How can people stand visuals like this? (56k warning)

This topic fails miserably for the 100% fact the images posted by IGN.com have been stretched from original size.

Who ever added the new media, doesn't know how to add correct sized images.

Here... these are true pics.

look different? no?

So you basically made a topic and found the worse pics you could? for what? attention? lol ;)

So who's winning this discussion so far? I am..

Enough yet? bow.

grandlx2

TC got owned

Meh, as long as it plays well. The importance of traits for a game to be good are:

1. gameplay

2. gameplay

3. atmosphere

4. graphics

5. story

but the traits for a game to sell are:

1. marketing

2. brand marketing

2. graphics

3. gameplay

Frankly, it's a niche game, I don't know why everyone's so stoked about it. Maybe because it looks like it isn't shovelware?

These threads simply blow. For some reason you didn't mind these graphics last gen. Now you can't stand them? Or did you just start playing games?

And have you actually seen the game in motion? It's completely different thing.

These threads simply blow. For some reason you didn't mind these graphics last gen. Now you can't stand them? Or did you just start playing games?

And have you actually seen the game in motion? It's completely different thing.

RK-Mara

Well he wouldn't have minded them last gen because that was the current standard and things become dated in time. HOWEVER, I'm actually Ok with how the game looks and the Wii can do some nice graphics. To me, it's not too outdated. On the other hand, anyone who says better graphics don't make any differenceis in denial.

SNES had the best graphics

/thread

but the wii is 250$ so it HAS to have better gameplay:cry:

no srsly gameplay is better than graphics

Kaosed

I know the Wii can produce better graphics than this, but the whole argument about 'last gen had these graphics and we played them' is stale. I mean this is the 7th gen, you would expect the graphics to look good on console.

Sure gameplay is important, and back in the day I enjoyed Zelda and Mario, but I think graphics are very important now when choosing games.

You are exagerating.

The PS3 game looks better, but in no way does the Wii game looks bad.

You are exagerating.

The PS3 game looks better, but in no way does the Wii game looks bad.

Willy105

PS3 games look nicer but they are not more fun or do they score higher.

Its the same reason that they can release old SNES and Genesis games on the VC/XBLA and they sell crazy numbers. Its a wild concept, but some gamers actually put a high value on gameplay.

I can still play Super Mario World and love it, despite the fact that 2d graphics are dead, and even if they weren't these graphics are highly outdated.

[QUOTE="Willy105"]

You are exagerating.

The PS3 game looks better, but in no way does the Wii game looks bad.

Cyber-

PS3 games look nicer but they are not more fun or do they score higher.

We knew that already....

[QUOTE="Cyber-"][QUOTE="Willy105"]

You are exagerating.

The PS3 game looks better, but in no way does the Wii game looks bad.

Willy105

PS3 games look nicer but they are not more fun or do they score higher.

We knew that already....

lol other fanboys dont seem to get the memo and they never will. As evidence most likely the game to get GOTY and Reader's Choice is a game that is normal on the gameplay and amazing in graphics. If there ever was a time where there was an over emphasis on graphics its this generation.

[QUOTE="Zenfoldor"][QUOTE="Zenfoldor"]

Am I really gonna be the first one to bust this guy our for using screenshots taken with a low definition camera, off a video monitor and comparing them to in game captures?

Man, you guys are slipping.

Topic owned in:

3

2

1

NMH

(bunch of pictures)

Gun_Haze

Don't buy it, these are the real NMH screens.

and whats the point of having DMC4 in there? Do you think they are comparable? :lol:

I might actually somewhat agree with the point behind most of this threads ramble, but I think that the point above was preatty obvious and I most definitely agree with it in relation to the main post... wich for some strange reason it is being ignored.

Does it compare to DMC? It may not, but the pics he posted is used as an example to the main topic and I can't help agreeing with it more than anything written in this thread.

[QUOTE="PhoebusFlows"][QUOTE="Blackbond"]

How can people not stand fun games? Eh well. Regardless looks will never make a game. Gameplay will always make a game. Maybe we should all just play Crysis and no other game at all.

Maybe we should never play old games ever again. Maybe consoles should not have B/C built in with them at all. Because who likes looking at crappy games right?

