Support NeoGAF

[Aesnath]

Honestly, I have a PS4 and a PC and it is going to be difficult not to pick a Wii U version if available. Sure, the quality may take a hit, but I really like the idea of playing it on the gamepad. I have a lot of people vying for TV and computer time and off TV play seems great.

Now, that having been said, I would hate to think that such a version will detract meaningfully from the game as a whole. So, I hope they know what they are doing.

 

[Lee Chaolan]

Is it 2017 yet? =/

 

[TheMoon]

I still really wish they would not spend time and money on a Wii U down port. SOrry Wii U owners :/

They aren't spending time. Armature is. Jesus, stop pushing Wii U owners off to the kids table. It's ridiculous enough that this is behind a $3m stretch goal. You're all getting your game already, they're hiring an external dev to make this version. Just fucking relax and be reasonable people. This attitude is mind-boggling.

 

[Sword Familiar]

Is it 2017 yet? =/

Yes!

Spoiler

No :/

 

[Bots are better than you]

Extremely vocal, extreme minority with bizarre and nonsensical priorities/preferences always get what they want. Like the guy from the BS tumblr who presumably DOES NOT have a PC, Xbone, or PS4, but DOES HAVE a fucking NVIDIA SHIELD.

Have you been in recent DQ/MH/general new game announcement threads without a platform? The "majority" can be extremely vocal too ... "PS4 please, for .... reasons." or my favorite "I don't like the game/not interested but PS4 needs it."
So how about stopping denouncing owners of just one platform, that maybe differs from your favorite system? Not everyone has the money for multiple consoles, i do have that luxury and own all 3 current gen systems. Or simply, maybe someone doesn't want multiple systems, like the guy you mentioned.

And do you really think that IGA just went out and said Armature handles the port, without first asking the studio about it? Maybe the talks even went so far that Armature made a basic budget-plan for a port, resulting in the 3 million funding goal? If you believe that the goal was made just because the "minority" was "vocal", then i think you are so very wrong, wow.

Whats with the butthurt right now? The port (if funded) is handled by a different team, and the technical wizards at IntiCreates (hint: sarcasm) can take all their time and resources for the main version, for me, a win-win, more players get the game without splitting the main resources.
It's not like this is a game with the scale of a Witcher or Uncharted or whatever ...

 

[foxuzamaki]

Besides MN9 and a few 3DS games, What is inti'S most tech technical proficient game?

 

[liliththepale]

Some people just don't want the Wii U to succeed. It's easy to laugh at and make fun of when it's a failure, but if the tides ever turn and it becomes a general success then that means eating crow and possibly investing hundreds to finally participate in the system. Having a game like this come to the system helps legitimize it.

No port is free, but I'm sure Iga shopped around to see if anybody could do it for a small enough amount of money. Even if the budget runs away from them, that's Armature's problem, not Iga's. And they'll probably at least break even, all the while engendering good will.

 

[TheMoon]

Whats with the butthurt right now? The port (if funded) is handled by a different team, and the technical wizards at IntiCreates (hint: sarcasm) can take all their time and resources for the main version, for me, a win-win, more players get the game without splitting the main resources.
It's not like this is a game with the scale of a Witcher or Uncharted or whatever ...

I wonder if some people think this is gonna be a AAA-looking fully 3D game or something lol

 

[Bots are better than you]

Besides MN9 and a few 3DS games, What is inti'S most tech technical proficient game?

Well, i can only speak for their 2D games, but Azure Striker Gunvolt was really good looking, and smooth animations. Of course, the Mega Man Zero-Games and the ZX DS Games and they have been working on the last Shantae games, Half-Genie-Hero and the Pirate's Curse.

Looking into their works, most of their games were for handhelds, and in 2D with spritework.

And i think we can agree to keep the name "Gal*Gun" buried, can we?

 

[QFNS]

They aren't spending time. Armature is. Jesus, stop pushing Wii U owners off to the kids table. It's ridiculous enough that this is behind a $3m stretch goal. You're all getting your game already, they're hiring an external dev to make this version. Just fucking relax and be reasonable people. This attitude is mind-boggling.

