Topic: "the graphics...barely better than those on Gamecube"

[Hostile Creation]

"I don't believe in air."

You are getting totally off-topic here sir.

[cubist]

Anyone catch Matt's new mailbag at IGN about his impressions of the XBOX 360?

After reading it, I really disagreed with his impressions of the graphics in HI-DEF.  He says that it will be Nintendo's second biggest mistake behind going with cartridges over CDs.  While I agree with the latter, I completely disagree that the graphics in HI-DEF are the huge leap that we've been waiting for.  

Anyone else read it?

[Kairon]

Basically, Matt says that we shouldn't lie to ourselves. On an HD TV, HD is pretty nice. But when they played on a standard TV that doesn't cost $600-$2000, the X360 just doesn't put out anything special graphic wise.

Oh, and I don't think we have to worry about Nintendo limitting console power directly. Nintendo is actually very keen on the actual application of hardware power into software. After all, the N64 was the most powerful system of its generation and the GC is neck and neck with the XBOX in terms of graphic prowess. I suspect that Twilight Princess may also make a lot of non-in-the-know casual gamers who use standard TVs wonder: "Why spend 300 bucks on a new system when a system 5 years old can give me graphics just as good?"

The question is about indirectly being less powerful hardware wise. How far is Nintendo willing to cut costs in its quest for a mass market price point of sub $200? Tieing this issue back to price shows how delicate a balancing act it is. Should they launch at more than $200 because they're sure to sell out anyways? How quickly do they go mass market with price? If they do go mass market pricing, CAN they even manufacture enough Revs to meet a risen demand? And by not spending extra money on the horsepower to output HD graphics, how low is their bottomline really?

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com  

[zakkiel]

I don't know that casual gamers care about graphics at all. Certainly non-gamers don't.  

[ThePerm]

actually lemme go back....i just felt like spelling troll...because i came up with a funny wa to do it. your opinion is correct. I liked the way zelda looked..but it was too damn short

[pudu]

Quote
Originally posted by: zakkiel<br

Quote
I believe games can and are overrated due to many circumstances like the publisher popularity, past game performance/popularity, fanboyism (sorry but best way I could think of saying it), the mood the reviewer was in at the time, and MANY other reasons. I do, however, find what you said to be really funny and entertaining. Maybe if you said, "It's not possible for a game like OoT to be overrated unless you believe that people can be deceived about how much fun they're having" it'd be more accurate.

A game is good insofar as people have fun playing it. You can say a game sold more than it should have (a lot of people bought it and didn't have much fun) or that critics overrated it, in the sense that the numbers they gave didn't correspond to how much the gaming public enjoyed it. But you can't say a game is overrated by the people who play it. All that means is you happen to enjoy that game less than other players. Unless, as I said, you really do believe people can be wrong about how much fun they have with a game, due to fanboyism or whatnot, which is deeply patronizing and also just silly.

Hmm we were thinking on different wavelengths obviously.  When I saw that you were talking about game ratings what comes to my mind is how it is critically acclaimed by magazines, gamesites, and user reviews for the rest of the public to see.  I obviously know that a game is good if it is fun...and as far as I see it you just agreed with me by saying that the numerical scores critics give games don't necessarily correspond to how much the gaming public enjoyed it.  By me saying that games can be "overrated" I meant that a rating should be the closest it possibly can to the average enjoyment that all the other people who play the game have.  

What you must have meant was on a personal level...which it is obviously true that each persons enjoyment of a game can't be overrated, nor can they be "deceived" into finding it more fun.  All I was trying to point out is that there are many circumstances and preferences can affect how much fun a game is for any person at any given time so that must be considered (example:  one person loves the genre and has a top notch setup and plays it on xmas break, the other hates that type of game, has a crappy tv and plays it while avoiding homework).  Given this fact (that each person is affected by all sorts of forces) AND the fact that it is impossible to perfectly score a game, all I was trying to point out was that as soon as a game is rated by someone it will be seen as overrated by others who see it in a different light.  How much greater the score is to the average opinion of the people who play it can be seen as how overrated it is.  

