Gameplay mechanics that are allowed due to graphics ability.
Close. Gameplay mechanics that are allowed due to hardware. Graphics illustrate your interactions. Pretty graphics make them more appetizing to your eyes. Moving gobs of verticies around means new avenues of game play are available. There are no games, however, that hinge on bump mapping.
If the visuals in a game are so far ahead of everything else, I could overlook other shortcomings just for some eyecandy goodness. The same applies for story, soundtrack and gameplay. I'll find out beforehand what the game is like, so it's not like I'll be getting ripped off or anything.
We're all guilty of falling for gimmicks. The game still stinks, though, you just don't feel ripped off about it.
Is the standard cable S-Video? S-Video signals have deficiencies that aren't apparent on most SD TVs. Once you have the extra resolution and extra screen size, it really sticks out.
No, at least in my case S-Video didn't help. (Pilot error is a possibility, here.)
^^ That is effectively what I got. My HDTV picked right up on it and it works really well. Virtual Console games look great on it! (the original Donkey Kong Country felt muddy until I got this cable..) I even have my Wii set to 16:9, so Super Mario Galaxy looked great on it.
The problem isn't the resolution, it's how the TV was taking the signal and putting it up on the screen. It's like they didn't want to bother with going through the extra effort to make that look nice. I had the same problem when I hooked up an old DVD player to an LCD monitor via NTSC.
As long as the graphics were designed for it (they would be.), it'd play just fine.
That's also not what the discusion is about. Which... is amazing considering how clearly it has been illustrated both in the video game and in the movie world.
If you look at one of the first posts in this story, you'll see the claim that currently 90% of people download instead of paying, and that if the RIAA were nice only 50% would do so. If this is true, wouldn't downloading cause lower revenues?
You would expect so. But in reality, there hasn't been a drop in revenue that paralells an increase in 'piracy'. What has happened is sales have gone up. In fact, I think it was 2009 that movie sales had reached an all time high. (I may have the year wrong.)
If it were open every day, and anyone could see people going into the store and taking out goods without paying, yes, it would be emptied soon.
Of course it would, by that point it's assumed that it's intentional. In the mean time, they HAD shoppers there and like half of them paid. On the flip side, we have retail all over the place with a very low shop-lifting rates and virtually no real 'security'. The assumption that everybody's a thief just waiting for an opportunity has not played out.
Most people realize they can get away with it, so they do it without paying. I'm not sure why this is so hard for you to understand.
In 2003 the RIAA claimed two billion (yes, billion with a B) songs were being traded a month. They had record sales that year. If two billion songs were really getting traded at the expense of spending money, that'd turn up on some sales report somewhere. A document like that would have been pure gold for the RIAA's case, but it never materialized. In the last 8 years, piracy has only gotten easier,. During that time, iTunes has grown more and more successful.
I'm being told that masses of people are thieves but nobody's showing me proof of it. So, yes, it is hard for me to understand.
Yeah, we should just go back to making all games in 320x200 with 16 colours because graphics don't matter at all. Portal 2 would be fucking awesome like that.
Take Portal 2, play it until you're bored with it, then double the resolution and poly count and tell us about how you immediately picked it up and played it over again.
The problem is that once there's no security and some people realize that they can take without being punished, that releases a flood of people who will overwhelm anyone but armed security.
It's not just that, there's always something like a natural disaster motivating it. Again, if it were just as simple as you're saying, it'd be a huge free-for-all.
It's worth noting that 'looting' usually follows something pretty big and serious happening. Otherwise all shopping centers would require armed security at all times.
Again, you are describing game mechanics, not graphics. I understand completely what you're saying, but you're arguing against the wrong point. The statement "prettier graphics don't make a game better" is not a statement that against the idea that more processing power means new types of games to play.
I'm getting tired of the meme that graphics are good enough and don't matter any more. My favorite game is Forza 3, and it would DEFINITELY be better at 1080p with a solid 60 fps (rather than the current un-aliased 720 with noticeable stuttering, and cardboard cutout pit crews). I cannot see how that could not be considered an improvement.
Frame-rate is tied to the control of the game, so there's some merit to what you say. But as far as cardboard cutout pit crews go, you wouldn't be noticing those after a few plays. Improved graphics are nice, but a faster processor doesn't make the game more fun.
