DreadPirateRoberts
Member
I'd like all of the games to run at 1080p, and the ground to not be so flat, but other than that, yeah.
Are you satisfied with the graphics NIntendo has been able to produce on Wii U?
- Thread starter metalslimer
- Start date
SuperEpicGuy
Banned
Well there's only so much you can do with the limited hardware power but it has been used effectively from what I can see so far.
Portugeezer
Member
If this doesn't satisfy you then...
I suppose that is to show off the water? In which case we have been satisfied for 7 years now.
It's good that Nintendo caught up on hardware last year, but now not so much. It's nice for what it is though, we have to give them that.
Vulcano's assistant
Banned
Except for the AA madness, this is close to my case. I am more often wowed when I don't expect a game to surprise me.
The only thing that wows me more than a nintendo game looking better than I expected is seeing a game like Skyrim looking great after small changes like a single ENB mod that is less than a megabyte.
Is this like 100% confirmed? I kind of remember reading Reggie's statement as being kind of vague.
Boy Wander
Member
More than satisfied. Wii U seems to be plenty powerful enough for the types of games/artstyle that Nintendo puts out. And for those who say its still overpriced, I'd rather pay 250 quid for a box that plays Wii Us current selection of games than 350 for PS4s.
OG_Original Gamer
Member
Cool thanks!
Mango The Magician
Banned
Yes, I am. 3D World looks absolutely amazing. Can't wait to see Zelda.
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
Is Mario 60fps?
soulassssns
Banned
Yes and worth every dime I paid for it.
PotionBleue
Member
New Super Mario Bros. U, New Super Luigi U and Super Mario 3D World are 720p/60fps.
Unfortunately it is only confirmed that Reggie is going to be there. We know nothing about new games announcements.
This. I can play Nintendo games on my HDTV! It's a beautiful sight.
They do need to reach that 249 "magic" price point quickly.
Always-honest
Banned
Yep.
I'd would have liked it to have more power. Especially for better anti aliassing, But yes. most first party games look clean and with AWESOME artdirection.
I just worry a game like Zelda might have too much consessions in the iq or graphics.
I'd would have liked it to have more power. Especially for better anti aliassing, But yes. most first party games look clean and with AWESOME artdirection.
I just worry a game like Zelda might have too much consessions in the iq or graphics.
foxuzamaki
Doesn't read OPs, especially not his own
Where are the X gifs
Unfortunately it is only confirmed that Reggie is going to be there. We know nothing about new games announcements.
Gosh darn it, people getting my hopes up ._.
While this is true, it's all the other games I'm not satisfied with. Any game that doesn't use Nintendo's brand of art style is going to suffer for it and there is no getting around it.
I've been saying this all along. Whoever decided to eliminate the lower tier system and then act like the system is now cheaper dropped the ball. The cost of entry is still the same and it's still too high for what's in the box.
PlumCantaloupe
Member
Yes, but to give a definite yes I need to see Metroid Prime U with online multiplayer (I hope!) before I could be completely sure. A realistic style built for the ground up for Wii U by developers that care (read: first-party) would help seal it.
They'll reach it quite quickly after they analyze holiday sales. I still don't understand how they can claim that they're not making money on the hardware at $299, unless they have the most inefficient supply chain possible. It has about one-third the number of transistors as a PS4, which itself only costs around $380 per unit.
brandonh83
Banned
I think, hopefully, people are being sarcastic about the water in Mario, but it looks gorgeous when playing the game.
The ps4 is being sold for a not insignificant loss. You can't just look at silicon when dealing with costing, especially with potentially inaccurate "estimates". Consider that the Wii was making Nintendo 6 bucks/unit profit at its at launch according to an old forbes article. At 250.
$60
Natureboy99
Banned
I think the main people that are satisfied are ones who never owned a PS3 and 360. I own a WiiU. Games have nice textures and effects, but the worlds are simplistic and gamey. I expected a lot more from Pikmin besides water effects and textures.
Ironically the shot in the OP perfectly illustrates my point. Nice textures and fire effect, and a simple, flat, and boring world. Tearaway looks 10 times more interesting than that. I'll play Mario, but definitely not for the graphics.
Ironically the shot in the OP perfectly illustrates my point. Nice textures and fire effect, and a simple, flat, and boring world. Tearaway looks 10 times more interesting than that. I'll play Mario, but definitely not for the graphics.
If this doesn't satisfy you then...
Seriously? that water is crap, it's a very small tile repeated over and over and over... it reminds me of the Starfox Adventure one.
You could have chosen way better picture to show off something from SM3DL.
If you want to take that statement literally, you also have to include the yearly subscription cost in that figure along with a game
Vampirolol
Member
Water in Mario 3D World sucks, I can see the pattern, it's a square collage. But the game overall looks stunning
Spieler Eins
Member
lol no. Was expecting Sonic Generations level (which blew my mind, it was like playing claymation versions of the Megadrive games) with a more stable framerate. Now even the WiiU Sonic game looks like a generation behind that one, what a joke.