So, in conclusion, if you look at it from an individual perspective where a person rates it truthfully then it is impossible for it to be "overrated" because there opinion is their opinion but if you look at it in a broader perspective where you take into account that a ratings sole purpose can be to show others what you thought then it will always have a chance of being perceived as "overrated" simply due to the fact that no two people are identical.

[Pale]

Hahha  I <3 you Zakkiel!

If I had your kind of time, I would quote rape the two threads to show you the absolute similarity between the two arguments.  Saying that you are carrying on a better intertron argument than me is hilarious.

Look in the mirror.  Both of us have silly opinions we try to defend by posting long rants that don't accomplish anything.  It's hard to make people have the same opinion as you... even harder on the internet.  That's why it's better to just discuss facts.  I wish I didn't fall into these traps so often..

How does that photoshop go?

Arguing on the Internet is like running in the special olympics.  Even if you win, you're still retarded.

[Don'tHate742]

hahahahah ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[zakkiel]

Quote
actually lemme go back....i just felt like spelling troll...because i came up with a funny wa to do it. your opinion is correct. I liked the way zelda looked..but it was too damn short

Fair enough

Quote
If I had your kind of time, I would quote rape the two threads to show you the absolute similarity between the two arguments. Saying that you are carrying on a better intertron argument than me is hilarious.

Yes dear, I know you could win the argument if you really wanted to, it's just that you're above the whole thing. Not too far above it to drag a several-month-old thread into this one, but far enough that you needn't defend your claims.

Incidentally, this post took me fiveminutes from beginning to end to write. I call it the miracle of ctrl+c/ctrl+v

Quote
Both of us have silly opinions we try to defend by posting long rants that don't accomplish anything. It's hard to make people have the same opinion as you... even harder on the internet. That's why it's better to just discuss facts. I wish I didn't fall into these traps so often..

Thing is, I like it when people disagree with me, whereas you call it flaming.

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor

Quote
Originally posted by: zakkielOddly enough I'm a big fan of some anime visuals. If I am a tremendous clownboat. looked more like Last Exile, say, I would have loved it. And no, I'm not just talking about the CG elements.

It happens that I also didnt like the particular art style of the Wind Waker, specially Links model, but that didnt stopped me for apreciating what they were trying to acomplish.

Replaying the game is making me to apreciate even more its visual presentation. The fire temple pales in comparison with Dragon Roost Cavern and its amazing lava currents and smoke effects, including distortion of the image because  of intense heat, so I have to strongly disagree with Kairon about the dungeons lacking caracter.

So, of course, although I cant wait for Twilight Princess, I cannot wait for Nintendo's next toon-shaded Zelda.

I have to strongly disagree with you about strongly disagreeing with me. Can I do that?

Dragon Roost Cavern is the ONLY Dungeon that WW got anywhere near right. It's a little too linear, but that's to be expected of the first full scale dungeon.

BUT, the next dungeon? the tree one? BO-RING! This dungeon's design simply retreaded past zelda concepts, and the art motifs offered nothing new over OoT's environments.

Then the dungeon design takes a REAL downhill with the rest. The Earth Temple (or whatever it was called) is almost completely...brown. period. The tower dungeon that marks the game's "mid-point" (WoW, this Zelda was so forgettable dungeonwise that I can't even remember the names of the places!) also fails to pull together any coherent theme for the player.

Whereas Aonouma is credited for OoT's amazing dungeon design, ever since he's become director I just haven't been able to get excited about the actual dungeons of the Zelda games. Yes, I'll get TP. But Aonouma's directing it, and not Miyamoto, and I have yet to see anything from Aonouma which I've liked. I never finished MM and WW and have had to rely on watching my younger bro play these games in order to experence the rest of the game.

I am a Miyamoto fanboy, and I pride myself on being able to guess whether Miyamoto has touched a game. WW had magic in it's combat system, and I highly suspect that this was because of Miyamoto's influence. But Aonouma was responsible for everything else, and everything else failed to WoW me. I personally feel that Zelda has been personally sliding downhill in actual game quality ever since Miyamoto has left its directorship. Opinion, yes, but opinion from a devoted fanboy.

