Zelda: From Tech Demo To Game

[Segitz]

A 256 is much more expensive and has negative impact on the future, because it makes making the console smaller a lot harder, if not impossible.

The 30% is sure a variable ballpark, but it has been more or less true for the past decade or so.

[frosty]

And that "only" cost about 250€, compared to PS3s 600€.

Not a valid comparison... GPU =/= a full system.

[Segitz]

Not a valid comparison... GPU =/= a full system.

Yes... add a 100€ CPU (AMD X2 4000+ at the time...), a 100€ motherboard (can be less) and 100€ RAM (between 2 and 4GB), 100€ PSU/Case and 100€ for both DVDROM and HDD... that sets you back about 750€... but got you a major PC system, which would still hold a candle with most games today, i.e. better than what consoles make games look at higher resolution AND framerate (I know, because I bought said system back in early 2007).

And with the lower prices of PC games, you get that difference back in no time at all. Probably less than a year. Maybe even less than half a year. I can't get into my head, why people always call PC gaming "expensive". Don't buy you prebuild PCs at fucking Walmart. DIY! Or let a friend do it... it's not hard. It was A LOT harder 15 years ago.

So, yeah... it's a valid comparison, I'd say.

[Otacon305]

Too much work and thought involved. You can buy a console based simply on what games are gonna be on it, without worrying if it'll be able to handle them.

[Segitz]

Too much work and thought involved. You can buy a console based simply on what games are gonna be on it, without worrying if it'll be able to handle them.

Absolutely true... and I guess that is the major advantage that consoles have over the PC. But the time has started that console games are just as problematic as PC games.

[frosty]

i DIY myself also, however it still comes out more expensive. Remember, PS3 only cost what it did due to blu-ray having the diode shortages and Cell having a low yield. even with the bad yield of cell, it still would have been $150 or so cheaper. You couldn't build a PC that would have performed better for that price at the time. not with a Geforce 8 series GPU in it. not with a CPU that could keep up. not with enough ram with enough bandwidth.

$150 CPU/mobo combo
$100 in RAM (you couldn't get 4gb that cheap back then,, 2gb most)
$250 video card (8 series)
$100 case with a shitty PSU in it
$100 DVD & HDD

You still pay more, and all you're going to get is a slight resolution increase and a few better shader effects. Hell, even my old PC with a 3ghz dual core (E8500) CPU, 3GB's RAM, and a low end Fermi architecture card still can't run just cause 2 at the same resolution as my PS3 at a stable frame rate. yes, it looks a lot cleaner because I can turn on AA, but if I do and run into a wooded area in the game, the frame rate falls through the floor. same for other similar games. crysis runs like shit, as does any modern game that stresses a GPU.

with PC's, you always have some stupid bottleneck holding you back due to the various configurations of parts, and some games requiring more of one thing than the other. this isn't an issue in a closed system where the devs have to take every limitation into account.

This is why you have to spend a decent amount of money (way more than a console) to get a system that has few enough bottlenecks to run most of the software on the market. even it won't run it all decently.

[Segitz]

Bullshit. My old PC ran Crysis at DX9 at VERY high settings at 1680x1050 with 30Hz, and DX10 with Ultra High settings at 720P.

I didn't play Just Cause 2 on my PC, but on my laptop, which has a bit slower GPU but a bit faster GPU than my old desktop, and it ran very well at 1368x768 (30Hz at higher settings... obviously not all at max, my new PC runs it at 1080P with everything set to max at 60Hz... and that was an upgrade to my old PC, meaning the upgrade did cost me 250€).

Well, in any case, this discussion won't end well either way, so we should stop it.

[Viper]

GC was a so sweet piece of hardware, very powerful, friendly to develop for; since the beginning devs could push a lot of graphics; devs on PS2 needed more time to do it, comparable graphics in the end, not a huge difference, but not as clean. I remember rogue squadron on GC, fantastic, pushing so many polygons with so pretty textures since the beginning, impressive !

Just to validate your statement here, Factor 5 developed Rogue Squadron is just 9 months time. From start to release in just 9 months.

[Bliss]

9 months ?! I din't know, even more impressive. Anyway, GC and PS3 are my most favourite consoles of all time; PSX and N64 runner up. I would love Wii U to impress like GC did from a technical/game-play point of view. And, just a dream, a Mario U killer app at Launch, a 3D Platform ! I know Nintendo can do it, I just don't know if they are interested.

[Viper]

9 months ?! I din't know, even more impressive. Anyway, GC and PS3 are my most favourite consoles of all time; PSX and N64 runner up. I would love Wii U to impress like GC did from a technical/game-play point of view. And, just a dream, a Mario U killer app at Launch, a 3D Platform ! I know Nintendo can do it, I just don't know if they are interested.

One thing that has me excited is that Nintendo will soon break ground a new $212 million, 400,000 sq foot R&D facility early next year. You want them to get serious about delivering new stuff, you don't get much more serious than that.

[Bliss]

I'm looking forward to it, I'll stay tuned on Wii U forum.

[Otacon305]

One thing that has me excited is that Nintendo will soon break ground a new $212 million, 400,000 sq foot R&D facility early next year. You want them to get serious about delivering new stuff, you don't get much more serious than that.

I'll take "good" over "new" any day.

[Viper]

I'll take "good" over "new" any day.

Only you would find a way to say something negative about that.

I mean seriously. They are expanding their capabilities, hiring 1,200 new R&D employees and you just want to shit on it.

[SadPanda]

i have a swell idea.

take those 1,200 new folk and churn out Pikmin, Mario Tennis, F-Zero, and a kickass Pokemon game for the WiiU launch and Nintendo can just take my paycheque for a year.

[Viper]

i have a swell idea.

take those 1,200 new folk and churn out Pikmin, Mario Tennis, F-Zero, and a kickass Pokemon game for the WiiU launch and Nintendo can just take my paycheque for a year.

Unfortunately, completion of the new facility is scheduled for sometime in early 2013 so it won't churn out anything for launch.

Doesn't mean the current teams aren't working on them though. We already know Pikmin 3 is in the works and you can bet it's been bumped up to a Wii U launch title by now.

[Segitz]

For a "R&D" center, I'd like them to do something NEW. Not reiterate what Nintendo has done the past 2 decades (my feeling, not necessarily reality). Though... some people (even here) might prefer that. I don't.

[Otacon305]

I want to see them do what they've already done, but better. Sure, Mario has gone from moving on a flat 2D plane to a flat 3D plane to a round 3D plane, but he's also running around in bee and penguin suits. Nintendo claims they market to "everyone", not just kids. Well it doesn't take a genius to know that only kids (young kids) are going to think a bee or penguin suit is cool. Why not a jetpack and a luge suit? You know who thinks jetpacks are cool? EVERYONE. And I'm only the only one who noticed Mario has gone from hitting shit with a hammer, doing punch-punch-kick combos, and kicking shells at enemies to spraying crap with water and shooting living glitter? And that's just Mario. I don't have the time to get into the LoZ, or their stupid hardware concepts.