By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
darkknightkryta on 07 March 2014
Edit Thread
Zero999 said:
darkknightkryta said:
Zero999 said:

KH3 was barely in development when they announced and there's nothing undoable on those FF 15 trailers. why do people keep thinking that the experience will change if the game is a little less pretty and lower resolution?

I know Kingdom Hearts 3 was barely in development, but what they shown honestly looks like a PS3 game, if not worse.  So either what they threw together was with the Wii U in mind, or it was a rush job.  Though Final Fantasy 15 looks far more impressive and the PS4 version couldn't have been in development long when they made the trailer for it so I doubt they couldn't have made a better looking Kingdom Hearts 3 trailer..

I never said Final Fantasy 15 isn't doable on the Wii U.  I said it wasn't worth the headache.  Especially trying to cram 5 gigs of ram data into 1.

the bolded part shows how limited your way of thinking is, that is not how things work (and theoretical optimized work on wii u has more RAM bandwidth than ps4, thanks to edRAM). basically, a wii u version of whatever runs on ps4 would get 720p with stable framerate and a few downgrades here and there. It's a huge exaggeration when anyone describes porting games to wii u as an herculean job.

1.  We don't exactly know what the edram's bandwidth is, but it's very possible (And most likely) that it's slower than the PS4s ram.

2. The system ram in the Wii U is actually slower than the PS3/360s ram.  This is part of the reason why those 360/ps3 multiplats have been running worse and are a mixed bag when it comes to graphics (Looking worse and better).

3.  You have no idea what needs to be done to art assets to fit a certain ram requirements.  You either change all the textures at once, and have a very ugly game that you won't buy, since you know, the devs didn't try.  Or they go through all their assets and judge whether the asset should be degraded or not, which is a very time consuming processes, thus, not worth the porting costs. This is even assuming the Wii U was as powerful as the PS4.  That's not the case so now you have other issues to contend with.  Do you reduce the polygon counts in the scene by half to keep the framerate playable?  This then requires a team of artists to change every model in the game (Including landscapes) to make it playable extra time rewriting game code.  What you're asking is roughly 6 months to a year to do for mediocre results which would be shunned anyways.

Dr.Henry_Killinger said:
darkknightkryta said:

Shall I point out the obvious flaws in using a screenshot of compressed video footage of a pre alpha build game to judge a cartoon styled game on its graphics?

KH 1.5 and KH 2.5 are more relevant. And the changes in gameplay are what matters.

Irregardless, its completly baseless to assume that SE with develop KH 3 for the Wii U first based on said screenshots.

When it is a fact that PS has the largest KH Fanbase.

I've said it before and I'll say it again but this time in all caps and bold:

THE WII U AND XBOX ONE ARE ON EQUAL FOOTING WHEN IT COMES TO WHETHER OR NOT KH3 SHOULD BE PORTED TO SAID CONSOLE. THE ONLY SIGNIFICANT FACTORS ARE PORTING COSTS AND USERBASE.

Not only does, Xbox One have a porting advantage, but as long as it is expected to get a larger userbase than the Wii U, then its obvious to see why these decisions are being made.

Except you can see perfectly well how the models are near identicle.  Can't hide the square polygons in Sora's outfits.  But that's besides the point; Outlawran was saying Kingdom Hearts 3 looks too good to be running in real time when the truth of the matter is that it barely looks better than a PS2 game at this point.  Though I'm not saying the porting costs to the Xbox One doesn't make more sense than porting to the Wii U; I'm saying what they've shown off is very capable on the Wii U as is vs Final Fantasy 15 which would need a huge overhaul.