Wyrdness said:
Except PS3 has the handicap of no motion control and that wand contraption isn't out and I hear has some lag, Galaxy looks graphically fine and far better then any GC game the way it is and you want to know why Galaxy is one of the best games in history it's not the hardware it's the concept and execution, the logic you're employing is like saying GOW3 and so on would be a much better game on PC. I know many PS3 users on this site who argue about Crysis would be just as good on consoles then PCs. Galaxy is praised because it used the Gravity concept in manipulating the physic of gravity to solve platforming puzzles, PS3 would offer nothing new to this concept that isn't done on Wii already it would also play differently which would hit various missions and reduce their appeal as well.
As said before it would be no different on PS3 infact it probably would suffer more like NMH has with the removal of MC despite touched up graphics. More power doesn't mean a game would be better on that platform. |
I agree with Galaxy being fine on the Wii, and that "more power doesn't mean better". What I was disagreeing with was that "Galaxy would not be enhanced and would be exactly the same on PS3".
First off, I'm not talking about controls or whether Nintendo's decision going with Wii tech vs HD tech was good or bad; that's a totally different topic... I for one like the Wii a lot. I'm only talking if Nintendo had a console equivalent to PS3 in power. Your comparison to NMH makes me think you're referring to some touched-up port of Galaxy with iffy controls to PS3. I'm talking about a ground-up game of Mario with that much power to work with. More power doesn't mean better, but what you're implying is that it wouldn't, or even couldn't be better. You're underestimating Nintendo's abilities and imagination. If the Wii had PS3 tech under the hood, a company like Nintendo would not limit themselves; why would they?
