Could Nintendo go third party?

[Theocnoob]

You should have your vision checked by an eye doctor.

Hilarious. Seriously though, look it up. PS1 pushed more polygons and had higher resolution textures than N64. Maybe you liked everything blurry and Z buffered but I didn't.

 

[Theocnoob]

It already looks amazing, what's your point?
The game isn't blurry, all the animations and textures you want are there, it doesn't NEED more graphics power.

When I lived in a small town where people are prone to say such things, a fellow teenager remarked to me that "N64 looked as good as games were ever going to look, and how could games ever possibly look better than that?"

A lot of people seem to suffer from this. If you doubled or tripled the number of polygons, added realistic grass, better physics, more reflections and more detailed reflections, etc, the game would look better.

 

[Automata]

If you doubled or tripled the number of polygons, added realistic grass, better physics, more reflections and more detailed reflections, etc, the game would look better.

Again, how does this help the game be more fun than it already is?

 

[ATMINSIDE]

I was genuinely surprised at how comfortable that game pad is!

 

[ATMINSIDE]

When I lived in a small town where people are prone to say such things, a fellow teenager remarked to me that "N64 looked as good as games were ever going to look, and how could games ever possibly look better than that?"

A lot of people seem to suffer from this. If you doubled or tripled the number of polygons, added realistic grass, better physics, more reflections and more detailed reflections, etc, the game would look better.

I'm not saying the games can't look better, simply that they don't need to.
They are crisp, look good, and offer tons of enjoyment. I will reiterate, you don't buy this system for uber graphics, that isn't the point of it.

Not sure how that would help the games. Again, they are fun, look good, and run smooth.
They are keeping console cost down for a reason. Accessibility.

Hilarious. Seriously though, look it up. PS1 pushed more polygons and had higher resolution textures than N64. Maybe you liked everything blurry and Z buffered but I didn't.

Not sure what your point is...
The N64 had a much higher entertainment value than the PS1. You know why? Quality games.
Know why I never owned a PS1, and only played them at friend's houses? Because most of the games were pretty terrible.

 

[mage_x]

To be fair, the PS1 had some truly amazing games. Many of the best RPGs ever created were on the PS1.

To name a few:

FF7/8/9/Tactics
Grandia
Xenogears
Chrono Cross
Vagrant Story
Star Ocean
Legend of Dragoon
Legend of Legaia
Parasite Eve

Thinking back, the PS1 really brought about the golden age of RPGs IMO. They haven't been better since.

 

[Theocnoob]

To be fair, the PS1 had some truly amazing games. Many of the best RPGs ever created were on the PS1.

To name a few:

FF7/8/9/Tactics
Grandia
Xenogears
Chrono Cross
Vagrant Story
Star Ocean
Legend of Dragoon
Legend of Legaia
Parasite Eve

Thinking back, the PS1 really brought about the golden age of RPGs IMO. They haven't been better since.

Siphon filter
Spyro series
Medievil series
Twisted Metal series
Resident Evil

PS1 was great. If anything it was the grown up console to N64's kid/teenage console.

Again, how does this help the game be more fun than it already is?

Eye candy makes everything more fun. If a game looks better, I'll play it for longer intervals and enjoy the game much more. Almost all great games in history had very good or at least very creative graphics, with the exception of most RPGs.

If graphics didn't matter people wouldn't pay a few hundred dollars every couple of years to upgrade their hardware to handle games with better graphics coming down the pipeline?

Know why I never owned a PS1, and only played them at friend's houses? Because most of the games were pretty terrible.

Lies!

 

[Automata]

Eye candy makes everything more fun. If a game looks better, I'll play it for longer intervals and enjoy the game much more.

You are confusing the two concepts. Better graphics does not equate to a better game. People go back and play older games because they were fun, not because their graphics look good.

