They're right. Graphics have ALWAYS spurred the industry forward. When a new console was released, we would be treated with the best new visuals. That tradition suddenly stopped with the WIi.
They design graphics cards, of course they would say that. They could possibly feel threatened by N's graphics stance thinking people will catch on and not care for graphics as much thus not buying expensive graphics cards. I don't really see any point of them releasing that statement though.
graphics do indeed matter, but not as much as gameplay :) I would love to see God Of War 2 graphics on Wii :) i would be completely content with that :D
Obviously they're gonna say that... first of all they want to sell more graphics cards. Second of all they wouldn't be saying that if it was an Nvidia card in the Wii and not an ATI.
So...the only response to this so far is "But they make teh video cards!"?
Why is it that no one has a valid counter-argument to what they said? They made some good points: our emotional experience is often directly tied to the visuals of a game.
He's absolutely right. Introducing new graphics and processing technology allows the real creative minds to do more with their games. I'd take powerful hardware over a glorified motion sensing controller any day.
[QUOTE="YellowPik"]Coming from the makers of graphics cards, I would think they might have a good reason for saying that.KeyWii
That argument is flawed. Even with the Wii's poor technical specs, it still NEEDS & USES a video card.Of course telling people they can forget about graphics and just use middle range cards instead of high end might be a little worriersome for companies like Nvidia, which sell a new video cards at the tune of 500 a pop. So I guess the argument isn't flawed at all.
first off ati>>nvidia! there graphics always looks like toy story to me lol. there a gpu company it makes me lol they said that. ati there main enemy made the wiis gpu.
Jealous Nvidia? Too bad ATI makes better chips like the ones in the 360 and Wii.
geist117
Wrong. Nvidia is the better company and makes better chips. Not too mention they release all the new technology much sooner then ATI. What does ATI do? Copy them, of course.
http://wii.ign.com/articles/760/760643p1.html Of course thats what they would say, that's how they get more money dfnj123
Isn't nVidia a graphics card manufacturer. Of course they are going to say stupid crap like that. They want everyone to be PC gamers and buy all their PCÂ graphic cards. nVidia wished they had some type of graphical hardware in the DS Lite.
Also, Roy Taylor comments are seriously bias. His comments of watching "24" on a 7in black & white T.V. has no merit at all. I could easily watch any T.V. show on a 7in Black & White T.V. and still enjoy it. It's about the quality of the show, not necessarily what color it's in. Yes, graphics are important, but without story, sound/music, gameplay and fun, it would just be a pretty picture. Video games aren't just about pictures Roy.
[QUOTE="KeyWii"][QUOTE="YellowPik"]Coming from the makers of graphics cards, I would think they might have a good reason for saying that.Golden_surfer
That argument is flawed. Even with the Wii's poor technical specs, it still NEEDS & USES a video card.Of course telling people they can forget about graphics and just use middle range cards instead of high end might be a little worriersome for companies like Nvidia, which sell a new video cards at the tune of 500 a pop. So I guess the argument isn't flawed at all. Nvidia still sells cheaper cards too. They're a successful company, they can easily produce and profit off cheaper video cards. But game creators want to make better looking games, and gamers want to play those better looking games. So Nvidia and ATi make those high end cards because one day, they'll be low-end cards. It's called progression.
So...the only response to this so far is "But they make teh video cards!"?
Why is it that no one has a valid counter-argument to what they said? They made some good points: our emotional experience is often directly tied to the visuals of a game. Teufelhuhn
I don't think the VG experience can evolve with graphics alone. I think Nintendo made a bold choice in which I agree on in perspective of graphics.
[QUOTE="Golden_surfer"][QUOTE="KeyWii"][QUOTE="YellowPik"]Coming from the makers of graphics cards, I would think they might have a good reason for saying that.KeyWii
That argument is flawed. Even with the Wii's poor technical specs, it still NEEDS & USES a video card.Of course telling people they can forget about graphics and just use middle range cards instead of high end might be a little worriersome for companies like Nvidia, which sell a new video cards at the tune of 500 a pop. So I guess the argument isn't flawed at all. Nvidia still sells cheaper cards too. They're a successful company, they can easily produce and profit off cheaper video cards. But game creators want to make better looking games, and gamers want to play those better looking games. So Nvidia and ATi make those high end cards because one day, they'll be low-end cards. It's called progression.
Hmm, I don't think drowning the market with cheaper graphics cards would be a good buisness plan as you need to encourage consumers to keep purchasing your products in order to make money... advancing the technology in graphics chips is what spurrs this continual purchasing of products and keeps companys like Nvidia a float... It is the same with most electronic products ( TVs, Keyboards, Sound Systems are all examples )
[QUOTE="geist117"]Jealous Nvidia? Too bad ATI makes better chips like the ones in the 360 and Wii.KeyWii
OH WAIT. So now even the Wii has a better graphics card than the PS3? I can't take it anymore... hahaha... give me a break. Fanboys... so funny. Way to put a post out of context, let alone put your comprehention into question. Geist117 said chips... Nothing to do with the Wii having better graphics than the PS3 which is a ludacrus claim. It's just coincidence that the Wii uses ATI tech.
