Zelda was a 2015 game

>Zelda Breath of the Wild gameplay was revealed in 2014
>Release was supposed to be in 2015
>Nintendo held it hostage for 2 extra years just so it could launch with Switch
>The graphics are still 2 generations old and probably scaled back for Switch and its portable mode
>The hardware is still 2 generations old
>The game and hardware are still full priced

youtube.com/watch?v=SECWlFInyFM

I like Zelda's gameplay. But why should Nintendo get away with such anti-consumer practices without a major backlash by gamers? Why should gamers reward them when they gimped the Zelda experience just to sell more hardware?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=ao47RQvCZwg&t=405
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

>games never get delayed to make sure they aren't shit
God I love how polished Todd makes his games.
And Ubisoft.

Instead of crying about it why don't you play a better game? This new Zelda is a Skyrim ripoff. Just play Skyrim.

The funny thing is. it will still be the undeniable game of the year. Sure Horizon will look better, but it can't compare to Breath of the GOAT.

>This new Zelda is a Skyrim ripoff. Just play Skyrim.

underage detected and you can't rip off a genre.

It wasn't delayed to make sure it wasn't shit. It was delayed to downgrade the graphics so it would work on the new portable console they were selling and so that it would launch with it.

But that's not funny at all. That makes it sadder. Nintendo made a great game a worse looking game just to sell more plastic.

>be Nvidia
>Tegra sells like shit
>first party Shield tablet sells like shit
>see AMD get consoles
>have idea
>go to Nintendo and offer to make a Nintendo Tablet with the next generation Tegra X1
>comes out underperforming and overheating
>have to have a fan inside it, and a fan in the dock, just to run at speeds 75% of what you promised
>have to run at a piddling 307mhz in mobile, less than half the docked speed
>have to use 720p screen to have even 30 FPS stable
>still overheats anyways, using 20 watts of power
>now a year past original ship date, successor Tegra P1 already out but incompatible due to Denver2 arm cores
>know people are going to buy it anyways because muh nintendo muh nvidia

The fuck are you even smoking? There's no way in hell that first demo was gonna be running on a fucking Wii U.

And there's no way Switch's portable mode could give you as good a graphical experience and WiiU's standard mode.

>Sony releases a piece of portable hardware comparable to a weak version of their previous home console
>people declare it an amazing piece of hardware (although other factors end up working against it)
>Nintendo releases a piece of portable hardware comparable to a weak version of the home consoles from the beginning of the generation
>"BUT THEY SAID YOU CAN PLAY IT ON A TV SCREEN SO IT DOESN'T COUNT THAT IT'S FACTUALLY PORTABLE AND HAS ITS OWN SCREEN"

To be fair the Wii U was based off GPU tech from 2008 for some god awful reason

The Swith is way more powerful than the Pii U retard...

What most likely happened is that they planned Zelda for the Wii U in 2015, then delayed it to 2016 to polish it some more. At the same time, Nintendo decided to push the NX / Switch and so held it hostage for a year. I'm certain the game was already content complete by E3 2016 and it could have easily been out by October / November.

By the way, that Mario Oddyssey game? I'm pretty sure it was going to be a Wii U 2017 title, if they had not decided to kill the system and release the Switch this early. They said during the Switch presentation the game was basically done and was just held back for Holiday 2017 to space out the releases.

Oddyssey looks like a Wii U game in every aspect.

The Switch has a 720p screen, which is the resolution at which BotW is rendered on Wii U, and they both run at 30 fps. No announcement has been made about the portable version being any different from the home version on the Switch aside from it running at a lower resolution (720p vs 900p).

>Hardware generation complaints
Hardware generations are only an existing issue because of shit consoles. The companies behind these shit consoles are making agreements behind closed doors so they can both make money because fuck giving the consumer the best product possible. This results in a gimped "generation" which holds back the entire industry.

Sonybronies hold back the industry more than anything else. Fuck consoles.

>implying anyones going to read a giant wall of muh sony deflection

It actually isn't

While comparing GPU's flop to flop isn't really top accurate, the Switch in mobile has 157 gflop and docked is 393 gflop

Wii U has 352 gflop

>No announcement
Lol, you think Nintendo is going to announce that? We don't need announcements. We have screen shots of big changes in detail, lighting, and more.