Blackbond

Xbox 360 and PS3 offer the latest high-end graphics AND offer the old games. You get the whole spectrum. Nintendo offers far less. They offer the old games and the modern games look like the games from Xbox and Gamecube.

No Mor eHeroes is going to be a new title for 2008. It should look better, not hide behind more excuses. It should not look like Xbox 1, it should look way better than Xbox 1. The more excuses you allow to come inside the door, the more your integrity will weaken. I don't allow excuses into my door.

I will make one correction. I didn't realize Grasshopper is now under Ubisoft. I thought they were still part of Capcom (like I really care. Not like Capcom could've made it any better on this system)

You'd be lying if you weren't slightly disappointed. Dont try to hide it. And if you think these visuals are fine, I bet you'd be furious if Wii 2 in 2010 looked like No More Heroes does today. Are you going to keep saying "As long as it's fun that's all that matters. What, you dont play old games anymore? Never heard of fun?" Yeah, just keep saying that until 2020 and 2030. Laptops, computers, televisions and radios all upgrade and so should video games, one of the most visual of mediums.

360 B/C sucks. I can't play Guilty Gear X2 Reloaded, Capcom vs SNK 2 EO ect

PS3 B/C? Hell not all the systems even have B/C.

Come to terms with the fact that the Wii isn't as graphcially impressive as the other two consoles. Just like Consoles will never be as graphically impressive as PC.

I'm not disappointed so no I'm not lying. I don't care for looks of games. The only time I've ever been disappointed with the way a game looked was Capcom's SFIV due to the lack of 2D Sprites. Am I going to keep saing as long as its fun that's all that matters? **** yeah. I play games for fun not for looks. I still play tons of 2D Fighters and old school games. Visuals really don't mean jack to me and by sales of the Wii they don't mean jack to the majority of people out there as well.

Visuals are always nice for a game to have but at the end of the day gaming is about Fun. Period.

The thing that interests even you the most in a game, is the graphics. You wouldn't be able to enjoy a game where instead of models you have only outlining lines, right? Unless the game was built that way, of course.

i agree, the graphics aren't so great .. but i think it should still look better than that .. RE4 on GC looks better, that's the quality they should be aiming for at the minimum

but it doesn't really matter to me, because having seen vids of the game, the gameplay is just as bad so i prob won't be playing it

sheeps dont like AA in their games. I dont think they care too much about graphics.ff7isnumbaone

I still see we aren't getting to far now and days.

Its a different art style..chicken008

To be fair, jaggies are not a part ofart style.

You're basically paying $250 for a waggle controller. So far waggle has produced nothing interesting at all to me besides a decent tech demo (wii sports) and a few small levels in SMG that include waggle controls (the monkey ball levels, the manta ray racing levels sucked ass). Amnesiacx

Are you going to post the same exact post in another thread other than the two I've read so far?

To quote the Bard "You don't play graphics"JiveT

cant play without watching them eiher

To quote the Bard "You don't play graphics"JiveT

omg i hate this arguement so much...

It wouldn't be so bad if they delivered good games but they've barely tried that much.

And graphics do enhance the experience, just as soundand physics have. In essence you do to some degree play games for their graphics, if they'd release the N64 with the wiimote would you go for it? Would you buy the Vii?

Would you mind if TV went back to black and white if the programming was written better?

You know you could have BOTH and result inpurewin. Or be like Nintendo are offer niether most of the time.

Geez. Watch the frickin' game in motion. Cell-shaded games look terrible in screenshots.

Take a look at it in motion.

Looks pretty damn good to me.

Horrible graphics can affect gameplay for all you "Gameplay>>>>>>>>graphics" dudes.

How can you enjoy it fully when your eyeballs are being lacerated?

Gun_Haze

Oh now Diablo II, Starcraft, LoZ: Oot sucks because of the bad/horrible graphics compared to new games? Graphics Whores will be graphics whores. I'm sure Retro gamers aren't graphics whore.

[QUOTE="JiveT"]To quote the Bard "You don't play graphics"ChinoJamesKeene

omg i hate this arguement so much...

It wouldn't be so bad if they delivered good games but they've barely tried that much.

