I hope this game doesn't get released in Australia for the ridiculous price of $100. I like Wii Sports bolwing as much as anyone, but a fleshed out version of it probably isn't gonig to be something on my shopping list.

I seem to only want to buy VC games on the Wii, as the "full" games seem to be thin on content and are only worthy of being rented.

r1nce

Toasticus

My local Gamecrazy has 17 used copies of MP8 already.

Captiosus

The game will probably be fun, but as of now it looks awful. I'm not attacking the Wii, I'm attacking the developer if anything...the system's capable of better than this. If the characters had tails and boobs and the pins had faces, it'd be on par with the crappy games my creepy cousin tries to make.

Baptism_of_Fiber

I agree with what everything you say in principle, PHIEDNY. I just don't see us as being anywhere close to "total immersion" on the graphical side, and I think a quick look at what comes out of the hollywood studios proves it. Gollum doesn't look like or move like a realistic person and he took a team of a dozen artists and programmers using 1000x the CPU power of the PS3, terabytes of memory, rendering a few frames a day, to produce... with motion capture an actor, then get animators to tweak that. Even if you solve BASIC human gait to make normal looking run and walk (which they haven't really mastered at ILM either, the long shots of CGI crowds running still look fake), you still have to solve the problem of ACTING or EMOTING. Most REAL HUMANS can't "act" realistically for an in-game situation... if we can't create CGI humans that are recognizably HUMAN and fool the eye when they walk, how far are we from creating CGI GOOD ACTORS? I don't even see us 20 years away from "total immersion" level graphics on the console side, because ILM with a room of computers, still can't show us a realistic CGI person picking up and drinking a cup of water, rendered at 5 frame per day. STILL shots look GREAT on consoles and movies. But once anything "ALIVE" starts moving, the illusion is shattered. It no longer looks "alive". Yeah, 360 looks better than Xbox side by side, but any criticism I can make for the Xbox graphics are the same ones I make for the 360... it's qualitatively the same experience: unrealistic renderings that don't move realistically, pixelated, but more detailed than its predecessor. THAT is why controller makes more impact today than a 10x increase on polygon count.

dcartist

L_K_M

The point you seem to miss is that in the grand scheme of things, graphics will hit their peak BEFORE immersion can. So while you point out that graphics don't count for immersion, you're only looking at half of the equation.

Graphics + Feedback = Immersion.

Making that simple equation more involved, we get:

Photo-realistic Graphics + Advanced Feedback = Total Immersion.

You're very stoically making the point for advanced feedback, while alienating the other half of the equation.

Phiedny

Thanks Toasticus.

My point was ALSO that on the Wii, "the graphics, no matter how technologically outclassed they may become, work for the story they are trying to tell. Wii Brunswick bowling is an example of appropriate graphics remaining adequate. Its graphics are carried by a visual style that was designed to minimize the limitations of the hardware."

And yes, MY point was the PONG has a visual style.

You also need to understand that on PONG, "the graphics, no matter how technologically outclassed they may become, work for the story they are trying to tell. PONG is an example of appropriate graphics remaining adequate. Its graphics are carried by a visual style that was designed to minimize the limitations of the hardware."

But YOU fail to see that on PS3 and XBOX360 as well, "the graphics, no matter how technologically outclassed they may become, work for the story they are trying to tell. GEARS OF WAR & HEAVY RAIN is an example of appropriate graphics remaining adequate. Its graphics are carried by a visual style that was designed to minimize the limitations of the hardware."
-
-
As for insulting you, YOU quoted me first, then picked quotes out of context to argue points unrelated to anything I was saying. You set the tone in our A & B dialog. If you want ME to be unilaterally polite to you, well... :P ...heck, sure, let's play it that way:
-
1) You state that all you're trying to say is "graphics matter". I agree. I respectfully submit that I have never claimed that "graphics don't matter".

2) As politely as I can put it: I'll stop the bold and italics if an administrator asks me to.

