Game Informer: " Why Xenoblade Chronicles Makes Me Want To Punch a Kitten"
- Thread starter anaron
- Start date
nincompoop
Banned
Wrong aspect ratio screenshots make me want to punch two kittens.
Yeah, from Iwata Ask, it looks like Nintendo's Gentle Guiding Hand (tm) was all over the final game. Plot less convoluted, playable proof of concept, telling Monolith to just ignore the deadline, Shulk's creepy touch removed, etc...
What "creepy touch"?
Criminal Upper
Banned
Neon_Icarus
Member
Shulk used to touch a girl in a creepy way.
That's BBK for ya! Sharpening filter too. But the art holds through.
Good question. The question at the heart of that would be: Did Xenoblade turn a profit?
My instinct is that they'd be given a similar budget to last time - a small increase, perhaps. Xenoblade sold okay but not spectacularly, and I'm not sure a graphical improvement would increase sales to the level that would be required to *pay* for that graphical improvement. One regular problem of this generation has been that the *costs* of graphical improvement haven't been equalled or better by appropriate revenue increases.
However, that's imagining them as a third party, and they're not. Nintendo may go in with the consideration that it might be okay if the game itself makes a loss provided that it helps the perception of the hardware. That's not their standard MO, but they're doing quite a few things that break from the norm for them, so I wouldn't regard it as a total impossibility. The overarching question there would be whether Nintendo believe that an expensive HD RPG would significantly drive Wii U hardware sales.
I will say one thing for sure, though: If there's any significant increase in budget, it'll *definitely* be intended from the outset to be released in all territories. There's no way they could sustain such a niche project with a large budget in only a single region.
aliencowz7
Member
I think the big question would be if nintendo cares enough to push a rpg of that level. Monolith is pretty much there most talented in house rpg development teams as far as I know, although I could be wrong there I suppose. I wouldn't be surprised that if they decided they wanted to make a push for a mainstream rpg or something that it would come from them.
Rebel Leader
THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
I still haven't punched a kitten.
Maybe. I just wished it wasn't just nintendo and gamestop selling it in the USA.
Maybe. I just wished it wasn't just nintendo and gamestop selling it in the USA.
The Halo shot on the previous page disproved any point that was trying to be made.
I do agree that the graphics is really the wrong thing to be upset about when it comes to Xenoblade. The handling of it by Nintendo of America is. While not the greatest game ever it is still a great game by any standard. If NoA had handled it correctly and actually pushed it in a timely manner it would have done well. There is nothing in this game that suggest otherwise. It's a quality game period. It looks nice period. No "for a Wii game" crap needs to be applied. This is what concerns me about the the Wii U going forward. There is a problem but it's NoA.
DCharlie
And even i am moderately surprised
... except it doesn't.
the second anyone is posting uprez'ed resampled emulated in game shots to , i assume, prove that the "Wii" version of Xenoblade looks "good" then the argument is conceeded.
As i say - EVERY TIME anyone posts a shot as some ill conceived idea that they're shooting down the original point, they're firing in own goal after own goal.
The Halo shot means fuck all and is a clutch at straws to make god knows WHAT fucking point. "Halo actually looks like shit so ..." ? That's a logical cul de sac and even if we accept it as truth it STILL doesn't change Xenoblades 'situation'
+ lots
I've managed to find a method to articulate my issue with "graphics whores" fairly well at this point.
The existence of "Graphics whores" does not, in itself, bother me. Lots of people care about things I do not care about, and that's fine. Further, I care about some silly and superficial things, too, so it would be hypocritical of me to judge others differently.
The problem, instead, is when graphics whores behave as if this is not a silly or superficial preference, and is instead meaningful and important. As an easy to understand example, I would have no problem if my girlfriend happened to enjoy "Sex and the City" as an outlet for vapid, girlish escapism. I really enjoy baseball, so I have my vapid interests as well. However, I would have a problem if she said she loved Sex and the City because of its deep, meaningful portrayal of the human condition.
