Didn’t a few Wii U games have the image on the Wii U game pad go below 480p? I know Hyrule Warriors did during multiplayer.
I don't remember any specific examples where the Wii U couldn't do 480p. But there were plenty of games where the image was busy enough and fast moving enough that there was a large drop in quality. FZero on the SNES VC being the worst offender I remember. The same would happen if you were pushing the limits of range a bit. But even when it was working the image was always a bit soft.
And because it was independent of how big the game was? Some games looked better on 3DS than they did on the Gamepad. Either way, the Switch outclasses the Wii U off Tv, on TV and the 3DS. I loved the Wii U for off Tv play despite these limitations but the Switch is all of that minus those limitations
God, you don't wanna make any effort at all or you read one line out of every two lines...
And the worse with all that, again you lie with impunity :
(1st lie : "The Switch at it's worst displays a clearer and higher resolution image than the Wii U did on the Gamepad.")
(2nd lie : "Some games looked better on 3DS than they did on the Gamepad.")
(3rd lie : "I loved the Wii U for off Tv play despite these limitations but the Switch is all of that minus those limitations")
Gosh, lying is a sport with you or what? I'm gonna give you facts that anyone could verify.
1st lie answer : the switch at its worst display goes below the wii resolution ! 342p < 480p ! Again you make a statement on something that is false.
2nd lie answer : Do you have any example of that ? Mario Maker is on Wii U and 3DS... looks better on Wii U. Captain Toad Treasure Tracker is on Wii U and 3DS... looks better on Wii U. Yoshi's Wooly World is on Wii U and 3DS, looks better on Wii U...
3rd lie answer : Explain to me how you could prefer buttons compare to a real D-pad ? Espacially with all these 2D games available on the system ? I'm currious about that..
Explain to me how you could defend the non existence of the Virtual Console on the Switch because apparently for you and I quote " the Switch is all of that minus those limitations". From my perspective, it's a more a Switch limitation than a Wii U one.
Explain to me how you can think that playing online for free on the gamepad is a limitation compare to playing online with fees on the Switch ?
Explain to me how you can prefer to pay for a game of the previous generation compare to an instant backward compatibily...
So, you know, when you make those kind of statements the way you do it, it's like binary thoughts 1 or 0.
From my perspective, there are better and worse on both side, Wii U does better on some points and Switch on other one. Simple as that.
@Cobalt
How many times do I have to repeat myself? You're not listening. The Wii U GamePad is a wireless 480p screen which while it does a decent job has a limited amount of bandwidth. Video compression is inevitable especially on high bandwidth content (eg foliage, fine texture details, fast moving scenes) where low latency is a requirement. It was a decent solution for the problem it was trying to solve but it did have its limitations. By comparison the Switch's screen, like any other self contained device, is connected directly to the GPU via a cable. There is zero compression between the GPU and the display. The way the Switch handles this will always result in a superior image.
If you still somehow choose to not understand, here is an example of what I'm talking about:
And yes, I did play some games on the Wii U GamePad which did get very close to the image on the right. It's why I said some games looked better on 3DS, I have some games I know looked better on 3DS. It's not the hardware that's struggling it's the wireless connection to the GamePad. So if your intent was to play the game mostly off-TV? Anything that could run well on 3DS without any major graphical compromise looked better on 3DS than the GamePad. And for some it was a very dramatic difference indeed.
The Switch has that same advantage over the GamePad that the 3DS did. It just turns the screws even more by also being more powerful than the Wii U and having a 720p rather than a 240p screen. Games on the Switch in off-TV mode perform as well or better than the Wii U. And any claims to the contrary are pure BS on your part. This is very, very well documented and you've even acknowledged this at multiple points in this thread. I agree 100% the Switch is no PS4 Pro and the Tegra is no GTX Titan but the idea that it's worse than the Wii U is a joke.
Explain to me how you could prefer buttons compare to a real D-pad ? Explain to me how you could defend the non existence of the Virtual Console. Explain to me how you can think that playing online for free on the gamepad is a limitation compare to playing online with fees on the Switch
The lack of a d-pad bothers me far less than I thought it would. Yes I would like to see classic games but the online services appear to be offering an alternative model for this and are cheap enough that I'm not particularly bothered. In all three cases, this is not what we were talking about. Your only three points have been that:
1. The Switch's library of software is worse than the Wii U
2. The Switch offers a visually inferior experience compared to the Wii U GamePad
3. The Switch is less portable than the Wii U GamePad
I've made decent counter points to all three, you've weaselled your way around my responses by throwing mud. If you had a strong argument you wouldn't need to change the topic or characterise me as a liar.
