125 replies to this topic 2 votes

[TheLegendOfMart]

Hardcore Til I Die, on 19 January 2013 - 14:28, said:

Nintendo have the right ideas; make games fun to play.

No reason why they can't have a powerful console and have fun games, Nintendo has always had a problem getting third parties onto their system ever since the Gamecube.

People buy Nintendo to play 1st party games, Marios, Zeldas, etc.. the problem is they are few and far between and lately have just been rehashes of old games.

New Super Mario Bros for example.....

[HawkMan]

TheLegendOfMart, on 19 January 2013 - 16:14, said:

the problem is they are few and far between and lately have just been rehashes of old games.

New Super Mario Bros for example.....

You make it sound like it's a bad thing, when it's an awesome thing.

[theyarecomingforyou]

HawkMan, on 19 January 2013 - 18:24, said:

You make it sound like it's a bad thing, when it's an awesome thing.

That is a bad thing. Super Mario Bros U looks more like a Facebook game or something you'd play in your browser for free; Wii Fit U looks barely any better than the original version; Nintendo Land has some interesting ideas but it barely looks current-gen—let alone next-gen—and the use of the gamepad is very forced; Pikmin 3 looks terrible. The only Nintendo title that looks any good is the upcoming Legend Of Zelda game but there's not even a release date on that. The Wii U line-up is incredibly poor and the hardware underpowered. It's certainly not strong enough to be a primary console, especially with the dearth of third-party games.

The Wii U doesn't stand up well to the current generation of consoles, let alone the next generation.

[Blackhearted]

HawkMan, on 19 January 2013 - 18:24, said:

You make it sound like it's a bad thing, when it's an awesome thing.

To most people it seems rehashes and remakes are only bad when it's nintendo doing them. It's ok when the other guys are doing them.

[TheLegendOfMart]

Blackhearted, on 19 January 2013 - 18:50, said:

To most people it seems rehashes and remakes are only bad when it's nintendo doing them. It's ok when the other guys are doing them.

Yeah well done put words in my mouth why don't you.

I don't buy or play the yearly increment games.

NSMBU is the same as NSMBWii 2 which is the same as NSMBWii which is the same as NSMB for DS, they could almost be addon levels for the original game.

Anyway this is getting off the topic.

[GP007]

Blackhearted, on 19 January 2013 - 18:50, said:

To most people it seems rehashes and remakes are only bad when it's nintendo doing them. It's ok when the other guys are doing them.

I don't see that being the case for the most part, when people moan about yet another CoD or halo or something on the other two then someone will inevitably bring up Nintendo and all the Mario or Zelda games. To me it's all the same, if a series keeps selling they'll keep making more.

[Anaron]

TheLegendOfMart, on 19 January 2013 - 12:31, said:

They won't though. They always code for the lowest common denominator, do you really think that gamers will be ok with one console having noticeably better graphics for multiplatform games?

[...]

That may be true for multiplatform titles but it'll show with exclusives. And even with the difference in memory, games may still look better on the PS4 (despite its memory limitations).

Blackhearted, on 19 January 2013 - 13:31, said:

If the target of the next gen would end up being 1080p then memory bandwidth will be incredibly important. Think of a pc graphics card, and how adding more ram doesn't make it more powerful, how it doesn't suddenly make it capable of more than it could do with the amount it originally shipped with. The same will apply to the xbox 720/3/whateverthehellyouwannacallit. They can add as much ram as they like, but if the gpu isn't powerful enough to be able to make use of all the extra assets the extra ram would allow, or it's somewhat starved in bandwidth it wont make a difference.

Memory bandwidth isn't as important as pixel and texture fillrate. A good example is the Radeon HD 7970. It has less pixel and texture fillrate than the GeForce GTX 680 but more memory bandwidth (264 GB/s vs. 192 GB/s). Even with a difference of 72 GB/s, the GTX 680 slightly outperforms the HD 7970 at resolutions of 1680x1050 and 1920x1080. The only time this isn't the case, with most games, is at a resolution of 2560x1600 where the extra memory bandwidth helps.

