Nintendo can’t even do games on a technical standard higher than 2012, how should they use AI? And their hardware is way to weak as well BTW.
They’re just lucky that the current AI Models are crap, otherwise this would be the next standard they’re missing in their “more of the same since 1980” games.
They should use more energy and money for developing innovative games than suing every fart on the planet.
They’re just lucky that the current AI Models are crap, otherwise this would be the next standard they’re missing in their “more of the same since 1980” games.
So you are complaining they are not adopting something you admit is currently crap?!
I’m going to complain about billionaire taxes then, I mean I have no billions but I’ll complain anyway
No, I’m saying, that Nintendo wouldnt benefit at all from AI, so why should they use it in the first place? And the reasons for that are:
-AI in it’s current state can only support in certain areas
-Nintendo’s games aren’t massive enough to profit from the things AI can do atm
An example: AI can do Text to Speech, but Nintendo doesn’t make games like TES. Nintendo needs to optimise their games highly to run on a switch, which AI can’t do.
He is just stating the obvious, like saying the sun is hot.
He is just stating the obvious, like saying the sun is hot.
But he could say they are engineering to catch up to the trend, right? the question is not if they are to implement AI features in their current 8 year old console. The question is if AI is in their development path in the future
And the answer is no, Nintendo does not seem to see value there. I for one agree, the stuff you mentioned about AI in other comments in the thread go from “meh” to “I actively do not want that in my games”. This is just my opinion as a casual gamer but I see logic in Nintendo’s stance here.
I’ll never understand how these always get downvoted. I understand Nintendo people love their zelda and mario games, but their console is less powerful than most mobile phones. I bought disco elysium on the switch that i only have for my nephew. It has a lot of trouble running DISCO ELYSIUM!
If you only judge games based on graphics, I understand your point of view.
But I think it can be argued that Nintendo’s gameplay/design is pretty often up to date, if not ahead of it’s time. And tbh to me that matters the most.
Putting the whole judging games based on graphics out there feels dishonest. I personally don’t give a rip how games look on the switch or can at the very least get over it pretty quick as long as they aren’t plgsued with performance issues . We shouldn’t be in a spot where playing modern console games on emulator is often a better experience than the real thing.
The switch architecture is very dated and the only ones who really know their way around to hack things together and make it kinda work is Nintendo. Still amazed that TOTK is playable on Switch with everything going on, but for a third-party dev to do the same would probably take an insane amount of effort. Its not worth it. Just update the standard and everyone will benefit.
How are they ahead of their time? AC is just grinding and grinding and grinding. Mario ist jumping jumping and jumping. They do good lvl design but that’s it. No story, no characters, no innovative gameplay, nearly always just more of the same. Imagine Sony still releasing God of War games with gameplay like the PS2 and PS3 games, they would get hated into oblivion.
Everyone is free to like the games they want and I’m not saying that Nintendo games aren’t fun, but they’re overhyped. Nintendo is a lazy ass company, they innovate only when it is necessary. Without their IPs they would have already gone bankrupt or developer only. They had more than one crappy console, that nearly ruined the company (newest esample: Wii U). Another example are the Pokémon games, where is the innovation? It needs more than five types of garbage can Pokemon’s to call it innovation. And instead of doing good games they keep suing other indie companies that are capable of making better games than Nintendo itself after developing that ip for over 2 decades.
I totally get your point and agree with it. I still play on my Vita, GB and PSP to this day.
What I’m criticising here is Nintendo as a company and the article itself. Is obvious that they don’t want AI because they can’t handle it and they don’t need it. AI atm can replace artists and actors but Nintendo games have nearly nothing to synchronise and the models for the games aren’t that difficult to make. So why should Nintendo care for AI anyway? Just take a look at Google and the other companies spending billions every year just to train their AIs.
Because even though everyone knows Nintendo’s consoles are under powered, they still usually deliver a ton of gameplay fun.
In this particular case, very few people want more “AI” in their stuff… and as even OP admits, current “AI” is crap. So why would I want to pay extra $$$ for hardware that can run “AI” when my gaming experience is likely not going to improve one bit?
Nintendo can’t even do games on a technical standard higher than 2012, how should they use AI? And their hardware is way to weak as well BTW.
