People seem to forget one major factor when comparing the consoles specs...

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. Wii U
  3. People seem to forget one major factor when comparing the consoles specs...

User Info: gazazi1997

5 years ago#11
I think that in the past, Nintendo has ignored developers when developing systems. They used carts for the Nintendo 64, used mini-discs for the Gamecube and used the weird controller for the Wii and made it underpowered. (This past generation they could've fixed that by packaging the classic controller with the console).
This generation they're trying to fix things, although they may be a little early when you compare this to the fact that we know NOTHING about PS4/720


5 years ago#12
guedesbrawl posted...
the devs ar enot the ones that spend all their time in those kind of debates

You sure?
NS_CHAIN 2666-2862-7656

User Info: LimblessQuasar

5 years ago#13
guedesbrawl posted...
the devs ar enot the ones that spend all their time in those kind of debates

I don't think there's any debate about it, but from a pure business standpoint, why spend 3 years programming something for the PS3 when it would take only 2 to develop on the 360, and would likely look and play better on that console?

If Ninty can get devs asking the same questions in regards to their console, they'll be doing good things.
When gaming goes to the cloud, I'm done. I don't buy things to not own them. Its like buying a time share in Mexico. -Seperath
BLIZZARD! Where is TLV 3!?!?!?!?

User Info: SkyCrackers

5 years ago#14
The PS3 does not have the technical edge in the visual department. It's gpu is inferior to the 360's in almost every aspect, not to mention that it has less RAM potentially available to it.

I've heard something about PS3 devs using the cpu to help out with rendering, but it's most likely not enough to put it above the 360.
Mega Man X is the best Mega Man game, and has one of the greatest soundtracks of all games.

User Info: FuzzyJello

5 years ago#15
Interesting point to make.

halomonkey1_3_5 posted...
The specs are only half the battle.

Look at PS3 vs 360, the PS3 is "technically" superior but in real world situations it under-performs compared to conventional architectures, and up until recently the 360 has had the visual edge despite it being the "weaker" system.

Because devs had a year head start and have since based all HD development on the 360? Well, yeah, because of the easier architecture and PC's not being difficult to port over to, like you said.

I think we can all expect Microsoft to have a easy system to develop for(when looking at the Xbox and 360 both being developer friendly), but Sony is the wild card, because if they have another Cell type situation(odd architecture that requires completely different approaches to programming) the Wii U could easily take over the spot the Playstation brand currently occupies as the other "Hardcore" platform, which would not only help the Wii U in the west, but would also help them further their dominance in the East, assuming the PS4 would take a distant 3rd with the lack of support in the West.

The interesting thing to point out here is, as I understand, Sony's console have always been a gigantic pain to develop for, even for their first parties (Naughty Dog cites their initial transition to the PS3 as "One of their darkest days"), and that Sony's market share despite this is the reason developers continually bite that bullet.

With the PS2 this wasn't as much of an issue, since it had such a lead that it was the de facto platform and everything was simply ported from it as HD games are with the 360 now, but then we saw the PS3's first year; the games suffered, but the PS3 base was too big to ignore.

The other point is that "easy to program for" is one of the Nintendo's core policies, aside from the mess that was the N64.

An example I have copied and saved somewhere courtesy of the user Isolated; the PS2 could render more polygons than the Gamecube, but every texture layer on an object had to be individually applied and the console had no texture compression, while on the Gamecube you could apply all of your texture mapping at once and the console had more RAM to process the code more quickly.

This to me explains why even Western multiplats looked sharper on the Gamecube, the machine is straight up more efficient, and why just about all games ported from Gamecube to PS2 suffered some sort of technical drawback (RE4's graphics, Tales of Symphonia's minor framerate drop, etc.). But more familiar code and the PS2's gigantic install base cause developers to ignore all of that, as the exclusives between the two clearly show.
The reign of the cloaks will never end. If giant shoes and puffy pants are eternal, then surely, those cloaks must be the same. Eternal. ~KMAnsem
  1. Boards
  2. Wii U
  3. People seem to forget one major factor when comparing the consoles specs...

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived