Real-world example of why this console generation turned out the way it did

I've got a friend, who happens to be female, that wants a video game console. She likes Rock Band, Hexic, nostalgic platforming games, and for some reason, Mortal Kombat. She's also in the market for a Netflix Roku box.

So, I suggest the 360, because it has everything she's looking for, and it just had a price drop on the 20gb model.

She phones me back later after going to the store. To make a long story short she got confused by "All the different kinds of Xboxes" at the store . She also was turned off when she found out she was going to have to buy a $100 adaptor to connect her console wirelessly; she "doesn't want wires all over my living room".

So, what did she buy? A Wii. She got it home, got it on her wireless network without a hitch and immediately downloaded SMB. She was sad that they didn't have Mortal Kombat, but she wanted to borrow some games from my collection. So far, she seems satisfied, and I can guarantee the Wii will be the only console she buys this generation.

And that, folks, is why Nintendo currently has the best-selling console and why both Microsoft and Sony are trying to emulate them. It's a brave new world out there, welcome to it.

Ideally I always try and make sure I am with any of my non-gamer friends when they go to a store to purchase a console.

I like to think I know as much if not more than the staff at the store and am not out to make a quick buck. I know each console's strong and weak points and thus give an acurate account of all machines. I don't like them to be hustled into a sale of a machine that I don't think they would like.

The Xbox probably would have been the ideal choice for her, I know wires aren't the best but surely considering the alternative it would have been better.

Not saying the Wii is a bad console, but it is nothing more than a fad unfortunately. Despite third party support it seems to suffer from the same problems as the Gamecube, yes there's some good first party software out for it, but even though it has third party support these seem to be third rate games also.

For every decent game there's an abundance of shoddy motion controlled pap that could barely be called a game. As far as REAL games go it seems the 360 and PS3 have the better software. Sorry Nintendo.

She just wanted the complete system working right out of the box, and she was definitely turned off by the multiple SKUs ... she didn't know if "all the games would work with the one she bought".

Graphical differences weren't even a factor. Like many of my non-gamer friends she can't tell the difference between a Dreamcast game and a 360 game. I know, strange, isn't it.

Anyway, $250 to Nintendo (plus some points for Virtual Console), $0 to MS, $0 to Sony. That's how it went.

Well, you talking about the mass gamers here. A hardcore gamer would never give up counterstrike, Starcraft, Warcraft 3, WoW, Civilization 4 up for a Wii, not even for a gayingplatform :P.

It is fun though, i know a lot of people who play it a lot. And nintendo made a dangerous but amazingly good path. They opened up a whole lot of cans of new people. But i don't think gamingplatforms will ever reach me, still don't like the games/gameplay or controlls of it. PC got it all for me, if i wanna play rockstar i open up fruityloops. if i wanna increase my brain capacity i will do some online minigames. If i want to play shooters i rather have the quicknes of mouse and keyboard. If i wanna play RTS i rather have a mouse and the shortcuts of the keyboard. If i wanna play civilization i rather play the full version of a game rather then not even half of it (revs).

Anyway, as long as you have fun it's ok i guess :D.

Gz

For every decent game there's an abundance of shoddy motion controlled pap that could barely be called a game. As far as REAL games go it seems the 360 and PS3 have the better software. Sorry Nintendo.

eregol

Don't bother apologizing to Nintendo, they're too busy counting money and manufacturing Wiis and DSs to care. :)

The 360 and the PS3 may have more "REAL" games... that is, games that appeal to males from the ages of 14-35, shooters, action games, football games, and driving games.

Howerver, there's no doubt that there's more to the market. Nintendo won this generation by selling copies of Wii Sports, Wii Fit, and Nintendogs. As the above example shows, they also won by keeping their console simple to buy, something that both Microsoft and Sony lost track of this generation.

FYI, I play the 360 more than the other two consoles combined... and she can borrow any Wii game she wants, because currently, I'm not playing them.

She just wanted the complete system working right out of the box, and she was definitely turned off by the multiple SKUs ... she didn't know if "all the games would work with the one she bought".

Graphical differences weren't even a factor. Like many of my non-gamer friends she can't tell the difference between a Dreamcast game and a 360 game. I know, strange, isn't it.

Anyway, $250 to Nintendo (plus some points for Virtual Console), $0 to MS, $0 to Sony. That's how it went.

Dire_Weasel

This is absolutely true -- I've seen it myself dozens of times, both in person and on forums. I've known people who swear (adamantly) that the PS2 was the most powerful system from that generation, and that even when you show them the differences in the visuals and why a Gamecube or Xbox game usually looked better, they still couldn't tell the difference. I've had people say, "What do you mean JAGGIES? I can't see anything jagged!"

This is kind of sad, because just as I feel reviewers are growing out of touch, I feel that the hardcore has grown out of touch in a lot of ways. I know people who won't play games with an erratic framerate. I know people who sneer at anything that runs at less than 60 frames. What about just playing a game for the most pure reason there is -- to have fun?

This is kind of sad, because just as I feel reviewers are growing out of touch, I feel that the hardcore has grown out of touch in a lot of ways. I know people who won't play games with an erratic framerate. I know people who sneer at anything that runs at less than 60 frames. What about just playing a game for the most pure reason there is -- to have fun?

Shame-usBlackley

I'm actually one of those 60fps guys when it comes to driving games. Of course, I have logged about 100 hours in PGR2, so it's not an absolute rule.

