Official Nintendo Fanboy Smugness & Gloating Thread

[Jamesac]

That's some odd phrasing of the question. Not "What do you want most?" but rather "Which will sell most?" At this point I don't even want to guess which console will end up on top, but I'll happily say that the Wii is my most desired piece of hardware.

James

[Darkflame]

I don't see why people are so desperate to prove its no better then a game cube.
Even a gamecube at higher clockspeed will do more polygons.
There's nothing contradictory about it.

In Sunshine, Mario has short sleeves. They're gone in Galaxy.

In Sunshine, Mario has a belt. It's gone in Galaxy.

If anything, they've cut down the poly count.

I hope your jokeing with that comment.

You are right theres less landscape, or rather, it can be LODed due to the layout easily, and thus save polys.
But on the other hand, the landscape you do see is a bit smoother then sunshines in terms of polygons as well. (eg. http://media.wii.ign.com/media/748/7485 ... 43645.html compared to http://media.nintendo.com/mediaFiles/m- ... 16-jpg.jpg)

Theres obviously higher texture res on the mario too (stach looks to stick out more, the m on the hat is clearly more defined, eyes are sharper looking).

One other point though I suspose is that sunshine used quite advanced water effects at any time. Not needing to account for that probably does help them a bit.

Apart from Mario, there's fuck all going on in the second pic.

Yes, because marios polygons so obviously dynamicaly changes in the video


Seriously, look, the Wii is better then a cube, and they have used the difference to push a few more polygons on the main charecter.
Seems fairly obvious to me.
Its not a big difference, but that dosnt mean it dosnt exist either.

As I said, Galaxy to me looked like the only real showcase for Wii graphics, and some (Tony Hawks) did look dire.

[Kemper_Boyd]

Why are you comparing SMG to a four year old game? Surely it makes
more sense to compare it to one of the best recent Gamecube games?
If you are going to see signs of 'shaders' and 'more polygons' at least
give the Cube a fair chance.

Your Wii screenshot:


Cube:






Wow the Gamecube looks more next-gen than the Wii!

[Samus]

Are you saying that Pikmin looks better than SMG to you?

[Rambozo]

Pikmin is done in a realistic style (the backgrounds anyways) whereas Mario games have traditionally aspired to a squeaky-clean Pixar style. IF you favor one over the other it'll likely look better to you.

[Snakey]

I don't see why people are so desperate to prove its no better then a game cube.

They aren't. But you're totally desperate to prove that anything we've seen so far IS better. You spend half your time saying graphics do not matter, and the other half saying they do.

I hope your jokeing with that comment.

No.

Theres obviously higher texture res on the mario too

All that requires is more RAM. Which, incidentally, a GC devkit already has. The majority of Mario is gouraud shaded, untextured polys.

[Jamesac]

Why are you comparing SMG to a four year old game? Surely it makes
more sense to compare it to one of the best recent Gamecube games?

Because comparing anything to Chibi Robo is just unfair. The PS2 can outperform that game visually without breaking a sweat.

James

[ThetaReactor]

I'm growing concerned that this thread is moving toward realistic debate rather than rampant fanwankery. We needn't tolerate rational thought.

Ban request: Snake

[GeeZa]

I'm growing concerned that this thread is moving toward realistic debate rather than rampant fanwankery. We needn't tolerate rational thought.

Ban request: Snake

Well quite. I think I'm going to be honest here and say that so far what I've personally seen of the Wii (and it's no different to anyone else), it looks pretty much like a Gamecube. Now, given the Gamecube did Resident Evil 4, I think it's fair to say that, in general, the graphical power of this current generation of consoles (PS2, Xbox, GC) are capable of providing beautiful gaming experiences for several years to come. Some of the graphics of this gens games have blown me away. I'd probably be happy with them for a few years yet and I bet others would too.

