Wii gamers not hardcore enough for Silent Hill...

WN: What is the future of the Silent Hill series?

AY: We' re making Silent Hill 5 for next-gen consoles. Are there any other platforms besides that? [laughter]

WN: There' s the Wii.

AY: Ah, the Wii. Wiiiiiiiiii... Silent Hill Wii. Can we do it? Will players like it?

WN: Yeah! There' s a lot of potential there, using the remote as a flashlight, or a knife...

AY: Yeah, there' s potential.

WN: But no plans.

AY: No plans. The Wii user isn' t a hardcore user.

LINK

LOL

I think the wii will rarely see big budget games, the wii' s reputation has determined its fate and software sales reinforce that since the same game on 360 sales much more, it' s obvious, granny and pappy won' t buy devil may cry 4 or resident evil 5 and the wii control isn' t revolutionary to allow those people to pick up the game, it' s not only about the control, the gameplay itself is complex, it requires reflexes and in occasions a lot of thinking (think zelda), so at the end, even if the controls are different it will appeal to the SAME people who know how to use a regular controller ...

so does the wii really expend the video game market the way it' s meant to be?? I don' t think so.

Listen to the wise

Wii users arent hardcore enough for Viva Pinãta.

I dont want to celebrate, I want to sell you hate.

I think another problem is that in games like Silent Hill or Resident Evil for that matter, the setting is very important, and it can be done prettier on another console.

If i could choose between a pretty game or a mediocre looking one, id choose the pretty one, and i bet the Wii mote wont put much to the table in a Resident Evil kinda game

Resident Evil looked pretty damn good on that ol' Gamecube!

Good news, a Port or version of Silent hill with tacked-on controls is something most Wii owners would rather not see.

Currently playing:
Korg DS 10 (ds) /  Metal Slug 7 (ds)
Rhythm Heaven (ds) /  Fire Emblem (ds)
Super Stardust HD (psn) /  Virtua Fighter 5 (360)
FSX (P

WTF !! He doesnt know what he is talking about . VF is ' HARDCORE' ..

Your dam right, just Grabbed a newly released Zelda: Phantom Hourlass to keep me busy on the plane journey to a VF5 tournament.

Thats Hardcore

BB in a week or soo.

Currently playing:
Korg DS 10 (ds) /  Metal Slug 7 (ds)
Rhythm Heaven (ds) /  Fire Emblem (ds)
Super Stardust HD (psn) /  Virtua Fighter 5 (360)
FSX (P

This is exactly why the Wii is lacking any good 3rd Party games. Developers aren' t taking the damn thing seriously.

Stupid ***ing developers!

I guess it is kind of Nintendo' s fault for giving the Wii such a family friendly reputation...

The people behind Fatal Frame disagree then. This game is developed by a Western company now, isn' t it? Except for the music then I assume.

I sometimes wonder though...what IS a hardcore gamer? To me, games like Silent Hill etc aren' t hardcore. I mean, there are easy settings that make the game playable for everyone. When I think of hardcore I think of Ikaruga for example or shmups in general. Games were easy mode already is hard. And players dedicated to fighting games are another hardcore category to me. Ninja Gaiden is another example then.

Resident Evil looked pretty damn good on that ol' Gamecube!

Definetly the prettiest game last gen yeah! But compare it to Gears of War, Killzone 2 and Mass Effect, its a ancient history.

Not if you' re the kind of person who can appreciate amazing art direction more than the amount of polygons.

Not if you' re the kind of person who can appreciate amazing art direction more than the amount of polygons.

Art direction is directly affected by the Polygon count. Say you could play RE4 either on the Wii, at its best power, or you could play it on the PS3 or 360 optimised and updated, a remake if you will.

The game would be a huge amount prettier on the later two!

Sorry Vx, but best looking game last gen was Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory. And RE4 wasnt " artistic" or stylized, it was meant to be a realistic-looking small EU village.

I dont want to celebrate, I want to sell you hate.

Sorry Vx, but best looking game last gen was Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory. And RE4 wasnt " artistic" or stylized, it was meant to be a realistic-looking small EU village.

I well say RE was cooler looking the Chaos Theory, i guess its what you favor, there is nothing really setting either apart much.

I didnt call anything artistic or stylized, neither did Gin, Art direction is so also just subtle things.

HOLY SHIT!

Art direction is directly affected by the Polygon count.

