I really don't agree with that sentiment. I don't really mind 'bad' textures—what composes a game's beauty to me is the visual variety of the world. That's why think Twilight Princess and Metroid Prime 3 Corruption are two of the best-looking games ever made; because their early Wii asset quality enabled the dev team to create a huge number and variety of items. That and all of those assets fit in the same world, complimenting each other. That's also part of the reason I really dig Bethesda games. It's a component of world building.
Sure, lighting is nice nowadays, but I don't care that much. Majora's Mask looks better than Far Cry 4, Metroid Prime looks better than Splatoon, etc, etc, and so on.
I'd love Twilight Princess to get revamped, higher quality assets, but not at the cost of their cohesiveness, not at the cost of their identity, and certainly not if they're just low-budget repurposed Skyward Sword or Hyrule Warriors assets. That can only make a game uglier.
TBH I don't think we're disagreeing. I completely agree that good art will always look better than good tech. I'll happily argue that a game like Mario Kart 8 is the best looking game of this generation thus far. Even when people make whining posts about shadow resolution and so on. But it's not a case of one or the other, both aspects are important.
I think you're just more worried about how Nintendo will treat the title than I am. I'm putting a lot of trust in their ability to do a good Zelda remake based on the quality of the OoT, MM & WW ports. And I really want it because of how much tech has progressed since the Wii launch. I'm not even dreaming about an NX release, the Wii U is more than enough of a jump to make Twilight Princess look as good as it should have looked in the first place.
9 years is actually quite a bit long amount of time.
When you put it that way...it is. O_o This would actually be a larger gap than the time between Link's Awakening and Link's Awakening DX (which was roughly five years).
These were all less than 9 year gaps:
Super Mario World -> Super Mario 64
A Link to the Past -> Ocarina of Time
Super Metroid -> Metroid Prime
Ocarina of Time -> Twilight Princess
Wind Waker -> Skyward Sword
In the tech industry 9 years is a long time. All because every few years you get twice as much of everything. Twice as much storage, twice as much ram, twice as much horsepower. And with games in particular over the last 10 years screens have gone from 0.3MP to 1MP to 2MP and now we're on the verge of going to 8MP screens. It might not be a long time in the grand scheme of things but it is for tech.
That's why that lighting demo that they said was compatible with Wii U (I can't remember what it's called, but it had the robot) was interesting, because that basically shows you that preset camera and lighting can go along way to improving a game. That's how they just basically put Wind Waker under a film. That is what it looked like to me.
The texture work in something like Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate, compared to the Tri version on Wii is a different story. There's literally that many more pixels to fill, which is why I personally wasn't impressed with Witcher 3. That game might as well be played on a 1080p to 4K upscaling capable TV to look right, IMO. That's sort of how they remade MH3U, but I feel like there's some room inbetween, regardless. That's what Nintendo would have to do to remake TP for HD, because something like Wind Waker has less texture work.
In the tech industry 9 years is a long time. All because every few years you get twice as much of everything. Twice as much storage, twice as much ram, twice as much horsepower.
Ah but Nintendo does try quite hard to repudiate Moores Law.
Ah but Nintendo does try quite hard to repudiate Moores Law.
I don't agree, at most Moore's law deals with the relative power over time at the same price point. It's not even that but that is one of the end effects. So if we're talking about Nintendo and Moore's law we should be asking if their consoles have been improving at the rate that everyone else has.
I found a website that compiles a list of devices and their GPU floating point performance. Based on that here's a list of 9 consoles sorted by the amount of a leap they were from their predecessor:
If we're going to be fair then the Wii U is actually more than keeping up with Moore's law. The Wii U is far more than just the Wii of this generation in the same way that the Gamecube and the PS3 were quite a leap. On the other end of the spectrum, well down the pack, the Wii. The one time that there wasn't much of a spec bump.
Ya. The first time I saw PS3, I immediately thought it looked like how GCN did when that came out. I played pretty closely to launch, because my cousin had it with Resistance: Fall of Man. Wii U seems like GCN all over again, just like Xbox One seems like the original Xbox; both of which were actually closer in performance than PS2, IIRC. There's no denying PS4 is the console with the best graphics, but it also doesn't blow the rest out of the water; especially with Windows OS and Wii U still has the better hardware for sound codecs(because it is PowerPC) and such. I would know, because I have both. I'll probably try Unity and a few other programs.
That's why I'm not surprised that Darksiders II is on Xbox One and PS4, now. They put in the extra effort to upgrade to 1080p graphics. Wii U already ran it in 1080p through upscaling(like all other games), but it could have ran the same version and that just came out on the other console not to long ago.
That's why I feel like Twilight Princess HD should look like the Zelda tech demo, period, because anything less and you know they didn't actually remake it to the fullest. Even Halo: Combat Evolved remake looks way better, but you know they didn't change the game, because otherwise the graphic switch option would be absent, which is more reason to think TP HD should look closer to the Zelda tech demo if it actually happens.
