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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Do The Nintendo Higher-Ups Sound Like Sore Losers To You ?

 

Do The Nintendo Higer-Ups Sound Like Sore Losers To You ?

Yes!! 216 59.67%
 
No!! 65 17.96%
 
Reggie is love, Reggie is life!! 35 9.67%
 
See Results :-) 46 12.71%
 
Total:362
Qwark said:
mine said:
Miyamoto said the right thing.

Beginning with the Wii - GC was more powerful than PS2 - Nintendo games showed that style beats raw power.

Nintendo does not make realistic looking games for a reason - they are a TOY company which offers GAMING EXPERIENCES.

They intentionally let others offer different experiences because they are not good at them.

Splatoon is Nintendos master piece showing how to reinvent a complete genre "owned" by others into a new one. By offering superior gameplay and graphics (!!) Splatoon manages to walk on the thin line of satisfying the "hunter" in us AND the inner child of which both are equally important...


Splatoon isn't a masterpiece and is per defenition not the best looking tps not even close. Playstation is a toy brand as well, yet they make cartoony and realistic looking games, as making experiences like Uncharted, TLOU instead of fun games only.

 

The GameCube was more powerful but it's games never got close to shadow of the clossus, GT 4 or God of war 2. 

 

You clearly never played Metroid Prime 2: echoes, F-Zero GX, Resident Evil 4, Star Fox: adventures, Star Wars Rogue Squadron III, Wind Waker or Twilight Princess.

And SOTC is your argument? That world was empty as fuck.



Around the Network
Qwark said:
mine said:
Miyamoto said the right thing.

Beginning with the Wii - GC was more powerful than PS2 - Nintendo games showed that style beats raw power.

Nintendo does not make realistic looking games for a reason - they are a TOY company which offers GAMING EXPERIENCES.

They intentionally let others offer different experiences because they are not good at them.

Splatoon is Nintendos master piece showing how to reinvent a complete genre "owned" by others into a new one. By offering superior gameplay and graphics (!!) Splatoon manages to walk on the thin line of satisfying the "hunter" in us AND the inner child of which both are equally important...


Splatoon isn't a masterpiece and is per defenition not the best looking tps not even close. Playstation is a toy brand as well, yet they make cartoony and realistic looking games, as making experiences like Uncharted, TLOU instead of fun games only.

 

The GameCube was more powerful but it's games never got close to shadow of the clossus, GT 4 or God of war 2. 

 


Are we talking on a technical level? Because I will take Star Wars Rogue Squadron II & III and Resident Evil 4 and put them head to head against anything on the PS2 and they come out ahead. 



midrange said:
bigtakilla said:

1st paragraph. Which ones? I cannot think of one that hadn't been improved since announcement (at least ones that needed it). Devil's Third? Yes. Super Mario 3D World? Yes. Bayonetta/2? Maybe not, but it looked absolutely jaw dropping since day 1. SMT X FE? Yes. 

2nd paragraph. This is just refering to "it's the hardware". We seen tons of franchises (even your example of Bayo 2) showing that the specs to create an on rail shooter os fine. It's the art direction of the series. They didn't have these increadibly detailed ships before, and now for some reason are scaling back, the ships in the series have always been simple designs. 

3rd paragraph. Miyamoto is allowed his take on the gaming industry, the same as everyone else.

Devil's third took a year to barely improve, mario 3d world did not get a graphics update, they simply showed the plain and uninteresting levels when they annouced it, SMTxFE was announced with a prerendered video so I don't know how you a comparing those graphics.

Why not look at the watch dogs downgrade controversy, or xenoblade X downgrade if you want to see visual downgrades since announcement.

I in no way refered to the hardware as a limiting factor. I will refer to time as a limiting factor. This is why fast racing neo looks amazing compared to other indie games, and star fox looks like garbage compared to retail games (wii u retail games included). It's not the art direction, it's the quick workaround to not having to delay the game, which we know won't happen seeing as how fans are already pissed zelda was delayed.

