sonicsonic posted...Xeeh_Bitz posted...
sonicsonic posted...
but it just got Blops2, AC3 and Darksiders 2. With only the former appearing on an Nintendo home console before.
Wii could not run the previous games of those without completely overhauling the graphics
The question is, will it be able to even runt the next generation games of the Xbox and PS without a complete overhaul.
No one knows. I'm certain the next Xbox/PS will be more powerful than the WiiU, but I can't imagine it being the same leap as it was from the Wii to the 360/PS3.
Pushing out super powerful consoles is not doing any of these companies favours. The PS3 took a long time to make profit, the Vita is doing poorly and Sony in a whole is looking quite bad.
Sony will have realised now that releasing the highest spec machine doesn't guarantee success. The PSP did well, but in comparison to the DS ? The Vita to the 3DS? The Wii to the PS3? ... and Ironically the PS2 was the weakest of the three when it was released (not the same difference as any of the other examples, but kinda funny).
Yeah, but being 2-3x more powerful than the Wii U is easily obtained by releasing a $400 system which will sell, since the Wii U is not that much cheaper
Wii U's cost comes from that damn controller, that's where all the power went.
Not saying Wii U is a bad system, but it's far easier for the next generation systems to go at least 3x over the Wii U.
Even with the current leaks, the GPU is double that of the Wii U, 2-3x usable ram for the games, Even if the 1.6ghz quad is true, say if its the exact same architecture and the cores are used proper, that's almost double the Wii U's resource
Even 2x powerful would be enough to cripple ports to the point where it would require a lot of extra work to get it to run.
---
To be fair, the bible has more plot holes than ME3. I wouldn't be listening either - Pies12
Facebook | 
Twitter