In other words, I don't mind silly, trivial, or superficial pursuits as long as people acknowledge that they are silly, trivial and superificial. I only mind when people try to insist that these superficial pursuits are instead important, meaningful, and correct. The writer in this article has clearly lost this perspective.
The existence of "Graphics whores" does not, in itself, bother me. Lots of people care about things I do not care about, and that's fine. Further, I care about some silly and superficial things, too, so it would be hypocritical of me to judge others differently.
The problem, instead, is when graphics whores behave as if this is not a silly or superficial preference, and is instead meaningful and important. As an easy to understand example, I would have no problem if my girlfriend happened to enjoy "Sex and the City" as an outlet for vapid, girlish escapism. I really enjoy baseball, so I have my vapid interests as well. However, I would have a problem if she said she loved Sex and the City because of its deep, meaningful portrayal of the human condition.
In other words, I don't mind silly, trivial, or superficial pursuits as long as people acknowledge that they are silly, trivial and superificial. I only mind when people try to insist that these superficial pursuits are instead important, meaningful, and correct. The writer in this article has clearly lost this perspective.
Bjoern the Smexy
Member
I don't know what to say.
I haven't read all of this thread but people seem to either praise Xenoblade's graphics too much or not enough.
In terms of art-style Xenoblade's graphics are fan-fucking-tastic.
On a technical standpoint...well, they're still pretty good, considering this is a Wii game. The areas are HUGE and detailed and HUGE and immense and HUGE and pretty wide and open. Also HUGE.
Not only are they HUGE, they are also extremely beautiful, thanks to the art-style.
Yeah, the character models aren't that pretty, but I don't really care that much because:
- I don't really take a great look at the characters outside of cutscenes
- The areas' beauty makes up for it
I too noticed the low-res textures on characters but I simply didn't care.
What I mean to say is: Xenoblade's beauty isn't depicted in its characters, but in the world it creates. If there weren't the usual problems like the lack of AA and low-res textures, a screenshot of either area could almost be equal to any artwork of it.
Also, aside from all the graphics, this game is this generation's best JRPG, period. I haven't enjoyed a JRPG this much since...maybe FF9, and that was 12 years ago.
The game, although low in the graphics tech department, is still damn beautiful and awesome to play. And it's on the fucking Wii! I consider the graphics and gameplay of this game a fucking accomplishment, not some "The developers were held back by the lack of power" kind of stupid thing.
TL;DR: Xenoblade is pretty damn beautiful. Especially considering it's on the Wii. It's the best JRPG in YEARS. I am done here.
EDIT: Also everything what Opiate said.
I haven't read all of this thread but people seem to either praise Xenoblade's graphics too much or not enough.
In terms of art-style Xenoblade's graphics are fan-fucking-tastic.
On a technical standpoint...well, they're still pretty good, considering this is a Wii game. The areas are HUGE and detailed and HUGE and immense and HUGE and pretty wide and open. Also HUGE.
Not only are they HUGE, they are also extremely beautiful, thanks to the art-style.
Yeah, the character models aren't that pretty, but I don't really care that much because:
- I don't really take a great look at the characters outside of cutscenes
- The areas' beauty makes up for it
I too noticed the low-res textures on characters but I simply didn't care.
What I mean to say is: Xenoblade's beauty isn't depicted in its characters, but in the world it creates. If there weren't the usual problems like the lack of AA and low-res textures, a screenshot of either area could almost be equal to any artwork of it.
Also, aside from all the graphics, this game is this generation's best JRPG, period. I haven't enjoyed a JRPG this much since...maybe FF9, and that was 12 years ago.
The game, although low in the graphics tech department, is still damn beautiful and awesome to play. And it's on the fucking Wii! I consider the graphics and gameplay of this game a fucking accomplishment, not some "The developers were held back by the lack of power" kind of stupid thing.
TL;DR: Xenoblade is pretty damn beautiful. Especially considering it's on the Wii. It's the best JRPG in YEARS. I am done here.
