Hmmm... no, no way, sorry
I want Criterion to make a great Bournout game with lot of crash fun and mega multiplayer not the one EA forced them to do (NfS clone).
Then I would also love to see a new Black-game from them it was very good (IMO).
Wii U Speculation Thread 2: Can't take anymore of this!!!
- Thread starter ClovingWestbrook
- Start date
- Status
Hmmm... no, no way, sorry
I want Criterion to make a great Bournout game with lot of crash fun and mega multiplayer not the one EA forced them to do (NfS clone).
Then I would also love to see a new Black-game from them it was very good (IMO).
Well, you are talking about non-linearity more on a story level, while I was complaining about drawing lines between each save statues (even inside dungeons) or each puzzle, that let me without the feeling of exploration. Plus, the 3 main areas disconnected between each other, Skyloft being a blank hub. Nothing comparable to OoT and even Majora's fields, plenty of somewhat secret warp points between each area.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
Nintendo are targeting a reasonable/small number of cores at Xenon+ clocks. Power7's pipeline fits. 476's does not. Rule of thumb: to get high clocks you need long pipelines; power7 hits 2x 467's clock at the same process.
Yes, nintendo could go with double the number of 476 cores. But they most likely won't. I sincerely doubt nintendo would try a Cell-like experiment at the expense of their business. I'm a fan of Cell, but the model proved not so good for this industry where people already spend excessive amounts of dev time catering to GPUs.
A fellow Wonderboy fan, I see.
JoshuaJSlone
Member
twisteddeeds
Member
lmao..
to be honest its anyones guess, all I want is them to allow every card under the sun so I can spend my money on games.. (sorry..eshop/ushop)
Dreamwriter
Member
The "Overworld" is the sky (and is actually more boring than Wind Waker's Overworld, though at least it is smaller). Those land parts you are calling "Overworld" are not Overworld, they are basically outdoor dungeons. And as such, they have mostly linear paths, and those paths change as you advance through the game, but they are still mostly linear, except during certain challenges. It gives the game a feel of having three "levels" that you keep coming back to rather than a world to explore. It kills all feeling of exploration.
Link's Awakening managed to have a feel of exploration though it had no Overworld at all and was similar to the 3 levels in SS, and the reason it was able to maintain that feel was that it was one huge connected world with different paths to the different sections, with your ability to explore it increasing as you gained new abilities. The requirement to backtrack through places you had been actually increases the feel of a single integrated world to explore.
If a Wii-U Zelda game out that was like SS except one interconnected world rather than three levels connected by a hub, that would be an awesome game. Especially if it had an alternate "plane" (I so wished SS would have had a
full world in the past that would interact with the present
Probably there are free slots to fill after a ban wave.
Please don't ban me ;_;
my activation took almost a year
jump_button
Banned
Better now they close to E3
All we need are good game and Big N really need to do something about 3rd partys but really it shouldn't be up to them 3rd partys can be fools sometimes eg wait and waiting on Wii
Super Smash Bro
Banned
Personally, I prefer huge, mostly empty over worlds (OoT, TWW, TP) for my 3D Zeldas, and the dense, puzzle-based over worlds (ALttP, Oracles, MC) for 2D games.
3D environments beg to be looked at, but if they are divided into "rooms" a la SS you never get a sense of scope. Bring back the gorgeous, sweeping views, and fill them with secret grottos and dungeons. Fun (not really) fact: SS is the only 3D Zelda without a single secret mini/side dungeon.
3D environments beg to be looked at, but if they are divided into "rooms" a la SS you never get a sense of scope. Bring back the gorgeous, sweeping views, and fill them with secret grottos and dungeons. Fun (not really) fact: SS is the only 3D Zelda without a single secret mini/side dungeon.
Federico_612
Banned
So, ignoring the third-party discusion for a minute, What diferences would, 1, 1.5 or 2 gigabytes of ram make?
R
Rösti
Unconfirmed Member
In the Wii U fact sheet Nintendo supplied in connection with E3 2011 (and also CES 2012), it reads:
I wonder if this is the only output supported, or if Dolby Pro Logic II (five-channel) will be featured as well (for backwards compatibility reasons). I've seen no press releases or interviews detailing licensing of any Dolby technologies for Wii U.
