Hey Nintendo Fans!

Are you guys tired of Nintendo's under powered consoles or are you ok with them being at the bottom of the barrel tech wise? I was just curious what you guys think because Nintendo has been at the visual bottom since The Wii(Gamecube was in the middle).
Think back to SNES vs Genesis and how much better the SNES ports looked than the Genesis, did that matter to you at all?

Other urls found in this thread:

vg247.com/2013/08/07/bayonetta-2-working-with-perfectionist-nintendo-is-unnerving-says-inaba/
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

I think Nintendo makes fun games.

Wii U had first party titles running at 1080/60. PS4 struggles to achieve that same feat with their own in-house games.
Raw power means nothing if you're just making unnecessary steam.

Nintendo and other console makers should just focus on their extensive IP and offer direct sales of their services on PC instead of attempting to keep their base unit hardware market alive. It'd be easily a 10x increase in reaching potential gamers that otherwise won't bother to throw money at a specific gaming device.

Not really. I've never really cared for graphics. I just like good games.

This. The games are fun and that's all that matters.

I mean sure, the better hardware could give us better graphics but that thought doesn't keep me away from playing their games.

The Wii U didn't hurt so much as far as being behind in tech.

But the Switch is pissing me off with all of its half-steps. Worse, the inevitable Smash port is STILL going to look like trash. I can't even bear to take Snapshots for all the jaggies, and I took a shitton in Melee.

given the direction other consoles have gone, I'm happy nintendo does their own thing. Consoles are barely consoles anymore, just underpowered PCs.

As long as they give me something different from PC and other consoles with good performance it's all good with me

wii u is literally worse than switch for graphics, especially regarding jaggies.

Stop you evil sonyboy. Nintendo makes fun games with soul and gameability. You would never understand what any of this means.

Nah, I have all consoles except switch(Not buying until they announce a NEW Punch Out game) and game on PC,

what a convincing falseflag

Well I doubt that they're gonna update the models, regardless.

what?

I've been fine with it for years and I'm still fine with it, Nintendo consistently makes good games, year after year, and that's why I buy the consoles, not for graphics. I have a PC for anything I want to look decent, PS4 and Xbox are better than Switch tech wise but theyre still trash

Nintendo games usually have an excelent Art direction, look at pic related a 2010 Wii game and aside from the jaggies it still looks good.

I'm not tired of consoles being underpowered because I have a PC for games that require power. Also graphics wise games look the same now that they did in the PS2/GC era. TVs got bigger, then we jumped to HD so pixel density per inch stayed basically the same.

well, nice to see this thread off to a cordial start.
Art Direction is what dictates what makes a game look good in my opinion. You can have bleeding edge tech realistic hyper graphics, but is it going to hold up in 10 years? as opposed to a non realistic art style that still looks pretty 25 years from now.
So no, being underpowered is not that big a deal. the only thing that bothers me about hardware is how much games can be made for it.
Also computer optimization being a lost art makes me sad, when you could have a lot more games theoretically running very well even on underpowered hardware relative to the market if big companies where not trying to shit them out ASAP

Wii U only had like 2 games running at native 1080p and 1 of them was a remaster

Yeah, because EVERYONE has a computer worthy of playing said games.

I forget, you all have a hard time connecting dots after consuming so much soy. Okay, lemme spell it out:

Even with the one stage of resolution boost that may or may not occur between Smash Wii U and its port to the Switch, the jaggies will still be noticeable and I very much doubt that Nintendo will allow the expense of updating the stage and character models to look smooth (especially considering that keeping the Wii U graphics would make online play smoother).

If you had a lick of brain matter, I wouldn't have had to write that giant sentence out.

hey Andy sweetie

>caring about technical prowess over artstyle

fucking faggot.

Did you arrive to Sup Forums while waiting for your resetera account?

if graphics didn't matter to people then everyone will still be playing Pong

Wow this post...
>Muh jaggies
>Muh soy meme
>Muh 9000 iq
Stay with Xbox plz.

im playing mario sunshine on wii u's home menu, and sometimes the a/b/x/y controls seem to swap themselves after a level randomly. does the game normally do that? also sunshine has bad controls.

Why can't you have both? Do you prefer the look of Rayman on PS1 or Rayman Legends on PC? Could Rayman Legends be achieved on PS1?

I'm no graphics whore. I haven't bought a top of the line gpu in a decade but more often then not, I wish nintendo's stuff was just a little bit stronger. Animal Crossing has always looked bad for the time despite the fixed camera angle and relatively small map it has to render. The GC and 3DS ones look okay but I wish instead of supporting 3D, the 3DS just had a higher resolution instead. A Link Between Worlds also looks ugly as shit on the 3DS and it's not just the art style.

Usually mario games look good but odyssey on the Switch definitely looks worse from having larger worlds. BotW has good assets and art style but the LoD is bad compared to the view distance so you end up with Oblivion tier distant objects.