No, the concept art used for games are ideas of what a game world should look like and isn' t affected by polygons or technology at all. What technology can do is help developers make the image clearer but the core idea is always stronger than the technology that realises it. That' s why I (but obviously not you) can appreciate the visuals in games that are several years old.

And RE4 wasnt " artistic" or stylized, it was meant to be a realistic-looking small EU village.

Dumbass! Art direction isn' t just the overall style in terms of how realistically looking it is, it' s also how every object in the game is designed. Even though a game is realistic you still have to design things, the houses, the characters, the clothes and stuff. You have to choose what kind of look you want on them. And the combination of choices will together create the full artistic impression the game gives.

No, the concept art used for games are ideas of what a game world should look like and isn' t affected by polygons or technology at all. What technology can do is help developers make the image clearer but the core idea is always stronger than the technology that realises it. That' s why I (but obviously not you) can appreciate the visuals in games that are several years old.

So id like you to make a new game, on the original doom engine, where the art direction isnt suffering because of low polygon, or should i say no polygon count.

By your words, a game need not have changed from 10 years ago, since it was all fine and dandy to you?


Besides your an idiot, and putting words in my mouth i never said. I can appreiciate old games, i just dont appreciate new games looking like they were made 5 years ago.

I haven' t played many games on the old doom engine.
But let' s take some games you probably think looks like crap... hmmm...
Ape Escape (PS1), Soul Calibur (DC), Zelda OOT (N64), Swat 3 (PC), Guardian Heroes (Saturn), Nights into Dreams (Saturn), Starcraft (PC), Final Fantasy VII (PS1), Batman (NES), Duck Tales 2 (NES), Castlevania (pick any of the 2D ones), Yoshi' s Island (SNES), Donkey Kong Country (SNES).
All of those games, and many more, impresses me with their visuals still today just as much as the latest games like Gears of War, Bioshock and and Killzone 2 does.
You may think I am a blind fool but I don' t care because it' s to my benefit.
And it' s not related to nostalgy either because I' ve played many really old games for the first time the past two years and I was still impressed by the visuals.

Of course, there is no denying the games would have looked even better on a next-gen console in HD. But to someone like me who appreciates the art more than the technological process of it it wouldn' t have been that much better. Just a slightly better image.

i just dont appreciate new games looking like they were made 5 years ago.

But that' s the thing, why can' t you? Why do you even think about how old a game looks? It can still look good even though it isn' t the latest technology that makes it.

So if a game with the visuals of FFVII was released today, it be just as fine to you as a game with the same art direction with the polygonal count of one of todays games?

You probably wouldnt look at it, since bad graphics = low production value.

I like old games quite a lot. But i dont convince myself they are good looking. How much graphics matters is a personal preference, gameplay is most important, but old games are old games. There is no point in creating new games with old graphics, when you can create new games with great graphics.

So:


new game with old grahics < new game with new great graphics



Provided its the exact same game. If you dont agree your just arguing for the sake of arguing or your fucking insane.

You speak as if technological power = graphics

Maybe you' ll understand if I put it this way
I don' t care about graphics. I care about artistic value.
A new game made on Saturn hardware with great art direction would to me look much better than a new game on 360 hardware with mediocre art direction.
I don' t think a game like Halo 3 looks good at all. Not the slightest. Not because it would be lacking when it comes to technology but because i really despise the art direction in the game.
I think Yoshi' s Island looks marvelous, not because it' s impressive by technology but because the art direction is awesome. IMO Yoshi' s Island > Halo 3.
You don' t have to agree but that is my point of view.

Bottom line: If I' m paying 80$ for a game it damn well better have superior art direction as well as graphical prowess. Of course that' s after the gameplay has proven itself.

VX and gin, you both make good points but have faults in your arguments.

You both seem to think it' s ok to sacrifice the other for what matters more. That' s fine but no one has to sacrifice anything. There are plenty of games with a great graphics as well as style.

VX you' re wrong when you say " art direction is directly affected by polygon counts" . It' s not, anyone who has seen the creative process in making videogames would know the art is made first then they make the models. Obviously the hardware sets the limits, which isn' t sayiong much when you consider that using your logic all games on the same platform would have the same art direction. Which of course is not true.

Gin the flaw in your argument is when you showed a bunch of old hits. They have style but you' re missing the point. If a game was released today selling for 80$ on 360 or PS3, it can have all the style in the world but if it looked and played like FF7, they wouldn' t sell 100 copies. Besides all the games you mentioned were at par or exceeding par for the times.