While six-channel PCM certainly should cover a basic audio experience in most games, it's nothing new. PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 have support for LPCM amongst other technologies such as Dolby Digital 5.1, Dolby TrueHD, Dolby Pro Logic IIz and DTS-HD Master Audio to name a few. I understand that Nintendo wants a somewhat cost-efficient system and perhaps theorizes PCM is sufficient to fulfil the demands of both developers and ultimate consumers, but I thought of how something like this would correlate to a certain thing Mr. Iwata said at the Corporate Management Policy Briefing/Third Quarter Financial Results Briefing for Fiscal Year Ending March 2012:
While he references graphic representations here in comparison to "the power games" and eventually that they do not hesitate to role out their resources, perhaps other aspects, such as physics and namely audio output, of a software title can be accounted for as well. It is not an area that is even remotely as popular as graphics, but by having support for a technology with which you can enable for example 16 channels (Dolby TrueHD), much atmosphere and ambience can be added to a game. Let's take Metroid or The Legend of Zelda series for an example; with these the player could experience very vivid environments where distant sounds of zoomers and keese respectively are heard. Even something as dripping water could add to the experience. PCM could certainly achieve this to some degree, but is it really enough for current expectations?
What Microsoft and Sony have in store for their respective next generation systems regarding the audio department should be less important than processing power and clock frequences when comparing the different systems. But if something like Dolby 3D or 22.2 surround sound (see NHK Science & Technology Research Laboratories) is implemented and marketed cleverly as a key selling point (not only for gaming), it could be tough for Nintendo to combat, at least only with PCM.
Sources:
Wii U fact sheet: http://e3.nintendo.com/hw/#/about
Corporate Management Policy Briefing: http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/en/library/events/120127qa/04.html
I wonder if this is the only output supported, or if Dolby Pro Logic II (five-channel) will be featured as well (for backwards compatibility reasons). I've seen no press releases or interviews detailing licensing of any Dolby technologies for Wii U.
While six-channel PCM certainly should cover a basic audio experience in most games, it's nothing new. PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 have support for LPCM amongst other technologies such as Dolby Digital 5.1, Dolby TrueHD, Dolby Pro Logic IIz and DTS-HD Master Audio to name a few. I understand that Nintendo wants a somewhat cost-efficient system and perhaps theorizes PCM is sufficient to fulfil the demands of both developers and ultimate consumers, but I thought of how something like this would correlate to a certain thing Mr. Iwata said at the Corporate Management Policy Briefing/Third Quarter Financial Results Briefing for Fiscal Year Ending March 2012:
While he references graphic representations here in comparison to "the power games" and eventually that they do not hesitate to role out their resources, perhaps other aspects, such as physics and namely audio output, of a software title can be accounted for as well. It is not an area that is even remotely as popular as graphics, but by having support for a technology with which you can enable for example 16 channels (Dolby TrueHD), much atmosphere and ambience can be added to a game. Let's take Metroid or The Legend of Zelda series for an example; with these the player could experience very vivid environments where distant sounds of zoomers and keese respectively are heard. Even something as dripping water could add to the experience. PCM could certainly achieve this to some degree, but is it really enough for current expectations?
What Microsoft and Sony have in store for their respective next generation systems regarding the audio department should be less important than processing power and clock frequences when comparing the different systems. But if something like Dolby 3D or 22.2 surround sound (see NHK Science & Technology Research Laboratories) is implemented and marketed cleverly as a key selling point (not only for gaming), it could be tough for Nintendo to combat, at least only with PCM.
Sources:
Wii U fact sheet: http://e3.nintendo.com/hw/#/about
Corporate Management Policy Briefing: http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/en/library/events/120127qa/04.html
If you take 1 GB as a base, then
1.5 GB is 50% more and
2 GB is double ....
) sorry have had to do that..No honestly, if I'm not doing something wrong now, then the more RAM is there the more you can boost the performance of the overall system.
For gaming (GPU) a higher amount of RAM is always good to bump the res or textures (quality-wise) in a game.
ecosse_011172
Junior Member
Rösti;34806310 said:
Thw 3 guys worldwide with 22 speakers and subwoofers will be delighted.
I have to agree. Sound technology is commoditized so much at this point it's basically a meaningless bullet-point on a spec sheet. I reminds me of when Surround Sound was listed as a feature on the PSP, which sounds great until you realize nobody makes special headgear/helnmts to position speakers around your head to enjoy it.
I find it funny people say this and then in the same breath they say the game has no sense of adventure or there is no exploration. Since when did Metroid structure the other action/adventure paradigm not promote and feature exploration and adventure?
