241–250 of 539 posts
It is impressive that a game running on an 8-year-old phone GPU will likely be game of the year. Nintendo proved again that gameplay and art direction matter more than anything.
Based on the complaints about framerate, pop-in, etc. I'm strongly reminded of Shadow of the Colossus (2005) which had these same issues on its original PS2 release. It was truly a seventh-gen game running on sixth-gen hardware, revolutionary for the time but the available hardware struggled to keep up. Looks like time is nearly up for the Switch. Awesome run, though.
The marketing was insane as usual. Nintendo performed excellent. Multiple front page reddit posts, multiple 10/10 reviews from big name outlets. Nintendo rivals Apple as the best company in marketing. Nintendo has done some sort of mass psychology that allows them to have sub 30fps with no complaints, I was born too early to see this reviewed in business schools, but we are starting to see a bit of the innerworkings…
Seriously. Nintendo has put quality games out like clockwork for decades now to the point where the biggest IP is almost instantly given top rating from everyone any time it's released, no matter how many glaring technical flaws exist. It's kind of nauseating, but impressive nonetheless. I can understand why - their games are fun, colorful, and (for the most part) very family friendly. All that said I wish Nintendo w…
You'll never get anything like God of war, red dead redemption 2 or dead space out of Nintendo.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Eh, Stanley Kubrick and Martin Scorsese constantly shipped 24fps and people were still very happy with their work. FPS does not good entertainment make.
Yeah, Picasso also often shipped 0fps and people didn't complain.
I love how every top level comment is all about how this is because Nintendo made an amazing game. Yet... with how fast this is selling, there is literally no way that folks know it is an amazing game ahead of time. More, odds are high that if they had made this as not a sequel, it would not be selling as well. Go bolder and make it a new franchise? Same game would basically not be noticed. I think it is fair to like…
They did make an amazing game: Breath of the Wild. They’re continuing to reap the profits from it.
If game of the year awards were reserved for new, non-sequel games, maybe franchises would be discouraged from selling the same game multiple times.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is "poor" the right description for the graphics? Like I get that they aren't anywhere close to as detailed or sophisticated as the graphics available in other games, but they appear to facilitate gameplay quite well. Like "poor" has a connotation of "bad", where in this game they just weren't a focus and clearly are good enough to not be distracting, at least in the videos I've seen.
That graphics would not look out of place in a 2013 indie game from a well-established but not rich studio. It would have not been ground-breaking in 2003, but would grab some attention for sure. I bet they will use same level of graphics in 2033, maybe with some AI tricks slapped on top if they manage to get cheap hardware for that.
Sure. The WiiU was around in that year, BotW ran on it. Indie games for powerful platforms could definitely have better grafics.
> It would have not been ground-breaking in 2003
This is biggest bullshit I've heard. This is Xbox/GC/PS2 era. Not only there weren't any games with 720p or 900p resolution on those consoles, PC capable of those were very rare. Games were still very cubish. Even games like FF that spend most of their budget on visuals and were not very interactive were just so bad in comparision. You don't really know how expansive it is to have small details like hair, light small objects and things like that rendered. Also add all the particles the game generates for all its possibilities.
go to a top 2003 game list, and you will notice that there is nothing that comes close visually, specially with these resolutions, moving interactable objects, etc. None of them would require one tenth of the processing power a game like TotK.
BotW and TotK push the swith to its max potential. Obviously that is nothing compared to what can be done today, the switch is based on a nvidia shield which is a SoC for a portable for 2015, obviously it is not very powerful. But that doesn't mean that the game doesn't have a lot of effort to make it able to run on such a system. Sure the Switch can handle 1080p, there are nintendo games with 1080p 60fps on both switch and wiiu, and nowadays PC games aim to 4k and 120fps, but this is a Switch, and this is a beatfiful game with a level of interaction not easily seen, this is much harder to make than a lot of 4k/120fps games on PC.
Well, not TotK in particular as that's BotW 2.0, but BotW is out of the ordinary, expanding is still not an easy thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Often times better graphics make a game worse because they're at the expense of everything else, while also making the community smaller because most people can't run it. Yes, I'm still slightly salty about the train wreck that KSP 2 turned out to be.
I think I'll still be fuming about KSP2 for a long time. I don't know why I let myself have any hope it'd be good given the development history but I still bought (and returned) it on launch. KSP didn't deserve that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's already running remarkably well under emulation, the few minor bugs that exist are easy to overlook when the upside is playing it at 60fps with triple or quadruple the resolution.
I'm very bothered by this aspect of switch gaming. If I want to play a game at a decent framerate and resolution I have to jump through hoops to run it on unofficial hardware.
Also there's the added benefit of not paying anything if you're ok with doing something illegal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
nintendo's playbook: bet on withered technologies. which means their focus is only on gameplay mechanics, story and art direction. not focusing on bugs that are well not known cz of using something too new, expensive etc. not fancy graphics, or other modern fancy things - that don't really add anything to the game. wish the software industry would learn to bet on old technologies and develop novel experiences on thos…
Weird take because of how much they have experimented with entire consoles in the past. I don't know how the Wii could be called betting on withered technologies.
I think the general consensus will end up giving this game a solid 8.5/10 (user consensus of course, not journali$t consensus. You can already see that in the user score on metascore.) Someone mentioned online "which part of this game constitues giving it a 10/10?" and I totally agree having been playing since the leaks. This is coming from an OG OOT 1998 player too. Happy Zelda is back, but still think they could ha…
Strange, I personally find it very enjoyable on the switch. Could be better obviously but I really like the art style and the gameplay is way more fluid than almost any other AAA games running at 60FPS on my PC.