By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
bonzobanana on 28 January 2018
Edit Thread
curl-6 said:
bonzobanana said:

Watchdogs on wii u vs ps3 and 360 versions is a massive win for 360 and PS3 because they both utilise their hard drives to stream in data quickly. The lack of hard drive in wii u was a big issue and I don't think the extra 500MB was enough to compensate for it although saying that obviously the wii u had 2GB of memory 4x 360 and PS3, both of which set aside a small amount of memory for their background operating system (not much though). My point is Watchdogs is a similar game to GTA and struggled on wii u and Zelda is a game that while beautiful makes no effort to present a realistic world it is more of a update on Zelda windwaker in visuals. Games like Zelda should not be used for comparison because they simply don't test the hardware. They don't attempt to do realistic physics, textures, lighting etc. However visually pleasing they are it is not really fair. Frankly its the reason Nintendo don't need decent performing hardware because most of their own games (if not all) are done in a cartoon style. The fact that PC's are emulating Zelda BOTW in 8k with high frame rates pretty much shows the underlying hardware. You aren't seeing that for PS3 or 360 games. Windwaker on Gamecube was achieved with only 8 gflops of gpu performance and still looked fantastic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qF1Itaye-z8

Everyone realistically knows Zelda BOTW would run on 360 and PS3 its just a question of how the game would be in comparison but it could certainly use hard drive streaming of data to compensate for lack of main memory.  The core engine of Zelda BOTW doesn't look particularly complicated and needy of resources.

It's a mistake to assume that a game not being realistic means it isn't demanding. Ratchet & Clank on PS4 is a cartoon, you think that would run on Wii U without downgrades? Botw has a ton of effects and techniques that are demanding for its hardware. 

You can port almost anything to anything if you downgrade it enough. Could PS3/360 run a mildly downgraded version of Botw? Of course they could. Could they run it as it is now, intact? Of course not; they don't have the memory, and hard drive streaming won't close the gap because Botw already does that.

We will have to disagree about the cartoon graphics, I'm not saying there isn't some demanding parts of such games but compared to a game attempting realistic graphics which has to do a lot more with regard physics and realistic textures which are constantly changing from scene to scene plus many other graphic effects which try to mimic real life I don't think it is a fair comparison. When you put PC games on very low graphic settings or even mod them to run on even weaker hardware than intended you can actually end up with a game that looks cartoon like and Nintendo in style.

1GB of main memory, optical drive reading plus a 3GB flash memory cache vs 360-420MB, faster optical drive (360) and much larger HDD cache is difficult to compare  especially when you  have to factor in cpu performance differences, memory bandwidth and greater GPU raw performance vs a later GPU architecture of weaker  performance  marginally.. We know generally when a multiformat title is on all 3 consoles PS3, 360 and wii u most of the time the 360 wins, followed by PS3 and then wii u. Yes wii u wins occasionally for a few games but overall the 360 is the easy winner. Zelda could easily be better on 360 and PS3 if programmed to the maximum of their abilities, enhanced using the greater cpu performance. Again though we can speculate as much as we want it will never happen so we can all believe what we want to believe. I own ps3, 360 and wii u and I believe properly programmed the ps3 is most powerful then the 360 and then wii u based on the evidence I've seen and the games I play and I would say digital foundry certainly backs up my views entirely based on their comparisons that 360 is stronger than wii u.