer missions are all way superior to the actual missions in the game. Even then, I quite liked the main story, it's decent. The hideouts are great because you have more of an opportunity to use the weapons and skills that you've acquired throughout the game, whereas you might not get much of a chance to do so with the story missions. It really is a shame that this isn't out for the WiiU. If anything, because it'll be the only proper open world game that appears for a long time, if ever. Unless Nintendo actually do create an open world Zelda, which I'm not convinced by yet.
Sheikah Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 The multiplayer in Pikmin 3 is what brings about the freshness in that game. When you go online and group up with... oh no, wait. Genius. :p
Rummy Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 To answer @Serebii, I don't recall giving MS or Sony a 'free pass' with PS4/XBone - more I don't give much of a fuck because I don't have the consoles or care much. Also because I'm in the WiiU thread, so I'm putting my main focus on, crazy enough, the WiiU. As you already said to Wii - kindly stop shitting up threads. 1. They aren't getting a free pass, they can just rely on getting every 3rd party title (and the best versions) on their systems. The first 9 months of the PS4, in the eyes of most gamers, has been much better than the Wii U's. And before you play the 'I don't like those games' card, well good for you, but that's not what the discussion is about. Also, it's a bloody Wii U thread. 2. 'Sony have had more time than anyone to get down and dirty with their hardware'. The console has been out less than a year and even then they've had to build new engines to run games on the significantly more powerful hardware, which takes time. Also, can you verify when you believe the developers of each console were given their respective devkits? Because I think your timing is slightly off. They haven't been given 'more' time; the amount of time first and second party developers have had with the devkits up until the consoles launch is similar in both cases. A perfect response very much in line with my thoughts. I'm going to stick up for Watch Dogs here. :pI really, really like it. I've also not spent THAT much time on the story itself. There's just tons to do, I've easily spent more time on the gang hideouts and fixer contracts than the story. It's not perfect and no doubt Ubisoft will make a better game when they inevitably create the sequel, but it's still a very, very good game in my opinion. You could easily spent hundreds of hours on this if you wanted to see everything...I dread to think of how much time I spent on this. We're talking anything from 3-7 hours playthroughs at a time. Oh dear. :p Anyway, this thread is negative. Why is it negative? Well, quite easy really. Are things going well? If everything is going well and there are tons of games to play and lots to talk about and admire, then the negativity is at a minimum. When things go wrong, people complain. Pretty simple stuff really, not sure at all why people are so surprised that there happens to be gamers who aren't happy with what Nintendo have or haven't done with this console. I still feel ripped off by the £200 I put down for this. How much online/mutli have you done though? That's what originally interested me, but given the farce that's occured with the WiiU version it's barely going to be worth me getting it for WiiU as the online might not be active enough for my tastes. Similarly I'm now less tempted to get it for my PS3 as the activity will likely have died down there, too. CatchTwentyU. I must admit though, if all that content you're talking about is offline stuff then maybe...just maybe. I've tended to enjoy side missions more in the open world games I've played than the main missions(I stopped playing GTAIV because one mission was apparently too hard, but I was half tempted to cheat past just to open the last area up so I could get more vigilante, most wanted, car thefts etc). I loved the Saints Row games from II-IV, and they're basically a massive collection of side missions too! I've still got to a lot to play of IV actually...
