Forums
Guides
Features
Media
Zelda Wiki
Patreon
    • Nintendo
    Wii U General Discussion V 2.0: Buy Mario Kart 8 for your grandma
    • Hoopy Frood wrote:

      Eh, someone did make a high res texture pack, and I think that's installed in the above image.

      Well, fuck me then, :P that's totally cheating.

      The game does look pretty freaking good on it's own either way, there's some jaw-dropping scenery even when playing on a Wii.

      Xenoblade's biggest strength is the distant stuff, and they always look amazing.

      As for the new Xenoblade, the only stuff that I think don't look straight up incredible, is the face of some characters (that look incredibly fake, and I don't mean just proportionally) as well as the grass (which is way too obviously in how it's done, though not too bad as long as you're not looking at it.)

      Everything else looks crazy good to me.

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Khaoabunga ().

    • To those of you signed up with Club Nintendo, the platinum and gold awards are now available!

      And every single reward is a downloadable game. Yep. No statue, hat, CD, poster, whatever. Just downloadable games for the Wii U/3DS.

      Platinum members can get Game&Wario (WiiU), NES Remix (WiiU), Earthbound (WiiU), Dr. Luigi (WiiU), Donkey Kong Country Returns 3D (3DS), Fluidity: Spin Cycle (3DS), Dillon's Rolling Western (3DS), and Mario v. DK Minis on the Move (3DS).
      Both Plat and Gold members can get Ice Climber (WiiU), Kid Icarus (WiiU), Super Mario Bros. (WiiU), Adventure of Link (WiiU), Donkey Kong 3 (3DS), Wario Land 2 (3DS), Metroid (3DS), and Super Mario Land 2: 6 Golden Coins (3DS).

      I'm still thinking of what to get (I'm Platinum) but... this year kind of sucks for rewards imo, especially for Gold, and doubly so for those who don't have both systems because your choice in rewards is pretty much cut in half.

      "FUCK YOU NINTENDO" by Topaz Mutiny



      Thanks to Sugarpoultry for the pretty sig! <3

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Topaz Mutiny ().

    • Astarael wrote:

      Don't forget that if you have a deluxe Wii U you get extra credit points for digital purchases. I need to check my Digital Deluxe promotion points soon - having downloading Pikmin 3 I might have enough for another coupon.





      Aonuma regrets nothing.


      That awkward feeling when this guy is making the next Zelda.

      Display Spoiler
      Just kidding, he is awesome.
    • IUHoosiersFan wrote:

      That's beside the point, because even still it's graphically "lacking" for a game from 2011. The point I was trying to make was that despite its inferior graphics, it still has a great looking world. The art style, I think, has a greater influence on how "pretty" or "ugly" a world is than the graphics. I doubt what really made you admit that it's not as ugly as you remember was the upped resolution, but I won't make assumptions.


      Hoopy Frood wrote:

      Art and general aesthetic design is more important than raw graphical power. I'd rather look at Xenoblade than Crysis.


      Ah, the 'art style > graphics' card. Although I agree pure graphical power isn't all that important (most games that looked great on the PS2 for example look like shit now), I think overall graphical quality is what matters. I too find a lot of NES/SNES games more appealing to the eye than many modern games.

      Xenoblade, being a fantasy JRPG, has some wonderous fantasy landscapes. The art style is kinda standard (*cough*finalfantasy) semi-realistic if you ask me, but the art designs are very good.
      Still, playing it I feel like they could've done a lot more. It has nice background landscapes, but the areas that you visit are sometimes a bit bland. Often pretty empty with not that much detail. Unlike say the 3D Zelda games (except for Hyrule field). Given Xenoblade is a much larger game and thus is restricted.
      Above that the textures are muddy as fuck for 2011, even for a Wii game. The worlds are artistic but it just feels a bit low quality, like they could've done more in the graphical department, not so much the art department. Example of very nice landscape and creative art designs but just lacking in graphical presentation.


      (I'm don't know much about game designing so it's hard to point out what I mean, I hope you can bear with me. I might not know all the correct terms but I know what I'm talking about.)

      Crysis on the other hand went all out on detail. Their grahical goal was to make a photorealistic island, and they did just that, better than anyone before. The graphical quality is high due to all the detail they've put into it, eventhough it's a 7 year old game.