I ordered a pizza on Friday, and the dude on the phone said it would be delivered in 45 minutes. It got there in 20. When I said to the delivery guy "Wow, you guys are Johnny on the Spot today -- 25 minutes early," he responded with:

"Actually, we're right on time. The owner's got us on a new system called 'underpromise and overdeliver.' She says the expectations for people are what you make them, and when you exceed them, people are going to be satisfied."

THIS is what videogame companies need to do. They need to STOP promising people 4D and 120 FPS. They need to smaller scale promises that they can exceed, instead of the other way around. People got so mad at Molyneaux for overpromising and underdelivering with the original Fable, but the whole industry is run that way.

I think the Wii is very much a break from the old guard mindset of hyping a system to levels it can't possibly meet, let alone exceed. Think back to the PS3 and 360 launches -- all the marketing speak, all the lies -- and it appears to mostly have been all bull****. Sure, they're both powerful systems, but the mistake the hardware companies made with them is that they led people to believe they were going to be the second coming of Christ, and that sets the systems up for disappointment.

[QUOTE="eregol"]

The 360 and the PS3 may have more "REAL" games... that is, games that appeal to males from the ages of 14-35, shooters, action games, football games, and driving games.

Dire_Weasel

It's been said a hundred times that Sony pioneered casual games with Eyetoy, which given the right development could be a lot more intuitive than any Wiimote possibly could.

I do however believe it is true that Sony and Microsoft have over-complicated their machines this time round. Yes it's nice being able to play movies and music on it, but I don't need a web browser, picture storage and so on and so forth, I just wanna play games.

The PSN and Live services are a god send though. Some of the games we're getting are absolutely brilliant (Braid, Echochrome).

Shame Nintendo neglected a HDD for the Wii

Noobs buy Wii.... real games buy X360 or PS3Abdullahcoolyo

...

Ok, so the "hardcore" gamer has spoken. I'm trying to point out that the hardcore gamers aren't deciding this generation.

[QUOTE="Abdullahcoolyo"]Noobs buy Wii.... real games buy X360 or PS3Dire_Weasel

...

Ok, so the "hardcore" gamer has spoken. I'm trying to point out that the hardcore gamers aren't deciding this generation.

[QUOTE="Abdullahcoolyo"]Noobs buy Wii.... real games buy X360 or PS3Dire_Weasel

...

Ok, so the "hardcore" gamer has spoken. I'm trying to point out that the hardcore gamers aren't deciding this generation.

[QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]

This is kind of sad, because just as I feel reviewers are growing out of touch, I feel that the hardcore has grown out of touch in a lot of ways. I know people who won't play games with an erratic framerate. I know people who sneer at anything that runs at less than 60 frames. What about just playing a game for the most pure reason there is -- to have fun?

Dire_Weasel

I'm actually one of those 60fps guys when it comes to driving games. Of course, I have logged about 100 hours in PGR2, so it's not an absolute rule.

That's because PGR2 is godly :wink:

As for the topic, I'm surprised she found a Wii when looking for a X360. Anyway this multiple SKU crap needs to end, its hard to keep up with.

The microsoft peripherals are ridulous. Everything is separate and over-priced (hard drive anyone?). I mean why isnt the the wireless capability built in for example?

Would have gone for the PS3, but the Xbox has some better exclusives I wanted to play.

[QUOTE="Dire_Weasel"]

She just wanted the complete system working right out of the box, and she was definitely turned off by the multiple SKUs ... she didn't know if "all the games would work with the one she bought".

Graphical differences weren't even a factor. Like many of my non-gamer friends she can't tell the difference between a Dreamcast game and a 360 game. I know, strange, isn't it.

Anyway, $250 to Nintendo (plus some points for Virtual Console), $0 to MS, $0 to Sony. That's how it went.

Shame-usBlackley

This is absolutely true -- I've seen it myself dozens of times, both in person and on forums. I've known people who swear (adamantly) that the PS2 was the most powerful system from that generation, and that even when you show them the differences in the visuals and why a Gamecube or Xbox game usually looked better, they still couldn't tell the difference. I've had people say, "What do you mean JAGGIES? I can't see anything jagged!"

This is kind of sad, because just as I feel reviewers are growing out of touch, I feel that the hardcore has grown out of touch in a lot of ways. I know people who won't play games with an erratic framerate. I know people who sneer at anything that runs at less than 60 frames. What about just playing a game for the most pure reason there is -- to have fun?

Fun.....

fun (fn)
n.
1. A source of enjoyment, amusement, or pleasure.
2. Enjoyment; amusement: have fun at the beach.
3. Playful, often noisy, activity.
intr.v. funned, fun·ning, funs Informal
To behave playfully; joke.
adj. Informal
Enjoyable; amusing: "You're a real fun guy" Margaret Truman.

So in the sense of games, for some people this might be awesome graphix, for somepeople it's gameplay, for some people it's playing with there friends, for some people it's competitive play, etc, etc. Whats fun for you might not be fun for others. People who want to play competitive, want better framerates and smoother gameplay is these games are about a micro fraction of a inch between a headshot or a miss. I like deep strategy games myself, where you have to use your head and anticipate on your opponent, i don't care at all about the graphix or framerate. It's just less importand, i used to play counterstrike on a semi pro level, i did anything to increase my framerate and ping.

Thats the difference between casual gamers and hardcore gamers. In short, Casual gamer like easy gameplay and nice graphics. Hardcore gamers care about the gameplay and how the game runs. No offense to any of these groups.