Miyamoto can have his opinions, but like everyother professional in the industry, he has to keep them to himself. Otherwise he looks immature and like a sore (given the context of a bad e3 and poor starfox graphics). Unless you were perfectly content with other developers calling the wii u hardware shit, you seem to be portraying a double standard here

http://www.dualshockers.com/2015/06/09/wii-u-exclusive-shin-megami-tensei-x-fire-emblem-gets-new-screenshots-shows-improved-textures/

A showcase of clear graphical improvement in Shin Megami Tensei. Will post a mario 3D world when I get out of work.

Xenoblade X was only a downgrade from the second video. Still a massive upgrade from the first, and even improved from the third onward.

I can disagree with devs, but they have every right to say what they want.



bigtakilla said:
midrange said:

Devil's third took a year to barely improve, mario 3d world did not get a graphics update, they simply showed the plain and uninteresting levels when they annouced it, SMTxFE was announced with a prerendered video so I don't know how you a comparing those graphics.

Why not look at the watch dogs downgrade controversy, or xenoblade X downgrade if you want to see visual downgrades since announcement.

I in no way refered to the hardware as a limiting factor. I will refer to time as a limiting factor. This is why fast racing neo looks amazing compared to other indie games, and star fox looks like garbage compared to retail games (wii u retail games included). It's not the art direction, it's the quick workaround to not having to delay the game, which we know won't happen seeing as how fans are already pissed zelda was delayed.

Miyamoto can have his opinions, but like everyother professional in the industry, he has to keep them to himself. Otherwise he looks immature and like a sore (given the context of a bad e3 and poor starfox graphics). Unless you were perfectly content with other developers calling the wii u hardware shit, you seem to be portraying a double standard here

http://www.dualshockers.com/2015/06/09/wii-u-exclusive-shin-megami-tensei-x-fire-emblem-gets-new-screenshots-shows-improved-textures/

A showcase of clear graphical improvement in Shin Megami Tensei. Will post a mario 3D world when I get out of work.

Xenoblade X was only a downgrade from the second video. Still a massive upgrade from the first, and even improved from the third onward.

I can disagree with devs, but they have every right to say what they want.

Let's assume those games have improved by a "significant amount." Does starfox fall under harsher circumstances and a small time frame compared to those games, most definitely. So is it reasonable to assume that starfox won't receive the same upgrade. Yes, yes it does. Given that it looks like a 2006 game now, even if it there is an upgrade, there is no way that it would match other wii u game graphics in such a short time frame (wii u games aren't really that graphically impressive to begin with). Could you then justify pricing starfox at $60? Could you honestly say that Nintendo isn't taking massive shortcuts for the sake of business and not customer satisfaction? It seems obvious that Miyamoto wants to distract people from that train of thought by downplaying other games.

Again, devs have every right to say what they want, but you can't expect them to not recieve backlash for what they say. Miyamoto being legendary in the past does not excuse him from looking like a childish sore loser after downplaying other games. He should have just been professional and kept his thoughts to himself, but instead he chose to whine about other games despite the fact that his games need the most work



Yeah, a bit. This arrogance is starting to grate on me, honestly. I've noticed in the past couple years that other companies (both Microsoft and Sony) compliment Nintendo on their IP and congratulate them on successes, but Nintendo acts the opposite with comments like those in the OP. It's kind of immature and doesn't show a good face to the public or their fans.

As much as I love Reggie, I think he's the worst offender. His damage control always seems to come off as defensive and finger-pointing-y.

I'll always love Nintendo, but some of their comments really turn me off.



It'll be awhile before I figure out how to do one of these. :P 

Around the Network
midrange said:

Let's assume those games have improved by a "significant amount." Does starfox fall under harsher circumstances and a small time frame compared to those games, most definitely. So is it reasonable to assume that starfox won't receive the same upgrade. Yes, yes it does. Given that it looks like a 2006 game now, even if it there is an upgrade, there is no way that it would match other wii u game graphics in such a short time frame (wii u games aren't really that graphically impressive to begin with). Could you then justify pricing starfox at $60? Could you honestly say that Nintendo isn't taking massive shortcuts for the sake of business and not customer satisfaction? It seems obvious that Miyamoto wants to distract people from that train of thought by downplaying other games.

