itsFizz said:
I´m still confused about the whole fusion thing. I mean sure it will save Nintendo some time for a couple games, but will cost them way more time than the 2 different platforms strategy overall.
The way I imagine it (and have read here) Nintendo will only produce home console level games (Assets/Size/polish/LoD/vision) and then downscale them to their handheld. This means that every single Handheld game will take as much time (and most importantly money) to develop as a console game. Sure now they instantly have a port of each console game on their Handheld but the overall output would significantly decrease compared to the OPs list.
The other Method would be every game is developed for the HH and ported to the home console. However that would probably spell instant death for the console.
Last but not least would be a mix (every console game is ported to HH and HH to console) of these. Now I really wonder who would buy that console in order to mostly play HH games? And let´s be real most people would still buy the HH instead of the console and Nintendo knows that. Thus we´d essentially be in a kind of reverse Vita situation ("all our HH games can be played on the Console...No need for a lot of original content").
Maybe I´m totally off here and missed some essential fusion concept or took things out of context. If so then tell me what exactly you mean with the fusion/unified platform as well as how it would actually help.
|
Would games necessarily have to be ported from one to another? When making games for PC, do developers have to make multiple versions in order to support PC's with different specs? Wouldn't it be possible to make a single game that is playable on both devices, with the console displaying the game at a higher resolution with better lighting and better AA?
