Do you like what you've seen so far from Wii U's visuals?

Calamari41 said:
And they look significantly better, just like the eventual PS4/Bone ports will look significantly better. I'm sorry, I think I'm not understanding your point.
Click to expand...

If all the PS4/X1 ports are 1080p (and some even 60 fps) how do the PC versions look "significantly" better? How many people do you think run at 1600p res at a good frame rate with caked on AA? Very, very small percentage.

That's not even counting the exclusives like The Division and The Order.

The gap just isn't going to be there this gen. The difference from 720p (many times sub 720) vs. 1080p for last gen was massive and very common. 1080p vs. 1600 or 1440p doesn't have nearly the same impact, and the amount of PC gamers that can run at those settings at a high framerate with good AA are so small it's disingenuous to use it as a talking point.
 
Heavy said:
If all the PS4/X1 ports are 1080p (and some even 60 fps) how do the PC versions look "significantly" better? How many people do you think run at 1600p res at a good frame rate with caked on AA? Very, very small percentage.

That's not even counting the exclusives like The Division and The Order.

The gap just isn't going to be there this gen. The difference from 720p (many times sub 720) vs. 1080p for last gen was massive and very common. 1080p vs. 1600 or 1440p doesn't have nearly the same impact, and the amount of PC gamers that can run at those settings at a high framerate with good AA are so small it's disingenuous to use it as a talking point.
Click to expand...

There is a lot more to graphics than the resolution and aliasing. Anyway, are you suggesting that PCs will never surpass the PS4 and XBone? "The gap just isn't going to be there this gen" seems to suggest that this is what you're saying.

Either way, my point isn't that The Division and The Order look like shit. It's that if the graphics in X and Mario Kart are so bad to a person as to make it not worth playing them, then they probably already have a $1,500 PC.
 
RagnarokX said:
This is a continuation of Galaxy. Galaxy started 3D Mario towards more fixed camera angles (although they were present before) and courses made up of floating linear paths with more of an emphasis on platforming. 3D Land took it a step further in the direction of tight platforming, but the platform it was on hindered it greatly. And now we got this:


...which is definitely the best 3D Mario has ever looked. It looks even better in motion at 60fps in HD. And unlike 3D Land, the levels look much bigger and more complex; hell, they're more complex than Galaxy, and you have full camera control:

iPzVLDQEGaeoe.gif
Click to expand...

All I see is a doggy obstacle course in a mushroom kingdom skin.

Nothing in there that stirs my imagination like 64 or Galaxy.
 
Calamari41 said:
There is a lot more to graphics than the resolution and aliasing. Anyway, are you suggesting that PCs will never surpass the PS4 and XBone? "The gap just isn't going to be there this gen" seems to suggest that this is what you're saying.

Either way, my point isn't that The Division and The Order look like shit. It's that if the graphics in X and Mario Kart are so bad to a person as to make it not worth playing them, then they probably already have a $1,500 PC.
Click to expand...

The gap won't be nearly as massive is what I was saying, or implying in that case. And resolution is, imo, the most immediately influential factor on visual fidelity. I skipped out on consoles last gen just because of 720p, it was horrific.
 
SaintMadeOfPlaster said:
So you picked 2 games, the 2 least cared about games on Nintendo's conference. Yes, GAF never shuts up about X, but nobody else in the gaming world is talking about it.

The games that people were frothing at the mouth for (3D Mario, Retro's new game, Smash Bros) were all more of the same.

3D Mario turned out being 4-player 3D Land.

Retro's game ended up being what essentially looks like HD DKCR

Smash Bros looks like they ported Brawl to an HD machine and called it a day.

I'm not saying these games look BAD, just that they look far too similar to their predecessors. You're not an idiot if you're excited for them, but you're an idiot if you can't see why so many people are disappointed.
Click to expand...

chill dude

I was disappointed myself

But What I said about the other 2 applies to the more popular games as well...

Just because sequels look extremely similar to their predecessors doesn't mean there isn't any new gameplay ideas

Did you have the same reaction when SMG2 was shown
Super Mario Galaxy 2 looked EXACTLY like Mario Galaxy and it's gameplay surpassed it!

So dont be too quick to judge a sequel's "new gameplay ideas" based off limited information, a demo and a few screenshots.


H_Prestige said:
All I see is a doggy obstacle course in a mushroom kingdom skin.

Nothing in there that stirs my imagination like 64 or Galaxy.
Click to expand...


It's one level
 
Yeah I think they look great! Mario 3D World, Mario Kart 8, and Bayonetta 2 really stood out for me. Perhaps it's because I've never seen Mario and friends in HD and more detailed before. Infact the Mario games look perfect because of the art style. That can't be said about every single game however.

Visuals will look even better later on when devs can push the hardware to its full potential. Obviously not the same as PS4/Xbone but that's okay. It works for Nintendo.
 
