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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Epic Mickey scans are out.

Erik Aston on 16 October 2009
LordTheNightKnight said:
Try looking at the full sized screens. The first page shows character designs that have almost no visible polygons save for the robots doing it deliberately (okay polygons aren't really visible, but the breaks between them can be), very smooth texturing, and lighting more commonly seen on HD games. Compare those to Kingdom Hearts models.

The levels don't look much better than in Kingdom Hearts, but that's not "bad".


You're right. Anyone who thinks this looks bad must not have clicked on the screens and viewed them full size.

They also must not have read the article. Or they must not even own a Wii. They are probably also mentally handicapped.

And funny how I'm supposed to focus on the mechanics, but when I do, writing just one line about the graphics, that's the line which is responded to and quoted.



"[Our former customers] are unable to find software which they WANT to play."
"The way to solve this problem lies in how to communicate what kind of games [they CAN play]."

Satoru Iwata, Nintendo President. Only slightly paraphrased.

Around the Network
shadowD on 16 October 2009

guys some of the scans ar broken?



senortaco on 16 October 2009
Erik Aston said:

Oh c'mon guys. You don't have to defend this. I own a Wii. Only a Wii. I read the whole article. I like Mickey Mouse. The plot of the game is cool. It reminds me of cool, old Disney cartoons I had forgotten, and sort of makes me want to rent Fantasia.

BUT THE SCREENS. LOOK. BAD. If they only showed random shots of one environment in the Mario Galaxy scan, it would not magically look this bad.

Rather talk about the mechanics? The mechanics don't sound revolutionary. This "paint the world" thing often becomes paint-by-numbers. Maybe that won't happen here, due to the connection of the painting system to a karma system. And even if the painting does fall flat, it could still be a good game. But only if the meat of the game is fantastic. So far, the 2D platforming looks best. Brawling with paint blobs and deformed Captain Hook robots doesn't look good. The 3D platforming looks decent if the camera is good. But it will be boring if it's just Gremlin collect-a-thons in big open levels. I did enough of that on N64.

When we see footage, we'll better see the pace and feel of the game. And maybe the pace and feel is polished to perfection. Hopefully eventually the worst thing we can say about the game is that Spector and Disney totally botched the reveal of it in GI in 2009.

Okay heres where I defend it by asking a simple question...Posters used track record against High Voltage with The Conduit, valid or not it did play out that it was an average/above average game

...How come Warren Spector's track record, WHERE AS BEFORE IT CREATE HYPE FROM POSTERS, now mean it will be an average game based on a few screens?



The Interweb is about overreaction, this is what makes it great!

...Imagine how boring the interweb would be if everyone thought logically?

Kenryoku_Maxis on 16 October 2009
senortaco said:
Erik Aston said:

Oh c'mon guys. You don't have to defend this. I own a Wii. Only a Wii. I read the whole article. I like Mickey Mouse. The plot of the game is cool. It reminds me of cool, old Disney cartoons I had forgotten, and sort of makes me want to rent Fantasia.

BUT THE SCREENS. LOOK. BAD. If they only showed random shots of one environment in the Mario Galaxy scan, it would not magically look this bad.

Rather talk about the mechanics? The mechanics don't sound revolutionary. This "paint the world" thing often becomes paint-by-numbers. Maybe that won't happen here, due to the connection of the painting system to a karma system. And even if the painting does fall flat, it could still be a good game. But only if the meat of the game is fantastic. So far, the 2D platforming looks best. Brawling with paint blobs and deformed Captain Hook robots doesn't look good. The 3D platforming looks decent if the camera is good. But it will be boring if it's just Gremlin collect-a-thons in big open levels. I did enough of that on N64.

When we see footage, we'll better see the pace and feel of the game. And maybe the pace and feel is polished to perfection. Hopefully eventually the worst thing we can say about the game is that Spector and Disney totally botched the reveal of it in GI in 2009.