Headaches? Really? Do you get headaches watching Youtube videos that are at half the Wii's output resolution, too? Or are you being melodramatic?
I think he's referring to the fact that if you take the cable that comes with the Wii and hook it into an HDTV it looks like ass. I think at some point Nintendo should have started shipping Wii consoles with component cables.
Ah, well if you decide to get back into it, keep those cables in mind. The problem isn't that the Wii's output sucks, the problem is that modern HDTV's interpret the signal lousily. It's something I will never understand.
I apologize if this is a dumb question, but did you get the component display cable for the Wii? Playing the Wii on my 46" drove me nuts until I sprung for that connection.
Why must we leave the planet? Nothing is going to happen to it. The Earth is a lot tougher than we are, and will be here for a long long time, so "man is destroying Earth" isn't a reason. Are you betting on the mother of comets or asteroids hitting?
Slashdot Mirror
Gameplay mechanics that are allowed due to graphics ability.
Close. Gameplay mechanics that are allowed due to hardware. Graphics illustrate your interactions. Pretty graphics make them more appetizing to your eyes. Moving gobs of verticies around means new avenues of game play are available. There are no games, however, that hinge on bump mapping.
If the visuals in a game are so far ahead of everything else, I could overlook other shortcomings just for some eyecandy goodness. The same applies for story, soundtrack and gameplay. I'll find out beforehand what the game is like, so it's not like I'll be getting ripped off or anything.
We're all guilty of falling for gimmicks. The game still stinks, though, you just don't feel ripped off about it.
I didn't realize how smart I am. I took an IQ test and scored 100 percent!
Nobody said that graphics were everything, you just assumed that was what people meant.
That wasn't what I was arguing. But while we're on this topic, nobody's saying we don't need anything past the Atari 2600, either.
The ability for good graphics allows a lot more freedom in what you can do and portray in a game or film.
You're not talking about graphics, you're talking about game play mechanics.
If there were two games that were equal in all regards except one looked a lot better, that's the one I'm getting.
I would, too. But, what you would NOT do, is buy the prettier game that's less fun.
Don't let this stop you from making a lame excuse for dismissing the survey results because they're inconvenient to your belief system.
Heh. I like how 'show me the losses' is a 'belief system', but a small sample survey from a country that gets everything last is irrefutable fact.
He said the survey showed Kiwis were willing to pay for products, but they were frustrated with supply.
Oh lookie lookie. Thank you for sharing that with me.
Is the standard cable S-Video? S-Video signals have deficiencies that aren't apparent on most SD TVs. Once you have the extra resolution and extra screen size, it really sticks out.
No, at least in my case S-Video didn't help. (Pilot error is a possibility, here.)
http://www.amazon.com/HD-Pro-Component-Cable-Wii-Nintendo/dp/B000M4KIME/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1303770093&sr=8-1
^^ That is effectively what I got. My HDTV picked right up on it and it works really well. Virtual Console games look great on it! (the original Donkey Kong Country felt muddy until I got this cable..) I even have my Wii set to 16:9, so Super Mario Galaxy looked great on it.
The problem isn't the resolution, it's how the TV was taking the signal and putting it up on the screen. It's like they didn't want to bother with going through the extra effort to make that look nice. I had the same problem when I hooked up an old DVD player to an LCD monitor via NTSC.
They also released the new name, which will tentatively be, "Poop".
Surely you can do better than that.
How about.. a mutli-player oriented successor named Wii2P.
As long as the graphics were designed for it (they would be.), it'd play just fine.
That's also not what the discusion is about. Which... is amazing considering how clearly it has been illustrated both in the video game and in the movie world.
If you look at one of the first posts in this story, you'll see the claim that currently 90% of people download instead of paying, and that if the RIAA were nice only 50% would do so. If this is true, wouldn't downloading cause lower revenues?
You would expect so. But in reality, there hasn't been a drop in revenue that paralells an increase in 'piracy'. What has happened is sales have gone up. In fact, I think it was 2009 that movie sales had reached an all time high. (I may have the year wrong.)
If it were open every day, and anyone could see people going into the store and taking out goods without paying, yes, it would be emptied soon.
