Nintendo Switch - Happy Switchmas Everyone!

[Sheikah]

Mario Kart 8 looks stunning and will continue to look stunning for decades.

 

Uncharted 2 looks dated now, and will look even more dated in ten years.

 

You can argue a lot of things against Nintendo, visuals are not one of them.

 

That timelessness because of the visual style of the software, nothing to do with the hardware, which was the point originally raised. The Wii U is not a powerful machine and nothing put out on it is graphically more intensive than what the PS3 was doing in its prime; this was the counter point to somebody mentioning that the Wii U was a more powerful machine. It can very easily be grouped together with the 360 and PS3 as "about the same power".

[Ronnie]

That timelessness because of the visual style of the software, nothing to do with the hardware

 

Give me timeless, stunning visuals any day.

[Kav]

Give me timeless, stunning visuals any day.

 

He's not suggesting you shouldn't prefer them. His post clearly explains why he said what he said.

[Ronnie]

He's not suggesting you shouldn't prefer them. His post clearly explains why he said what he said.

 

My posts were in reply to this:

 

That said, MK8 still ran at 720p and to me was still not as graphically impressive/intensive as the later Uncharted games.

 

Apart from being confused why "intensity" matters, I'd argue that a nicer visual style trumps an "impressive" one.

[Ashley]

MK8 is impressive because of its art style. Uncharted is impressive because of how it pushes the visuals to be more realistic. Each has merit. Each person has their own opinion.

 

Can we not start this - whatever the opposite of a circle jerk is - again please both of you? Debate the merits, sure, but it's already clear its a difference of opinion that is unlikely to be reconciled.

[Hogge]

I can't think of one Wii U game that has looked much more impressive than say Uncharted 2.

 

My point exactly.

The Wii U IS more powerful than the PS3, but not once were Nintendo able to show that. Espescially not prior to the debut of the PS4 or XBOne. In fact, third party ports and a heavy first party emphasis on games that were visually unimpressive resulted in many claims that it even was underpowered when compared to the Xbox 360.

Edited October 11, 2016 by Hogge

[Ronnie]

My point exactly.

The Wii U IS more powerful than the PS3, but not once were Nintendo able to show that.

 

I don't understand why this matters? Wii U games look fantastic, isn't that enough? Why is the industry so obsessed with POWER. The games look stunning, that's the important thing isn't it?

[Hogge]

I don't understand why this matters? Wii U games look fantastic, isn't that enough? Why is the industry so obsessed with POWER. The games look stunning, that's the important thing isn't it?

 

Consoles are expensive. Why buy a new console that can't do anything better than the (at the time) six year older machines?

And like I said, the Wii U's flaw was the GAMES. The three "launch window" games that Nintendo showed off weren't killer apps. None of them were so amazing that people went "OMG, I have to buy this system NOW just to get that game".

[Ashley]

I don't understand why this matters? Wii U games look fantastic, isn't that enough? Why is the industry so obsessed with POWER. The games look stunning, that's the important thing isn't it?

 

Arguably lead by example. If Nintendo don't show the power of their console third parties are unlikely to be able to try and do it (either because they feel what Nintendo outputs is the maximum strength of the console or "if they're not going to, why should we"*)

 

This then becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy whereby people believe the console doesn't have the power to handle games that other consoles can (and that's the important bit because it all comes down to porting) then it is likely to result in fewer ports and a belief that the console isn't powerful enough. It might stop developers from trying and it might stop consumers from buying. Yes there doesn't need to be a link between technical power and, for lack of a better term, muster but there is a perception. There is a perception across the whole tech industry that is hard to shake. It's why Apple use buzzwords like Lightning to cover up for the fact proprietary cables are a pain in the arse. People believe the buzz and it helps them (obviously their market share helps as well and the recent headphone debacle proves their not indestructible from a PR POV but you can bet that people will keep buying iPhones). A lack of public perception that the console can handle stronger games arguably becomes its own downfall.

 

Obviously there are many more factors at play but ultimately you may not like the obsession with power and you may feel it is wrong, but it is part of the game (no pun intended) and sure Nintendo can choose to ignore it, but then they choose to keep themselves open to criticisms and potentially weakened sales.

