Wii U Forum

Topic: Pachter: "I think Nintendo becomes completely irrelevant."

Showing 101 to 120 of 129

AuthorMessage
Avatar

WaveBoy

101. Posted:

I don't think we'll be seeing 'real' real graphics until the PS5 surfaces. There's definitly a lot of room for improvement. The cutsenes in RE5 & RE6 for ex look a lot better than the in-game graphics. Even then the graphics IN the cutscenes don't look real, but pretty impressive nonetheless with fantastic art direction to match. Frame rate is another big thing. Here we have a slew of great looking games but most of them are capped at 30 frames per second.
I wish 60fps would become the standard, but developers would rather take a hit in performance and opt for dazzling detailed graphics. Then there's realistic animation and the many ways to impliment complex enemy reactions which have basically become bare bones & limmited in practically every game in exsistense. The enemy reactions in RE5 & RE6 are quite robotic & artificial and again there isn't much variety.

Currently Playing: Mega Man V!
We shall swim to Bubble Island, or you will suffer the wrath of my Trident Laser!
80s FANATIC & King of NES Tekkidome!

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

102. Posted:

Ya, I know what you mean. The player is always moving in full control compared to AI figures. Like in Killzone 3, when you do a brutal melee, and they were turning around because they heard you, but then it still goes through with the animation like they didn't hear you. I think graphics are great, but not real, and the animations and AI don't help either like you said. I haven't seen any better graphics than Killzone 3, or Uncharted. It might just be the style, too, but that's what I think. If they DID make a console/pc that could proccess graphics that looked literally real, what would you think? Would you still think there would be more to improve on? This isn't a sarcastic question... What more would you expect after that?

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Happy_Mask

103. Posted:

I think this thread becomes completely irrelevant. :P

[16:08] LordJumpMad Hides his gut with a griddle
[16:08] Reala: what ljm does for cash is ljm's business
[16:08] LordJumpMad: Gotta look good my my next game u_u

AuthorMessage
Avatar

MAB

104. Posted:

I have a question about HDTV's... Which one iz da be5t? :P

MAB

AuthorMessage
Avatar

CM30

105. Posted:

Pachter again? Why do people even listen to him given his terrible track record with predictions?

Nintendo 3DS Community aka my website
Also, if you're a Wario series fan, check out Wario Forums today! Your only place for Wario series discussion!
My 3DS Friend Code: 4983-5165-4189

AuthorMessage
Avatar

skywake

106. Posted:

SCAR392 wrote:

Honestly, I don't see graphics getting any better, and think graphics have kinda gotten as good as they can in terms of consoles. Maybe a PC or Mac can do better, but I haven't seen graphics better than console systems ever regardless of whether they can or not, which is usually the argument.

Because there are only three gaming companies and the two mature platforms are basically at the same level of power. The Wii U pushes it a little bit further but it just launched so the best looking games we're getting are quick ports. If a PC can do better than so can a console, there's nothing magic about a PC it's all the same sort of hardware.

If anything developers have been held back because they make their money on limited platforms not the PC. Why would you spend extra pushing the visuals on the PC if all of your sales are going to be on the 360/PS3? That's part of the reasons why visuals have slowed. Another part of the reason is that the main performance drain, screen resolution, hit 1080p and stopped. When we jumped from SD to HD on our TVs the extra performance boost mattered a lot. Now? Not so much especially with developers not pushing the visuals.

You look at what sort of displays PC gamers are using to justify all that power. They're playing games on 120Hz displays, in 3D, with tipple monitor setups or with screens with twice the number of pixels as 1080p. Then you look at console gaming and there's literally none of that for the vast majority of users. Then we wonder why console gaming by its very nature tends to stand five years behind PC gaming... or even ten years as it is currently...

NNID: skywake

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

107. Posted:

Well if PC gaming is that far ahead, then I guess the next PS/Xbox won't be as good as everyone thinks it will be. Or maybe it will just catch up to the best tech in a computer available. If it did though, it will cost $1000 just to be on par with what a PC can do at max, just for gaming. Does anyone buy parts of a computer JUST to play video games and just ditch the other features of Windows or Mac? PCs are better, because they have components that run more than just games which can also be used to help run software, which is the whole point of having a computer. Consoles are made just for games, so that's why the PC gaming argument isn't valid. Sure, PC can do way better stuff than any console in evety way, but it doesn't/won't because PC games are an add on feature for what computers are meant to be used for. It's very likely, that if you have a computer that can run a game that would kill consoles in performance, you can make games for consoles. I know every one likes to have the best tech in their computer, no doubt, but you might as well be making games for consoles if you have that strong of a computer just laying around never being used to full potential. I've never had a top notch computer, because I'm not into building computer w/ the best possible specs. A Windows 2000 computer can develop games that would work on a N64, so Windows 8 must be able to develop Xbox 360 games, PS3 games, and Wii U games. They keep making the minimum better and better, and I can only imagine how easy it would be to develop a game for N64 using a non-pro version of Windows 8, assuming you had the software to do so. They make PC games on a PC. I'm not really sure if this post even matters, but it's all I had to say...

