| Zekkyou said: I'm not talking purely visually, just graphically. From an artistic stand point Nintendo are incredibly skilled, which is why MK8 looks good. Graphically (the technical side of visuals) Nintendo lack any kind of ambition. I'm still amazed they haven't moved on from basic edge detection AA >.< |
It's just embarassing how people respond to this, when you're explicitly breaking out technical details distict from the enjoyability of the art, which you state looks good. If they have an argument on technical details, that should include actual technical details like textures, lighting, shadows, AA, occlusion... But no, they will incessantly argue a topic they apprently have no interest in, because they emotionally feel it is a dig on Nintendo. WTF?
Agreed on repurcussions of lack of 1st party ambition... Nintendo should be pushing to limit there, and sharing their work with all 3rd parties, that's how to get full optimization of Wii U across the board. Sony did similarly with PS3. Nintendo's games are ultimately not dependent on technical ambition, but that is not to say that they could still not benefit from it: lighting for one. Not being dependent on it, Nintendo can freely push teams to push the limit, and if they don't achieve it 100%, that's OK the game still works fine. But anything they do achieve can be harvested for future games. Now Nintendo may very well see that as not ultimately being a worthwhile thing to invest in... but if so, I hope the Wii U fans can stop playing victim about how 3rd parties won't fully optimize to leverage Wii U's secret sauce.