With that said, Microsoft only needs a certain amount of memory bandwidth for 1080p. But with a difference of 124 GB/s, the PS4's GPU will definitely have an edge.

Blackhearted, on 19 January 2013 - 13:31, said:

Specs are important actually. The low end specs of the current consoles lingering around as long as they have like a bad odor does is the reason why progress in gaming graphics has nearly screeched to a halt.

Agreed. There was a huge push for better graphics hardware and software back in 2004. It all ended when the current-gen consoles were released. Developers stuck to DX9 longer than they should have.

[TheLegendOfMart]

Anaron, on 19 January 2013 - 19:20, said:

That may be true for multiplatform titles but it'll show with exclusives. And even with the difference in memory, games may still look better on the PS4 (despite its memory limitations).

I don't think it matters, exclusive games always take full advantage of the hardware as they don't have to dumb down for either console. They can probably hide the limitations.

What Naughty Dog did with Uncharted 3 with 256Mb RAM is amazing.

[HawkMan]

theyarecomingforyou, on 19 January 2013 - 18:46, said:

That is a bad thing. Super Mario Bros U looks more like a Facebook game or something you'd play in your browser for free; Wii Fit U looks barely any better than the original version; Nintendo Land has some interesting ideas but it barely looks current-gen—let alone next-gen—and the use of the gamepad is very forced; Pikmin 3 looks terrible. The only Nintendo title that looks any good is the upcoming Legend Of Zelda game but there's not even a release date on that. The Wii U line-up is incredibly poor and the hardware underpowered. It's certainly not strong enough to be a primary console, especially with the dearth of third-party games.

The Wii U doesn't stand up well to the current generation of consoles, let alone the next generation.

While the WiiU isn't awesome compared to current gen and will be left in the dust by the next gen.

what does any of that have to do with NSMB not being awesome. so it doesn't have incredible photoreal graphics... umm it's MARIO!... and it's got awesome gameplay. it's a great gameplay, arguably the only great game you can only find on the WiiU atm.

I fully expect the nextbox to have a new Halo, and I fully expect the game to play almost exactly like Halo 4, which basically plays like Halo 3 and so on, just minor tweaks along the way, just like Mario.

[HawkMan]

Anaron, on 19 January 2013 - 19:20, said:

That may be true for multiplatform titles but it'll show with exclusives. And even with the difference in memory, games may still look better on the PS4 (despite its memory limitations).


Memory bandwidth isn't as important as pixel and texture fillrate. A good example is the Radeon HD 7970. It has less pixel and texture fillrate than the GeForce GTX 680 but more memory bandwidth (264 GB/s vs. 192 GB/s). Even with a difference of 72 GB/s, the GTX 680 slightly outperforms the HD 7970 at resolutions of 1680x1050 and 1920x1080. The only time this isn't the case, with most games, is at a resolution of 2560x1600 where the extra memory bandwidth helps.

With that said, Microsoft only needs a certain amount of memory bandwidth for 1080p. But with a difference of 124 GB/s, the PS4's GPU will definitely have an edge.


Agreed. There was a huge push for better graphics hardware and software back in 2004. It all ended when the current-gen consoles were released. Developers stuck to DX9 longer than they should have.

Memory speed vs memory amount are pretty much intersecting graphs.

in this case, the nextbox has so much more memory, and the base speed of MS' memory is so high that the PS3 really has no advantage, outside of small games with very small levels and frequent loading screens. that are games that will frequent a LOT of ME1/2 style texture streaming technology, texture popping and LOD model popping, because that's awesome.

In general both have enough memory to handle awesome next gen graphics with no problem. But on larger games with large levels, the 360 has an edge. and lets face it. gaming isn't heading far small closed in levels anymore.