Right on about the time, but completely ignored the issue of spending money.

I'm happy that they are outsourcing it, if they weren't it would show a sign of them not knowing what they are doing. But I'm still pretty sad they are bothering at all when I would like the budget to remain in 1 silo if you will. Splitting it up doesn't benefit me (as a person who will absolutely NOT play this on a Wii U despite owning one), and I don't see it benefitting my version of the game (PC most likely). So I can quite easily see where this attitude is coming from.

With any game, I think it tends to be better to develop for as FEW platforms as possible. It is easier for a developer to express their vision when they know exactly how everything is going to come together. Even just developing solely for PC these days makes that pretty difficult with the wide range of hardware out there. Console only games have a pretty big advantage in that regard. IMO, it's part of the reason games like Symphony of the Night ended up being so great. They had 1 target, aimed as high as they could, and just went for it.

When budgets are divvyed up into a bunch of pools for a bunch of platforms, it is impossible to say that it won't have some kind of effect. Good management and great producers might be able to limit the impact, but it has to have some effect. Unless that budget simply would have been sent straight into IGA's wallet (lol no), it will impact the development somehow.

 

[Dictator93]

They aren't spending time. Armature is. Jesus, stop pushing Wii U owners off to the kids table. It's ridiculous enough that this is behind a $3m stretch goal. You're all getting your game already, they're hiring an external dev to make this version. Just fucking relax and be reasonable people. This attitude is mind-boggling.

They are spending money on it though, which is my point. I think most people would think it were odd if Star Citizen devs spent money on down porting to current gen consoles (as in, why are you wasting backermoney doing that instead of making the game better), which is my stance.

It is not about disliking the Wii U or anything, just I think it is totally fine to want to see a game spend its money on being an ambitious current gen game.

 

[liliththepale]

Right on about the time, but completely ignored the issue of spending money.

I'm happy that they are outsourcing it, if they weren't it would show a sign of them not knowing what they are doing. But I'm still pretty sad they are bothering at all when I would like the budget to remain in 1 silo if you will. Splitting it up doesn't benefit me (as a person who will absolutely NOT play this on a Wii U despite owning one), and I don't see it benefitting my version of the game (PC most likely). So I can quite easily see where this attitude is coming from.

With any game, I think it tends to be better to develop for as FEW platforms as possible. It is easier for a developer to express their vision when they know exactly how everything is going to come together. Even just developing solely for PC these days makes that pretty difficult with the wide range of hardware out there. Console only games have a pretty big advantage in that regard. IMO, it's part of the reason games like Symphony of the Night ended up being so great. They had 1 target, aimed as high as they could, and just went for it.

When budgets are divvyed up into a bunch of pools for a bunch of platforms, it is impossible to say that it won't have some kind of effect. Good management and great producers might be able to limit the impact, but it has to have some effect. Unless that budget simply would have been sent straight into IGA's wallet (lol no), it will impact the development somehow.

If they gain more sales and more/higher pledges from the Wii U, then it's not pulling money from your precious PC version. It's probably adding a small amount at the end of the day. The onus is on you to prove that there isn't enough Wii U-motivated interest to substantiate the financial departure, and I don't think that can easily be done.

 

[TheMoon]

Right on about the time, but completely ignored the issue of spending money.

I'm happy that they are outsourcing it, if they weren't it would show a sign of them not knowing what they are doing. But I'm still pretty sad they are bothering at all when I would like the budget to remain in 1 silo if you will. Splitting it up doesn't benefit me (as a person who will absolutely NOT play this on a Wii U despite owning one), and I don't see it benefitting my version of the game (PC most likely). So I can quite easily see where this attitude is coming from.

With any game, I think it tends to be better to develop for as FEW platforms as possible. It is easier for a developer to express their vision when they know exactly how everything is going to come together. Even just developing solely for PC these days makes that pretty difficult with the wide range of hardware out there. Console only games have a pretty big advantage in that regard. IMO, it's part of the reason games like Symphony of the Night ended up being so great. They had 1 target, aimed as high as they could, and just went for it.