3) Please refrain from using the "f***" word in posts addressed to me, especially while barking orders at me. I love profanity as much as any other adult, and I can't and won't tell you what to do, but I'd prefer not to be addressed that way.
-
4) My point from the beginning (and my arguments have been consistent with this) has been that the level of "immersion" in video games is affected by both graphics and control scheme, but I see more impact today, by changing controls. The mass market game "control", has not qualitatively changed since the N64 analog stick was introduced in 1996 (11 years ago for those counting). Meanwhile, graphics have improved incrementally every year with hardware and software gains. YET, gains in graphics between last generation and this one are noticeable when XBox is side by side with XBox360, but the experience is NOT QUALITATIVELY DIFFERENT if played outside that context. PLUS I've already seen what the NEXT NEXT Gen platform might look like on highest end PCs running NVIDIA 8800, and it only dazzles in side by side comparison. It doesn't fundamentally change the experience. You're still moving cartoons around, that don't look as good as 12 year old movies. My points about all those movies and their CGI is that they represent what PS5 might look like someday, and I can STILL tell they're just cartoons. You can too. The real gains are to be made today in the control scheme and possibly other sensory feedback or sterescopic. There is no "revolution" in flat graphics for the foreseeable future.

dcartist

I'll admit the character models look a bit rubbish, but its not like they're reaaaally that big a feature of the game, is it? I'd be more concerned about the bowling balls looking cool.

Alyn

Pong does have a graphic style, believe it or not. Though it was due to hardware limitations and not intentionality, you cannot not find a better example of minimalism.

In case you missed it while typing your obnoxious and insulting reply, my point was simply that graphics do matter. Not that more powerful harder equates to better graphics. Many games will come out on the 360 and PS3 that will not age as well as the new Smash Brothers game because it uses a style that minimizes the effect of hardware limitations. Additionally, the quality of the animation is an issue that depends almost exclusively on the skill of the animators, programmers, and mocap artists, rather than on hardware.

Give the bold and capslock a fucking rest already.

Toasticus

smokyburnout

smokyburnout

You guys gave the graphics in Ultimate Duck Hunting such a hard time, so why the hell are you defending this game? I've messed around with the models in Ultimate Duck Hunting (my Maya teacher did the art on the game) and I didn't get displaced vertices shooting out of the characters armpits.

It's not really a matter of how many polygons are on the character, it's the fact that the artists didn't properly weight the joints on the character's skeleton. They can easily fix that (and thus fix the dislocated arms, the stretching, and the jagged vertices) in a matter of hours.

It's just people like (some of) you guys (the ones defending the graphics), who make developers think they don't have to put in those extra hours to fix these problems. The Wii can do a hell of a lot better than this and I think it is high time the developers realize it and stop churning out such shitty visuals.

Doomstink

It was, and still is, quite believable for the style it was in.
-
"Quite believable for the style it was in"???

BWAHAHAH... that was utterly meaningless. What does that phrase even mean? PONG was "quite believable for the style it was in" too. So is LITTLE MERMAID. As is MARIO 64.
-
"Have you forgotten that Toy Story was cutting-edge CGI when it was released?
-
Of course. One of my main points IS that TOY STORY was cutting edge CGI when it was released 12 years ago. Yet, I enjoy TOY STORY today, as much as I did the day it came out, and more than any other PIXAR movie... despite the fact that the CGI was produced TWELVE YEARS AGO, on much SLOWER PROCESSORS, with very BASIC LIGHTING AND PHYSICS, SIMPLER TEXTURES, and MUCH LOWER POLYGON COUNTS than we are used to today.

Did you honestly not get that?? :eyeroll:

dcartist

Sloan Ranger

sweetie55

"... TOY STORY (whose graphcs are already dated compared to the newest films)"

Sure, there are lame movies that technically look better than Toy Story. But Toy Story is by no means an ugly movie even by modern standards, and its animation was extremely high quality. It was, and still is, quite believable for the style it was in. Have you forgotten that Toy Story was cutting-edge CGI when it was released?

"GEARS of WAR is... just a shiny coat of CGI paint on the same old FPS shooter..."

Not really. The graphics are the most hyped feature of the game, yes, but it integrated diverse gampeplay elements and very strongly emphasized a sense of atmosphere. Half the fun of that game was its sense of atmosphere, which was partly accomplished through the excellent use of team AI and co-op gameplay. There's more than meets the eye there.

"It still all looks bloody fake."

Since the hardware isn't capable of it in most situations, very few studios go for straight photorealism. Are you really going to hold non-photorealistic graphics against games that aren't actually even trying for them? The vast majority of games coming out have some form of stylization to the visuals. Burnout Paradise is a notable exception, however; go take a look at their trailer for and come back and tell me that it looks "bloody fake."

