Anyone else think it's bad the Revo downplays graphics?

[DCVI]

I do. If there is one thing gamers appreciate, it's good graphics. Although the new design and controller is going to be amazing, the fact that the system is going to have graphics the Xbox could have achieved, that means that for the next four years, we will be playing an outdated piece of material. Which is ironic because not only was GC in second for graphics, it was the most highly advanced with a size to capability ratio that outdid the others but light years (Meaning, at that size, they were able to accomplish quite alot)

So I don't know, this makes me more worried. I mean it doesn't bother me that they're going to be last in the graphics battle, it bothers me how last LAST they're going to be. I think this was a bad decisions.

Thoughts be-eth welcome!  

[TurMacar]

Prove it. Yes it has been said that they are not emphasising graphics as much but that does not mean that the graphics will not be up to next-gen standards, they will certainly be well beyond the Xbox's capabilities. Since literally no hard data has been released on the Revolutions specs I don't see how you can even guess that the graphics will be so sub-standard.

To tell the truth I don't see the big point with graphics. Yea they're neat and all...but if the only good/original/above-average thing about the game is that it has better graphics the game'll be forgotten within the next few months. People still play Pac-Man and Tetris and Ocarina of Time and Final Fantasy 1-9 (etc. etc.) because they were and are good games! By today's standards the graphics are horrible. Hell, look at Starcraft! Ten years old this year and still played by an insane amount of people online because its just that frakkin' good. Even though many RTS games have come out since then.

(...and I have to go take a Math final...so if I survive I'll be back...)  

[Chaos_The_Chosen_One]

Yes, good graphics are important. but I'm not too worried. besides, I highly doubt that the graphics won't be worse then the older system. I'm not too well infgormed on video games, seeing as I'm poor, but I'm guessing PS2 had the best graphics? anways, I'm sure the graphics will be great.  

[DCVI]

I Macar

Prove it. Yes it has been said that they are not emphasising graphics as much but that does not mean that the graphics will not be up to next-gen standards, they will certainly be well beyond the Xbox's capabilities. Since literally no hard data has been released on the Revolutions specs I don't see how you can even guess that the graphics will be so sub-standard.

To tell the truth I don't see the big point with graphics. Yea they're neat and all...but if the only good/original/above-average thing about the game is that it has better graphics the game'll be forgotten within the next few months. People still play Pac-Man and Tetris and Ocarina of Time and Final Fantasy 1-9 (etc. etc.) because they were and are good games! By today's standards the graphics are horrible. Hell, look at Starcraft! Ten years old this year and still played by an insane amount of people online because its just that frakkin' good. Even though many RTS games have come out since then.

(...and I have to go take a Math final...so if I survive I'll be back...)

Visually impaired
The Q hates being the bearer of bad news, but it comes with the territory (at least that's what the rumormonger handbook says). During a recent powwow with a few well-known gamemakers, some discussed their hands-on time with early Revolution development kits. OK, here it goes: According to those fellas, the grahpics that Nintendo's next-gen system can produce are barely better than those on GameCube. Hey, sounds a lot like Xbox-Xbox 360."

That's from the EGM Jan. Edition.  

[TurMacar]

kp606

I Macar

Prove it. Yes it has been said that they are not emphasising graphics as much but that does not mean that the graphics will not be up to next-gen standards, they will certainly be well beyond the Xbox's capabilities. Since literally no hard data has been released on the Revolutions specs I don't see how you can even guess that the graphics will be so sub-standard.

To tell the truth I don't see the big point with graphics. Yea they're neat and all...but if the only good/original/above-average thing about the game is that it has better graphics the game'll be forgotten within the next few months. People still play Pac-Man and Tetris and Ocarina of Time and Final Fantasy 1-9 (etc. etc.) because they were and are good games! By today's standards the graphics are horrible. Hell, look at Starcraft! Ten years old this year and still played by an insane amount of people online because its just that frakkin' good. Even though many RTS games have come out since then.

(...and I have to go take a Math final...so if I survive I'll be back...)

Visually impaired
The Q hates being the bearer of bad news, but it comes with the territory (at least that's what the rumormonger handbook says). During a recent powwow with a few well-known gamemakers, some discussed their hands-on time with early Revolution development kits. OK, here it goes: According to those fellas, the grahpics that Nintendo's next-gen system can produce are barely better than those on GameCube. Hey, sounds a lot like Xbox-Xbox 360."

That's from the EGM Jan. Edition.