Fierce_LiNk Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 How much online/mutli have you done though? That's what originally interested me, but given the farce that's occured with the WiiU version it's barely going to be worth me getting it for WiiU as the online might not be active enough for my tastes. Similarly I'm now less tempted to get it for my PS3 as the activity will likely have died down there, too. CatchTwentyU. The online stuff in this game is a bit different in some ways. I found it very interesting. Basically, you can be hacked by other gamers whilst you're playing midgame. You can turn this off in the settings and I think that there's some occasions where you can't be hacked (e.g if you're in the middle of a story mission, cut scene) But, gamers have entered my games and I've entered theirs. There's a few things you can do as part of this "mode". There's online tailing and online hacking. Online hacking is where you enter somebody else's game and you have to hack them without them spotting or seeing you. This is pretty fucking intense. There's the opposite of that where somebody is hacking you and you have to find them. Online tailing is where you enter somebody's game and you have to just follow them around, keeping them in view. Vice versa, somebody can enter your game and they follow you around, scanning you. The unique thing about this is that...you're not always aware that you're being tailed! I've entered somebody's game and have scanned them whilst they were in the gun store. They came out and walked right past me, obviously unaware that I was even there. Probably my favourite mode. There's online races, typical race through different locations to get to the finish line. Pretty fun really. Then there's decryption which is like a capture the flag style mode. Think that's it. So yeah, I've spent a lot of time online in this game. I must admit though, if all that content you're talking about is offline stuff then maybe...just maybe. I've tended to enjoy side missions more in the open world games I've played than the main missions(I stopped playing GTAIV because one mission was apparently too hard, but I was half tempted to cheat past just to open the last area up so I could get more vigilante, most wanted, car thefts etc). I loved the Saints Row games from II-IV, and they're basically a massive collection of side missions too! I've still got to a lot to play of IV actually... Yeah, all the other stuff I mentioned is offline. There's tons of stuff to do in the game. Saying all of that, I haven't played GTA since the original or any of the Saints Row games or anything of that type. So, I can't compare. To me, there seems like there's shit tons of stuff to do. It's easily my most played game for a long time.
Pestneb Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 You're defining the games on one feature (graphics). My favourite thing about Infamous has been the photo feature. I enjoyed Destiny's online aspect and MMORPG aspect. I've loved the breadth of indie titles that have been available due to the architecture and capabilities of the console. None of these things are in isolation only available on the PS4, but they add up to a sum that surpasses it's parts. To answer your second part, the ability to record and share while playing is just one thing that has been made available because of the greater power. Again, it goes beyond the graphical capability. Wii U does this well in some regard (the technical capacity of the GamePad). It has, for numerous reasons, been less successful in a number of ways (sales, usage, support etc). Actually I wanted to exclude graphics because that was the one feature I can easily see how it can benefit from more powerful hardware. Really though, the record and share is more a consequence of social media, technically I am sure the PS2/GC/XBOX could have handled that, albeit with add on's being employed with the GC and PS2, but the potential was there. Without add-ons the last gen definitely had the capacity to do so, it was lacking software, not hardware that hampered that, no? To branch out to something more than graphics, take a look at this: When I saw the trailer for that, I was pretty impressed. Now game developers can make a far more immersive game through adding additional character models that makes the gamer feel more like they're a part of that world. Which, for a game like AC, complements it perfectly. The game is about going into the Animus in which you view a virtual reconstruction of the world. In order to make the person in the Animus feel like they are really there, the crowds around them as well as the environment should look as real as possible. So I'd argue that the next gen hardware is making the games more engrossing (through graphics, number of character models, and effects), which is a definite leapfrog over the previous generation. Actually I would say that was largely graphics. A similar scene could have been done in the snes era - imagine chronotrigger as an example. I do agree with your overall point though, the graphics are a tool which enables you to feel like you really are there. Making that sequence snes era graphics would excite me far less, watching a trailer at least. But in terms of the gameplay itself, it's not an improvement. It's all about making the world look more believable to help immerse the gamer more fully, but the gaming possibilities themselves aren't changed.
Rummy Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 (edited) Yeah, all the other stuff I mentioned is offline. There's tons of stuff to do in the game. Saying all of that, I haven't played GTA since the original or any of the Saints Row games or anything of that type. So, I can't compare. To me, there seems like there's shit tons of stuff to do. It's easily my most played game for a long time. Hmm. You're tempting me. Tbh GTAIV was my first since the original and the SR games was just off the back of a trailer for III I bought II and fell in love. Many would say SR is a weaker game than GTA, but I view them as being quite different despite similar genres. I'm hoping for the same from WatchDogs really. My only concern regarding what you say about content - is there a difference between the 'nextgen' versions and the 'currentgen' content wise; as I understand the WiiU version is likely to have more parity with the PS360 versions? Whereas you're playing PS4. Hmm. Time to go do some research of comparisons! EDIT: Didn't take long to find PS3 vs PS4 - http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-watch-dogs-ps3-vs-ps4 Mostly sounds not too bad, so if WiiU is at least on par or possibly even in between it might not be too shabby after all. Problem is that the damage may already be done, and for me I'm not yet ready to drop the dime and assume it IS on par with at least the 360/PS3 versions. You've definitely got me thinking about it again though, Flink! Edited August 22, 2014 by Rummy
Happenstance Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 There do tend to be a lot of things that are forgotten about with generational jumps and graphics will be the one focused on because its the obvious one that you can see but things like better AI have been spoken about by developers as a major thing for this generation with the new power they have available to them. The leaps between generations may feel like they are getting smaller but they are still just as important. Naughty Dog is one developer that talks a lot about it and how they were pretty much done with what they could do on the PS3 and with The Last of Us they squeezed every last bit of power out of the console that they could. I mean you just have to look at the specs for the PS3 to see just how outdated its been for years.