When budgets are divvyed up into a bunch of pools for a bunch of platforms, it is impossible to say that it won't have some kind of effect. Good management and great producers might be able to limit the impact, but it has to have some effect. Unless that budget simply would have been sent straight into IGA's wallet (lol no), it will impact the development somehow.

They are spending money on it though, which is my point. I think most people would think it were odd if Star Citizen devs spent money on down porting to current gen consoles (as in, why are you wasting backermoney doing that instead of making the game better), which is my stance.

It is not about disliking the Wii U or anything, just I think it is totally fine to want to see a game spend its money on being an ambitious current gen game.

The issue of money is a non-issue since the port is locked away behind an insanely high stretch goal beyond the base game already. All the stuff Armature will use will come from the base game from previous goals/stretch goals already. They will most likely plop it into UE3 and strip out whatever fanciness UE4 allowed for and make it work as well as they can that way. I bet many are forgetting th the KS money isn't the game's actual budget. They are getting additional funding from outside investors who just wanted the KS to show the level of interest in the game. Ports are fairly cheap to do as they are. Armature have experience with the platform, genre and know what they're doing in general.

The kids table is not gonna steal your precious food. Relax.

 

[Cheerilee]

We literally have no idea how demanding this game will be.

Hell, I doubt the devs even know yet. This discussion is completely fruitless at this point.

Our budget left us with two options: Build the biggest, most beautiful game we can, or make sure it runs everywhere from the start. As things stand today, we can't afford to create the two separate versions of this game that would be necessary to make it run on every console.

They had a choice between making the game in UE3 (PS3/X360/WiiU/PC/PS4/Xbone/Vita/NX) or UE4 (PC/PS4/Xbone/NX) and they decided "we would rather make the game to next-gen specs".

Armature is either going to make a downgraded version of the game for WiiU, or spin some sort of customized magic that results in the WiiU matching an UE4 game, when Mark Rein literally laughed at the idea of UE4 running on WiiU. Sane money's on "it will be downgraded".

 

[Lee Chaolan]

Yes!

Spoiler

No :/

Love your avatar <3

 

[Bots are better than you]

They are spending money on it though, which is my point. I think most people would think it were odd if Star Citizen devs spent money on down porting to current gen consoles (as in, why are you wasting backermoney doing that instead of making the game better), which is my stance.

It is not about disliking the Wii U or anything, just I think it is totally fine to want to see a game spend its money on being an ambitious current gen game.

Did the devs of Star Citizen offer a strech goal for consoles? As in, officially on the kickstarter-page, made by them? Honest question, haven't followed that game.
If they did not, and would make a console version with kickstarter money, then your point would be valid.

In this case, the producer(s) himself/themselves went out, offered a official strecht goal, and pretty much made already enough planning with that port in mind. In this case, your point is not valid, because now they are getting pledges from people who *want* the port, thus backing the project. Making it "their" game, too.

And again, i would understand all those points if this game was on a AAA-level like big blockbuster releases, for example GTAV. But it's a 2.5D IGAvania, i think they can make a great game with the publisher funding and the kickstarter money.

 

[OmegaDL50]

If they gain more sales and more/higher pledges from the Wii U, then it's not pulling money from your precious PC version. It's probably adding a small amount at the end of the day. The onus is on you to prove that there isn't enough Wii U-motivated interest to substantiate the financial departure, and I don't think that can easily be done.

Considering there is also supposedly a publisher line up with money lined up as well, there isn't that much in terms of production money to take away from the project.

Iga said the point of this Kickstarter was the prove that demand exists for this game. The Publisher wouldn't provide funds unless Iga could raise 10% of the publisher amount (which is 500k)

Let's not automatically assume that the current $3 million this project raised is the only money going into the project. We still need to factor whatever the Publisher is willing to offer on hand.

