windbane said:
Bodhesatva said:
windbane said:
Bodhesatva said:
windbane said:
LeroyBrown said:
Bodhesatva said:
Diomedes1976 said:
Soriku said:
And I forgot to say that Capcom said they might bring RE5 to Wii if RE: UC does well :P They said it won't come in 08 so 09 which is plenty of time to make it for the Wii. |
Sorry to burst your bubble but Capcom hasnt said anything like that . |
Yeah, Diomedes is right, although it's important to note that Capcom did say that they would bring more Resident Evil games to the Wii if UC did well. That doesn't mean RE5, it just means more Resident Evil. Perhaps 6? Who knows, but 5 is extremely unlikely. |
Didn't Capcom downgrade RE4 to port it to the much more popular PS2? If the margin of graphics between the Wii and 360 are narrower than those of the PS2 and GC (I could be entirely wrong in that though), I don't think its impossible for RE5 or RE6 to come to the weaker Wii. No way the Wii would be getting that at the same time though if that was the case, we'd be seeing the game comming out a year later at best. Either way, no sense in making predictions when nothing has been said for how long since the game was announced. |
Yeah, you are wrong. The gap between Wii and 360/PS3 is far greater than Wii to PS2, much less the GC. Again, the Wii is about as powerful as the first Xbox. |
Yep, it's much closer to the Super Nintendo/Neo Geo or PS1/3D0 gap. That was a very big one, and you couldn't port games from 3D0 to PS1 etc. |
yeah, except the PS3 will have sold more than twice as much as the Neo Geo and 3DO ever did combined by the end of the year. This situation is unprecedented. |
I was only talking graphics, Windbane, since that was what you were talking about. I guess you don't like the comparison to the 3D0 and the Neo Geo? Let's repeat:
Windbane: "The graphical gap between the Wii and 360/PS3 is quite large." Me: "Yes, I agree. The graphical gap is much closer to the gap between the Neo Geo/SNES or the PS1/3D0." Windbane: "The PS3 has sold more than either of those!" How is that relevant? Clearly you're just irked that the PS3 has similarities to the 3D0 and Neo Geo. It does: in fact, not only are all graphical leaps, but they all retailed originally for 600 dollars. I absolutely agree that there are differences between these systems (no two systems are ever exactly alike, after all), but you don't need to get annoyed any time someone makes a comparison. |
I'm just saying that this situation, while similar in the respect you mention perhaps, is far different than any previous generation. The 3DO was $700, btw. The $560 that the Neo Geo debuted was a lot more back then if you adjust for inflation. http://curmudgeongamer.com/2006/05/history-of-console-prices-or-500-aint.html Anyway, we agree on graphics although I never had those other systems so I'll take your word for it considering those are the 2 most expensive console launches ever. |
Everyone always says every generation is different. The 3D0, for example, had for more economic muscle behind it than the PS3 does. I still remember my best friend (who had a Neo Geo) telling me how everyone would buy one once the price went down. Except the sales pickup never happened. The CD-i was in the same boat.
Again, for emphasis: everyone always says every generation is different than the last -- and they're right, they're never the same. You can always come up with reasons why the underdog will come back and win it in the end, but in reality the underdog has never come back: not once, and none has even made it close. That doesn't mean it can't happen, windbane, nor does it make the underdog a bad console: I'm just saying (as I always have) that it's very unlikely, and as the weeks go by, the likelyhood continues to decrease.
But again, I was just talking about graphics! I agree, there are differences between these three previously mentioned consoles.
Edit: and thanks for the 3D0 info. I always thought it debuted at 600!
