For those who don't remember: Upon release the PS3 was a joke for QUITE a while

#31squatch22Posted 4/18/2013 11:07:26 AM
kissdadookie posted...
Again, UE4 is a prime example. That engine does not have support for the Wii U. A UE4 based game will have to be rebuilt using an engine that could run on the Wii U...


http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2013/03/epic_games_developers_can_use_unreal_engine_4_for_wii_u_titles
---
Nintendo: Leading the way for others to follow.
http://img.gamefaqs.net/screens/1/9/b/gfs_75574_2_16.jpg
#32kissdadookiePosted 4/18/2013 11:07:37 AM
DiscostewSM posted...

You seem to lack the understand of a company directly giving support and an engine being able to run on a platform. Epic isn't doing the former, but they stated the latter is very much doable if companies want to use it.


You don't seem to understand that what Epic said was nothing more than a "let's prevent getting ourselves in a crazy PR nightmare." If you had a clue about the UE4 engine, you would have understood that what the UE4 features and supports, the Wii U is unable to support on a technical level. Yes Epic can make a alternative Wii U version of the engine where the effects and shaders could be systematically converted to baked in effects and what not but here's the thing:

Why would Epic bother to put in the effort to build and maintain two major versions of UE4 that would be DRASTICALLY different? The answer is that they wouldn't because they are not fools.

The latter IS very doable if a company wishes to do it, I've already explained how: The company will basically rebuild the game using a different engine. You can do that for any game and for any platform. What Epic said is PERFECTLY true but nobody is going to ever do that because you're going to basically be building two completely different versions of the same game. You can't even port it, you will literally have to rebuild the thing from scratch with the only things carrying over being the assets, however, the resource intensive part of a game is going to be the engine, that's why UE is so popular, that's why Havok us so popular, these engines reduces MUCH of the work needed to build games. Nobody is going to be stupid enough to go back to the stone ages and build brand new engines for each game which is basically what they will end up doing if they wanted to move a UE4 based game on to the Wii U. Yes you can argue that they can reuse these Wii U engines they make but let's face it, these developers are not going to be making enough titles to justify the expense and effort needed to build that Wii U engine in the first place.
#33kissdadookiePosted 4/18/2013 11:09:35 AM
squatch22 posted...
kissdadookie posted...
Again, UE4 is a prime example. That engine does not have support for the Wii U. A UE4 based game will have to be rebuilt using an engine that could run on the Wii U...


http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2013/03/epic_games_developers_can_use_unreal_engine_4_for_wii_u_titles


Why don't you actually bother to read the article? Epic essentially said that developers can bring UE4 games over to the Wii U but Epic did not say that UE4 supports the Wii U. This is a VERY VERY important distinction. How so? You can bring a UE4 game to the GameBoy if you wanted to, you would just have to rebuild the game so that you have a version that you can run on the GameBoy.
#34sonic777Posted 4/18/2013 11:13:40 AM
P_A_N_D_A_M_A_N posted...
Crazy_tank51 posted...
googler posted...
For sure it was, bit what's Nintendo's excuse. They had every chance to learn and avoid the same problems


Development times and juggling with 3DS. Not a perfect defense though. I think they were banking on NSMBU to hold up for months. Not the case.


They were banking on third parties taking the opportunity to get their games on the system early. Twas the same tactic they used on the 3DS to build better relationships with third parties but, again, third parties dropped the ball. About half of the launch window games were either delayed or abandoned for various reasons.


Two of the biggest games that got delayed in the launch window were published by Nintendo, you know.

Seriously, I swear, you must be an employee of Nintendo. There's just no other explanation for all the crap you write.
---
squatch22 = defeated
#35MichaelDeAngeloPosted 4/18/2013 11:15:05 AM
Cecil255 posted...
I can honestly say that just Nintendo Land was more fun than anything new I've played for a very long time.


Whenever I have friends over, NL is the goto game. Bioshock, Tomb Raider... they've been good, but NL is the best multiplayer they've got out there now.

Nintendo Land didn't have a good showing at E3, because nobody really understood the appeal. How could you? You can't understand it any better than 3D previews without 3D.

That was why they closed out E3 with NL. It was awesome to them because they knew how fun it was. We had no idea, so we scoffed at the concept (of course, we also saw how excited Miyamoto got for Wii Music, so it wasn't unheard of for a massive misstep like that).
---
Alundra is the best top-down Zelda game since Link to the Past.
Darksiders is the best 3D Zelda game since Ocarina of Time.
#36sonic777Posted 4/18/2013 11:17:18 AM
MichaelDeAngelo posted...
Cecil255 posted...
I can honestly say that just Nintendo Land was more fun than anything new I've played for a very long time.