EDIT: Also everything what Opiate said.
But...bu..Samantha...Carrie...
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
The article is 100% accurate IMO. The Nintendo Wii put out some of the ugliest visuals that I've ever seen in a video game. No, this isn't about needing great graphics to enjoy a game BUT it is about Nintendo putting out a piece of hardware that simply wasn't up to part for the games they put on the system. Skyward Sword is one of the most horrifying pieces of Nintendo software that I've ever seen and its simply inexcusable.
nincompoop
Banned
Did you start playing video games in 2006 or something?
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
... I started on the Atari 2600, thank you. My favorite game of all time is Link to the Past. I was simply SHOCKED when I turned on Skyward Sword. The amount of jaggies was simply unforgivable and inexcusable. Now, that is due to the atrocious hardware of the Wii no doubt which is again what is being discussed. Nintendo shouldn't be forgiven for massacring such a game due to their horrible underpowered hardware.
lol it's only 2012 no wonder you're from the future that explains everything
i kid
Was this your first Wii game?
As I've stated multiple times in this thread: if the image quality of the Wii bothers you (and I'm sure it bothers many many people, the author included) load it up in Dolphin. SS is gorgeous at 4x rez:
People have different tolerances - I understand. But this is a bit hyperbolic in my opinion. There is a lot uglier stuff than SS.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Yes, I will be doing that once I get my new PC up and running but even with that being said, loading it up on Dolphin just shows how inexcusable Nintendo was in releasing the Wii hardware as is. In terms of how it benefited Nintendo financially isn't my concern. The Wii was such a disappointment for so many people because the games themselves were so limited and negatively affected by the hardware. Nintendo won financially for the first few years but many people like myself lost. And when I said ugliest software I specifically mentioned Nintendo software.
No. I bought SMG 1, 2, SMB, Metroid, etc. None of those games were as offensive in terms of jaggies, blurriness, sheer embarrassing visuals as SS.
History has shown that the Wii was the right move at the time. You and I may not be pleased with the 480p image (I obviously am not), but as standard console cycles and sales go Nintendo obviously made the right move.
But then I say that as someone who still regularly loads up Space Quest 4 and Sam & Max regularly without issues.
But then I say that as someone who still regularly loads up Space Quest 4 and Sam & Max regularly without issues.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
It was the right move for Nintendo financially for a few years, I agree, but as I said, I am not as concerned with the financial side as the executives of Nintendo are. Also, I'd argue that it also hurt Nintendo in the long run of this generation. They may have sold the most hardware but the life span of the system was shortened in comparison to its competitors due to the limiting hardware.
Also, I still enjoy great games like Myst, Zelda 1, Super Mario Brothers 1-4, Full Throttle, and many indie games that don't compare graphically to the current gen.
The Wii had a normal-length cycle. The other 2 are extending the generation to recoup the massive trail of red ink. It helps that they have industry-wide support, unlike the Wii (which would've given *it* a longer tail).
It wasn't just financially that Nintendo made the Wii what it was. It was a massive risk to do the Wiimote (so they minimized their risk elsewhere) and Nintendo doesn't have non-gaming related revenue to fall back on. There's a method to the madness that was the Wii. At the time of its conception and design (2004) good enough HD penetration wasn't even a gleam in the eye of the mass market. But they have spoken - both in terms of the Wii's massive hardware and software sales, and now with more prevalent HDTV adoption and higher HD content adoption.
TL
R - normal 5 year cycle, was right moveTo me, Skyward Sword was a good game (well I still haven't finished it) regardless of the lower resolution everything and jaggies everywhere before I switched to Dolphin. That made the game more entertaining than, say, Crysis 2 at Ultra w/DX11 Tesselation @ 1080p. To me.
I respectfully disagree. Graphics are an important factor in the immersion in a game and helps draw the player in.
If this wasn't the case, we wouldn't have new hardware every 5+ years.
