It seems to me a lot of gamers have a very skewed view of their favorite console's hardware capabilities and feel a sense of resentment if developers are able to make a half-decent port of a game to an older platform. It often carries a bitter accusation that the game was somehow "held back" by older hardware, regardless of evidence for or against such an idea.
This paranoia that a developer's "creative vision" will be compromised by the existence of an (often outsourced) port isn't *totally* without merit (executive meddling is a thing), but it assumes too much based on too little evidence. If a game is even vaguely linear, the automatic accusation is those darn older consoles are responsible. It's the console version of PC gamers blaming consoles for everything. It's like being a GC or Xbox fan back in the day and blaming everything you don't like about gaming on "that darn PS2 with its weak hardware holding us baaaack!" Tony Hawk 3 can't possibly be good because it had a PS1/N64 port.
Black Ops 1 was on the Wii. A console weaker than the original Xbox. Yet you didn't see people complaining about "compromised artistic vision" in their droves.
This paranoia that a developer's "creative vision" will be compromised by the existence of an (often outsourced) port isn't *totally* without merit (executive meddling is a thing), but it assumes too much based on too little evidence. If a game is even vaguely linear, the automatic accusation is those darn older consoles are responsible. It's the console version of PC gamers blaming consoles for everything. It's like being a GC or Xbox fan back in the day and blaming everything you don't like about gaming on "that darn PS2 with its weak hardware holding us baaaack!" Tony Hawk 3 can't possibly be good because it had a PS1/N64 port.
Black Ops 1 was on the Wii. A console weaker than the original Xbox. Yet you didn't see people complaining about "compromised artistic vision" in their droves.