Topic: Star Fox Zero - OT

I feel like complaining about how textures look while really up close to them in a screenshot is similar to when people were complaining about Mario Kart 8's jaggy-ness. Once you get the game in your hands you do see those issues.

@DefHalan: I think MK8's jagginess makes it look very sharp. But that's just me...
I think the world does look empty, though. I'm hoping it's a bit filled before release.

For me, the game looks fine.

Check out a game like Bayonetta 2 and then look at what StarFox Zero is producing. They have a long ways to go if they're going to pass this off as a true Wii U game.

Well Bayonetta 2 had many years of development while Star Fox had 1 to 1.5 years of development. Expecting every game to match Bayonetta 2 is too much. I don't think many games will reach the same level as Bayonetta 2. Star Fox is stylized, not liking the style is different than saying it doesn't look as good as a PS2 game.

Bayonetta admits realistic (sort of) graphics. Starfox, the entire franchise, use very polygoned (i don't know if the words exists) graphics. So, for a Starfox game they looks nice. The world is detailed, a lot of things are happening, but yeah, the floor texture looks bad...thats not a big issue.

The complaints came from the preview trailer. The screenshot is just illustrating the point!

And again, I don't know what people are looking at, what I saw looked good.

So has anyone figured out if this has off-TV play yet?

We just showed you in the screenshot! Fairly bad texturing. And also quite low poly modelling, and not just on the ships (which are supposed to be low poly). The environments look like they're from a gamecube game too.

@Dezzy: You seem to forget that this game is made under one year. Second, the visuals are good certainly not as vibrant as say Lost World even but they do the job of being above average. I can say the same thing that the visuals for Pokemon X/Y are above average. Not as impressive as its predecessors but it gets the job done.

Thirdly, we are finally getting a game that actually makes use of the gamepad.

To me this game looks like a PS3 game during the middle part of its cycle...WHICH is not a BAD thing. To me it still looks like a good game.

@Artwark: I disagree, X and Y look much better than Gen 5.

the visuals are a bit questionable. While I can understand that its the first time a Pokemon game is made in 3d, it looks safe and does nothing groundbreaking. Honestly, it looks like an N64 game.

@Artwark: Then I'm not sure what kind of N64 you've been playing...

Ok so maybe not N64 quality but definitely close to Skies of Arcadia quality.

@Artwark: Try again.

As far as I'm concerned SFZ looks good. I've played HD ports of GC/PS2 games and this looks better and it's running at 60 fps. That's more than good enough for me.

Ok seriously, how can you think that Pokemon X/Y is superior to that of Uprising? Its actually because of it being in 3D that it feels clunky moving the character.

IMO the only game SFZ is comparable to is pikmin 3. We're also forgetting this game is meant for children... It doesn't have to be as realistic as halo (which it's pretty close to halo3 odst)

"When up close,"

First of all.. When are you going to be up close to anything anyway? Does SFZ have tea parties? Even if the graphics are mediocre, it's still extremely good by young child aimed Nintendo standards.

What the ****?!
I can't speak for everyone else, but I'm not a child so the game is not just for children. Even tough Nintendo games are child-friendly they don't just make games with good gameplay, but with great visuals as well. That the game is targeted for children is no excuse for poor graphics. Splatoon is just one example. TWW-graphics was critizised for being childish, but was still stunning.

Maybe Nintendo should go back to 16-bit. The children won't even care -_-