Zelda Wii trying to match MH3's graphics!

"In one of Nintendo's Iwata Asks features, the Nintendo president admits that they need to catch up with the folks at Capcom in the visuals department. You see, they think Monster Hunter Trilooks amazing.

It does look amazing from what I've seen.

Here's what Iwata tells MHT director Kaname Fujioka and producer Ryozo Tsujimoto:

"I can tell Nintendo's staff has really been galvanized by you. I can tell they feel like you did what they hadn't yet."

He continues: "Looking at the graphics objectively, I feel like the game's visuals are one of the representative examples of what can ultimately be done with Wii. I think it has placed the Zelda team under a considerable amount of pressure."

It turns out that visuals were a top priority over at Capcom for MHT. It shows. You'll see when it comes out later this month, April 20th.

Maybe Capcom can be nice and pass along their graphics tech to Nintendo for Zelda. And everything else 3D." -Destructoid

So I guess Zelda Wii will be going for generally very realistic looking visuals, though I think that direction was obvious after the artwork was shown for it and TLP's look was used!

That's interesting. Though I kinda felt it was going to be similar in style to Twilight Princess. Honestly I really feel that Zelda will look even better than Tri even though Iwata made those comments.

One of the reasons Monster Hunter 3 looks so great graphically is because of the small environments, all of which are separated by load times.

One of the reasons Monster Hunter 3 looks so great graphically is because of the small environments, all of which are separated by load times.

Sky-

blue font = hard to read on grey backround.

But good news anyway. MH3 looks amazing, and i can't wait for it.

I hope Zelda's graphics wont look as boring as Monster Hunter 3's.

I don't expect Zelda to be the next graphics king unlike a lot of people. I personally think a lot of people will be upset with what Nintendo first shows. But I won't care. Zelda is Zelda. BTW, I think this is really old.

They actually said that?

I'm glad that they want to surpass Capcom's Graphics but..Honestly I think They already matched them.

in the Gamecube....in Twilight Princess.

Much of what MH3 did was done in TP. MH3 just used better textures, and used more bloom than TP. They both generally looked the same in my opinion. TP was actually more tasking because the world was more open. With MH3 you have to keep loading every time u go into anothe region which i found very annoying. Im pretty sure Nintendo can make the new Zelda look much better than MH3 considering that they know their hardware better than anyone else. I dont expect it to look perfect at e3, but by the time of release i expect it to look great. I remember how with TP at E3 it looked good, but greatly improved by the time of release.

Wow Nintendo just acknowledge that Capcom did better than them in graphics department & some of you guys here are shooting it down? talk abt fanboyism

That's odd.. Twilight Princess already looks better than Monster Hunter 3..

That's odd.. Twilight Princess already looks better than Monster Hunter 3..

_BlueDuck_

Obviously not according to Nintendo...if they're striving to be better than MH3 in graphics. Otherwise they would have mention TP instead of MH3.

[QUOTE="_BlueDuck_"]

That's odd.. Twilight Princess already looks better than Monster Hunter 3..

maxgil2

Obviously not according to Nintendo...if they're striving to be better than MH3 in graphics. Otherwise they would have mention TP instead of MH3.

According to Nintendo yes, but I'm using my own judgement :P

Sorry Nintendo, I don't think you can match this.

LOL^^

Sorry man i have to agree with above and maxgil2 on this. Honestly TP's graphics left me a little underwhelmed... O.O But they have room to improve i mean the game was made to be handled on the last console so let's see what they can do for specifically this one.

LOL^^

Sorry man i have to agree with above and maxgil2 on this. Honestly TP's graphics left me a little underwhelmed... O.O But they have room to improve i mean the game was made to be handled on the last console so let's see what they can do for specifically this one.

shaka_fo00o

well ppl have to remember TP is a GC game ported to Wii - it was good for GC, Im expecting the new Zelda for Wii to look much better & Nintendo strive to be better in graphics then its a good thing..I just dislike seeing comments where credit aren't given where its due...MH3 looks great if Nintendo is striving to be better than MH3 in looks then it will be even better - hopefully the new Zelda game will push Wii to its MAX

Sorry Nintendo, I don't think you can match this.

