Are Next Gen Graphics Really Needed on Next Gen Hardware?

[Hungry Friend]

My main issues with Nintendo are the forced gimmicks(stylus with the DS, motion with the Wii, Gamepad with the Wii U) but on the other hand, I still believe they make some of the best games on the planet. I just wish the gimmicky stuff(I know gimmicky is in the eye of the beholder) was 100% optional and you could, for exmple, have 2 pro controllers connected to the Wii U and discard the gamepad. Games would have to be patched to allow Pro controller only support but naturally there are titles that need the Gamepad. Generally speaking though, I want it to be optional, which would also lower the cost of the Wii U significantly.

Raw horsepower is overrated imo; art direction is everything. Naturally it's nice if a console has more assets to work with, but some people are WAY too picky about resoolution, textures and that kinda shit when in reality, good art design very often makes up for a system's lack of power. Take Dragon Quest VIII for example, a beautiful PS2 game that isn't terribly demanding graphically, even compared to other PS2 games, but its cell shaded style made its presentation timeless. Even if you don't like Akira Toriyama's art, you have to admit DQVIII is an excellent representation of that particular style. Framerate is the only thing I can be picky about, and only in games that requires lots of quick twitch reflexes like fighting games(don't play any FPS games), Racing games, Platformers etc.

Too much money is spent on making games look really pretty, and it's steadily jacking up dev costs. It's possible to make gorgeous games without spending assloads of money if their art style/direction is solid enough. Chrono Trigger, FF6, Phantasy Star IV, Secret of Mana, Seiken Densetsu 3, Suikoden 1-2(especially 2), Mario games, Zelda games, Metal Gear Solid 1-4 and TONS of other older games still look great today due to their superb art direction, and the hardware most of them run on is practically stone age tech by today's standards.

edit: The death of the mid-budget game and mobile obliterating dedicated handhelds is really hurting the industry as a whole. Most games today are either "AAA" games that cost WAY too much to make with beautiful graphics or cheap mobile shit. We need more mid-range games. OT I know but it's true.

 

[TecXero]

Why won't we call the Wii for what it is? Nintendo had a contract with IBM, a contract that cost them $1 billion USD, and the result of that contract was the Gekko and the line of processors that followed it. Since the Gamecube failed to meet their expectations, they had to think of a way to utilize the hardware they already had without having to improve upon it too much. They've mobilized, they've slightly beefed up the specs, they revived the WiiMote concept which was a previously shelved GC controller, they've oriented the system around it and they've released the Wii as their last shot at home consoles - very little risk involved and a fair chance at making their money back. The Wii was a success, everyone was happy, but the Wii U? That's where they got greedy.

I agree on the Wii front. I don't think it was a bad idea, though I didn't care much for the Wii until homebrew became more interesting on it. It just didn't have many appealing games to me. As for the Wii U, poor choices were made, especially with the controller, but in the end it's a cheap little console that has games that interest me. Nintendo is very greedy, but as long as it's packed as something that I enjoy at a fair price, I don't mind. Wii U for exclusives like Bayonetta 2 and Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze, 3DS for mobility, and PC/HTPC for everything else. I know that it's not something everyone wants, it's just what works for me.

 

[Foxi4]

I agree on the Wii front. I don't think it was a bad idea, though I didn't care much for the Wii until homebrew became more interesting on it. It just didn't have many appealing games to me. As for the Wii U, poor choices were made, especially with the controller, but in the end it's a cheap little console that has games that interest me. Nintendo is very greedy, but as long as it's packed as something that I enjoy at a fair price, I don't mind. Wii U for exclusives like Bayonetta 2 and Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze, 3DS for mobility, and PC/HTPC for everything else. I know that it's not something everyone wants, it's just what works for me.

The Wii was perfectly fine considering the losses they took with the Gamecube. People keep saying that Nintendo was still profitable at that point in history, but I can't help but think that they mostly stayed afloat thanks to the great success of the GBA, the Gamecube seemed more like a money pit to me. They had technology that they needed a use for so they've updated a Gamecube and it worked out, fine, good for them. My problem here is that after they've recuperated and made up tenfold, I expected them to come out with something new and exciting, not the same rehashed technology. Stapling three Wii's together is not my idea of progress.

 

[TecXero]

The Wii was perfectly fine considering the losses they took with the Gamecube. People keep saying that Nintendo was still profitable at that point in history, but I can't help but think that they mostly stayed afloat thanks to the great success of the GBA, the Gamecube seemed more like a money pit to me. They had technology that they needed a use for so they've updated a Gamecube and it worked out, fine, good for them. My problem here is that after they've recuperated and made up tenfold, I expected them to come out with something new and exciting, not the same rehashed technology. Stapling three Wii's together is not my idea of progress.