      But if you'd port Crysis to the Wii (god the thought), Xenoblade would be a much prettier game thanks to its art design so I see your point. But Crysis isn't a Wii game and thus has much more detail.

      'Realistic' games like Crysis are prone to age fast, but due to all the effort they put into it I think it will never be considered an ugly game. And thanks to the active modding community it has stayed relevant.
      Xenoblade will age better, yes.

      But my initial point was that Xenoblade X's graphics don't amaze me, unlike other members here, since it's a 2015 game.

      The post was edited 5 times, last by john_marston ().

    • john_marston wrote:

      Ah, the 'art style > graphics' card. Although I agree pure graphical power isn't all that important (most games that looked great on the PS2 for example look like shit now), I think overall graphical quality is what matters. I too find a lot of NES/SNES games more appealing to the eye than many modern games.

      Xenoblade, being a fantasy JRPG, has some wonderous fantasy landscapes. The art style is kinda standard (*cough*finalfantasy) semi-realistic if you ask me, but the art designs are very good.
      Still, playing it I feel like they could've done a lot more. It has nice background landscapes, but the areas that you visit are sometimes a bit bland. Often pretty empty with not that much detail. Unlike say the 3D Zelda games (except for Hyrule field). Given Xenoblade is a much larger game and thus is restricted.
      Above that the textures are muddy as fuck for 2011, even for a Wii game. The worlds are artistic but it just feels a bit low quality, like they could've done more in the graphical department, not so much the art department. Example of very nice landscape and creative art designs but just lacking in graphical presentation.


      (I'm don't know much about game designing so it's hard to point out what I mean, I hope you can bear with me. I might not know all the correct terms but I know what I'm talking about.)

      Crysis on the other hand went all out on detail. Their grahical goal was to make a photorealistic island, and they did just that, better than anyone before. The graphical quality is high due to all the detail they've put into it, eventhough it's a 7 year old game.


      But if you'd port Crysis to the Wii (god the thought), Xenoblade would be a much prettier game thanks to its art design so I see your point. But Crysis isn't a Wii game and thus has much more detail.

      'Realistic' games like Crysis are prone to age fast, but due to all the effort they put into it I think it will never be considered an ugly game. And thanks to the active modding community it has stayed relevant.
      Xenoblade will age better, yes.

      But my initial point was that Xenoblade X's graphics don't amaze me, unlike other members here, since it's a 2015 game.


      Well, what I do generally find interesting that just upscaling Xenoblade to 1080p fixes the vast majority of the muddiness of the textures which speaks volumes for how good the game really does look. I think the first time you walk out into Bionis Field is a quite breathtaking view



      Stuff likethis evokes wonder



      I'm not just saying this shit to be contrarian. I would genuinely rather look at any of those places than this



      Crysis is impressive from a technical standpoint, but boring from a artistic stand point. Which isn't to say that a realistic style can't look good. Games like Max Payne and Alan Wake have wonderful visual designs, same with something like Dark Souls. Hell, you clearly like Red Dead Redemption, that game's visual design is worlds better than Crysis.
    • Hoopy Frood wrote:

      Well, what I do generally find interesting that just upscaling Xenoblade to 1080p fixes the vast majority of the muddiness of the textures which speaks volumes for how good the game really does look. I think the first time you walk out into Bionis Field is a quite breathtaking view



      Stuff likethis evokes wonder



      I'm not just saying this shit to be contrarian. I would genuinely rather look at any of those places than this



      Crysis is impressive from a technical standpoint, but boring from a artistic stand point. Which isn't to say that a realistic style can't look good. Games like Max Payne and Alan Wake have wonderful visual designs, same with something like Dark Souls. Hell, you clearly like Red Dead Redemption, that game's visual design is worlds better than Crysis.


      Red Dead? Never heard of it ;)

      But yeah, RDR has some of the best graphics for a realistic world. But Crytek tried to take Crysis a step further and make it photorealistic. Real life is boring for you I suppose.