IppoTenma

If anyone can match those graphics and even surpass them is Nintendo, specially the Zelda team.

Sorry Nintendo, I don't think you can match this.

IppoTenma

yeah the people who made the actual hardware dont know how to make their games look as good as a third party dev who doesn't have as much experience with the hardware. That makes perfect sense. Im not saying MH3 looks bad infact it is one of the best looking games on the wii because it uses its strengths and weaknesses to its advantage, but that is not to say that it cant look any better. Mario Galaxy IMO still has set the benchmark for wii graphics mainly because that's the only game were I have actually noticed a large amounts of advance TEV shaders used. (if u did not know the wii uses TEV shaders instead of the standard fixed function or programmable shaders used in most hardware)

I was pleased with TPs graphics myself.

Really all I need is better anti-aliasing, sharper textures, and more consistent art direction (some parts of TP looked vastly nicer than others imo)

I'm really excited by this though.

[QUOTE="IppoTenma"]

Sorry Nintendo, I don't think you can match this.

madsnakehhh

If anyone can match those graphics and even surpass them is Nintendo, specially the Zelda team.

I was pleased with TPs graphics myself.

Really all I need is better anti-aliasing, sharper textures, and more consistent art direction (some parts of TP looked vastly nicer than others imo)

I'm really excited by this though.

Meinhard1

i agree with this. i also want them to add more shader effects. there isnt enough in most wii games. i rate the effort of a dev on a wii game on whether they tried to make it look good, and if they made use of the features of the hardware. Making nice graphics is the hardest part of development for most wiii games. The only thing that im 100% sure we wont see in the next Zelda game or any other game is antialiasing. The wiis GPU doesnt have great support for that for some reason. They just decided to leave it out.

pleasepleasepleasepleasePLEASE LET THIS BE A NINTENDO/CAPCOM ZELDA GAME! capcom has dome SO well with 2D zelda games! let them co-op with ninty on a 3D one! i would seriously record myself crapping my pants if this happened!garrett_duffman

They should team up again and do a 3-d zelda this time!

Don't think Ninty would let them touch a major zelda on a home console though.

Maybe a title on the 3ds? That would be boss, and hopefully it uses the OoT engine as Ninty handhelds are now capable of it, even on the normal DS yet they won't touch it, not that I have anything wrong with the PH engine they made up for the platform....

[QUOTE="garrett_duffman"]pleasepleasepleasepleasePLEASE LET THIS BE A NINTENDO/CAPCOM ZELDA GAME! capcom has dome SO well with 2D zelda games! let them co-op with ninty on a 3D one! i would seriously record myself crapping my pants if this happened!kenakuma

They should team up again and do a 3-d zelda this time!

Don't think Ninty would let them touch a major zelda on a home console though.

Maybe a title on the 3ds? That would be boss, and hopefully it uses the OoT engine as Ninty handhelds are now capable of it, even on the normal DS yet they won't touch it, not that I have anything wrong with the PH engine they made up for the platform....

Trust me the 3DS is capable of more than OOT. Its close to the power of the xbox1 if not surpassing it in some aspects, but not that close to the wii. Polycount differences can give u a better picture aswell. Xbox1 26m poly's. Tegra2 28poly's, Wii apparently 100m, but i think thats an overstatement maybe 80m idk for sure. If the 3DS does use the tegra2 then i will be very happy. As for capcom making a major Zelda game...id say no. Im fine with smaller projects.

[QUOTE="kenakuma"]

[QUOTE="garrett_duffman"]pleasepleasepleasepleasePLEASE LET THIS BE A NINTENDO/CAPCOM ZELDA GAME! capcom has dome SO well with 2D zelda games! let them co-op with ninty on a 3D one! i would seriously record myself crapping my pants if this happened!painguy1

They should team up again and do a 3-d zelda this time!

Don't think Ninty would let them touch a major zelda on a home console though.

Maybe a title on the 3ds? That would be boss, and hopefully it uses the OoT engine as Ninty handhelds are now capable of it, even on the normal DS yet they won't touch it, not that I have anything wrong with the PH engine they made up for the platform....

