Support NeoGAF

[iamaustrian]

I for one, think that these games look absolutely amazing coming from a mere 33Watt "underpowered" system.

this

I was really disappointed by pretty much all xbone and PS4 games (graphic wise) after seeing MK8 and especially "X". seriously, X made my jaw drop. the lightning on the mechs, the huge mega-detailed enviroment, everything.

some Xbone4 games might look "better" but certainly not 5-8x times better.

 

[DaSorcerer7]

this

I was really disappointed by pretty much all xbone and PS4 games (graphic wise) after seeing MK8 and especially "X". seriously, X made my jaw drop. the lightning on the mechs, the huge mega-detailed enviroment, everything.

some Xbone4 games might look "better" but certainly not 5-8x times better.

Gorgeous

 

[Espada]

Overall? Definitely. Sure there were some disappointing ones like Tropical Freeze, but MK8 and X were just... wow. It helps that I like the aesthetics of the games in question so I'm sure that's affecting my perception of the graphics.

some Xbone4 games might look "better" but certainly not 5-8x times better.

A large chunk of the games are either rushed launch titles (the weakest of a new generation) or cross gen ports. Both of which are being done on non-finalized hardware. It's a little premature to say the PS4/Xbox One aren't running circles around the Wii U.

 

[RobFox64tm]

some Xbone4 games might look "better" but certainly not 5-8x times better.

This. There really shouldn't be an argument about which is technically superior (the specs speak for themselves), but instead whether those improvements make a big difference or not. The leap certainly isn't large enough to convince the general consumer to choose one over the other based on that alone.

 

[EvaristeG]

They look good enough for Nintendo game artstyles. But I think the difference with XB1/PS4 will show with third party games 2/3 years from now.

 

[freezamite]

Nice posts history, just Nintendo topics.

Ok, if i dont know anything about tech, please enlighten us how lighting in new Mario is different to Galaxy. Or how tech is different in new game, how particles are different in new game, how geometry is more dense etc. I'm listening.

Look, if you're unable to see that the only object that casts a proper shadow on galaxy is Mario while in 3D World everything does (from enemies to the whole scenario) then I think that you've proved yourself pretty incapable to speak about technical feats.
You can't see even what's pretty obvious, and you want me to go into details? Come on!

I don't consider it downplaying at all.

LOL If saying that Super Mario 3D world has the same lighting than Galaxy on the Wii is not downplaying something, you tell me what it is.
Well, in fact, the difference between 3D World and Galaxy is big enough to consider your positions as simply trolling instead of only downplaying it.

Because art is subjective and i cant compare subjective.

You can't even see that in Galaxy there is only one real time shadow being cast at any time, so while I agree that art is subjective, it's pretty obvious that you can't speak about objective facts either.

 

[Shin Johnpv]

A large chunk of the games are either rushed launch titles (the weakest of a new generation) or cross gen ports. Both of which are being done on non-finalized hardware. It's a little premature to say the PS4/Xbox One aren't running circles around the Wii U.

He's just doing what 75% of this board did with Wii U launch titles.

 

[MilesVor]

He's just doing what 75% of this board did with Wii U launch titles.

Yeah. Let's not forget as well that the current games announced aren't really "2nd gen wii u games", they're the first gen. Either delayed, a dev studio's first try on the wii , or built for the Wii U from the ground up for the first time.

Just like XBO and PS4 games will look better in the future, so will the Wii U games.

 

[Seance]

I'd say the only Xbox One game that looked as good as what Nintendo showed was Metal Gear 5, that shit looked amazing.

Other than that, tears left my eyes as I watched the Nintendo Direct and I literally said, "This is Next-Gen..."

.

 

[Barack Lesnar]

LOL If saying that Super Mario 3D world has the same lighting than Galaxy on the Wii is not downplaying something, you tell me what it is.
Well, in fact, the difference between 3D World and Galaxy is big enough to consider your positions as simply trolling instead of only downplaying it.

Why are you attributing that quote to me? I've never said anything about Galaxy and 3D World. You have the wrong person.

 

[Can Crusher]

I'm pretty baffled by some of the impressions. Wii U games really don't come close, and saying Mario kart 8 and X looked better just sounds ludicrous.

 

[bequietdrive]

Personally don't get the fuss about bayoneta 2,looks crisper than the first but not mind blowing. X and especially mario kart do look incredible though,not as great as the new kill zone etc obviously but definitely a generation ahead of ps360.

 

[Arc Christelle]

I lol'd at everyone's responses to my earlier statement.

Are there any screenshots or anything of the new Rainbow Six? I've been wanting to see what that's gonna look like visually, I got high expectations.

 

[Barack Lesnar]

Personally don't get the fuss about bayoneta 2,looks crisper than the first but not mind blowing. X and especially mario kart do look incredible though,not as great as the new kill zone etc obviously but definitely a generation ahead of ps360.