Have you played the games on the Wii U? My roommate and I can play Mario Kart 8 or New Super Mario Brothers U for hours without saying "hmm, I like this game, but it would be at least 10x better if I could see Mario's beard is mega detail!" We play because the games are fun (*gasp amazement shock awe*).

 

[Theocnoob]

You are confusing the two concepts. Better graphics does not equate to a better game. People go back and play older games because they were fun, not because their graphics look good.

Have you played the games on the Wii U? My roommate and I can play Mario Kart 8 or New Super Mario Brothers U for hours without saying "hmm, I like this game, but it would be at least 10x better if I could see Mario's beard is mega detail!" We play because the games are fun (*gasp amazement shock awe*).

I know people play games because they're fun but personally, I get bored with seeing the exact same level of rendering power for 10-12 years in a row when it's used in two successive generations of hardware.

I think that, although games like the ones you mention are fun, they would be more fun if you could see beads of sweat running down Mario's slightly blemished, unshaven skin. Eyecandy+ great gameplay is possible. Look at the original Gears of War. Sold 3 thousand trillion copies because it was the best looking 360 game up to that point and it was fun.

There's little denying that Mario Kart 8 has sold so well not only because of the subject matter, but because it's the best looking game on the system. So what if it looked twice as good? Would it have twice the sales?

This is what I'm getting at.

 

[Automata]

Would it have twice the sales?

No

 

[Arbiter Odie]

More processing power is always useful.

When developers make a game for a console, it’s a constant ballet act of painful compromise.
Can we keep the particle density in this explosion, or are we dropping frames?
Would we benefit more from a higher draw distance, or better shader quality? We can’t keep both.
What about our texture resolutions? We’re low on vRAM, so high rez on the foliage or weapons? It would look better with both, but it’s not possible.

Now… it may appear, at times, that Nintendo’s first party games don’t require much graphical ompfh to render the assets and environments used in their unique art style.
And you would be correct.

Two conflicts are intertwined here. The importance of graphical fidelity in general, and it’s importance specifically in Nintendo’s games. Mario, I’m looking at you.

High fidelity graphics can be very important, and extremely evocative in a gaming experience. When I play an FPS, I mentally merge myself into the game as thoroughly as possible. Art is beautiful, and I want to enjoy all of it. It helps me feel like the game isn’t totally separate from reality, as though I might possibly be there. The more blurry the line between photorealism and in-engine rendering becomes, the more immersed I am. It’s a major factor of enjoyment for my play-style of games.

But Nintendo? Nintendo has chosen to use a cartoony art style for most of their games. Especially the Mario games. It lacks surface detail, it lacks modeling realism it lacks lifelike lighting. And it works. When I sit down to play Mario cart, I make a different connection to it, than I would Crysis. It’s a light hearted game, an unrealistic game, and it’s art style is goofy but fun. I can’t be immersed in it, because it’s a 3rd person racing game, best played in split screen with friends.
It’s a different experience.
I don’t mind the simplicity of the graphics, because they’re intentional! They look that way on purpose! And they fit with the ridiculous universe that has giant, fire breathing, spikey shelled turtle/dragons racing in mini-go karts alongside talking mushrooms, and heroic plumbers. Shooting homing turtle shells, and gathering super powered stars as they go. Instead of being a detriment to the game, the simple, silly, graphics are one of it’s core assets.

In conclusion, the Wii U should have more processing power for whenever they decide to re-release the first and second 3d Metroid games. Those benefit from environmental immersion, and I would love to see the output resolution doubled or quadrupled.
But more graphical fidelity is not needed for Mario Cart. It stands on a different set of merits than the Metroid games do, and is fine as it currently stands.

 

[Theocnoob]

More processing power is always useful.

When developers make a game for a console, it’s a constant ballet act of painful compromise.
Can we keep the particle density in this explosion, or are we dropping frames?
Would we benefit more from a higher draw distance, or better shader quality? We can’t keep both.
What about our texture resolutions? We’re low on vRAM, so high rez on the foliage or weapons? It would look better with both, but it’s not possible.