The Wii U version existing won't effect the main versions from a financial standpoint negatively.

Did the devs of Star Citizen offer a strech goal for consoles? As in, officially on the kickstarter-page, made by them? Honest question, haven't followed that game.
If they did not, and would make a console version with kickstarter money, then your point would be valid.

In this case, the producer(s) himself/themselves went out, offered a official strecht goal, and pretty much made already enough planning with that port in mind. In this case, your point is not valid, because now they are getting pledges from people who *want* the port, thus backing the project. Making it "their" game, too.

And again, i would understand all those points if this game was on a AAA-level like big blockbuster releases, for example GTAV. But it's a 2.5D IGAvania, i think they can make a great game with the publisher funding and the kickstarter money.

Star Citizen didn't have a publisher line up with funds with a condition on the table unlike Bloodstained does.

 

[kunonabi]

This is pretty much my sentiment as well. It's wonderful that a small contingent of people with only a Wii U and less-than-capable PCs will be able to play this and not be left out, but from a business standpoint, this seems nuts. Surely the portion of the potential audience that fits this category is small enough that this would lose them money in the long haul, right? Even Shovel Knight, which was heavily Nintendo-focused in its marketing, sold a third of its initial copies on PC. Wii U's a sinking ship, kept afloat only by the constant bailing of high-quality Nintendo titles. That's why I said in an earlier post that this feels like a gesture of goodwill rather than a smart business tactic. Then again, dollars and cents aren't everything, and fostering goodwill is also smart business, so I don't know. But if it's not going to detract from the overall product, then a Wii U version isn't a bad thing at all.

I have a Wii U and an Xbox One, as well as a decently-capable PC. I love Nintendo--have since I was a kid--but I can't justify willingly getting what is almost certain to be an inferior version of the game, so Wii U's not even in the equation for me. So to the people who are favoring the Wii U version of this, I ask with genuine curiosity: why? It's pretty much a given (or at the very least HIGHLY likely) that this version will not be on par technically with the other versions, so there must be other reasons why you'd favor it. Controller? Off-TV play? General Nintendo loyalty? Only option? Something else? I guess you could call this an informal survey. I'd like to know what the reasons are for going with the Wii U version of this over others. And no, this isn't bait, so please refrain from making bitter replies.

- I prefer the gamepad to the ps4 controller and with castletroids in particular I like having my map on a second screen. It's also easier to look up info on the gamepad thanks to the internet browser and miiverse.

- Off-TV play is great when you have to do the mindless BS grinding that comes with these types of games.

- The Wii U is primary console so I try to have all my games there which comes in handy when I travel.

- I don't have a PS4 yet(I'm waiting on the Witch and the Hundred Knight remake and the sequel) but it's most likely going to sit in a box when I'm not playing it since there's going to be more for me to do on my ps3 for quite a while and I don't have space for three consoles.

- Nostalgia does play a factor as Castlevania is still pretty much a Nintendo franchise to me since the majority of the titles are on Nintendo platforms and the ones that aren't are mostly poor aside from Bloodlines, Chronicles, and to a lesser degree Rondo and SOTN.

Really the only benefit I'm going to get out of the PS4 is better graphics and that really doesn't matter to me.

 

[Crocodile]

@HellBlazer: Can you whip up another one of your Kickstarter line graphs? I'm curious as to how things stand now.

Anyway, I have no idea why the Wii U port is a contentious subject anymore (or why it even was at all). It's being made because there is demand and they are willing to accommodate such demand if the fans pay for it. Since we know it won't negatively impact the development of the UE4 versions (though we always knew this) anybody who doesn't have a Wii U shouldn't care one way or the other. Concerns of "how much would a Wii U version sell" (not your concern and since fans are paying for the port, risk is mitigated), "they could use that money on something else" (without the existence of a Wii U port they would be getting LESS money not the same amount) and "what about the NX" (you don't make promises to develop for vaporware nor do all Wii Us in existence explode in 2017) feel weak as all hell. If the existence of a Wii U port legit bothers or confuses you after everything we know right now, you may want to take a short moment and think about what's actually annoying you. I certainly can't figure it out.

