Post by: RABicle on August 22, 2003, 04:41:22 AM
I'm mainly referring to the geometry or our figures, or the blockiness if you want to call it that. If you run down the EAD developed games on gamecube, Animal Crossing, Mario Sunshine, Zelda, Mario Kart, Pikmin, Luigi's Mansion etc. they are all very low in polygon counts. This is a bit of a bad image for Nintendo as some of their biggest games, look average when compared to your average Xbox or PS2 game, turning off the joe Blogs of the gaming world. Even turning off the young market who believe graphics is everything.
We all know the gamecube is powerful and capable of amazing graphics, as seen by the example shown to us my Retro Studios, Capcom, Nintendo System Technology, Amusement Vision and others. It just seems strange that EAD, arguably the single greatest and most influential of all video game developers, who would've had a say in the way the cube hardware was put togethor, produce such shoddy graphics.
I'm guessing that a) They dont care, graphics dont make a game great (I agree, but they can make a very good game even better)
or b) The way they are making their games is saving more processor grunt for the dynamics of the gameworld than the graphics.
You people agree?
Post by: Grey Ninja on August 22, 2003, 05:44:35 AM
Mario Sunshine
This game features some of the most wonderful water effects ever. The game handles a massive amount of water on screen, with a nice draw distance, and rarely loses its 60fps charm. The polygon counts are certainly passable, but the true beauty lies in the many different effects used in the game, and the speed at which they are run.
Zelda
I still consider this to be one of the most breathtaking games I have ever played. Being a cel shaded game, lighting is the key to making the game look excellent. Of course Zelda handled the lighting like a champ. Multiple light sources didn't even faze the game. Multiple torches in a darkened area was simply astounding. The polygon count was also insane at times. Whether it be a field of grass gently blowing in the wind, or a bunch of floating particles over realistically modelled water, the game always had something to make you go "WOW!" I know that this game continually wowed me, right up to the end. The final fight knocked me on my butt, watching the realistic water fall down as Ganon cast all his special attacks without a hint of slowdown. This game had it all. Artistic and graphical beauty.
Mario Kart
This game just amazes me every time I see it. There is always a LOT going on in any given scene. There are carts racing down the road, there are chomps on the side doing their thing, as well as many other ambient effects. There's lots of nice particle effects, as well as 7 other racers, each doing their thing, with 2 detailed character models in each cart. But the truly wonderful thing about this game is that no matter how much happens on screen, the game never drops a frame.
Pikmin
100 independently controlled AI characters attacking other AI characters is not an easy trick. But the GameCube handles it marvellously, showing nice smooth character models, and smooth animations while handling all the AI. The game sacrifices graphics to add more processing power to the mix, and the game works well because of that.
Luigi's Mansion
It constantly amazes me that people think this game looks bad. The particle and lighting effects in the game are still some of the best I have ever seen. Virtually everything in the game is affected by the vacuum cleaner, and will move appropriately according to the laws of physics. It takes a very powerful particle engine to manage all that. The lighting is also very well done, complete with some of the finest shadows that you are ever likely to see. The main character in the game is also endowed with a very high poly model, with some very nice animations and facial animations. This game in particular I feel is a tech demo above all. It showcases many of the GameCube's strengths, and does it well.
Basically, the point I am trying to make with this post is that there's more to a game than a polygon count, and if that's all you look at, then you are seriously missing out on what makes a great game engine. Nintendo believes that ambience is more important than a character with a few thousand more polys.
Post by: SuperLink666 on August 22, 2003, 06:25:23 AM
Post by: Gup on August 22, 2003, 06:27:47 AM
In Wind Waker, other than Link, Ganon, and the other bosses; the designs were of kid caliber. In Mario Sunshine, all the island inhabitors looked like(again) they could have been drawn by some kid. And then there's Pikmin, no explanations needed.
