declaring someone "doesn't know what they're talking about" doesn't make it so.
It is a completely FITting example. You are just in denial.Look no further for a completely unfitting example that describes a completely different situation, that mind you has already been explained in this thread and a million of other times.
The game's assets are not the problem. Lack of memory and lack of hard disk space on a fixed platform were the problem. There were tons of things they couldn't do with the game purely because they had used up all the memory of the PS2 already.FFXI was limited by the PS1 for the simple fact that the PS1 was the *lead platform*. The game was developed for PS1 and then ported to PC. Its core assets were designed for the the PS1 and could not be upgraded to PC standards unless they were completely remade for scratch.
That's all well and good but why bother releasing an inferior version? A PC capable of running the game doesn't cost much more than a game console. There's no reason to do it. Your game controllers work on the PC. Your PC connects to a TV. You can play on the couch with a controller regardless of the platform. Your PC can be upgraded so you can stay on the same platform without buying entirely new hardware.This problem does not appear when PC is the lead platform and the game is only ported to consoles, as assets can be downgraded easily and as much as you want to fit ONLY the console version, while the PC version can remain untouched.
It's very different from any other games because those games usually aren't extended and upgraded beyond some DLC that was already planned before the game was released.It's no different from any other games made for consoles and ported to PC. Unless the developer is willing to do a lot of additional work on them, they're bad for PC standards. See Skyrim and many others.
I can think of one game in existence that runs on multiple engines for multiple platforms, and that's Skylanders. But it's not really even the same game on each platform- it's completely different on each.Your point about MMORPGs needing an upgradable platform is equally and completely off mark. A MMORPG that runs on PC on consoles doesn't even need to run on the same engine to run seamlessly on the same server. All that needs to be common between the two platforms is the data flow about characters, enemies and variable elements and the collision map so that a character doesn't look stuck inside a wall on the other platform. That's it.
My point about MMORPGs needing an upgradable platform is completely ON the mark. Unless you want an MMORPG that has a hard cap on its lifespan, they should not be released on platforms that can not be extneded and upgraded just like the game can. While it's true that you can partially offset this by building the client from the ground up for each platform instead of just porting it, that takes a LOT more resources. You also run into a problem where if the assets aren't the same, it takes much longer to release patches and it's much harder to release them at the same time for all platforms. You end up making the "lead platform" players wait for a patch while it gets remade for each other platform.
You sir, using personal attacks does not add to your argument. I am not a platform elitist. I own many different platforms, and I play particular kinds of games on each one. I bought a Wii, 3DS and later the Wii U on day one of their launches. Hell, I'm playing Fire Emblem: Awakening as I write this post.