Whenever I have friends over, NL is the goto game. Bioshock, Tomb Raider... they've been good, but NL is the best multiplayer they've got out there now.


Wow.

So, you prefer to play multiplayer games than single player games when you have multiple players over.

WHAT A SHOCK!
---
squatch22 = defeated
#37AiddonPosted 4/18/2013 11:23:06 AM
MichaelDeAngelo posted...


Whenever I have friends over, NL is the goto game. Bioshock, Tomb Raider... they've been good, but NL is the best multiplayer they've got out there now.

Nintendo Land didn't have a good showing at E3, because nobody really understood the appeal. How could you? You can't understand it any better than 3D previews without 3D.

That was why they closed out E3 with NL. It was awesome to them because they knew how fun it was. We had no idea, so we scoffed at the concept (of course, we also saw how excited Miyamoto got for Wii Music, so it wasn't unheard of for a massive misstep like that).


It doesn't help that most multi modes despise local multiplayer with a passion. Nintendo has always understood that playing with friends in the immediate vicinity is the most fun because then people don't treat others as just bots
#38squatch22Posted 4/18/2013 11:25:15 AM
kissdadookie posted...
Why don't you actually bother to read the article?


''Unreal Engine 4 is scalable technology, therefore should developers wish to use it when developing Wii U games they can''
---
Nintendo: Leading the way for others to follow.
http://img.gamefaqs.net/screens/1/9/b/gfs_75574_2_16.jpg
#39Cecil255(Topic Creator)Posted 4/18/2013 11:37:14 AM(edited)
CelestialMind posted...
Come on. You've clearly never owned either.

Haha! I could take a picture of my ps3 collection if you'd like, right next to my PS3 and Wii U. Take a stroll to the downstairs, I have PS2, Wii, Dreamcast, N64, SNES, NES, and a Sega/Sega CD. xbox and 360 are the only consoles I'm really not a fan of at all. (lack of classic games for one thing... of which they have none. Only XBOX title I would touch today would be Jet Set Radio Future)

Oh, and the Vita. I have plenty of posts on the Hot Shots Golf: World Invitational board and have platinumed the game, and have about a dozen ps1 classics.

Seriously... I wasn't impressed with the Wii U until I actually played it. I watched a friend play Zombi U for hours and didn't think much of it at all. I was very skeptical, I think most people have "Wii fatigue" and tired over gimmicky motion controls.

Nintendo Land is actually good. It really is, and I everyone owes it to themselves to give it an honest shot. I do play a lot of local multiplayer and my friends and I are going to have an absolute ball with it. Nothing on ps3 or 360 comes close. You Don't Know Jack starts collecting dust now...
#40New LinkPosted 4/18/2013 11:42:16 AM
kissdadookie posted...
squatch22 posted...
kissdadookie posted...
Again, UE4 is a prime example. That engine does not have support for the Wii U. A UE4 based game will have to be rebuilt using an engine that could run on the Wii U...


http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2013/03/epic_games_developers_can_use_unreal_engine_4_for_wii_u_titles


Why don't you actually bother to read the article? Epic essentially said that developers can bring UE4 games over to the Wii U but Epic did not say that UE4 supports the Wii U. This is a VERY VERY important distinction. How so? You can bring a UE4 game to the GameBoy if you wanted to, you would just have to rebuild the game so that you have a version that you can run on the GameBoy.


You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. You can't run UE4 on a gameboy nomatter what you do. The dotmatrix screen simply won't be able to handle the system calls. A better example would be to spend five minutes to create a qbasic program depicting a ball bouncing on a screen, and porting it to a modern 64bit system you'll have the frames running at the wrong rate (far too fast) -- you make simple modifications to handle the new architecture and it runs smoothly. The Wii U's architecture is largely based on x86, which is the same architechture the ps4 will be using. It will be less of an architechtural difference than there is between the 360 and ps3 (see: ridiculous cell processor)

It's really not that hard. You compile it as is, comment out anything causing errors, get it to compile, fix the errors one at a time to get the modules / calls functioning correctly, and then do some QC to check for non-obvious bugs.
---
-SNES- Hasta Pasta!
Sieh nur wie ich laufen kann... Mich fängst du nicht, ich bin der Lebkuchenmann!