Now… it may appear, at times, that Nintendo’s first party games don’t require much graphical ompfh to render the assets and environments used in their unique art style.
And you would be correct.

Two conflicts are intertwined here. The importance of graphical fidelity in general, and it’s importance specifically in Nintendo’s games. Mario, I’m looking at you.

High fidelity graphics can be very important, and extremely evocative in a gaming experience. When I play an FPS, I mentally merge myself into the game as thoroughly as possible. Art is beautiful, and I want to enjoy all of it. It helps me feel like the game isn’t totally separate from reality, as though I might possibly be there. The more blurry the line between photorealism and in-engine rendering becomes, the more immersed I am. It’s a major factor of enjoyment for my play-style of games.

But Nintendo? Nintendo has chosen to use a cartoony art style for most of their games. Especially the Mario games. It lacks surface detail, it lacks modeling realism it lacks lifelike lighting. And it works. When I sit down to play Mario cart, I make a different connection to it, than I would Crysis. It’s a light hearted game, an unrealistic game, and it’s art style is goofy but fun. I can’t be immersed in it, because it’s a 3rd person racing game, best played in split screen with friends.
It’s a different experience.
I don’t mind the simplicity of the graphics, because they’re intentional! They look that way on purpose! And they fit with the ridiculous universe that has giant, fire breathing, spikey shelled turtle/dragons racing in mini-go karts alongside talking mushrooms, and heroic plumbers. Shooting homing turtle shells, and gathering super powered stars as they go. Instead of being a detriment to the game, the simple, silly, graphics are one of it’s core assets.

In conclusion, the Wii U should have more processing power for whenever they decide to re-release the first and second 3d Metroid games. Those benefit from environmental immersion, and I would love to see the output resolution doubled or quadrupled.
But more graphical fidelity is not needed for Mario Cart. It stands on a different set of merits than the Metroid games do, and is fine as it currently stands.

And there's another bone I have to pick with Nintendo. They are the re-release KINGS of the videogame market. It started with Super Mario All Stars and they've just been at it ever since at an ever increasing rate.

"Here's the same game you payed $49.99 for 10-15 years ago, again, with high resolution textures at 1080P, for $49.00. What? You've played it already? No but did we mention this one's at 1080P? Do you know how much work we went through to make this game 1080P? Surely it's worth the same $49.99 that a brand new game built from the ground up is worth. We're not just milking cash cows here, we're producing genuine entertainment!"

And what's up with farming Nintendo properties out to 3rd party developers? F-ZERO GX by Sega? GARBAGE. Star fox by god knows who? Garbage. Donkey Kong Country by Retro Games? Garbage (I know its a 3rd party game to begin with but RARE is the only company that should be making a donkey kong country game). Nintendo angers me to no end. I will never support them by buying one of their systems again. I briefly owned a 3DS and sold it because of the terrible battery life. Hell, I even had a Virtual Boy.

 

[ATMINSIDE]

Nintendo angers me to no end. I will never support them by buying one of their systems again.

Good.

 

[Janus67]

FWIW the two DKC games that came out were excellent.

 

[VG_Addict]

Could someone tell me what's wrong with Wii U's online?

 

[Janus67]

Are you speaking in general or specifically there is an issue with it today?

 

[VG_Addict]

I've heard a lot of people complain about it.

 

[Automata]

The only issues I've had online were when Mario Kart 8 initially got released. It wouldn't connect to any of their servers and the errors it threw were totally useless. Past the first week, I haven't had any issues.

 

[Silver_Pharaoh]

Hilarious. Seriously though, look it up. PS1 pushed more polygons and had higher resolution textures than N64. Maybe you liked everything blurry and Z buffered but I didn't.

But it's easy to overclock an N64!
And it had Goldeneye and Perfect Dark

 

[Janus67]

But it's easy to overclock an N64!
And it had Goldeneye and Perfect Dark

Didn't you kill your n64 trying to overclock it?