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

Forums - Gaming - Games with crappy textures.

 

Well, what do you think?

I like games with crappy textures too! 39 35.45%
 
WTF you talking about? 41 37.27%
 
Meh, I don't know. 12 10.91%
 
Show me da' results! 18 16.36%
 
Total:110
morenoingrato said:

Maybe it's just my low graphics standards, but... those are crappy graphics? O_o

Also, I agree with Curl-6. Best game of the generation, and it did not need mindblowing textures.

I agree. Are we bad people for thinking this?!

OT: Art-style is what mostly matters, really. You can have a game that aims at photo-realism but looks worse than, say, Kirby. Just because it is supposed to look real, doesn't mean it'll look good.



Around the Network
Wright said:
Zero999 said:

the gen it was released of course but that's not the case with tp wich released on the concole it was developed for: the 6th gen gamecube.


It also released on the console it was marketed for: the 7th gen Wii.

as a secondary version to the originally made gc version.



Zero999 said:
Wright said:
Zero999 said:

the gen it was released of course but that's not the case with tp wich released on the concole it was developed for: the 6th gen gamecube.


It also released on the console it was marketed for: the 7th gen Wii.

as a secondary version to the originally made gc version.


How can be secondary when there were only one advert for the Gamecube version and multiple ones for the Wii?



Wright said:
Zero999 said:
Wright said:
Zero999 said:

the gen it was released of course but that's not the case with tp wich released on the concole it was developed for: the 6th gen gamecube.


It also released on the console it was marketed for: the 7th gen Wii.

as a secondary version to the originally made gc version.


How can be secondary when there were only one advert for the Gamecube version and multiple ones for the Wii?

because the game was made on gamecube and you will never shut up.



Zero999 said:
Wright said:
Zero999 said:

as a secondary version to the originally made gc version.


How can be secondary when there were only one advert for the Gamecube version and multiple ones for the Wii?

because the game was made on gamecube and you will never shut up.


That's a trait of a journalist. I can't get exhausted of insisting too much.



Around the Network
Wright said:
Zero999 said:
Wright said:
Zero999 said:

the gen it was released of course but that's not the case with tp wich released on the concole it was developed for: the 6th gen gamecube.


It also released on the console it was marketed for: the 7th gen Wii.

as a secondary version to the originally made gc version.


How can be secondary when there were only one advert for the Gamecube version and multiple ones for the Wii?

Exactly; the Wii version not only came out first, but  was treated as the primary version by Nintendo. The only GC thing about it is the graphics, and the whole point about the Wii is that graphics are beside the point.



Wright said:


When the core development of a game is done on a PC and then ported exclusively to release on a console, you wouldn't say that game belongs to PC. Same case here with the gamecube. They delayed the game, and then promoted it as a Wii game, with the swordplay and all that. The game went and sold millions on the Wii. It was released at the same time with the Gamecube counterpart in Japan, but localized way more quickly than the GC. Check everywhere. In the "top games of the seventh generation" TP is listed. TP belongs to the seventh generation, where it was marketed and pushed forward. The success of TP on Wii was what make Nintendo to made the next game, Skyward Sword, with motion controls only.

 

Watch Dogs is being crazily marketed as a next-gen game, despite being its core development in PC with the seventh generation consoles in mind. When it releases, it will be a next-gen game despite being the seventh gen consoles counterpart released as well. That's how it works. If Nintendo chose to delay Twilight Princess and then use it as a next-gen game, then its a next-gen game.

Metal Gear Solid V is another example of this.

 

I'm sorry, but no. They delayed the GC version of Twilight Princess for ONE reason and one reason only. Because they wanted people to buy it on the debuting Wii. Period. There's literally no other answer, they wanted people to buy it for Wii, not GC, they didn't want the two versions to "compete", so they delayed the GC version by a whole whopping MONTH. Which even then, wasn't a huge span of time. Otherwise, it was finished, ready, and could/would have launched at the same time, if not even earlier. It was strategic move to make the Wii version stand out and feel like a "timed exclusive". People who couldn't wait to play the new Zelda, would possibly be tempted to go run out and buy a Wii (if they could find one) to play it. It was a business move.

The game is still a GC game. The main version of the game, the ORIGINAL build, with Left-handed Link, and everything in it's proper place (not flipped and mirrored like it was in the Wii version), was the Gamecube game. It's a pointless and irrelevant argument to continue try and make. Twilight Princess is a Gamecube game that they ported to Wii, no different from RE4. Skyward Sword, on the other hand, was a Wii game. End of story.



DevilRising said:

I'm sorry, but no. They delayed the GC version of Twilight Princess for ONE reason and one reason only. Because they wanted people to buy it on the debuting Wii. Period. There's literally no other answer, they wanted people to buy it for Wii, not GC, they didn't want the two versions to "compete", so they delayed the GC version by a whole whopping MONTH. Which even then, wasn't a huge span of time. Otherwise, it was finished, ready, and could/would have launched at the same time, if not even earlier. It was strategic move to make the Wii version stand out and feel like a "timed exclusive". People who couldn't wait to play the new Zelda, would possibly be tempted to go run out and buy a Wii (if they could find one) to play it. It was a business move.

The game is still a GC game. The main version of the game, the ORIGINAL build, with Left-handed Link, and everything in it's proper place (not flipped and mirrored like it was in the Wii version), was the Gamecube game. It's a pointless and irrelevant argument to continue try and make. Twilight Princess is a Gamecube game that they ported to Wii, no different from RE4. Skyward Sword, on the other hand, was a Wii game. End of story.

The right-handed/left-handed/mirroring thing is the height of triviality.



DevilRising said:

 

I'm sorry, but no. They delayed the GC version of Twilight Princess for ONE reason and one reason only. Because they wanted people to buy it on the debuting Wii. Period. There's literally no other answer, they wanted people to buy it for Wii, not GC, they didn't want the two versions to "compete", so they delayed the GC version by a whole whopping MONTH. Which even then, wasn't a huge span of time. Otherwise, it was finished, ready, and could/would have launched at the same time, if not even earlier. It was strategic move to make the Wii version stand out and feel like a "timed exclusive". People who couldn't wait to play the new Zelda, would possibly be tempted to go run out and buy a Wii (if they could find one) to play it. It was a business move.

The game is still a GC game. The main version of the game, the ORIGINAL build, with Left-handed Link, and everything in it's proper place (not flipped and mirrored like it was in the Wii version), was the Gamecube game. It's a pointless and irrelevant argument to continue try and make. Twilight Princess is a Gamecube game that they ported to Wii, no different from RE4. Skyward Sword, on the other hand, was a Wii game. End of story.


Read above.