You think Mario Kart and X look a generation ahead of PS360 games? Have you seen the direct feed footage and screens of Kart or just that off-screen 6-feet away video that makes-it-look-CG-because-that's-what-off-screen-does posted on the first page.

 

[jmls1121]

You think Mario Kart and X look a generation ahead of PS360 games? Have you seen the direct feed footage and screens of Kart or just that off-screen 6-feet away video that makes-it-look-CG-because-that's-what-off-screen-does posted on the first page.

They both look a good step ahead of PS/360. Those proclaiming that Wii U is equal or even worse than the HD Twins should be eating crow.

Also, don't forget that kart is running at 1080p 60fps, EVEN when in two player mode.

 

[lunchwithyuzo]

720p 60fps and because its 60fps its inferior technologically to maintain it. Thats the point. Its nothing wrong with 60fps and decreased fidelity of course, its not technically impressive as current gen games and still is 60fps.

And there is some game called Wipeout HD that is 1080p and 60fps on PS3 and was released in 2008.

Wipeout HD is gorgeous for sure, but it's geometry, lighting and shading is significantly below what MK8's putting out.

The best PS360 comparisons really are Sumo's Sonic Racing games, which are both sub-720p and 30fps. MK8 maintains 60fps in 2 player splitscreen btw.

 

[joesiv]

Wipeout HD is gorgeous for sure, but it's geometry, lighting and shading is significantly below what MK8's putting out.

The best PS360 comparisons really are Sumo's Sonic Racing games, which are both sub-720p and 30fps. MK8 maintains 60fps in 2 player splitscreen btw.

It's not really a PS360 comparison though, since it also runs like that on the Wii U.

 

[mijkil]

Its threads like this that make the Nintendo "enthusiasts" on this board look like a bunch of lunatics.

 

[M°°nblade]

They both look a good step ahead of PS/360. Those proclaiming that Wii U is equal or even worse than the HD Twins should be eating crow.

Also, don't forget that kart is running at 1080p 60fps, EVEN when in two player mode.

Where did you get the info that mario kart is 1080p? All the official screens are 720p with a minimal (or no?) amount of AA.
Neither do the assets look anywhere above current-gen.
You can count the polygons on the cars and the tires and the ground and environment textures look washed. Overall, for a current-gen game, the game looks great though. The same can be said about X.

 

[Buzzati]

It looks good enough. Ya know?

 

[Twenty7KVN]

Its threads like this that make the Nintendo "enthusiasts" on this board look like a bunch of lunatics.

Same could be said about the haters too.

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

I'd say the only Xbox One game that looked as good as what Nintendo showed was Metal Gear 5, that shit looked amazing.

Other than that, tears left my eyes as I watched the Nintendo Direct and I literally said, "This is Next-Gen..."

 

[muu]

this

I was really disappointed by pretty much all xbone and PS4 games (graphic wise) after seeing MK8 and especially "X". seriously, X made my jaw drop. the lightning on the mechs, the huge mega-detailed enviroment, everything.

some Xbone4 games might look "better" but certainly not 5-8x times better.

Just goes to show what we learned from games like Xenoblade and uncharted last gen: it's not the raw horsepower (the ps3 was a joke compared to pc specs within a few years of its release), but the art direction and how they decide to work the assets within the confines of the tech that determines how good something looks. Watch dogs looked amazing when we saw it last year, but I attributed that to 1) explosions and 2) rain effects. Sure enough they show another rainy day scene, because later on during their demo things didn't look nearly as pretty or immersive as that first glimpse.

 

[Barack Lesnar]

Where did you get the info that mario kart is 1080p? All the official screens are 720p with a minimal (or no?) amount of AA.
Neither do the assets look anywhere above current-gen.
You can count the polygons on the cars and the tires and the ground and environment textures look washed. Overall, for a current-gen game, the game looks great though. The same can be said about X.

This is 100% accurate, the assets are current-gen.

There's one thing that sticks out to me that makes the game look great and that's the lighting. It has that Nintendoland type of lighting on the characters. But the assets? What Moonblade said.

 

[lunchwithyuzo]

It's not really a PS360 comparison though, since it also runs like that on the Wii U.

The sequel was ported to Wii U, but PS3 was the lead platform. For both games in fact.

 

[KageMaru]

Games look great. I think it's foolish for some here to say the system can come close to the PS4 and XBone, that's hardly the case when just looking at launch titles.

I'm still shocked that post was real...

 

[Caesnd]

X was the best looking game at E3.

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

X was the best looking game at E3.

Your in the overwhelming minority if we are talking about from a graphical perspective.

 

[Padawan of Windu]

The games look phenomenal. I couldn't be happier.

 

[NotLiquid]

X was the best looking game at E3.