Sheikah Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 (edited) Actually I would say that was largely graphics. A similar scene could have been done in the snes era - imagine chronotrigger as an example. I do agree with your overall point though, the graphics are a tool which enables you to feel like you really are there. Making that sequence snes era graphics would excite me far less, watching a trailer at least. But in terms of the gameplay itself, it's not an improvement. It's all about making the world look more believable to help immerse the gamer more fully, but the gaming possibilities themselves aren't changed. It can impact gameplay. As evidenced by that AC Unity GIF, you could now have more enemies on screen, which would ultimately mean a more difficult game (if the designers chose to go that way). Power isn't just about graphics, it can result in significant changes in game and level design. While you can say "they could put as many enemies on screen if you had SNES graphics" - not if it was an FPS, since that wouldn't work in 2D. I guess you could then say "Wii U could do that many too if it went for N64 era graphics", but we all know that N64 graphics in an FPS these days would go down so badly that such a game would probably never be made. So yeah, we can pretty much say that it can change gameplay. :p Edited August 22, 2014 by Sheikah
Rummy Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 There do tend to be a lot of things that are forgotten about with generational jumps and graphics will be the one focused on because its the obvious one that you can see but things like better AI have been spoken about by developers as a major thing for this generation with the new power they have available to them. The leaps between generations may feel like they are getting smaller but they are still just as important. Naughty Dog is one developer that talks a lot about it and how they were pretty much done with what they could do on the PS3 and with The Last of Us they squeezed every last bit of power out of the console that they could. I mean you just have to look at the specs for the PS3 to see just how outdated its been for years. Relevant to both your and Sheikah's point just made was my WatchDogs concerns, for me graphics are something I can sacrifice, but I'd rather the gameplay experience is mostly the same. However that article does illustrate one point where causing traffic obstructions appears to be harder in the PS3 version due to hardware limits on amount of objects etc. which is something that does matter imo. I think Pestneb was getting at issues like that, which are completely understandable. In fact, to answer the question about social sharing etc @Pestneb, there may be issues or ram and storage space for actually capturing, saving or uploading etc. along with such tasks pushing so hard that it slows the system when doing it - I dunno though. I'm also not 100% familiar with the mechanisms of the new-gen console's media sharing but I'd imagine it's actually as captured video - whereas I know systems in the past such as Halo and Smash do their videos/replays by recording the game data and rendering it within the game each time. Video's always been the rather more intensive of tasks, so I think it probably is something more possible in recent times.
Pestneb Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 There do tend to be a lot of things that are forgotten about with generational jumps and graphics will be the one focused on because its the obvious one that you can see but things like better AI have been spoken about by developers as a major thing for this generation with the new power they have available to them. The leaps between generations may feel like they are getting smaller but they are still just as important. Naughty Dog is one developer that talks a lot about it and how they were pretty much done with what they could do on the PS3 and with The Last of Us they squeezed every last bit of power out of the console that they could. I mean you just have to look at the specs for the PS3 to see just how outdated its been for years. My knowledge of AI is pretty limited, but it is an area I can accept as moving forward. I haven't seen a large difference over the last couple of generations though.. Perhaps I am playing the wrong games! Can you think of any examples yourself of notably improved AI since the GC/PS2/XBOX era?
Recommended Posts