Shigeru Miyamoto doesn't have the ambiition to create photo realistic games, not even for Wii U. He prefers to create a game world that's full of fantasy. Currently he's creating Luigi's Mansion 2 for 3DS, Pikmin 3 for Wii U and an unannounced game.
Yes please. We already have enough amount of developers who can do that. Has anyone seen NI Nu Kuni? Valkyria Chronicles?
Makes sense. None of the Nintendo characters asides from Link would benefit for becoming realistic.
Samus. They could detail the hell out of her suit. F-Zero and Starfox games could also benefit from realistic graphics. In Starfox's case just the Arwings and machines though. A realistic-lookin bi-pedal fox would look so weird lol.
The fact that there are studios that lean in a photo realistic direction is great, but there will always be room for games like Shadow of the Colossus, Limbo, Zelda (Wind Waker), Muramasa, Team Fortress 2, Jet Set Radio, Okami etc etc.
Team Fortress 2 looks and plays great on my crappy PC. I'm glad that Miyamoto isn't pursuing photorealism like everyone else. I did like the Zelda Wii U demo but that wasn't entirely photo-realistic.
I rather devs use their imaginations to make their own art style rather making what they see outside. Pikmin 3 :)
Well, I think part of imagination is to use the innovation that ,with art, improves each generation. There's no reason that there can't be a time and season or a combination into some sort of new sensation to improve the relation between real and fiction.
he said he didn't want to do it, doesn't mean others wont. anyway it all depends on the game.
I love what Miyamato stands for as part of Nintendo but he's a personal hero to me. Awesome guy, brilliant, witty always interesting. Just a wonderful person and there's absolutely no one like him. Now here's the one million dollar question. How did Miyamato create a Chracter in the early eighties that still is relevant today? Loved by children and adults the world over? No one's even come close to accomplishing that not even Walt Disney.
Depends on the game. Most of Miyamoto and Nintendo's first-party stuff just wouldn't suit being photo-realistic but when you consider a photo-realistic Metroid title, that idea goes right out of the window. It'd be fantastic.
he is why nintendo is the best game company every year.
Nintedo is why Nintendo is the best game company every year!
lmao what??? i dont consider a company who only makes childrens games aswell as the same games without changing them for 25 years, they dont even change the storyline. games are fun, but i wouldnt say the best, but thats opinion ofcourse
@Tanir Your trollig is laughably transparent. nintendo is number 1 in software and hardware every year, all year.
Of course they do, you're a closet Nintendo fanboy who can't even handle proper gaming discussion and worship Nintendo as a god.
I support photo-realism for every genre except shooters.I prefer the wacky and unique shooters like bioshock or Left 4 Dead which don't take graphics TOO seriously.
what? that's the opposite of what people would want.
@GribbleGrunger I'm not interested in what others want.All gamers are different and we all want games handled differently.Personally I'm sick of ultra realistic shooters where you fight Taliban or Russians.
perhaps i misunderstood you. i just think out of all the genres it's the FPS that requires photorealism, but i take your point. i hate FPS most of the time myself for the reason you mentioned
I've never been a huge fan of the gritty realistic look that a lot of people seem to want. I can live with it, but would rather haven cartoony fantasy graphics any day. I loved the look of games like 'The Windwaker' and the Sly trilogy.
Respect. Why do we want realism so bad when we live in it already? I don't want a supre realistic violent game for instance, it'd just be disturbing. Games will stop becoming escapism if they become too realistic. Particularly in the visual department.
Not true at all, other than modern shooters and sports titles(and not always) no other genre has realistic graphics or design as the primary graphical focus. I mean even amazing looking games like UC3 and Gears 3 are stylized but to a much higher standard than normal. Photo-realism has its place but quality is always quality and you don't need to make it look realistic to have it look exceptional in graphics fidelity.
