Sheikah Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 (edited) I haven't completed FF7 on Vita yet, but what I've played of it has had no problems. Certainly nothing like that! Let's not forget that the initial point here was that one company was leagues ahead of the other in terms of emulation quality. If that's a real bug with the game then that is indeed a shit one. But so too was something like the collector's edition Zelda disc with Majora's Mask on it. That shit would freeze regularly, and you'd lose hours and hours of play due to the unique save system. No emulation is really perfect, yet for most PS1 games it's great and pleases all but the most annoyingly stringent gamers. Edited February 5, 2015 by Sheikah
nekunando Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 I have to say that I'm thankful for the quality of Nintendo's VC releases over the years and am so glad that the games they release work well on the hardware they've been released on. I nabbed my brother's PSP a few months ago specifically with the thought of downloading some PS1 classics from the PlayStation Store to play on the go, but my overall feelings have been tainted by disappointment Considering my love for the original Metal Gear Solid, the thought of having it on the go was almost too tempting to pass up. It wasn't until after downloading and playing it that I became aware that it had unbearable sound problems during cutscenes and codec sequences It completely ruined it for me, but perhaps transferring Um Jammer Lammy to the PSP would give me a better opportunity to clear the last couple of songs..? Well.. maybe it would if you could actually hear the notes you play on guitar It's actually a problem that sometimes rears it's head on the PS3 side of things, too, though it never works on PSP I'm sure there are many games that work well across all PlayStation consoles but it just so happens that the ones I really wanted to play are the ones with crippling flaws.. If that's a real bug with the game then that is indeed a shit one. But so too was something like the collector's edition Zelda disc with Majora's Mask on it. That shit would freeze regularly, and you'd lose hours and hours of play due to the unique save system.. That completely ruined Majora's Mask for me.. I never played the GC version again after that happened
Serebii Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 (edited) The only thing wrong with the Virtual Consoles releases Nintendo puts out is the NES filter on the Wii U. They should make it optional like the GBA ones, but that'd require them rewriting the emulator of ~300 games Edited February 5, 2015 by Serebii
Dcubed Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 (edited) Have you seen others talk about that as well? Something that bad looks like its a problem with your Vita or maybe a corrupted file. I never had any problems playing FFIX on my Vita either. It's a known problem, happens randomly (activating fast disc loading makes it more likely to occur). It's a problem that has been there ever since they added support for PS1 games on Vita and has persisted with every single system update since then (yes I have tried re-installing it many times). Runs much better on PS3 mind you - though not without some minor graphical issues here and there. FF9 has some slowdown issues on PS3 and PSP (particularly when using certain spells like Fira - even the music slows down along with the game!) I can't remember if they persist on Vita mind you. I have to say that I'm thankful for the quality of Nintendo's VC releases over the years and am so glad that the games they release work well on the hardware they've been released on. I nabbed my brother's PSP a few months ago specifically with the thought of downloading some PS1 classics from the PlayStation Store to play on the go, but my overall feelings have been tainted by disappointment Considering my love for the original Metal Gear Solid, the thought of having it on the go was almost too tempting to pass up. It wasn't until after downloading and playing it that I became aware that it had unbearable sound problems during cutscenes and codec sequences It completely ruined it for me, but perhaps transferring Um Jammer Lammy to the PSP would give me a better opportunity to clear the last couple of songs..? Well.. maybe it would if you could actually hear the notes you play on guitar It's actually a problem that sometimes rears it's head on the PS3 side of things, too, though it never works on PSP I'm sure there are many games that work well across all PlayStation consoles but it just so happens that the ones I really wanted to play are the ones with crippling flaws.. That completely ruined Majora's Mask for me.. I never played the GC version again after that happened Agreed on all accounts. The input lag also makes Um Jammer Lammy a real chore to play on PS3 as well And the Majora's Mask emulation on the GCN collectors disc was horrible! (Well, what do you expect for a freebie I suppose ) I sold the collection the second that MM came out on the US Wii Virtual Console (which thankfully was a billion times better! Runs, looks and sounds perfect! ) The only thing wrong with the Virtual Consoles releases Nintendo puts out is the NES filter on the Wii U. They should make it optional like the GBA ones, but that'd require them rewriting the emulator of ~300 games Yeah true. I get that they're trying to emulate the bluring effect that CRTs used to produce on the game visuals, but they just go overboard on the NES games. The SNES filter is much more subtle and does a much nicer job! (and the GBA one is simply amazing!) Edited February 5, 2015 by Dcubed
Sheikah Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 FF9 has no slowdown issues for me, nor have any of the many PS1 games I've played on it. I think when you're complaining about using Fira then that's so small that it wouldn't bother the vast majority of players. Never noticed that myself though! I'd certainly take having a mahoosive library available over an insignificant flaw like that. We don't really have much of an accurate comparison for the Vita though to be honest, given its competitor is 3DS. That's hardly running N64 games across the board...
