They needn't consume the cost of the porting though - they could farm that out to a third-party like Sony have done with some of their older titles and take a cut of the profit from the sales.
Theres huge potential being wasted here at the moment I think, they have such a rich back catalogue of quality games but dont even seem interested in bringing them to their own system at the moment - the virtual console could easily be a real rival to the arcade titles available on...
"So you think them remaking every mario game ever and releasing it on every platform will be a surefire sales tactic? I mean that's what he's mainly saying. And i refute that as well."
I think they'd be incredibly successful - Nintendo make quality games that would sell on any platform, there just arent enough of them to convince many people to purchase a WiiU.
And I say all this a WiiU owner myself - I know literally nobody else who has...
Ether One will probably use it as well, it was demoed using oculus rift at EGX Rezzed.
@Corvusmd
You're crediting Microsoft with Broadband? Really?
I Know the original Xbox had a ethernet connection, but come on - do you really think the other platforms would be stuck in 1999 otherwise?
Also, motion controllers?? I think you're crediting the wrong company. Game streaming too.
Amazing.
Ah I see, that makes sense - personally I'm hoping for Dark Souls 2 on PS Now so I can finally unhook my PS3 :)
Sly Cooper (and the rest of the trilogy), got a HD remake ages ago
Author has their facts wrong - the original xbox wasnt £100 cheaper than the ps2 when it launched, it was £100 more expensive at £399 (I bought one at the time)
Doom 4 I reckon
That would have to go down as the greatest piece of trolling ever conceived!
Edit: Not sure what the disagree was for - I love my PS4 but it sure as shit cant play PS3 games.
"Fun fact that everyone already knows: The PlayStation 4 can run PlayStation 3 games."
Errr... what?
Their whole business model is based on depriving owners of other consoles of games that would otherwise be multi-platform rather than creation of new IP.
Thats why the sooner they f**k off the better imo.
Just like I reserve the right to not touch their console with a f**king bargepole
"Lol, kind of makes you wonder what the hell you're agreeing to when you buy a product."
You dont get to agree to anything when you BUY a product, its forced upon you when you try to USE the product.
Big difference.
By disagreeing to the Ts & Cs youd basically be throwing $500 down the toilet.
@KonsoruMasuta Do those terms and conditions get shown when you add the console to your shopping basket online or when purchasing from a store?
No.
They appear AFTER you have parted with your money.
THAT is the problem.
Some of us didnt?
The Last of Us?
Not to mention that even the most powerful PC on Earth is never going to run the AAA exclusives that only come on console.
I'd take a 720p Uncharted/GOW running at 30fps over just about anything running on a PC.
@StarChild
"Of course they could have got the game to run at 1080p. But the graphics would have been pared back in some ways."
Errr... so the 900p was a compromise to get the performance up to scratch then - i think thats pretty much the exact point people are making.
@KonsoruMasuta Haha why the hell would they intentionally target a lower resolution??
@The diagrees:
You do realize you are actively encouraging developers to not be the slightest bit arsed about developing games for 1080p right?
Sorry, but you're logic is deeply flawed. What I said was they could take a cut of the sales from ports if they mitigated the cost of developing them to other studios. They would only get 100% of the profit if they developed the ports themselves, which would cost significant money and resource.
Not to mention the fact that by releasing on other consoles, they'd be increasing their potential audience by literally 10s (if not 100s) of millions (80m PS3, 80m 360, 7m PS...