Jump to content

Breath of the Wild PC Emulation


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Escaped said:

There's nowt besides bipartite egos stopping them from merging with conditions, such as minimum development times.

 

More like they'd never willing do it for the same reason they intentionally nerfed the Playstation addon deal years ago, $$$, they don't want to share the potential profits with anybody else. Buying out a competitor, sure, a merger of equals, not worth it. Controlling the entire supply chain and profiting from each and every step is the whole point of being a console platform holder.

 

They'd probably also suffer from a culture clash with either of the other two.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, the_debaser said:

Based on those videos the game doesn’t actually look much better, just a bit darker. 

 

You need to watch the 60fps video at the 60fps setting on YouTube, otherwise you are just watching it in 24fps video (which is silly).

 

Also, watching a video where the game has been upgraded to 4k on an iPhone probably isn't the best way to judge how much better it looks. Need to watch it on a decent TV / monitor.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Stanley said:

Are you implying that Zelda BoTW was delayed and in development longer than expected because of egos?

 

Could it also be possible that because they designed the hardware they have a better understanding of how to use it, and the hardware itself is designed around the games they prefer making?

 

I'm sure the choice of whether to use the X2 chip was on the table, but was considered too costly. But to be honest, if them doing the best they can with limited hardware is giving us games such as Zelda and Mario, then it's not really an issue.

 

— No, that egos would get in the way of mergers. On paper I'd like a 3DO model with a shared library. In reality, it's a no-go because of what mushashi said. The PlayStation came to be because Nintendo messed Sony around, and Chris Stamper had to hack NES hardware to present a demo before they'd work with him. Imagine the N64 up against the PlayStation without Rare...

 

— Hardware's becoming homogenised at an increasing rate. The Switch is a Tegra, after all. The Joy-Cons are a neat idea (although way too small for me), and you can defend their functionally. But in this case, there's nothing in BotW that can't be replicated on a pad. I can only think of ARMS as a showcase for them.

 

— My only gripe is that £280's the right ballpark for an X2. The Switch should be £200 in hardware terms, but they're able to rinse people because their software's so attractive. Which is another tick in their stay-independent box for now.

 

9 hours ago, mushashi said:

They'd probably also suffer from a culture clash with either of the other two.

 

They're not really treading on each other's software toes any more, but there would be a hardware clash. Nintendo could reserve the right to fund and create their own complementary handhelds as a one-sided venture, receiving all profits. But the dock would be Sony's...

 

And you're right — that's why it won't happen. They've very different philosophies based on their markets. Nintendo don't need strong hardware until something happens to disprove that, and if they ever struggle they could licence their catalogue to Sony. Then we'd have Bluepointed versions after an agreed delay. It'd be interesting to see how hardware numbers added up over time were that to happen.

 

8 hours ago, the_debaser said:

Based on those videos the game doesn’t actually look much better, just a bit darker. 

 

The draw-distance and framerate are the major improvements for me; the former especially. It's still a massive world without the fog, so you don't lose any sense of scale, at the same time as being able to enjoy more of it.

 

12 hours ago, S0L said:

I can tell you from personal experience that Nintendo do look for one frame windows for perfect timing :P

 

I'm working on a pretty major game right now and one of the choices we've made is a locked physics time-step, mostly as we've got an online and cross play component.

 

— Do you have an example? There are no one-frame links in the Smash games as far as I know, so that's 16.7ms per frame at 60 fps. The GameCube version does have inconsistent polling IIRC, so it's for the best that it doesn't have 1f links if that's true. A one-frame link at 30fps is 33.3ms, and I'm pretty sure that the Guardians are never that tricksy. Because of the typical 10ms polling rate (4ms on PS4) and inherent hardware lag, timing windows aren't that tight codewise.

 

— But that sounds like a variant of lockstep protocol, which isn't a concern in an offline game.

 

http://drewblaisdell.com/writing/game-networking-techniques-explained-with-pong/

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Escaped said:

 

— My only gripe is that £280's the right ballpark for an X2. The Switch should be £200 in hardware terms, but they're able to rinse people because their software's so attractive. Which is another tick in their stay-independent box for now.

 

Only picking up on this one point, but did you ever see the estimated breakdown of costing per Switch? There's very little money made per unit.

https://www.polygon.com/2017/4/5/15195638/nintendo-switch-component-cost-estimate

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Escaped

 

Whilst the Switch's hardware uses a Nvidia chipset the way they're using it is innovative, and it's what's drawing people to the console, well that and the games of course. 

 

What you're suggesting is that they do away with that and either manufacture the most powerful home console they can afford, or merge with Sony, or form a collective. All of those options would immediately cease making them a unique company, and the only platform holder doing anything different at the moment.

