It does, but it's not some mythical cap where improvements in graphical quality stop.
No, I'm just pointing out that it's there. Also at lower resolutions it does make a pretty significant difference (which is to say, SD resolutions vs. HD resolutions). At this resolution, not so much of course. But again, that ties into what I was saying about perceieved increase as every other generation has made significant leaps, partially due to resolution jumps (and the jump to HD)
Also, I don't know why you are bringing up PCs Sheep when this entire discussion is about how WiiU's hardware will compare to other consoles...
Edit: In fact, these days it seems like most PC titles are just console ports anyways. It's rare that companies specifically develop with the PC in mind as consoles are where all the money is.
Because you said that graphical quality has topped out, when it hasn't, and PC games show that. It's not a stretch to associate current high end PC graphics to next gen consoles. As a matter of fact, there's a thread at NeoGAF with Epic and Crytek saying that very thing, exactly, that we'll see DirectX 11 quality graphics on the next Xbox/PS console.
*For consoles* - I still don't know why I need to qualify that statement when that's the damn thing we were talking about. And again, very few developers are expanding on PC development. I think Crytek may be the only one that's even pushing graphical boundaries there...
I'd argue we've already got to the point to where the graphical improvements will be so very slight they'll be hard to notice. Remember, we're talking "core," not "hardcore."
*For consoles* - I still don't know why I need to qualify that statement when that's the damn thing we were talking about. And again, very few developers are expanding on PC development. I think Crytek may be the only one that's even pushing graphical boundaries there...
And as other people have stepped in to add, you putting that "for consoles" qualifier in there doesn't make you any more correct because Resolution has little bearing on Graphical Quality.
Sheep on
0
Options
Warlock82Never pet a burning dogRegistered Userregular
*For consoles* - I still don't know why I need to qualify that statement when that's the damn thing we were talking about. And again, very few developers are expanding on PC development. I think Crytek may be the only one that's even pushing graphical boundaries there...
And as other people have stepped in to add, you putting that "for consoles" qualifier in there doesn't make you any more correct because Resolution has little bearing on Graphical Quality.
And as I keep trying to point out, resolution has very little to do with the argument I'm making. Consoles will never be as powerful as PCs (at least until they become as swappable as PCs, which at that point they might as fucking well be PCs). Talking about how awesome top-of-the-line PCs can do is irrelevant because consoles are nowhere near that powerful...
And as I keep trying to point out, resolution has very little to do with the argument I'm making. Consoles will never be as powerful as PCs (at least until they become as swappable as PCs, which at that point they might as fucking well be PCs). Talking about how awesome top-of-the-line PCs can do is irrelevant because consoles are nowhere near that powerful...
How does this back up your comment that games have hit a graphical plateau?
There's plenty more that can be done to make substantially noticeable differences visually, even without increasing the dev costs.
But graphics aren't even the big concern for me with higher power so much as freeing game design from constraints that aren't readily apparent. Such as the effects of the relatively low RAM on current consoles upon level design or character variety for example. Or a number of other benefits to power that aren't as immediately visible as graphics but open up lots of options for games that simply weren't possible to properly implement on current hardware.
Speaking of the WiiU, that controller looks entirely unwieldly and uncomfortable to hold
I actually remember reading reports that it was surprisingly comfortable to hold given the size.
Indeed.
Again to sell the core gamers, Nintendo will need more than slightly better versions of franchise they can get on systems they already own, because the perceived hurdle is: game price + Wii U price vs game price. And to sell the casual gamers they need something beyond graphics that says, 'this is the new experience everyone is talking about'.
Group A is predicated on them pushing developers to bring their A-game to the Wii U's table, because a port+ won't really cut it. Group B is all about the message and the story Nintendo wants to tell. Nintendo has time to work on that, but it wasn't there at E3. In fact, it was quite a muddle message presented there, with more of a proof-of-concept than anything.
Oh no! And there's no possible chance more games could be announced in the year or so before it's released! Nintendo is dooooooooomed!
