Wii U Daily got a chance to try out the Wii U console and some games.
TNS: Nintendo has failed to win a trademark battle against a Costa Rican supermarket named Super Mario owned by Don José Mario Alfaro González.
Nintendo going after grocery stores now? Wow what lame legal stuff are they going to do next?Not suing enough?
the funny thing is tho, that store had that name for yyeeears, and just now Nintendo is like coming forward.
good. that store has had that name for years and just now Nintendo came knocking.
not sure what Nintendos issue is lately.
Good the more they lose the better. “Nintendo spends more time litigating against little people than they do making games and consoles,” So true, yet they never get the money they spend in court fees and lawyers back, what a waste of time and money.
Nintendo has finally acquired the remaining 4% of Monolith Soft's shares, making it a wholly-owned subsidiary.
One of the best Nintendo first party developers who can squeeze most out of Nintendo platforms.
It si quite a feat that they managed to improve the graphics on Xenoblade Chronicles 3 in comparison to 2 as Digital Foundry pointed out in their tech review.
It would look so much better with some decent power. When your characters were in a closeup they became very blurry, the ground looked like PS2 graphics. That’s not on Monolith though. Hopefully the Switch 2 is considerably more powerful but I’m not sure it will be
Most likely it will be.
But also very likely DLSS or some proprietary variant will handle the heavy lifting on visuals.
Dedicated hardware-based ray tracing and a decent CPU should be a good starting point.
I enjoyed playing XC3 more than Tales of Arise on my PS5. So graphics are not everything.
Imagine if Nintendo made a Next Gen Console stronger than the Series or PS5. They would completely crush the competition. I’m not a Nintendo fanboy in the slightest but let’s be real here, the only thing stopping Nintendo from world domination is the lack of power.
"If you're not directly working on the game, go away" - former Retro world artist, Nate Purkeypile
Then there is Microsoft's approach which is just to piss in the wind and 95% of their stuff turns out bad. Developers might like that personally but you'll be out of a job quicker than you know it through badly shipped products.
First party Nintendo titles are held to a specific standard for a reason. It could be argued that both Sony and MS could benefit from doing the same, but you are right with MS nonchalant approach and "it scored well internally" and then putting out something like Redfall. Even Halo, MS' flagship series, wasn't overseen with the fine tooth comb to ensure it was top notch quality.
Nintendo first party games are very rarely duds, let alone non functional ones. You don't get that without a little (or a lot) of micromanaging. Is it annoying? No doubt. Their track record speaks for itself though and you can't deny that.
I think there is good evidence for both sides of that argument, really.
Japan Studio didn't have much oversight and that studio produced pure magic. Financially, it wasn't a cash cow studio, but I sense that anyone who played their games really felt the care and passion for their creation at work. Media Molecule is another one. I personally feel that Sony and Microsoft micromanagement tends to be overly negative. It might work for Nintendo because they're big on making a fun and engaging game first and entice people that way.
Sony as of late and Microsoft for at least two generations now, when they get into the micromanagement, it seems like a profoundly anxious experience.
i dunno if i agree with that.
i think some leeway is necessary to achieve atleast some sort of spectacle.
To everyone saying that the Wii U has a weak line up cause of prots or the graphics sucking compared to PC specs, for one thing, the wii u launch actually has a good load of exclusives. Far more than any previous console launch and some good ones too (ex: mario U, pikmin 3, nintendo land, the wonderful 101, bayonetta 2, etc.). As for specs, compare the specs needed to run battlefield 3 on pc and on ps3/360. Consoles have a mere 512mb of ram and still run it pretty respectively. Pc needs atleast 2 gigs to run it. You can't compare PC gaming to console. PC has too much driver lag that does not allow direct access to the GPU as well as the impossibility to optimize for so consoles don't need 4gigs of ram to look good. Besides, later on in the life cycle, it may be 1.5gigs to games as the OS gets optimized.