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

skywake

108. Posted:

@SCAR392 Wall of text alert!

Seriously though, PC gaming is that far ahead of console gaming at this point and that's even with a component manufacturer culture of reducing power consumption rather than getting maximum performance. The PS4/720 will probably come with a GPU that's about on par what you would have found in a mid-range gaming PC late last year. Three years for the higher end. By the time they launch 2009 will be a good five years in the past.

Anyways, your argument is backwards. Chances are a lot of people either have or are getting a new PC anyway for something around $550 excluding peripherals anyways. Not out of the question, a reasonable new PC budget. People do this probably at least once every five years or so. For less than the price of a basic Wii U extra you get visual performance above what the PS4/720 will have. And yes, you could even develop games on it.... but why is that even a point? It just shows how much more flexible a platform it is. You're going to write it off as a potential gaming platform because you can do more with it?

Edited on by skywake

NNID: skywake

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

109. Posted:

I just think they need to release the best possible computer day one for once.

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

skywake

110. Posted:

You think the most ridiculous things

NNID: skywake

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Nibelilt

111. Posted:

insert comment about how much more powerful PC power will always be anyway

Edited on by Nibelilt

"In the beginning, the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move." -Douglas Adams

Myland's Dream Address: 6500-2329-0504 | (Currently Inactive) Backloggery

3DS Friend Code: 2191-7661-4611 | Nintendo Network ID: Nibelilt

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Jack_Package

112. Posted:

@SCAR392

People do have dedicated game rigs

Jack_Package

AuthorMessage
Avatar

shingi_70

113. Posted:

I don't excatly agree with Patcher but when were getting a spring bloated with a ton of games and the Wii isn't getting maybe 1 or 2 its a bad sign.

That and when established third parties are trying to be coy, like when Watchdogs was revealed to be a 360/PS3/PC/maybe next gen with smartglass support and ubisoft were laying coy if the wii u was even getting the game.

@Scar

Halo 4 and The Last of US both look better than Killzone and Uncharted.

WAT!

Hey check out my awesome new youtube channel shingi70 where I update weekly on the latest gaming and comic news form a level headed perspective.

3DS Friend Code: 3093-7342-3454 | Nintendo Network ID: shingi70

AuthorMessage
Avatar

skywake

114. Posted:

Sony_70 wrote:

I don't excatly agree with Patcher but when were getting a spring bloated with a ton of games and the Wii isn't getting maybe 1 or 2 its a bad sign.

I'm assuming you meant "the Wii U is only getting one or two"....

I doubt there's nothing for the Wii U in 2013 or even early 2013. The fact is there's nothing confirmed outside of the launch window. The developers of these big games have all been asked whether a Wii U version is on the cards. The most dismissive they've been is "we're not working on it at this time". Ubisoft for example was asked whether the Wii U would get Watch Dogs and in response, in June, they said "We have so many titles in development for Wii U right now that we need to keep that team focused and this is a very very ambitious game. But it’s not out of the question"

So what games are the Ubisoft Wii U team working on now? Rayman still? ... Curious. What about GTA and Bioshock. You can't tell me none of these games will appear on the Wii U.

NNID: skywake

AuthorMessage
Avatar

brooks83

115. Posted:

SCAR392 wrote:

I just think they need to release the best possible computer day one for once.

Consoles are in development for years, so by the time they decide what they are gonna put under the hood and then start mass manufacturing them, computer technology has already moved on.

brooks83

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Mandoble

116. Posted:

Basically the rule is that the relevance is there where all the gaming companies are, if you dont have third party support, you are irrelevant, it doesnt matter how many units you sell, you are simply ignored by the gaming industry and you become as relevant as a company selling millions of microwaves. And that's what happened with the Wii, lets see what happens with the U.

Mandoble

AuthorMessage
Avatar

shingi_70

117. Posted:

In all honestly I'm not expecting the Wii U to get GTA or Bioshock Infinte. (

But saying the lack of news is because nintendo is only focusing on the launch window is disingenious at best.