Thank you, I guess. Acording to IGN however the Rev. will probably have about twice the horsepower of GC. And as the same article points out (ok, so i'm adlibing alittle) who cares? Yea, technically GC was second best to the Xbox...but RE4 has some of the best graphics this gen and was on the GC. The problem with the Xbox is that since they have the tech they assume they can just run with that...where games on the GameCube tend to squeeze the system for everything its worth and can come out better. I still think the Metroid Primes are two of the best looking current gen games out there, Xbox or not.

My point however still stands. Big whoop about the graphics. The human eye can only detect so many pixels/polygons/whatever. And besides. There really isn't such a thing as 'bad' graphics anymore, you're acting like they're going back to 16-bit or something.  

[Rockman JET]

dude check your math.....

good graphics+ bad story + bad game play= bad game

good graphics+ good story- good game play= still bad game

good graphics+ good story + good game play= good game

bad graphics + good story + good game play = mediocer game

and so on....


simply dude its just not graphics that make a good game its like a fruit salad sure you can have lots of one fruit with other fruits but if its all that one fruit then its not a fruit salad.  

[DCVI]

I Macar

kp606

I Macar

Prove it. Yes it has been said that they are not emphasising graphics as much but that does not mean that the graphics will not be up to next-gen standards, they will certainly be well beyond the Xbox's capabilities. Since literally no hard data has been released on the Revolutions specs I don't see how you can even guess that the graphics will be so sub-standard.

To tell the truth I don't see the big point with graphics. Yea they're neat and all...but if the only good/original/above-average thing about the game is that it has better graphics the game'll be forgotten within the next few months. People still play Pac-Man and Tetris and Ocarina of Time and Final Fantasy 1-9 (etc. etc.) because they were and are good games! By today's standards the graphics are horrible. Hell, look at Starcraft! Ten years old this year and still played by an insane amount of people online because its just that frakkin' good. Even though many RTS games have come out since then.

(...and I have to go take a Math final...so if I survive I'll be back...)

Visually impaired
The Q hates being the bearer of bad news, but it comes with the territory (at least that's what the rumormonger handbook says). During a recent powwow with a few well-known gamemakers, some discussed their hands-on time with early Revolution development kits. OK, here it goes: According to those fellas, the grahpics that Nintendo's next-gen system can produce are barely better than those on GameCube. Hey, sounds a lot like Xbox-Xbox 360."

That's from the EGM Jan. Edition.

Thank you, I guess. Acording to IGN however the Rev. will probably have about twice the horsepower of GC. And as the same article points out (ok, so i'm adlibing alittle) who cares? Yea, technically GC was second best to the Xbox...but RE4 has some of the best graphics this gen and was on the GC. The problem with the Xbox is that since they have the tech they assume they can just run with that...where games on the GameCube tend to squeeze the system for everything its worth and can come out better. I still think the Metroid Primes are two of the best looking current gen games out there, Xbox or not.

My point however still stands. Big whoop about the graphics. The human eye can only detect so many pixels/polygons/whatever. And besides. There really isn't such a thing as 'bad' graphics anymore, you're acting like they're going back to 16-bit or something.

I don't think you understand. The average idiot sixteen year old to twenty year (in America at least, Japan seems to understand things a little better) will not carry this philosophy. Alot of them prefer games that are eye candy, is that intelligent? No. Well it could be, because it's an opinion and there's nothing wrong with it. Take Art: I think good art needs to look real. I think Picaso's art is a waste of canvas, nothing about it looks good. Of course then come in people who think like you do and believe that the other aspects of the painting are what make it ~amazing~. I beg to differ.

I won't lie to you and tell you I believe the exact same thing. Could AC/PKMN Col./SMS/WW all have looked better? Yeah they really good have.

Halo is pratically the same rehashed idea on paper, it's a shooter that doesn't bring anything unique to the table. OMG! You can throw grenades with the other trigger, and it has CARS! GOOD LORD! But people threw themselves onto that game, for the graphics? (Those aren't even that mind boggling)

But yeah, that's my opinion. It's a smart buisness decision, that doesn't mean everything needs to do it.  

[Mr._Stabby]

At this moment, I don't beleive its anything to worry about, until Nintendo gives an official comment on what the specs are. As far as I remember the rumors, they said that its going to be 5 times as powerful as the gamecube.  

[N t e r]

I completely agree with kp606, sorry Macar.

But this is Nintendo and most of what they publish would be great anyways. Gamers still need the graphics to be blown away by a game and not by just the story line or the gameplay.

Imagine 3rd party publishers such as EA and Activision still making movie games in the next gen cycle. And suppose there will be Revolution versions of said games. And we're given the same crappy nonsense were currently seeing with movie games lately.

Even if said movie game has it's flaws we would still be able to look at the graphics and be somewhat pleased.

