Resident_Hazard said:
Ughhh, this is turning into one of those internet nuances where logic is pummelled and abused the way religion treats science. And you're making very incorrect assumptions. For one thing, my "logic" doesn't automatically assume the PS2 should've been replaced early in it's lifecycle to compete with the GameCube and Xbox--for one major reason (that isn't sales), the PS2 was technically still in the same generation as the GC and XB. --------------------------------------------------------------- No it was not. Resident Evil 4 proved that the PS2 was very far behind the Gamecube. The Game had long load times and effects had to be cut from the game just to get it to run properly. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Most games at the time were made on the PS2 and then ported to the "bigger brothers" because A) the PS2 had higher sales so it made sense to optimize for the PS2 and B) it's cheaper and easier to port a game from a weaker system to a more powerful one. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Not always. You are forgetting the art that may have to be done again, Just go read what Retro had to do to get Metroid Prime and Metroid Prime 2 to look like a standard Wii game. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Everything the PS2 could do, the GC and XB could do. The same wasn't necessarily true the other way around. The Wii is easily a generation behind--and everyone knows that. It's as if the PS2 was running on N64-era hardware. The Playstation was also not under-powered compared to the N64. Looking back, many PS1 games made the N64 look like the weaker system thanks to those stupid cartridges and the N64's pathetic textures. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That's your assuption about the Wii and it shows that you do not know much about technology. All I can say is that the Gamecube could not run Wii games that were developed by Nintendo, such as and it definately can not run a game like Monster Hunter or Red Steel 2. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You seem to be assuming that porting from the Xbox360 to the Wii is somehow cheaper and easier than porting from the Xbox360 to the PS3. Which is just absurd. For one thing, the Wii cannot even handle many of the new game engines such as that in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare or the Unreal 3 engine. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- During the development of World at War the team[Treyarch] figured out a process for porting down the COD4 engine onto Wii, which brought about a pretty impressive offering for fans that weren't afraid to jump into another World War II shooter. http://wii.ign.com/objects/902/902591.html
Unreal Engine 3 IS in the works for the Wii http://gonintendo.com/viewstory.php?id=12897s If it happens it happens. If it does not. I doubt any one would care at this point.
Capcom Brings MT Framework to Wii http://wii.ign.com/articles/103/1038907p1.html Even if they never make a game for the Wii using this engine. It's there to be used. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Here's what happens when porting from Xbox360 to PS3: Here's what happens when porting from Xbox360 to Wii: Just because the Xbox360 and Wii may have similar basic architecture, that doesn't automatically make porting shit to the Wii suddenly an easy task. Remember, the Wii is roughly the same power as the original Xbox, and it's not even remotely close to the Xbox360. If porting from HD to Wii was so easy, Activision wouldn't have handed the development of the Wii versions of Call of Duty to different development teams. If it was so cheap and easy, development of the Wii version would've been done by the same team that made the HD versions. For that matter, if porting from X360 to Wii was easy, then the Wii version of Dead Rising would've been more like the X360 version than the piece of crap the Wii ended up with. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Capcom used the Resident Evil 4 engine and the game 's development was outsourced,TOSE Software Inc. The original Dead Rising team did not work on the game. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ... Okay then. Old software suddenly "not showing up in sales charts" is not proof that most new Xbox360 sales are going to users simply upgrading. Older games, for one thing, are not typically in constant production throughout the lifespan of a console. They are not still making Fable II, for instance. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Typical when a console gets a large boost in sales or a new model old games that were popular pop back into the charts. This shows that new buyers are purchasing the console. When old games that are popular do not resurface in the charts is a sign that current users are trading in consoles for a newer model or just upgrading their old console for other reason, different colors, speciality model like a Halo edition Xbox, or other factors. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I was mistaken in one thing, however, and that is that I was a year off in thinking of the launch of the DS. I was thinking 2005, not 2004. Still, Nintendo did not just kill off the GBA because the DS was out--it was still fairly heavily supported for another year all-around. Nintendo did axe the GameCube in 2006 when the Wii launched, which was pretty foolish--but then, there was almost no support on the thing, and the fact that the Wii was barely any different meant that many GC games could just easily be dropped onto the Wii. Nintendo is also not going to follow Sony's blueprint for console/system development and sales. They didn't the last two generations, why would they do it all of a sudden now? Essentially, you're not using logic. You're making really loose assumptions like equating the PS2 to the Wii in their respective generations, which is grossly innacurate. The Playstation & N64, and the PS2 and GC/Xbox were in similar leagues with one another. The Wii is at least a league behind the Xbox360. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The last two generations Nintendo consoles were in second and third place. Support for both systems were slim and they were at their five year life span. Also the returns for the systems were low and they'd already had drop the prices on the systems as far as they could. Lowering the price would have not increased the sales enough to Justify continuing to sale and support the system with software.
I enjoyed the debat. Thanks, I look forward to us debating another topic someday. |
If Nintendo is successful at the moment, it’s because they are good, and I cannot blame them for that. What we should do is try to be just as good.----Laurent Benadiba