Boss Doggie
all my loli wolf companions are so moe
I wonder if Wii U will utilize 3DS's "join your friend playing a game" thing.
Wii U Speculation Thread of Brains Beware: Wii U Re-Unveiling At E3 2012
- Thread starter bgassassin
- Start date
- Status
Shin Johnpv
Member
IsntChrisL said:
It came from the O1's article based on the alpha dev kits, which are almost always underpowered compared to the final kits. Since then we've basically had confirmation that those Alpha kits were underclocked, and that subsequent ones have had a significant boost in power. The trolls though, refuse to listen to those reports and just hang onto the original 01's one.
I mean shit you can see that the bird demo is doing somethings that just haven't happened on this gens consoles. The lighting engine is a big step up, but again they choose to ignore things like that. Because it doesn't support their pre-conceived notion of what Nintendo does with their hardware based on 1 generation.
bgassassin said:
I'm slightly sceptical of this; do bear in mind that Epic are also in the position of having to make and sell an engine upgrade, and that that needs to look justifiable in the eyes of their clients.
That said, it's still quite possibly completely accurate... I'd just like it from a source without an ulterior motive when it comes to pushing power. How do the small devs - the Grasshoppers, the Monoliths, the Atlusses - how do they feel about the prospect?
[Nintex] said:
Other than Zelda, I think one of the biggest hurdles will be making 'HD' look significantly different. I thought Mario Galaxy looked fantastic in SD, and the graphical style of many Nintendo games fits well to SD resolutions and I don't know how much of a bump they'll get simply running in a higher resolution
IceDoesntHelp
Banned
fixed.mrklaw said:
But I couldn't agree more. I honestly don't see how Mario will look any better in HD. More AA I guess...
There's so much wrong with the statement in bold I don't know where to start.mrklaw said:
First things first, stop by the dolphin thread sometime. Resolution and AA (which for practical purposes is the same thing as resolution) make a huge difference. Most Wii games look a ton better "simply running in a higher resolution".
Secondly, and more importantly, Wii U games will do so, so, so much more then simply run at a higher resolution. I don't feel I really need to say any more then this because it's so damn obvious.
Forsaken82
Member
I think he was sarcastically pointing out the 0% in the 0-100%Luigiv said:
Cheesecakebobby
Banned
This has probably been said already, but I haven't read all 207 pages, shoot me.
The Wii U seems to have 2 USPs in regards to the tablet. The first is that it allows innovative gameplay where the second screen is used in combination with the television. The second is that it allows the player to game without using the tv at all. The problem then is that these two selling points are incompatible. A feature that uses the second screen disappears when just using the tablet, unless that feature is merely the use of touchscreen and not an interaction of the two screens. It seems to follow therefore that developers have three choices. They can make a game that relies heavily on the tablet being used in conjunction with the television. They can make a game that does not rely on the tablet at all, so that the entire experience can be played with just the tablet. Or, they can have trivial features on the tablet which are not missed when playing without a tv, but are a nice extra for when you have both screens available. I personally only find the first option particularly exciting and hope it is the route most developers choose to take. I would only use the 'no tv' set-up when absolutely forced to. I can't see myself wanting to give up the 40" LCD and surround sound Zelda experience just to continue my game on the toilet.
The Wii U seems to have 2 USPs in regards to the tablet. The first is that it allows innovative gameplay where the second screen is used in combination with the television. The second is that it allows the player to game without using the tv at all. The problem then is that these two selling points are incompatible. A feature that uses the second screen disappears when just using the tablet, unless that feature is merely the use of touchscreen and not an interaction of the two screens. It seems to follow therefore that developers have three choices. They can make a game that relies heavily on the tablet being used in conjunction with the television. They can make a game that does not rely on the tablet at all, so that the entire experience can be played with just the tablet. Or, they can have trivial features on the tablet which are not missed when playing without a tv, but are a nice extra for when you have both screens available. I personally only find the first option particularly exciting and hope it is the route most developers choose to take. I would only use the 'no tv' set-up when absolutely forced to. I can't see myself wanting to give up the 40" LCD and surround sound Zelda experience just to continue my game on the toilet.
StreetsAhead
Member
bgassassin
Member
ShockingAlberto said:
I wouldn't completely rule it out. China Wars did eventually sell 1M for the DS.