Dcubed Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 (edited) FF9 has no slowdown issues for me, nor have any of the many PS1 games I've played on it. I think when you're complaining about using Fira then that's so small that it wouldn't bother the vast majority of players. Never noticed that myself though! I'd certainly take having a mahoosive library available over an insignificant flaw like that. Well that's the point I was making. For people like you, who fit closer within Sony's target audience, it's "good enough". For people who value what the VC stands for though? Absolutely not! If the VC games started having issues like that? I would be utterly livid! I would just not buy games from there anymore because I highly value the quality of the emulation on there and I am far from alone. I sold that Zelda Collectors Edition disc, despite being a big Zelda fan, because the emulation quality was gobshite. For my PS1 game collection though? The PS3 emulation quality is generally good enough because I don't generally value those games as highly as the ones available on the VC (and when there's a game that is available on both the VC or PSN/XBLA, like Monster World 4, I will always pick the VC version - even if it's more expensive, because the emulation quality is just better there). I would not consider Vita's emulation good enough mind you as it's generally not up to par with the PS3, let alone the VC. So yeah. I value emulation quality highly and so do a big chunk of the VC's target audience. It's two different styles of emulation for two different audiences. Edited February 5, 2015 by Dcubed
Sheikah Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 (edited) Well that's the point I was making. For people like you, who fit closer within Sony's target audience, it's "good enough". For people who value what the VC stands for though? Absolutely not! Yeah, clearly: I'm reasonably sure I've played more PS1 games on Vita than you, on account of you being firmly in the Nintendo camp.Unless you own over 50 downloadable PS1 games via PSN, you'd be dead wrong. Sony's emulation efforts must be so unappealing for such an emulation connoisseur for you to have bought 50. Honestly, if you're that bothered about every pixel, flicker and grain to be perfect (which I strongly doubt Nintendo even achieve, see Majora's Mask) then I'm surprised you don't just exclusively play old games on your old consoles. Edited February 5, 2015 by Sheikah
Dcubed Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 Yeah, clearly: Sony's emulation efforts must be so unappealing for such an emulation connoisseur for you to have bought 50. You didn't read what I wrote obviously. I don't value the PS1's library as highly as the ones on the VC, so for those games, the PS3's emulation (note, not Vita - which is considerably worse) is good enough. It's far from ideal, but the problems that those games have are relatively minor - certainly I've never had a game crash on me or get completely garbled like on Vita. Most problems are minor graphical or audio artefacts (it was worse when it first started, with some games like FF5 not even saving properly, but thankfully is at a decent state now) that can usually be worked around when they crop up. But yeah, obviously you're just looking for a fight and don't actually want any reasoned discussion, so I'm ending it here. If you're lucky, I might send you a picture or two of my collection when I get home though if I can bothered though
Sheikah Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 You didn't read what I wrote obviously. I don't value the PS1's library as highly as the ones on the VC, so for those games, the PS3's emulation (note, not Vita - which is considerably worse) is good enough. Dude, the fact somebody almost autistically infatuated with 'perfect' emulation perfection bought 50 titles (be it PS3 or Vita) tells me they've got it right. They're obviously spending the right amount of money and time emulating their games so they can bring lots of them without impairing quality to the extent someone like you won't buy them.