Trust me the 3DS is capable of more than OOT. Its close to the power of the xbox1 if not surpassing it in some aspects, but not that close to the wii. Polycount differences can give u a better picture aswell. Xbox1 26m poly's. Tegra2 28poly's, Wii apparently 100m, but i think thats an overstatement maybe 80m idk for sure. If the 3DS does use the tegra2 then i will be very happy. As for capcom making a major Zelda game...id say no. Im fine with smaller projects.

Sorry Nintendo, I don't think you can match this.

IppoTenma

[QUOTE="painguy1"]

[QUOTE="kenakuma"]

They should team up again and do a 3-d zelda this time!

Don't think Ninty would let them touch a major zelda on a home console though.

Maybe a title on the 3ds? That would be boss, and hopefully it uses the OoT engine as Ninty handhelds are now capable of it, even on the normal DS yet they won't touch it, not that I have anything wrong with the PH engine they made up for the platform....

mouthforbathory

Trust me the 3DS is capable of more than OOT. Its close to the power of the xbox1 if not surpassing it in some aspects, but not that close to the wii. Polycount differences can give u a better picture aswell. Xbox1 26m poly's. Tegra2 28poly's, Wii apparently 100m, but i think thats an overstatement maybe 80m idk for sure. If the 3DS does use the tegra2 then i will be very happy. As for capcom making a major Zelda game...id say no. Im fine with smaller projects.

first of i want to apologize for this wall of text, and if u dont bother to read i understand.

1. yes and no, the xbox 1 is capable of 120m raw triangles(yeah typo lol), but when other effects are applied it drops down to around 70m, and even lower at times. When bumpmaps and shaders were heavly used i noticed that it dropped down to around 30m and 15m. Riddick and Doom 3 are very good examples of this. The xbox1's CPU basically bottlenecked the GPU. The GC on the otherhand had a significantly better CPU. The powerPC in the GC crushed the intel 3. The GC's max was 50 mil raw, but drops down to 25-40mil when other effects are used. Zelda TP IMO made the best use of poly's Links model alone contained 6768poly's so i think the GC was capable of having a stable 50 or so if the engine was well optimized. before someone brings conker up i want to point out that most of the game used prebaked textures, and thats why the game looked so good. It wasnt realtime shaders.

2. as for wii, it is capable of around 140m raw, and when shaders are applied it drops down to 100m. The reason i say it might be lower is because TEV shaders partially manipulate poly's to emulate pixel shaders,a nd in a sense increase polycount, but one thing for sure it never dropped down to the levels of the xbox1 i say the amount drops abput 20-10m depending on the rest of the game, but games like Mario Galaxy may prove me wrong, and maybe its not an overstatement. That game basically is full of EMBM shaders on almost every sruface, With exception of certain character models and other things., most the game used actual polys to detail things like bricks instead of using EMBM to give them detail. but like u siad its basically all subjective and depends on the game engine i suppose.

3. as for self shadowing and all that other good stuff u listed :P, alot of that is proccessed by the starlet (the wiis co proccesor that does both software proccessing as well as graphics, this chip was not in the GC btw and is not an FPU that was present in the GC) so if a dev uses that instead of completely relying on the broadway then it shouldnt be that hard on the wii, but this is in a perfect case scenario like galaxy, MH3 etc. Also the Wii's CPU isnt just an overclocked Gekko. Its actually using a new architecture. Its not such a large change that it has to emulate GC games though, but it is more efficietn and that also makes a factor in preformance. its not just a GC overclocked by 50%, there have been alot of changes made in the hardware that alot of people overlook. but essentially you are right when u say that everything has to be balanced in order to achieve a good result.

4. As for anti-alaising. yeah basically the wii sucks at MSAA, and i dont plan on ever seeing anything similar implemented. Also on other thing that dissapoints me is that the wii is capable of 32bit color, and 720p, but the frame buffer chip has a hardware limit of 480p, and 24bits :(

but anyway thats what ive conjured up and learned over the years. I think ur the first person ive met on the wii boards that actually know abot EMBM lol. this is fun :P

@ mouthforbathory/painguy1

Any games on Wii so far that you've seen that pushes the Wii hard or hitting it to MAX?...was SMG/MH3 close? (might be a dumb question)

I really want Zelda to use cel shaded graphics. Just not in the WW art style. Something like Red Steel would be nice.