Yes I am sick of how weak their hardware is but I also appreciate that their shit is cheap so I'm willing to put up with it

For graphics I just play PC games. If I just want to play a fun game without worrying about graphics I play Nintendo games. It's really Sony and Microsoft who shouldn't have a place in the market since they lack both powerful hardware compared to PC and fun games compared to Nintendo.

>Wii U had first party titles running at 1080/60

Yeah, like two games. Everything else was 720p/60fps with upscaled 1080p, just like PS4 games except Wii U games looks like slightly improved 360 game

bruh Rayman 1 still looks like a fucking dream even today I don't know what the fuck you're smoking.

I didn't say it looked bad, I said which looks better.

artstyle is better than graphics. This isn't synonymous with graphics > gameplay you fucking faggot

You nintendo fags should stick with your 3ds shits then. Nintendo does make good games but its time for them to up their shit. Fucking retards being satisfied with crappy ass devices

nigga, just save up, it's only like $400 for a decent pc

thats a matter of opinion don't you think.

I'd honestly prefer they'd just stick to making games.

PC gamer but Nintendo is good for kids and general fun. Also like their IPs. Only consoles I buy are Nintendo.

At first I thought you were joking but then I realized you actually are this retarded. People still play games with art styles from the 80s.

>prefers artstyle over graphics
>directs him to a game with neither

How are you playing on the home menu?

>You nintendo fags should stick with your 3ds shits then.
nah i'll play my switch and multiple GOTYs

if you use wii U usb helper, select gamecube games are available to download, just supply the .iso. and install through wup installer

Revisiting many Nintendo games from past era with nice art direction: always pleasant, Wind Waker in its original form still holds up, maybe Twilight Princess not too much but whatever, not to mention that it keeps control perfectly.

Revisiting many PS2 games praised to look like reality back then with their realistic artstyle: they look atrocious and are usually very stiff to control.

I know that the power doesn't mean only the graphics but also the physics and what the world around you could actually do bu whatever, as long as the quality of their game is that I'm fine with it.

>are you ok with them being at the bottom of the barrel tech wise?
I never really cared or noticed. Super Mario 64 didn't impress me when it came out. Neither did Ocarina of Time. Neither did any SNES or NES games. I REALLY don't understand these "Nintendo used to have powerful consoles" people, since I've played games from all of their systems and was never impressed by anything they did. Ever.
>Think back to SNES vs Genesis and how much better the SNES ports looked than the Genesis, did that matter to you at all?
They both looked average to terrible to me. Nothing impressive on either system. So naturally neither's graphics mattered to me at all.

I grew up playing games based on gameplay, and that hasn't changed. Just like how I play RPG's based on if I enjoy the battle system or not.

Ok, what's your opinion?
You like this one better?

I like Nintendo because it's nice to have a break from some of the more serious blood and gore type games and just have a colorful fun game to refresh

Oh, so you pirated it.

supply the iso, either rip your own or get it elsewhere.

No, pong's gameplay can get boring. What kind of fucking statement is that "if everyone didn't care about graphics, they would stay with the same gameplay style forever" what a idiot.

I care more about library than anything else, so no that doesn't really bother me
Also I'm more of a retrofag than anything, so graphics are the exact last thing I worry about since most of my time is spent with PS1 and SNES games

The thing is Nintendo will never look past the graphics issue. Having more power isn't better just for graphics, it's better because it broadens the possibility of what can be developed and made to run. Their hardware is so shit that their consoles come with what? 32gb max storage?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>filters

Modern "high performance" consoles are the equivalent of cheaply made PCs, running games at very poor framerates, and it's all in service of graphical fidelity. And I don't know why - is anybody out there seriously still impressed by graphics?
When was the last time a game made you go WOOWW just because it had lots of polygons?
And I don't mean a game genuinely looking good because it has a dramatic style or something, and puts graphical tech to good use to create a certain look that's really memorable. I just mean raw graphical fidelity, the ability to push polygons on the screen.
I don't even think kids who've grown up in the social media age give a shit. We're surrounded by flawless lifeless computer animation every day. I'm pretty sure the only ones who care are sony and microsoft investors who think that dumb people are impressed by graphics.

>720p/60fps with upscaled 1080p, just like PS4 games

PS4 games getting 60FPS

LOL

Honestly yeah. I wish they did have better hardware. It would help them get more games and make their current ones look even better. Don't know what's with the faggots itt who are ok with mediocrity.

>filters

vg247.com/2013/08/07/bayonetta-2-working-with-perfectionist-nintendo-is-unnerving-says-inaba/

To summarize for people that don't want to read:
>Bayo 2 Devs: "We upped the graphics to cover up a glitch in the gameplay that was hard to work on"
>Nintendo: "No, fuck that, change the graphics back to normal, and work on fixing the glitch"
>Bayo 2 Devs: "But, this is how normal third party developers deal with these problems! You can't actually expect us to fix glitches!"
>Nintendo: "We can and do, fix it!"
>Bayo 2 Devs: "You fucking perfectionists!"

Nintendo isn't lazy, unlike third parties.

I just started playing The Last of Us on PS3 for the first time and it did blow me away with how great it looks.