Consoles are already low-end to me on the technology front. The only thing that interests me when it comes to consoles is what I can't play on PC. Handhelds are an exception, since they're portable and I put a high value on portability. I'd rather have a game on my 3DS than on my PC. Yeah, I'd probably be happier if Nintendo also developed their games for PC, but the Wii U is a cheap enough investment that it's not a big deal to me.

 

[Psionic Roshambo]

The NX is not replacing the Wii U though, it's not Nintendo's next gen, it's supposed to be sold alongside the 3DS and the Wii U.

That's what Nintendo said about the DS too, that it would not be replacing the GameBoy line and we all know how that ended.

On the main topic, I would say my opinion on the level of tech is... Yeah it's good enough for games. Then again I am happy playing old 16 bit games too so my tastes in graphics are "Can I tell what is going on and is the frame rate constant and not choppy?" Meeting that requirement is something I can tell in like 2 seconds... The "Is the game fun to play? and will I want to keep playing and finish it perhaps multiple times?" that's the hardest spec to hit of all....

You can't put a bit number on it, you can't slap Mhz on it, you can't even put a brand name on it. I enjoy a good game from ANY company even EA as "evil" as they are.

Fun it's all about the fun for me If I am not having fun I don't care what the game looks like.

 

[Foxi4]

Consoles are already low-end to me on the technology front. The only thing that interests me when it comes to consoles is what I can't play on PC. Handhelds are an exception, since they're portable and I put a high value on portability. I'd rather have a game on my 3DS than on my PC. Yeah, I'd probably be happier if Nintendo also developed their games for PC, but the Wii U is a cheap enough investment that it's not a big deal to me.

There's a difference between being on the low-end of the spectrum and not being on the spectrum at all, y'know. The PS4 and the XBO may very well be low-to-mid-end in comparison to your average PC, but thanks to shortened API's and customized architectures they get the job done relatively well. The same cannot be said about the Wii U which simply can't support current gen mainstream games, no matter how you slice the cake.

That's what Nintendo said about the DS too, that it would not be replacing the GameBoy line and we all know how that ended.

I don't remember them ever saying anything like that, but to be fair, the Game Boy line lived on for a while in the form of the Micro.

 

[Deleted User]

I have no idea if I said anything on this thread at an earlier date, but I don't think having lots of polygons/triangles on models and maps is really a necessity, and super HQ shading isn't a necessity either. You can sometimes achieve a pretty nice look with lower poly graphics, and if you know what you're doing, you can also get a pretty great look with fairly low poly graphics.
With frame rate, sometimes having a smoother frame rate can make a game easier to play, 60fps is only really needed if a game has issues like input lag when played at 30fps.
The thing that matters most to me is good gameplay, but at the same time, I don't want to look at a game that mainly uses overly bright, clashing colours, and where all the characters are just a lump of polygons.

 

[TecXero]

There's a difference between being on the low-end of the spectrum and not being on the spectrum at all, y'know. The PS4 and the XBO may very well be low-to-mid-end in comparison to your average PC, but thanks to shortened API's and customized architectures they get the job done relatively well. The same cannot be said about the Wii U which simply can't support current gen mainstream games, no matter how you slice the cake.

Even if it did, it wouldn't really matter to me. The "mainstream" games I play are generally also on PC, so I'd prefer to play them on there. Wii U I think fills its niche fine, but it's just that, it's a niche console. It's for people that enjoy Nintendo games. I tend to enjoy some of their Donkey Kong, Metroid, Zelda, SSB, F-Zero, Star Fox and a few other titles on their systems. It's definitely a niche thing, but it works for me.
I'd rather have console specialized for gaming than something that tries to be everything but doesn't do any of them particularly well. Nintendo does know how to utilize their hardware, while I've seen nasty performance issues on PS4 when visiting a friend. Of course, that's more software side than anything, if the developers took more time to optimize a game for the PS4, I'm sure it could look almost as good and perform almost as well as if it was on PC. This generation and last are to a point for me where graphics kind of plateaued for me. Yeah, better hardware will still get better performance and allow for more resources for anything developers can think of, but as long as it's something interesting, is visually appealing, performs well, and at a fair price, I'll probably go for it.