Graphically though, I have no quarrels. Wind Waker is the most unique and beautiful looking game released so far(even with the bad character designs). Sunshine looks fine, it's just that character designs are ugly, but the levels(enemies, water!!!) looks great and full of life. Mario Kart, though, looks fantastic. Each character stay true to there origins and look a hell lot better than the games they were in(Mario and Peach in Sunshine/SSBM, Luigi in his Mansion/SSBM, DK in SSBM). The only game from EAD I don't like graphically is Pikmin, the character designs just ruined that game for me. If I wanted to see a 100 low-detailed and ugly character models wonder around the screen, I'd rather go play Mystic Heroes/Dynasty Warriors with 50+ reasonably detailed characters onscreen hacking and slashing one another.
Post by: DRJ on August 22, 2003, 06:48:07 AM
Take a new game in store kiosks now (Ultimate Muscle). I personally dont like sports games, and especially dislike wrestling games, but it still annoys me when people see the graphics and ohhh kicky, crappy, garbage. Give the game a chance, play it and see how fast it is. The graphics may not be realistic but the game plays great, and that is the most important thing for me.
You shouldnt say "cant EAD make realistic graphics" when it is quite obvious that they can make anything that they can imagine. You should say why doesnt EAD make a game with this style of graphics.
Post by: egman on August 22, 2003, 07:17:48 AM
A good example of this is the recent news that Project Gotham Racing 2 is going to be locked at 30fps to allow more detail. The reactions to this news is split--some gamers welcome the the added detailed, while others would much rather have the detail scaled back to allow for as high a framerate as possible. Nintendo generally would go with the latter opinion because movement is much more impressive than detail. Wind Waker is impressive not because of detailed models or such, but because it all runs incredibly smooth 90 percent of the time with copius amounts of effects thrown in.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on August 22, 2003, 09:21:34 AM
The environmental water causes a significant performance hit, preventing any "reliable"/smooth 60fps performance.
Post by: Toolvana on August 22, 2003, 09:38:49 AM
Post by: Gup on August 22, 2003, 10:25:32 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Toolvana
I'm so tired of hearing people try to pass off their opinions as fact. To make a statement saying that you don't like a games graphics, and therefore the graphics are crap is utterly ridiculous.
Yeah, I've had that problem not with the graphics, but the game itself.
Post by: Uglydot on August 22, 2003, 11:05:03 AM
Post by: rpglover on August 22, 2003, 11:51:24 AM
Post by: mouse_clicker on August 22, 2003, 12:05:27 PM
I was going to write up a big post detailing all of EAD's Gamecube games I thought had great graphics, but Grey Ninja beat me to the punch. Let me just add that pictures NEVER do a game justice- I've heard many reports from people who have actually played Mario Kart: Double Dash who've said it looks very good.
Post by: mjbd on August 22, 2003, 12:39:49 PM
Post by: Michael8983 on August 22, 2003, 02:23:05 PM
For whatever reasons, the screenshots seem to ALWAYS look like cr*p while the games themselves actually look really good.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on August 22, 2003, 03:08:43 PM
Trust high-quality DivX video
*_*
Post by: Grey Ninja on August 22, 2003, 04:11:13 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666
Mario Sunshine is 30fps, not 60fps, btw.
The environmental water causes a significant performance hit, preventing any "reliable"/smooth 60fps performance.
Sorry, that was my best guess, as I didn't feel like looking it up, and I didn't feel like throwing in the game. I never really remembered it having stuttering animation, so I thought it was 60fps. Sorry.
Post by: AgentSeven on August 22, 2003, 04:56:56 PM
Why is it that fanboy loners do nothing but complain? I'm willing to bet that whomever started this"thread" hasn't even seen Mario Kart: Double Dash in person, as I have on more than one occasion. It's graphics are bright and colorful. It's a joy to behold.
Hey Rab, quit complaining
I love the part where this "graphics genius" says that the average Ps2 game looks better than most GC games, LMAO!!!! Take a look at the JOKE of a game that is the ps2 version of Soul Caliber 2 and you will know why I'm laughing (BTW, am I the only one here who notices that the same, Nintendo bashing person keeps posting threads under different forum names? Hmmm........I bet this kid doesn't have a GC...)