 

 

*of course some may still try and good for them!

[Ronnie]

I played Mass Effect 3 for the first time on Wii U, and not once did I think urgh I wish this looked more impressive. Devs know the scope of a console, Nintendo should be applauded and seen as inspiration to the industry by making games that look and play so good on more modest hardware. Gameplay comes first after all, or at least it should do IMO.

 

Consoles are expensive. Why buy a new console that can't do anything better than the (at the time) six year older machines?

 

Because it has games that look just as good if not better than the competition?

 

And like I said, the Wii U's flaw was the GAMES. The three "launch window" games that Nintendo showed off weren't killer apps. None of them were so amazing that people went "OMG, I have to buy this system NOW just to get that game".

 

That didn't stop PS4s from selling at launch. Knack ?? It may have been the case in the past but these days launch titles are rarely much good, people buy consoles expecting a good lifespan, rarely to play a must-have launch game. Look at PS4, Wii U, Xbox One, PSVR etc. If Zelda Breath of the Wild is a launch game the NX will at least have that killer game in its armoury.

Edited October 11, 2016 by Ronnie

[Ashley]

Because it has games that look just as good if not better than the competition?

 

That didn't stop PS4s from selling at launch. Knack ?? It may have been the case in the past but these days launch titles are rarely much good, people buy consoles expecting a good lifespan, rarely to play a must-have launch game. Look at PS4, Wii U, Xbox One, PSVR etc. If Zelda Breath of the Wild is a launch game the NX will at least have that killer game in its armoury.

 

But...it didn't. Or at least arguably it didn't.

 

Of the three 'main' Wii U launch titles only one had a realistic visual style (and yes once again there's merits in others but if we're comparing we'll compare the most compatible). Zombiu. In the same year we had a game like Far Cry 3 released.

 

So a consumer had a choice (as it were) between this:

 

 

And this:

 

 

Now if you judge it on a purely superficial level, as many people do (sorry but it's true) you will think "well they at best look similar, at worse FC3 looks better so should I spend £300 on a new console or £150-200* on an old console with far more games" or "why buy a new console for £300 when I already have a console that is outputting the same"? Again it comes back to the point that consoles are judged visually, particularly to a lot of 'undecideds' that Nintendo needed to get on the Wii U.

 

And yeah console launches have duffs (I don't see what your point was other than maybe to criticise Knack but we all know that's rubbish), but Killzone Shadow Fall, Ryse and ZombiU all showcased the best their consoles could muster at that point. And furthermore, people were attracted to the PS4/One because there was a noticeable leap compared to what else was out and to a lesser extent their other features (streaming, sharing, multimedia etc). The Wii U was obviously a leap compared to the Wii, but your average joe wouldn't have compared it to the Wii in 2012. They would have compared it to what else was available in 2012 - two other consoles with games that look as (if not more) impressive for a much lower price.

 

*or whatever the PS3/360 was at that point

 

 

I played Mass Effect 3 for the first time on Wii U, and not once did I think urgh I wish this looked more impressive. Devs know the scope of a console, Nintendo should be applauded and seen as inspiration to the industry by making games that look and play so good on more modest hardware. Gameplay comes first after all, or at least it should do IMO.

 

Devs know the scope of the console at launch but they know how to use it best by the end of its life. It's a learning experience and part of that learning is through seeing what others do.

 

Nobody (of any credibility) is arguing that Nintendo shouldn't be applauded for what they squeeze out of their hardware. In fact, they are often applauded for it by many people. The problem becomes 1) there becomes no benchmark 2) it feeds into the idea that Nintendo 'keep' the knowledge for themselves (fair or not, it is a criticism that has been levelled at Nintendo). People in this industry love Nintendo and try to live up to their standards, but they simply aren't setting it (or trying to) when it comes to certain aspects. And again we come back to - "that's fine as a software supplier, less so as a hardware supplier".

