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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Digital Foundry confirms MK8 720p, No AA

 

*sigh*

"Fist-sized pixels" 190 35.78%
 
"But it looks AMAZI... 326 61.39%
 
Total:516
gladiator on 24 May 2014
the_dengle said:
gladiator said:
the_dengle said:
I didn't see anyone complaining about the game looking bad in motion until DF reported the technical bit. Now it's time for everyone to come out of the woodworks to remind us that 720p with no AA looks awful, because that's what they've been trained to believe. I guess some people can't rely on their own senses to determine whether or not something looks good.

go look at the direct feed pics from DF article, it really does look awful, and has always been a huge complaint in the 360/ps3 generation.

Is Mario Kart some kind of visual novel now? We have seen tons of direct feed gameplay, and the consensus all around is that the game looks fantastic. Use your own senses to look at the game. Then apply the technical side. You'll find you are more impressed with the craftsmanship. Imagine looking at two visually identical games: one is 1080p with AA, the other is 480p with none. Which is the more impressive feat?

Here we are faced with a game that many think looks as good as or better than anything on PS3/360, without the need for AA. Why shouldn't I consider that impressive?by

these are direct feed pics from DF. there are no reviews that claim that it looks better, or even techically better then 360/ps3 games, that only people that claimed this were nintendo fans, they also claimed batman, AC4 and COD were looking better on wiiu, infact they swore by it, when DF article came out, it was the opposite, running at a worse frame rate and missing effects.




Around the Network
Justagamer on 24 May 2014

The game looks great. Mario 3d world looks great. I'll get the game, even knowing that information. People saying it's suddenly ugly, or virtually unplayable now because of it are simply ignorant. The game looks great. It looked great yesterday, it looked great a month ago, and digitalfoundry saying it's 720 p with no aa didn't change what the game was. The ignorance displayed in this thread by many is amazing. But I'm not surprised.



cannonballZ on 24 May 2014
gladiator said:

go look at the direct feed pics from DF article, it really does look awful, and has always been a huge complaint in the 360/ps3 generation.


I saw the pics and vids, the game looks great. 

 

A huge complaint in the 360/ps3 gen? Really? I saw very few complaints of resolution for last gen games. Most people didn't even know that a lot of the games were sub 720 last gen and still looked great. 



Locknuts on 24 May 2014

Lol never expected 1080p. In my view the Wii U is a perfectly balanced 720p machine, and I'm fine with that. I can game at 1080p on my PC and then go and game at 720p on a console and it doesn't bother me. It's nothing like playing SD games on a HDTV (which is unbearable for me).



kinisking on 24 May 2014

who cares about the pixels, if what youre seeing looks good????????? Yes, it WOULD look better at 1080p, but thats as stupid as saying it would look better on pc. its not on pc, its not 1080p. it still looks amazing



Ltd predictions by the time 9th Gen comes out

Ps4:110million

Xbox one :75 million( was 65) 

Wii u: 20 milliion

Around the Network
gladiator on 24 May 2014
cannonballZ said:
gladiator said:

go look at the direct feed pics from DF article, it really does look awful, and has always been a huge complaint in the 360/ps3 generation.


I saw the pics and vids, the game looks great. 

 

A huge complaint in the 360/ps3 gen? Really? I saw very few complaints of resolution for last gen games. Most people didn't even know that a lot of the games were sub 720 last gen and still looked great. 

http://images.eurogamer.net/2013/articles//a/1/6/7/9/4/0/9/3.bmp.jpg this looks great? and yes iy was a huge complaint on neogaf. they would alway see vieos on youtube with tha game looking amazing, then when they got it on home on a 40 inch+ tv the iamge quailty and jaggies were always a huge let down.



NavyNut on 24 May 2014

WiiU now as powerful as Xbone confirmed.



amak11 on 24 May 2014
gladiator said:
the_dengle said:
gladiator said:
the_dengle said:
I didn't see anyone complaining about the game looking bad in motion until DF reported the technical bit. Now it's time for everyone to come out of the woodworks to remind us that 720p with no AA looks awful, because that's what they've been trained to believe. I guess some people can't rely on their own senses to determine whether or not something looks good.

go look at the direct feed pics from DF article, it really does look awful, and has always been a huge complaint in the 360/ps3 generation.

Is Mario Kart some kind of visual novel now? We have seen tons of direct feed gameplay, and the consensus all around is that the game looks fantastic. Use your own senses to look at the game. Then apply the technical side. You'll find you are more impressed with the craftsmanship. Imagine looking at two visually identical games: one is 1080p with AA, the other is 480p with none. Which is the more impressive feat?

Here we are faced with a game that many think looks as good as or better than anything on PS3/360, without the need for AA. Why shouldn't I consider that impressive?by

these are direct feed pics from DF. there are no reviews that claim that it looks better, or even techically better then 360/ps3 games, that only people that claimed this were nintendo fans, they also claimed batman, AC4 and COD were looking better on wiiu, infact they swore by it, when DF article came out, it was the opposite.