I know this. Games needn't look real to look amazing. But think about it: There IS a drive in graphic technology to look as convincing and realistic as possible, but why? Why is this necessary? Game graphics should remain stylized to some extent, there should be no goal to achieve realism. There's no point to it. I'm not sure why you disagree with me here, you're making a correllative point that I would agree with. My point is that photo-realism does seem to be an implicit goal in video-games technology. Not all developers care about it, but it's a goal nonetheless.
"Game graphics should remain stylized to some extent, there should be no goal to achieve realism. There's no point to it." This right here is why I disagree with you, above you claimed gaming as a form of escapism but thats not the entire story. In a racing game I want to become the driver, in a football(soccer) game I want to be the player on the field. Depending on the FPS I want to be that person. Gaming is not only good for escapism but also for immersion and mainly entertainment and people are entertained in a myriad of ways. Just because realism does not fit into your gameplay style doesn't mean other people shouldn't be entitled to it and that's exactly what you're saying. The goal to improve graphics is one that won't change and shouldn't change because for every game that strives for realism there are 5 others that go a different route, not a wrong route just different and variety will keep gaming alive and fresh.
Okay you make a good point about driving and sports games. I'll concede that I hadn't considered that. I suppose i'm kind of fixated on violent games becoming too realistic which almost seems inevitable. I suppose then for simulation games, realism in all departments is important, but I just wish that war games and whatnot wouldn't continue to jump on the bandwagon. It's troubling. Not that I'm one of those maniacs that thinks games cause violence, but it's the symbolism of making a game that fetishizes violence and rewards it, whilst simultaneuously trying to make it as real as possible. It's moral stupidity (A big problem in games), but anyway that's a whole other conversation.
that's true.. and other thing those realistic games when time is passing getting too old and dated, while games with great art style, colorful can last forever.. Examples: Viewtiful joe, Killer 7, Skyward sword, wind waker, marios, kirbys, XIII, Red steel 2, Fragile dreams and other great games
I could care less whether a game is photo-realistic. What he should be working on is you know, making something new for an IP. The last new Nintendo IP that mattered I believe was Pikmin and that was early Gamecube era. I loved Nintendo up till this generation; honestly a good portion of their portable games are enhanced ports of SNES/N64 games and their first party console games consist of usually the same game we've played 5-10 years ago with one or two new tricks. This isn't to say the other companies don't do this, Sony does enhanced ports and has games suffering from sequels with only a few improvements all the time. My problem is that Sony and other companies don't earn half of what Nintendo does using the same practices. Nintendo is the ONLY company I know of who can get millions of sales from just doing enhanced ports. Super Mario 64 DS sold millions for the DS. Ocarina of Time 3D, a slightly enhanced port of OoT (not to mention the second time it had been remade after Master Quest on Gamecube) was somehow reason enough for some consumers to go shell out hundreds of dollars on a new system. It baffles me. They somehow all get flawless reviews as well, while remakes like Halo:Anniversary or Metal Gear Solid get pats on the back. I feel Nintendo strives on nostalgia. Hell, I'll admit I bought Pokemon Black because I remembered how much fun I used to have with it, same reason I bought Twilight Princess. There's nothing wrong with this of course, but when you see Mario Kart 7 hauling ass in the sales charts when original games struggle to get on the list it makes me sad, Nintendo has likely made more profits than Sony and Microsoft combined, there's no reason they can't take a risk on new software for their systems.
I love how you call the remake a slightly enhanced port and then say the actual port was a "remade" version. Master quest was not remade on gamecube it was a port of both the original and master quest versions of the game, rendered in a higher resolution. The 3D version on the other hand had new 3D models for pretty much everything, redone music made to sound like the originals, better lighting, some control aspects felt better, and it ran at 30FPS.
you are stupid, they made alot of new ips last year, the problem is people ignore it unless it's nintendo more brand recognizable characters. Some of these new ips are xenoblade, soma bringer, The last story, fling swing, and technically kid icarus uprising cause it plays nothing like the first two
didnt shigsy make pushmo, thats a new IP.
Nintendo, always putting gameplay and artstyle first. That's not to say photo-realism would be BAD, it's just not as important as most people would think.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.