Gamnesia "E3 is a wonderful time for gaming fans across the globe. We get several new reveals, new demos, and tons of information about games we are craving more information from."
I think that's going a bit to far. Nintendo had a good E3 but lets not get carried away. The Wii U has also had an extra year on the market, I think people forget about that. "Nathan Drake looks fantastic in Uncharted 4. However, do we really know if the game will look this good? No, we don't." 1. Naughty already clarified this. They are not using pre rendering at all and it's real time. That's in game, which ND also said. 2. I don't think people realise who Corrinne Yu is and how big of an addition she is to an already super talented team. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/w... 3. The same could be said for Zelda, who's creator also stated the game will look like it did. I have zero doubt either game will look any different when released. Nintendo and Sony's elite developers are the best in the industry.
My lone gripe with this is that if E3 is a show of lies, who do we believe? Do we believe Naughty Dog when they say that is what the game will look like? We believed it when ubisoft said as much. Is Eiji Aonuma correct or will there be a small downgrade at the end because they have to or the FPS is too inconsistent? I'm not saying the PS4 can't do what happened with Uncharted 4, but there are some very PC specific games that can't even reach that sort of realism on rigs that are way more powerful than the PS4. Something tells me there are some clever trickery here, and the game isn't going to look like that when it is finalized. It will look good mind you, but I think they just set the bar unrealistically high.
but how many games did reporters get an actual hands on play? just 2 or 3 E3 is supposed to be mainly about showcasing the products for people to try out for themselves, that is the point of expos.
No, E3 is meant for attendees to promote their upcoming games. Sometimes that includes playable demos and others mean just trailers.
I think we can all trust ND at this point. And to a large degree, Nintendo.
The Uncharted 4 and Zelda Wii U trailers were the same thing: Real-time cutscenes. We don't know how the actual gameplay will look like for either game. That's where this article's bias became clear.
@ShinMaster I really don't understand how or why people gain this level of uncertainty from in-engine footage. Nintendo and Sony are not Ubisoft and it's pretty unlikely that Uncharted 4 or Zelda Wii U will look at all worse than the footage that was given. Ubisoft or Warner Bros. are different because they don't develop for a single platform but Nintendo and Sony have little excuse not to make their games look as good as possible from promotion to release.
Not sure why anyone would doubt how Zelda Wii U will look, Nintendo's games tend to look better when released than they do in their reveals.
Until the games are in the consumers hands all bets are off on how it will actually look.
Why do people keep bringing up Nintendo's year head-start as if it's a significant factor? They completely screwed up their chance to make that year significant. After the [completely natural and expected] first burst of sales, the system slumped in record time. The first year's head-start did little to nothing for the system's chances. Everyone needs to quit pretending otherwise by mentioning it as if it were some sort of huge boon. It's doing as well as it is now because of changes in marketing tactics, key titles, and elimination of some of the bad stigma surrounding it. Not because it had "a year's head start" which wasn't even properly taken advantage of with tons of first party games and huge amounts of advertisement for both first and third party games.
exactly then brag about PS4 and Xbone sales being better.
What is this garbage? Nintendo has a magnificent showing at e3 (Unlike Sony) and we have to be constantly reminded that the Wii U had a year head start? The Xbox 360 had a year head start and nobody said a word about it!!!! And Elji Anouma said the Zelda presentation was IN GAME! And to equate Nintendo software development teams with Sony software development teams is FUCKING INSANE!!!!!! Nintendo home video game consoles live on Nintendo triple a software. Sony's PS4, just like Microsoft's Xbox One are pretty little PORT MACHINES! They even look alike.
Like Nintendo haven't been doing ports before? Gimme a break. Do at least some bit of research at how many ports your precious Ninty have been doing over the years genius.
The both of you are being ridiculous. There's a plethora of PS4/Xbox One games that are not remasters or ports. The Order, Sunset Overdrive, Evolve, Batman, Hardline and Destiny. And how many remasters has Nintendo even done? Game rereleases are a part of this industry and the both of you need to stop attacking others and get over that fact.