A bit surprised that the funding barely jumped since the Wii U port was announced.

?

Even when only confirmed near the end of yesterday, total funds for yesterday exceed what was gained in any individual day in the past 4. Today, given current rates, today will be the best day in at least the past 5. There have been more backers today so far than any individual day in the past 5 (this is all from kicktraq data). Several people here and even on the KS page have said they increased their pledge in response to the Wii U confirmation. There stands to a non-insignificant number of backers to be gained over the next two weeks and during the final rush period due to the Wii U port as well. Did you expect the total to jump up like 300k+ today? That's not how Kickstarters work.........

 

[ShogunDarius]

i've decided to stop doing the updates now I might start again for the final week

 

[TheMoon]

They had a choice between making the game in UE3 (PS3/X360/WiiU/PC/PS4/Xbone/Vita/NX) or UE4 (PC/PS4/Xbone/NX) and they decided "we would rather make the game to next-gen specs".

Armature is either going to make a downgraded version of the game for WiiU, or spin some sort of customized magic that results in the WiiU matching an UE4 game, when Mark Rein literally laughed at the idea of UE4 running on WiiU. Sane money's on "it will be downgraded".

This is all I can find on their engine choice:

Using UE4 allows us a great deal of flexibility, and Inti Creates can't wait to show you just what they can wring out of it.

A 2.5D world built on Unreal Engine 4 was the right choice to balance development time, graphical fidelity, budget, and scope.

Nowhere that I can see are they talking about "next gen specs." UE4 is the more modern engine with lots of improvements on UE3 (in the engine itself and also the licensing fee aspect, iirc) so choosing that one is logical in some way especially if one is mainly banking on the unstoppable PS4/X1 sales train while the platforms not supporting UE4 are, well, negligible in that area. Specs for "OMG TEH GRAFX!!!" reasons seem to have little to do with that decision.

 

[HellBlazer]

@HellBlazer: Can you whip up another one of your Kickstarter line graphs? I'm curious as to how things stand now.

Sure.

Torment had two great days at this point in their campaign, so it pulled ahead a bit, but Bloodstained might start gaining ground again tomorrow.

Yooka needs to pull up soon if it's going to dethrone MN9 or PoE... though then again, they chose to go for a super long 47-day compaign, so I guess they have time.

 

[Dictator93]

The issue of money is a non-issue since the port is locked away behind an insanely high stretch goal beyond the base game already. All the stuff Armature will use will come from the base game from previous goals/stretch goals already. They will most likely plop it into UE3 and strip out whatever fanciness UE4 allowed for and make it work as well as they can that way. I bet many are forgetting th the KS money isn't the game's actual budget. They are getting additional funding from outside investors who just wanted the KS to show the level of interest in the game. Ports are fairly cheap to do as they are. Armature have experience with the platform, genre and know what they're doing in general.

The kids table is not gonna steal your precious food. Relax.

Your point is great. Can we assume that te money from the preceding goal to the WiiU goal is money "dedicated" to the WiiU version? Maybe I just think they should prioritizes that goal to something else?

Did the devs of Star Citizen offer a strech goal for consoles? As in, officially on the kickstarter-page, made by them? Honest question, haven't followed that game.
If they did not, and would make a console version with kickstarter money, then your point would be valid.

Yeah they haven't (and will never according to their comments).

 

[diffusionx]

Some people just don't want the Wii U to succeed. It's easy to laugh at and make fun of when it's a failure, but if the tides ever turn and it becomes a general success then that means eating crow and possibly investing hundreds to finally participate in the system. Having a game like this come to the system helps legitimize it.

No port is free, but I'm sure Iga shopped around to see if anybody could do it for a small enough amount of money. Even if the budget runs away from them, that's Armature's problem, not Iga's. And they'll probably at least break even, all the while engendering good will.

Give me a break. The Wii U is never going to be a success. I have one and like it. It has lots of nice games but that ship has sailed. Releasing the worst version of a Kickstarted side scroller in 2 years won't do anything for the system.