As it is, I don't really see what Nintendo would have to gain by having more powerful hardware. Yeah, it would be easier for third-party companies to port multiplatform games to it, but Nintendo would have to do a lot more than that to get them on board. Nintendo isn't the nicest to outside developers. Not saying they shouldn't, just that I don't think they would fill their niche any better, might actually make it worse as it wouldn't be as affordable. A lot of people that are big into Nintendo stuff are generally either kids, which don't have much money or generally don't have parents willing to spend that much for something like that, or 20-somethings that are fairly nostalgic or grew up on Nintendo stuff (like myself) and don't have a lot of money as they're still ramping up their careers.

Do I wish Nintendo would drop their console and just develop games for PC? Sure, if they embraced the idea of options. As it is, though, the Wii U is the only one that has enough interesting stuff to get me to buy it out of the three main consoles around. If MS or Sony put out a few exclusives that interest me, I will probably consider buying their console, though I would still rather see everything just move to PC. Now handhelds, on the other-hand, I want to see stick around, at least until there's a decent handheld PC. I know there's some Android based alternatives, but they rarely have the gaming quality of dedicated handhelds.

Sorry for the long-winded nature of this. I tend to enjoy debates like this, despite how fruitless they tend to be. xD

 

[Foxi4]

Even if it did, it wouldn't really matter to me. The "mainstream" games I play are generally also on PC, so I'd prefer to play them on there. Wii U I think fills its niche fine, but it's just that, it's a niche console. It's for people that enjoy Nintendo games. I tend to enjoy some of their Donkey Kong, Metroid, Zelda, SSB, F-Zero, Star Fox and a few other titles on their systems. It's definitely a niche thing, but it works for me.
I'd rather have console specialized for gaming than something that tries to be everything but doesn't do any of them particularly well. Nintendo does know how to utilize their hardware, while I've seen nasty performance issues on PS4 when visiting a friend. Of course, that's more software side than anything, if the developers took more time to optimize a game for the PS4, I'm sure it could look almost as good and perform almost as well as if it was on PC. This generation and last are to a point for me where graphics kind of plateaued for me. Yeah, better hardware will still get better performance and allow for more resources for anything developers can think of, but as long as it's something interesting, is visually appealing, performs well, and at a fair price, I'll probably go for it.

As it is, I don't really see what Nintendo would have to gain by having more powerful hardware. Yeah, it would be easier for third-party companies to port multiplatform games to it, but Nintendo would have to do a lot more than that to get them on board. Nintendo isn't the nicest to outside developers. Not saying they shouldn't, just that I don't think they would fill their niche any better, might actually make it worse as it wouldn't be as affordable. A lot of people that are big into Nintendo stuff are generally either kids, which don't have much money or generally don't have parents willing to spend that much for something like that, or 20-somethings that are fairly nostalgic or grew up on Nintendo stuff (like myself) and don't have a lot of money as they're still ramping up their careers.

Do I wish Nintendo would drop their console and just develop games for PC? Sure, if they embraced the idea of options. As it is, though, the Wii U is the only one that has enough interesting stuff to get me to buy it out of the three main consoles around. If MS or Sony put out a few exclusives that interest me, I will probably consider buying their console, though I would still rather see everything just move to PC. Now handhelds, on the other-hand, I want to see stick around, at least until there's a decent handheld PC. I know there's some Android based alternatives, but they rarely have the gaming quality of dedicated handhelds.

Sorry for the long-winded nature of this. I tend to enjoy debates like this, despite how fruitless they tend to be. xD

See, that's the thing - they would benefit from at least meeting the par. Most people have one primary gaming system, they don't buy several consoles nor do they invest in a beefy gaming PC if they already have a console. If Nintendo's console are far behind the status quo, their customers are pretty much required to own another system or at least a PC in order to access mainstream titles at all, and I have a problem with that. A good console should provide you with access not just to exclusives but also to third-party mainstream games, otherwise it's just not a lot of bang for the buck.

You've chosen the PC as your primary mainstream gaming machine and that's fine, you're also okay with owning a Wii U as an extension to it which is also fine, but you have to realize that most gamers aren't like that. The average customer wants an all-in-one, no-nonsense gaming system, I think that's pretty much obvious. You won't see those customers here though, we're obviously all enthusiasts on the Temp.

 

[Acidflare]

I'll at least accept an argument for the Wii U but the Ouya is a garbage "console".

If your best argument is "it's not for everyone!" then it's bad.

I agree the Ouya was a terrible Idea, who wants to pay twice for things which was the worst selling point of the Ouya consoles in my perspective, If you bought an application on your android phone/tablet and wanted the same application on the Ouya even if you use the same account across all devices you still had to pay for it on the Ouya console. I was all in for buying an Ouya console then I read this factor on a couple of sources reddit, the ouya forums, and a topic here on gbatemp as soon as I found out about that I said "No not buying it."

