Are graphics in Nintendo games under-rated due to hardware?

While people on this forum praised graphics found on the PC and the Xbox and Playstation systems, I feel that graphics found on Nintendo games seem to be under-rated. Just look at games like Kirby's Yarn, Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wind, and even Super Mario Odyssey. Perhaps that because these games appeared exclusively on Nintendo systems, and for the last few generations, Nintendo home consoles are seen as "under-powered" compared to the competition this explains why graphics in these games are often over-looked. Had Nintendo released home consoles that are as powerful as their competitors, perhaps the graphics in Nintendo games would be more appreciated.

What do you say, System Wars?

BotW got a lot of citations for its good graphics, it even ranked in the top graphic showcases of 2017 for DF. But still I wish they had more powerful hardware, I can only imagine how crazy good games like Zelda, Mario or Xenoblade would look with more power.

Art Style/direction and graphics are two different things to me.

The Switch games that look good are simply because they have great art style but graphically they are meh... Textures, aliasing, resolution, lighting, shadows, view distance and the list goes on.

I am a performance whore, I hate HATE poor framerates. Its my biggest first world gaming problem with consoles.

The switch is not "under-powered" its just over the weight of a xbox one controller. It does what Nintendo wanted it to do, play anywhere and gameplay always beats graphics. The switch is impressive for what it is.

They are not underrated. On the contrary, they are often overrated because I simply don't buy the argument "for Nintendo". If Nintendo chooses to go the underpowered route, that's on them. But their games are often this: Awesome art style, crap graphics. By modern standards of course.Nintendo don't get a pass from me for their choices as I'm not a fanboy.

I do feel Nintendo can get the most out of their hardware (before I always felt Rare got the most out of the Nintendo hardware)

And I love their artstyle and how colors pop in games like Mario Kart 8 or Mario Odyssey

But underrated ? Hell no. Wii and Wii U were underpowered and Switch games are running on tablet hardware.

I feel you need a certain level of maturity to appreciate Nintendo graphics. It's not an ultra-high realistic texture, but the package as a whole. Let's look at the latest Mario game. 60 fps with almost never a drop. Animations are smooth and models just as much. Attention to detail is everywhere and is also artistically pleasing to the eye. Even if the Switch was more powerful than the others, the kids who hate on these forums would still not give credit where due.

Nintendo’s graphics are OVERRATED Bro.

They get a free pass all the time because of nostalgia and lower standards from reviewers.

Anyone can make cartoony looking games like zelda and Mario. They are NOT impressive. But since “Nintendo made it”, they get a 10/10.

It really sucks for Nintendo owners because they could be playing Pixar quality graphics like Ratchet And Clank(PS4), but Nintendo is too cheap and lazy.

The only difference between Super Mario Sunshine and Super Mario Odyssey is a higher resolution. Odyssey could have been made on the freaking GameCube.

SAD!

PC games have raw power

But Nintendo just outright has superior presentation.

It's pretty clear no matter how much money is being thrown at that screen Star Citizens models are comparatively drab and lifeless, while every facet of a Nintendo game is crackling with artistry.

I have to agree with the posters saying Nintendo graphics are overrated or just not factored at all in reviews. Art style and graphics quality are different things. Nintendo gets a free pass for crap hardware and graphics.

I think Nintendo is a perfect showcase for the power of artistry and smart technical design. Mario Odyssey looks gorgeous. It's as simple as that. You can point at aliasing and "cartooniness" and laugh, but I think it's a marvel. The game is visually striking, incredibly detailed, and runs rock solid. Tons of games on more powerful systems have a less clean resume, especially with their shit framerates. The people who developed Odyssey knew how to optimize for the hardware and compensate with amazing artistry to deliver a gorgeous AND high performing game on a toaster.

I've been thinking a lot about this lately, and I think games like Odyssey put 3rd party devs on the big systems to shame - they have so much power to work with but even when the result is impressive (honestly, the woody janky animations, poor framerates, and static mininally-interactive worlds defined by excessive collision boundaries and minimal traversal options, all sandwiched between excessive cinematics, are often disappointing) the result/power is almost always worse.

Underrated Nintendo graphics isn't the word, Nintendo has a knack for using an art direction that looks impressive and ages well. Nintendo is also great at optimizing their software to get the most out of their hardware. Sometimes when I am playing BotW, there are definitely aspects of it that are more visually impressive than The Last Guardian on PS4. But in terms of visuals, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt on PC totally blows BotW in terms of performance. The difference between PS4 graphics and Switch graphics is visually to little for me to care about. It's why I love both Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild & Horizon: Zero Dawn in there own console's hardware.