...The closer I get to Miyamoto the happier I'll be. That's probably why I remember Pikmin more fondly than WW.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[ThePerm]

in Majora's mas i really liked the level design, i thought they were awesome, however it was sort of short on dungeons. In WW the dungeons felt sort of short. Though the experience was great, but its been a long time..so its sketchy.

[nemo_83]

 "during an era when analog TVs are slowly being phased out"  -- Matt

So right, its not like everyone has four HDTVs in their house right now; in fact I barely know anyone who has one.  Americans are not confident in the economy; droping $1000-$5000 on resolution right now looks more than a little nitpicky.  Lighting effects make things look real; not resolution.  If resolution equalled realism I guess when I watch the news tonight it just won't look real cause my tv is not HD, it doesn't matter that I know they're real people cause their in low def and it looks totally fake.

360 is Xbox HD.  If there is a polygonal leap that is major present there, then Nintendo is right, graphics don't mean **** anymore because the leap isn't visible.  All they're doing is putting more characters on screen.  I spent more time during Thanksgiving playing Halo 2 on 360 than I did with the other games, because Halo 2 in HD looked as good as PDZ and played nine times as well.  Go go magic jump button!  

Nintendo can launch the Revolution with two standards.  They could have a cheaper version which would play all games in SD, and they could have an HD version which puts all games in HD whether developed for SD or HD.  Nintendo's style though would be to wait two years before launching the HD version.

[odifiend]

I don't like the idea of 2 standards for a console.  I think the whole Xbox thing is stupid, but at least you can always add on where as that wouldn't be an option for the Revolution.  

[Bill Aurion]

"But Aonouma's directing it, and not Miyamoto, and I have yet to see anything from Aonouma which I've liked."

I feel like vomiting...

[Don'tHate742]

Bill...once again I totally agree....

I should smack you for insulting Majora's Mask, OOT, and WW....

And TP, it looks to be the best out of all Zeldas....that's saying alot...and guess what, Aonuma is directing it....

[Kairon]

Well, to start with, you'll notice that since Aonouma didn't direct OoT and Shiggy did, I actually liked it.

Bottomline, I don't like either of Aonouma's Zelda's as much as I liked the ones Miyamoto directed. Majora's Mask immediately struck me as nothing really new. The multiplicity of Masks it touted were really just a fancy way to present the player with Fed Ex quests, as we disparagely call them in MMORPGs. And the time system was in no way whatsoever restrictive to me: I scheduled my way around it as if it wasn't there. And let's face it, Oni link was cheap, cheap, cheap. As was the Fairy sword.

Not to say I didn't like it. It was okay... But it was nowhere near the quality that a crazy Miyamato fanboi like myself wants from Nintendo.

And of course I just don't need to repeat my criticisms of WW. Aonouma makes some decent stuff, but he provides nowhere near the magic that MIyamoto brings to a project.

Yes, I am a Nintendo Fanboy, and yes, I am coming out and saying that in my fanboi opinion, Aonouma has failed to match Miaymoto's OoT. In fact, he believes this himself. This is why he's gone out to state that he wants to return to OoT and top it. He's already tried to differentiate himself from it with MM, and tried to outdo it in WW. But he just can't escape Miyamoto's masterpiece.

I almost feel sorry for the guy.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: Don'tHate742
And TP, it looks to be the best out of all Zeldas....that's saying alot...and guess what, Aonuma is directing it....

If TP is looking to be so good, why has Miyamoto already stated that it'll be the last Zelda of its kind? I suspect that Miyamoto himself believes that the current Zelda paradigm is at or near creative saturation, and that no matter how good TP turns out, it is useless to even try further along the lines that these last Zelda's have progressed under Aonouma's direction.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Mario]

TP looks to combine both of the main elements in OoT and MM. Ocarina of Time had more of a focus on dungeons and Majoras Mask had a bigger focus on sidequests and atmosphere, it all comes down to personal taste, I prefer Majora's Mask. I've heard TP will have a ton of dungeons AND a ton of sidequests Just look at all the characters in one of the new screenshots ;drool:, and it seems like there's going to be lots of surprises, so it should be a great game for fans of both games. What it has in common with TWW is the graphics I guess, it's not cel-shaded but it still looks similar to me, and TWW is the best looking game i've ever played.

