| Zekkyou said: The 360 had started releasing highly ambitious titles in less than 12 months. Especially Gears of War and The Elder Scrolls IV, both praised immensely for their ambition and how they pushed the TPS and open world RPG genres forward. Titles like that are why people are disappointed that they haven't made similar jumps with the PS4 and X1 yet (though such games appear to be on the way; it's just taken a year longer. Better than 3 to even hit 7th gen standards). And yes you're right. I'm sure the Wii would crumble at the knees if it had to run 4 whole character models at once. Silly me. (To actually answer your question: both games could run fairly easily with linear asset scaling, and removing non-gameplay related effects. It's the same way we get titles like DA:I or FarCry 4 to run on the PS3/360. We could likely get some lower key games to run on the PS2 too, again with linear scaling. It's magical stuff ^^). As I said though, this conversation is looping (we've gone full circle twice now :p). I really don't have the energy to bother with it anymore. Believe whatever tickles your fancy, I'm out. *jumps* |
Again inconsistent, you tried to play down B2's ambition then bring up GOW which ambition wise it can be argued it was mainly graphically focused, you then were arguing about taking steps backwards earlier now you bring up Oblivion a game widely regarded in the series as taking a step backwards, it was smaller then Morrowind and used a much more simpler system. If anything these are the worst examples you can bring up given your earlier posts.
How much of the experience would suffer with this scaling, COD ran on the Wii yet I'm sure the experience took a hit compared to the HD versions, the PS3 and 360 versions of Watch Dogs ran like injured dogs and weren't as pleasing on the eyes which hit the experience. You've been saying you're out for a few posts now either stick to your word or stop parroting empty words.
