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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - My thoughts on "Star Fox Zero's graphics look bad"

AZWification on 18 November 2015

It does look slightly better, but I was always going to get Star Fox regardless of its graphics.



                
       ---Member of the official Squeezol Fanclub---

Around the Network
LurkerJ on 18 November 2015
Tachikoma said:

Here's a screenshot taken exactly when the guy says "the main thing we can notice from this walker is both a huge increase in texture resolution and dynamic lighting"


And yes, the texture resolutions the same (looks actually worse in the video, but mainly due to compression), the only actual difference is the body of the craft is now using a shader and not just a flat texture, and the glass was made transparent (was only misty-blue in the E3 trailer to hide the fact the pilot was low poly).

So again, the video is nothing but falsehood and confirmation bias, confirmation bias which people who really want to like the game will then use this video to give themselves.

If I had a cent for everytime he said "way way way better" , "much much much MUCH better"...

If it's that obvious you'd let the side-by-side comparison speak for itself, but it's not. How he gathered 100k views and that many likes for such a twisted comparison is beyond me. The vast majority of his videos have views count below the 5k mark



Pavolink on 18 November 2015
Tachikoma said:

Here's a screenshot taken exactly when the guy says "the main thing we can notice from this walker is both a huge increase in texture resolution and dynamic lighting"



And yes, the texture resolutions the same (looks actually worse in the video, but mainly due to compression), the only actual difference is the body of the craft is now using a shader and not just a flat texture, and the glass was made transparent (was only misty-blue in the E3 trailer to hide the fact the pilot was low poly).

So again, the video is nothing but falsehood and confirmation bias, confirmation bias which people who really want to like the game will then use this video to give themselves.

Is this supposed to look better?



Proud to be the first cool Nintendo fan ever

Number ONE Zelda fan in the Universe

DKCTF didn't move consoles

Prediction: No Zelda HD for Wii U, quietly moved to the succesor

Predictions for Nintendo NX and Mobile


curl-6 on 18 November 2015
LurkerJ said:
Tachikoma said:

Here's a screenshot taken exactly when the guy says "the main thing we can notice from this walker is both a huge increase in texture resolution and dynamic lighting"


And yes, the texture resolutions the same (looks actually worse in the video, but mainly due to compression), the only actual difference is the body of the craft is now using a shader and not just a flat texture, and the glass was made transparent (was only misty-blue in the E3 trailer to hide the fact the pilot was low poly).

So again, the video is nothing but falsehood and confirmation bias, confirmation bias which people who really want to like the game will then use this video to give themselves.

If I had a cent for everytime he said "way way way better" , "much much much MUCH better"...

If you had a cent for every time he said "dynamic", you could buy a small country.



curl-6 on 18 November 2015
zippy said:
midrange said:


Gamepad definitely affects processing power. The graphics would have changed completely. Literally replacing the gamepad with a map/inventory would have been enough. The game would have improved vastly

Nintendo would have had the art style , character models and environments ready way before they started tinkering with gamepad controls. Plus as somebody has stated, Mario Kart 8 can render on both screens, and that's hardly a bad looking game. Star Fox looks like it does because its Miyamotos vision on how he wants the game to look.

Mario Kart 8 only renders a 2D menu or a mirrored image to the Gamepad, that's much less demanding than having a separate viewpoint of a 3D environment.

Yes, Starfox's art direction would likely be the same without the Gamepad view, but the additional horsepower would allow them to apply a much higher level of technial polish.

And knowing Miyamoto, the Gamepad controls were probably the first thing they came up with, before they even started building the graphics.



Around the Network
curl-6 on 18 November 2015
Vodacixi said:
curl-6 said:

2 sets of player inputs isn't a big processing hit to a modern console.
It's still just one gameplay scenario in MK8, just with two participants.

Yes, but each player inflict different variables in the scenario. I'm using a star at 9th place kicking 8th, 7th and 6th asses while my friend at 3th is throwing red shells to 2nd and first. That rendered in two different perspectives looks more demanding that just SHOWING two perspectives. If it wasn't the case, Mario Kart 8 wouldn't drop to 30fps with 3 or 4 player neither would Hyrule Warriors drop its resolution AND framerate dramatically in co-op. If processing different players doing different things in the same scenario is not that demanding, those games should stay almost the same in any of this situations.