 

 

 

(also looking at that ZombiU shot now, man they really screwed up the holding of that bat. Give it a shot, try and position your hands/arms like that)

Edited October 11, 2016 by Ashley

[Josh64]

Power is incredibly important to get third parties on board. Personally I am more than happy with Wii U level graphics, especially for the types of games I play, but I know that it's something that holds them back and makes porting harder. It's my biggest fear with the NX being a hybrid, if it's a handheld at its core and a home console dock second, can we realistically expect it to output graphics that are much better than the Wii U currently is? If it isn't at least on par with PSBox4 then I fear we'll have another generation of barebones third party support or a bunch of really rubbish toned down ports like on Wii.

 

The Wii U got so much wrong, but it only had as many flaws as the Wii. In fact, I think they fixed a lot of the problems you'd come across on Wii. The biggest problem is that unlike the Wii Remote which had everyone super hyped, there was nothing magical or groundbreaking either about the Wii U hardware or software that allowed people to overlook the flaws like they did with Wii.

[Rummy]

It's a catamaran. No boat-to-boat radio.

 

I've actually heard it's quite a large passenger ship capable of carrying equal to if not even possibly more than its competition's number of passengers for some pretty impressive feats, but it actually also has a smaller speedboat attached to it that you can use for smaller journeys out and about.

 

Of course it all depends on how well they maximise their use of space to really get the most out of it and to also consider whether or not passengers really want to take a trip on it. All very tricky territory really.

 

On the subject of ports though I heard that it is very likely to be dockable either way at least.

[Rummy]

I don't understand why this matters? Wii U games look fantastic, isn't that enough? Why is the industry so obsessed with POWER. The games look stunning, that's the important thing isn't it?

 

You seem to pose this argument regularly - but I don't think it holds. If you ask me, even though I played it much later than when it came out, Super Mario RPG was actually pretty graphically stunning for what it was when it was imo. However - does that mean you'd still take a game in that visual style now? What if there's something that looks MORE fantastic? What if there was something that looked MORE fantastic at the time? Very little of any of this is really as static as you seem to think. Or maybe it is and you should just go buy a Gameboy and SML or something, iono. It was amazing at its time, right? Why bother to ever push any harder?

 

Power is incredibly important to get third parties on board. Personally I am more than happy with Wii U level graphics, especially for the types of games I play, but I know that it's something that holds them back and makes porting harder. It's my biggest fear with the NX being a hybrid, if it's a handheld at its core and a home console dock second, can we realistically expect it to output graphics that are much better than the Wii U currently is? If it isn't at least on par with PSBox4 then I fear we'll have another generation of barebones third party support or a bunch of really rubbish toned down ports like on Wii.

 

The Wii U got so much wrong, but it only had as many flaws as the Wii. In fact, I think they fixed a lot of the problems you'd come across on Wii. The biggest problem is that unlike the Wii Remote which had everyone super hyped, there was nothing magical or groundbreaking either about the Wii U hardware or software that allowed people to overlook the flaws like they did with Wii.

 

Absolutely agree. Nobody's really trying to say Nintendo have super shit visuals or capabilities as far as I take it - but just that they ARE arguably behind the competition. Now, if you're manufacturing a game and go multi-platform and you develop with a certain level of graphical fidelity easily achievable on Xbox or PS, yet it's not as easily achievable on the Nintendo system - that's a barrier. Maybe it's not related to the raw power of the Nintendo system, or higher achievable power squeezing out efficiencies, but maybe it's just difficult in its architecture and design that porting the code is tricky. Obviously if it ISN'T up to scratch on the visual fidelity capabilities due to hardware, it's for a different reason but it's still the same barrier in essence. That's the sort of thing that then causes problems(apply the same to online systems rather than graphical capabilities, if you wish, and maybe even then beyond!).

Edited October 11, 2016 by Rummy

[Goafer]

I've actually heard it's quite a large passenger ship capable of carrying equal to if not even possibly more than its competition's number of passengers for some pretty impressive feats, but it actually also has a smaller speedboat attached to it that you can use for smaller journeys out and about.