When will people learn that gameplay and graphics aren't entirely independent entities? Seeing impacts from each weapon shot enhance the gameplay feeling that you are causing massive destruction. Watching something blink out of existence isn't nearly as satisfying as watching it explode in a ball of flames or zap into a ball of lightning or disappear under a cartoony poof that shoots out little stars.

No matter what kind of gameplay you have, be it revolutionary or mundane, quality visuals are important. Whether or not they are cutting-edge big-budget pseudorealism is a separate matter. High quality graphics are not synonymous with big budgets.

Graphics do matter, period.

Toasticus

I wish more people would realise this. Making characters look like they're wrapped in a condom really does nothing for the immersion factor when you realise it's exactly the same thing you've played possibly 10 years ago, just with a different veneer.

Burguois, Teabagger of Olde

Yeah, they said that the controls worked well, but took some getting used to. And like I said, with no wrist strap, that thing will go flying pretty good I'd imagine.

Still, it looks good enough, and for $10 from the PSN, what the hell?

PapaBear434

Thanks, I am interested, actually.

PapaBear434

If you notice, I'm not complaining about the graphics. I am just pointing out why they look like they do.

I don't care what the Wii games look like anymore. I don't have one, though Wii-Fit has me interested enough to try and find one when it is released. But the fact of the matter is, graphics are going to suck as long as they are aiming soley at the casual crowd, becasue they don't have any incentive to do better.

Yes, gameplay and immersion is important, but only an idiot can say that graphics play no part in that stew.

PapaBear434

gaggle64

Well, I hope you like slumming it when it comes to character models and texture graphics.

It's this kind of thinking that makes some idiots think that TRANSFORMERS is a better movie than TERMINATOR. Or that some of the modern CGI DRECK movies are as good as TOY STORY (whose graphcs are already dated compared to the newest films)

PS3 and XBOX360 graphics are nice, but they are actually nowhere near as good as MOVIE CGI anyway...

...even 20 year old CGI.

GEARS of WAR is cool eye-candy when you first look at it, but after about a minute of play, you realize it's just a shiny coat of CGI paint on the same old FPS shooter I try to manipulate with the same abstract button-mashing control scheme I did when I played DOOM or Counterstrike. It doesn't look "photoreal". Even a 2 year old wouldn't think it's "photoreal".
-
ANYBODY WITH A BRAIN who plays a COMPUTER or CONSOLE GAME QUICKLY starts to view the characters and objects in the game as SYMBOLIC representations, not as an "illusion of reality".

Improved graphical quality on a TV screen is NOT going to produce proportionate increase in "immersion". Doubling your resolution yields maybe a 1% improvement in the "illusion of reality". It still all looks bloody fake. All figures LOOK FAKE, and MOVE even FAKER.
-
The areas in which significant improvemens in "immersion" are going to easily occur are via the CONTROL INTERFACE (and possibly stereoscopic headsets/sound, etc.) You can double your "immersion factor" in a sword game, by letting you actually swing it.

dcartist

alucard_0007

There's a video of High Velocity Bowling for the PSN on gamespot if you really want to know, it's on the second line from the bottom

[e3.gamespot.com]

the developer demonstrates how it's used if that's of any help

alucard_0007

MarkPhoenix

satsantokh

PapaBear434

No, I think you misunderstand me. The game I am talking about Cresente played at Gamers Day, he said that it was held in the middle of the SIXAXIS between the hand grips, and you swung it just like you would a bowling ball. The motion sensing in the remote acted the same as it would in the Wiimote.

I'm not talking the standart "Push a button to set your speed" game that consoles usually get for bowling games.

PapaBear434

MarvinTheParanoidGamer

I hope it comes with a can of disinfectant and toe jam that I can spray into my shoes to really replicate the experience.

Zadaz

PJ Moreno

I have a bit of a different take, even though this game isn't a minigame compilation but a more advanced version of a game included in a minigame compilation.

The Wii is getting inundated with minigame titles and Nintendo needs to tread lightly milking the minigame cash cow because after a while even the casuals WILL get tired of playing minigames. Mario Party is a great example. Sales of MP peaked on the Gamecube and each version since 6 (I think) have sold less overall copies than the last. Why? Because it just becomes the same old same old.

Nintendo needs to really be pushing third parties to consider diversifying genres for the Wii. This doesn't necessarily mean they have to make hardcore titles. Platformers, for example, would be awesome on the Wii.

What it boils down to, in the end, is that if the consumers go to the game store in a couple years and see nothing but Mario-Metroid-Zelda-SSBB, the usual EA Sports suspects, and then a whole wall of minigame compilation games, they will eventually get tired of it.

