midrange said:
Point is, zelda wasn't that great. It was good, but it was far from stealing the show despite the praises (because many other games also had similar praise). Why is this relevant? Because it's the only wii u game to come out in 2017. No other developer wants to work with the wii u and this is because of the hardware. Even Zelda is struggling on the wii u (as shown by the 2 year delay and the fps drops). More power is only a component of better hardware. Architecture is very important and this was shown by how the ps3 (it's funny that you mentioned this) lacked games early in its life (because of the overly complex cell processor). The fact that the wii u opted for power pc architecture over x86 led to the wii u facing the same slow start as the ps3. The fact that the wii missed out on HD is what led to its slow sales later on. The fact that the wii u has a weak cpu has lead to many devs to give up. But if the wii u is somewhat stronger than the ps3, why did it get less support? Because developers left the wii and HAD to get familiar with the ps3. By the time the wii u came out, developers didnt need to do that again since the ps3 and xbox 360 had a much bigger install base and roughly similar graphical output compared to the wii u. The Ps4 and the xbox one on the other hand are much easier to work with and produce MUCH clearer differences. That's why all the developers went to those consoles. That's why I'm salty as a wii u owner and why I have a right to complain about the hardware |
You can complain, but complain about the real issues which you do have one solid issue you mentioned, the architecture.
Even if LoZ was only as praised as the rest of the top E3 showings, that's kind of my point. It isn't being held back because of its power to wow people, hell their are games praised that wish the 20s were the lowest they hit (FF XV, and Scalebound anyone?) and Zelda had no frame drops.