Okay heres where I defend it by asking a simple question...Posters used track record against High Voltage with The Conduit, valid or not it did play out that it was an average/above average game

...How come Warren Spector's track record, WHERE AS BEFORE IT CREATE HYPE FROM POSTERS, now mean it will be an average game based on a few screens?

Remember, his track record is now running full force into a brick wall of anti-Wii Fanboys who finally have fuel to nit pick his game.  The 'graphics'.



Six upcoming games you should look into:

 

  

chasmatic12 on 16 October 2009

Honestly, I think people are thrown off by the purple hint in almost every environment shown. Of course the entire game won't be like that, but I think that's something from this particular level. Otherwise, it looks awesome. (We ARE looking at grainy scans of a game a year away from release.)



Around the Network
SnowFlow on 16 October 2009
LordTheNightKnight said:
"Sorry but on a tech level those are HORRIBLE graphics. The colors even look bland."

No, that is a subjective thing, and don't claim otherwise.

"It looks like they just threw the beautiful concept art away and did something on flash....what the hell gives! This ticks me off cause I was expecting something close to Galaxy."

Do you mean the scans or the three dimensional polygon models. If you think you can just whip up the latter in flash, and fit them on a large scale video game, you really don't know how tech levels work.

Basically after looking at the concept art I was expecting something CONSIDERABLY better.  The textures (or lack there of) are poor.  The color palet is bland and washed out looking.  There is poor lighting and no shadowing.  The in game graphics just lack "pop".  Maybe my expectations were too high after seeing the vibrant color palets and creativity used in the concept art.



ameratsu on 16 October 2009

From reading that, it sounds like this is going to be closer to a 3d platformer than an actual adventure game. This is a bit disappointing as based off my initial impressions, I had it pegged as a 25-40+ hour adventure game. Saying he wants to take the best of Zelda, Ratchet, and Deus EX for this is intriguing on the surface, but meaningless without a more detailed explanation.

I'll wait to hear more about it.



Demon's Souls Official Thread  | Currently playing: Left 4 Dead 2, LittleBigPlanet 2, Magicka

LordTheNightKnight on 16 October 2009
Erik Aston said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
Try looking at the full sized screens. The first page shows character designs that have almost no visible polygons save for the robots doing it deliberately (okay polygons aren't really visible, but the breaks between them can be), very smooth texturing, and lighting more commonly seen on HD games. Compare those to Kingdom Hearts models.

The levels don't look much better than in Kingdom Hearts, but that's not "bad".


You're right. Anyone who thinks this looks bad must not have clicked on the screens and viewed them full size.

They also must not have read the article. Or they must not even own a Wii. They are probably also mentally handicapped.

And funny how I'm supposed to focus on the mechanics, but when I do, writing just one line about the graphics, that's the line which is responded to and quoted.

Honestly not sure if you're being sarcastic (and I didn't quote a line you wrote), but the point is that the character models are a lot smoother than they would have been on the GC or PS2. They come closer to Mario Galaxy models, which is certainly a good thing.



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

senortaco on 16 October 2009
ameratsu said:

From reading that, it sounds like this is going to be closer to a 3d platformer than an actual adventure game. This is a bit disappointing as based off my initial impressions, I had it pegged as a 25-40+ hour adventure game. Saying he wants to take the best of Zelda, Ratchet, and Deus EX for this is intriguing on the surface, but meaningless without a more detailed explanation.

I'll wait to hear more about it.

It'll probably be closer to Deus EX then anything, cause remember that was sorta a mashed-up genre too. =p

@Kenryoku_Maxis: touche` lol



The Interweb is about overreaction, this is what makes it great!

...Imagine how boring the interweb would be if everyone thought logically?

Staude on 16 October 2009

The concept art was very interesting. The tidbit of information is pretty interesting.. I don't like how the game looks judging from the scans though.



Check out my game about moles ^