      Those high res Xenoblade images look pretty neat, that's something I can play (I for one hate to play a game like OoT on an old TV with shitty blurry graphics). But in terms of landscapes I still prefer some of the Crysis ones. I like to be immersed and I like detailed graphics, so yeah. I prefer looking at Crysis scenery.
      Display Spoiler

      Especially if you slap on a mod:



      So eventhough Xenoblade has really neat art designs and pretty fantasy worlds, the actual game on the Wii still looks a bit crappy imo due to the overall quality of the graphics.
    • Xenoblade's world looks great from a distance, and that's what they were going for. Close up, things get a little muddy, but I stared more at the environments that look amazing rather than my character. For a Wii game, it's an achievement how they managed to make such a massive world, with huge draw distance (probably some tricks involved, but that doesn't matter) and still have real-time combat and high framerate, while looking as good as it does.
    • I saw that Nintendo took another loss in Q1 2014.

      Neither the Wii U nor the 3DS is doing all that well. They need to shake some things up. I'm surprised by the generally positive reception to their E3 this year (compared to a fair amount of criticism last year). I didn't see many compelling new software announcements.

      Mario Kart was a hit, but the only big first party release until Super Smash Brothers is Hyrule Warriors. I'm still not at all impressed with the software being offered at this point in Wii U's lifespan. I know summer is typically a downtime for gaming, but I still think Nintendo has really dropped the ball. And it shows in their financial performance.

      You would think that several bad fiscal periods in a row after a long history of incredible success and profitability would cause alarm and prompt immediate action. But, aside from the price cut, they seem almost lackadaisical about it.
    • I think it is admirable that executives are being held accountable for poor performance. However, that in and of itself, will not boost the business or offer a better "proposition" (as I think Nintendo themselves put it) to consumers. They need to use their war chest to invest and reinvent themselves now while they still can or die slowly.

      I could be wrong, but I believe I recall reading that Nintendo had never taken a loss until just the last few years. Now they've taken taken losses several periods in a row. It's a very alarming trend. Yes, they've built up assets over the years and they're not in immediate danger, but the trajectory is clearly in the wrong direction. I don't think it can be seriously disputed that the Wii U and 3DS (to a lesser extent) have been bad business for Nintendo.
    • The reason for the loss in Q2 is because they basically had just one month of strong sales from Wii U. Mario Kart 8 was released on May 31st, which meant that all of April and 30 days of May amounted to those 30k a week hardware sales that have plagued the system so much over the last year and a half.

      They could be out of red with the Q3 reports. July still saw some momentum on the Wii U's side thanks to Mario Kart and the free game promotion, August will have Hyrule Warriors in Japan, and then the rest of the world in September.

      If not, Q4 will knock it out of the park for them. They have real potential to finish right behind PS4 this holiday.

      Meanwhile, 3DS surged back in Japan with Yokai Watch recently. Later this year it's finally going back to the kind of AAA software that launched it in the first place; Smash Bros. Sapphire/Ruby remakes, then Monster Hunter 4 Ultimate and Final Fantasy Explorers in Japan, maybe even Bravely Second.

      After the years like 2012 and 2013 for software, it's not surprising that the 3DS eventually fell back down to the earth; things like Kirby, Bravely Default and Tomodachi Life aren't going to drive interest the same way that Mario Kart, Zelda and a flagship Pokémon will.

      Times are tough in the industry. The kind of losses that Nintendo posts are a drop in the bucket compared to what Microsoft and Sony see; production costs are just crazy high nowadays. If you want to post profits, you have to do a lot better than just "all right" sales, which is what 3DS has seen lately, and is a far cry from what Wii U was accomplishing before Mario Kart.

      I'm published! Check out -
      THE LEGEND OF LIGHT
      Book One, The Echoes of Light, available in Paperback and on Kindle - Book 2 out late 2018
      Read the first five chapters for free
    • Well it's definitely more than what most other executives are willing to do.

      I mentioned this in another thread, but I cannot possibly imagine Zelda Musou reeling in big numbers for the Wii U. The Musou series has become stagnant over the years and the fanbase is niche at best. The only conceivable reason people would even remotely flock to buy Zelda [I]Musou [/I]is because it has the Zelda name attached to it. Will that be enough? Objectively, I can't say that it will. Not enough to move a sizeable amount of Wii U units. However, it wouldn't be a stretch to say current Wii U owners would probably pick up the game in lieu of other titles (or lack thereof). Jeff is right in that Q4 will be the time for the Wii U to show a little bit of its stuff.