Part of the appeal of videogames is the immersion. When we were kids playing our first games. There was this thrill that came with controlling objects on the screen. New games that were' t previously possible two years ago. Thats the thrill that many of us seek. It' s the same feeling I got while playing Super Mario 64 for the first time. You won' t get that with games that are 10 years old. I want to see the new shit.

Secondly, you seem to have this notion that you can measure art direction quatitatively and exclusively as if it can stand out on it' s own right. You can' t it' s purely subjective. Not only is it subjective but it has context to the type of game it goes along with. For example, the art direction in my Katamari is piss poor, but it doesn' t matter because it suits the game. Just as the art direction in Yoshi is total shit but it suits the game well anyways. Imagine if Halo 3 had Yoshi' s story art direction. That would suck!.

My point is that there is no such thing as a superior art direction. If it could be measured then it wouldn' t be art. It' s like choosing the right color for a wall. We don' t say this color is superior, we say this color is best for this room, just as this art dirction can be best for this game.

"This is sad. There's no other word for it. The person who invents a way to punch someone in the face over the Internet will make millions from the demand generated by people like this." Youtube comments

I guess you' re right.
Although I would personally not mind paying $80 for a game that looks like a Saturn game if it is good. Of course, if the developers had the ability to make it in HD resolution then you would normally get pissed off because they' re lazy. But on consoles like Wii, DS or PSP there are technical limitations but my experience (visually) wouldn' t be ruined by it even though I knew it could' ve looked much better on another console.
Paying $80 for a 360 game that looks like a Saturn game would bother me though since the developers obviously could have spent more time on details.
It may sound unfair but that' s the way it is.

I guess I judge a games visuals based on an effort/potential ratio and the imagination of the developers instead of judging it based on a quality index of the most recent videogames.

ginjirou why are you argueing with a Graphics whore? And one that doe not even play the best looking games.. (you have the own a killer PC to see the difference between good/decent and the BEST)


I' m glad i can switch From Crysis to Wave racer and respect and enjoy both visual qualities OLD or New, so long as thier smooth have great art-dirction that suit' s the genre/gamestyle im respecting it.

_____________________________


Top 10 most Wanted


1) Super Mario Galaxy (wii)
2) Mario Kart Wii (wii)
3) Yakuza 3 (PS3)
4) Super Smash Bos: Brawl (wii)
5) Crysis (PC)
6) Zak & Wiki (wii)
7) Contra 4 (DS)
8) No More Hero' s (wii)
9) Ninja Gaiden: Dragon Sword (DS)
10) PES8 (wii)

Currently playing:
Korg DS 10 (ds) /  Metal Slug 7 (ds)
Rhythm Heaven (ds) /  Fire Emblem (ds)
Super Stardust HD (psn) /  Virtua Fighter 5 (360)
FSX (P

I don' t think a game like Halo 3 looks good at all. Not the slightest. Not because it would be lacking when it comes to technology but because i really despise the art direction in the game.

Hm, I thought that I was the only one that didn' t actually think Halo 3 looked good. I mean, I can see that there is impressive technology behind it all. Very clean look etc. But the character design and lots of things that I have seen from the environment don' t appeal to me.

I played Killer7 recently and played through Shadow of the Colossus again. While doing so I actually thought that, despite rough edges here and there compared to games now, it' s still possible to think that it looks good. The same goes for Shenmue I think with it' s amount of detail. It sets it apart from other more bland looking games from that time. Windwaker is another good example I think and I assume Twilight Princess is also great when it comes to style.

For me personally, games from the DC on really had the potential to look good enough so immersion doesn' t get lost. Everything more advanced coming after it is almost as a bonus for me but not necessary in itself.

Of course, developers shouldn' t be lazy and try to create the best possible graphics anyway. Well, best suited for the intentions of the game.

My imagination is limitless so I get extremely immersed even when playing Pong
Seriously though, having a big imagination of your own is very good and it can make almost everything very interesting. I prefer to use my own imagination instead of being presented with all the facts and details because that way I can make every experience my own.

For me personally, games from the DC on really had the potential to look good enough so immersion doesn' t get lost

Most Dreamcast looked so good because SEGA back then had the best god-dam art-direction and arcade 60fps smoothness and married them in a (usually) Gorgeous-looking game.