H_Prestige said:
All I see is a doggy obstacle course in a mushroom kingdom skin.

Nothing in there that stirs my imagination like 64 or Galaxy.
Click to expand...

Why is everybody forgetting that 95% of the Galaxy levels were Point A to Point B obstacle courses? Most were significantly more narrow than the levels we've seen so far in 3D World. The big difference was the skin on it, and the fact that you could run under the levels too. What is confusing you is the fact that the camera is pulled back to accommodate four players at once.

Heavy said:
The gap won't be nearly as massive is what I was saying, or implying in that case. And resolution is, imo, the most immediately influential factor on visual fidelity. I skipped out on consoles last gen just because of 720p, it was horrific.
Click to expand...

I disagree on resolution being the immediate factor. It is a big factor, to be sure, but the standouts for me are things like draw distance.

And now that the goalposts have been moved to just talking about the gap not being "nearly as massive," then maybe you can admit after looking at Mario Kart (nearly a year before release) in motion that the gap between that and an XBone game isn't "nearly as massive" to the point where its some kind of travesty?
 
Calamari41 said:
Why is everybody forgetting that 95% of the Galaxy levels were Point A to Point B obstacle courses? Most were significantly more narrow than the levels we've seen so far in 3D World. The big difference was the skin on it, and the fact that you could run under the levels too.



I disagree on resolution being the immediate factor. It is a big factor, to be sure, but the standouts for me are things like draw distance.

And now that the goalposts have been moved to just talking about the gap not being "nearly as massive," then maybe you can admit after looking at Mario Kart (nearly a year before release) in motion that the gap between that and an XBone game isn't "nearly as massive" to the point where its some kind of travesty?
Click to expand...

Versus some of the worst looking Xbone games? Sure.

Draw distance isn't close to as important and impactful as resolution for me.
 
H_Prestige said:
All I see is a doggy obstacle course in a mushroom kingdom skin.

Nothing in there that stirs my imagination like 64 or Galaxy.
Click to expand...

It's strange, but for some reason it doesn't even look as good as galaxy on dolphin.

It just seems so dissapointing all around. Fortunately though, it looks like this isn't a main 3d Mario game I think and they are probably going to show the real thing maybe next year I'm guessing.

Though I'm probably judging a book by its cover, and it should be fun enough with coop. It just wasn't what i was looking for.
 
Calamari41 said:
And now that the goalposts have been moved to just talking about the gap not being "nearly as massive," then maybe you can admit after looking at Mario Kart (nearly a year before release) in motion that the gap between that and an XBone game isn't "nearly as massive" to the point where its some kind of travesty?
Click to expand...

Right, IMO the gap between the WiiU and Xbone/PS4 will be comparable to the gap between the Xbone/PS4 and high-end PCs. I imagine that going 720p/30fps on some titles will help close the effect/geometry-level difference when compared to 1080p/60fps on the next step up (whether that's from WiiU to Xbone/PS4 or from Xbone/PS4 to high-end PC).

I don't think anyone is seriously arguing that the WiiU games that we have seen are as visually good as the Xbone/PS4 games. But, IMO, they are comparable in many respects.
 
Heavy said:
Minecraft running at 1080p and 60 fps doesn't make it look special, either. You've saw the direct feed footage and screenshots of Kart, right?
Click to expand...

You're the one saying again and again that resolution is the holy grail of graphical fidelity, and the reason PC games won't look better than PS4/XBone games. If Mario Kart has the same resolution as an XBone game, then what about Kart makes it a travesty in comparison?
 
Almost every game Nintendo showed off looked excellent visually with Mario Kart 8 being the winner, surprisingly. I was expecting the new main Mario game to be that.
 
Calamari41 said:
You're the one saying again and again that resolution is the holy grail of graphical fidelity, and the reason PC games won't look better than PS4/XBone games. If Mario Kart has the same resolution as an XBone game, then what about Kart makes it a travesty in comparison?
Click to expand...

This is being deliberately obtuse. Minecraft @ 60 and 1080p isn't next-gen. You know what I meant. The assets obviously have to be next-gen as well, that's implied.
 
Heavy said:
This is being deliberately obtuse. Minecraft @ 60 and 1080p isn't next-gen. You know what I meant. The assets obviously have to be next-gen as well, that's implied.
Click to expand...

I actively said this earlier and you actively rebuffed me.

My point isn't that Wii U games will look like PS4 games. My point is that PS4 games will look worse than PC games. That's it. When I said that, you said that it wasn't the case because the resolutions would be the same. I said there is more to graphical fidelity than resolution, and you said resolution is king.

You prove my point with the Minecraft example. Sharper blocks aren't as impressive as being able to see detail all the way to the horizon.