      Of course, I hope I'm wrong and Zelda Musou moves a bunch of Wii U units and sells outstandingly. But I remain skeptical.

      The post was edited 5 times, last by Xeno ().

    • Jeff wrote:

      The reason for the loss in Q2 is because they basically had just one month of strong sales from Wii U. Mario Kart 8 was released on May 31st, which meant that all of April and 30 days of May amounted to those 30k a week hardware sales that have plagued the system so much over the last year and a half.

      They could be out of red with the Q3 reports. July still saw some momentum on the Wii U's side thanks to Mario Kart and the free game promotion, August will have Hyrule Warriors in Japan, and then the rest of the world in September.

      If not, Q4 will knock it out of the park for them. They have real potential to finish right behind PS4 this holiday.

      Meanwhile, 3DS surged back in Japan with Yokai Watch recently. Later this year it's finally going back to the kind of AAA software that launched it in the first place; Smash Bros. Sapphire/Ruby remakes, then Monster Hunter 4 Ultimate and Final Fantasy Explorers in Japan, maybe even Bravely Second.

      After the years like 2012 and 2013 for software, it's not surprising that the 3DS eventually fell back down to the earth; things like Kirby, Bravely Default and Tomodachi Life aren't going to drive interest the same way that Mario Kart, Zelda and a flagship Pokémon will.

      Times are tough in the industry. The kind of losses that Nintendo posts are a drop in the bucket compared to what Microsoft and Sony see; production costs are just crazy high nowadays. If you want to post profits, you have to do a lot better than just "all right" sales, which is what 3DS has seen lately, and is a far cry from what Wii U was accomplishing before Mario Kart.


      Actually this quarter, is the first, since their fiscal year begins in April, so we have:

      - Q1 from April - June, where they released Mario Kart 8 has the only big name game.

      - Q2 from July - September, there should be a profit in this quarter, thabks to the 3DS sales boost in Japan, thanks to Youkai Watch 2, and SSB3D around mid September, and the Wii U seems to be receving a game around every 2 weeks, starting with Zelda Musou in August 14, followed by another DQX rerelease, followed by either Fatal Frame V or Bayonetta 2. So Nintendo should have a nice quarter here, even though the majority of it would be thanks to Japan.

      - Q3 from October - December, this quarter should be guarranted profit, with both SSBs in the West, Captain Toad may also sell well in NA and Japan(this is announced for Japan, right???) SSBU in Japan, Pokemon ORAS, and Mario Kart 8 should also help push consoles and software sales here,and the Amiibos, if there is no profit here, then something is seriously going wrong, and for Japan alone, then there is MH4U and FFE.

      - Q4 from January - March, this quarter is still a heavy mystery, but the only thing known till now, we only know about Captain Toad for Europe.

      Xeno wrote:

      Well it's definitely more than what most other executives are willing to do.

      I mentioned this in another thread, but I cannot possibly imagine Zelda Musou reeling in big numbers for the Wii U. The Musou series has become stagnant over the years and the fanbase is niche at best. The only conceivable reason people would even remotely flock to buy Zelda [I]Musou [/I]is because it has the Zelda name attached to it. Will that be enough? Objectively, I can't say that it will. Not enough to move a sizeable amount of Wii U units. However, it wouldn't be a stretch to say current Wii U owners would probably pick up the game in lieu of other titles (or lack thereof). Jeff is right in that Q4 will be the time for the Wii U to show a little bit of its stuff.

      Of course, I hope I'm wrong and Zelda Musou moves a bunch of Wii U units and sells outstandingly. But I remain skeptical.


      Well the series seems to still have a ok following in Japan, so it should help there, and there are still some people ho would go by something by simlly seeing the name Zelda on it, and it being something new, so it should atleast help it a bit, and help bring the baseline a bit up, maybe some 2k-4k.
    • I just heard about the news yesterday, and I was honestly shocked to hear the poor performances. But in regards to the sales, I'm not surprised. Perhaps a few of us, like myself, were too optimistic that MK8 did very well in bringing the Wii U up in the sales. However, I don't see hope being completely lost. Hyrule Warriors may help raise the system in consistent purchases. At least until Smash Bros. for Wii U arrives for the Holidays.