I haven't played too many open world games but the ones I have played seem to have pockets of gameplay separated by "beautiful landscape" to create a sense of grandeur. Isn't that dangerously close to the empty overworld syndrome people complain about? Is that how we want Nintendo to use their new found power?
JoshuaJSlone
Member
I wouldn't read anything into that; it's not like supporting ProLogic II requires much in the way of hardware beyond the ability to output stereo sound. Looking back at the Wii fact sheet, here's as much as it says about sound output: "An AV Multi-output port".Rösti said:
R
Rösti
Unconfirmed Member
Probably so. Information about audio output would seem like something you wouldn't have to suppress, but as you wrote, Nintendo provided rather modest details about Wii as well. Perhaps we'll get something new at GDC, despite a rather low attendence by Nintendo there (only one speaker, Steve Rabin). They've got a bigger booth than last year though, this year it's 50' x 50', last year was 50' x 40'.
It wasn't Crytek as a company that said it, but one of their graphics tech guys.
bgassassin
Member
Looks like it. I'm enjoying the new influx of posters. They'll be good and ready for E3. And it keeps Ace from hogging the thread.
Rösti;34806310 said:
Well one key thing to remember from the e3 hardware link at the bottom of the system detail.
They essentially left themselves a lot of breathing room for how the final will shape up.
TheCongressman1
Member
Not if you make the gameplay about the exploration. In this situation, the player should be rewarded by exploring, not hindered by it. The easiest way to do this is not tell the player what to do. If you give them a direction, they instantly become set on that goal and anything in between them and the goal becomes work. If you don't, their first instinct is to find something themselves and thus they set off without a set goal in mind. It should be a natural sense of finding the world on your own.
Not every bit of the map needs interesting or fun things, because that isn't the way worlds work, it also makes stumbling upon really substancial things much more fun. Not to say there shouldn't be lots of things to find, of course.
Also, the items should be fun to play with. If items stopped only being keys to access new areas, and became toys that the player can manipulate things in the world with, the overworld would become more of an interesting place. Take the hookshot for example:
In SS it only serves as a key to the funny shaped grapple plate. It can grab vines, but you can already climb most of those. It can't even grab loot anymore. How much fun can you have with that? Now, imagine if you let the player hook into walls of rock, trees, and whatnot. They choose how to use the item, and aren't forced to use it just to progress. Imagine being able to use it to search a gorge that was previously too steep to go down, or just swing over the gorge and keep going if you want, it's all up to you. And of course, there has to be limits to keep the player from breaking dungeons, but that isn't too hard to implement.
DTS, Dolby, SDDS and the like are all just compressed multichannel audio. LPCM multichannel audio makes them all obsolete, as it's lossless and supports up to eight channels via HDMI. The only reason to support anything else would be movies, and considering Wii U won't play movies, there's simply no need for Dolby or DTS.
playing Dark Souls again recently I found myself imagining a Zelda game fashioned in this manner. Link traveling around a mysterious beautiful countryside. Temples can be seen well into the distance, but perhaps not obvious how they're accessed... Seamless, connected overworld.
Enemies have never been overly plentiful in Zelda, and SS seemed to want to make individual enemy encounters something you had to stop and handle, versus just mash a button and move on. Now I'm not saying to make it as difficult as Dark Souls (never gonna happen) but why not have these relatively sparse enemies be an actual obstacle to overcome, an actual threat, than just some minor annoyance on your way to your next objective?
I don't want to take the Dark Souls comparison too far - I realize they're very different games and going for different things. But man, Dark Souls exploration was so incredibly rewarding for me when discovering new areas, new enemies, new items. I want that sense of discovery and satisfaction in Zelda!
Enemies have never been overly plentiful in Zelda, and SS seemed to want to make individual enemy encounters something you had to stop and handle, versus just mash a button and move on. Now I'm not saying to make it as difficult as Dark Souls (never gonna happen) but why not have these relatively sparse enemies be an actual obstacle to overcome, an actual threat, than just some minor annoyance on your way to your next objective?
I don't want to take the Dark Souls comparison too far - I realize they're very different games and going for different things. But man, Dark Souls exploration was so incredibly rewarding for me when discovering new areas, new enemies, new items. I want that sense of discovery and satisfaction in Zelda!
R
Rösti
Unconfirmed Member
Has that been fully confirmed? Wii has got Netflix, maybe Wii U will feature even more applications similar to that. They surely want to combat Xbox LIVE with Nintendo Network, and to have a few exclusive services for film and music though that platform could be one incentive to buy the console. I don't expect anything marvelous though.