Fierce_LiNk Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 I've never really understood this whole obsession with backwards compatibility and it's not something that immediately springs to mind when I think of what the WiiU's successor needs in order to succeed. Actually, there's about a dozen or so things that would appear before it on the list. The whole point seems a bit...ridiculous when it can't even get current/next gen games on the system. I'd be more worried about that happening again than whether or not we can play Wii/WiiU games on the next one.
Ramar Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 I sold that Zelda Collectors Edition disc, despite being a big Zelda fan, because the emulation quality was gobshite. I'm willing to bet the £30-£50 on ebay played a fair role too.
Kaepora_Gaebora Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 I've never really understood this whole obsession with backwards compatibility and it's not something that immediately springs to mind when I think of what the WiiU's successor needs in order to succeed. Actually, there's about a dozen or so things that would appear before it on the list. The whole point seems a bit...ridiculous when it can't even get current/next gen games on the system. I'd be more worried about that happening again than whether or not we can play Wii/WiiU games on the next one. I'd argue that Nintendo, more than perhaps Sony or Microsoft, should focus more on backwards compatibility as a means to secure their home console future. Part of their appeal is the nostalgia, and the fact that some of their older games were so bloody good!! Wii is a great example, you had a brand new Zelda on launch, Super Mario 64 ti download day one, and your entire back catalogue of GameCube games ready to play as well. Basically, what most people want from their Wii U right now! It annoys me that, due to finances, I had to trade in my 360 for my One, leaving all my 360 games useless in the process. Each to their own, but personally don't think backwards compatibility should be dismissed
Fierce_LiNk Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 I'd argue that Nintendo, more than perhaps Sony or Microsoft, should focus more on backwards compatibility as a means to secure their home console future. Part of their appeal is the nostalgia, and the fact that some of their older games were so bloody good!! Wii is a great example, you had a brand new Zelda on launch, Super Mario 64 ti download day one, and your entire back catalogue of GameCube games ready to play as well. Basically, what most people want from their Wii U right now! It annoys me that, due to finances, I had to trade in my 360 for my One, leaving all my 360 games useless in the process. Each to their own, but personally don't think backwards compatibility should be dismissed By that same token, a major problem that I have with Nintendo is that they are so stuck in the/their own past that the present (possibly future) is passing them by. I bought a Wii to play Zelda and games like Red Steel at the time, or ExciteTruck. I already had an N64 for Mario 64. To me, a new console should always be forward thinking and if it can also play the old games, then that's an added bonus. Nobody gave a shit about backwards compatibility when the N64 came out and nobody cared when the GameCube was released. At the time, the feeling was new hardcore, new possibilities, new games.
Wii Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 New update to Miiverse. You must have JavaScript enabled on your device to view Miiverse posts that have been embedded in a website. View post in Miiverse
Kaepora_Gaebora Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 By that same token, a major problem that I have with Nintendo is that they are so stuck in the/their own past that the present (possibly future) is passing them by. I bought a Wii to play Zelda and games like Red Steel at the time, or ExciteTruck. I already had an N64 for Mario 64. To me, a new console should always be forward thinking and if it can also play the old games, then that's an added bonus. Nobody gave a shit about backwards compatibility when the N64 came out and nobody cared when the GameCube was released. At the time, the feeling was new hardcore, new possibilities, new games. I'd certainly think then, that from Nintendo's point of view, Cube showed that people didn't want that type of experience. Don't get me wrong, I did like you, loved my Cube to pieces and the games too, but nobody bought it! Then they try out VC on Wii, and boom, people seem to be interested in their heritage and classic games. I'm just devils advocating here really as I feel the same as regarding new content, loving Hyrule Warriors, Capt Toad and Smash Bros with a real passion at the moment, but give me Mario 64 on VC and I'm there in a heart beat
nekunando Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 As far as backwards compatibility goes, the Wii, Wii U, DS and 3DS sort of back Nintendo into a corner of having to release a console with the capabilities to play these libraries of games, be it 2 screens or motion control. It's going to be almost impossible to achieve such diversity in one console without damaging the focus of the new console. For me, the Wii satisfied my VC needs in a way that the Wii U VC is basically unnecessary for my needs. However, my main desire for the future of VC titles is to be able to take them on the road I love the thought of having games like Wave Race: Blue Storm, F-Zero X and Super Mario Kart on a handheld, one that can also act as a Wii U gamepad for the next home console if necessary
liger05 Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 Backwards cpmpability is good but I don't think it should come at the expense of more important things such as the processor. Ultimately I don't think the majority of people when buying a new console care too much about backwards compability.