However, paying circa $250 for something that can't really out-beef the Gamecube irks me a bit. I was honestly expecting more, a significant bump. I feel like I'm paying for Nintendo's desire to stay in the next-gen race. If that makes any sense. I guess it's not even remotely feasible for the business just to release the Wii controller for the Cubey and cut out the bull. And yet they say they wont make much profit on the Wii which begs the question, wtf? I'm still gonna get one, I just feel let down that I might not being going 'Wow' at Ninty visuals like I did when Rogue Leader and F-Zero came out on the Cube. And yet to be utterly frank, nothing on the 360 or anything I've seen of the pre-release PS3 stuff has really blown me away either. I'm trying to be critical beyond the hype I suppose.

[Rambozo]

You spend half your time saying graphics do not matter, and the other half saying they do.

It's hard not to defend when attacked. I think what most Nintendo fans have a hard time articulating is that graphics alone aren't the problem and aren't something to be dismissed, but rather that the blind march towards better graphics at the expense of dev time that might otherwise be spent on charm, content and honing the gameplay is (or was) killing the industry.

It's nice for a game to look good. It's also nice for it to play well. The latter is more important, and when you can have both it's ideal, but when you must sacrifice one for the sake of the other, let it be graphics.


As for why the Wii games shown at E3 looked like they were running on Gamecubes.....They were. The Wii hardware exists, but not in a state that is final enough for developers to show their games on just yet.

[Snakey]

You spend half your time saying graphics do not matter, and the other half saying they do.

It's hard not to defend when attacked. I think what most Nintendo fans have a hard time articulating is that graphics alone aren't the problem and aren't something to be dismissed, but rather that the blind march towards better graphics at the expense of dev time that might otherwise be spent on charm, content and honing the gameplay is (or was) killing the industry.

It's nice for a game to look good. It's also nice for it to play well. The latter is more important, and when you can have both it's ideal, but when you must sacrifice one for the sake of the other, let it be graphics.


As for why the Wii games shown at E3 looked like they were running on Gamecubes.....They were. The Wii hardware exists, but not in a state that is final enough for developers to show their games on just yet.

Bloody hell

All I can say to that is:

$250

Well, all they've said is it will be less than that. I guess we'll have to wait and see if that means $249, or much less, and that figure was quoted just to throw off the competition.

[A Black Falcon]

It's hard not to defend when attacked. I think what most Nintendo fans have a hard time articulating is that graphics alone aren't the problem and aren't something to be dismissed, but rather that the blind march towards better graphics at the expense of dev time that might otherwise be spent on charm, content and honing the gameplay is (or was) killing the industry.

It's nice for a game to look good. It's also nice for it to play well. The latter is more important, and when you can have both it's ideal, but when you must sacrifice one for the sake of the other, let it be graphics.

Yeah, that pretty much sums it up... graphics are nice (though this is partially relative -- Axelay on the SNES looks amazing, while Axelay on a GC would look cool stylistically, but obviously outdated in techical graphics...), but gameplay matters far more. Graphics do matter, of course, though, and particularly to casual gamers (who likely might focus more on technical detail than artistic merit...) but definitely to everyone, but graphics alone don't make games great, that's for sure. While it would be wrong to say 'graphics are good enough now, we can stop here' when you look at how Nintendo has tried to compete graphically for two generations now and gotten nowhere at it, you can fully understand why they have changed tactics. And so far at least, with the DS and the rising status of the Wii (partially, it must be admitted, thanks to Sony's miscalculations), that's working well.

[Deckard]

Why are you comparing SMG to a four year old game? Surely it makes
more sense to compare it to one of the best recent Gamecube games?

Because comparing anything to Chibi Robo is just unfair. The PS2 can outperform that game visually without breaking a sweat.

James

Yeah just compare it to Res 4 - best game of the last generation consoles and we're all happy

[grue]

Well, graphics aside I think Nintendo has the potential to outsell Sony and Microsoft with just one game.

Pokemon.......Online

You can already see the rabid kids battling and talking about it at school.

If that card is played right then I don't think graphics power will matter to Nintendo anymore.

[Marius]

The DS proved once and for all that it never did, you don't need the most powerful hardware, just the right hardware.