If what we've seen of Mario Kart 8 and X are the absolute ceiling of what Wii U is capable of, I will be happy. And it should be clear that they are not the ceiling.
 
Not really understanding why Heavy is getting so defensive. I don't think anyone is saying Wii U first-party is the graphical equivalent of all PS4 games. What we're saying is these first-party games look noticeably better than PS3/Xbox 360, and indistinguishable from some Xbone/PS4 games we saw. Not the best-looking PS4 games, mind you.
 
Calamari41 said:
I actively said this earlier and you actively rebuffed me.

My point isn't that Wii U games will look like PS4 games. My point is that PS4 games will look worse than PC games. That's it. When I said that, you said that it wasn't the case because the resolutions would be the same. I said there is more to graphical fidelity than resolution, and you said resolution is king.

You prove my point with the Minecraft example. Sharper blocks aren't as impressive as being able to see detail all the way to the horizon.

If what we've seen of Mario Kart 8 and X are the absolute ceiling of what Wii U is capable of, I will be happy. And it should be clear that they are not the ceiling.
Click to expand...

You said "significantly better", which I disagreed with because I don't believe the gap will be as big this time around since these consoles are now hitting 1080p native and have full DX11+ functionality with all the bells & whistles, and massive amounts of RAM. I'm not arguing they won't look better... just the fact that you can take PC games up to 1600/1440p resolutions makes that an inarguable fact.

Nightstick11 said:
Not really understanding why Heavy is getting so defensive. I don't think anyone is saying Wii U first-party is the graphical equivalent of all PS4 games. What we're saying is these first-party games look noticeably better than PS3/Xbox 360, and indistinguishable from some Xbone/PS4 games we saw. Not the best-looking PS4 games, mind you.
Click to expand...
That's not what you said earlier in this thread (or another one, I forget, but it was a ridiculous post that people laughed at). Even so, only X can compare to the lower end next-gen games. That's one game.
 
Heavy said:
You said "significantly better", which I disagreed with because I don't believe the gap will be as big this time around since these consoles are now hitting 1080p native and have full DX11+ functionality with all the bells & whistles, and massive amounts of RAM. I'm not arguing they won't look better... just the fact that you can take PC games up to 1600/1440p resolutions makes that an inarguable fact.
Click to expand...

We'll just have to check back and see if PC games are significantly outperforming XBone games in 3/4 years, I guess. History leads me to believe that they will.

And you keep ignoring my point. This whole time, all I've been trying to say is that if you (not you specifically, you seem to think that I was calling you out but I was speaking generally) look at Kart and X and are disgusted, then PC is where you belong.
 
Heavy said:
That's not what you said earlier in this thread (or another one, I forget, but it was a ridiculous post that people laughed at). Even so, only X can compare to the lower end next-gen games. That's one game.
Click to expand...

That's almost word-for-word what I said earlier... and you would note that many people expressed similar sentiments as well, so not really understanding where your mischaracterization of the the reaction is coming from. And yes, it can only compare to the lower end PS4 games. That's what I've been saying all along
 
Mario Kart 8 finally has a 'grown-up' environment lighting model. Thank goodness. It's the best lighting I've seen on Wii U yet (and yes, I'm aware of Zombiu). High res self and ground shadows.

Nintendo game artstyles aren't really comparable to any other game I can recall on other platforms. It's their biggest advantage. Graphics kind of don't matter.

I will say though that stills aren't very flattering for the Wii U games, and makes them look far closer to this gen with the lowres muddled textures and models and whatnot. A lot of games unfortunately do have very shitty lighting. It makes me wonder what Nintendo is really struggling with if only one of their titles has anything that screams Current Gen.
 
Magic Ovaries said:
MK8 and X show Wii U can compete with the new hardware.
Click to expand...

I would personally add Donkey Kong and Bayonetta 2 to that list too. Those 4 games definitely look 'next gen'...a real shame about 3D Mario though. It certainly doesn't have the same 'Wow' factor that Super Mario Galaxy had last gen. I was expecting more for 3D Mario and less for Mario Kart 8. Mario Kart 8 looks amazing.
 
Calamari41 said:
We'll just have to check back and see if PC games are significantly outperforming XBone games in 3/4 years, I guess. History leads me to believe that they will.

And you keep ignoring my point. This whole time, all I've been trying to say is that if you (not you specifically, you seem to think that I was calling you out but I was speaking generally) look at Kart and X and are disgusted, then PC is where you belong.
Click to expand...
I'm not at all disgusted by them. I've said numerous times they look great for Wii U's hardware.

Nightstick11 said:
That's almost word-for-word what I said earlier... and you would note that many people expressed similar sentiments as well, so not really understanding where your mischaracterization of the the reaction is coming from. And yes, it can only compare to the lower end PS4 games. That's what I've been saying all along
Click to expand...