      It's no surprise the Wii U is continuing to struggle with underwhelming sales. At this rate, however, I can see the Wii U rising up slowly but surely. Too bad it had a slow start to begin with, back in November 2012.
    • Xeno wrote:

      Well it's definitely more than what most other executives are willing to do.

      I mentioned this in another thread, but I cannot possibly imagine Zelda Musou reeling in big numbers for the Wii U. The Musou series has become stagnant over the years and the fanbase is niche at best. The only conceivable reason people would even remotely flock to buy Zelda [I]Musou [/I]is because it has the Zelda name attached to it. Will that be enough? Objectively, I can't say that it will.


      See, I think it is, because it has the potential to tap into the casual Zelda fan, as well as the mainstream gamer in a way that the main series hasn't the last few years. You wouldn't believe how many people I've seen refer to it as the "next Zelda" as if its a flagship title.

      For one, this is the first game since Twilight Princess (which was nearly 8 years ago OMG) to give us a more reserved art direction. No cel shading, no gaudy colors, we've even got a Link that looks kind of badass. That alone is going to turn heads.

      Then you've got the simple fact that this game is providing experiences that people have always wanted more out of in Zelda, but have never really gotten. Don't get me wrong; the combat looks as shallow as ever and it's not going to be some AAA quality title, but fans of all different levels of enthusiasm have wanted more combat out of Zelda, and the mere illusion that you're battling sheer armies of enemies, performing ridiculously crazy attacks has a strong appeal that the more laid back approach that traditional entries can't match.

      For the people who really only identify with the series because of Ocarina of Time and/or Twilight Princess, this game has a "cool factor" that the series has been losing for a while.

      For Zelda fans, meanwhile, this is the giant fanservice that Nintendo has kept from us since the series' inception. We're not just seeing the return of characters that have been absent for a decade or more, but we're getting to play as them. We're not just getting to talk to fan favorites like Midna and Darunia again, we get to play as them as we would with Link. This game is offering so many opportunities and realized fantasies that for years fans thought were only possible in sprite comics and fan fiction.

      Mark my words, it'll make an impact.

      I'm published! Check out -
      THE LEGEND OF LIGHT
      Book One, The Echoes of Light, available in Paperback and on Kindle - Book 2 out late 2018
      Read the first five chapters for free
    • Amazon.co.jp ƒxƒXƒgƒZƒ‰[: ƒQ[ƒ€ ‚Ì’†‚ōłàl‹C‚Ì‚ ‚鏤•i‚Å‚·

      For what it's worth Zelda Musou has been bouncing all around Amazon Japan's top 20 list since earlier this year.

      Who knows how well it'll actually do, but on some level the hype is real in Japan.
    • I think that's largely to do that it's a Dynasty Warriors crossover. If it were its own thing and didn't bear Musou in its name, it might not be as hyped.

      Honestly, I don't think HW is really going to be a game changer even with the features of playable characters and it being a crossover. The developer twitter recently confirmed that there will be no online co-op in this game, and that alone killed the game for a lot of people judging by their comments.
    • To me, a game like Hyrule Warriors is a sign of desperation and decay. It does seem like an attempt to appeal to the Japanese market in particular, which makes no sense. It's easy to see that the Japanese market is smaller and declining. Why focus on that market? If anything, it makes more sense to pivot to the west.

      I've made this point and anyone is free to disagree, but I do feel like Nintendo has crossed a crucial threshold the last few years where their reliance on established IP has become toxic. In the past, I never felt like Nintendo relied too heavily on IP, because the games introduced fresh concepts. However, most of the iterations on Wii U and 3DS have been polished, but very "safe."

      That Captain Toad game is a perfect example. I can't believe they're making a full game based off of a mini-game that was arguably the worst part of another game that itself was a minor evolution of another game. Hyrule Warriors is pure fan-service--they're just slapping the Zelda name on another game. Another big example is what they did with NSMB. NSMBWii and DS represented the glorious return of 2D Mario and were huge hits. But U and 2 and came off as shameless cash-ins.

      I don't think they should go third party, but I do think they either need to focus on a single platform or invest heavily in personnel or new studios. Right now, it's clear that they are overextended and cannot offer a consistent flow of software. If they hired more developers or acquired more studios and/or focused on one platform, I think they could offer a much better product.