-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
HD graphics. Will Revolution be better off without them?
- Thread starter xexex
- Start date
Distance detail is really the only way I can see gameplay benefitting from HD. And that's for games that pretty much require you to discern objects very far ahead of you....Burnout being the only example I can think of.
I guess it helps in an FPS if you are trying to snipe objects far in the distance without using the scope, but then what game has a sniper rifle without a scope? If you're talking about aim precision at the pixel-level, then any benefit essentially gets negated by the imprecise analog pad and overbearing auto-aim that most every console developer is throwing in.
I guess it helps in an FPS if you are trying to snipe objects far in the distance without using the scope, but then what game has a sniper rifle without a scope? If you're talking about aim precision at the pixel-level, then any benefit essentially gets negated by the imprecise analog pad and overbearing auto-aim that most every console developer is throwing in.
BlueTsunami
there is joy in sucking dick
But wouldn't the Revolutions control scheme benefit from HD resolutions?
Shogmaster
Sloppy seconds
Monk said:
Hate to pull out a technicality card on such a good point, but N64 games topped out at 128MB of content (64MB with 2X lossless compression).
Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
Can't wait till E3....If i see impressions like "Didn't even want to play mario it looked so crappy at 480p, so I played PS3" then nintendo was wrong. I'm pretty sure that won't be the case.
Because HD cripples their ability to make games that look comparable at SD resolutions. If a game doesn't have to run in HD, then they can bump up the other effects and it will at least be a fair(er) fight.Mook1e said:
C'mon, that's totally dubious reasoning that ignores every single other factor that might have made people choose Xbox over the Cube, and relies only on some ridiculous similarity between the two percentages. PS2 beat Xbox 500%, so maybe that means people don't give a shit about an all-encompassing pay-to-play online service?
People ignored Cube because it didn't have the games, didn't have DVD, and it looked like a little girl's lunchbox. Online seems like it was on the minds of very few people.
This is where it's nice to remember that PC games have been running at HD-or-better quality for 7-8 years. And what new gameplay has it introduced? By and large, it is a purely visual upgrade.
Depends on two things:BlueTsunami said:
A.) The sensitivity and precision of the wand. How often does it update the onscreen movement?
B.) People's ability to wield the wand in a precise way.
I am kind of doubting the "B" factor here, even if the wand is as precise as a mouse. Just seems like it would be more difficult to "stop on a dime" in mid-turn like mouse-FPS'ers do. But we'll see.
Shogmaster
Sloppy seconds
border said:
I can tell you from experience that if Nin is indeed using Gyration's standard tech for the wand, A is gonna pretty much suck.
Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
Mrbob said:Here is a visual aid for those who still champion 4:3 480P games next gen!
Hey that looks better than madden 360 is that HD res?
Gahiggidy said:
AHAHAHAHAHA If anything it was from Miyamoto urging that Iwata chose the SDTV Resolution. Just like it was Miyamoto that urged Yamauchi to go with carts
.I have to say though, this is a very good way to differentiate Nintendo from the others. They are making their product as uncomparable to the others.
I mean look at it this way $200 verus $400
SDTV versus HDTV
$50 games versus $60 games
remote versus controller.
It is a big risk because it may be seen by the regular public as an inferior product, if anything its the latter if you go by GAF, but Iwata has some real big balls to do this.
I havnet read all the replies in this thread so...here's a dumb question...
Is it too late for Nintendo to just make the Rev HD? How much would it delay the release, if at all?
I know some developers have kits already and I dont think it would that much of a step back to just rework stuff to high res. I mean no ones gonna be playing a game on Rev till Fall of '06 anyway. :\
Sure they would have to bite the bullet about their previous statements but I wouldnt give a shit.
for the record, I dont think this will happen.
Is it too late for Nintendo to just make the Rev HD? How much would it delay the release, if at all?
I know some developers have kits already and I dont think it would that much of a step back to just rework stuff to high res. I mean no ones gonna be playing a game on Rev till Fall of '06 anyway. :\
Sure they would have to bite the bullet about their previous statements but I wouldnt give a shit.
for the record, I dont think this will happen.
tapedeck said:I havnet read all the replies in this thread so...here's a dumb question...
Is it too late for Nintendo to just make the Rev HD? How much would it delay the release, if at all?
I know some developers have kits already and I dont think it would that much of a step back to just rework stuff to high res. I mean no ones gonna be playing a game on Rev till Fall of '06 anyway. :\
Sure they would have to bite the bullet about their previous statements but I wouldnt give a shit.
for the record, I dont think this will happen.
Are you soundwave???
Gahiggidy
My aunt & uncle run a Mom & Pop store, "The Gamecube Hut", and sold 80k WiiU within minutes of opening.
Only one of thoe for things is a negative, the no hdtv one. I still can't underdatand why a $200 piece of kit is not able to do HDTV.Monk said:AHAHAHAHAHA If anything it was from Miyamoto urging that Iwata chose the SDTV Resolution. Just like it was Miyamoto that urged Yamauchi to go with carts
I have to say though, this is a very good way to differentiate Nintendo from the others. They are making their product as uncomparable to the others.