 

The joycons are essential to part of what makes it unique, and there are other examples of games which use motion controls, two player modes etc. and there'll be more to come. 

 

The most powerful hardware in the world isn't causing MS to produce original games, is it? 

 

And you asked us to imagine the N64 without Rare.  Well now imagine Rare without Nintendo. Having access to Nintendo's tools and knowledge helped them create a body of work they've never since been able to match under Microsoft's guidance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Stanley said:

The most powerful hardware in the world isn't causing MS to produce original games, is it?

 

Nintendo's own paid game effort on iOS/Android kind of disproves the theory that they need their own hardware to continue making good games, they don't control the OS or have intimate knowledge of every single aspect of the hardware there, yet still managed to make a game lauded by people. The entire mobile push is proof that Nintendo controlled developers can still do good work on other people's hardware.

 

They just like doing their own hardware for control/profit reasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, mushashi said:

 

Nintendo's own paid game effort on iOS/Android kind of disproves the theory that they need their own hardware to continue making good games, they don't control the OS or have intimate knowledge of every single aspect of the hardware there, yet still managed to make a game lauded by people. The entire mobile push is proof that Nintendo controlled developers can still do good work on other people's hardware.

 

They just like doing their own hardware for control/profit reasons.

This paragraph kind of disproves the first one doesn't it? 

 

They want control because it allows them to continue making the products they like making at the price point they set.

 

They have less control in the mobile market where  $10 was considered pricey for a fully fledged Mario game, and one that's basically just devolved into pay to win. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, mdn2 said:

Only picking up on this one point, but did you ever see the estimated breakdown of costing per Switch?

 

Yeah, but I've a hard time believing it, even though there are lots of unknowns. I know about the cost of PCBs for controllers and Alps analogues, and it's all pennies from Chinese suppliers, really. I had a custom 360 PCB from China for not very much. The extra bits in the Joy-Cons do add up, but none are expensive in isolation.

 

11 hours ago, Stanley said:

All of those options would immediately cease making them a unique company, and the only platform holder doing anything different at the moment.

 

I agree and disagree at the same time. Merging with Sony would restrict their creative options on the hardware front, but apart from the Wii, I don't consider any of their stuff that radical. A handheld with a dock is similar to tablets (or a JXD) with HDMI-outs. Just a neater solution because it doesn't leave a cable dangling when not in use. The Joy-Cons can be used as pointers, but again, aren't. Maybe for Metroid Prime 4?

 

I don't think there's any evidence that Sony would've vetoed the idea of a handheld with detachable pads, and if they create another of their own, that could well be their choice. I'd expect a 7" tablet from them with more focus on apps and comms. So yeah, I don't really rate anything that separates Nintendo right now, but if you do, it's true to say that they're better off as they are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

“Of course, once you’ve spent the money to design the innovative technology you don’t need to price it such that you recoup your investment: it’s a rip off if you’re not just selling it for the price of a cheap, low quality Chinese copy”.

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Escaped said:

 

Yeah, but I've a hard time believing it, even though there are lots of unknowns. I know about the cost of PCBs for controllers and Alps analogues, and it's all pennies from Chinese suppliers, really. I had a custom 360 PCB from China for not very much. The extra bits in the Joy-Cons do add up, but none are expensive in isolation.

 

 

I agree and disagree at the same time. Merging with Sony would restrict their creative options on the hardware front, but apart from the Wii, I don't consider any of their stuff that radical. A handheld with a dock is similar to tablets (or a JXD) with HDMI-outs. Just a neater solution because it doesn't leave a cable dangling when not in use. The Joy-Cons can be used as pointers, but again, aren't. Maybe for Metroid Prime 4?

 

I don't think there's any evidence that Sony would've vetoed the idea of a handheld with detachable pads, and if they create another of their own, that could well be their choice. I'd expect a 7" tablet from them with more focus on apps and comms. So yeah, I don't really rate anything that separates Nintendo right now, but if you do, it's true to say that they're better off as they are.

A handheld with a dock is only simlar to tablets in the same way a console is similar to a PC. it's a dedicated games console with a fixed chipset and detachable controllers. Sure you could cobble something together that maybe resembles it, to a point, but it wouldn't be the same. The point here is that it frees Nintendo up allowing them to concentrate on delivering software to both their core markets, home console and handheld, at the same time. So fewer resources covering the same two markets. There is currently no one else offering hardware that does this. There is literally no other platform holder that supports handheld games consoles.  The Vita is dead and Sony have no current plans for another. Not that we know of anyway. So that's what separates them and informs the type of games they make. Take that away and they're making games for someone else, tailoring them to fit that eco system ergo loss of control.