[theyarecomingforyou]

HawkMan, on 19 January 2013 - 19:26, said:

what does any of that have to do with NSMB not being awesome. so it doesn't have incredible photoreal graphics... umm it's MARIO!... and it's got awesome gameplay. it's a great gameplay, arguably the only great game you can only find on the WiiU atm.

The gameplay had been done to death and improved graphics are one of the main reasons people buy new consoles. The trouble is that NSMBU has bad graphics and doesn't compete with contemporary titles, like Rayman Legends. It really is a classic case of a rehash that achieves nothing.

HawkMan, on 19 January 2013 - 19:26, said:

I fully expect the nextbox to have a new Halo, and I fully expect the game to play almost exactly like Halo 4, which basically plays like Halo 3 and so on, just minor tweaks along the way, just like Mario.

And people rightly criticise those games as well, so I'm the last one to defend that sort of behaviour. However, at least each new Halo game pushes the envelope on graphics and art direction - they're offering some new for fans. The original Halo was groundbreaking but each successive game has been less relevant; it's the same with the Call Of Duty series since Modern Warfare. The real sequels are games like Far Cry 3, Crysis 3, The Witcher 2 and Batman: Arkham City - where they substantially improve upon the graphics, gameplay and direction of the previous games.

Personally I think the art direction of NSMBU is worse than that of NSMB for the Wii. It's very sterile, the animations are stiff, the colours very stark - it just doesn't sit well with me. Nintendo used to innovate, used to lead the market - now they're putting out one derivative title after another. Their games sell because of nostalgia, not

NSMBU:

Rayman Legends:

[HawkMan]

While RayMan seems interesting, it's not Super Mario.
And I actually play(ed) both of them on my WiiU.

Old gameplay or new gameplay, I play games for two reasons, because I like the gameplay, and/or because I like the story and setting.

With Mario I like th egameplay and settings, it's just fun and enjoyable as well as challenging, and they offer me new levels.

with Halo, I like the story, as well as the graphical style more than the gameplay.

in either case I don't want them to modernize and change the games. so many franchises have been ruined by changing, like the horrible MArio 3D games starting wht the N64 where everyone thought all games had to be 3D for no good reason.

[Osiris]

I understand why some of you do but for me I don't care about the specs. I will look at how the games perform on each of them but I dare say they will be reasonably similar in which case it will come down to what else they do. I very much expect the next xbox is going to have some strong interconnectivity features with win8/wp8, as well as the potential of the next connect; both of which may seal the deal.

[DirtyLarry]

theyarecomingforyou, on 19 January 2013 - 19:50, said:

The gameplay had been done to death and improved graphics are one of the main reasons people buy new consoles. The trouble is that NSMBU has bad graphics and doesn't compete with contemporary titles, like Rayman Legends. It really is a classic case of a rehash that achieves nothing.

Personally I think the art direction of NSMBU is worse than that of NSMB for the Wii. It's very sterile, the animations are stiff, the colours very stark - it just doesn't sit well with me. Nintendo used to innovate, used to lead the market - now they're putting out one derivative title after another. Their games sell because of nostalgia, not

I really have to ask, have you seen it in person? SMB on the WiiU's graphics are awesome, and I'm not sure how anyone can say otherwise. My only guess is they are just watching YouTube videos of it and have never seen it in action. On my 55" TV it looks brilliant. It is still the same art direction the series is known for, but so much crisper. There is a HUGE difference between it and it's Wii counterpart. This difference is very noticeable when one plays one game then the other on the same TV. Besides, not sure what you expect? It is Mario. A complete departure stylistically would make zero sense.

Sure, Rayman looks better, but it also has a much more painterly style to it. I just cannot see how anyone who has actually seen it in person does not say SMB does not look the best it ever has on the WiiU??

[Luc2k]

Poor Mario, he's the most milked character in the history of video games. His nipples must be shrivelled.

Anywho, back to the topic at hand. What's the word about compatibility with current gen games?