Post by: RABicle on August 22, 2003, 07:41:17 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: AgentSeven
I gotta say that this "thread" smells a lot like flame-bait. Sorry, but it just does. Just about everyone here feels that EAD does in fact create some great games with beautiful graphics.
Why is it that fanboy loners do nothing but complain? I'm willing to bet that whomever started this"thread" hasn't even seen Mario Kart: Double Dash in person, as I have on more than one occasion. It's graphics are bright and colorful. It's a joy to behold.
Hey Rab, quit complaining
(BTW, am I the only one here who notices that the same, Nintendo bashing person keeps posting threads under different forum names? Hmmm........I bet this kid doesn't have a GC...)
I'm glad you could go to the trouble of not adding anything to the disscussion but instead just flame me. real good man, real good.
This thread wasn't supposed to be flame bait, I was seeing if other people had noticed the fact that as a whole EAD arn't producing the same high quality of graphics that companies such as Capcom are.
Yes I have never seen mario kart in person. Living in a regional area of WA and having things such as school and life to attend to I cant spend all day attending Nintendo previews in stores and watching Mario Kart in person, so i guess you win whatever money you put on that bet.
I actually quite enjoy complaining and I'm glad you brought to our attension how much better Soul Caliber 2 looks on Gamecube when compared to the PS2 version. Obviously this means that the gamecube is a technically supirior machine, giving developers such as EAD no excuse for not being able to replicate some of the Playstations finer looking games.
And belive it or not, I am not the same Nintendo bashing person posting under a different name. I've been a member of this board ever since PGC swapped from the Ezboards, The only consoles I own are Nintendo consoles, including the Gamecube you believe I dont have. SO i looks like you lose the money you placed on that bet. Sorry. (I presume you thought I was evil because of my communist avatar or something)
Anyway now that I have dealt with you I'll state the next part of my case.
If you go down to any primary school, and ask some kids there why they like xbox or why they like Gran Turismo or something, one of the first things they will say is "Because the graphics are so good"
Now thats what would happen when you asked a primary kid, Primary kids ounce upon a time played kiddy games, they played Nintendo. Now if the kids arn't playing Nintendo, who else besides us here are? Because certainly the older casual gamer crowd seems to think that Nintendo is for kids, and they dont buy it and the kids are buying Playstations and Xboxs. And one of the most important things toa kid is how good the graphics are. When I was in 5th grade I wanted a N64 cos it had the best graphics.
And if the best gamecube games arn't displaying the graphical quality they could be Nintendo are losing their ounce core market.
Also i'ld like to thank the people that brought to my attension the fact that the poly counts on Mario Sunshine could be low because of the complex wter effects it throws around. I beat the game a fair while ago and have forgotton just how good it looked. I can remeber that it would mysteriously dropp it's framerate greatly for seemingly no reason at all.
And lastly somebody was telling me that GCN games often look dodgy in screenshots when compared to Xbox and PS2 games because the GCN Debug kits simply wernt very good at taking the screenshots.
Post by: ThePerm on August 22, 2003, 07:44:09 PM
Post by: Grey Ninja on August 22, 2003, 07:48:39 PM
Near as I can tell, you are just saying: "EADs graphics are teh suck!" without backing it up in any way. Mario Sunshine did have a couple of places where the framerate dropped, but I think it's hardly representative of the entire game. I know that the few times it did happen didn't bother me in the slightest. Hell, I could even make Rogue Leader slow down by bombing the ground like 50 million times.
I still see no evidence that EAD can't make good graphics. I look at Zelda, and I see the most gorgeous game ever made. I see Mario Sunshine, and I see water that makes me want to dive into the TV. I see Luigi's Mansion, and I see a fully interactive world that would make Kojima cry to mommy.