The launch windows is till march or apirl. There are a ton of games releasing in that time frame that aren't currently slated for the Wii U.

Beyond the launch window is a whole another thing as there aren't really that much we know about past summer 2013 (expect maybe sony and microsoft next gen consoles)

Would love to be proven wrong though.

WAT!

Hey check out my awesome new youtube channel shingi70 where I update weekly on the latest gaming and comic news form a level headed perspective.

3DS Friend Code: 3093-7342-3454 | Nintendo Network ID: shingi70

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

118. Posted:

There's still a ton of good games that are gonna come out next year.
@Sony_70
I haven't played Halo 4 yet, because I got rid of my Xbox. As for The Last of Us, that game doesn't count against Uncharted, because the same people made that. I plan on getting an Xbox again, but only when the new consoles come out. I got sick of only having Gears of War, and Halo games that all play and look the same... I have Gears of War 1-3, Halo 3/Reach, Dead Rising, Alan Wake, the Banjo games, Fruit Ninja Kinect, and a few other games still on my account, so it's not like I lost them from selling my Xbox anyway. All those games just got really stale to me, especially Halo and Gears. Gears of War wasn't that great after the first one IMO, even though they did improve on graphics and gameplay. They ruined the story in my eyes after the first one... Halo was fun for a while for me(only on multiplayer), but they keep adding features and leaving out old ones that made those ones really cool. Dual weild is one of them that shut me off from Halo, plus adding a new enemy in the story that looks stupid. There's just not enough melee combat in those games, and there's alot of gameplay options left open that they never take advantage of. The biggest gameplay option left out of every FPS shooter ever, is the ability to sprint AND shoot, ledge grabs, Halo left out weapon customization years late, real melee combat, you can't even sprint and reload at the same time, and more that doesn't come to mind right now... I just get disappointed by any game when I see something I want to do, and COULD do in real life(reloading or shooting while sprinting impossible, or ledge grabs), but little crap like that always puts me off when I play games. I want to try the new Halo, sure, but it seems like games are always so late from what I expected from them years ago. It's like a love hate relationship. I just want them to make the best possible gaming experience, and I feel like there's always so much left out when it comes to stuff like this. I'm glad I have a PS3 and a Wii U, but I also can't stand seeing missed opportunities all the f***ing time...

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

shingi_70

119. Posted:

The new enemy design has been getting a lot of credit for being good as well as the over all art design. I have the Halo 4 art book and its amazing.

Seems like you don't play you just want a run and gun call of duty. A lot of the your complaints were taken out do to balance issues.

Halo 4 does have a few parts where their is ledge travsersal in the campagin but it really doesn't add anything gameplay wise.

Your complaing about a lack of melee combat in a game with a first person perspective is kind of odd.

Dual weilding was taken away due to weapon balance issues. It seems like a good thing at the time but then it becomes pretty easy to just run with a plasma pistol and a magnum.

Most of what you want while works in real life doesn't make sense when building a shooter based around compettive play.

WAT!

Hey check out my awesome new youtube channel shingi70 where I update weekly on the latest gaming and comic news form a level headed perspective.

3DS Friend Code: 3093-7342-3454 | Nintendo Network ID: shingi70

AuthorMessage
Avatar

moomoo

120. Posted:

Mandoble wrote:

Basically the rule is that the relevance is there where all the gaming companies are, if you dont have third party support, you are irrelevant, it doesnt matter how many units you sell, you are simply ignored by the gaming industry and you become as relevant as a company selling millions of microwaves. And that's what happened with the Wii, lets see what happens with the U.

Bingo. I find it odd that people don't seem to realize this. Nintendo lost a has lost a huge ton of market share over the past few years. Part of why Pachter said Wii HD would happen was because if Nintendo didn't make it they'd lose market share. After 2009 Nintendo stocks fell drastically (here's a link: http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2009/04/nintendors_stock_dro...) and just continued to fall. Instead of doing something like Wii HD to get 3rd party games on their platform, they just took the hit, and now their they're worth around 10 billion, compared to when they were around an implied 100 billion. From an analyst's perspective, and from an investors perspective, Pachter's comments and predictions make a ton of sense.

Best thread ever
Feel free to add me on Miiverse or PSN.
Miiverse is Moomoo14, PSN is Moomoo1405390

3DS Friend Code: 4940-5561-6002 | Nintendo Network ID: Moomoo14