The interactions of 2 player characters and 10 AI drivers Mario Kart aren't hugely demanding for a system like Wii U. It drops to 30fps in three and four player splitscreen not because of the amount of interactions, (after all, AI drivers provide these interactions even in single player) but because each player's viewpoint has to draw its own set of polygons, textures, etc. With three or four perspectives, drawing all that at 60fps is too much for the Wii U's GPU.

Starfox has to draw two sets of polygons/textures/etc, just like MK8's 2-player splitscreen, but it has to do so over a larger number of pixels. (1290x720 + 854x480 as opposed to just 1280x720 in Mario Kart)



Miyamotoo on 19 November 2015
curl-6 said:
zippy said:

Nintendo would have had the art style , character models and environments ready way before they started tinkering with gamepad controls. Plus as somebody has stated, Mario Kart 8 can render on both screens, and that's hardly a bad looking game. Star Fox looks like it does because its Miyamotos vision on how he wants the game to look.

Mario Kart 8 only renders a 2D menu or a mirrored image to the Gamepad, that's much less demanding than having a separate viewpoint of a 3D environment.

Yes, Starfox's art direction would likely be the same without the Gamepad view, but the additional horsepower would allow them to apply a much higher level of technial polish.

And knowing Miyamoto, the Gamepad controls were probably the first thing they came up with, before they even started building the graphics.

Totally agree, art direction would be same even without gamepad view, but with additional horsepower we could have more details, better textures and more things going on on screen.

Miyamoto already said they wanted Star Fox for Wii but they wanted completely new experience and controls and Wii didnt give them what they wanted, but Wii U gamepad give them that. So basically Wii U gamepad is reason why Nintendo on first place decided to make Star Fox game for Wii U.



ZyroXZ2 on 19 November 2015

I'm of the mindset that agrees that Star Fox Zero is not a good-looking game, and in reality, the core issue really IS that they're rendering the same screen space twice at 60 fps. That is a HUGE drain on power.

I personally think a game like Star Fox does NOT need 60 fps, however (and I am well aware this is Platinum Games' target goal all the time), and I actually think a drop to a solid 30 fps would do this game wonders in pleasing the eye while maintaining enough fluidity as to not hamper the experience.



Check out my entertainment gaming channel!
^^/
hunter_alien on 19 November 2015
ZyroXZ2 said:
I'm of the mindset that agrees that Star Fox Zero is not a good-looking game, and in reality, the core issue really IS that they're rendering the same screen space twice at 60 fps. That is a HUGE drain on power.

I personally think a game like Star Fox does NOT need 60 fps, however (and I am well aware this is Platinum Games' target goal all the time), and I actually think a drop to a solid 30 fps would do this game wonders in pleasing the eye while maintaining enough fluidity as to not hamper the experience.


This. Starfox IMO didnt need a perfect 60fps on both screens. 30 would have been enough and the game could have looked way better. I mean, I knopw that most people will play it for the gameplay, but this is imply... ugly. It looks like a pre-alpha build IMO. There is some difference between the two build, true, but that is mostly down to the engine optimization IMO. Textures on the other hand are terrible.

SM3DW looked amazing, MK8, looked amazing, B2 looked even moreso... why does this look like a 1st generation, 3rd party 360 cash-in? Beats me...



Vote the Mayor for Mayor!

ps3-sales! on 19 November 2015

Ok you know what, this will not be the popular opinion but it has to be said.

Are you insane?

Normally I don't partake in these dumb console X > console Y with visuals/graphics and what not. But you guys are being veeeeerrry Nintendo biased here.

I don't want to get banned by attacking Nintendo/it's fans; but come on. Star Fox looks like an average 360 launch title game that would come out in 2005. It just simply looks bad.

It. Looks. Bad.

That's blatantly obvious to me. No sugarcoat.

Is that a bad thing?!?!?! OF COURSE NOT.

The game will probably be a blast to play and i look forward to it! But stop trying to defend the visuals lol. Until there is an obvious upgrade Star Fox Wii U is destined to look crappy! That's just a fact!!!!!



Currently own:

 

  • Ps4

 

Currently playing: Witcher 3, Walking Dead S1/2, GTA5, Dying Light, Tomb Raider Remaster, MGS Ground Zeros