>muh sony deflection
You didn't read all right.

Are you stupid or retarded?

Switch is 750 GFlops

Considering Switch is the home/mobile hybrid we've been expecting, I think the specs are passable. I don't like the controller pricing, though. Do the pro controllers also have the new HD rumble? Because that might actually be interesting in horror.

Are you saying they are intentionally having a shitty launch line up?

>>The graphics are still 2 generations old and probably scaled back for Switch and its portable mode

Have you not seen any screenshots? Switch version looks way better than the Wii U version.

That's a relief, but GFLOPs aren't everything. A hidden performance boost comes from the cartridges.

The Switch has the same specs either docked or undocked you stupid fucking retard. The only thing that changes when undocked is the resolution just to save battery life. Kys.

No it isn't

It's 256 shaders with a 768mhz docked clock and 307mhz mobile clock

It's not Tegra P1, it's X1

Wrong again, Nvidia GPUs are way more power efficient than AYYMD HOUSEFIRES and have very advanced features that the Wii U simply does not support

Yes they do.

If their Christmas is barren, probably not. However if they are hiding some games that are ready for Christmas, it makes sense; they want the Zelda out and to officially abandon WiiU before the fall.

I'm not sure he's saying that but I'll say it. Nintendo wants to space things out because they don't have big third party support.

>Switch version looks way better than the Wii U version.
You retarded? The change was made long ago. But even with today's build, the only thing the Switch has is higher resolution when docked.

Wrong again, Nvidia GPUs have very advanced features than Wii U simply does not have

Conservative Rasterization
Rasterizer Ordered Views
Tiled Resources Tier 3

You're so fixated on GFLOPs, you don't know shit about architecture differences

AYYMD GPUs are inefficient as hell and wastes all it's rated GFLOPs

>Nintendo held it hostage for 2 extra years just so it could launch with Switch
>Implying not releasing a game for 2 years is financially viable
>Implying it won't still sell more on Wii U

Get rid of your tinfoil hat.

Is that why the Switch version has modern graphics while the Wii U version does not?

youtube.com/watch?v=ao47RQvCZwg&t=405

Tegra runs Unreal Engine 4, can your Pii U do this?

NO

>the only thing the Switch has is higher resolution when docked.
Haven't you seen the draw distance and color comparisons? Then there is the overblown on WiiU and the Switch boasts stable fps, even when handling heavy explosions.

Overblown bloom*

It wasn't delayed for 2 years just for the switch. It was delayed once at the start of 2015 in order to rework the game, as the dev team had never made an open world before and had come up with a shit load of ideas to make it better at the end of it's development. The team was unhappy with the version they had made, so they delayed it to more or less start over, only keeping base systems and shit.

The second delay was to port it to Switch. In November of 2015 they said it would be a 2016 title, but in March of 2016 it officially became a multiplat. Aonuma has gone on record stating March 2016 as the official decision to port to Switch.

Good lord, that instant lag as he walks up to the cliff

>better colors
>improved draw distance' so no exagerated pop in lile in the Pii U version
>better sound qualIty
>better framerate
>load times are way shorter

Yes, the wii U version is so superior!!!

>stalling a game for two years is not viable
It's more viable than selling it on a dead console and leaving your next console barren.
Hopefully they did use the time to develop the game further.

I love Nintendo, but the Vita really should have shut down the 3DS. It had a waaaaaay better launch, online support that wasn't babby tier, a great screen comparable if not better than what mobile was offering, and two (2) proper analog sticks.

Obviously the library dried up almost instantly and the memory cards killed online sales, but everything else shat all over every iteration of the Fischer Price handheld.

>It's more viable than selling it on a dead console and leaving your next console barren.
Or you could, you know, release the game, and port it 2 years later to the new system. It worked with The Last of Us

I dont care. It means the game will be as polished as possible and not rushed like every other big title

Never forget.

Not that guy but it does look awfully similar to Skyrim at least compared with contemporary vidya.

The difference honestly seems pretty negligible, and that sound thing is silly.

Enjoy your 300 dollar zelda machine

If they released Zelda couldn't be delayed anymore, since it's also a Wii U title, if Mario Oddyssey came out during launch, they'd have no system seller during the holiday season, user.

>inb4Xenoblade2isasystemseller

The new Zelda is totally not Skyrim, guys

Catch phrases don't change the fact that they delayed it to sell an unrelated future product, not to make it a better game.

