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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Xenoblade Chronicles: Definitive Edition Reviews: 89 Metacritic, and 89 Opencritic

DonFerrari said:
Shaunodon said:

I didn't attack Curl for saying negative things but because he keeps regurgitating the same complaint.

2% is based on the first reply in the resolutiongate thread, that mentions it running in 720p 98% of the time docked. I can't find the article he was referencing so you'll have to ask him. Maybe you missed it cause you were in a hurry to post your innacurate slander for this game.

And I'm not sure how I could be talking about several threads, when outside the dedicated fan thread there's only two threads talking about it.

Does the game run only docked? Nope, so you are already admitting it get under for more than 2%? And I haven't moved any posts, so you were the one lying.

And your accusation of spreading lie hardly would apply to 2 posts while also asking how many times does it need to be considered trolling. Your posts would be more on line of flaming than whatever you think I did.

The game drops under the original release (even docked) so I wasn't telling any lies.

Just objectively not true. Like my goodness, spend a couple minutes researching.

I can't say that 2% is perfectly accurate, but I know it's a hell of a lot closer to reality than anything you're saying. I only mentioned portable for the sake of it, but I don't even know why portable mode should matter, when you're comparing it to a version that didn't have one and your statement was, "...a remaster that even got some features being worse than the original like resolution."

How far from the truth are you planning to stray this time?



Around the Network
Shaunodon said:
DonFerrari said:

Does the game run only docked? Nope, so you are already admitting it get under for more than 2%? And I haven't moved any posts, so you were the one lying.

And your accusation of spreading lie hardly would apply to 2 posts while also asking how many times does it need to be considered trolling. Your posts would be more on line of flaming than whatever you think I did.

The game drops under the original release (even docked) so I wasn't telling any lies.

Just objectively not true. Like my goodness, spend a couple minutes researching.

I can't say that 2% is perfectly accurate, but I know it's a hell of a lot closer to reality than anything you're saying. I only mentioned portable for the sake of it, but I don't even know why portable mode should matter, when you're comparing it to a version that didn't have one and your statement was, "...a remaster that even got some features being worse than the original like resolution."

How far from the truth are you planning to stray this time?

Does the game run in portable mode? Is Switch a hybrid and Lite a portable only? Since the answer for both is yes, portable is valid.

And even talking only docked 2% or any amount of time under is still under so you can't claim it is a lie much less saying what you are saying is objective true when you yourself admit it does occur, so you would be objectively lying when denying even though you accuse me of lying, very strange.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari said:
Shaunodon said:

I didn't attack Curl for saying negative things but because he keeps regurgitating the same complaint.

2% is based on the first reply in the resolutiongate thread, that mentions it running in 720p 98% of the time docked. I can't find the article he was referencing so you'll have to ask him. Maybe you missed it cause you were in a hurry to post your innacurate slander for this game.

And I'm not sure how I could be talking about several threads, when outside the dedicated fan thread there's only two threads talking about it.

Thank you for accepting that you were attacking me and curl though.

I'm not even gonna dignify your last post with a response. But since I didn't notice you had double-posted I'll quickly respond to this point:

I wasn't intentionally attacking Curl, but sharply asking him to drop the issue. I moved on after one short post because I'd said enough. Guess I should've corrected my language here, because it was obvious you'd use something like this as a 'gotcha' moment.

As for you, it's a clear case of correcting your blatant lies and pointing out a trend. Pretty sad you'd try to paint a narrative that you're somehow being attacked or falsely accused, but I guess that's all you really have to stand on.

Anyone, I'm done with this.



DonFerrari said:

Does the game run in portable mode? Is Switch a hybrid and Lite a portable only? Since the answer for both is yes, portable is valid.

And even talking only docked 2% or any amount of time under is still under so you can't claim it is a lie much less saying what you are saying is objective true when you yourself admit it does occur, so you would be objectively lying when denying even though you accuse me of lying, very strange.