I'd argue we've already got to the point to where the graphical improvements will be so very slight they'll be hard to notice. Remember, we're talking "core," not "hardcore."
Keep telling yourself that. [/quote]
And you keep telling yourself graphics matter for sales, then.
And you keep telling yourself graphics matter for sales, then.
Never did to begin with!
Then why are they an issue for the Wii U?
Because you wanted to pretend that the WiiU had this unknown factor going for it that will help Nintendo's standings, and I pointed out that, no, it didn't. I pointed out that it was launching very much similarly to the original Wii, graphical gap and all.
Obviously the graphical gap didn't stop the Wii from selling gangbusters. No one is arguing that. I will argue that it does matter to the fan base that Nintendo is actively trying to court. However, in certain circumstances, I can see, and even stated so, the exact opposite. When we get the option to buy Modern Warfare 4 for the 360, or Modern Warfare 4 and a WiiU, a large portion of 360/PS3 owner won't abandon their console and gamer profile for the WiiU version simply because of gimmick+ slightly better graphics.
Only thing stated, by me, in this thread is that the WiiU doesn't have some mystical ace up it's sleeve and that graphical quality hasn't reach some kind of plateau.
It might not even be a case of "slightly better graphics" - there's no way the Call of Duty games are pushing the PS3 and 360 to their limits, for example, and the PS3/360/WiiU versions will probably look exactly the same.
It will certainly be a good long while before we get non-first-party titles that make intelligent use of the iPad with a 3DS stuck on either sideWiiPad controller thingy's screen.
0
Options
MaddocI'm Bobbin Threadbare, are you my mother?Registered Userregular
Did we ever get third party titles that made interesting use of the Wiimote?
Actually, I guess I sort of liked the motion control integration in No More Heroes, but mostly because it was pretty non-intrusive
Did we ever get third party titles that made interesting use of the Wiimote?
Silent Hill: Shattered Memories.
Shattered Memories was awesome, but the only thing besides moving the camera that the wiimote did was act as a cellphone, right? I haven't played in a while, so I'm probably wrong.
Skull2185 on
Everyone has a price. Throw enough gold around and someone will risk disintegration.
Did we ever get third party titles that made interesting use of the Wiimote?
Actually, I guess I sort of liked the motion control integration in No More Heroes, but mostly because it was pretty non-intrusive
Some, but most of the time developers did not bring their A-game. They mapped a function to motion control and called it a day. Sometimes that worked well (RE4), sometimes not as much. I worry the Wii U will have the same problem without the novelty of motion control to entice users.
WiiU will do well with gimmicky games. That golf demo was really neat. DS type stuff will also be neat.
0
Options
Warlock82Never pet a burning dogRegistered Userregular
Honestly was there much "interesting use" to be had with the Wiimote? I think Nintendo kind of did almost everything of significance with their launch lineup (particularly Wii Sports).
And you keep telling yourself graphics matter for sales, then.
Never did to begin with!
Then why are they an issue for the Wii U?
Because you wanted to pretend that the WiiU had this unknown factor going for it that will help Nintendo's standings, and I pointed out that, no, it didn't. I pointed out that it was launching very much similarly to the original Wii, graphical gap and all.
Obviously the graphical gap didn't stop the Wii from selling gangbusters. No one is arguing that. I will argue that it does matter to the fan base that Nintendo is actively trying to court. However, in certain circumstances, I can see, and even stated so, the exact opposite. When we get the option to buy Modern Warfare 4 for the 360, or Modern Warfare 4 and a WiiU, a large portion of 360/PS3 owner won't abandon their console and gamer profile for the WiiU version simply because of gimmick+ slightly better graphics.
Only thing stated, by me, in this thread is that the WiiU doesn't have some mystical ace up it's sleeve and that graphical quality hasn't reach some kind of plateau.
Why does the Wii U need an ace up its sleeve? After all, you said the 360 didn't do anything spectacular, yet it's selling quite well and could pass the Wii's overall sales in a couple of years.
I never said the Wii U had an unknown factor up its sleeve, I just said that it's a lot less annoying to third-party core game developers, as we can already see from the early game announcements.
