S.T.A.G.E. said:
(1) Its not just about better graphics, its about better animations CG like lighting, draw distances, smarter ai, larger landscapes, faster loading, true emotion being able to be shown on peoples faces, better particle effects and assets being able to be on the screen at one time. (2) Console gaming has held back PC gaming because at lot of the high budget games depend on console profit. The noticable drought in higher budget games is more noticable on PC and they dont get console exclusives so it really hurts them. PC gaming has also been held back by consoles that cannot push tech. (3) Nintendo is in that same wheelhouse with the last gen consoles and you will see that because of Nintendos lack of communication with third parties on a user friendly console. Nintendo only makes consoles for Nintendo and no one else but they demand that third parties support them, well they have and current gen is the best they'll do and they'll be so happy with next gen tech that the Wii U wont even be an option. (4) Why downgrade a game just for one console? (5) Sony hasn't been doing anything thats toxic for the industry, they've adapted to the western way of doing things and Microsoft is at home with the Americanized way of doing things. Nintendos relationship with third parties is toxic for Nintendo. That is the proper perspective, because they dont get the profits off of licensed games like Sony and Microsoft do. That was one of their biggest issues during the Wii generation despite winning. Cheap casual games ruled the day and third parties jumped on it like a cheap hooker. Most devs said industry develpment costs will not majorly rise for now but as the gen winds down its going to get a little higher. Game prices will remain at $60. The problem is Nintendo. |
I disagree with a lot of what you said, so I will just deal with the point points from your second paragraph as I've numbered therein and below:
1) (1) Exactly – so you trying to say tat the WiiU doesn’t offer all those things?
2) (2) Rubbish – If underpowered console, as compared to PCs, are a problem, then go tell Sony and MS that they keep making crappy ass underpowered consoles and need to build consoles that are inline with current PC specs. Nintendo on the other will continue to cater for the CONSOLE MARKET.
3) (3) Nintendo consulted with lots of third parties, including Epic, when they were developed the WiiU. The fact that Nintendo didn’t make a console that will put money directly into Epic’s pockets does not mean that the WiiU is underpowered or that 3rd parties can’t put more advanced games on it.
4) (4) 3rd parties will have to upgrade before they even think about downgrading. You seem to think that every 3rd party will pay Epic for their engine or have the resource to develop their own like Square or Capcom. If anything, I expect that 90% of 3rd parties will transition, not jump, into UE4 type of graphics and tech over a period of about 3 years. By then the WiiU will have a much larger installed user base and thus would make even more sense to make SCALEABLE UE 4 type games at the end of the transition period can also be put on the WiiU and make the 3rd party even more money. MOROVER, because of the large installed use based for the PS360, it will be at least two years before 3rd parties transition into UE 4 type technology.
5) (5) Sony and MS are very toxic to the industry. I agree that they do bring some advantages in driving the tech forward, but at the very same time they could be very destructive. For example, PS3 costing about $600.00 at launch. I’m sure if Sony had their way such console prices would have been the norm. MS tries to throw money at everything which I’m sure hurts and alienates a lot of smaller developers. However, I admit Nintendo could be a bit toxic as well J
Nintendo Network ID: DaRevren
I love My Wii U, and the potential it brings to gaming.