Fujibayashi was the director of SS (not Aonuma) and the game has sold well.
Bigger overworld? But then people would complain about a big empty overworld.
15 dungeons.That would be like a 100 hour game unless every one was a short flaccid disappointment.
Better not to aim for the moon and get your hopes dashed. TP had 10, that was a great amount. Not too few (like SS) and not too many. Honestly I'd be happy with 8 or 9 really well done dungeons (I felt the last two in TP were sort of disappointing.) And honestly that's an absolutely massive amount of content just on its own.
Correct. The "HD era" (well, Nintendo entering it) will mean *less* content, not more. Whatever the next Zelda will be, the production time will be longer and the end result will have less content not more. People should treasure stuff like Xenoblade, because outside of copy+paste NPCs/houses/etc affairs like Skyrim we're never going to see a game like that again on consoles.
That has nothing to do with laziness. Dolphin has taken collectively thousands of hours to support game titles re-rendering in HD, and it's done per-title and is nowhere near perfect (and it never will be - something a console manufacturer like Nintendo doesn't like). You're not going to see that kind of effort put into any virtual console projects. Especially not something that's going to sell for $10 or whatever. The cost benefit ratio is way out of whack. If you're talking about games that get *completely* redone asset/engine wise (like OOT 3DS) for a full retail re-release? Maybe. My personal candidate would be Wind Waker, as unlike TP the widescreen hacking doesn't work so well in emulation and the 2D assets are all low-res. They would look pretty crappy as a virtual console release on people's HDTVs.
The "missing dungeons" thing is a misnomer. There are no dungeons sitting around in a vault somewhere, waiting to be completed. Whatever content didn't make it likely got thrown into Twilight Princess, and completely re-jigging the triforce hunt may require more than just a Grezzo remake.
So a 7 year development time is cool? lol
Yes, following the HDMI spec (the Wii U has an HDMI port, which has to follow the spec) means 8-channel uncompressed LPCM is supported.
-Pyromaniac-
Member
not as well as it should haaaaveeee
:lol
TheCongressman1
Member
You act as if Nintendo can't hire more people.
Sorry but IMO that souns really stupid to me.
Nintendo is not the company that will take HD as an excuse to deliver less content.
What they will probably do is raise the cost per game.
That's a sad outlook to have...
I think the reason why Nintendo has been expanding and hiring so many people (many of whom are adept at HD development) is so that their level of production doesn't drop as they move into HD. In fact, with they way their growing a lot of their teams, I wouldn't be surprised if the next Zelda title had more content.
Anywho, put me down in the group who prefer an open-world approach to SS's method. I think that with SS Nintendo realized that they needed to make the zones outside of dungeons more interesting to explore. I just didn't agree with the approach - they basically turned them into mini dungeons, which did kill the sense of exploration for me. I personally don't care if each "zone" is connected or not, but I think the key to making them more interesting is to fill them with things to do, while still keeping them open. I think every zone should have at least 1 NPC hub where you can interact and get some story progression, do some side-quests and mini-games, unique beasts to hunt...maybe a shop or two, etc. Then you have a big, meaty dungeon to cap it all off. That would be perfect.
Speaking of Zelda and the added cost of moving to HD, what do you guys think of this: this gen we saw a lot of franchises get extended into trilogies as a means to save money and time by reusing assets. Usually, Nintendo doesn't do this - instead building each console Zelda from scratch. But, considering the added cost/time of developing HD games, plus Miyamoto stressing that they want to get Zelda games out faster, would anybody be opposed to Nintendo pulling an Assassin's Creed/Uncharted/Galaxy, and creating one big library of assets (in one art style) for a Wii U "trilogy" of Zeldas?
I personally would love if they did that. It would ensure we got Zelda games faster, and since they'd be coming out in rapid succession, gamers wouldn't be expecting them to reinvent the wheel with every iteration, and they'd instead be able to focus on improving on the things that worked in each successive title.
Everyone laughs at Squaresoft for the "HD towns" remark, but they were and are absolutely correct.
I don't know if Square is the best example, as it's becoming more apparent that their low output this gen has less to do with the challenges of HD development, and more to do with the gross mismanagement of their teams' time and resources.
I don't think Square planned for HD. Nintendo, on the other hand, seems to be doing a lot of expanding/restructuring specifically for the transition. I don't think they'll have the same problems.