Gran Turismo 4 is a very nice looking game, but I don't see it as being much nicer than Wind Waker in terms of graphics. They both achieved quite nicely what they sought out to do. Until you actually start saying what makes the graphics "teh suck", I am afraid I can't debate this with you. A general statement about "low poly counts" just doesn't do much for me.
To tell the truth, even the title of this thread bothers me. You are implying that EAD's graphics are some of the worst on GameCube. This is just the hugest lie ever. Look around at the GameCube's selection. Hell, look at Xbox and PS2 too. EAD's graphics are better than at least 95% of what else is out there.
Btw, listing Animal Crossing in your list of "crappy" EAD games is just a low blow. It was an N64 game.
Post by: BlkPaladin on August 22, 2003, 08:13:11 PM
Post by: RABicle on August 22, 2003, 08:17:31 PM
yes I think Zelda looks mindblowing, I love the look. I also like Mario Sunshines water effects. I shuld take back a few things I said at the start of this topic. EAD graphics arn't bad as sorta, but when you compare the quality of the gameplay and the sounds in their games it's almost as if the graphics ae taking a back seat. And while Gameplay should always be first graphics are very important in peoples initial impressions of the game.
Take halo for example, When people see it for the first time they would initially be impressed by it's stunning visuals, when they have a chance to play it they would enkoy the gameplay. Same goes for a stunning game like Metroid Prime. When a person sees Pikmin in action for the first time though, they might be turned off by the fact that the graphics arn't as good as they could be. Sure when they play it they'll enjoy it but first impressions is one of the most important factors when anybody buys a game. especially if ift's just your average gamer or your kid, two markets Nintendo used to have.
Mabye I am expecting too much. Mabye i'm used to the days when EAD were leading the industry in the graphics departments (see Mario 64, Mario Kart 64 etc.) Mabye I have been expeting those days to continue or something, I dont know. They are very talented and make some stylish games, but their exceptionally high levels in the gameplay stakes are far above what they are doing with graphics.
And they are making their games look better than a lot of other GCN developers, I only have to look at the Sega games I own (Crazi Taxi, Sonic 2, SMB) to see that.
Post by: AgentSeven on August 22, 2003, 08:48:58 PM
This thread = Flame Bait (I know I took the bait, but what could I do? I can't resist the challenge)
RABicle, I sense that you have had other names in this forum. Other identities if you will....
Finally, let me be the first to say that this topic blows and it's a bit pointless. Let me explain. Here you have RAB, a guy who is stuck in his opinion no matter what anyone says, and then there's the rest of us. Were the people with enough common sense to see the truth, who feel that for some inane reason, we need to change the opinion of an ignorant fan boy shooting his mouth off on the web. Not to mention the fact that he's probably a fanboy of another system, who also probably doesn't even own a GC in the first place.
see what I mean? pointless....
Post by: Michael8983 on August 22, 2003, 08:55:04 PM
dont know."
You have to keep in mind that the N64 was a lot more powerful than the PSX and Nintendo was one of very few developers that knew how to harness that power. Obviously, things are different this generation and Nintendo doesn't have such an advantage.
Nintendo's games are still among the most impressive graphically (despite what cr*ppy screenshots would have you believe) but you can't expect them to be leagues above the competition's like Mario 64 and Zelda Oot's were.
Post by: RABicle on August 22, 2003, 08:58:04 PM
The fact that i'm willing to question the ways of EAD shows that I'm not a totally blind fanboy, but a fanboy who happens to read a multiformat magazine. You dont know anything about me, do i have to get people from this forum who know me personally (Evilmanman) to clarify what I've said or something?
Post by: BlkPaladin on August 22, 2003, 09:05:49 PM
Post by: RABicle on August 22, 2003, 09:16:51 PM
I would just like to see EAD just push their next few titles more graphically, because we they probably could and the games would benfit from them.
Post by: Grey Ninja on August 22, 2003, 09:33:44 PM
Am I also to assume that the only game left on your list of games with subpar graphics is Pikmin? Because that's the impression I got from one of your earlier posts.