Switch: 3947-4890-9293
0
Options
MaddocI'm Bobbin Threadbare, are you my mother?Registered Userregular
Did we ever get third party titles that made interesting use of the Wiimote?
Silent Hill: Shattered Memories.
Shattered Memories was awesome, but the only thing besides moving the camera that the wiimote did was act as a cellphone, right? I haven't played in a while, so I'm probably wrong.
It was also used for picking stuff up and manipulating objects in puzzles
Ace up its sleeve is a bit much, but the whole point of selling a product is to convince consumers that your product is better than the other guys, not mostly the same. The third parties on the Wii U say "mostly the same" so far, seeing as they used footage from their competitors' systems for the announcement. It's up to Nintendo to put their best foot forward and push third-parties to do the same. Part 1 is relatively assured, Part 2 is not. If that is the case, the possibility is that you could see a repeat of the GameCube situation.
I never said the Wii U had an unknown factor up its sleeve
That's kind of what I took this to mean:
but the Wii U has thrown the monkey wrench of uncertainty
Which is still not really accurate, since, again, the WiiU is launching in a very similar situation to the Wii.
Actually, the Wii's pre-launch situation threw in a lot of uncertainty as well, though in this case it was because the industry wondered whether people would buy an underpowered system with a weird waggle controller.
The Wii U is also generating uncertainty due to its wacky hardware, plus the question of whether Microsoft and Sony will launch new consoles sooner rather than later as a response.
Not exactly the realm of drooling fanboy blather, here. (Especially since I never actually put in a prediction of how well the Wii U will sell, just that it seems to be less off-putting to third parties than the Wii is.)
Did we ever get third party titles that made interesting use of the Wiimote?
Silent Hill: Shattered Memories.
Shattered Memories was awesome, but the only thing besides moving the camera that the wiimote did was act as a cellphone, right? I haven't played in a while, so I'm probably wrong.
It was also used for picking stuff up and manipulating objects in puzzles
And using the cellphone's camera was awesome since they managed to make it react just like a real cellphone camera with a slight time delay, artifacts and blurring.
I just don't see who the WiiU is targeting. The controller doesn't have the wow factor that the Wii did for the casual gamers and I imagine most hardcore gamers are still wary of Nintendo and will just wait until the next Microsoft or Sony system comes out unless there's something amazing for the WiiU at or near launch..
I never said the Wii U had an unknown factor up its sleeve
That's kind of what I took this to mean:
but the Wii U has thrown the monkey wrench of uncertainty
Which is still not really accurate, since, again, the WiiU is launching in a very similar situation to the Wii.
Actually, the Wii's pre-launch situation threw in a lot of uncertainty as well, though in this case it was because the industry wondered whether people would buy an underpowered system with a weird waggle controller.
The Wii U is also generating uncertainty due to its wacky hardware, plus the question of whether Microsoft and Sony will launch new consoles sooner rather than later as a response.
Not exactly the realm of drooling fanboy blather, here. (Especially since I never actually put in a prediction of how well the Wii U will sell, just that it seems to be less off-putting to third parties than the Wii is.)
Having an ace up your sleeve really is a different thing from just generally adding some uncertainty. You don't have to have some special advantage to be a game-changer.
I was terrible at Halo in college, but I turned the tide a couple times just by briefly distracting the good players on the other side. I wasn't an ace up my team's sleeve, but I altered the game a bit just by being there.
The WiiU's touch screen may be a huge factor, it might not be, but in any case you can be sure that it has thrown a monkey wrench into existing plans.
I just don't see who the WiiU is targeting. The controller doesn't have the wow factor that the Wii did for the casual gamers and I imagine most hardcore gamers are still wary of Nintendo and will just wait until the next Microsoft or Sony system comes out unless there's something amazing for the WiiU at or near launch..
How do you know this? Is it one of those blatantly obvious things or has there been some market research showing a dearth of interest in touch screens?
Warlock82Never pet a burning dogRegistered Userregular
Honestly I think the controller has the potential to be really interesting. Probably more so than waggle. Problem of course is the "potential" part relies on developers actually doing shit with it.