Oh yeah, better graphics than GameCube? Sweet, but expected.

[Kairon]

I want to be the Ian of Zelda games.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Don'tHate742]

Um....i would of thought that question's answer quite obvious....

It's the last of it's kind because of the REV. New controls mean new game. Even simply changing the fighting to something more interactive makes TP the last of its kind. You see, we don't know exacty what will change in the next zelda, so saying that its near its creative saturation is jumping the gun a bit. If you think about it, all games are going to be the last of their kind....all nintendo games at least.

I think your Miyamoto fanboyism is clouding your head....

[Kairon]

I don't think so Don'tHate. Mario Sunshine, Mario Kart: DD, WW... all key innovative Nintendo Franchises that when they arrived felt like... more of the same. Throw in the fact that most gaming review site's opinions when recovering from playing TP demos was... "it played just like Zelda's before, there wasn't anything really new."

For a company so driven to innovate, and for a man like Miyamoto who before the Cube was enjoying years of acclaimed innovation after innovation, the GC era seems a blight on Nintendo's record. Where were the innovations? Where was the excitement? Why did it feel like for the first time, Nintendo was merely milking its franchises instead of wowing the entire world with them?

This is dangerous, because creatively-stuck is anathema to a company that can only succeed by staying ahead of bigger, richer and meaner competitors. This is also a strike to Nintendo's self-image and/or pride: Nintendo has always been the company that wins the innovation prize. But thrid parties are snapping at Nintendo's heels with games like Ico and Katamari Damacy, and all Nintendo can do is give Mario a waterpack, stick a second parson on a Kart, and give link a context-sensitive counter-attack.

That's my Nintendo-view as a Miyamoto fanboi, and that's why I sense that Miyamoto's been fidgety this entire generation including Wind Waker. Working with today's controls, he simply feels that today's games are going nowhere. This is, after all, why we have the Rev controller: to introduce a paradigm shift and open up whole new dimensions of gaming. To make possible a whole new kind of Zelda. Because Miyamoto is eager to move forward and not at all eager to see another Zelda in the same tired mold of OoT/MM/WW.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Mario]

You obviously haven't played Donkey Kong Jungle Beat.

I'm looking forward to seeing how the new Zelda will be next generation as well, but there's no way in hell i'm tired of the way Zelda currently is (though, perhaps I will be in two years, perfect timing!), and all 3D Zelda games offer completely different experiences.

[Don'tHate742]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
I don't think so Don'tHate. Mario Sunshine, Mario Kart: DD, WW... all key innovative Nintendo Franchises that when they arrived felt like... more of the same. Throw in the fact that most gaming review site's opinions when recovering from playing TP demos was... "it played just like Zelda's before, there wasn't anything really new."

For a company so driven to innovate, and for a man like Miyamoto who before the Cube was enjoying years of acclaimed innovation after innovation, the GC era seems a blight on Nintendo's record. Where were the innovations? Where was the excitement? Why did it feel like for the first time, Nintendo was merely milking its franchises instead of wowing the entire world with them?

This is dangerous, because creatively-stuck is anathema to a company that can only succeed by staying ahead of bigger, richer and meaner competitors. This is also a strike to Nintendo's self-image and/or pride: Nintendo has always been the company that wins the innovation prize. But thrid parties are snapping at Nintendo's heels with games like Ico and Katamari Damacy, and all Nintendo can do is give Mario a waterpack, stick a second parson on a Kart, and give link a context-sensitive counter-attack.