That's the same trick Prime uses, but it also had larger environments than I have seen in Tri and more detail to the environment. But its not just the number of polygons you fit inbetween load screens, there is also the art style, so who knows. I'm sure Nintendo can match it polygon for polygon, then it comes down to how it works with the art style. Sepewrath

If we are speaking from a strictly technical level, then Nintendo would be hard-pressed to match Monster Hunter 3's graphics, since there have traditionally been some very large areas in the Zelda series. Unless of course, they decide to use the trick that MH3 and Corruption used. However, I don't think having load times between every small area would mesh very well with a Zelda title.

Does everyone have high hopes for this game in terms of graphics? I'd actually want larger environments that's connected with Water, Land, Sky etc. with little to no Loading times in between. I wouldn't mind if it looked worse than MH tri, which I think is one of the best looking Wii games. As far a graphics go, I'm hoping Pikmin 3 can take the cake. Although, Pikmin hasn't been known for Graphics so I kind of doubt it. But I would Imagine it would be a lot easier to squeeze amazing Graphics out of Pikmin than Zelda.

@ mouthforbathory/painguy1

Any games on Wii so far that you've seen that pushes the Wii hard or hitting it to MAX?...was SMG/MH3 close? (might be a dumb question)

maxgil2

haha no its not a dumb question. im also a bit unsure, but lets create a perfect scenario in which Nintendo is the developer and they plan on using everybit of the wiis hardware. Take a look at galaxy's framerate. its 60fps. Take that scenario and lets say we increase the graphical intensity by 20% maybe even 25%(highly unlikely to be perfect 25%, but this is me being hopeful :P). Thats basically the max, but this of course is a perfect case scenario that i honestly dont believe will happen througout the wii's lifetime. Its very hard and costly, and i dont believe that anyone besides Nintendo is willing to spend that kind of time and effort. Thats even a steep expectation for Nintendo IMO. At this point we are trying to squeeze the Wii dry of whatever power is left in the box. The fact that Nintendo is sayng they want to compete with MH3 is an obvious sign. But like i siad before, I have no doubt in my mind they can easly achieve this goal, but after that i think we wont be able to get much more out of the wii. The most i think we will see is 10% maybe 15%. It may sound like a low number, but 15% can make a big difference.

I have to say Monster Hunters graphics look pretty impressive.

They actually said that?

I'm glad that they want to surpass Capcom's Graphics but..Honestly I think They already matched them.

in the Gamecube....in Twilight Princess.

well ppl have to remember TP is a GC game ported to Wii - it was good for GC, Im expecting the new Zelda for Wii to look much better & Nintendo strive to be better in graphics then its a good thing..I just dislike seeing comments where credit aren't given where its due...MH3 looks great if Nintendo is striving to be better than MH3 in looks then it will be even better - hopefully the new Zelda game will push Wii to its MAX

maxgil2

Sorry Nintendo, I don't think you can match this.

IppoTenma

But at least TP had shadows and dynamic lighting.

Im anticipating the graphics to blow my mind like Mario Galaxy did. Nintendo always seems to get the most out of their system.

[QUOTE="maxgil2"]

@ mouthforbathory/painguy1

Any games on Wii so far that you've seen that pushes the Wii hard or hitting it to MAX?...was SMG/MH3 close? (might be a dumb question)

painguy1

haha no its not a dumb question. im also a bit unsure, but lets create a perfect scenario in which Nintendo is the developer and they plan on using everybit of the wiis hardware. Take a look at galaxy's framerate. its 60fps. Take that scenario and lets say we increase the graphical intensity by 20% maybe even 25%(highly unlikely to be perfect 25%, but this is me being hopeful :P). Thats basically the max, but this of course is a perfect case scenario that i honestly dont believe will happen througout the wii's lifetime. Its very hard and costly, and i dont believe that anyone besides Nintendo is willing to spend that kind of time and effort. Thats even a steep expectation for Nintendo IMO. At this point we are trying to squeeze the Wii dry of whatever power is left in the box. The fact that Nintendo is sayng they want to compete with MH3 is an obvious sign. But like i siad before, I have no doubt in my mind they can easly achieve this goal, but after that i think we wont be able to get much more out of the wii. The most i think we will see is 10% maybe 15%. It may sound like a low number, but 15% can make a big difference.