If the port runs into trouble, of course it is Iga's problem. It's his name on the project and people are funding the game today for a Wii U version. So if the port blows up the money and means will have to be found to get it out the door.

 

[lensoftruth]

They had a choice between making the game in UE3 (PS3/X360/WiiU/PC/PS4/Xbone/Vita/NX) or UE4 (PC/PS4/Xbone/NX) and they decided "we would rather make the game to next-gen specs".

Armature is either going to make a downgraded version of the game for WiiU, or spin some sort of customized magic that results in the WiiU matching an UE4 game, when Mark Rein literally laughed at the idea of UE4 running on WiiU. Sane money's on "it will be downgraded".

Or they could port UE4 to the Wii U, no reason why they couldn't.

 

[hawk2025]

@HellBlazer: Can you whip up another one of your Kickstarter line graphs? I'm curious as to how things stand now.

Anyway, I have no idea why the Wii U port is a contentious subject anymore (or why it even was at all). It's being made because there is demand and they are willing to accommodate such demand if the fans pay for it. Since we know it won't negatively impact the development of the UE4 versions (though we always knew this) anybody who doesn't have a Wii U shouldn't care one way or the other. Concerns of "how much would a Wii U version sell" (not your concern and since fans are paying for the port, risk is mitigated), "they could use that money on something else" (without the existence of a Wii U port they would be getting LESS money not the same amount) and "what about the NX" (you don't make promises to develop for vaporware nor do all Wii Us in existence explode in 2017) feel weak as all hell. If the existence of a Wii U port legit bothers or confuses you after everything we know right now, you may want to take a short moment and think about what's actually annoying you. I certainly can't figure it out.



?

Even when only confirmed near the end of yesterday, total funds for yesterday exceed what was gained in any individual day in the past 4. Today, given current rates, today will be the best day in at least the past 5. There have been more backers today so far than any individual day in the past 5 (this is all from kicktraq data). Several people here and even on the KS page have said they increased their pledge in response to the Wii U confirmation. There stands to a non-insignificant number of backers to be gained over the next two weeks and during the final rush period due to the Wii U port as well. Did you expect the total to jump up like 300k+ today? That's not how Kickstarters work.........

You are right, not to mention that the Wii U version has been teased since the beginning -- it's impossible to infer what I did from today

 

[RM8]

I still think this won't be the technically stunning game some people expect it to be, and that will only lead to tears. It's still a 2.5D game that had to be Kickstarted, I'm expecting something like Strider tech-wise.

 

[TheMoon]

Your point is great. Can we assume that te money from the preceding goal to the WiiU goal is money "dedicated" to the WiiU version? Maybe I just think they should prioritizes that goal to something else?

So you think the $250k that make up the difference between the previous stretch goal and the Wii U goal (i.e. the "cost" of the Wii U port in the stretch goal sense) should instead go somewhere else and simply not go towards a port to another platform because....??

Again I point out that the KS money is not their only budget. They made it clear they have outside investors providing the rest. That Wii U port isn't gonna harm your precious game. Why is this so hard to see?

Or they could port UE4 to the Wii U, no reason why they couldn't.

Rein specifically said someone could do this if they wanted to, they just didn't bother with it themselves. So yea.

 

[Eusis]

Rein specifically said someone could do this if they wanted to, they just didn't bother with it themselves. So yea.

Incidentally I wonder if this is a fringe benefit? In the off chance anyone else wants to put a UE4 game on to Wii U (maybe PS3/360 too? Probably an indie) they could pay Armature to assist given they'll have downported it already for them?

 

[liliththepale]

Give me a break. The Wii U is never going to be a success. I have one and like it. It has lots of nice games but that ship has sailed. Releasing the worst version of a Kickstarted side scroller in 2 years won't do anything for the system.

If the port runs into trouble, of course it is Iga's problem. It's his name on the project and people are funding the game today for a Wii U version. So if the port blows up the money and means will have to be found to get it out the door.