 

So merging with Sony to appease hardcore gamers who demand cutting edge visuals seems nonsensical to me. They sell enough hardware and software on their own, maintaining complete control all the while. And why would Sony choose to give up that control either? A merger would suit neither of them because whilst their markets crossover they're largely different demographics; child and family focussed vs hardcore gamers. 

 

As mentioned earlier by Mushashi they do make games for mobiles, but they're very different, tailored to those systems. It's also a lot less risk averse than going completely third party for PS4 or Xbox.

 

Look at the pricing models on those consoles.  It's all day one sales or your fucked. Two months down the line your game is half price. Not so for Nintendo ganes which always seem to maintain their value. Again, because they control that. 

 

I mean five years down the line it might be different. Maybe they won't be able to follow up the Switch successfully, maybe people won't want Nintendo hardware any more. Who knows. But for now if the only argument is that Nintendo should make games that run in 4K so that I don't have to use a PC emulator, then I think they're safe. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gizamaluke said:

So what settings are you lot all using then?

 

I use the NVidia smoke fix, FPS++ and the 1440p graphics mods.

 

Dabbled with some of the other shaders but none have really appealed as much as the default, despite it looking a bit washed out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, footle said:

“Of course, once you’ve spent the money to design the innovative technology you don’t need to price it such that you recoup your investment: it’s a rip off if you’re not just selling it for the price of a cheap, low quality Chinese copy”.

 

That's not what I said, if you think about it. The vast majority of current technology's put together with parts from China, many of which are cheap in bulk (1000+ per order). I could buy analogue sticks for about 80p each, for example, and less again if I ordered 10,000+. I'm not talking about a Chinese-made unbranded tablet here, which are mostly built to a very low spec. 7" IPS screens are also cheap now. Its LRA motors are similarly priced to those analogues in bulk, and so on. I bought a bespoke controller PCB for not very much a couple of years ago.

 

I'm not saying that Nintendo are absolutely coining it, but the R&D for a device that uses off-the-shelf parts wouldn't have been such a big thing. On the hardware side, that is — market research is another matter.

 

7 hours ago, Stanley said:

I mean five years down the line it might be different. Maybe they won't be able to follow up the Switch successfully, maybe people won't want Nintendo hardware any more.

 

Million-dollar question, because so many of us doubted the ongoing appeal of handhelds outside of Japan. I didn't foresee the Switch doing nearly as well as it has so far, and perhaps I need to leave my own feelings out of it when it comes to predicting the future. But on the other hand, I really feel that the Switch and U are partners waiting to be joined, inasmuch as the dock could provide a 30% boost to a portable X2. It's still not getting many ports that way, though, and that's a great shame.

 

Given its diddy screen, portable two-player doesn't seem to have much traction at all? And besides tidiness, the dock doesn't do anything that mini-HDMI-outs don't. As a handheld that allows continued play at home, Sony could support it. I respect those who'd rather Nintendo stayed on their own, but I'd personally buy their stuff if they weren't. As it is (with the exception of a temporary U for BotW), I don't. I'm down to one console per generation, and that's the PS4 for now. If Nintendo sold Breath of the Wild and Mario Odyssey (after a delay) as port options for it, I'd buy 'em. Equally, if I could play Uncharted 4, Shadow of the Colossus, The Last Guardian and The Last of Us: Part II (among others) on the One X... Bye-bye, PS4.

 

Fanboyism doesn't have to claim a company: it's fine to agree that Nintendo have made some great games and Sony and Microsoft some great consoles, and a marriage between the two's desirable for many on our side. A marriage between companies, maybe not, but between tech, yes. 'Cause after all these years, my favourite Nintendo console is still the SNES.

 

5 hours ago, Isaac said:

Dabbled with some of the other shaders but none have really appealed as much as the default, despite it looking a bit washed out.

 

Yeah, I'm not playing it, but I feel the same way. I don't like the washed-out original graphics, but haven't seen a totally sympathetic overhaul yet. Yam's the best I've seen by a long shot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Escaped said:

Million-dollar question, because so many of us doubted the ongoing appeal of handhelds outside of Japan. I didn't foresee the Switch doing nearly as well as it has so far, and perhaps I need to leave my own feelings out of it when it comes to predicting the future. But on the other hand, I really feel that the Switch and U are partners waiting to be joined, inasmuch as the dock could provide a 30% boost to a portable X2. It's still not getting many ports that way, though, and that's a great shame.

