megaman79 said:
BMaker11 said:
megaman79 said:
BMaker11 said:
makes absolutely no sense. Porting up to HD means adding more, COMPLEX work after the job is done. When you port down to the Wii...you simply take stuff out. That takes like...5 minutes lol |
Its funny coz noone said shit when PS2 specs were holding back the xbox's graphical capabilities.
|
Was the original Xbox a generational leap above the PS2, spec wise? No, it wasn't. It's already known that the Xbox was more powerful, but guess what? The Wii has the same computing power as the Xbox, meaning, it too is only about 1.5x more powerful than the PS2. Now, putting this in relative terms, the PS3/360 are over 4.5x more powerful than the Wii. Not to mention they're architectures are VASTLY more complex than the Wii, relative to the PS2 vs. Xbox. At the end of the day, what N'Gai is proposing is just silly, and like someone above said, PS360 software would plummet.
You think they could make KZ2 the way it is, with the Wii in it's vision, and then a "port up" at a later time? No.
|
KZ2 is going to loose money, atleast with 360, Wii and PS2 versions it might have had a chance to break even.
According to the HD argument higher resolution is a key reasoning for having it. Well the xbox had a higher resolution output than either console competitor last gen. so yes it was a "generational leap".
|
Why would Killzone 2 lose money? It likely cost less than MGS4 to make (developers in Amerstdam are generally paid half that of their American counterparts, who are generally paid less than those in Japan, as far as I am aware), and it'll probably sell as much as MGS4 (or at least as much as CoD4).
If MGS4 made Konami a nice profit, why wouldn't Killzone 2 do the same?
