By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Wii U VS 4BONE graphics

FrancisNobleman on 08 September 2013

like half of you people discussing numbers - that you're not even close to truly comprehend because I doubt any of you is a competent advanced electronics and hardware engineer - have been playing minecraft and that game looks like a psone game.

also, I think both mario galaxy titles are among the absolute best looking this past gen.



Around the Network
prayformojo on 08 September 2013
superchunk said:
Seece said:
superchunk said:
Have you not seen my thread?

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=136756

Is the gap between WiiU and X1 bigger or smaller than Wii - 360?

A lot smaller, however the gap between PS4/Xbone and PX360 is also smaller than the gap between PS2/XBox gen to that of PS360.

Basically, Nintendo went GC to Wii to WiiU where GC to Wii was minor jump and Wii to WiiU was major.

MSony went MAJOR jump to minor.

End result is Wii U is far closer to its competitors. More similar to that of PS2 to XBox.

The Wii-U is NOT as close as PS2 was to Xbox lol.



JoeTheBro on 08 September 2013
F0X said:
JoeTheBro said:

Those games are artistic. If when comparing graphics we factor in the flavor, then it's nothing but an opinion. Also the low resolution really hurts those games. Playing them in doplhin at 1080p makes them so much better. Beauty is shackled by hardware capability.


On the flip side, to ignore the flavor is to ignore the artistic value of video game graphics. There's a better argument in your favor beyond trying to seperate art and technology in a medium where both are extremely important: while there are some beautiful Wii games, the console can't realize most artistic visions as well as its competitors.


Think of it this way.

VS

The art on the right obviously took more raw talent to create vs the art on the left. Creating the work on the right would have taken years while the one on the left could be constructed in a day. There is nothing wrong with preferring the art on the left, I personally like what it's getting at, but everyone can agree that art on the right is a much more impressive accomplishment of getting the idea from head to work.

Artistic video games are great, beautiful, incredible, etc., but the vast majority of the time it's just less impressive that they're running on the console.



Links

Angelv577 on 08 September 2013

So in dbz power level, I think it looks like this:

current gen: Goku super saiyan (freeza version)
Wii U: Goku super saiyan (after hyperbolic time chamber/cell version)
xbox one: gohan super saiyan 2
ps4: goku/vegeta super saiyan 2 (this version of ssj2 were stronger than gohan).



curl-6 on 08 September 2013
JoeTheBro said:
curl-6 said:

Doesn't matter, beauty transcends hardware capability. 


Those games are artistic. If when comparing graphics we factor in the flavor, then it's nothing but an opinion. Also the low resolution really hurts those games. Playing them in doplhin at 1080p makes them so much better. Beauty is shackled by hardware capability.

Art is a key part of graphics. It's not just how good your tech is, it's how well you use it. A parallax-mapped turd in Quad HD is still a turd.

480p doesn't stop Muramasa or Epic Yarn looking gorgeous.



Around the Network
JoeTheBro on 08 September 2013
curl-6 said:
JoeTheBro said:
curl-6 said:

Doesn't matter, beauty transcends hardware capability. 


Those games are artistic. If when comparing graphics we factor in the flavor, then it's nothing but an opinion. Also the low resolution really hurts those games. Playing them in doplhin at 1080p makes them so much better. Beauty is shackled by hardware capability.

Art is a key part of graphics. It's not just how good your tech is, it's how well you use it. A parallax-mapped turd in Quad HD is still a turd.

480p doesn't stop Muramasa or Epic Yarn looking gorgeous.


Think of it this way.

VS

The art on the right obviously took more raw talent to create vs the art on the left. Creating the work on the right would have taken years while the one on the left could be constructed in a day. There is nothing wrong with the art on the left, it's certainly much "better," but everyone can agree that the art on the right is a much more impressive, albeit ugly, piece.

Artistic video games are great, beautiful, incredible, etc., but the vast majority of the time their graphics are not impressive.



Links

curl-6 on 08 September 2013
JoeTheBro said:
curl-6 said:

Art is a key part of graphics. It's not just how good your tech is, it's how well you use it. A parallax-mapped turd in Quad HD is still a turd.

480p doesn't stop Muramasa or Epic Yarn looking gorgeous.


Think of it this way.

VS

The art on the right obviously took more raw talent to create vs the art on the left. Creating the work on the right would have taken years while the one on the left could be constructed in a day. There is nothing wrong with the art on the left, it's certainly much "better," but everyone can agree that the art on the right is a much more impressive, albeit ugly, piece.

Artistic video games are great, beautiful, incredible, etc., but the vast majority of the time their graphics are not impressive.

Beauty can be impressive in and of itself, regardless of whether it is complex. Sometimes simplicity is more elegant than complexity.



gatito on 08 September 2013
Kane1389 said:
Whats the point of this thread? We all know the graphical difference between Nintendo and everyone else will insanely huge, as always.


Yeah, just like the N64 and GameCube days.



fordy on 08 September 2013
JoeTheBro said:
F0X said:
JoeTheBro said:

Those games are artistic. If when comparing graphics we factor in the flavor, then it's nothing but an opinion. Also the low resolution really hurts those games. Playing them in doplhin at 1080p makes them so much better. Beauty is shackled by hardware capability.


On the flip side, to ignore the flavor is to ignore the artistic value of video game graphics. There's a better argument in your favor beyond trying to seperate art and technology in a medium where both are extremely important: while there are some beautiful Wii games, the console can't realize most artistic visions as well as its competitors.


Think of it this way.

VS

The art on the right obviously took more raw talent to create vs the art on the left. Creating the work on the right would have taken years while the one on the left could be constructed in a day. There is nothing wrong with preferring the art on the left, I personally like what it's getting at, but everyone can agree that art on the right is a much more impressive accomplishment of getting the idea from head to work.

Artistic video games are great, beautiful, incredible, etc., but the vast majority of the time it's just less impressive that they're running on the console.


Where's the "art" in imitating RL things as close as possible?

Call it by it's real name: copied RL



teigaga on 08 September 2013

I wanna play this game!

ps4 (%30) >> X1 (300%) >> Wii U  (70 %) >> Ps3...


Really, none of it matters much. XB1 and PS4 will both blow our minds once they pick up, the difference between them seems largely ignorable. Wii U won't be able to stack to the crazy particle effects and physics but its stylised games will look flawless none the less.

As a graphics whore, I just want 2014 to come already. I need to the see The Order 1886, Halo 5 and X in all their glory.