There are many who say Nintendo games don't have good graphics due to outdated hardware. But Nintendo are masters at making good looking games with weaker hardware. Graphics to me is way more than resolution and textures. Artstyle is what matters most to me, and Nintendo is pretty much unbeatable in that.

Underrated? Probably. No one associates Nintendo with good graphics other than people who know games really well.

They seem to have good artstyle and in my pov artstyle will always trump over raw graphics. Art is timeless, raw graphics are not. Thats why games like Okami still look good to this day.

Saying this, there are still games with great/good graphics AND artstyle like Horizon or Bloodborne for example

Crappy graphics and crappy art style is nintendo in a nutshell

Like Sanchez just now

At least DocSanchez has always been honest about Nintendo and if anyone was a Nintendo fanboy, would you agree they weren't gonna be honest in terms of graphic wise hardware?

Nintendo graphics I think are actually very good, they're just let down by very poor image quality as for some reason they don't seem to know what anti-aliasing is or how to use it in their games.

Obviously not.

They are technically outdated so no they are not underrated. Their art style is unique however.

Gaming forum opinions are rarely sincere, you're going to have fanboys and haters pushing their hyperbole from both sides on this one. Which is why Nintendo visuals might seem under rated to you if SW is your barometer lol.

But nah, I don't think they're under appreciated/overlooked at all. When Nintendo makes a pretty game, they definitely get their due praise.

Personally, outside of Cuphead, I think Odyssey was the prettiest game I played last year. And while BotW isn't as consistently pretty as Odyssey to me, it's still a looker and has some truly great moments.

Imagine a Zelda in Horzion tier graphics...

@metalboi: Nintendo has terrible production and quality. They make constant ports/rehashes and garbage but their fan base overrate their games as 10/10 because of delusions and nostalgia.

Lay off the fanboy pedal a little bit

Meh, I like both realistic graphics and artsy games like BotW or Okami. That's why I own both a PS4 and a Switch.

There are boring games under both categories though so people who automatically assume a game has a creative art style because the devs wanted to focus on the gameplay are wrong.

Right. That explains why BotW won the GotY awards, now, doesn't it?

It has and will continue to be “It’s Nintendo “ Nintendo gets a free pass on graphics, story, game pacing and gameplay so damn much that it’s laughable when the loyalist that are in denial try to argue to the contrary. The amount of excuses that people conjure up for Nintendo’s shortcoming is truly a marvel of wordplay. It’s a futile discussion to a large extent because of the apologists. No other company gets the amount of passes than Nintendo hands down.

Graphics IMO, part of it is hardware based, but in some cases like in Nintendo's case or for lower budget games, graphics are more about art direction and style than it is a out hardware being pushed to its limits.

I'm not saying one approach is superior to the other, but we are flooded with games that attempt to awe with high production values, trying to get that photo-realism, so in many ways when I do dabble in Nintendo games, it's a breath of fresh air when they take a different approach.

They're probably overrated a bit. Still, it's quite reasonable to judge graphics in context of the given hardware. Nintendo seem to be very adept at balancing performance and art style, an effort that goes a long way in making their games visually appealing even if technically inferior.

i think some just disregard any games visuals if its not designed to run or not running on high end hardware. hell some would argue that games running on an xbox 1x are just mess messy but still not as good as they should be. to these people the PS4 and X1 are also a write off now. they hate things like checkerboard rendering. anything technical that somewhat compromises the visual output and the game is a write off to some it appears.

its the same with a PC game running on something like a GDP win or low end laptop. some cant conceive of running a PC game on anything less than the state of the art at the games maximum ability. some extremists would argue that anyone playing a PC game on an average laptop is not a PC gamer (which is of course nonsense).

nintendo is a clear target for these types of people as they are the furthest off the pace in terms of using state of the art visual tech. the there is the usual SW banter of comparing switch and PS4 specs which is what you would expect in a forum such as this.

personally there are some things that irk me with nintendos tech decisions: mainly the lack of AA. i can only guess that AA causes unexpected performance hits which they cant get rid of so they leave it off. i certainly respect and admire their pursuit of reliable and consistent performance and wish more devs (especially those making console games) pushed as hard for it. but im just surprised that AA would cause them such an issue. or maybe its messing up the visuals too much due to nintendos artistic direction in most of their games. maybe the cure is worse than the disease.