The's a problem with your argument, in order to be accurate you'd have to compare portable mode to the other portable version aka the 3DS version because then a comparison is being made as a console and portable, comparing portable mode solely to a home platform which doesn't have to account for factors like battery life and such is still something of a reach.

As for resolution I'm playing the game right now on a 4k TV the's not really anything to worry about the game looks fine.



Wyrdness said:
DonFerrari said:

Does the game run in portable mode? Is Switch a hybrid and Lite a portable only? Since the answer for both is yes, portable is valid.

And even talking only docked 2% or any amount of time under is still under so you can't claim it is a lie much less saying what you are saying is objective true when you yourself admit it does occur, so you would be objectively lying when denying even though you accuse me of lying, very strange.

The's a problem with your argument, in order to be accurate you'd have to compare portable mode to the other portable version aka the 3DS version because then a comparison is being made as a console and portable, comparing portable mode solely to a home platform which doesn't have to account for factors like battery life and such is still something of a reach.

As for resolution I'm playing the game right now on a 4k TV the's not really anything to worry about the game looks fine.

If you think the game looks fine that is totally ok. Although for me on 65" even 1080p in some games is already ugly (I was playing Darksiders II Deathnitive version and god it is ugly as sin).

And Nintendo is the one that sell their system as both console and they didn't port two versions at the same time, didn't they port the Wii version with improvements?

I don't mind you saying my comment or argument is imprecise or even unfair, but to say it is a lie or trolling is another thing entirely. I do think the score is to high for the presentation it have and compared to current games on the market, but if you and other buyers are happy that is what matters most.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
DonFerrari said:

If you think the game looks fine that is totally ok. Although for me on 65" even 1080p in some games is already ugly (I was playing Darksiders II Deathnitive version and god it is ugly as sin).

And Nintendo is the one that sell their system as both console and they didn't port two versions at the same time, didn't they port the Wii version with improvements?

I don't mind you saying my comment or argument is imprecise or even unfair, but to say it is a lie or trolling is another thing entirely. I do think the score is to high for the presentation it have and compared to current games on the market, but if you and other buyers are happy that is what matters most.

I don't think the game looks fine it does I can even take some off screen images if you want.

How Nintendo sells the switch doesn't debunk the point about the flaw in the argument in fact it's irrelevant, you're comparing a mode where the platform is dealing with factors one particular version doesn't have to deal with. A more accurate representation is to compare portable mode to the 3DS version otherwise he has a point in highlighting how much of a misrepresentation it is to say it performs less than the original version based off that mode, it would be like running a PC version of any game with out the GPU and saying a game runs worse than console versions.



He's right in a certain way, if we're to compare only the portable versions of the game then this means the remake is quite the monumental difference considering the way it looked on the New3DS.



Switch Friend Code : 3905-6122-2909 

I can't help but think it's a little funny that Monolith Soft get so much praise and glorification for helping optimize Nintendo's games when they don't even polish their own games very well. It doesn't seem like it will be the biggest deal in the world, and I doubt the resolutions will hit lows as often as in Xenoblade 2, but a decent amount of the textures are apparently still low res. In 2010-2012 at least a decent chunk of Xenoblade's playerbase were gaming on CRTs, I know I was. This is probably the worst version in terms of resolution to pixel ratio possible. Will it be the best looking version? Yes. Do I think games tend to look noticeably worse at 720p or less, even on a system like the Nintendo Switch? Honestly, yes.



AngryLittleAlchemist said:
I can't help but think it's a little funny that Monolith Soft get so much praise and glorification for helping optimize Nintendo's games when they don't even polish their own games very well. It doesn't seem like it will be the biggest deal in the world, and I doubt the resolutions will hit lows as often as in Xenoblade 2, but a decent amount of the textures are apparently still low res. In 2010-2012 at least a decent chunk of Xenoblade's playerbase were gaming on CRTs, I know I was. This is probably the worst version in terms of resolution to pixel ratio possible. Will it be the best looking version? Yes. Do I think games tend to look noticeably worse at 720p or less, even on a system like the Nintendo Switch? Honestly, yes.