I was driving around the SUZUKA CIRCUIT track in the new GT5 Demo. thinking, Man i remember this track from Dreamcast F355. I switched off my PS3 and loaded DC F355. Still looked f**king great and even smoother than GT5 (no slown down and jerking). Still holds up really well, loads of cars on screen always silky smooth 60fps, shit.. not even racers today do this FFS.

Man i want old SEGA back..

_____________________________


Top 10 most Wanted


1) Super Mario Galaxy (wii)
2) Mario Kart Wii (wii)
3) Yakuza 3 (PS3)
4) Super Smash Bos: Brawl (wii)
5) Crysis (PC)
6) Zak & Wiki (wii)
7) Contra 4 (DS)
8) No More Hero' s (wii)
9) Ninja Gaiden: Dragon Sword (DS)
10) PES8 (wii)

Currently playing:
Korg DS 10 (ds) /  Metal Slug 7 (ds)
Rhythm Heaven (ds) /  Fire Emblem (ds)
Super Stardust HD (psn) /  Virtua Fighter 5 (360)
FSX (P

I' m more of a nostalgic gamer myself. I am always much happier seeing the blocky graphics of Super Smash Bros and Mario 64 than I am many games these days. That' s not to say that I don' t like today' s graphics, because I do, but the old ones remind me of happier times. I can still play Final Fantasy VII and Ocarina of Time and not get a sickening feeling, just as I can enjoy videos of Crysis.

And while many will find these views retarded, I am actually quite proud that I can feel this way. I' d much rather enjoy a game than be put off by it over the most ridiculous of things.

And while many will find these views retarded,

Nope, theirs nothing wrong about your views whatsoever.

Currently playing:
Korg DS 10 (ds) /  Metal Slug 7 (ds)
Rhythm Heaven (ds) /  Fire Emblem (ds)
Super Stardust HD (psn) /  Virtua Fighter 5 (360)
FSX (P

I' m going to make a bold statement here but I think art direction was better before.
Probably because back then when you didn' t have very powerful technology you HAD to have really awesome art direction in order to make a game stand out from other games. The technical limitations forced developers to really put an effort into the artistic parts of creating a game.
Today the art direction is more advanced with more detail but that doesn' t necessarily make it much better. Because today you can simply make a player impressed by the visuals by adding cool effects and just showcasing the technology. On the other hand, bad art direction becomes more evident as the details show much more. But by adding lots of effects and stuff I think they can hide that pretty well.
I think that as time goes developers will have to put more and more effort into art design this generation too since after a while the technological power won' t be as obvious anymore.

Yeah, you need a killer PC with off-brand parts.....

I dont want to celebrate, I want to sell you hate.

ORIGINAL: Virtua fighter 5

I' m glad i can switch From Crysis to Wave racer and respect and enjoy both visual qualities OLD or New, so long as thier smooth have great art-dirction that suit' s the genre/gamestyle im respecting it.

I though you were pissing off for a week? To some " tournament"

average Wii user

Change is inevitable. Except from a vending machine.

Viva La Revolution! erm, I mean Viva La Wii!

Either people are daft or i' m bad at getting what i mean through.

Now just to get it out of the way: Virtua Fighter is a fucking moron and should be tortured indefinetly.

When i say art direction is affected by polygon count its true to a certain extent. If you dont have any polygons to work with, creating a special style will be hard, the more polygons you ahve the preciser you can recreate your vision.

Just answer this question, and just this question.

Two games, with the exact same gameplay, and art direction, one running on a N64 utilizing the machines full potential. The other playing on a PS3 utilizing that consoles full potential, both games released today at the same price point.

The 64 obviously not as detailed as the PS3 one, which would you choose?

More powerful systems help to better realise the art of the game. But yes the art direction is pretty seperate from the driving technology.

Going back I can still play old games and think they look great (for what they were made on).

but Ginj, If you could have resident evil 1 released now for the first time looking like the psx version on the wii and the gcn version for 360/ps3, but were otherwise the same game and same price, which version would you get, assuming you had both wii and ps3/360?

---------------------------------EDIT----------------------------------

So I didn' t see page 2 before posting... oops

NiGHTS into Dreamcast

This is my definite standpoint regarding graphics

I guess I judge a games visuals based on an effort/potential ratio and the imagination of the developers instead of judging it based on a quality index of the most recent videogames.