>The Last Guardian gameplay was revealed in 2007
>Release was supposed to be in 2011
>Sony held it hostage for 5 extra years just so it could launch with the PS4
>The graphics are still a generation behind scaled back for the PS3
>Still fully priced

>Final Fantasy 15 gameplay was revealed in 2006
>Release was supposed to be before 2013
>Square Enix held it hostage for 4 extra years just so it could launch with the PS4
>Had to released to recoup the development costs. Still not fully completed. Wait for the story patch(es)!
>Still fully priced

>Persona 5 gameplay was revealed in 2013
>Release was supposed to be in 2014
>Sony held it hostage for 2 extra years just so it could launch with the PS4
>The graphics are still a generation behind scaled back for the PS3
>Still fully priced

...

>2 generations

No, they delayed it because the Wii U didnt sell enough, nor would Zelda persuade enough people to buy a Wii U

>>The graphics are still 2 generations old and probably scaled back for Switch and its portable mode
Don't tell me you ACTUALLY believe the Wii U is more powerful than the switch, user.

>Muh sony...
Every time

you fucking spoiled child. The game ran like shit on the Wii U and wasnt finished being localized in 2016, Why the fuck do you think it was ready to be released in 2015.

You have not a single clue on what you're talking about.

Also, Wii U uses VLIW5 not GCN, completely different architecture. It's focused on instruction level parallelism rather than SIMD. Very very different than current AMD GPU's.

>without a major backlash

Where have you been for the past month? We've been tearing Nintendo a new asshole since switch's unveiling for failing to produce competent hardware again under their delusion that they aren't competing with the other companies despite doing just that.

I've played their shit longer than most of this boards been alive, I'm done with it. Nintendo fails as a company and fails to know their fanbase for the last time within my tolerance. They're so out of touch its cringier than Tak Fuji's wan mirrion troops presentation.

i have no doubt the WiiU is more powerful than portable Switch mode, no doubt at all

The Foxconn leak says otherwise.

And to elaborate, the reason why AMD moved so far away from VLIW wasn't because it's bad at graphics, infact it was far more efficient than contemporary Nvidia architectures (that current Nvidia archs have deep roots in). They moved away because it was a terrible architecture for GPGPU. Nvidia had just solidified that market as being viable, and AMD wanted to compete in it.

Link to leak with substantiated evidence that's not "Anonymouse source!"? I'm not them, I just don't take bullshit for proof without evidence.

If the Switch was really twice as powerful (or more) than the Wii U, it could take a 720p Wii U game and run it at 1080p without breaking a sweat.

BotW is 900p on the Switch.

End.
of.
story.

Square Enix and Atlus aren't Sony.

It's still the same as GCN, it's very inefficient and there's many stalls in the pipeline that kills performance and it does not run at max utilization and it's worse than GCN in every aspect

See, you don't know shit, kindly fuck off

VLIW is not efficient at all, don't be a moron
It's crap in graphics and crap in compute

Nvidia is significantly more power efficient than AYYMD HOUSEFIRES

Just Google "switch Foxconn leak", user. It takes 10 seconds. It got nearly everything right. It only got three things wrong: 1080p screen, 4g model, and a hole in the back of the dock for air to vent. These were probably wrong because the guy just fucked up and couldn't tell it was only 720p, thought the MicroSD slot was a SIM card slot, and the hole was for air not just just wires. Everything else has been 100% accurate so. Even down to battery capacities and the neon Joy-Cons.

>completely ignoring the SCDs
It got so much wrong
Foxconn is probably just manufacturing parts of the Switch. The guy got the parts right that they were manufacturing and lied about everything else.

Idc senpai I play games for fun lol :^)

There's no fan in the dock.

Simple. Japs are the kikes of the east.

Based on the Foxconn leak it's lining up with calculated P1 specs

...

A 921mhz P1 is still less powerful than a 1ghz X1

Poor Wii U sales are the consequence for not finishing it on time.

It doesnt matter if its P1 or X1. The game is built for the Wii U. Same way consoles hold back PC graphics, the Wii U is holding back Switch graphics. Which is fair since the switch games are ports of Wii U games. We wont really get to see how much more powerful the Switch is until a game is built from the ground up for the Switch.