And graphics do enhance the experience, just as soundand physics have. In essence you do to some degree play games for their graphics, if they'd release the N64 with the wiimote would you go for it? Would you buy the Vii?

Would you mind if TV went back to black and white if the programming was written better?

You know you could have BOTH and result inpurewin. Or be like Nintendo are offer niether most of the time.

Yeah graphics are important dude but you are missing the point. It's not as much important as gameplay. Mentions Lair. Got it?

[QUOTE="Gun_Haze"]

Horrible graphics can affect gameplay for all you "Gameplay>>>>>>>>graphics" dudes.

How can you enjoy it fully when your eyeballs are being lacerated?

lordlors

Oh now Diablo II, Starcraft, LoZ: Oot sucks because of the bad/horrible graphics compared to new games? Graphics Whores will be graphics whores. I'm sure Retro gamers aren't graphics whore.

no more heroes doesnt even have bad graphics, its one of the most unique looking games i have ever seen.

Maybe if you started on the PS2 era, this would be a problem.

However, when you grow up on Atari and NES games, essentially blockson blocks, graphics don't matter to you.

[QUOTE="JiveT"]To quote the Bard "You don't play graphics"ChinoJamesKeene

omg i hate this arguement so much...

It wouldn't be so bad if they delivered good games but they've barely tried that much.

And graphics do enhance the experience, just as soundand physics have. In essence you do to some degree play games for their graphics, if they'd release the N64 with the wiimote would you go for it? Would you buy the Vii?

Would you mind if TV went back to black and white if the programming was written better?

You know you could have BOTH and result inpurewin. Or be like Nintendo are offer niether most of the time.

Barely tried? Zelda, Paper Mario, Battalion Wars, Mario Strikers, Metroid, and Mario Galaxy in the first year plus Mario Kart and SSBB in the first two months of next year. Not to mention any unannounced/low profile games such as Pikmin, Disaster, Animal Crossing and whatever else Nintendo has up their sleeve.

Nintendo has done nothing but offer tons of great games, many of which use the hardware better than most 3rd parties. They've done an incredible job, but they're only one company. The 3rd party's need to pick up the pace, and up the quality of their games much more than Nintendo does.

Good graphics can almost always enhance a game. But where the technical proficiency lacks, the artstyle can easily excel. Technically, No More Heroes is a terribly ugly game. Grasshopper has some bright minds, but they're not particularly good at the high polygonal models and huge environments.

Still, many people seem to discredit the effect of an artstyle. No More Heroes has a great (or terrible if you don't like it) look in that respect. What people don't seem to realize is that this can hold a much larger effect than a jump to HD graphics.

I think PhoebusFlows needs to take this to mind, that other people actually have different opinions than him. When compared to previous gens, this isn't as big of a leap in graphics. I don't see the mind-boggling beauty of a "next-gen" game when compared to a screen shot of No More Heroes. Is it better? Undoubtedly. Will it make a difference? Of course. But will I give up a great game solely because I decide that the technical merits are below average? No.

And that's how the cookie crumbles.

I don't love the Wii's graphics, but I don't think they're at a point where they're unbearable. This gen (360 and PS3 grapihcs) seems to have the smallest jump in graphics, and I believe the difference is only going to get less and less noticeable. From 8-bit to 16- bit to 32-bit to last gen--all were extremely noticeable and had a big effect on the experience. This gen seems to be just a little more polish, lighting, and high-definition.

However, I do see a big difference in processing power.

If you have a problem with No More Heroes graphics, than how did you ever manage to stomach last gens games?

Yeah. because we only recently became able to make out what games are suppose to look like.

but the wii is 250$ so it HAS to have better gameplay:cry:

no srsly gameplay is better than graphics

Kaosed

And that better gameplay is on the 360 and the ps3

Because hyping something because of it's awesome graphics is good, amirite?
Just take a look at flop of the century aka Lair, and Uncharted: Flopped Misfortune.

Begone with your flamebait, you pick some of the most atrocious, jaggy and blown up screens from No More Heroes and compare them to shots from one of the best looking PS3 titles. Nice one.

No More Heroes looks great, it has real flair and charm.