From the art direction perspective I thought it looked the most interesting certainly.

 

[Amneisac]

I don't even understand why these arguments persist. Nintendo fans shouldn't care about having the highest fidelity graphical experience. I'm completely satisfied with the Wii U visuals on upcoming games. No one can match Nintendo's art style and finally with Wii U we have a system that can display at HD resolutions with a good frame rate.

To me, the Wii really was a graphical disappointment. Playing games at 480p was a constant downer, games looks BAD that really could have been so visually impressive (Last Story / Xenoblade, etc.). Now we have a system that will be floating somewhere a little bit above 360 and PS3, but that's GOOD ENOUGH.

There is a sensible middle ground of people who love the art style and are satisfied with the upcoming Wii U games' technical performance for what it is. Obviously the PS4 and Xbone games look better, but you'll never get to play Zelda or Mario Kart on those systems, so what we're left with is completely satisfactory.

Likewise, these people who are either trolling or willfully ignorant comparing MK8 and these other games to 360/PS3 launch titles are not being sensible.

 

[Arc Christelle]

While everyone else is talking about graphics, you make a point about a SNES game still having good gameplay. Do you not see how that doesn't fit? 300x300 sprites can't be compared to a 480p 3D game.

What SNES game??

 

[Caesnd]

From the art direction perspective I thought it looked the most interesting certainly.

I don't feel that there's a need to make a distinction between art direction and graphical fidelity.

 

[Saint Gregory]

I'm pretty baffled by some of the impressions. Wii U games really don't come close, and saying Mario kart 8 and X looked better just sounds ludicrous.

Its threads like this that make the Nintendo "enthusiasts" on this board look like a bunch of lunatics.

People see what they want to see and it always cuts both ways. If you would like an example just see last years "PS360 games look worse than PS360 games" thread when it turned out that all the footage from the Wii U 3rd party montage were really from the other versions.

 

[Meelow]

People see what they want to see and it always cuts both ways. If you would like an example just see last years "PS360 games look worse than PS360 games" thread when it turned out that all the footage from the Wii U 3rd party montage were really from the other versions.

That was so funny.

I still remember the "LOL, Wii U is so weak, these graphics look terrible and PS3/360 look way better".

 

[defferoo]

WiiU games look good. but some ps4/xbox one games had me wondering if they were CG or in-game footage. games like the division or mgs5 blew my mind in terms of the graphical fidelity that had been achieved.

 

[ThoughtsOfSpeaking]

I think the games are sufficent for nintendos style but nothing mindblowing. I am happy that they are not compromising on framerate though. This is why i will buy a wiiU.


And as i pointed out in the bayonetta thread, while textures are clearly improved from current gen, ememy counts have gone down. Nintendo games look like there is less to interact with than many current gen games.

 

[muu]

Your in the overwhelming minority if we are talking about from a graphical perspective.

So what looked better, and in what ways? Please, tell me.

There's a graphical ceiling when you try to make games "realistic," and I think it's starting to show: games looked impressive, but even the Xbone/PS4 games are having to rely on impressive scenes or backdrop to really catch an eye. BF4 had the obligatory destructible environment (scripted) and then a huge expansive backdrop; AC4 (or was it Pirates!, I forgot) had ships blowing up and water efffects; Ryse had ships blowing up and water effects (oh wait, did I mix those two up?). Titanfall had impressive robots, except the FPS part was corridor shooting and the mech part was Hawken. X had mechas, weird giant Named creatures and a huge expansive environment that shat on Gaul plains.

If you merely look from a tech perspective... sure, X probably loses. If you're looking at the promo reels themselves and not scrutinizing every screenshot, every scene things start to feel more similar. Then you weigh in what you enjoyed the most: I'm growing weary of BroShooters, AC never did it for me, I could give two shits about Rome. Successor to Xenoblade and a possible link to early episodes of Xenogears? Holy shit, sign me up!

Emotions and such directly affect how you view things, how you taste, whether a piece of music is good, etc. Xenoblade was such a good experience for many people that, looking at it we automatically shit our pants in excitement. As far as graphics for GAMES go this is perfectly fine, because we get the games to play them. The music by ACE might not be all that fucking spectacular, but it gets exponentially better as a result of the gestalt of music, world view and the greatness of the game. If all I wanted to do was marvel at graphics I can play on my PC.

 

[Oppo]

Wipeout HD is gorgeous for sure, but it's geometry, lighting and shading is significantly below what MK8's putting out.

Not... even.... remotely... close. Wipeout is 1080p/60 FPS and just flat out looks better.

Seriously, you guys. What is up with this nonsense. Is this the old "artstyle" fallback?

I think the new MK looks really nice but c'mon, be real.

 

[KageMaru]

I don't even understand why these arguments persist. Nintendo fans shouldn't care about having the highest fidelity graphical experience. I'm completely satisfied with the Wii U visuals on upcoming games. No one can match Nintendo's art style and finally with Wii U we have a system that can display at HD resolutions with a good frame rate.