Have you ever done any contract work? If you don't serve up the agreed upon product, you're liable to be sued for restitution. Armature can't just reach in and grab more money if they run out. Not that it's likely they'll need it, but it would take a suite of convoluted errors before this blows up in Iga's face.

It seems unlikely that the Wii U will turn into any kind of big success going forward, but it's not impossible. Its library continues to get stronger, and there are multiple corporate changes going on at Nintendo right now. To dismiss that out of hand is really immature.

Not to mention that a project like this signing on to Wii U has ripple effects. Seeing other devs value the platform encourages yet more devs to value the platform. I've seen that first hand in a couple of development communities, including the indie dev thread here.

 

[TheMoon]

Incidentally I wonder if this is a fringe benefit? In the off chance anyone else wants to put a UE4 game on to Wii U (maybe PS3/360 too? Probably an indie) they could pay Armature to assist given they'll have downported it already for them?

I don't see that happening. While possible, I don't actually think they'd port the whole engine for that since I doubt the actual game design would necessitate it and thus rebuilding it in UE3 seems more likely to me. But I'm no dev, I'm just pulling this out of my butt.

 

[M3d10n]

Well, now that there's a Wii U version, I'd like to see PS3/X360 versions.

Porting UE4 to the Wii U is actually easier than porting it to the PS3 and X360 due to the Wii U's DX10 GPU, since that's UE4's minimum spec (when not using the mobile render path). Taking the OpenGL RHI as a base (since it runs on Apple's terrible OpenGL drivers), it shouldn't be that hard to port it.

UE4 is also more efficient than UE3 when it comes to CPU usage. If I had a Wii U dev kit available, I'd give a go at it myself.

Epic never ported it themselves because it's not cost effective for them, since it means they would need to keep supporting it. Same reason they didn't port it to Windows Phone or Windows 8 (there is an unfinished WinRT port in there, however).

 

[liliththepale]

I don't see that happening. While possible, I don't actually think they'd port the whole engine for that since I doubt the actual game design would necessitate it and thus rebuilding it in UE3 seems more likely to me. But I'm no dev, I'm just pulling this out of my butt.

I'm not very familiar with Unreal, so this is also conjecture, but it seems obvious that if it could be done by three guys on a shoestring budget, Epic would have done it already.

 

[RoboPlato]

I still think this won't be the technically stunning game some people expect it to be, and that will only lead to tears. It's still a 2.5D game that had to be Kickstarted, I'm expecting something like Strider tech-wise.

You can do some neat stuff relatively easily with UE4. The main concern comes from the fact that there's now a version on a system that isn't officially supported by the engine. Even with another team doing it, that will lead to some issues.

 

[Cleve]

I'm glad to see they got a great studio to handle the Wii U port even if I don't understand the demand behind it. With all the garbage ports coming out I have faith Armature will turn out something respectable.

 

[TheMoon]

I'm not very familiar with Unreal, so this is also conjecture, but it seems obvious that if it could be done by three guys on a shoestring budget, Epic would have done it already.

The support argument that M3d10n brought up could be the key factor here since that's something that Epic is known for and prides itself on, afaik. If I'm not mistaken they have really great customer support for their licensees.

 

[TheSpaceBetween]

It is not about disliking the Wii U or anything, just I think it is totally fine to want to see a game spend its money on being an ambitious current gen game.

Wow, people in denial that the Wii U is a current gen system continue to make themselves sound childish.

 

[Davey Cakes]

I'm glad to see they got a great studio to handle the Wii U port even if I don't understand the demand behind it. With all the garbage ports coming out I have faith Armature will turn out something respectable.

Of course there's demand for a Wii U port. Considering where the previous Igavania games went (plus the fact that all six of the handheld ones may appear on the Wii U Virtual Console now that DS VC is out) there's definitely an audience on Nintendo platforms.

 

[Eusis]

The support argument that M3d10n brought up could be the key factor here since that's something that Epic is known for and prides itself on, afaik. If I'm not mistaken they have really great customer support for their licensees.