I mean look at it this way $200 verus $400
SDTV versus HDTV
$50 games versus $60 games
remote versus controller.
Gahiggidy said:
Its not that it cant, it can by most reports. But it was a consious choice by Nintendo. By forcing 480p devs can design games for 480p which would look better at 480p than if they were designed for 720p for example. Unlike where you get the idea of free HD, high resolution really does come at a price.
HomerSimpson-Man
Member
Hero said:
Expect for one huge difference, that was Nintendo's dominant territory this is Sony's.
HomerSimpson-Man
Member
Gotta be quick!! Still good to know someone else sees it.
ThunderEmperor
Banned
Gahiggidy said:
LIke Matt knows anything
ThunderEmperor
Banned
Gahiggidy said:
ahhahahhahahah Miyamot has sworn his life to Yamachi and he is not allowed to dream about going anywhere else.
I'm going to be in the minority and say I think this is a smart move for Nintendo. The way they are trying to compete is produce a low-cost console with low development costs. For them personally it is a good strategy to take - people enjoy their franchises regardless if they spend $20 million or $40 million on them. In fact, I think it's debatable if LoZ:TTP will recoup its dev costs - didn't someone from Nintendo talk about how they were going to try to sell a $70 premium edition of that game to get it in the black? I doubt that even more expensive Zeldas and Metroids are the way they want to go.
If low cost games are the way to go then HD support can cause problems because the graphical quality of non-HD games will be compared to HD games. While hardware wise HD support comes for free, it definitely adds costs to the dev pipeline. Textures now require more work, shader effects become clearer at a given distance to an object (especially things like subsurface scattering which are hard to see even in SD video without close-ups) and so to compete on a graphical level you are throwing money at something that's not the system's core competency.
If low cost games are the way to go then HD support can cause problems because the graphical quality of non-HD games will be compared to HD games. While hardware wise HD support comes for free, it definitely adds costs to the dev pipeline. Textures now require more work, shader effects become clearer at a given distance to an object (especially things like subsurface scattering which are hard to see even in SD video without close-ups) and so to compete on a graphical level you are throwing money at something that's not the system's core competency.
Nintendo isn't competing for the same market as Sony any more. I would hope that people would realize that by now.HomerSimpson-Man said:
I think they absolutely believe they can replicate what they did with the DS in Japan by "expanding the market." You're not going to expand the market with a $400 box, so what they are doing has inherent logic.
Akia said:
SSBM took 2 years and they started right away after finishing SSB64. And that was without the online components and stuff. And I won't stop posting until somebody can console me.
I want HD too, obviously, but here's a question. Do any of you honestly think that If Nintendo did have HD and that the console does manage to beat the Xbox360 in graphics, hell, even the PS3 in graphics, the mainstream gamer is gonna know about it? There are still fucking people who think the PS2 was the most powerful console this gen and the GC still had N64 grafix or something. And most of those who think so write gaming articles, no less. :lol
deadhorse32
Bad Art
you know all this talk about HD and crap is really pointless at the end of the day.
Mainstream has adopted the "worst" hardware (no texture filtering with PSone - TEH JAGGIEZ on PS2) thanks to the GAMES.
IF there are compelling games on the Rev for the mainstream to enjoy, the rev will sell HD or not.
Mainstream has adopted the "worst" hardware (no texture filtering with PSone - TEH JAGGIEZ on PS2) thanks to the GAMES.
IF there are compelling games on the Rev for the mainstream to enjoy, the rev will sell HD or not.
soundwave05
Member
I still think there's time for Nintendo and ATi to hopefully impliment a work-around to this problem.
Nintendo doesn't want the main unit to incur the cost of HDTV, since they want to sell the main system for as cheap as possible to casual shoppers.
That's why there's no HD as of right now. Nintendo sure as hell is not going to eat the cost of a feature that a lot of people may not even use, especailly the type of audience they're going for.
Perhaps ATi can design the GPU in such a way to accomodate an external add-on which overclocks the GPU and upconverts games to 720p/1080i. That way the people who want HDTV support can have it if they're willing to pay say $40-$50 more.
That's fair IMO.
Nintendo doesn't want the main unit to incur the cost of HDTV, since they want to sell the main system for as cheap as possible to casual shoppers.
That's why there's no HD as of right now. Nintendo sure as hell is not going to eat the cost of a feature that a lot of people may not even use, especailly the type of audience they're going for.
Perhaps ATi can design the GPU in such a way to accomodate an external add-on which overclocks the GPU and upconverts games to 720p/1080i. That way the people who want HDTV support can have it if they're willing to pay say $40-$50 more.
That's fair IMO.
Frankfurter
Member
GitarooMan said:
I was always confused by that logic and I now have to ask you if you haven't got a computer? I've been playing with PS2, Xbox and GCN for the last years and I never had the feeling that there SD resolution was a disapointment for me compared to my 19" TFT display.
Myoclonic Jerk
Member
Can someone answer me please. Will REV have 480p?
Shogmaster
Sloppy seconds
almokla said:
GC did . Why wouldn't the Rev?