Ookami-kun said:
The first time I heard this feature mentioned was for Wii U, so I would say yes.
monome said:
I've said something similar. We won't see Wii U's true power till the others come out.
bgassassin
Member
mclem said:
Yes it does.
mclem said:
I definitely agree about that. DICE didn't have a motive and we saw the comment they gave. Having more give indications on it would be good.
Luigiv said:
Don't blame me then since even you said he said it weird.
IceDoesntHelp
Banned
I'm gonna be honest. When I look at Mario Galaxy games on Dolphin. I don't see any differences, besides more bloom.Luigiv said:
POWERSPHERE
Member
Lighting, physics, polys on screen and textures will all benefit. Paper Mario HD better look like REAL paper!IceDoesntHelp said:
radioheadrule83
Banned
IceDoesntHelp said:
It's not just about the resolution, the added power will be transformative. I've not missed the power or the HD on Wii because Nintendo are such an amazing games company that they were able to create compelling experiences like Galaxy without them... but with the added power on Wii-U they can and *will* be able to do more.
Games like Zelda and Metroid will benefit from the possibility of more destructible environments, larger environments, procedural animation, more complex AI... think of the likes of Assassins Creed, Arkham City etc, in terms of scale, scope, seamless animation, amount of assets / buildings / objects / enemies on screen etc. The first time we go to battle in Hyrule or some Zebes like world in HD, we're going to be in love.
Mario is just always brilliant and inventive no matter what, I'm sure their creativity will put that power to good use.
StreetsAhead said:
The problem with Mario, specifically, is that clarity is important. Platforms *need* to be clearly delineated flat surfaces so the player has complete confidence in their understanding of the limitations and scope of the platform itself. That doesn't leave a huge amount of scope to add extra polygons (the resolution boost would of course help, but that's not something that requires tons more power)
One of the biggest problems with user levels in LBP is that they'll often go out of their way to make extremely attractive highly-decorative platforms which look gorgeous - and are a pain in the arse to actually *platform* off. Part of that's also due to LBP's physics, of course, but it's not really an issue in MM's levels because they're fully aware of the constraints of the system and design so it's not an issue.
That said, there is a third option: Fake platforms. It's a trick I picked up years ago from developing Doom levels. If you're going to make a particularly intricate wall, that's fine, but be aware that a player could get stuck on the sticky-out bits in a heated situation. The suggested solution? Make the intricate wall, but then place an invisible wall in front of it that's a more navigable shape. What the player *sees* does *not* have to be the actual space he's navigating.
herzogzwei1989
Banned
radioheadrule83 said:
I love this post and I fully agree with you on everything.
bgassassin
Member
radioheadrule83 said:
radioheadrule83
Believes in his Wii U
(Today, 09:58 AM)
Reply | Quote
I totally agree with your post.
Luigiv said:
by so, so much more you mean shaders and shit? My point wasn't purely technical, more than the graphical style used by many first party Nintendo games doesn't seem to lend itself to lots of shader effects. Mario with bloom, HDR, normal mapping? Meh. Galaxy already had nice fur effects.
Zelda and Metroid, sure. I've been slightly dribbling since that Zelda Wii U concept trailer.
bgassassin
Member
monome said:
All depends on how efficient they are. There are some very nice games out there that don't require that many people working on it. And Nintendo has a history of delaying a game if something doesn't feel right to them so schedule doesn't mean much.
Forsaken82
Member
monome said:
The ass creed team is also developing on a much tighter deadline than the Mario and Zelda teams... there is no need for all that man power on a game that has a 2+ year timeline
Metroid will most likely be outsourced and Iwata pretty much implied that Nintendo would outsource more projects in the future. As for Zelda I expect Nintendo to do an HD remake of one of their older titles so it won't be a 4/5 year wait untill we see an HD Zelda. My guess is that Zelda 3DS will hit late 2012 followed by a Zelda HD remake for Wii U in 2013.monome said:
Other than that I think there will be quite a difference between casual games and hardcore games as far as graphics are concerned. I don't expect much of a leap for Wii U Sports or Mario Kart Wii U but the system will get some lookers(Pikmin 3 is probably the early eye catcher because of the photorealistic style that the environments have).
Have you seen this patent? Could something like this be used to replace the second Upad?
The magic of mirrors makes the device work. When you touch the pad an infrared LED turns on and the amplified beams from the LED bounce off the mirror and are interpreted by the controller as position data. If you dont touch the pad, the remote works just like a standard Wii remote.