I find it funny that one of the games they keep getting compared to for optimisation, is Breath of the Wild-- a game they had to devote resources to help develop.

I'm not sure why it's suddenly imperative to criticise them for two games (not including Torna) released in the first 3 years of a system's life, both with short dev cycles, both likely on short notice, but I just hope you all remember your criticisms for Monolith going forward.

Whenever Monolith release their new long term project, and whatever state it releases in, I just hope you're all keeping this same energy.



Shaunodon said:

I find it funny that one of the games they keep getting compared to for optimisation, is Breath of the Wild-- a game they had to devote resources to help develop.

I'm not sure why it's suddenly imperative to criticise them for two games (not including Torna) released in the first 3 years of a system's life, both with short dev cycles, both likely on short notice, but I just hope you all remember your criticisms for Monolith going forward.

Whenever Monolith release their new long term project, and whatever state it releases in, I just hope you're all keeping this same energy.

The irony in my comment is people overpraising a company because they optimize other peoples games while turning a blind eye to how disappointing their own games are in terms of optimization - it's essentially turning a blind eye to Monolith's own faults just to glorify them. Me admitting, in the very comment you're replying to, that they help optimize other teams games and make them better is not turning a blind eye to something or being willfully ignorant. So no, that's not funny. 

I don't think we should run the narrative that poor Monolith is working on a tight schedule when the reality is they probably weren't forced into one but rather chose it. Xenoblade Definitive Edition got two years of development time, for what is essentially a remaster with extra content. Yes, they went above and beyond their peers, but that was still plenty of time, and they chose to make Definitive Edition this ambitious (in fact, if I remember, they chose to make it a remaster of one at all). Torna from what I understand was a case of them being overambitious to a fault. 2 I doubt was pushed to release by Nintendo, I suppose it is possible but there really wasn't much reason for it.  

I usually understand when people say something like "I hope you remember your comments for there will be a day of reckoning upon you and every non-believer! Your ilk should personally be ground into little meat patties to be fed to rabid dogs and secreted like the shit you are" to me. But this time, I do not. What would be the hilarious gotcha of Monolith going forward? What scenario would make my comments inane? Monolith releasing a polished game? Because I absolutely think they could do it, and that's what I want, so how would I lose in such a case? Or is it that they might make a future must have title? Because we're arguably talking about one now. I know I'm getting the game. 

About keeping the same energy - you clearly don't know me well, or at least I wish I could say that but we've argued many times in the past. Being cynical is kinda my thing. Expecting more out of developers is my thing. That's not to say that Monolith is in a particularly bad position or anything, there is nuance there. I might joke about them a lot privately because Xenoblade 2 had a lot of design flaws that just felt glaringly annoying to me, but like, they make numerous games in a short time, all of which get critical praise and some of the most hardcore dedicated fans in the industry. That's a great scenario to be in, specifically being able to make multiple titles in a short amount of time, that's something I admire a lot in this current triple A space because we get to see more experimentation in a shorter time. I think you could argue that we wouldn't be getting a new IP from them at all, for example, if their development times were so bloated they had to put all their teams behind one or two long projects. And that new IP from the little information we have is exciting. But, that original comment, wasn't to give an essay about Monolith's entire condition as a studio, so none of that was relevant. And frankly I shouldn't have to explain myself to make a valid point about not even Monolith themselves, but just the reception that they get (and resolution as a whole, my comment was nearly more a reply to that old resolution isn't important thread). The fact that I'd need to praise the company in ways that aren't really applicable to the scope of my original comment, simply so I won't get angry replies, speaks a lot about the constant needless defense of justified criticisms. Trust me, I did that once, it wasn't a pretty look.