Least the remastered games nintendo do are not just a year after the original... I still remember everyone bashing wind waker HD... That was 10 years after the original release!
I like Jim sterling and his candid approach bit this is absurd. E3 isnt anymore a showing of lies than anything else. If thats the case, we should b raving about EAs press conference too. E3 is exactly what it is. Its glam. Publishers attempt to wow us with what they r working on. The problem is either the way we see it or the way its reported to us. And if developers are lying, we call the out. Do we want to tell developers only to show us what is done, or have them never push boundaries? We all know that many games at E3 never get finished etc. The reason Nintendo doesnt fall into the trap is b/cbit cant push technical boundaries. Yes, they show us what they hav and thats cool, but if others followed suit, we may not get much. Also, isnt E3 technically the days that follow with playable demos of everything? Maybe more emphasis should be put on that. But I still want my teasers etc. I am smart enough to know that that isnt the final product. Stop asking them to play to the lowest common denominator. Inform better.
The TreeHouse gave me much to watch in those three days and made E3 feel fresh for me, but I wouldn't go as far as to say 'Everyone Else Shat on' E3. 7_7
All three of them had decent E3's, but nothing mind blowing. I still don't understand love for The Treehouse. Sony and Microsoft also did livestreams of games and discussions with developers.
It's because The Treehouse was 3 full days of live-from-the-show-floor content, not just 1, and it was also host to interviews with some of the developers behind the games. Sony's streams and Microsoft's streams didn't offer that.
Yes. Yes, they did. Three full days of live-from-the-show-floor content. I was literally AT E3 watching Sony and Microsoft doing all of this stuff.
Let him be some people cant accept nintendo did better than sony
nothing mind blowing? lol, i guess you didint watch the tournament for smash and that crowd man..best live reaction out of all of the big three. lol that mega man final smasg was gg.
Idiot. We live in a world of over 7 billion people. No one will carry the exact same opinions as you do.
If you call people idiots, who do not understand opinion, then you call a lot of people on here idiots.
Not presented in the same fashion. Not by a long shot.
This is sony-loving n4g, im positive if sonys stream was up to par with Nintendos, we would have heard. No, its not a conspiracy, Nintendo just did it better. Also, ive havent heard one person so far say they watched a Sony or microsoft stream, if it existed, it wasnt popular.
The way Nintendo handled E3 with the online mega stream and the super streamlined and condensed web broadcast rather than the over-elaborate and hilariously overproduced stage show is definitely something I would not mind Sony and Microsoft copying for E3 in the future, that's for sure.
Agreed. I really don't like the whole stage thing. Especially the Ubisoft sections with the annoying host.
Definitely. Maybe we'd get to see more gameplay trailers out of them, too, if we're not waiting for someone strutting around on stage to finish talking.
I disagree, largely because I don't believe they did themselves too many favors with their E3 performance, outside of their already existing fans. Did they advertise their stream on various sites to draw in gamers outside of their fans? Did they air it on some TV channel or another? The traditional E3 presser gets coverage from a large number of media outlets; I don't think- not that I'm 100% certain- that Nintendo's streams get the same attention. This doesn't mean they had a bad showing. But I do wonder if it did them the sort of good that E3 is supposed to do, which is to expose new games/hardware/services to the world.
They advertised the crap out of their E3 stuff, and their tournament got more attention[and better crowd reactions to watch] than the live stage shows. They also got a HUGE amount of coverage from all corners of the internet as far as the media is concerned. It did them a world of good, especially compared to last year.
"Did they advertise their stream on various sites to draw in gamers outside of their fans?" Yes they did, as much as Sony and MS advertised their showing outside of their fans. Even better it was directly on Youtube for everyone to see. "Did they air it on some TV channel or another?" Again, anyone person with a tablet, smartphone or access to a computer could access Nintendo's showing. You are not making a compelling argument as to why Nintendo didn't do themselves any favors. "..that Nintendo's streams get the same attention." Well then you are very wrong since a lot of media outlets like this particular article was very impressed by Nintendo. A lot of media outlets even wish Sony and MS would go the Nintendo route for next year's E3.
Zero One, You haven't got a clue. Really good luck!!!!