spemanig said:
No they wouldn't. Standard TVs don't run at 120htz and no game would look acceptable at 4K with how week these machines are. That's the point. You're blind if you think something like The Witcher III, one of the most graphically impressive games of this generation, would look "only a little better" than Wii U any Wii U game. That was 900p 30fps on the XBO and was virtually indistinguishable from the PS4 version. Especially if it ran at 720p 60fps. Also, let's stop this fantasy that 720p 60fps is the "standard" for Wii U games. It's not. Only like 7 games run at that clip. Also, let's stop pretending that Wii U 720p 60fps games are even remotely as demanding as other games that run at better specs on the XBO. The XBO version of MGSV runs at 900p 60fps. Smash runs at 1080p 60fps. Smash isn't even a slither as graphically pressing as running a full open world game that looks that good at that resolution and framerate. Meanwhile, XCX looks the way it does at 720p 30fps. The Wii U couldn't dream of getting the game to run at 900p 60fps, not even if it still looked like the Wii game. |
Do not quote me if that's the kind of things you're going to say.
You still didn't explain yourself. Why is there no relation between hardware power and framerate + resolution?
If the wichter ran at 720p 60fps on x1, it would look about the same. Like I already mentioned, lower resolution and better framerate balance themselves. 720p 60fps is the standard for wii u. The exceptions are xenoblade, wich runs at 30fps in exchange for a huge draw distance and open world. It's at least laughable that you think wii u couldn't handle wii graphics in 900p 60fps, it could probably render wii games in 4k 60fps.
Overall, you ignored much of what I said and expanded the number of false statements.