Mario Kart and Xeno are the only titles so far on the horizon that meet the minimum expectations I had for Nintendo games in HD, but god knows when those come out. WW has a decent basis, hopefully the U Zelda builds upon that one well.
Mario Kart and Xeno are the only titles so far on the horizon that meet the minimum expectations I had for Nintendo games in HD, but god knows when those come out. WW has a decent basis, hopefully the U Zelda builds upon that one well.
Always-honest
Banned
I still kinda think some games i played were a step up from 360 and PS3. Not multilpats though.
Maybe because of economic use of assets.. Dunno? SMW3D is a step up imo. A small step up, yes.
TheFLYINGManga_Ka
Member
Yes. Mario World is beautiful.
Baron von Loathsome
Member
I only have Nintendo Land, Wonderful 101, and Mario 3D World. They all look fantastic (Wonderful 101 less so, but due to deliberate aesthetic decisions).
Except the PS4 is NOT being sold at a loss. It's being sold at a $19 gross profit in the US (before factoring in overhead, marketing, etc. which aren't really applicable because they don't really correspond with the number of units sold). Source: http://press.ihs.com/press-release/design-supply-chain-media/sony-nears-breakeven-point-playstation-4-hardware-costs
Industry analysts peg the BoM for the Wii U at around $180, which stands to reason given the modest hardware inside, and the fact that the touchscreen technology in the gamepad is ancient and almost certainly was chosen for its cheapness. I don't think anyone believes Nintendo's supply-chain is as well-managed as Apple's, but it's hard to imagine a scenario where they're overpaying for components and manufacturing to such a degree that they're losing money on each unit sold.
I think Nintendo's quotes about losing money on each Wii U unit sold are amortizing the entire R&D cost for the system across the relatively small number of units sold, which isn't really a proper analysis unless it projects the number of units sold over the lifetime of the product.
And the estimates for these devices are normally right around dead on -- Apple's gross margins are pretty much exactly what would be expected from IHS's analysis.
1) the estimates are wrong
2) Nintendo indicated that it was a per hardware loss, which means stuff like marketing/r+d are not included
3) Sony themselves said the ps4 is being sold at a loss, and it is being sold at a loss per unit
If I were you, I would stop putting stock into BOM estimation sites like those, as just looking at silicon doesn't give you the full picture of the cost of the hardware and is often wrong in itself when it comes to the estimates
2) Nintendo indicated that it was a per hardware loss, which means stuff like marketing/r+d are not included
3) Sony themselves said the ps4 is being sold at a loss, and it is being sold at a loss per unit
If I were you, I would stop putting stock into BOM estimation sites like those, as just looking at silicon doesn't give you the full picture of the cost of the hardware and is often wrong in itself when it comes to the estimates
That's not true.
Besides, Nintendo is in better financial shape than Sony, there's no reason they couldn't take a slight hit on the console only to make it back, and then some, on games and accessories.
That's because you like the art style and it looks wonderfull for what it is but technically SMW3D can't hold a candle to games like Beyond, TLOU, GTA V, Crysis 2/3, Forza 4 and Halo 4 just to name a few examples. All running more complex geometry and longer shaders. Sonic Lost Worlds is another prime example. A great looking game but technically downgraded in geometry compared to Sonic Generations. The same reason why that's running 60fps instead of 30fps.
1) The estimates are probably very close
2) Nintendo's statement was incredibly vague and didn't state how they were computing the cost. "Per unit" most definitely does NOT mean only component costs -- that's not even a GAAP term. Nintendo would have to recognize R&D costs associated with the release of the console in their financial reporting.
3) Sony's statement was definitely including other costs associated with the console in their tally, which would swing them to a loss on each unit sold. Their CFO even explicitly mentions R&D costs for chip development in the same paragraph.
If I were you, I'd learn a little bit about this before commenting in such a manner. My day job is financial reporting.
Vanillalite
Ask me about the GAF Notebook
Your basis for that statement? Just because you think so or do you have some info?
And one of my day jobs involves something rather close to the topic at hand, so I wouldn't pull out that particular card. Sony is selling the console at a per unit loss that doesn't include ancillary costs like research and development (if they did it would be considered a major loss and not a smaller one, as here - as would most consoles). When discussing strictly silicon you forego a ton of costs that are also per unit. Assembly, packaging and shipping are also factored in, as well as a percentage given to each retailer for the box. Margins aren't decided on silicon, and as someone who's into the financial aspect of things I shouldn't have to reiterate it nor be insulted in the process. Estimating an iPhone cost somewhat correctly doesn't make a video game console estimate correctly automatically.
Because IHS has traditionally been very accurate with regards to their Apple BoM estimates, which pretty much perfectly explain the gross margins that Apple publicly reports each quarter when you adjust for the product mix they actually sold.
The vast majority of component expense in consoles are from components that go into a variety of devices and thus finding the competitive wholesale price is relatively simple for supply chain experts. The price of 2GB of DDR3 RAM of a certain spec, for instance, varies very little regardless of whether you're buying from Samsung, Hynix, or Micron. These components are commodities -- if one supplier raises prices then they'll lose sales to their competitors.