| RedKingXIII said: As usual what zeldaring is saying doesn't make lot of sense if you stop and think about it. The Wii U was never succesful so it was never prioritised by third parties when they made the ports. Despite all of that, I can think about 3 games that are better on Wii U compared to the PS360 versions: -Need for Speed Most Wanted U But that doesn't matter because this is a terrible way to measure a console power. The best version of Alien Isolation is on the Switch. The Switch is not more powerful than the PS4/XB1. Good ports and bad ports happen all the time. The Wii U is more powerful compared to the PS360 but not by much. Wii U's CPU also is terrible. The whole models discussion is also nonsensical. Resident Evil 4 is not na open world game and the models are lower fidelity if you compare them to the XCX models. The same can be said about the FF12 models... It's a game with huge open areas, but it's nowhere big as XCX. The models are lower fidelity as well, because it's a PS2 game. If you compare it to the open world games of the era like I did in my previous post then... lol. It's not even close. At the end of the day, yes, XCX is a game that belongs on the 7th gen. No, NLA doesn't look like GTA Vice City.
|
LOL i'm the only one making sense. Judging a console off one port is stupid of course it is but we are talking about 12 or so ports from AAA developers that ran much worse, you can't have something keep happening and not think maybe the hardware has short comings. The gpu is basically the same design as the 360 architecture wise, they both have advantges and disadvantges and in almost every game they showed the same graphics, developers did not have a problem with that, it was the cpu that was a terrible and realisticly made it a weaker console then 360 over all. COD black ops 2 was much worse on wiiu 10 frames behind and sonic all star was lower resolution then the 360 version. need for speed they added lighting but no where in any port that did wiiu win in perfomance. saying wiiu is more powerful is factually wrong when you compare both the cpu and gpu, at best you can say they are on par cause of more ram and that's being nice cause the ram was half the speed as 360/ps3.
looking at exclusives is just a prefernce thing, no one can look at the game and say yea this makes the console more powerful or is more demanding then the other game with totally different engine, art style and goals. This also depends on the skill of the devs. For example ps4 exclusives looked better then anything on pc that by huge margin when they first released that doesn't make ps4 more powerful then a PC with a slightly more powerful GPU. different engines have differnt goals and different art styles some are more taxing then others this is impossible to tell. How the heck do i know if wiiu can run last of us, uncharted 3, gears of war 3, or halo 4 with such a weak cpu i really don't but i'm not gonna assume it can't till i see a ports. i would bet 360 runs BOTW at a better frame rate and run MK8 with no problems, but i doubt wiiu could run those games using 3 wii cpu's duct taped together. you can argue all day why this game is techically more demanding and why this game can run or can't, a port actually gives the hardware a chance and to see how they run, better then just pure specualtion of why this can't or can run on this hardware. One more example is 360 vs ps3 sony exclusives looked much better and was always labled as the way more powerful console till the end of the gen when gears 3. and halo 4 came out and actually closed the gap interms of what people thought were the more impressive games.
As for XCX we are beating a dead horse, to me the game looks terrible and reminded of a 6th gen game. it's exaggerated expression, like i said dark souls 2 looks like a ps2 game plenty of times no one responds cause obviously if they wanna get technical it's not.
Last edited by zeldaring - on 21 July 2024