Right here dude:
Nightstick11 said:
X looked better than any Xbone game I saw and better than almost every PS4 game
Click to expand...
 
H_Prestige said:
Uh, the whole game is like that. That's the concept. It's a 3D twist on 2D Mario. Complete the course before the time runs out. That's it. There's no adventure elements here.
Click to expand...

I wasn't refering to the concept of the entire game. Just the fact that this one level isnt representative of the entire games potential creativity in level design.
 
Two of my good friends (also members on this forum) claim that X and MK8 even have better graphics than anything shown on E3 (including XBONE & PS4).

Anybody agrees?
 
Al13n said:
Two of my good friends (also members on this forum) claim that X and MK8 even have better graphics than anything shown on E3 (including XBONE & PS4).

Anybody agrees?
Click to expand...

I could imagine someone who strongly prefers a cartoony artstyle or is super-hyped about X's setting saying this without being crazy, but there were definitely titles on the ps4 and xbone that clearly outclassed them.
 
Al13n said:
Two of my good friends (also members on this forum) claim that X and MK8 even have better graphics than anything shown on E3 (including XBONE & PS4).

Anybody agrees?
Click to expand...

I don't care about X (jrpg trash) but I think MK8 is the most visually impressive game of e3 outside parts of FFXV.
 
Mario Kart looks phenomenal.

Everything else just as (optimisticly) expected. If the games run in 60fps, I could not ask for more.
 
H_Prestige said:
I don't care about X (jrpg trash) but I think MK8 is the most visually impressive game of e3 outside parts of FFXV.
Click to expand...
How can someone honestly make a statement like this? How impressive games are technically isn't even an opinion, it's a fact, so it's not like he can resort to the "it's just my opinion!" excuse. I'm reading that and am just dumbfounded at how someone could think that based on what we've seen of Mario Kart and what we've seen on the other two consoles.
 
Something about the shading/lighting in MK8 and M3DW blew my mind. They looked great, as I knew they would, but they even surpassed my expectations. I was never worried about the Wii U's visual fidelity but I was never under the impression that lower spec numbers than other consoles meant that the graphics wouldn't be as good as they need to be.
 
I think the excitement over the Wii U's graphics is based on the fact that the games look so good, it doesn't even matter if there are technically better looking games out there. For me, when I look at Mario Kart or DKC, all I can think is "why would this even need to look better than this?"
 
As expected this is the true WiiU power on show, which looks to be about 1.25x a PS3.

The games that actually look nice, Mario Kart and X, will be launching seemingly half a year after the Xbox One and PS4 change the playing field again though. Forever a gen behind.
 
Calamari41 said:
Those look great, especially for a game with almost a year left in the oven. Do you have any more?
Click to expand...

I just found them from earlier in the thread.

They look great for Wii U's hardware indeed. The claims people are making about it being the most impressive game at E3 are just insane, though. Completely delusional.
 
Heavy said:
I just found them from earlier in the thread.

They look great for Wii U's hardware indeed. The claims people are making about it being the most impressive game at E3 are just insane, though. Completely delusional.
Click to expand...

It should be noted that the game looks significantly better than that in motion. I'm judging that based on what I saw streaming off of my Wii U last night, which I would assume is official as well as it comes directly from Nintendo.
 
H_Prestige said:
Uh, the whole game is like that. That's the concept. It's a 3D twist on 2D Mario. Complete the course before the time runs out. That's it. There's no adventure elements here.
Click to expand...

How in the world do you know this? Do you have early access to the game or something. Nintendo never shows off the whole game before its release. We don't know anything about the game outside of what was shown.
 
As long as a game has a solid framerate and pleases my eyes, I couldn't care less about how "great" it looks. To me Pikmin 3 is one of the best looking games at E3 just because it pleases my eyes so much.
 
Blades64 said:
How in the world do you know this? Do you have early access to the game or something. Nintendo never shows off the whole game before its release. We don't know anything about the game outside of what was shown.
Click to expand...

We can speculate a lot just by the similarities to 3D Land.
 
Heavy said:
How can someone honestly make a statement like this? How impressive games are technically isn't even an opinion, it's a fact, so it's not like he can resort to the "it's just my opinion!" excuse. I'm reading that and am just dumbfounded at how someone could think that based on what we've seen of Mario Kart and what we've seen on the other two consoles.
Click to expand...

He didn't say technically impressive. Many people have no desire to separate artistic choices from techincal achievement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Why do Low Budget Indie Developers Market so Far Out?
9
256
Durin replied
  • Poll
What do you think about Metcacritic?
2
72
239
PlayStaytion replied
Ugliest character you've seen in a game?
2 3 4
198
15K
mdkirby replied
What Does Gaming in the Rest of 2025 Look Like for You?
2 3
116
276
NeonDelta replied
What dead game do you miss?
2 3
123
686
ClanOfNone replied
Top Bottom