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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Fast Racing Neo Screenshots / The Future Is Fast

bigtakilla on 03 June 2015
JEMC said:
bigtakilla said:
JEMC said:

The truth is that they are a very small team and being free allows them to do what they want to do and take the time they need to launch the game they want.

With Nintendo, just like with every other publisher, they would have to grow or move to another country (they are from Germany) to join another team and make the games Nintendo tells them to do, with the budget Nintendo gives them and with a certain deadline to launch the game (although Nintendo seems to be more flexible than others in that matter). All those things would destroy the group.

They are fine the way they are.

People swore Monolith Soft would be destroyed when they went to Nintendo too. Turned out not to be the case at all. 

As captain carot already said, Monolith is a completely different case. Not only because they were a big studio before their Nintendo acquisition but because they weren't a "free" developer. Monolith was owned by Namco, who sold them to Nintendo.

They were already used to work under the constraints of a parent publisher.

But it seems they found the budgeting and freedom they needed to create their swan song game under Nintendo.

http://www.siliconera.com/2014/12/04/xenoblade-chronicles-x-director-says-hes-finally-made-game-always-wanted/



Around the Network
JEMC on 03 June 2015
bigtakilla said:
JEMC said:

As captain carot already said, Monolith is a completely different case. Not only because they were a big studio before their Nintendo acquisition but because they weren't a "free" developer. Monolith was owned by Namco, who sold them to Nintendo.

They were already used to work under the constraints of a parent publisher.

But it seems they found the budgeting and freedom they needed to create their swan song game under Nintendo.

http://www.siliconera.com/2014/12/04/xenoblade-chronicles-x-director-says-hes-finally-made-game-always-wanted/

That's also thanks to a machine powerful enough to let them do things that were not possible before .



Please excuse my bad English.

Currently gaming on a PC with an i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.

TheLegendaryWolf on 03 June 2015

Nintendo should publish a retail version of this game, looks too good for just an eshop release IMO.



bigtakilla on 03 June 2015
JEMC said:
bigtakilla said:
JEMC said:

As captain carot already said, Monolith is a completely different case. Not only because they were a big studio before their Nintendo acquisition but because they weren't a "free" developer. Monolith was owned by Namco, who sold them to Nintendo.

They were already used to work under the constraints of a parent publisher.

But it seems they found the budgeting and freedom they needed to create their swan song game under Nintendo.

http://www.siliconera.com/2014/12/04/xenoblade-chronicles-x-director-says-hes-finally-made-game-always-wanted/

That's also thanks to a machine powerful enough to let them do things that were not possible before .

Yes and no, true the Wii U is powerful enough to realize the vision he had in this new version, but it's only been after numerous times titles have been cut from budgeting. Xenogears had to be cut back to two disks, Xenosaga had to be cut back from a 6 game series to 3, ect. 



hsrob on 03 June 2015
sc94597 said:
curl-6 said:

The Wii U is really a 720p machine, once you go beyond that to 1080p or 900p you start losing a lot of your capacity for pretty shaders and such.

The same could be said for using 4k/8k textures, but the discernible difference, unless the image-quality is excellent for a 720p game (due to downsampling/SSAA) won't be noticeable.  It would make more sense to just stick with 2k textures (which are impressive enough for a Wii U game) and either use a higher resolution/better AA or just put those extra resources into something else. 

For reference: 

At 720p if you filled your whole screen with a 1k texture, it will look fine. If you filled your screen with a 512x512 texture it would look aliased and pixelated. If you filled your screen with half of that 1k texture it would also look aliased and pixelated. For an 8k texture you would have to fill your screen with about an eighth of said texture before it became aliased and pixelated. I just can't see that happening in this game and it seems like a waste of resources. 

I thought I had read they were using the 4k/8k textures for the vehicles, rather than the environment. Perhaps they felt it might be beneficial in replays where it's possible that there will be very close up views of the cars? i.e. part of the car taking up most of the screen.

I don't disagree with your point though and it will be interesting to see if people thinks it pays off.



Around the Network
sc94597 on 03 June 2015
hsrob said:
sc94597 said:
curl-6 said:

The Wii U is really a 720p machine, once you go beyond that to 1080p or 900p you start losing a lot of your capacity for pretty shaders and such.

The same could be said for using 4k/8k textures, but the discernible difference, unless the image-quality is excellent for a 720p game (due to downsampling/SSAA) won't be noticeable.  It would make more sense to just stick with 2k textures (which are impressive enough for a Wii U game) and either use a higher resolution/better AA or just put those extra resources into something else. 

For reference: 

At 720p if you filled your whole screen with a 1k texture, it will look fine. If you filled your screen with a 512x512 texture it would look aliased and pixelated. If you filled your screen with half of that 1k texture it would also look aliased and pixelated. For an 8k texture you would have to fill your screen with about an eighth of said texture before it became aliased and pixelated. I just can't see that happening in this game and it seems like a waste of resources. 

I thought I had read they were using the 4k/8k textures for the vehicles, rather than the environment. Perhaps they felt it might be beneficial in replays where it's possible that there will be very close up views of the cars? i.e. part of the car taking up most of the screen.

I don't disagree with your point though and it will be interesting to see if people thinks it pays off.


In that case it would make sense, since you see the cars closer than other textures. I assumed that the high res textures were the vines /trees and other environmental features, as they look pretty nice in these pics.



Tachikoma on 03 June 2015
Mnementh said:
Tachikoma said:
id have liked to have seen the screenshots before the heavy doctoring, personally.

What make you think they're doctored? Shinen is known to squeeze good visuals out of the available hardware and it doesn't seem unrealistic (not PS4-level for instance). Also as far as I know Shinen also isn't known for doctored images beforehand. I might be wrong though so I need your indications.

Fullscreen per pixel motion blur, or at least, what it tries to pass off as FSPPMB but is actually photo manip, same goes for the per object blur, crudely cut and applied to segments of the image.

The AA applied for the vehicles, especially in the first image, is TOO high, almost blurry, yet segments of the same vehicle show jagged edge, a jagged edge that suggests the AA on show is actually just smudge tool in photoshop applied after render output, the blurryness of textures as they reach geometrical edges lends hand to this theory too.

Then theres the portions of road under the main vehicle, close to its geometry that the motion blur filter applied to the rendered image missed, because its the edge of a crop and thus has no data to process a motion blur with.

In short, theyre bullshots, not because they look "too good" mind, but because the poor application of these manual processes gives it away.



alabtrosMyster on 03 June 2015

Why only the Wii U???



TheGoldenBoy on 03 June 2015

It looks pretty good. I'll keep an eye on it now.



hsrob on 03 June 2015
RolStoppable said:
alabtrosMyster said:

Why only the Wii U???

Because the PS4 and X1 have a different architecture. Blame Sony and Microsoft for doing their own thing.

Touche.