To be clear, I don't think that graphics will make or break a game, or they are a necessity to enjoy a game. However they most certainly do add to a game.
This isn't even touching on the other options or possibilities that open up do to newer tech.
What is the purpose of immersion? What makes immersion valuable? Because generally the answer given is escapism.
I think, again, that you've simply managed to convince yourself that your preferences are important and meaningful, because most people find it unappealing to admit they can be silly and superficial.
As a deliberately extreme example to clarify the concept, imagine someone who cheats on their significant other, and then rationalizes it in their mind: "She never treated me well, so she got what she deserves!" or "Monogamy isn't natural, you can't blame me!" and so forth. This is a case of someone acting poorly, and then doing mental summersaults to convince themselves that not only was their behavior acceptable, it was actually the correct, appropriate thing to do. The girl deserved to be cheated on.
In this case, we aren't talking about people acting immorally or unethically, just acting on silly, juvenile preferences. And even though that is much better than being explicitly immoral, it's still something people don't like to admit to -- and so people will find rationlizations to explain why superficial preferences are not only okay, but actually good and correct, as you have done here. People will go to great lengths to justify their behaviors and feel like they're deep, complex, and moral people.
And surely we wouldn't have so many McDonald's if it was just junk food. The fact that McDonald's is so popular is proof that it is healthy, beneficial food.
Let me ask you this question: what attribute of a game do you feel is more superficial than the graphics?
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
I agree. We never really needed to move away from Pong. To do so was extremely superficial.
Usually, sound. Fairly commonly, story.
Ghost Dad the Whip
Member
add me to the list of people who think the article's author is a spoiled brat with a poor understanding of what makes a game worthwhile
Absolutely. Go is still a more complex, deep, and mentally demanding game than any game I've played which was released in the last 30 years -- although a few are certainly arguable (e.g. Dwarf Fortress).
But I do think it's fine that we moved forward anyway; again, nothing is inherently wrong with enjoying something superficial, as long as we all recognize that it is, ultimately, superficial. It's fine if you happen to like "Sex in the City" or "All my Children," just as it's fine that I like stupid, childish things like baseball -- everyone can have some juvenile preferences, and we either have to damn everyone or recognize that none of us are perfect. But as soon as you start trying to insist that "All My Children" is a profound work of art, or that Baseball is deep and meaningful because I love it and surely nothing I love could be silly or juvenile, then you get in to trouble.
Neon_Icarus
Member
Yeah. Even in Europe, this game really should have been released in 2010, back when
there still might have been a market for this kind of game on the Wii. NOE would still have
had plenty of unreleased Japanese games to fill their schedules for 2011 and 2012.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
One of the reasons that SS was so unenjoyable for me was due to its shortcomings visually. I couldn't stop staring at the jaggies. I couldn't stop focusing on how everything was so blurry due to the resolution that Nintendo limited the Wii to. For many people, the author of the article included, it takes you out of the game world and makes it almost impossible to focus on anything but the things that stand out like a sore thumb. So yes, graphics for many are incredibly important.
Here is the problem though, for a game like Pong, you didn't have anything to compare it to at the time. It now stands on its own for all time as a game according to its time. I thought Goonies II on the NES looked great when it was released and I still do, partially due to the era it was released. For the Wii version of Skyward Sword, it looks HORRIBLE in comparison to other games released on hardware from the same time frame. Also, it's easier IMO to hide some visual 'boo boo's' with side scrolling and top-down 2d games. From what I have seen of Skyward Sword on Dolphin, it is a lot better and I'd probably find it more enjoyable since my eyes wouldn't immediately dart over to the jaggies and the blurriness. I don't think that is being superficial.
Here is the problem though, for a game like Pong, you didn't have anything to compare it to at the time. It now stands on its own for all time as a game according to its time. I thought Goonies II on the NES looked great when it was released and I still do, partially due to the era it was released. For the Wii version of Skyward Sword, it looks HORRIBLE in comparison to other games released on hardware from the same time frame. Also, it's easier IMO to hide some visual 'boo boo's' with side scrolling and top-down 2d games. From what I have seen of Skyward Sword on Dolphin, it is a lot better and I'd probably find it more enjoyable since my eyes wouldn't immediately dart over to the jaggies and the blurriness. I don't think that is being superficial.