To me, the Wii really was a graphical disappointment. Playing games at 480p was a constant downer, games looks BAD that really could have been so visually impressive (Last Story / Xenoblade, etc.). Now we have a system that will be floating somewhere a little bit above 360 and PS3, but that's GOOD ENOUGH.

There is a sensible middle ground of people who love the art style and are satisfied with the upcoming Wii U games' technical performance for what it is. Obviously the PS4 and Xbone games look better, but you'll never get to play Zelda or Mario Kart on those systems, so what we're left with is completely satisfactory.

Likewise, these people who are either trolling or willfully ignorant comparing MK8 and these other games to 360/PS3 launch titles are not being sensible.

Very good post.

I don't feel that there's a need to make a distinction between art direction and graphical fidelity.

You may not feel there's a need, but there is a difference between the two. Art is generally subjective where graphical fidelity is not.

As it was mentioned before, the lighting is nice many of these games, but the geometry and assets are closer to current than next gen.

Edit:

Not... even.... remotely... close. Wipeout is 1080p/60 FPS and just flat out looks better.

Seriously, you guys. What is up with this nonsense. Is this the old "artstyle" fallback?

I think the new MK looks really nice but c'mon, be real.

To be fair, art direction does contribute the most to a game's graphical make-up.

 

[lunchwithyuzo]

Not... even.... remotely... close. Wipeout is 1080p/60 FPS and just flat out looks better.

Seriously, you guys. What is up with this nonsense. Is this the old "artstyle" fallback?

I think the new MK looks really nice but c'mon, be real.

Artstyle is exactly why Wipeout looks so good and why it can afford a performance advantage / asset sacrifice over pretty much every other combat racer out there. MK8 really does blow it away for assets/shading though, no contest.

 

[Linkhero1]

Not going to lie. I think it could be better, but I don't mind. I love how X and W101 look, but especially W101.

 

[metalslimer]

Not... even.... remotely... close. Wipeout is 1080p/60 FPS and just flat out looks better.

Seriously, you guys. What is up with this nonsense. Is this the old "artstyle" fallback?

I think the new MK looks really nice but c'mon, be real.

What wipeout did you play?

 

[evangd007]

I see a PS2-OG Xbox gap between the Wii U and PS4/Xbone.

I'm also frustrated that I can't the OG Xbox the Xbox 1 anymore.

Oh, and X looks noticeably better than anything on Xbox360 and PS3. I may have seen textures, draw distance, and animations as good as those on the PS360, but never all 3 at the same time. Add the lighting and it's clearly a class above.

 

[rockmanjoe]

Love them. It's HD with COLORS!

 

[Mr Swine]

Not... even.... remotely... close. Wipeout is 1080p/60 FPS and just flat out looks better.

Seriously, you guys. What is up with this nonsense. Is this the old "artstyle" fallback?

I think the new MK looks really nice but c'mon, be real.

Doesn't Wipeout change resolution to 720p as soon there is lots to render on the screen? You can't really say that it's better than Mario Kart 8?

 

[lunchwithyuzo]

Doesn't Wipeout change resolution to 720p as soon there is lots to render on the screen? You can't really say that it's better than Mario Kart 8?

Yeah, Wipeout is dynamic resolution but still above 720p (it's 1280 x 1080 minimum). Nintendo always favors stability and consistency, which is why you'll only see 720p or 1080p locked from them most likely.

Wipeout HD has no AA either iirc.

 

[Xun]

I don't think Super Mario 3D World is getting enough credit for its visuals.

It's subtly beautiful, even if I would've much preferred a "proper" 3D Mario.

 

[lunchwithyuzo]

I don't think Super Mario 3D World is getting enough credit for its visuals.

It's subtly beautiful, even if I would've much preferred a "proper" 3D Mario.

It has great assets and a really nice dof effect. I think the issue everyone really takes with it is the scope and perspective.

Isn't it 60fps too?

 

[Toparaman]

It took a while to grow on me, but I like what I'm seeing now. Seen in motion, the graphics for MK 8 and Smash Bros U look like what we used to only see in the pre-rendered intros to previous games in those series. And while I thought 3D World looked no better than Galaxy initially, I now see a significant improvement:

This looks like it could be from a Mario CG animated movie.

Plus, many titles are aiming for 1080p, which we barely got at all with PS3/X360.

Not... even.... remotely... close. Wipeout is 1080p/60 FPS and just flat out looks better.

Seriously, you guys. What is up with this nonsense. Is this the old "artstyle" fallback?

I think the new MK looks really nice but c'mon, be real.

What? Wipeout HD does not look better than MK 8. Technically, I mean. It has much less stuff being rendered, that's for sure.