Nintendo's decision honestly shocked me and threw me into disbelief. Why can't Nintendo give us a great system, with a great controller and great graphics? (Not meaning that said graphics would have to be on the same level as the Xbox 360 and the PS3.)

Oh an one thing kp606, these American developers have only seen Early development kits for the Revolution which means that Nintendo still has to make a few advancements or adjustments to the dev kits and possibly the graphics. Who knows? rolleyes  

[Owl and Pussycat]

Rockman JET

bad graphics + good story + good game play = mediocer game

Bad graphics don't make a really good game mediocre. Look at Chrono Cross, the original Mario and Metroid games, and many older games. To today's standards they look like s**t, but they are still our favorites, and are still revered. Good graphics don't make a game. Look at Halo 2. Good graphics are just a bonus.

 

[Rockman JET]

[.SamusAran.]

Rockman JET

bad graphics + good story + good game play = mediocer game

Bad graphics don't make a really good game mediocre. Look at Chrono Cross, the original Mario and Metroid games, and many older games. To today's standards they look like s**t, but they are still our favorites, and are still revered. Good graphics don't make a game. Look at Halo 2. Good graphics are just a bonus.

you are right, but my point being not all games with bad graphics are bad games.
that reminds me i have to beat chrono cross which ive got to admit is way better than final fantasy 7 and 8.  

[Rockman JET]

N t e r

Nintendo's decision honestly shocked me and threw me into disbelief. Why can't Nintendo give us a great system, with a great controller and great graphics? (Not meaning that said graphics would have to be on the same level as the Xbox 360 and the PS3.)

riddle me this Nter...
why buy a crappy system that may have great looking games and great loading times that breaks always, when you can have a system that doesnt break down ((unless you throw it down and smash it with a hammer and stuff like that )) and has great games that doesnt have that of good graphics?  

[ECUnlimited]

The reason Nintendo is doing this in the first place is affordablility.

Why do you think a s**t load of people buy the DS and GBA more then the PSP? Because they are cheaper and more affordable.

Nintendo knows their fans dont' give a s**t about graphics. Nintendo is about the games. Sure, they may not have the best graphics, but has that ever stopped them? Yeah, it WILL hurt them in the long run because a lot of people are flocking to the PS3 in paticular so they can get their realistic fix.

But what Nintendo is doing here is making their console different.That's what every company is doing. Each of them caters to a different audience. Xbox 360 is a media hub for games, movies, music pictures and most notably online services. PS3 is for the graphics. Nintendo is for an affordable system that everyone can afford.

Yeah, graphics DO help in a games greatness. Half Life 2 probably would'nt have been the same unless it had the realism that deeply brought players in. Morrowind Oblivian probably would'nt sell as well unless it had those amazing real time graphics, but for Nintendo, that isn't a concern. What their system is for is to play different. It's not trying to be like everyone else, it's trying to be it's own system where people can go and have different experiences then they do on the other two systems.

I could go longer then that but I'm half asleep.  

[Gaughan]

This is insanely stupid.

The so-called "Revoltuion" developement kits are infact Gamecube developement kits to work with the Revolution controller.

IgnRev

Readers are advised to make two notes before continuing with this article. The first is that developers are still working with incomplete Revolution hardware. Most studios are, in fact, developing on "GameCube-based kits,"

http://revolution.ign.com/articles/673/673578p1.html

Also,another thing to look at is that this news isn't official. Developers are getting used to the controller first to make the games. A selected few have the real develpment kits, and they are mainly Nintendo based developers like Retro Studios.

Will this hurt Nintendo? Well point is, The Ps2, the most popular console has sold more than the Xbox and the Cube since both competitors where released. The Ps2 has the worse graphics, even on the flip side of it being teh first console out.

Nintendo also has the controller and heck lots of old games to draw in the crowd.

And what about a lil battle going on between the PsP and Ds? We all know the specs and we know that both have been bascally equall in sales for some time in the Usa...

I see the point of people going with what the gaming culture is, but we have living prove with the Ds that a weaker system with new ideas can survive in the market compared to a more graphical and multi media system that the gaming culture normall are meant to look out for.  

[TurMacar]

Picaso? I'm with you on that one. It makes no sense. I do get your point that a lot of people are more inclined to buy games with better graphics (or at least I think thats your point. sweatdrop ). But its getting to the point where you can barely tell the difference (ok maybe not quite yet but its getting there) and companies are going to have to focus on other things to draw in customers. Microsoft and Sony are just combineing game systems with multi-media centers....apparently they're assuming that most people who would get DVD players, etc. in the first place don't already have them. While Nintendo is searching for ways to make the games different, hence the Revolution and DS.