Post by: KDR_11k on August 22, 2003, 10:02:08 PM
The environments are really important for the first impression, but they seem to lack in most EAD games. This is true for other games as well, but those aren't part of this debate.
Post by: egman on August 23, 2003, 05:26:14 AM
In the end, I think technical power is often confused with design. I can see how some people are not enthralled with Nintendo's art direction, but to say that their games are technically weak without some knowledge of what has to be done to achieve the look of their games is folly.
Post by: Grey Ninja on August 23, 2003, 06:03:49 AM
I think it's like egman says. It's the artwork you don't like. There's nothing wrong with the amount of stuff that Nintendo does in their games.
Post by: Infinitipo on August 23, 2003, 11:46:09 AM
Basically, what I'm saying is that some parts (not all of it) of Wind Waker and other recent Nintendo games seem to be lacking a lot of detail in environments and characters. In Sunshine, I really don't have any gripes about the graphics; it's a platformer, so the lack of detail doesn't distract gamers (I played SMS just a couple hours ago--still think it's an awesome game). With Wind Waker, however, there is a lot less jumping and more walking/sailing around and looking at things. In my opinion, the designers put the most effort into Ouset Island, what with moving grass, lots of characters and houses, etc. But on Windfall, there isn't any slashable grass at all (you can check for yourself), just dull clumps of bushes that don't move unless you swing your sword at them. Even then, you can't cut down the bushes like the ones at Outset and some of the smaller islands in the game. I know this isn't a very big part of the game (not by far, lol), but when you just want to wander around the town it's somewhat disappointing when you bump into plantlife and it doesn't even wobble, or you just walk right through the graphics.
Anyway, to get this over with, my point is that in some of Nintendo's games it seems like they leave out detail that could have otherwise been easily added. I'd post more of what I mean exactly, but I have to go. And if none of this makes sense, I don't know what to say.
Post by: mouse_clicker on August 23, 2003, 01:31:21 PM
Post by: Infinitipo on August 23, 2003, 01:50:12 PM
Oh, and about the lava pool area. Yes, that was definitely awesome; the only way it could have been better is if there were more places like it.
Post by: kennyb27 on August 23, 2003, 02:00:07 PM
Post by: Infinitipo on August 23, 2003, 02:08:03 PM
Post by: blackfootsteps on August 23, 2003, 04:14:11 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Gup
...The only game from EAD I don't like graphically is Pikmin, the character designs just ruined that game for me. If I wanted to see a 100 low-detailed and ugly character models wonder around the screen, I'd rather go play Mystic Heroes/Dynasty Warriors with 50+ reasonably detailed characters onscreen hacking and slashing one another.
What about the actual settings / landscapes? The 'garden' was just beautiful.
Post by: WesDawg on August 23, 2003, 05:12:45 PM
Anyways, I wasn't disappointed with the graphics in the game ever until my second time through. Then I finaly started to get picky and noticed that sometimes forests were nothing more than textures painted on a wall, or that the camera wasn't always placed very well, or the frame rate dropped. Still, go down that crazy labrynth to the room with tons of those goat-kids or the one with the million little slime guys in it, and you've gotta be impressed. I don't know how high-poly those models are, but they're more than enough to give the game all the expression it needs. Why waste polygons that aren't going to be used, when you can use it to add more enemies?
Post by: Infinitipo on August 23, 2003, 06:32:32 PM
Post by: Gup on August 23, 2003, 07:12:34 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: blackfootsteps
What about the actual settings / landscapes? The 'garden' was just beautiful.
I can't remember well, but I thought it was okay, nothing mind-blowing for sure. It doesn't stand out in my mind and I usually notice stuff like that such as each blade of grass in Halo, diversity of areas in Metroid Prime, or destructible levels in DOA3.
Post by: Grey Ninja on August 24, 2003, 05:55:13 AM
Quote
It doesn't stand out in my mind and I usually notice stuff like that such as each blade of grass in Halo
I seem to remember every blad of grass being individually rendered in Wind Waker.