You cant cut down the tree at the top. And even if you could the animation would look bad. And even worse when you chop it into fire wood.

>two years worth of extra polish

It will be worth it, just 37 days left

>the Wii U is holding back Switch graphics
What about framedrops don't you understand?

If the game wasn't tasking the system to the max, there wouldn't be framedrops.

Yeah I bought a Vita before a 3DS or any of the current gen home consoles. I was so ready for it to firmly take hold of the market. But once I played through the free PS+ games that I liked on it, Persona, and a couple indie titles better suited to handheld than console or PC, I had nothing to do with it anymore and ended up selling it to put towards my New 3DS XL, which has been my main gaming platform for two or three years now. And it feels like a 20 year old fucking system.

>But why should Nintendo get away with such anti-consumer practices without a major backlash by gamers?

Because the game under-performs on Wii U and is so much better on Switch? I wait for games on PC so this is nothing new.

>watch video
>"are you sure this'll be released next year?"
>yes

I'm sorry your mom made you go to bed after the Switch presentation and was at hot yoga when preorders sold out. Hopefully once you get one, you can stop being a bitter butt blasted nerd.

Wow this is literally the dumbest thing Ive read in a while. This is why i hate end users as a developer. You have no what goes into porting a program over.

>taking inspiration from an insanely popular title for a game coming out half a decade later

Hurr Skyrim is just fantasy GTA

The success of Skyrim among the normies was Aonuma's realization that people in the casual era was still interested in the experience of the original Zeldas. After OOT and MM they were still open world games, but each entry had more focus on history and had too much hand-holding so the experience of getting lost was forgoten in the saga, and Nintendo thought that was good at first.

>delayed game
>a good sign
>ever

Wow this is literally the vaguest retort I've read in a while. This is why I hate marketers as an enduser. You have no idea what goes into waging a proper argument

By that logic, Ocarina of Time should be a 1995 game.

It's not about Switch's ability to run it. It's about making the game run on both Wii U and Switch. Are you actually this stupid or are you getting paid to mouth breathe?

I feel like it would have made more sense to wait until the holiday season to release the console along with a bigger, better launch line up.

You talk about proper arguments when you have no capability of understanding how software development works. fucking pathetic.

If the Switch could run it at 1080p it would

Are you suggesting they arbitrarily downgraded it to 900p for no reason, when games like MK8 had no problem running at 1080p on the Switch?

BotW runs at 900p because it can't run at 1080p.

>Tells significant difference between GPUs
>"But muh resolution"

you're a fucking idiot. the game dev side bears responsibility for that, too. you can have inefficient code (the kind you would have to use to have a game on two separate console generations at the same time) that causes framedrops too. do you really think your PS3 was being pushed to the max in 2007 and in 2012 and it just magically took five years for that max potential to be much higher graphic fidelity? that shit happens because of developers getting better at working with the hardware

Why are there so many idiots in this thread. Let me help you understand how software development works in a small example.
>make game for wii u
>wii u can only handle 100 sprites on screen before stack overflow
>set it to use the heap after 100 sprites
>suddenly port game to switch
>try to run 101 sprites since switch is more powerful
>even though switch is 3x more powerful game runs 5 times worse because its using the heap
Theres a world of difference between an engine built for a weak console and a game build from the ground up for something closer to current gen.

When you cap your framerate at 30 fps it first of all implies that the hardware couldn't handle anywhere close to 60 fps. When it dips below 30 fps it means it couldn't handle 30 fps at that moment because the hardware couldn't make frames that fast. It has nothing to do with the software. They've had 3 years to optimize the game, Switch has been in development for at least that long

Your "The Switch will be good guys, just wait 3 years for an actual Switch game" is complete 100% marketer bullshit. While games might look better than BotW, they will either run at a lower resolution or a lower framerate in order to do so, since that game is tasking the system near its max already. The fact that it originated on the Wii U is utterly irrelevant

THEY DOWNGRADED IT ON PURPOSE BECAUSE IT HAS TO RUN ON MUCH OLDER, WEAKER HARDWARE AND THE CODE IS INEFFICIENT FOR SCALING TO 1080p!!! STOP BEING A DENSE IDIOT YOU FUCKING CRETIN

uh is it not also possible the the switch version also has higher graphical fidelity as well?