I don't agree, at most Moore's law deals with the relative power over time at the same price point. It's not even that but that is one of the end effects. So if we're talking about Nintendo and Moore's law we should be asking if their consoles have been improving at the rate that everyone else has.
I found a website that compiles a list of devices and their GPU floating point performance. Based on that here's a list of 9 consoles sorted by the amount of a leap they were from their predecessor:
If we're going to be fair then the Wii U is actually more than keeping up with Moore's law. The Wii U is far more than just the Wii of this generation in the same way that the Gamecube and the PS3 were quite a leap. On the other end of the spectrum, well down the pack, the Wii. The one time that there wasn't much of a spec bump.
You got the source for that? One problem with that measure is that it doesn't take into account the different lengths of generations. The gamecube only having a 5 year life, whereas the Xbox 360 had 8 years (so the Xbox one almost definitely fails the test)
I don't know about the flops but just looking at the CPU clock speed, the Wii was only about twice the Gamecube. In a 5 year gap, Moore's Law says you should get about a 6x increase.
@Dezzy
Wii was only an enhancement of the GCN tech; mainly to run the new controllers, SD card, Wi-Fi, and USB slots. @skywake already said that Moore's Law only applies if they advance the technology above its predecessor, which is why the main point is that Nintendo recycled the GCN hardware. Even Super Mario Galaxy could have ran on GCN.
Most of the reason why some Wii games looked more advanced than GCN, was because of development progression in the studios(not the hardware). That's why a lot of people weren't impressed with Wii's graphics and why RE4: Wii Edition exists, among a few other rereleases. Most GCN games actually looked better than Wii's library, because 3rd parties were actually pushing the hardware. RE4 looked and ran a good deal better on GCN than PS2, and I would say that the GCN version still looked better than the Wii version, because they practically ported the PS2 version and tried to run it with GCN graphics.
Wii U is still the most advanced standard PowerPC available for consumers, with only Xbox 360, PS3, and Apple PowerPCs from 2005 to look back to, so we would have to apply Moore's Law to machines that actually followed it; which Wii did not.
I am quite curious to when they started dev on this game. I agree with @scar. If the visuals are not as beefed as the tech demo, that'll be disappointing.
That said... it's a darn shame that games focus on visual HD remakes but not audio remakes. It would've been wonderful for WWHD to have a soundtrack of more full instruments.
Heh, the visuals will be no where near the tech demo, don't get your hopes up that high. I'm expecting something like this
That's what I'm afraid for, a 10-year old game with updated textures. I'd rather see a complete rehaul, and I know that's going to require quite a lot of work.
Heh, the visuals will be no where near the tech demo, don't get your hopes up that high. I'm expecting something like this
That's what I'm afraid for, a 10-year old game with updated textures. I'd rather see a complete rehaul, and I know that's going to require quite a lot of work.
Yeah... this doesn't look like something I would buy. Nintendo isnt' known for going cheap—I would hope they don't go simple like this.
I should think it would look better than that video posted. It almost still looks like the Wii game only just crisper. The edges are still rough, things are still blocky. I've seen better from the WiiU.
What are you talking about? Twilight Princess plays better than every game released in the last decade.
@Haru17: I should've been clearer; It's an amazing game, I agree. But if all Nintendo does is updating textures (like in that YouTube vid), it still isn't going to look amazing (or as good as it can be). They need to update all the 3D models, character and objects, everything. That's going to require a lot of work, if they're not going to do this, there's no point in just updating the textures. I'd rather save my money if that was the case and play the GCN or Wii version instead. What I want from a HD remaster is a complete remaster. Keep the gameplay the same, but update everything in terms of graphics if you're doing a remaster and don't deliver a rushed project.
I only expect what's in the video because of WW HD. Ninty added lighting and bloom, made the models and texture HD, and thats all, graphics wise. But they could have just done that because that's all WW needed. Now they could do a full graphical overhaul with TP, but since it seems they're just trying to make a quick buck along with fans over for Zelda Wii U, I doubt they'd put that much effort in it. I hope I'm wrong, though.
@rishisquid: They didn't update the models, that's the thing. Wind Waker HD used the same models from the original game. Frankly, Wind Waker was quite ahead of its time, and quite a lot was still usable in 2013 due to its art style. That isn't the case with TP. That's why they have to go the extra mile and put a little more effort in TP HD to convince me.
I think the difference is that WW's art style can pretty much only look so sharp after a while because it's cartoonish, there's really only so much that could be done to make it look newer and more advanced. TP on the other hand has the "realistic" art style and I think would require a full rebuild to keep that style but have it updated to stick with the times. Same with how they did OoT or MM a bit? On N64 it was suppose to be "realism" and then when they did the full remake on the 3DS, they did their best to do the same with realism only better.
Forums
Topic: The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess HD - OT
Posts 201 to 220 of 1,760
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.