Of course it would, by that point it's assumed that it's intentional. In the mean time, they HAD shoppers there and like half of them paid. On the flip side, we have retail all over the place with a very low shop-lifting rates and virtually no real 'security'. The assumption that everybody's a thief just waiting for an opportunity has not played out.
Most people realize they can get away with it, so they do it without paying. I'm not sure why this is so hard for you to understand.
In 2003 the RIAA claimed two billion (yes, billion with a B) songs were being traded a month. They had record sales that year. If two billion songs were really getting traded at the expense of spending money, that'd turn up on some sales report somewhere. A document like that would have been pure gold for the RIAA's case, but it never materialized. In the last 8 years, piracy has only gotten easier,. During that time, iTunes has grown more and more successful.
I'm being told that masses of people are thieves but nobody's showing me proof of it. So, yes, it is hard for me to understand.
Yeah, we should just go back to making all games in 320x200 with 16 colours because graphics don't matter at all. Portal 2 would be fucking awesome like that.
Take Portal 2, play it until you're bored with it, then double the resolution and poly count and tell us about how you immediately picked it up and played it over again.
This "experiment" shows that a large number of people will ONLY obey the rules of society if somebody is standing behind them with a heavy stick.
No, it doesn't.
Yeah, sort of like the free-for-all of people downloading music and movies for free, huh?
Not really, nothing (i.e. revenue) has actually been reported missing.
When people realize they can get away with something they shouldn't do, many people do take advantage of the situation.
Yeah, that's why this store was completely emptied and nobody paid, right?
You're full of crap and you know it.
I might realize it if you weren't supporting my point.
Why do you expect 1/4th to be honest people? I wouldn't trust anybody.
When you leave your desk to go home, do you lock all the drawers?
The problem is that once there's no security and some people realize that they can take without being punished, that releases a flood of people who will overwhelm anyone but armed security.
It's not just that, there's always something like a natural disaster motivating it. Again, if it were just as simple as you're saying, it'd be a huge free-for-all.
It's worth noting that 'looting' usually follows something pretty big and serious happening. Otherwise all shopping centers would require armed security at all times.
Again, you are describing game mechanics, not graphics. I understand completely what you're saying, but you're arguing against the wrong point. The statement "prettier graphics don't make a game better" is not a statement that against the idea that more processing power means new types of games to play.
From all of the claims the *AA made, I would have expected an empty store and 0 paying customers.
Improved graphics are nice, but a faster processor doesn't make the game more fun.
oh come on, even if improved realism in physics and AI dont float your boat, wacky ragdoll physics and thousands of objects make stuff a lot of fun
You're not describing graphics, you're describing gameplay mechanics. Nobody said improved graphics don't open doors for new gameplay.
I wouldn't call that a truce. It's more like a desire to recoup all the investment they put into their respective systems.
I'm getting tired of the meme that graphics are good enough and don't matter any more. My favorite game is Forza 3, and it would DEFINITELY be better at 1080p with a solid 60 fps (rather than the current un-aliased 720 with noticeable stuttering, and cardboard cutout pit crews). I cannot see how that could not be considered an improvement.
Frame-rate is tied to the control of the game, so there's some merit to what you say. But as far as cardboard cutout pit crews go, you wouldn't be noticing those after a few plays. Improved graphics are nice, but a faster processor doesn't make the game more fun.
Headaches? Really? Do you get headaches watching Youtube videos that are at half the Wii's output resolution, too? Or are you being melodramatic?
I think he's referring to the fact that if you take the cable that comes with the Wii and hook it into an HDTV it looks like ass. I think at some point Nintendo should have started shipping Wii consoles with component cables.
The Wii is basically two Gamecubes duct taped together.
Oh wow, I had forgotten about that silly attempt to discredit the Wii. Blast from the past!
Ah, well if you decide to get back into it, keep those cables in mind. The problem isn't that the Wii's output sucks, the problem is that modern HDTV's interpret the signal lousily. It's something I will never understand.
I apologize if this is a dumb question, but did you get the component display cable for the Wii? Playing the Wii on my 46" drove me nuts until I sprung for that connection.
Why must we leave the planet? Nothing is going to happen to it. The Earth is a lot tougher than we are, and will be here for a long long time, so "man is destroying Earth" isn't a reason. Are you betting on the mother of comets or asteroids hitting?
No, I'd bet on a nuclear war.