Siliconera.
The magic of mirrors makes the device work. When you touch the pad an infrared LED turns on and the amplified beams from the LED bounce off the mirror and are interpreted by the controller as position data. If you dont touch the pad, the remote works just like a standard Wii remote.
Siliconera.
ShockingAlberto
Member
If the Sonic Dimensions rumor is true, then Nintendo's strategy might be to send their own guys to third parties to help them make the game.
It's something they've done for different reasons in the NES and Gamecube eras and it might be a good way around the "We can't compete with Nintendo games!" complaining third parties do.
It's something they've done for different reasons in the NES and Gamecube eras and it might be a good way around the "We can't compete with Nintendo games!" complaining third parties do.
ShockingAlberto
Member
StreetsAhead
Member
mclem said:
I completely agree. I wasn't suggesting that Mario go completely 'organic' or anything. Lighting, textures and scope are all things that could definitely benefit using more powerful hardware without affecting clarity or platforming ease.
TheExplodingHead
Banned
mclem said:
I agree with this, the truth is (with the exception of Metroid and in some cases Zelda) most of Nintendo's biggest franchises benefit very little from a practical design/control/experience perspective from increased horsepower. My feeling is Nintendo will be much more invested in a resolution bump and focus mainly on Upad implementations.
The jump in horsepower over 360/PS3 in my mind is purely to satisfy fans, features, console bells and whistles and third-parties rather than Nintendo's internal dev's clamoring for it. If anything to them it's just another expense and resource taken away from what Nintendo does best, pure gameplay and tight design. Especially when we consider that for 99.9% of the industry "graphics" have offered nothing other than eye candy and not contributed to abstracting and expanding the core hand-eye entertainment...while of course increasing production costs dramatically and in many cases diverting focus away from what is important, gameplay.
TheExplodingHead said:
I agree with this too, and hopefully designers in the future will be more in touch with what the entire point of graphics is to begin with, which is delivering the concept art.
Back in the 8-bit days we were kinda forced to accept what graphics were at the time. To use Zelda as an example, When you saw concept art like this:
You just accepted that they couldn't match.
But when Wind Waker comes out and turns this:
You notice that there is little difference between what the concept art is and what the game shows. Even now with just an idea of the Wii U's hardware we know this will happen with Nintendo's games. (Since my post is getting heavy on images I'll just use links from here.)
Here's Concept art for Twilight Princess versus The Wii U demo. Again, they essentially match. (except for Link having a reversed part in his hair) Now graphics, even ones set in more realistic tones, are more able to do the job that graphics were meant to do, as opposed to seeing who can make the better tech demo and whose specs has higher numbers.
I see in the future that realistic graphics will have nowhere to go, which is not to say graphics won't get "better" but the improvements will be invisible to your average consumer, gamer, or dare I say even enthusiast. We already have graphics that look like photographs, and needing to bust out a separate program to show any improvement means functionally that there is none. And once this is realized, the graphics crown will go to the designers with the better art team team than the better programmers (although they will still be necessary obviously.)
Also we've run out of ways to show increased graphics without compromising the gameplay itself in order to actually show the improvement. Which reminds me of this game China Warrior which boasted of the superior sprite capabilities of the Turbografx, yet had pretty laughable gameplay because the Kung Fu Warrior himself took up like 20% of the screen. Like So. Most of the game was you dodging birds and random sticks being thrown at you while you whale away at homeless robe guys who attack you... somehow.
I also agree with you that the extra power is just there for third parties. At least the third parties themselves won't have that excuse next time (HA! Joke's on Nintendo! They'll fall back to "demographics" which is a college-level euphemism for "teh kiddeh") I'm sure some Nintendo designers are happy that they won't run into performance walls as much anymore, but most of EAD games will use the extra power to ensure a clean crisp look and not worry about making sure the HDR on Peach's crown is juuuust right.
Black-Wind
Member
I think that Nintendo could really use the horse power behind the WU and that it's not just something to please fans and 3rd parties. Seeing what they can do with this amount of power in areas other then just pure graphics is something I'm sure we will all look forward to seeing. Hell, just the fact that they can cram in a ton more animations and animation transitions makes a huge difference to me. At the very least it would allow for the example above where they can now truly make the game look like the concept art.