Either way, I'm in for Nintendo's stuff. Even if 3rd party support ends up being garbarge, 1st party support is typically worth it (IMO anyways).
Is there a reason a lot of these console discussions seem to operate under this silly assumption that a person can only own one console at any one time? That if you want to buy a WiiU, you suddenly must get rid of your 360?
I know money can be tight, and you can't expect everybody to instantly buy every single system. But like... you can own more than one. They don't suddenly explode in proximity to one another.
"The sausage of Green Earth explodes with flavor like the cannon of culinary delight."
0
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
I know money can be tight, and you can't expect everybody to instantly buy every single system. But like... you can own more than one. They don't suddenly explode in proximity to one another.
They can?
Alert the media!
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
Rovio CEO Peter Vesterbacka says his company is "betting everything" on the ultra-popular Angry Birds brand, saying he'd like it to be "the first entertainment brand with a billion fans."
Speaking at the Casual Connect conference in Seattle (as reported by VentureBeat), Vesterbacka said reaching such levels of popularity would "take us two or three years to do." The goal, Vesterbacka said, was to make Angry Birds in to a long-term brand on par with Mario or Mickey Mouse.
Included in Vesterbacka's plans for growth is a hope to become China's most popular entertainment brand by next year, he said, with planned launches across a number of Chinese mobile devices and even a flagship store devoted to Angry Birds merchandise.
Angry Birds officially launched in China in May through a partnership with Chinese mobile games network Downjoy. But sales from such official efforts in the highly-populated country are likely dwarfed by derivative knock-offs and pirated versions on jailbroken iPhones.
Vesterbacka addressed this concern at the conference, saying the only way to fight it was with quality. "Instead of sending lawyers, we are building products," he said.
As for putting all the company's eggs in a single Angry Birds basket, Vesterbacka said he realized Rovio was unlikely to create another product that had such an immense impact.
"Game makers buy into their own bullshit," he said. "You think you can make hit after hit. We know how hard it is to do that, so we are betting everything on Angry Birds."
The Angry Birds games have been downloaded 250 million times as of June, with over 100 million monthly active users spending 200 million minutes a day on the titles.
Licensed plush toys based on the characters have sold over 2 million units, according to the company, and the games are being developed for everything from an animated series to a cook book, "Bad Piggies Secret Egg Recipes."
Dude, please, please stop talking.
Then again, it's probably because of things like this:
Roku's new line of internet-video-streaming set-top boxes will launch later this month with a motion-sensing remote that can be used to control casual games, including a built-in copy of Rovio's Angry Birds.
As announced today on Roku's blog, the Roku 2 line uses a remote equipped with an accelerometer to play "casual 3D games" in HD on a TV connected to a palm-sized box.
The Bluetooth-powered remote features a directional pad and two colored buttons, much like the Wii Remote, which can presumably be used for non-motion controlled games.
Roku CEO Anthony Wood writes that game titles -- which are downloaded to an SD card memory -- will sell "in the $5 range rather than $30 range," and said he hoped the rise of gaming on Roku would be comparable to the explosion of gaming apps on smartphones and tablets.
Wood said the company is "spending a lot of time with the major casual game publishers" to attract gaming content to the box. VentureBeat reports the company is planning to release Pac-Man: Championship Edition and other Namco titles, as well as further versions of Angry Birds.
The Roku 2 will come in three configurations: A $59.99 HD model that only supports 720p video; a $79.99 XD model that supports 1080p video; and an XS model that adds Ethernet and USB support along with an included game-playing remote, which is sold separately for $29.99.
Started in 2002, Roku launched its first set-top box in 2008 as the first hardware boasting the ability to stream Netflix movies directly to a TV. The Roku platform now supports over 300 "channels" of free and paid internet video content, and claimed one million viewers as of May.
Switch: 3947-4890-9293
0
Options
Warlock82Never pet a burning dogRegistered Userregular
Oh my God, why does that guy make me want to punch him in the face every time he opens his mouth? Does he seriously think "milk Angry Birds into the ground" is a sustainable business plan?