>filters
good god that looks like ass

I care more that the controllers still don't have analog triggers

Visual fidelity doesn't matter to me at all.

because high end graphics are expensive, and it's not even expensive in the creative department, it's just an expensive slog to get the models up to scratch that eats up a huge portion of the budget for something that, in the end, doesn't actually make the game look any better unless the game's visual style actually required that level of graphics work.

>It would help them get more games and make their current ones look even better
You must be just a game collector. I'm a real gamer so I prefer fun games to more games

This is sad. Good for Nintendo

/Or this one?

THATS A MATTER OF OPINION, DON'T YOU THINK? YOU DUMB MOTHERFUCKER.

play it again in 10 years.

It's fine if Nintendo themselves focus more on artstyle but what I want is more 3rd party games for Switch. Alot of companies don't bother porting stuff to Nintendo platforms because it takes so much to get it up and running on such weak hardware. I'd rather pay more for graphical fidelity than the pointless HD rumble and whatever sensors that only Nintendo will use. Have they even used those functions outside of 1-2 Switch?

low effort bait

Consoles have gotten powerful enough that there's no reason a fun game can't run well enough to be enjoyable.

So you want the switch to abandon portability and to just be another home console box like PS4 and Xbox1? Why not just buy those?

This is getting nowhere, I asked for an opinion and got nothing, so I will take it as fact that Legends looks much better than Rayman.

jaggies has nothing to do with models, it's entirely to do with resolution and anti-aliasing, so I still have no idea why you brought up models?

Not really. I have a monster of a PC for gramphics. For plain old fun I have the switch.

what a fucking retard

you ever think that maybe there's more to a game than just LOOKING GOOD?

I'll take 'PC Gaming' for $2,000, Alex.
Answer: "THIS is the last thing developers should EVER do."

I mean fuck man, you're just demanding that developers throw away any and all profits they can get. PC gamers are the most FICKLE graphics whores on the fucking planet. Most devs would go bankrupt in a year trying to make PC gamers happy.

I want to play Nintendo's games. I hate having to buy Nintendo's hardware just to play their games.

And don't give me that bullshit "home console box". They could've put a more powerful gpu in the Switch instead of the useless controllers and kept the portability.

I know you were trying to come off as smarter than you are, but all you did was prove to everyone that you're a ten year old.

>I want to play Nintendo's games.
you literally just said you want 3rd party games

>I hate having to buy Nintendo's hardware just to play their games.
I hate having to breathe and eat to live but hey, it is what it is

I want both.

>bottom of the barrel tech wise?

What are you babbling? The technology in the Switch is much newer and technically superior to that in the competition.

>I want to play Nintendo's games.
>I want to play games on a different device, ergo third party games

Pick one, and only one.

>Are you guys tired of Nintendo's under powered consoles or are you ok with them being at the bottom of the barrel tech wise?
I just recently bought the most powerful dedicated gaming handheld to ever grace the market.
That's pretty neat and exciting if you ask me and a huge step up from the previous handhelds I had.

then buy both, poorfag

Then buy both?
Don't say that's too expensive, that's the same price for a powerful device with Nintendo games on it as well.

Nah, I'll stick with Soul Calibur 2, Star Craft, Vampire Savior & Magic Knight Rayearth, Misadventures of Tron Bonne, Crystalis, Alex Kidd, Batman: Arkham City, God of War... even Blue Dragon, SMT Strange Journey, and Xenoblade.

Why can I only want one or the other?

I have a PS4 Pro, PC, and Switch.

>Don't say that's too expensive, that's the same price for a powerful device with Nintendo games on it as well
This just makes no fucking sense.

Don't really care about graphics, I have a capable PC too and most games I play on it are indies with low requirements anyway, AAA is shit.

Of course not. He games on PC exclusively.

>Nintendo devices are cheap because of poor graphics
>"I want better graphics"
>Then expect to pay more
>"That makes no sense"

It makes perfect sense. Either buy two devices, or a single device that plays Nintendo games with good graphics that's close to the same price as both of those devices combined. You cannot have a perfect world, if you can't stomach a world with $500 Nintendo toys, then it's a world you don't want.

I'm just saying what I want, fag. You don't think it would've been better for Nintendo to do away with the HD Rumble and sensors in the joy cons and put the Tegra X2 in there so New Donk City doesn't stutter like a bitch?

Please, most Nintendo games are hardly more demanding than any given flash game on facebook.

Nintendo will always put out "entertainment systems" not high end computers. For better (Wii) or for worse (Wii U)

>so New Donk City doesn't stutter like a bitch?

What are you talking about?

Nobody is asking Nintendo to grab the attention of graphics whores. Their hardware specs are so relatively low that they could reach out and grab tons of market share from shitty flash/indie games with Nintendo IP. They'd even be able to pull in money from long dead games run on emulators by reselling them over and over again. And they could even do it through their own pay service portal.

New Donk City only stutters on handheld mode, which is expected. It runs perfectly fine on console mode.