They’re just lucky that the current AI Models are crap, otherwise this would be the next standard they’re missing in their “more of the same since 1980” games.
They should use more energy and money for developing innovative games than suing every fart on the planet.
So you are complaining they are not adopting something you admit is currently crap?!
I’m going to complain about billionaire taxes then, I mean I have no billions but I’ll complain anyway
No, I’m saying, that Nintendo wouldnt benefit at all from AI, so why should they use it in the first place? And the reasons for that are:
-AI in it’s current state can only support in certain areas -Nintendo’s games aren’t massive enough to profit from the things AI can do atm
An example: AI can do Text to Speech, but Nintendo doesn’t make games like TES. Nintendo needs to optimise their games highly to run on a switch, which AI can’t do.
He is just stating the obvious, like saying the sun is hot.
But he could say they are engineering to catch up to the trend, right? the question is not if they are to implement AI features in their current 8 year old console. The question is if AI is in their development path in the future
And the answer is no, Nintendo does not seem to see value there. I for one agree, the stuff you mentioned about AI in other comments in the thread go from “meh” to “I actively do not want that in my games”. This is just my opinion as a casual gamer but I see logic in Nintendo’s stance here.
I’ll never understand how these always get downvoted. I understand Nintendo people love their zelda and mario games, but their console is less powerful than most mobile phones. I bought disco elysium on the switch that i only have for my nephew. It has a lot of trouble running DISCO ELYSIUM!
If you only judge games based on graphics, I understand your point of view.
But I think it can be argued that Nintendo’s gameplay/design is pretty often up to date, if not ahead of it’s time. And tbh to me that matters the most.
Ex: Mario Wonder, Odyssey, BOTW, TOTK, Metroid Dread, Animal Crossing, etc
Putting the whole judging games based on graphics out there feels dishonest. I personally don’t give a rip how games look on the switch or can at the very least get over it pretty quick as long as they aren’t plgsued with performance issues . We shouldn’t be in a spot where playing modern console games on emulator is often a better experience than the real thing.
The switch architecture is very dated and the only ones who really know their way around to hack things together and make it kinda work is Nintendo. Still amazed that TOTK is playable on Switch with everything going on, but for a third-party dev to do the same would probably take an insane amount of effort. Its not worth it. Just update the standard and everyone will benefit.
How are they ahead of their time? AC is just grinding and grinding and grinding. Mario ist jumping jumping and jumping. They do good lvl design but that’s it. No story, no characters, no innovative gameplay, nearly always just more of the same. Imagine Sony still releasing God of War games with gameplay like the PS2 and PS3 games, they would get hated into oblivion.
Everyone is free to like the games they want and I’m not saying that Nintendo games aren’t fun, but they’re overhyped. Nintendo is a lazy ass company, they innovate only when it is necessary. Without their IPs they would have already gone bankrupt or developer only. They had more than one crappy console, that nearly ruined the company (newest esample: Wii U). Another example are the Pokémon games, where is the innovation? It needs more than five types of garbage can Pokemon’s to call it innovation. And instead of doing good games they keep suing other indie companies that are capable of making better games than Nintendo itself after developing that ip for over 2 decades.
What about any of those are ahead of their time?
I play on Switch and Pc, different games on each. The attraction to games on the switch for me isn’t graphics or power or performance… at all…
It’s gameplay and form factor.
I totally get your point and agree with it. I still play on my Vita, GB and PSP to this day.
What I’m criticising here is Nintendo as a company and the article itself. Is obvious that they don’t want AI because they can’t handle it and they don’t need it. AI atm can replace artists and actors but Nintendo games have nearly nothing to synchronise and the models for the games aren’t that difficult to make. So why should Nintendo care for AI anyway? Just take a look at Google and the other companies spending billions every year just to train their AIs.
Another things no consumer wants
Because even though everyone knows Nintendo’s consoles are under powered, they still usually deliver a ton of gameplay fun.
In this particular case, very few people want more “AI” in their stuff… and as even OP admits, current “AI” is crap. So why would I want to pay extra $$$ for hardware that can run “AI” when my gaming experience is likely not going to improve one bit?