Yeah, the real cost could be making sure its up to date and assisting people in making work, versus just dumping it once on Wii U.

Might also mean Armature's familiarity won't mean very much after all, but then as someone with hands on experience they could be useful for help (or just doing the port themselves.)

 

[RM8]

You can do some neat stuff relatively easily with UE4. The main concern comes from the fact that there's now a version on a system that isn't officially supported by the engine. Even with another team doing it, that will lead to some issues.

WiiU was in the basement from day one, so I doubt it changes anything. Also, that WiiU was in the basement from day one could also be proof that this won't be the eye-melting visual marvel some people might expect.

 

[TheMoon]

WiiU was in the basement from day one, so I doubt it changes anything. Also, that WiiU was in the basement from day one could also be proof that this won't be the eye-melting visual marvel some people might expect.

That proof was in the basic premise. People are just fooling themselves by looking at the list of platforms and ignoring everything else.

 

[FlashbladeGAF]

It is not about disliking the Wii U or anything, just I think it is totally fine to want to see a game spend its money on being an ambitious current gen game.

The game they wanted to make became possible when they reached $500,000

Everything else is just a bonus.

 

[Theonik]

Maybe if they throw in a few more million dollars things could change!

 

[liliththepale]

WiiU was in the basement from day one, so I doubt it changes anything. Also, that WiiU was in the basement from day one could also be proof that this won't be the eye-melting visual marvel some people might expect.

That's just silly. If the Wii U was the common denominator, then they would have built the game on UE3 to begin with. It's only reasonable to conclude that some of the effects and textures will be downgraded or removed.

 

[PixyJunket]

People are actually getting mad that another version of the game is going to be available and more people will get to play it?

Seriously. Adults? Adults are having this reaction?

How sad.

 

[WhiteRabbitEXE]

I'm not very familiar with Unreal, so this is also conjecture, but it seems obvious that if it could be done by three guys on a shoestring budget, Epic would have done it already.

Not really. The issues are that 1) there's not much demand amongst developers to get UE4 running on Wii U (most AAA devs aren't developing on the platform and indies still have Unity), 2) Epic themselves aren't interested in supporting the platform, and 3) generally UE3 can be used as a fallback, even if not ideal. There's just not many reasons for Epic to officially support the platform when others can port the engine themselves if need be.

 

[RM8]

That's just silly. If the Wii U was the common denominator, then they would have built the game on UE3 to begin with. It's only reasonable to conclude that some of the effects and textures will be downgraded or removed.

Who said anything about WiiU being the common denominator? I said they probably think re-building it for WiiU won't be such a huge struggle if they've considered it from the beginning.

 

[Cleve]

Of course there's demand for a Wii U port. Considering where the previous Igavania games went (plus the fact that all six of the handheld ones may appear on the Wii U Virtual Console now that DS VC is out) there's definitely an audience on Nintendo platforms.

Eh, the demand was on the DS for sure. If the Wii U directly inherited the DS user base it wouldn't be in the position it's in.

There seems to be a small but very vocal U fanbase, so as I said, I'm glad they got what they wanted.

 

[Grampasso]

Who said anything about WiiU being the common denominator? I said they probably think re-building it for WiiU won't be such a huge struggle if they've considered it from the beginning.

This. And as a software developer, downgrading from a framework is never painful as people think it is. You just port it down and see what doesn't work. Then you fix it with what you have available or you just remove it. Honestly all this panic around the WiiU port is quite silly.

 

[BassForever]

Eh, the demand was on the DS for sure. If the Wii U directly inherited the DS user base it wouldn't be in the position it's in.

There seems to be a small but very vocal U fanbase, so as I said, I'm glad they got what they wanted.

Considering only 1 of these Igavania games (and yes the biggest one) was on PS1/PSP and every other game that cemented the legacy was only on Nintendo systems I think it makes sense for a good chunk of the fan base to be Nintendo fans, or at least fans of Nintendo's hand helds in the past.