This isn't even a question. But I'll answer the obvious (to me, at least) answer nonetheless. Yes. Yes, they are "resting on ones's laurels," so to speak. We truly saw a big push in innovation in the Wii generation, but that had no long-term effect. They've been chasing gimmicks ever since. And with such oversight and straight-up dismissal of numerous modern gaming trends and standards, Nintendo has just adopted a pattern of not budging to do anything unless they think of it first. It puts them in a hole.
"The Skeleton King, secret, post-credits 'true' final boss"
-Eldin Ring leaks
@skywake said : "How many times do I have to repeat myself?"
You don't need man, I never encounter somebody with such bad faith.
Explain me your statement about "no compression at all" when a game that runs 900p native on the Switch when docked and have to shrink to 720p at best on the Switch screen because 720p is the max resolution... There is no other way than to deteriorate the image...
Ow and I'd like to add something that probably never came to your mind :
The 480p was a choice for the resolution of the gamepad BECAUSE the Wii U is backward compatible with the Wii and with that choice made, OUT OF THE BOX, Nintendo could fulfill the promise to play the enormous Wii librairy without any distortion.
However, the promise to play your Switch games on the TV or on the go can't display the game the same way on both situations.
You see it's not as simple as you present the situation, it's less binary than the way you explain your opinion.
@isturbo1984
I'd argue that it's far easier to follow "modern gaming trends" than it is to "chase gimmicks". If Nintendo was being lazy they wouldn't have produced consoles like the GameBoy, DS, Wii, Wii U or Switch. They would've done what every other company was doing at the time. In terms of the console hardware itself they're the biggest risk takers in the industry. I'd even go as far as saying they're one of the biggest risk takers for tech in general.
Now don't get me wrong, they're a very conservative company in other aspects. They've been very slow to move when it comes pricing structures, online or their IP in general. They're super protective of their brand and their image and that often means that they're behind the curve. But even so, I wouldn't accuse a company that has gone all in on a portable console in the era of smartphones and 4K TVs of taking the low risk path.
Explain me your statement about "no compression at all" when a game that runs 900p native on the Switch when docked and have to shrink to 720p at best on the Switch screen because 720p is the max resolution...
You didn't read a thing I said. Read it again, I've explained this several times already.
The 480p was a choice for the resolution of the gamepad BECAUSE the Wii U is backward compatible with the Wii
It has nothing to do with this. It was almost certainly 480p because of the bandwidth limitations of 802.11n and the capabilities of the H.264 decoder/encoder they put in the GamePad/Wii U. They wanted a relatively cheap way to push a low latency video stream from a console to a thin client wirelessly using 2012 tech. This would've been the main reason for the decision to have a lower resolution screen on the GamePad.
The Switch display is not wireless and therefore doesn't have this limitation.
@Cobalt
Pro tip: Before being condescending step back and consider the possibility that you are the one who looks the fool. Then, if you're wise enough, you may avoid losing all respect by putting down the shovel rather than making a bigger hole for yourself.
Wisdom is being able to recognise when someone else knows more about something than you do. Shouting at people and hurling insults because they discredit your opinion with facts? That's the behaviour of a narcissist living in a bubble, behaviour that is spreading online faster than ever these days. There are too many of those kinds of voices on the internet, be big enough of a person to stand with the real silent majority
Video scaling and video compression
The clarity of an image delivered over HDMI vs one streamed over circa 2012 WiFi & ARM SoCs
The portability of a device that requires AC power and one that's charged via USB Type C
The library of a console with ~700 games at EOL vs a new console with ~1200 games already
Arguing the point vs attacking the person
"
I have paid you back in your own coin dude because you know, YOU JUST UNDERSTAND...blablabla... ^^
But Ok, you know what, I present my apologies if I have offended you because, to forget is to forgive without merit.
@GrailUK Oh, God, please no... @EvilLucario Actually, it was only one of the two. Extensive audio analysis (from third parties, done before the official reveal of the answer) has already proven that. The whole thing about it being two names or younger people hearing different things than older people was just a load of BS.
What is proven, is that younger people are more easily influenced by believing in just about anything that's written (and/or shown to them), so if they see the word "green", but hear the word "blue", then you could probably count on almost half of a younger test group to actually say that they heard "green".
The actual gimmick here, is that if your mind is already leaning towards one word, then you will hear that, so when Yanny resonates more in your brain, you will hear that, but with some practice, and focus on the other name, you can actually also quite easily hear that.
In essence, it's just a simple mind trick. The person playing the audio for someone, could even influence it by emphasizing one of the two names, which would make certain people subconsciously choose that name, even before they've actually heard the audio clip.
@Cobalt@skywake might be a bit... condenscating in his post, but he is perfectly right in the tech analysis in this case. Switch has better internal tech, better screen, better portability and a bigger library. If it has a better library is subjective, but IMHO it has.
And 2018 is mediocre when looking at exclusive games.
Forums
Topic: Is Nintendo resting on its laurels?
Posts 181 to 200 of 543
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.