[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]So...the only response to this so far is "But they make teh video cards!"?
Why is it that no one has a valid counter-argument to what they said? They made some good points: our emotional experience is often directly tied to the visuals of a game. Teh_Stevz
I don't think the VG experience can evolve with graphics alone. I think Nintendo made a bold choice in which I agree on in perspective of graphics.
Of course it can't, and thats why Nvidia didn't say that. All they said was that graphics are important, which is true. Nintendo is basically ignoring graphics completely, which I don't agree with.
[QUOTE="KeyWii"][QUOTE="geist117"]Jealous Nvidia? Too bad ATI makes better chips like the ones in the 360 and Wii.Teh_Stevz
OH WAIT. So now even the Wii has a better graphics card than the PS3? I can't take it anymore... hahaha... give me a break. Fanboys... so funny. Way to put a post out of context, let alone put your comprehention into question. Geist117 said chips... Nothing to do with the Wii having better graphics than the PS3 which is a ludacrus claim. It's just coincidence that the Wii uses ATI tech. Please provide proof of these "superior chips" in the Wii and 360.
The RSX has superior chips to the Wii's video card because the RSX us a better video card, it's pretty simple logic.
[QUOTE="Teh_Stevz"][QUOTE="KeyWii"][QUOTE="geist117"]Jealous Nvidia? Too bad ATI makes better chips like the ones in the 360 and Wii.KeyWii
OH WAIT. So now even the Wii has a better graphics card than the PS3? I can't take it anymore... hahaha... give me a break. Fanboys... so funny. Way to put a post out of context, let alone put your comprehention into question. Geist117 said chips... Nothing to do with the Wii having better graphics than the PS3 which is a ludacrus claim. It's just coincidence that the Wii uses ATI tech. Please provide proof of these "superior chips" The RSX has superior chips because it is a better video card, it's pretty simple logic. Now... Did I say that or did geist117 say that? :roll:
[QUOTE="KeyWii"][QUOTE="Teh_Stevz"][QUOTE="KeyWii"][QUOTE="geist117"]Jealous Nvidia? Too bad ATI makes better chips like the ones in the 360 and Wii.Teh_Stevz
OH WAIT. So now even the Wii has a better graphics card than the PS3? I can't take it anymore... hahaha... give me a break. Fanboys... so funny. Way to put a post out of context, let alone put your comprehention into question. Geist117 said chips... Nothing to do with the Wii having better graphics than the PS3 which is a ludacrus claim. It's just coincidence that the Wii uses ATI tech. Please provide proof of these "superior chips" The RSX has superior chips because it is a better video card, it's pretty simple logic. Now... Did I say that or did geist117 say that? :roll: Well you're defending his statement that the Wii has superior chips to the PS3, but you acknowledge the RSX as the superior video card. So tell me, how does that work? The superior video card must also have superior chips. Meet logic. If you say the Wii has superior chips, it must also be the superior video card... only we all know that is not the case.
They're right. Graphics have ALWAYS spurred the industry forward. When a new console was released, we would be treated with the best new visuals. That tradition suddenly stopped with the WIi.KeyWii
Indeed, both N64 and GC were the best or at least competant for their time, now Wii stuck to GC graphics, one era back
They're right. Graphics have ALWAYS spurred the industry forward. When a new console was released, we would be treated with the best new visuals. That tradition suddenly stopped with the WIi.KeyWii
True. But Ninty is the only console maker that could pull this off. Their games generally aren't graphics intensive...they may still look good due to artistc style (like FF has always looked good), but they definitely don't push the envelope.
[QUOTE="Teh_Stevz"]Now... Did I say that or did geist117 say that? :roll:KeyWii
Well you're defending his statement that the Wii has superior chips to the PS3, but you acknowledge the RSX as the superior video card. So tell me, how does that work? No. I'm not agreeing with geist117's statement and for that matter I don't care for what GPX card is superior. I'm questioning your interpretation of your post towards them.
Well I would not expect a Graphics Manufacturer to say anything else. But they got it wrong. Nintendo did not say that graphic don't matter. Just that at the moment they are good enough. Silly graphics person... :P
[QUOTE="KeyWii"]They're right. Graphics have ALWAYS spurred the industry forward. When a new console was released, we would be treated with the best new visuals. That tradition suddenly stopped with the WIi.avenger_dot
Indeed, both N64 and GC were the best or at least competant for their time, now Wii stuck to GC graphics, one era back
I agree. Nintendo even bragged about the N64 being superior to the PS1, but apparently they're too good for graphics now.
Nintendo didn't say graphics don't matter. OGTiago
Yeah but its fanboys said they don't. Search this forum for graphics thread. Practically every fanboy of Nitendo says graphics don't matter. Like they wouldn't want to play Zelda with CGI graphics, 3x the game length, some xbox live online stuff, and 1000 real time features. Imagine the landscape for Zelda looking like Crysis's Island.......yeah graphics don't matter why don't we all go back to playing the NES and Atari then?
Log in to comment