LightyKD it seems like what your asking for is one heck of a Star Trek or Star Gate game that has had years upon years of work put into it, but I feel you on that topic of a game where you get to explore multiple planets with different cultures and civilizations.
Although playing the metroid series from start to finish will give you some of the same feeling, it's actually a really fun/difficult series to play start to finish, if you own a Wii/WiiU with copies of Metroid Prime Trilogy, Other M and Super Metroid(VC), a DS Lite a DS Flash cart and a EZ-Flash 3in1/IV you can play the whole series from start to finish on 2 systems.

 

[LightyKD]

I agree the Ouya was a terrible Idea, who wants to pay twice for things which was the worst selling point of the Ouya consoles in my perspective, If you bought an application on your android phone/tablet and wanted the same application on the Ouya even if you use the same account across all devices you still had to pay for it on the Ouya console. I was all in for buying an Ouya console then I read this factor on a couple of sources reddit, the ouya forums, and a topic here on gbatemp as soon as I found out about that I said "No not buying it."

LightyKD it seems like what your asking for is one heck of a Star Trek or Star Gate game that has had years upon years of work put into it, but I feel you on that topic of a game where you get to explore multiple planets with different cultures and civilizations.
Although playing the metroid series from start to finish will give you some of the same feeling, it's actually a really fun/difficult series to play start to finish, if you own a Wii/WiiU with copies of Metroid Prime Trilogy, Other M and Super Metroid(VC), a DS Lite a DS Flash cart and a EZ-Flash 3in1/IV you can play the whole series from start to finish on 2 systems.

You don't have to buy things on OUYA twice. It's rather a matter of being smart about where you buy your Android games from. I have OUYA's store, Amazon's app store and Google Play on my console and I buy my games according to this:

* OUYA version available? - buy first
* No OUYA version? - check Google Play
* Don't like the price? - check Amazon
* Amazon version too high or has no non-Fire TV controller support - buy Google Play version.

 

[Acidflare]

You don't have to buy things on OUYA twice. It's rather a matter of being smart about where you buy your Android games from. I have OUYA's store, Amazon's app store and Google Play on my console and I buy my games according to this:

* OUYA version available? - buy first
* No OUYA version? - check Google Play
* Don't like the price? - check Amazon
* Amazon version too high or has no non-Fire TV controller support - buy Google Play version.

from what I had read I got the impression that anything bought on google play couldn't be downloaded it had to be paid for again if it was also in the Ouya store. for example SuperRetro16(SNES Emulator) from what I had gathered if I wanted to use my google play license on the ouya I would have to pay ouya for it if they offer it aswell

 

[LightyKD]

from what I had read I got the impression that anything bought on google play couldn't be downloaded it had to be paid for again if it was also in the Ouya store. for example SuperRetro16(SNES Emulator) from what I had gathered if I wanted to use my google play license on the ouya I would have to pay ouya for it if they offer it aswell

I play my GP version of Sonic 4 EP 2 on my OUYA all the time. Yes the menu might give you the buy option because your account has not purchased it but opening the game will take you to your Google Play copy

 

[Acidflare]

I play my GP version of Sonic 4 EP 2 on my OUYA all the time. Yes the menu might give you the buy option because your account has not purchased it but opening the game will take you to your Google Play copy

My only issue with Android game console's is root functions, I use Root for certain things like running a copy of ubuntu which requires root for the vnc server to function running a full fledged linux OS like Lubuntu on an android devices has a lot of features like support for flash and html5 sites there's no need for a mobile view at all the VNC viewer manages all of the zooming and scaling features, and depending on the device that the linux OS is installed on you may be able to play some linux games too. I also use root to connect my DS3 to my android as a mouse/game controller.

I think if android game console companies went the route that HTC went with the bootloader unlocking, sales would rise, I trust older HTC's phones because I can unlock my bootloader at my own discretion and update my device's android version, currently my HTC Wildfire S is running PACrom android 4.2.2 the phone only had an update from HTC up 2.3.3. My HTC One V is updated from 2.3.5 to 4.1.2 I am currently trying to decided whether I should update it to 4.4.4 or 5.1.1 . The way I see that HTC looks at it is, we are giving you the ability to use your retail device for development purposes if you screw it up don't come crying.

 

[TecXero]

See, that's the thing - they would benefit from at least meeting the par. Most people have one primary gaming system, they don't buy several consoles nor do they invest in a beefy gaming PC if they already have a console. If Nintendo's console are far behind the status quo, their customers are pretty much required to own another system or at least a PC in order to access mainstream titles at all, and I have a problem with that. A good console should provide you with access not just to exclusives but also to third-party mainstream games, otherwise it's just not a lot of bang for the buck.

