By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
TheShape31 on 22 September 2012
Edit Thread
HappySqurriel said:
Sal.Paradise said:

Can you give me sources on Kameo and Pikmins 3s development please? 

Remember, when I said: ..why doesn't Pikmin 3 look like a clear generational leap, as Kameo most definitely was? Hell, it doesn't even need to make the jump from SD to HD like Kameo did. It benefits from years of work and tools used in HD development that were not available at the start of this generation. Kameo didn't. So? 

You said:18 to 24 months to improve visuals of a nearly completed game will typically result in a better looking game than 12 to 18 months to develop a game from scratch from the ground up ...

Are you telling me you have sources on neither of these?

And don't even try to now argue that Pikmin 3 shows a generational leap anywhere near the size of leap that Kameo showed, because you don't have sources. It won't go well for you


Why doesn't Pikmin have a clear generational leap? Because there is no need to improve graphics for the game beyond its current level ...

Looking at the following games, please tell me which one is showing that it is suffering from a lack of processing power:

Pikmin 3:

Rayman Legends:

The Wonderful 100

New Super Mario Bros U

 

These games don't show a generational improvement because increased graphical processing power is meaningless to games that use art styles similar to this.

The only exclusive Wii U game that has a reason to see a graphical improvement is ZombiU which switched mid-development of the kind of game it was going to be; and yet it still looks roughly on par with most of the best looking first person shooters on the XBox 360 and PS3

You need to get used to the fact that 90% of games released from this point forward will probably see no significant graphical improvements over what was possible on the HD consoles because it is meaningless to the game, remarkably expensive, and time consuming.

First of all, you posted screenshots of games that are literally all 2D and 2.5D games.  Take a screenshot of Rayman Origins for PS3, same quality.

And the best-looking 3D game happens to look not even as good as the best-looking PS360 games.  This shows that there is definite room for imporovement, and makes your entire point moot.  All of these games could be made to look as good on current HD consoles.

 

"You need to get used to the fact that 90% of games released from this point forward will probably see no significant graphical improvements over what was possible on the HD consoles"

This is hogwash.  Every generation sees graphical improvement as technology progresses.  Higher resolutions, framerates, and polygon counts do not mean that every game has to look photo realistic.  There is plenty of room to make stylistic universes look more beautiful with more powerful hardware.  I am, of course referring to that Mario picture that was too ugly to repost.  Look at the Toy Story movies... just because technology allows you to make CGI like Avatar still means you can create unrealistically animated awesomeness.  And there was no better way to watch Toy Story 3 than on a 4K projector.  Resolution and the progression of technology matters, regardless of whether we're talking about movies or games.