Oh my God, why does that guy make me want to punch him in the face every time he opens his mouth? Does he seriously think "milk Angry Birds into the ground" is a sustainable business plan?
Yes.
This has been another edition of Simple Answers To Simple Questions.
The difference is that it's not nearly as expensive to re-skin Angry Birds every few weeks than it is to produce Guitar Hero. Practically anything they earn makes it profitable.
The difference is that it's not nearly as expensive to re-skin Angry Birds every few weeks than it is to produce Guitar Hero. Practically anything they earn makes it profitable.
True, though I wonder how much appeal those re-skins even have. At least with Guitar Hero they were throwing in new songs that had potential to attract people who liked them. Do people really buy Rio because the bird is blue now or whatever?
Posts
No, I'm just pointing out that it's there. Also at lower resolutions it does make a pretty significant difference (which is to say, SD resolutions vs. HD resolutions). At this resolution, not so much of course. But again, that ties into what I was saying about perceieved increase as every other generation has made significant leaps, partially due to resolution jumps (and the jump to HD)
*For consoles* - I still don't know why I need to qualify that statement when that's the damn thing we were talking about. And again, very few developers are expanding on PC development. I think Crytek may be the only one that's even pushing graphical boundaries there...
No, not really. The Wii received games like Far Cry, Need for Speed and Splinter Cell weeks after launch.
Keep telling yourself that.
And as other people have stepped in to add, you putting that "for consoles" qualifier in there doesn't make you any more correct because Resolution has little bearing on Graphical Quality.
And as I keep trying to point out, resolution has very little to do with the argument I'm making. Consoles will never be as powerful as PCs (at least until they become as swappable as PCs, which at that point they might as fucking well be PCs). Talking about how awesome top-of-the-line PCs can do is irrelevant because consoles are nowhere near that powerful...
How does this back up your comment that games have hit a graphical plateau?
Yeah everything I've read has suggested that. But *shrug*, haven't held one myself.
But graphics aren't even the big concern for me with higher power so much as freeing game design from constraints that aren't readily apparent. Such as the effects of the relatively low RAM on current consoles upon level design or character variety for example. Or a number of other benefits to power that aren't as immediately visible as graphics but open up lots of options for games that simply weren't possible to properly implement on current hardware.
Indeed.
Again to sell the core gamers, Nintendo will need more than slightly better versions of franchise they can get on systems they already own, because the perceived hurdle is: game price + Wii U price vs game price. And to sell the casual gamers they need something beyond graphics that says, 'this is the new experience everyone is talking about'.
Group A is predicated on them pushing developers to bring their A-game to the Wii U's table, because a port+ won't really cut it. Group B is all about the message and the story Nintendo wants to tell. Nintendo has time to work on that, but it wasn't there at E3. In fact, it was quite a muddle message presented there, with more of a proof-of-concept than anything.
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/
I write about video games and stuff. It is fun. Sometimes.
Oh no! And there's no possible chance more games could be announced in the year or so before it's released! Nintendo is dooooooooomed!
Keep telling yourself that. [/quote]
And you keep telling yourself graphics matter for sales, then.
Never did to begin with!
Then why are they an issue for the Wii U?
Because you wanted to pretend that the WiiU had this unknown factor going for it that will help Nintendo's standings, and I pointed out that, no, it didn't. I pointed out that it was launching very much similarly to the original Wii, graphical gap and all.
Obviously the graphical gap didn't stop the Wii from selling gangbusters. No one is arguing that. I will argue that it does matter to the fan base that Nintendo is actively trying to court. However, in certain circumstances, I can see, and even stated so, the exact opposite. When we get the option to buy Modern Warfare 4 for the 360, or Modern Warfare 4 and a WiiU, a large portion of 360/PS3 owner won't abandon their console and gamer profile for the WiiU version simply because of gimmick+ slightly better graphics.
Only thing stated, by me, in this thread is that the WiiU doesn't have some mystical ace up it's sleeve and that graphical quality hasn't reach some kind of plateau.