You've chosen the PC as your primary mainstream gaming machine and that's fine, you're also okay with owning a Wii U as an extension to it which is also fine, but you have to realize that most gamers aren't like that. The average customer wants an all-in-one, no-nonsense gaming system, I think that's pretty much obvious. You won't see those customers here though, we're obviously all enthusiasts on the Temp.

That's true. Though, like I said, Nintendo has a lot more to do than have a more powerful console to get third-party games on board. Not saying they shouldn't, no harm in having more gaming options, just that Nintendo has shot themselves in the foot in that area multiple times. Nintendo has always done their own little thing while being slightly disconnected with reality and slow to change. As much as they say they push "innovation", it took way too long for them to embrace the internet, and even then they're still having troubles with it. Even in the NGC days, which was the height of Nintendo consoles for me, they still were backwards with their mini-DVDs.

I don't think it should have supported DVD Video playback, as then they probably would have gone the route of the other consoles, but full sized DVDs would have made it a lot easier for multiplatform games to be ported to it without going through and compressing everything. Which is fine for others, but all this is from my own selfish point of view. I don't have any desire to pay an extra $100 just so my Wii U could be another blu ray player.

Maybe Nintendo could fill their niche and have a multiplatform console. We'll see if they can stop doing whatever drugs they're doing long enough to go that way. Probably not. Ever since the N64, they've gotten by on niche consoles and dominating the handheld market. For now, I think the lower price helps justify it, but that's just me. Then again, you practically need some sort of external storage for it, and not everyone has spare HDDs laying around. I think Nintendo should probably knock $100 off the price, even if it would be selling at a loss again.

 

[FAST6191]

[DS was not supposed to replace the gameboy]
I don't remember them ever saying anything like that, but to be fair, the Game Boy line lived on for a while in the form of the Micro.

They did. The term they used was "three pillars" with the DS supposed to be the third of them. Do a search for nintendo three pillars and you will get some stuff back.

 

[Acidflare]

They did. The term they used was "three pillars" with the DS supposed to be the third of them. Do a search for nintendo three pillars and you will get some stuff back.

Edit: It's actually a great deal of a history lesson, I didn't know about this term my self. here is a link to a page that tells a great deal on the history of the third pillar http://www.nintendojo.com/features/specials/a-pillar-too-many

the GameBoy was at it's end of life. it lived from 1989 - 2002 a 12 year life span across 8 different console's I would say nintendo had a good run with the GameBoy line and they will probably go the same route with the DS line of systems there have already been which has already reached 9 different systems it'self. yes the DSiXL 3DSXL and N3DSXL are variations but would you call the SP and micro variations of the GBA or different console's they all feature slightly different hardware and features but still all run the same programming code. the whole nintendo handheld line confuses me are they different consoles or are they different variations of the same console, what are your guys' thoughts about it?

 

[VMM]

Edit: It's actually a great deal of a history lesson, I didn't know about this term my self. here is a link to a page that tells a great deal on the history of the third pillar http://www.nintendojo.com/features/specials/a-pillar-too-many

the GameBoy was at it's end of life. it lived from 1989 - 2002 a 12 year life span across 8 different console's I would say nintendo had a good run with the GameBoy line and they will probably go the same route with the DS line of systems there have already been which has already reached 9 different systems it'self. yes the DSiXL 3DSXL and N3DSXL are variations but would you call the SP and micro variations of the GBA or different console's they all feature slightly different hardware and features but still all run the same programming code. the whole nintendo handheld line confuses me are they different consoles or are they different variations of the same console, what are your guys' thoughts about it?

For me, the handheld line can be described as:
1st) Game and Watch
2nd) Gameboy, Gameboy Pocket and Gameboy Light
3rd) Gameboy Color
4th) Gameboy Advance, Gameboy Advance SP, Gameboy Micro
5th) Nintendo DS Phat, Nintendo DS Lite, Nintendo DSi, Nintendo DSiXL
6th) Nintendo 3DS, Nintendo 3DS XL, Nintendo 2DS, New Nintendo 3DS, New Nintendo 3DS XL

 

[MikeyTaylorGaming]

The thing is, with huge game worlds you end up with a lot of empty space, which IMO is just annoying.

This is my problem with Zelda: Wind Waker.

I love the game, but why, oh why why why, is all that sea there to waste so much time. It's so unnecessary!

 

[The Real Jdbye]

This is my problem with Zelda: Wind Waker.

I love the game, but why, oh why why why, is all that sea there to waste so much time. It's so unnecessary!

They fixed that in WWHD though
And there are islands evenly dispersed with things to do on each one, so it's not so bad.