 

The first part of your comment is true, but PS3 and 360 haven't pulled off native AAA 720p games for 6 years other than indie titles. Games have become increasingly more  complex and filled, meaning your resolution and  textures are suffering. Look at the PS3 version of ACIV and compare that to the Wii U, the PS3 version is ass in comparison. Considering Batman, AC3/4 and CoD were all lazy ports that didnt take advantage of hardware. AC4 had better shadows than the 360 version, but it was hit by the lazy porting and suffered frame rate drops as a direct result (then again, can't expect much when the game was being displayed twice with a map overlaying the Wii U gamepad screen). The console itself is technically better, and performs much more efficently than the PS360. If you want a real comparison, lets see how the 360 version of watch_dogs will fair agains the Wii U version. I don't even believe PS3 or 360 games have had AA for a long time. All the games are jagged as hell. It's pretty damn easy to add "next-gen blur" filter over everything. 



Hedra42 on 24 May 2014
vivster said:
Hedra42 said:
vivster said:
gladiator said:

 

i was looking at the full resolution pics from the digitail foundry article, and holy hell is the game ugly when your not moving fast.

 

That's what I've been saying all along. It looks amazing... if you look at the tiny screens and videos. Once you blow it up on a big 1080p screen it rears its ugly head.

But most people who praise the game's visuals don't bother doing that.

I was looking at the full resolution pics, and I get that stuff like this will show when blown up on a big screen. But will it be an issue? I don't know. I'm not going to be playing the game standing 18 inches away from that screen.

Scrutinise anything hard enough and there will be holes to pick - me, I'll reserve my judgement until I put the disc into my Wii U.

Having a sizable library of PS3 games I don't have to wait to see how it will look like on my tv. There are plenty of examples for games with 720p and no AA. TLOU had 720p with very weak AA and I hated it for that(the game was great but it was held back by hardare limitations). Now MK presents us the whole thing without AA. My standards did not deminish over the past year so MK8 has to go up against that. Weak or nonexistant AA were the reasons why I never could get into Darksiders or Dragon's Dogma.

Like I said, I'll reserve my judgement until I put the disc into my Wii U. Meaning, I've always intended to buy it to play the game, and the gameplay IMO is more important factor in my judgement. I don't care if it's 160fps, 2160p and antialiased ad infinitum, if it's a crap game, it's no good to me.

I've read a number of reviews where MK8 would have been played on a sizeable screen, and have yet to find one that has marked it down because it is 59 fps, 720p and missing AA, or have said that these things have detracted from the overall experience. If you can find one, I'll happily stand corrected, but I'm sure if you do, it will be in the minority.

I feel sorry for you if a few jaggies disrupt your gaming experience. From the reviews I've read, it doesn't really look like it's going to spoil the game for the vast majority of players. Certainly, while I'm having a laugh racing with my family and friends, the last thing I'll be doing is counting frame rate, jaggies and pixels.

While it's fantastic what can be done graphically nowadays, I think people expect too much, and all this 'you can't see it until it's pointed out to you and then you can't not see it' nonsense is what I mean by scrutinising too hard.



gladiator on 24 May 2014
amak11 said:
gladiator said:
the_dengle said:
gladiator said:
the_dengle said:
I didn't see anyone complaining about the game looking bad in motion until DF reported the technical bit. Now it's time for everyone to come out of the woodworks to remind us that 720p with no AA looks awful, because that's what they've been trained to believe. I guess some people can't rely on their own senses to determine whether or not something looks good.

go look at the direct feed pics from DF article, it really does look awful, and has always been a huge complaint in the 360/ps3 generation.

Is Mario Kart some kind of visual novel now? We have seen tons of direct feed gameplay, and the consensus all around is that the game looks fantastic. Use your own senses to look at the game. Then apply the technical side. You'll find you are more impressed with the craftsmanship. Imagine looking at two visually identical games: one is 1080p with AA, the other is 480p with none. Which is the more impressive feat?

Here we are faced with a game that many think looks as good as or better than anything on PS3/360, without the need for AA. Why shouldn't I consider that impressive?by

these are direct feed pics from DF. there are no reviews that claim that it looks better, or even techically better then 360/ps3 games, that only people that claimed this were nintendo fans, they also claimed batman, AC4 and COD were looking better on wiiu, infact they swore by it, when DF article came out, it was the opposite.

 

The first part of your comment is true, but PS3 and 360 haven't pulled off native AAA 720p games for 6 years other than indie titles. Games have become increasingly more  complex and filled, meaning your resolution and  textures are suffering. Look at the PS3 version of ACIV and compare that to the Wii U, the PS3 version is ass in comparison. Considering Batman, AC3/4 and CoD were all lazy ports that didnt take advantage of hardware. AC4 had better shadows than the 360 version, but it was hit by the lazy porting and suffered frame rate drops as a direct result (then again, can't expect much when the game was being displayed twice with a map overlaying the Wii U gamepad screen). The console itself is technically better, and performs much more efficently than the PS360. If you want a real comparison, lets see how the 360 version of watch_dogs will fair agains the Wii U version. I don't even believe PS3 or 360 games have had AA for a long time. All the games are jagged as hell. It's pretty damn easy to add "next-gen blur" filter over everything. 

lol nope the wiiu version is the worse, DF did a comparsion.  this part is also laughable, most 360/ps3 AAA games are 720p native.