Mr Khan said:
mrstickball said:
Mr Khan said:
pezus said:
Not really...People do not agree, so they argue about it. People argue, so they do not agree? That doesn't make much sense.
The answer is just as simple as the one I gave you. I don't know what more you want. The reason people are still arguing is because they still don't agree. They don't agree because 8 GB could be seen as a good idea or a bad one. Good as in it keeps the price down, so it is good for the casuals. Bad as in it discourages developers to support the platform with digital content if they know it won't reach the majority of the Wii U market anyway.
|
Or it could encourage developers to reduce bloat. With some of the dlc size figures i've seen people quoting me, they're taking PS3/360 gamers for a ride on some of this...
|
Why would they spend time and money 'reducing bloat' when the competitors will not have the huge limitations on size?
A small HDD is going to cripple online games for the Wii significantly. Some of the higher end downloadable titles between XBLA and PSN are nearing 1GB, as well as most major pieces of DLC.
And downloadable games? Forget about it. You will not be able to download a single new or recent title and meet the cap. No Arkham City. No Assassin's Creed 3. Nothing. That will hurt the WiiU immensely.
|
Nintendo's pushing downloadable retail titles on 3DS, which only comes with 2 GB packed in, surely they'll be able to get someone to follow their lead on Wii U, especially since the third parties will be mooching off Nintendo's server space for the cause
|
The space requirements of a 3DS title and a WiiU title in 1080P are immensely different, wouldn't you agree? For example, Dillon's Rolling Western, one of the best-selling and decent looking 3DSWare titles was just 48.3MB. What do you think such a title would weigh in that required textures to fit a 1080P television?