 

Given its diddy screen, portable two-player doesn't seem to have much traction at all? And besides tidiness, the dock doesn't do anything that mini-HDMI-outs don't. As a handheld that allows continued play at home, Sony could support it. I respect those who'd rather Nintendo stayed on their own, but I'd personally buy their stuff if they weren't. As it is (with the exception of a temporary U for BotW), I don't. I'm down to one console per generation, and that's the PS4 for now. If Nintendo sold Breath of the Wild and Mario Odyssey (after a delay) as port options for it, I'd buy 'em. Equally, if I could play Uncharted 4, Shadow of the Colossus, The Last Guardian and The Last of Us: Part II (among others) on the One X... Bye-bye, PS4.

 

Fanboyism doesn't have to claim a company: it's fine to agree that Nintendo have made some great games and Sony and Microsoft some great consoles, and a marriage between the two's desirable for many on our side. A marriage between companies, maybe not, but between tech, yes. 'Cause after all these years, my favourite Nintendo console is still the SNES.

Well the Switch is on track to beat Wii U's total sales to date in it's first year, so I think it's fair to say that's not going to happen.  Add in 3DS sales and it's clear that the handheld market is still very healthy. I think the reason people thought it would go away is down to smart phones. But then the same people also signalled the death knell for home consoles too, and look at how that turned out.

 

I think your argument only works if Nintendo weren't selling Switch's. And not only are they selling them, but they've been struggling to keep up with demand, and upped even their own sales projections. 

 

The "one console per generation' rule that you're applying has never worked, and never will. As you've demonstrated, people will always want more. So we have the PS4 Pro and the Xbox One X. Just like we'll see an X2 Switch with a bigger screen etc etc. Perhaps that's when you'll dive in :)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Isaac said:

Congratulations on derailing this thread (again) @Stanley, a great piece of work you've done here.

It's totally on topic considering the way the discussion had ebbed and flowed between emulation, piracy and those advocating Nintendo go third party. I mean I'm not having this discussion on my own. Perhaps people just aren't as interested as you are in discussing BOTW on an emulator, but find the wider discussion of value.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I have the game running at a locked smooth 30fps now (with 11gb system RAM in use - a record for my PC I think), but it still doesn't look right. There's ghosting at every resolution other than 720p and it looks incredibly jaggy and low res at every resolution. If I were to guess I'd say the graphics packs aren't working properly, but I've tried cemuhook + others and it's the same story.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Stanley said:

This paragraph kind of disproves the first one doesn't it? 

 

They want control because it allows them to continue making the products they like making at the price point they set.

 

They have less control in the mobile market where  $10 was considered pricey for a fully fledged Mario game, and one that's basically just devolved into pay to win. 

 

Most people seem to misunderstand the real reason Nintendo went mobile, even the bloody financial analysts who thought it was them finally capitulating to putting their games onto the most popular platforms and printingmoney. They have no desire to go 3rd party really, the mobile pushes not so secret agenda is to get more people familiar with Nintendo games and then be upsold into their own ecosystem, making some profit on the side is a bonus to that desire. Same with the Theme Park and licensing deals they are now more actively pursuing.

 

As mobile isn't a direct competitor like Sony or Microsoft are, it is more complementary rather than cannibalistic to their primary business, if they started selling their console games on mobile feature complete, then that would be a different story.

 

But that wasn't the reason I mentioned mobile, it was more a real example showing that Nintendo's developers are perfectly capable of still making good games on somebody else's hardware, it isn't intrinsic to developing on their own hardware. Most of the lauded games developers out there don't and never have controlled their own hardware platform.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I don't think there's any doubt that Nintendo could make games for other platforms such as PS4. On a purely technical level it's just another bit of silicon. But they would lose some of their autonomy in the process, and there does tend to be a synergy between their hardware and software.  Even in games such as Breath of The Wild, which is divided up so that you can just play a few minutes here and there if you choose. It suits handheld play in short bursts as well as the more time sinking TV mode.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Something else I found interesting is that when Ubisoft reported on their recent financials they said that total Switch sales of their software are only 1% behind total sales of their Xbox One software. I find that insane considering it (Xbox) has four times the hardware sold, and a much broader range. No wonder third parties are all scrambling to get on Switch.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Stanley said:

Something else I found interesting is that when Ubisoft reported on their recent financials they said that total Switch sales of their software are only 1% behind total sales of their Xbox One software. I find that insane considering it (Xbox) has four times the hardware sold, and a much broader range. No wonder third parties are all scrambling to get on Switch.

 

Which quarter? The one where they released a Mario game and nothing on Xbox 1?

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, footle said:

 

Which quarter? The one where they released a Mario game and nothing on Xbox 1?

Q2, Switch is on 19% Xbox 20% PlayStation 4 31% 

 

Mario vs Rabbids certainly helped. Apparently Just Dance sold the most on Switch also.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 years later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.