curl-6 said:
Soundwave said:
Output is relative to what they chose to make, not due to the hardware.
Super Mario Galaxy would be a better game on Wii U hardware than it would be on 3DS or Wii hardware.
Better hardware just makes good developers that much better.
All the stuff we've been sold over the years as Nintendo fans as far as being anti-technology has generally turned out in the long run to be a bunch of bunk. CD/optical media was a good thing (also not paying $80 for games was nice too). But we were told Nintendo didn't need CD-ROM, it was bad, games were big enough on the N64, etc. etc. etc.
Online play? It's bad, Nintendo doesn't need it, wouldn't you rather play in the same room? Etc. etc. etc.
HD graphics are bad, you'll go bankrupt if you make HD games, you can be more innovative with SD graphics ... load of bunk. Nintendo games are wonderful in HD with the huge upgrades in things like physics engines, level scope, animation, etc. that comes with next gen HD. The only bad thing is it took so long for them to get there.
|
But 3D World in HD wasn't as good as Mario Galaxy in SD, Tropical Freeze wasn't as good as Retro's SD Metroid games, Xenoblade X wasn't as good as the Wii one, etc. As far as I am concerned the strength of Nintendo's hardware does not correlate linearly with the quality of their software.
|
This is just design choice. I think 3D World obviously is trying to cater to the 4-player NSMB crowd, that's not a flaw in the Wii U hardware.
Comparing DKC to Metroid is obviously apples to oranges too, DKC: TF is a very, very good game.
Have you ever played a Nintendo game and said "wow, this is good, but it'd be even better if you put in on the last generation Nintendo hardware and reduced the visual quality and scope of the game to do so!".
I doubt it.