Besides, I never really saw what was so pretty about Halo.
Whereas, it was completely obvious what was so pretty about Zelda
I can't wait for the cries of "fanboy" in response to this post, but I will say this in advance. Show me a screenshot that is actually PRETTY in Halo. I can't find any. Most of the scenes I have seen are very lacking in the texture work, and don't have a lot of detail at all.
Post by: mouse_clicker on August 24, 2003, 07:30:28 AM
Seriously, Halo looks great, but I don't see how anyone could think it achieves it's graphical style better than Wind Waker does. Wind Waker is one of the best looking games around, in my opinion, and I just can't fathom anyone thinking Halo looks better.
Post by: Grey Ninja on August 24, 2003, 08:01:19 AM
Post by: Gup on August 24, 2003, 09:23:31 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Grey NinjaQuote
It doesn't stand out in my mind and I usually notice stuff like that such as each blade of grass in Halo
I seem to remember every blad of grass being individually rendered in Wind Waker.
Besides, I never really saw what was so pretty about Halo.
Whereas, it was completely obvious what was so pretty about Zelda
I can't wait for the cries of "fanboy" in response to this post, but I will say this in advance. Show me a screenshot that is actually PRETTY in Halo. I can't find any. Most of the scenes I have seen are very lacking in the texture work, and don't have a lot of detail at all.
There's really no way to compare Wind Waker vs. Halo graphically since they both use completely different styles, but the grass(actually bushes) in WW is kind of cheap if you think about it. It's just three sharp blades stuck together times fifty where as in Halo's grass, you can see each blade of grass stuck onto the area.
And yes, I consider you a Nintendo fanboy AND a microsoft hater. I am too, but I give credit to where it deserves and Halo, DOA3 deserves credit. I've never seen you compliment anything on xbox, yet games on GCN by Nintendo or any other big games(ToS) are always lush and beautiful.
And(last time), those pics you showed were both horrible, and it ain't completely obvious that Wind Waker looked nicer. The graphical beauty of WW(to me) are from the enemy/boss fights and the special effects in it. The environments of WW weren't really weren't detailed much(due to cel-shading) with exceptions to some places like Hyrule Castle. Halo's environments were repetitive as hell though.
Post by: AgentSeven on August 24, 2003, 09:24:40 AM
The animated style of Zelda :Wind Waker is pure genius, whereas Halo, although a great game, is just a marketing driven product that rips off other successfull franchises quite heavily. I.E. "Aliens" and "Half Life", especially Half Life. I'm suprised nobody sued.
By the way "Master Chief," even though it's a military rank, is the most stupid name I have ever heard for a video game character.
Post by: mouse_clicker on August 24, 2003, 12:27:42 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on August 24, 2003, 12:38:56 PM
Post by: kennyb27 on August 24, 2003, 12:58:06 PM
QuoteThat, my friend, is a nice looking texture, not individually rendered grass blades.
where as in Halo's grass, you can see each blade of grass stuck onto the area.
Post by: Grey Ninja on August 24, 2003, 01:09:35 PM
Quote
I've never seen you compliment anything on xbox, yet games on GCN by Nintendo or any other big games(ToS) are always lush and beautiful.
I am not a graphics person. I thought I made that clear by now. I kept a DOA XVB desktop background for quite some time though. Other than that, I have nothing nice to say about Xbox. It has no games I want. It's really that simple. I consider the Xbox to be about as useful as an empty box of beer.
In this thread, I am defending EAD from an attack that I think is injust. I am attacking Halo because it was used as an example of better environments, and I am simply saying that I think the environments are pathetic. I am not attacking all Xbox games. I think Panzer Dragoon is quite good looking for instance.
Regarding ToS, I don't think I've ever commented on its graphics. I want it because it's a great RPG.
Post by: RABicle on August 24, 2003, 06:03:39 PM