Again, devs have every right to say what they want, but you can't expect them to not recieve backlash for what they say. Miyamoto being legendary in the past does not excuse him from looking like a childish sore loser after downplaying other games. He should have just been professional and kept his thoughts to himself, but instead he chose to whine about other games despite the fact that his games need the most work

True, but I think the ground work is laid and looks fine. They just need to really add more effects, and place some more enemies on the field so it doesn't feel barren. 

A $60 price tag would depend on a LOT of factors, graphics would be so far down that list it would be practically insignificant. Online modes, campaign completion time, these far outweigh what it looks like in development. 



bigtakilla said:
midrange said:

Let's assume those games have improved by a "significant amount." Does starfox fall under harsher circumstances and a small time frame compared to those games, most definitely. So is it reasonable to assume that starfox won't receive the same upgrade. Yes, yes it does. Given that it looks like a 2006 game now, even if it there is an upgrade, there is no way that it would match other wii u game graphics in such a short time frame (wii u games aren't really that graphically impressive to begin with). Could you then justify pricing starfox at $60? Could you honestly say that Nintendo isn't taking massive shortcuts for the sake of business and not customer satisfaction? It seems obvious that Miyamoto wants to distract people from that train of thought by downplaying other games.

Again, devs have every right to say what they want, but you can't expect them to not recieve backlash for what they say. Miyamoto being legendary in the past does not excuse him from looking like a childish sore loser after downplaying other games. He should have just been professional and kept his thoughts to himself, but instead he chose to whine about other games despite the fact that his games need the most work

True, but I think the ground work is laid and looks fine. They just need to really add more effects, and place some more enemies on the field so it doesn't feel barren. 

A $60 price tag would depend on a LOT of factors, graphics would be so far down that list it would be practically insignificant. Online modes, campaign completion time, these far outweigh what it looks like in development. 

If the engine is as I assume complete, there won't be much improvement in visuals that don't detract from gameplay. So they only thing they can do is try to add effects like particles or enemies like you suggest, but that even that would put more work onto the cpu, which I assume they are maxing out.

graphics I argue are not that far down the list, but even if they were, starfox really isn't known for long campaign times (first one could have been completed in an hour), there won't be online multiplayer (http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/06/16/e3-2015-star-fox-zero-has-no-online-multiplayer-mode), and given the gamepad interaction, I don't think their local multiplayer is looking good. I am still highly doubtful that this game merits $40 much less $60



Samus Aran said:
Qwark said:


Splatoon isn't a masterpiece and is per defenition not the best looking tps not even close. Playstation is a toy brand as well, yet they make cartoony and realistic looking games, as making experiences like Uncharted, TLOU instead of fun games only.

 

The GameCube was more powerful but it's games never got close to shadow of the clossus, GT 4 or God of war 2. 

 

You clearly never played Metroid Prime 2: echoes, F-Zero GX, Resident Evil 4, Star Fox: adventures, Star Wars Rogue Squadron III, Wind Waker or Twilight Princess.

And SOTC is your argument? That world was empty as fuck.

The same way you never played SOTC, GT4 and GOW II. GOW II blows away any GC game graphically.



GameMasterPC said:
Samus Aran said:

You clearly never played Metroid Prime 2: echoes, F-Zero GX, Resident Evil 4, Star Fox: adventures, Star Wars Rogue Squadron III, Wind Waker or Twilight Princess.

And SOTC is your argument? That world was empty as fuck.

The same way you never played SOTC, GT4 and GOW II. GOW II blows away any GC game graphically.

Metroid Prime 2: echoes obviously looks better and has a perfect 60 fps framerate to boot with no visible loading times. GoW II's framerate is pathetic compared to Prime 2.

It's not even close really.



Samus Aran said:
GameMasterPC said:

The same way you never played SOTC, GT4 and GOW II. GOW II blows away any GC game graphically.

Metroid Prime 2: echoes obviously looks better and has a perfect 60 fps framerate to boot with no visable loading times.

It's not even close really.

No dude, just no. GOW II looks better and is technically more impressive and has barely any load times as well.

Yeah its not close, GOW II blows it away graphically.