It will certainly be a good long while before we get non-first-party titles that make intelligent use of the iPad with a 3DS stuck on either side WiiPad controller thingy's screen.
Actually, I guess I sort of liked the motion control integration in No More Heroes, but mostly because it was pretty non-intrusive
Silent Hill: Shattered Memories.
Wario Ware for the Wii is pretty awesome.
Alright yeah forgot about that one but I really enjoyed it on the Wii
Shattered Memories was awesome, but the only thing besides moving the camera that the wiimote did was act as a cellphone, right? I haven't played in a while, so I'm probably wrong.
Some, but most of the time developers did not bring their A-game. They mapped a function to motion control and called it a day. Sometimes that worked well (RE4), sometimes not as much. I worry the Wii U will have the same problem without the novelty of motion control to entice users.
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/
I write about video games and stuff. It is fun. Sometimes.
Why does the Wii U need an ace up its sleeve? After all, you said the 360 didn't do anything spectacular, yet it's selling quite well and could pass the Wii's overall sales in a couple of years.
I never said the Wii U had an unknown factor up its sleeve, I just said that it's a lot less annoying to third-party core game developers, as we can already see from the early game announcements.
It was also used for picking stuff up and manipulating objects in puzzles
That's kind of what I took this to mean:
Which is still not really accurate, since, again, the WiiU is launching in a very similar situation to the Wii.
Ace up its sleeve is a bit much, but the whole point of selling a product is to convince consumers that your product is better than the other guys, not mostly the same. The third parties on the Wii U say "mostly the same" so far, seeing as they used footage from their competitors' systems for the announcement. It's up to Nintendo to put their best foot forward and push third-parties to do the same. Part 1 is relatively assured, Part 2 is not. If that is the case, the possibility is that you could see a repeat of the GameCube situation.
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/
I write about video games and stuff. It is fun. Sometimes.
Actually, the Wii's pre-launch situation threw in a lot of uncertainty as well, though in this case it was because the industry wondered whether people would buy an underpowered system with a weird waggle controller.
The Wii U is also generating uncertainty due to its wacky hardware, plus the question of whether Microsoft and Sony will launch new consoles sooner rather than later as a response.
Not exactly the realm of drooling fanboy blather, here. (Especially since I never actually put in a prediction of how well the Wii U will sell, just that it seems to be less off-putting to third parties than the Wii is.)
And using the cellphone's camera was awesome since they managed to make it react just like a real cellphone camera with a slight time delay, artifacts and blurring.
Zeboyd Games Development Blog
Steam ID : rwb36, Twitter : Werezompire, Facebook : Zeboyd Games
Having an ace up your sleeve really is a different thing from just generally adding some uncertainty. You don't have to have some special advantage to be a game-changer.
I was terrible at Halo in college, but I turned the tide a couple times just by briefly distracting the good players on the other side. I wasn't an ace up my team's sleeve, but I altered the game a bit just by being there.
The WiiU's touch screen may be a huge factor, it might not be, but in any case you can be sure that it has thrown a monkey wrench into existing plans.
How do you know this? Is it one of those blatantly obvious things or has there been some market research showing a dearth of interest in touch screens?
Either way, I'm in for Nintendo's stuff. Even if 3rd party support ends up being garbarge, 1st party support is typically worth it (IMO anyways).
I know money can be tight, and you can't expect everybody to instantly buy every single system. But like... you can own more than one. They don't suddenly explode in proximity to one another.
They can?
Alert the media!
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/35989/Rovio_Betting_Everything_On_Angry_Birds_Targeting_1_Billion_Fans.php
Dude, please, please stop talking.
Then again, it's probably because of things like this:
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/35983/Roku_Adds_MotionControlled_Game_Capabilities_To_VideoStreaming_SetTop_Box.php
Yes.
This has been another edition of Simple Answers To Simple Questions.
True, though I wonder how much appeal those re-skins even have. At least with Guitar Hero they were throwing in new songs that had potential to attract people who liked them. Do people really buy Rio because the bird is blue now or whatever?