there are also things about the VC which are disappointing. their focus on delivering the original experience is a bit too much some times. it would be nice to have options to clean up the image a bit at least in some games (especially N64 and GC/wii games).

but at the end of the day i see games like mario kart 8, BOTW, odyssey, xenoblade and so on and i can't say they are ugly at all. even the texture work and lighting is superb. it may be using older and simpler tech but its used very well. to be honest since the PS2 really (especially later that gen) there are very few games made by talented developers (not just Nintendo) that i would call flat out ugly. anything from starfox adventures to shadow of the colossus (performance issues but great looking game), gears of war (even the first one) and so on....these are all good looking games. i was playing metroid prime 1 there last year and the game has aged very well. as i mentioned above, if the VC could just have some options to clean it up a bit then it would just that nice bit of extra shine on a classic.

@lamprey263: Time to update your sig Lamprey and see if Greatness Awaits finally came to you in 2017 :P

@metalboi: It's just reality. If you can't face it, you're in denial.

@Rovelius: Yes he's really the one in denial.

Well considering Horizon has very high production and quality values it wouldn't be any different.

Now imagine if Nintendo actually stopped be lazy and game up with a brand new AAAE/AAAE franchise, would do a good of a job as GG did with Horizon?

It explains why not reviewer commented on it's sub-standard performance at launch, if it was any other AAAE game that had performance issues as bad as BoTW did they would of been crucified, but as it was a Nintendo game = Let it slide

Nintendo is not capable of creating amazing games like Witcher 3, GTAV, Horizon Zero Dawn etc.

That is why they stick to rehashing the same couple games every 5 years except make them worse with the added gimmicks.

Even with billions in the bank, they could never make such a detailed world or actual characters.

They stick to simplistic design in everything. They still use N64 quality “textures” even in their newest games.

The grass in Mario Kart 8 is just flat green square. The grass in BOTW is cartoony and LOL worthy.

They can’t even rival the grass from MGS3 that came out in 2004.

God forbid any of Nintendo’s game spends more than a month in development.

When you all gonna understand that art design is not graphics design you might end up accept the fact that Nintendo games graphics are crappy considering this is 2017.

The proof to that is when Switch tries to play games like DOOM or similar that are not even top notch graphic games and system has plenty of problems to do even that in lower resolutions.

Zelda, Mario etc might be pleasing to the eye because of the cel shaded approach and upon that the great art design but that doesnt mean graphics are great by all means. In fact thats why Nintendo choosing this kind of approach over traditional 3D engines. Because games will look like horseshit since Switch is seriously underpowered if they go with graphics like Horizon, Uncharted, Witcher 3 etc. Thats a fact.

So Switch graphics underated ? More like overated.

But then again who cares when games like BOTW or Mario are delivering. Its not like bad fps or cartoony approach affecting them in a bad way nor fans seems to care as long as they playing a good game overall. So whatever.

I know I'm breaking the 4th wall here, but your character is just... boring. I really think you can do better.

Mario isn't cel-shaded.

Kinda obvious isn't it..Nintendo's hardware specs (very low power draw) compare to its competitors?..lol...you can only make visual as good with the hardware specs you have. For what Nintendo is pushing with the hardware they use the visuals are good. :P

Really? Because I've seen far more for Sony in almost the past two decades now.

well you get the point. Its still a good art/ mediocre graphics game at best. Does it matter ? Not at all but is it Witcher 3 like graphics wise ? Is it Battlefront 2? Is it Uncharted 4 or whatever ? Nah, not even close.

And if you take into consideration that Switch is the next-gen console ( supposed to be in my opinion as you know already but whatever ) from Nintendo that supposed its a whole generation above PS4/X1 and the successor of Wii U, the console that supposed would rival PS4/X1 ... well, Switch graphics wise is as bad as it gets.

Underated ? Come on now ... This is 2018. If anything Switch graphics are overated because of good art design or cartoony style.

A good game is a good game. Jaw-dropping visuals are not a requirement. It's what's at the core that counts.

I'm sorry, but everyone is this thread has it all wrong.

So a game that HAS won GOTY at some places over BoTW and has also won more awards then Mario's latest Switch outing doesn't have high production values?

And I'm the biased one? HAHAHAHAHAHA.....