I'm sure they have some ideas for Mario that just can't be done on the Wii ... just like I'm sure SMG can't be done on the 64.
I'm sure they have some ideas for Mario that just can't be done on the Wii ... just like I'm sure SMG can't be done on the 64.
What are you guys going on about, I see no concept art in your posts. That's some nice promotional art, though.
For arguments sake, this is what actual concept art looks like.
As you can see, it's practical, clean and consistent and such is something that the 3D modellers can actually use. By comparison, the promotional art is just designed to look cool and is not useful for conveying information to modellers. TP promo art in particular, which is incredibly inconsistent when it comes to proportions and the like.
And yes I know what I'm saying is irrelevant to your argument. It just always annoys when people call promo art concept art.
For arguments sake, this is what actual concept art looks like.
As you can see, it's practical, clean and consistent and such is something that the 3D modellers can actually use. By comparison, the promotional art is just designed to look cool and is not useful for conveying information to modellers. TP promo art in particular, which is incredibly inconsistent when it comes to proportions and the like.
And yes I know what I'm saying is irrelevant to your argument. It just always annoys when people call promo art concept art.
TheExplodingHead said:
I don't agree with that, and it's sad if Nintendo does. Just look at Kirby game. They have shown high production value and a big visual ambition, while staying classic platforming with abstraction and clarity.
Now, the duality between natural graphics against clear gameplay is and will always be a problem for sure, but not an unsolvable one. And i think that having something "like a toy" with straight and artificial platforms, mixed with realistic details and scenery is actually a part of the magic of some old school impressive games.
You can keep this clarity and symbolism and still make it look like it's straight fro a Pixar movie, i'm pretty sure of it.
Luigiv said:What are you guys going on about, I see no concept art in your posts. That's some nice promotional art, though.
For arguments sake, this is what actual concept art looks like.
*Link picture*
As you can see, it's practical, clean and consistent and such is something that the 3D modellers can actually use. By comparison, the promotional art is just designed to look cool and is not useful for conveying information to modellers. TP promo art in particular, which is incredibly inconsistent when it comes to proportions and the like.
And yes I know what I'm saying is irrelevant to your argument. It just always annoys when people call promo art concept art.
That's in my post, dewd. Did you not click the link?
What didn't help Red Steel 2 was that it was called Red Steel. Wouldn't be the first time a pretty good game was punished just because the one that came before it sucked.
orioto said:
In many Nintendo patents you will find they mention pixar-like graphics.
So Nintendo has been pursuing ways to reach that fidelity. But of course, technology simply has to catch up in terms of providing the power in an affordable box. Maybe with the WiiU they finally have it.
jump_button
Banned
Graphics are just tools art style is what can make a good looks good or bad, Big N always been good at knowing they own style unlike Sonic teams going with streets and roads
Nuclear Muffin
Banned
Sadist said:
That's not really the same thing though. Retro just lent them pointer code supposedly, they never did any actual design work.
Plus when it comes to sales, it had a million things going against it (lost in the March 2010 bloodbath, killed by the reputation of the original game/Ubisoft's bad name, poisoning of the Wii market, lack of media attention, lack of any sort of promotion at all! The list goes on and on)
Yes. He was drawn explicitly to be used in the instruction manual (or where ever it appeared) after the in game sprite had already been designed.Deguello said:
Concept art from the original Zelda looks like this.
Whilst it's not Link, explicitly, you can see a clear difference in the practicality and polish of that verses the promo drawing. The concept art is meant to used as a point of reference for the sprite artists, hence it's not polished and Miyamot hasn't bothered with colour (given the severe colour limitations of the NES, it would have been pointless). The promo drawing on the other hand is just meant to look cute and wouldn't be very helpful as a point of reference for the spriters.
Your short sightedness is incredible. Mario Galaxy's art was designed specifically to work well within the walls of the Wii's limitations. It was explicitly designed to look good without the use more advanced shaders, higher poly counts and other technical benefits. Mario for Wii U will have art designed to take advantage of all the extra power on offer (probably).mrklaw said:
Think Sonic Colours to Sonic Generations for an idea of what I mean. Both look fantastic but you can see that Generations has a gone with a more detailed art fundamental that really pushes it further then Colours.
Games like Ninja Gaiden II and Halo 3 (which didn't update there art design in the generation leap and look crap because of it) are the exception not the rule. I'd expect Nintendo to avoid that pitfall.
- Status