padib said:
vivster said:
The thing is, there really is no other way than to push graphics. You might not realize it but it's not like the consoles are so powerful that devs have to come up with new technologies to reach the limit. It's actually the absolute opposite. Hardware is still too weak to come even close to the vision developers intend and they have to put in a lot of work to create visual workarounds. This wouldn't be necessary with more hardware power available. Devs on all platforms never have enough hardware resources so I think it's ludicrous to intentionally go the other way. There is a reason why so many 3rd parties are avoiding Nintendo and one big point is the hardware.
You see BOTW as beautiful and I see a lot of wasted potential. The first thing that greets you is a washed out screen thanks to sub 1080p and badly upscaled image. Don't you think the developers would've liked to have a much sharper image that not only looks good on a tiny handheld screen but also on a big TV?
Then I start to move and notice the stutter. That tells me that the developers had to compromise a smooth gaming experience for a minimum of graphical fidelity, yet they couldn't even reach 1080p with that compromise. As a developer I'd feel like shit that not only do I have to compromise my vision but also that it isn't even enough.
Then I go outside into the world and notice all the little visual workarounds to decrease workloads like reduced textures, flat 2d models, static shadows and certain visual tricks that try to emulate actual animation. Tricks that cost time and effort and can cause bugs. Things that wouldn't be necessary if they had the power to do the things the way they want.
BOTW looks good for what it is because talented devs had to power through and work with compromises. To me that's a pretty sad picture in my mind. Don't you think the devs of Arms would've liked to have a sharper picture in this highly competitive game? Or maybe be able to deliver 60fps in 4 player mode?
Slow and outdated hardware is a detriment to games and their developers. So I find it hard to take people reveling in that fact.
BTW I'm including all consoles and even PC in the "hardware too weak" statement.
I would also like to note that the visual fidelty is not among the reasons why I became to hate the game. It just accelerated it.
|
I'm not saying you're wrong, but you have to remember that the switch is also portable. Maybe next gen all the workarounds you're talking about might not be necessary anymore.
I just sense that the point where pushing hardware won't be needed as much is on the cusp of being real for Nintendo consoles. Would you say that next gen or the one after is a fair expectation to say that we would have 1080p 60fps with no need for workarounds in order to have very nice games?
|
Of course it's a handheld but Nintendo chose specifically to use older hardware for it that they even had to clock down to work. A 30-50% increase in power would've been doable for a reasonable price. But they went for profit margin instead. I also think it's a good thing that they unified the hardware. Well, good for them because they hate porting their games so much. At least like this they won't be able to withhold so many games from us by making them exclusive to a handheld device.
I expect them to reach a very good compromise for hardware performance next gen, even if they go again with outdated hardware. Most Nintendo games don't look or run bad but, all they need is a bit more power to smooth out the experience. I don't expect photorealism of Nintendo games but I would at least like the games to be sharp and responsive. Things that are realized with zero additional dev input and just come down to hardware.