Absolutely! This is one of the reasons I feel its status is arguable. Go's elegant complexity remains one of its strongest selling points, and one of the reasons it remains so overwhelmingly popular today.
I feel UIs designed around human hands prevented them from becoming overly obtuse when reconfigured for a mouse and keyboard or game pad. Go has a very simple set of inputs (and, in fact, precisely three game mechanics which define its ruleset), but manages to outclass virtually every game made today on vastly more powerful hardware.
06nbarnhill
Member
lttp
But does this guy EVER have a none absurdist opinion? Game is amazing and anjoyable on Wii. Just better on Dolphin.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
For me, it was one of the worst experiences I've had with any Nintendo game released. EVER.
hardcastlemccormick
Banned
As I've become more interested in music, especially classical and some branches of ambient techno, I've found that audio formats for digital recordings are a fascinating branch. The problem with learning too much about, say, the MP3 format, is that you begin to understand exactly why the format has limitations. It's an old format. However, it's also extremely widespread. Over time, I began to hear the problems and it bothered me so badly I couldn't even listen to the music anymore.
My ears have become attuned to FLAC and lossless music, but I can still enjoy MP3 files because I more or less unlearned the issues with the format. I still vastly prefer an OGG or an AAC file to MP3 if I have to go lossy (and pretty much anything to WMA, ugh), because my ears aren't used to the flaws. But at the end of the day, it really doesn't matter if the music is good enough. It took me a while to get over that, but hey. I fully realize that I'm in a vast minority.
I'm not sure I agree. I can, right now, imagine games with vastly more complex graphics than games released today. Why doesn't thinking about those make you dislike Uncharted and Crysis? It doesn't seem rational.
This definitely seems true. I also think cartoonish graphics alleviate some concerns, a la Windwaker.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Well, like I've been saying, I don't need a graphical powerhouse to impress me. There are so many indie games that I LOVE! Beat Hazard imo is AMAZING. Same with Super Meat Boy, Rayman Origins, Minecraft, Jamestown, Machinarium, etc. These are games that while they aren't graphical powerhouses, they're artistic powerhouses. The art direction, the creativity, the simplicity in many cases blows me away. Skyward Sword feels like the exact opposite and part of that is due to how horrible it looks on the Wii.
What makes you think graphics and technology are only superficial? The article isn't only complaining that the games aren't pretty enough, but that the artistic vision and new gameplay concepts are being compromised by outdated hardware.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Yep. Windwaker looked AMAZING. Still does. Uncharted 2 due to the use of color, the different environments, it looked amazing on my TV, helped impress me greatly. I was never too impressed with Crysis. Skyward Sword was so lacking any type of AA and due to its resolution it was simply unforgivable for my eyes. I simply couldn't see anything but the jaggies. That wasn't the case with Uncharted 2.
hardcastlemccormick
Banned
That's exactly what I'm talking about. It wasn't the audio content that bothered me. The artistry of a song is still the same whether it's super compressed or not. It was the medium by which the artistry was communicated that was changing the experience for me. It was the audio container. I was letting the container overrule the content.
I'm not saying that you're wrong, I'm just comparing my experience in a different field to what you're saying. When I was avoiding MP3's, I sounded a lot like what you're saying, replace "jaggies" with "compressed drums" and "smaller range." I'm also pointing out that I was capable of moving on for the sake of the music. While I enjoy a direct-CD rip of some awesome music, I'm also no longer avoiding some great mix tapes I've found on the web just because it was encoded using an old MP3 encoder and sounds like crap.
EDIT: I'll throw out that I thought Skyward Sword looked great, but I had just finished off a stack of PS2 games so that might have changed the situation. My TV also upscales pretty well.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Locked