Serebii Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 Backwards cpmpability is good but I don't think it should come at the expense of more important things such as the processor. Ultimately I don't think the majority of people when buying a new console care too much about backwards compability. The majority don't care if it's x86 or PowerPC. It's all in the marketing. A decent marketing campaign can get a severely underpowered console to sell. Nintendo just lacked that.
Goron_3 Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 The majority don't care if it's x86 or PowerPC. It's all in the marketing. A decent marketing campaign can get a severely underpowered console to sell. Nintendo just lacked that. Marketing was one issue but a small one in the grand scheme of things. They made multiple mistakes with the Wii U, from the 'Play With The New Controller' slogan to releasing a £300 console that couldn't run engines designed for consoles released in 2005. Many problems...too many to write about this late
Serebii Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 Marketing was one issue but a small one in the grand scheme of things. They made multiple mistakes with the Wii U, from the 'Play With The New Controller' slogan to releasing a £300 console that couldn't run engines designed for consoles released in 2005. Many problems...too many to write about this late Wii U can run those engines though.
Goron_3 Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 (edited) Wii U can run those engines though. Barely. It's extremely bottlenecked by the relatively low speed CPU (which it makes up for when using custom engines by using the GPGPU). This is why 3rd party ports struggled significantly at first because they were designed to run on consoles with faster CPUs. This can be seen in games like Assassin's Creed 3, Origins and many more. Of course, the way around this was to spend time customising the engines around the CPU and GPGPU combo, and the results could be quite good (see Need For Speed) but unfortunately this also required significant staff time. It's very difficult to simply port games straight over. It's actually very similar to the 360-PS3 generation, when games ran and looked better on the 360, despite the PS3 arguably having a higher graphical ceiling. Of course, the upside to this is the fact the Wii U is only a 40W machine, which apparently is good and appeals to people. Apparently. Seriously though, you already knew everything I just posted. How do I know? Because I've posted it before, and I've seen other people post it in response to your comments on GAF. In fact, if you asked anyone with a Wii U dev kit and asked them the same question they'd say the same thing (I have done..several times in fact). So why do you keep repeating the same thing every few months? Selective reading? Edited February 5, 2015 by Goron_3
Sheikah Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 Seriously though, you already knew everything I just posted. How do I know? Because I've posted it before, and I've seen other people post it in response to your comments on GAF. In fact, if you asked anyone with a Wii U dev kit and asked them the same question they'd say the same thing (I have done..several times in fact). So why do you keep repeating the same thing every few months? Selective reading? Never ceases to amaze what people 'choose' to forget if it doesn't suit their agenda. :p
Ashley Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 Of course Wii U's successor will be backwards compatible with the Wii U. It's easy to emulate the previous generation's games when there are no games to emulate! (bad jokes will diffuse this tension, right?)
liger05 Posted February 6, 2015 Posted February 6, 2015 The majority don't care if it's x86 or PowerPC. It's all in the marketing. A decent marketing campaign can get a severely underpowered console to sell. Nintendo just lacked that. If only it was that simple. No product would ever fail if it all it requires is good marketing.
Recommended Posts