Forums - Nintendo Discussion - About Star Fox Zero graphics

Graphics are:

Amazing! 74 14.98%
 
Nice, just a bit outdated 221 44.74%
 
Pretty bad 86 17.41%
 
Terrible 67 13.56%
 
Do a barrel roll 46 9.31%
 
Total:494
curl-6 said:
JRPGfan said:

Still can you think of a wii u game that looks worse than Starfox Zero? I cant right now.

Cmon, curl, let me not start DT flame war again.

At first: these "lets players" are jerks.

Secondly: car's texture wasn't load properly, UE3 such a shit engine (on any platform).

Devil's Thirdly: Jane Doe's tits contains more polygons than whole Corneria level.




Around the Network

About framerate:
Rock solid 30fps with correct frametimes can look smoother than 60fps sometimes with bad frametimes. And as it looks Star Fox is a most of the time



Boberkun said:
Vodacixi said:

The only time I remember something similar happening on W101 is when you enter a building and the action takes place on the gamepad while the TV screen remains pretty much static, which is not even close to what Star Fox does, first because in one of the screens there is no action at all and in the one where the action takes place (normally the gamepad) the framerate drops drammatically to 30 or even less. Also, those are very few specific moments, while Star Fox Zero does it for the entire playthrough.

So no, they cannot be compared.

Yes, they can:

From 2:10 and so on. Literally Star Fox Zero situation: third person view + cockpit mode. Framerate isn't perfect (neither in SF0), but picture looks way better.

"Way better" is a bit exageratted considering that The Wonderful 101 is not exactly a great game graphic wise either. That being said, it is what I already stated: one of the views hardly shows or generates anything at all. It's a small and closed area where almost nothing happens besides the character moving a bit or something ocasionally falling from the sky. Its almost static. And even then, one of the views drops from 60 to 30fps and at the same time the one that is still at 60 drops to 40 or less sometimes. Meanwhile, Star Fox Zero manages to show two points of view in an open area and in both of them a lot of shit is going on. Also, this feature is constant during all the gameplay, while in TW101 is limited to some specific ocasions.

 

Is not comparable.



Boberkun said:

 

Nice pic, thanks for sharing.



 
I agree... I think the Ratched & Clank has a nice graphic but does not match what star fox proposes... In addition, people are very confused about what is art style and graphical capabilities. I truly believe that if SF0 was released on PS4 we would have minor differences, but only at a technical pov. (like resolution and some textures) >


And, I like Star Fox graphics, they're well polished most port of time.There's no comparison to any NGC game or even a PS3, this is stupidity.


Around the Network
ThisanmU said:
 

And, I like Star Fox graphics, they're well polished most port of time.There's no comparison to any NGC game or even a PS3, this is stupidity.

 

I think they can be compared to Project Sylpheed, a 2006 Xbox 360 game:



 

Vodacixi said:

The Wonderful 101 is not exactly a great game graphic wise either.

Objectively better than Star Fox. On both screens you can see tons of models, particles, shaders, etc.

Vodacixi said:

It's a small and closed area where almost nothing happens besides the character moving a bit or something ocasionally falling from the sky

What's the difference with Corneria where literally one big flat green texture, ten enemies, two buildings and lonely tree on screen?

Vodacixi said:

Also, this feature is constant during all the gameplay, while in TW101 is limited to some specific ocasions.

Not a argument. You want the game which can manage "two-screens in 60 fps" and you got it.



captain carot said:
About framerate:
Rock solid 30fps with correct frametimes can look smoother than 60fps sometimes with bad frametimes. And as it looks Star Fox is a most of the time <60fps bad.

Wow ... You've got to be kidding me ... sorry but no matter what happens 60-50 FPS will always look much better than 30 FPS.



Switch Friend Code : 3905-6122-2909 

What I got from this is that to defend the lazyness on SF0 we come again to the "gameplay is first, gameplay is the only thing, graphics come at least" argument.

But then we have praise and threads dedicated to the great graphics of some certain Wii U games.



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


Wright said:
ThisanmU said:
 

And, I like Star Fox graphics, they're well polished most port of time.There's no comparison to any NGC game or even a PS3, this is stupidity.

 

I think they can be compared to Project Sylpheed, a 2006 Xbox 360 game:

Wow... Now this game looks much better then Starfox and it's 10 years old, hahahahahaha.

The NINTENDO Quality people expect is quickly disappearing.

 

Moderated - VXIII