 

Of course it all depends on how well they maximise their use of space to really get the most out of it and to also consider whether or not passengers really want to take a trip on it. All very tricky territory really.

 

On the subject of ports though I heard that it is very likely to be dockable either way at least.

 

I've heard that it has one oar with the word "Nintendo" scribbled down the side of it. There may be other oars available later, but for now it's just the one. There's half a life jacket with Ubisoft written on it though.

[Happenstance]

I think as usual we just have to remember that power doesnt just relate to graphics. Devs need it for a lot more than that. AI for example is a big one.

[bob]

 

Can we not start this - whatever the opposite of a circle jerk is - again please both of you?

 

Hmmm. If would imagine that the opposite of a circle jerk is where you all crouch in a circle, and shit into the outheld hands of the person behind you.

 

A circledump.

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

I was pretty content with the visual performance of the Wii U tbh - and I believe its full potential will sadly never be met. (Edit: Forgot BotW)

 

In some way, I detest the idea that every new generation of hardware must have better graphics. The idea that power brings more to the table in terms of gameplay is a positive one, but IMO that ideology simply translates to some as better graphics - and often than not some third party games just feel like a prettier version of its prequel on the older gen system.

 

Im playing Pro Evo 17 at the moment and I really don't care for - for example - the veins you can see on the arms of the players and the extra creases in the shirts if the intelligence of the ai stays the same as it was.

 

I appreciate the balance that Nintendo aims to have with visuals - gameplay - Even when they change to a more favourable art style ala WW, they still add notable upgrades to the gameplay/AI etc.

Edited October 11, 2016 by King_V

[liger05]

I don't understand why this matters? Wii U games look fantastic, isn't that enough? Why is the industry so obsessed with POWER. The games look stunning, that's the important thing isn't it?

 

Obsessed? Technology always advances with each generation with graphics being one of those advancements. It has always been this way.

[Hero-of-Time]

I've heard that it has one oar with the word "Nintendo" scribbled down the side of it. There may be other oars available later, but for now it's just the one. There's half a life jacket with Ubisoft written on it though.

 

This got me good. I genuinely burst out laughing reading this. The Ubisoft thing pushed me over the edge. Well played.

[somme]

Why is the industry so obsessed with POWER.

 

Surely it's a good thing they are? Otherwise gaming would never have progressed from the games of the 70s/80s.

[Ronnie]

Surely it's a good thing they are? Otherwise gaming would never have progressed from the games of the 70s/80s.

 

You can push boundaries with each console without being obsessed with power. The PS4 Pro is a typical example of horsepower being the driving force of the industry, and the reaction has been mostly negative, calling it pointless. As @King_V says better graphics are all well and good but if all each iteration of a previous title in a franchise has is better graphics with no new ideas and games are the same thing over and over then surely that's not healthy. At least PSVR and VR in general is giving us new ways to play and fresh ideas, which the industry seems to badly need IMO.

[Ashley]

The PS4 Pro is a typical example of horsepower being the driving force of the industry, and the reaction has been mostly negative, calling it pointless.

 

I can't recall if you answered me last time I asked but where are you seeing this. At worst I'm finding indifference (if you ignore GAF).

[liger05]

You can push boundaries with each console without being obsessed with power. The PS4 Pro is a typical example of horsepower being the driving force of the industry, and the reaction has been mostly negative, calling it pointless. As @King_V says better graphics are all well and good but if all each iteration of a previous title in a franchise has is better graphics with no new ideas and games are the same thing over and over then surely that's not healthy. At least PSVR and VR in general is giving us new ways to play and fresh ideas, which the industry seems to badly need IMO.

 

If VR is the future then no thanks.

 

A bunch of tech demos that offer very little in actual gaming experiences. VR is going to suffer a very quick death. It's a Novelty and unless they fix it it's a bomba.

 

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2016-10-10-john-carmack-says-vr-is-coasting-on-novelty

Edited October 11, 2016 by liger05

[Ashley]

I don't think it's the future but a future. One that will exist alongside traditional gaming the same way mobile has done.

 

A lot of early stuff is novelty. Often the case. But I think it will have great applications in the future