Just to clarify, I have no problems with the marketing and profitability of minigames. The Wii has proven those games have a solid place in gaming. But they can't expect peoples' interest to remain as high in a year, or two years, if minigames (or, in this case, more advanced renditions of something from an existing minigame) end up dominating the console.

I wonder how many Wii owners will see this title and think, "Hmm. Bowling. Been there, done that, think I'll pass on this one."

Captiosus

Gamemaster

Hell, maybe worse.

poematik14

It will still be fun i think, maybe.

Belain

Yes, but when marketing to the casual crowd, they don't NEED to. They are fresh, practically game virgins. They don't have much of a basis of comparison.

And as long as the machine keeps printing money off this business plan, there really isn't any logical reason for them to change it up. Hell, I wouldn't if I knew it would probably sell the same either way.

PapaBear434

But they could have ported a GC game like everyone says they do and come out with a better result than this.

@insert_gently:

I find Wii bowling to be HIGHLY entertaining, thank you very much. Even just the Wii sports one. For all its simplicity, its fun and the wii remote works well to simulate the feel of bowlin'.

Komrade_Kayce

It's the Wii. What can you do, eh?

Oh, no he didn't...

Honestly, though, it has been discussed to death how the Wii is marketing the casual gamer. This game is not exactly an exception to that rule. The average casual person like my parents are not going to notice long monkey arms or low polygon counts and dislocated shoulders. They are just going to throw the ball down the ally and cheer when they get a strike.

And you know what, they will be AMAZED by the graphics while doing so, too, because until the Wii their most recent gaming venture was "Duck Hunt."

It's the nature of Nintendo's business plan. Despite Reggie's insistence to the contrary, I wouldn't expect to much more in the way of supporting their core gamers. You will still get the usual suspects of Mario, Zelda, and Metroid, but as far as expecting new first or third party IP's supporting the more discerning tastes of a more involved player... Well, I hope you like slumming it when it comes to character models and texture graphics.

PapaBear434

insert_gently

Well, the arms are long as hell, but it would seem to me that the disjointed arms are simply caused by a low polygon count.

It's the Wii. What can you do, eh?

PapaBear434

On the other hand, if the game will show my bowler knockin' gutterballs granny-style, I can look past the graphics.

Baptism_of_Fiber

*looks at screens again*

but how?

Gamemaster

Ah, ye old 'it looked like a hot girl from behind!' excuse. You learn to mistrust your eyes quite a bit after it happens

...more than once

Komrade_Kayce

But why are skimping on the characters models? There 's no reason they can't look 10x better than they do know.

I'll pick this up, but I will anxiously wait a for "Kingpin" game - with voice acting from Bill Murray and Woody Harrelson and good character models (a man can dream can't he)

kingartie

Charron

Gamemaster

Even still. Nobody is going to take a bowling game seriously where the arms pop out of their sockets.

Wii/Mii bowling was a bit different. For its simplicity, it looked clean. Clean is fun.

Buying this game this way it is currently is like a girl you'd pick up at around 2am in a dark alley thinking she'll be a great time, not realizing you're drunk and not thinking straight and upon getting home, realizing shes ugly as sin and not very much fun at all.

If you're going to do realism, give me curves and arms that dont look dislocated, or keep it simple.

Komrade_Kayce

@Creamsodaslurpee: If that's true you lose your right to own a Wii... Have you not seen the Wii ownership requirements?
-Purchase of at least 2 of the following games: Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, Metroid Prime 3: Corruption, Super Mario Galaxy, Super Smash Bros. Brawl.
-No whining about graphics (unless "third party" is a pivotal part of the sentence.
-Purchase of at least 8 Virtual Console games.
-Purchase of at least 3 Wii Remote/Nunchuck combinations (they don't care if you have no family).

As for this game, hopefully the game will have realistic gameplay. I'm sick of getting owned by relatives because they get lucky.

Gamemaster

As far as this game goes, my sister gave my Mom and Dad her Wii while she studies abroad in England, and they both love to bowl, so I'll probably pick this up for my Dad's birthday. They have a nice big HD TV, so it will be like being at the lanes.

And the graphics won't matter, because they extent of gaming knowledge IS the Wii.

PapaBear434

Doomstink

Doomstink

Citan359

Something looks really, really WRONG with the arms.

Komrade_Kayce

Krytha

CreamSodaSlurpee