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

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.

ps360 ports didn't ran that well because of diffecence in architetures, wii u is more gpu focused and the gpu is supposed to do some stuff the cpu usually did.

But the final point is always the same, it's not as simple as 5gb of ram vs 1gb, the true difference is much smaller than that. and the wii u runs any effect that is capable on other systems, it's only a matter of companies doing what they always do and port the game. it wouldn't take any "huge overhaul" to run FF15 (wich wasn't even that amazing on the non cgi footage).