How many hundred or thousand extra people have they hired at EAD?
See this as a general question, more or less unrelated to the argument you made: Are there any internally-developed Nintendo titles with huge and massive worlds/towns? Only Zelda & Metroid?
-Pyromaniac-
Member
Square-Enix wasn't right about shit, the only reason they couldn't do it, and the same reason why it took them and takes them forever to release games, is because they've never had a proper engine this whole generation. Thankfully they have one prepared for next-gen. I think Duckroll in some post a while back explained square's difficulties pretty well, but I think it boiled down to lack of engine.
*Brofist*
You and I are a rare kind on this forum.
Wonderboy 1, 2 or 3? Master System or Mega-Drive?
I'm not sure, but they are expanding.
Retro's hired several new people, all of whom have experience with HD game development. and there was word that they were actually cultivating a second team over there, but I don't know if that was ever confirmed.
They're building another headquarters in Kyoto as well. I assume they're going to be filling that with a lot of talent. And wasn't there an article awhile back about Nintendo hiring up a lot of US programmers specifically for their Japan-based teams and Monolith? Or was that a dream I had? I can't find the link, but I could have sworn I saw that on GAF one day a few months back...
Rabbi_Vole
Banned
Even without an interconnected overworld, it's still taking me over 60 hrs to complete SS. I'm at the very end, but I've found myself "exploring" every nook and cranny and have squeezed a lot of enjoyment out of the experience. Would I have preferred a huge connected world with seamlessly integrated dungeons? Of course, but its absence hasnt rendered SS a "bad" Zelda. Enjoy the game for what it is.
I do hope Nintendo tries something more open for Zelda U, though. A new Zelda 1 would be an amazing way to recreate modern Zelda without straying from its roots.
I do hope Nintendo tries something more open for Zelda U, though. A new Zelda 1 would be an amazing way to recreate modern Zelda without straying from its roots.
Pretty much. There are various ways to explore and having a "classic" overworld isn't the only way. I still view the outdoor parts as an overworld that's able to have density of content akin to the 2D Zeldas and there's lots to explore there. I don't think people appreciate how hard it would be to create a hub overworld like the previous 3D Zeldas but with density like Skyward Sword. That's a major challenge, one that no developer has pulled off. I like both design philosophies, as long as they're done well.
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
Skyward Sword had 7 explicit dungeons. Even counting the pre-dungeon sections as part of each dungeon, I also find them to be not as well designed as most of TP's. The pre-dungeon sections, if considered an overworld, are some of the best overworld sections of any Zelda game, but they straddle the line and they're hard to categorize. I would have preferred if the ground world in SS were interlinked, and I think it would have been a much better game if they were.
Regardless, 7 in a Zelda game is sort of a middling amount, in my opinion. Coming from Twilight Princess, it was a definite step down (in terms of count and design.)
This is the next generation of gaf posters. Just in time for E3.
I predict Nintendo falling under the influx of Crytek and putting 2GB of ram in the Wii U, the Cryengine 3 will shine on it.
Instead of condescension, go ahead and correct me.
Xenoblade is one of the biggest games of this generation, content-wise. That's an internal Nintendo game.
Content creation is still the biggest hurdle all studios have had this generation.
You weren't dreaming - over the past year or so we've had articles proclaiming they've hired this guy or that guy. But building massive games a la Skyrim/Xenoblade (or in the past page, a Zelda with 15 dungeons) requires a heck of a lot more than handfuls of people. Or a heck of a lot of time.
Grampa Simpson
Banned
I've always taken the high clocks speed in the PS3 and 360 as relics of 'more clocks is better' Pentium 4 mentality. We later saw faster chips from Intel that ran at lower clock speeds.
I know I'm mixing two different companies here, but I've assumed that some fo the mentalities are the same.
I've been assuming that a thread on 476FP is going to get more instructions done per cycle than on something like the Xenon. I think that's why we get away with lower clock speeds.
My understanding is probably flawed somewhere here.
You're right that we need to think about yields for the processor that Nintendo wants. If the Power7 solution has a much lower surface area than a 476FP solution, then they're going to be able to get better yields, and vice versa.
The fact is that I haven't run across enough data on completed solutions like the "Axxia ACP3448" to say with any certainty how that would play out, I've just been running with the assumptions that the simpler cores with the lower clock speeds were going to get better yields. If a completed 476FP is bigger than a Power7, then that gets thrown out the window.
- Status