As for what you said about the system earlier, nothing has been confirmed about the CPU or GPU being real architectural improvements from the GC, just die shrinks and for the CPU some added SIMD functionality and instructions. It's still a PPC750 family processor. Starlett is just an ARM9 core (confirmed through Homebrewers) that purely manages I/O and software security. There is no known FPU anywhere in the system, and nothing so far has shown it to be possible. The heavily physics based games like Elebits and Boom Blox are purely running on the CPU. It's not that powerful, but it's certainly capable of handling it since there is nothing else to manage like AI and basic game orchestration is simple in those settings. The TEV isn't as flexible as the programmable architecture in the Xbox's GPU (which is Geforce 3 related), but in conjunction with the CPU it can do effects like normal mapping, though it readily does EMBM and other various types of basic bumpmapping extremely efficiently. The Wii's real improvments like lie in the memory bandwidth and amount of RAM in general. Because of that, the Wii isn't just 50% more powerful, it should be able to realistically achieve 2x the results the GC could thanks to the increased efficiency. The CPU and GPU are the real bottlenecks now. Super Mario Galaxy, the Conduit, MP3 and some other titles support this notion.

As for pure theoreticals, 140 million triangles is way out of the Wii's league. It's maybe 70 million at best. Real games at highest would probably be running a quarter of that number once purely textured and lit. The Xbox was running at best 20 million, though the record in game last gen is held by a Gamecube title: Rogue Squadron III, which IIRC is pushing 20 million/second. I've read some discussion on the title, and it's purely amazing how Factor 5 managed to do it especially while still running self shadowed vehicles as well as bumpmapping on the vehicles and many other surfaces. Water ran a shader when present too, though I've noticed some of the levels make the system slow down.

As for the Wii, here are my graphical highlights:

Super Mario Galaxy - Best use of the system's strengths. EMBM spammed everywhere. Some fur shading. Very good geometry throughput and lighting, as well as rock solid 60 fps.

Metroid Prime 3 - Extremely high polygon throughput, HDR and bloom lighting (IMO a waste) at rock solid 60 fps.

The Conduit - Employment of largest amount of varying graphics techniques, including normal mapping, EMBM, dynamic shadows, bloom lighting (though wastefully over-used). My favorite thing though was the dynamic water simulation. Absolutely fantastic though only present in "lull" areas of the game where there is nothing else to orchestrate. Expect to see all these techniques again in Gladiator AD turned Tournament of Champions.

Overlord Wii - Large scale shadowing system that included self shadowing. Unfortunately it's very low resolution, but a good effort on the part of the developers. The Wii just can't handle too much shadowing. It's very expensive.

There are other games to mention I'm sure, but I've actually played most of those.

If there is one thing about the Wii I could realistically improve, it would be the CPU. I would've employed a generation better CPU maybe Power 4. Backwards compatibility would've been preserved while gaining a much better CPU that was readily available. Only issue might have been heat, but the performance gains would've been massive. Areas where the GPU lacked could be made up for somewhat by the much faster Floating Point capabilities.

I was pleased with TPs graphics myself.

Really all I need is better anti-aliasing, sharper textures, and more consistent art direction (some parts of TP looked vastly nicer than others imo)

I'm really excited by this though.

Meinhard1

Meh they can use TP graphics, i just want it to reel me right into some zelda universe filled with mystery.

If we are speaking from a strictly technical level, then Nintendo would be hard-pressed to match Monster Hunter 3's graphics, since there have traditionally been some very large areas in the Zelda series. Unless of course, they decide to use the trick that MH3 and Corruption used. However, I don't think having load times between every small area would mesh very well with a Zelda title.

Sky-

Does everyone have high hopes for this game in terms of graphics? I'd actually want larger environments that's connected with Water, Land, Sky etc. with little to no Loading times in between. I wouldn't mind if it looked worse than MH tri, which I think is one of the best looking Wii games. As far a graphics go, I'm hoping Pikmin 3 can take the cake. Although, Pikmin hasn't been known for Graphics so I kind of doubt it. But I would Imagine it would be a lot easier to squeeze amazing Graphics out of Pikmin than Zelda.

AmayaPapaya