360 games should look good enough to motivate the hardware it' s running on.
Wii games doesn' t have to look as good because the Wii isn' t as powerful. Of course the games will look less impressive overall but in no way does it make the artistic values any less impressive. It takes a pretty big gap in power between two consoles if it' s going to have any impact on the ability to realise artistic ideas. The gap between the 360 and the Wii isn' t big enough. It' s pretty much HD vs No-HD but apart from that games on both consoles can pretty much achieve the same results when it comes to realising artistic ideas.
If a game is released on both Wii and 360 and they are identical except for the graphics then the 360 version is obviously the best one since the picture will look better.
But if there is a game exclusive to the Wii then the weak graphics won' t affect my enjoyment of the game as long as the art direction is good.

If you don' t like the hardware choices behind the Wii and you can' t live without the latest graphics then I guess you' ll never like the games.
But then you shouldn' t like the 360 either since 360 games will soon look like crap compared to the latest PC games anyway.

There is always a bigger fish but I say that as long as your smaller fish tastes good there is no need to feel dissatisfied.

You seem to like beating around the bush.

Everyone would choose the prettier game if the games are exactly the same in every other department.

So to bring the topic back on track.

If a silent hill Wii game didnt bring anything new to the table it would be pointless to release it since the 360 game and the PS3 version would be better visually!

Truth spoken:

360 games should look good enough to motivate the hardware it' s running on.
Wii games doesn' t have to look as good because the Wii isn' t as powerful. Of course the games will look less impressive overall but in no way does it make the artistic values any less impressive. It takes a pretty big gap in power between two consoles if it' s going to have any impact on the ability to realise artistic ideas. The gap between the 360 and the Wii isn' t big enough. It' s pretty much HD vs No-HD but apart from that games on both consoles can pretty much achieve the same results when it comes to realising artistic ideas.
If a game is released on both Wii and 360 and they are identical except for the graphics then the 360 version is obviously the best one since the picture will look better.
But if there is a game exclusive to the Wii then the weak graphics won' t affect my enjoyment of the game as long as the art direction is good.

If you don' t like the hardware choices behind the Wii and you can' t live without the latest graphics then I guess you' ll never like the games.
But then you shouldn' t like the 360 either since 360 games will soon look like crap compared to the latest PC games anyway.

There is always a bigger fish but I say that as long as your smaller fish tastes good there is no need to feel dissatisfied.

More powerful systems help to better realise the art of the game. But yes the art direction is pretty seperate from the driving technology.

Going back I can still play old games and think they look great (for what they were made on).

but Ginj, If you could have resident evil 1 released now for the first time looking like the psx version on the wii and the gcn version for 360/ps3, but were otherwise the same game and same price, which version would you get, assuming you had both wii and ps3/360?

ginjirou why are you argueing with a Graphics whore? And one that doe not even play the best looking games.. (you have the own a killer PC to see the difference between good/decent and the BEST)


I' m glad i can switch From Crysis to Wave racer and respect and enjoy both visual qualities OLD or New, so long as thier smooth have great art-dirction that suit' s the genre/gamestyle im respecting it.

Hm, I thought that I was the only one that didn' t actually think Halo 3 looked good. I mean, I can see that there is impressive technology behind it all. Very clean look etc. But the character design and lots of things that I have seen from the environment don' t appeal to me.

I played Killer7 recently and played through Shadow of the Colossus again. While doing so I actually thought that, despite rough edges here and there compared to games now, it' s still possible to think that it looks good. The same goes for Shenmue I think with it' s amount of detail. It sets it apart from other more bland looking games from that time. Windwaker is another good example I think and I assume Twilight Princess is also great when it comes to style.

For me personally, games from the DC on really had the potential to look good enough so immersion doesn' t get lost. Everything more advanced coming after it is almost as a bonus for me but not necessary in itself.

Of course, developers shouldn' t be lazy and try to create the best possible graphics anyway. Well, best suited for the intentions of the game

VX Chemical Ali your out-numbered kiddo.

VX Chemical Ali your out-numbered kiddo.

You have no idea what your talking about, your braincells amount to...... 0. Unless you at somepoint can contribute anything to the forum and discussions i suggest you take a chiller and shut the fuck up.

And please, pry that wii from your ass.

You changed the subject:

new game with old grahics < new game with new great graphics

You take the punishment.