That's my Nintendo-view as a Miyamoto fanboi, and that's why I sense that Miyamoto's been fidgety this entire generation including Wind Waker. Working with today's controls, he simply feels that today's games are going nowhere. This is, after all, why we have the Rev controller: to introduce a paradigm shift and open up whole new dimensions of gaming. To make possible a whole new kind of Zelda. Because Miyamoto is eager to move forward and not at all eager to see another Zelda in the same tired mold of OoT/MM/WW.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

It's funny how even if your points are sound, they aren't relevant. You said something to the degree of, why is TP the last of its kind? I said because of the REV controller....

You can't argue that...

Your tangent mongering about creativity ceilings and such doesn't pertian here, because we don't know exactly how much the next gen Zelda will change. However, we do know WHY it will change, and though you may have a few points, the only real answer is the REV controller. End of argument.

[KDR_11k]

Personally I didn't like OOT but liked Wind Waker. To each his own, I guess...

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: Don'tHate742

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
I don't think so Don'tHate. Mario Sunshine, Mario Kart: DD, WW... all key innovative Nintendo Franchises that when they arrived felt like... more of the same. Throw in the fact that most gaming review site's opinions when recovering from playing TP demos was... "it played just like Zelda's before, there wasn't anything really new."

For a company so driven to innovate, and for a man like Miyamoto who before the Cube was enjoying years of acclaimed innovation after innovation, the GC era seems a blight on Nintendo's record. Where were the innovations? Where was the excitement? Why did it feel like for the first time, Nintendo was merely milking its franchises instead of wowing the entire world with them?

This is dangerous, because creatively-stuck is anathema to a company that can only succeed by staying ahead of bigger, richer and meaner competitors. This is also a strike to Nintendo's self-image and/or pride: Nintendo has always been the company that wins the innovation prize. But thrid parties are snapping at Nintendo's heels with games like Ico and Katamari Damacy, and all Nintendo can do is give Mario a waterpack, stick a second parson on a Kart, and give link a context-sensitive counter-attack.

That's my Nintendo-view as a Miyamoto fanboi, and that's why I sense that Miyamoto's been fidgety this entire generation including Wind Waker. Working with today's controls, he simply feels that today's games are going nowhere. This is, after all, why we have the Rev controller: to introduce a paradigm shift and open up whole new dimensions of gaming. To make possible a whole new kind of Zelda. Because Miyamoto is eager to move forward and not at all eager to see another Zelda in the same tired mold of OoT/MM/WW.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

It's funny how even if your points are sound, they aren't relevant. You said something to the degree of, why is TP the last of its kind? I said because of the REV controller....

You can't argue that...

Your tangent mongering about creativity ceilings and such doesn't pertian here, because we don't know exactly how much the next gen Zelda will change. However, we do know WHY it will change, and though you may have a few points, the only real answer is the REV controller. End of argument.

I'm sorry I wasn't clear. My thinking is that the Rev controller came about BECAUSE Miyamoto knew that he wanted to change the fabric of games, including Zelda, already.

You imply that the Rev controller was developed and ONLY THEN did Miyamoto accept that games would change due to it's nature. This is very un-Miyamoto because he always let's the game and hardware emerge more or less together, a more organic process where the hardware is actually a RESPONSE to where he wants to go with his games. Not at all a "develop the hardware and hope that good games comes out" way of thinking.

That's why I am undeterred in my belief that Miyamoto first realized that current generation games, including Zelda, were reaching a dead end, and AFTER that realization, was driven to revolutionize the controller with future games, including Zelda, in mind. I think back to all the times Miyamoto has talked about changing the nature of games, to his one-stick-one-button-thinking, I think back to the lengthy dev time for Mario 128 which suggests that they simply couldn't find anything new in the current paradigm, I look back to the somewhat lackluster Sunshine, Double Dash, and Wind Waker...

And I am not convinced that this is the last Zelda game just because Miyamoto realized at a later point that the Rev Controller would be better suited for another format. Miyamoto KNEW what was happening all throughout the Rev's development and TP's development. He saw the Rev Controller coming miles away, he had a hand in that, and he was thinking about gaming while doing it. Yes, this is the last Zelda because the Rev controller is changing everything, but why is the Rev Controller changing everything? Party because of the last generation of games, partly because of how Wind Waker came out.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com