Wii proving to the world why graphics don't matter right now.
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Yeah. Nintendo has done a good job proving that. If you like amazing graphics, you get a PS3 or an XBOX 360. If you like incredibly fun games, you get a Wii. I'm not saying that PS3/360 games suck, actually they are pretty good from what I have heard, but the Wii is just more appealing to casual gamers.
I plan on getting a 360 sometime this year to get my amazing graphics, but until I do, the Wii will definitely tide me over.
This isn't about "fighting" graphical innovation - it's simply retarded to suggest that if Nintendo could have put HD graphics into the system, while keeping the cost the same, they would have avoided doing it. What Nintendo has *really* demonstrated is that people don't want to pay $400+ for a gaming system, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.
You're comparing the sales of a $250 system against the sales of $400 ~ $600 systems. The real test of what the casual gamer wants would be if the PS3, 360, and Wii were each $200 - which one(s) would gamers buy? I think you'd still find high Wii sales because of its innovation, but it would not be nearly as competitive once titles like GTA IV were shown to look better on the competition than the Wii.
This isn't about "fighting" graphical innovation - it's simply retarded to suggest that if Nintendo could have put HD graphics into the system, while keeping the cost the same, they would have avoided doing it. What Nintendo has *really* demonstrated is that people don't want to pay $400+ for a gaming system, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.
subrosian
It's not just the price tag. Casual gamers wouldn't go spend even $250 unless they thought it was worth it.
[QUOTE="subrosian"]You're comparing the sales of a $250 system against the sales of $400 ~ $600 systems. The real test of what the casual gamer wants would be if the PS3, 360, and Wii were each $200 - which one(s) would gamers buy? I think you'd still find high Wii sales because of its innovation, but it would not be nearly as competitive once titles like GTA IV were shown to look better on the competition than the Wii.
This isn't about "fighting" graphical innovation - it's simply retarded to suggest that if Nintendo could have put HD graphics into the system, while keeping the cost the same, they would have avoided doing it. What Nintendo has *really* demonstrated is that people don't want to pay $400+ for a gaming system, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.
reggie186
It's not just the price tag. Casual gamers wouldn't go spend even $250 unless they thought it was worth it.
Of course not but they're even *less* inclined to spend $400. Minimizing the importance of price is ignorant - why does McDonalds sell more burgers than Chilis / TGI Fridays / Applebees? And why do burgers out-sell steak sandwiches? Yes, casuals wouldn't spend $250 unless they thought it was worth it = and Wii Sports has gone a long way to selling Wiis, but a $150 buffer between them and the nearest competition certainly doesn't hurt. I'm not saying Nintendo hasn't made a great product. You have to do something right to compel people to spend $250 - but at that same time, that's a *much* more reasonable amount of money to ask out of people than $400+. If Nintendo's innovation had been "HD graphics for only $250", I'm pretty sure they would have sold a lot of consoles as well - after all, the Xbox 360 was sold out for months as well on the "HD Graphics for $400" premise... So I don't think we can use high Wii sales to say the general public is opposed to graphical innovation. What we are saying is the general public wants *innovation* and they want it at a reasonable price - but again, we're stating the obvious. It's almost needless to add on that Nintendo has delivered on that demand...HD is just a resolution it has nothing to do with graphics, even on standard definition there's a huge difference. But its still proved you don't need good graphics to be successful, but thats not an excuse for poor visuals though. Either way Wii be successful no-matter whats goes on with the other systems, just by doing its own thing.
If you want to experience the best of gaming however people should always buy into multiple platforms. Its not a case of graphics versus gameplay as some suggest because there's quality gaming across the board.
Indeed it is true great graphics don't make the game but neither does a fancy new controller, you still need a quality video game to support it. Its down to designers to make the most of their resources and the fruits of this can be seen on all platforms.
Nintendo is doing a great job with the Wii. Let's not forget that they also have the DS which also could care less about graphics. I miss the days when GameBoy beat out GameGear, and when Super Nintendo held its own against 3DO, Jaguar, Sega CD, 32X, and CD-i. I believe Nintendo is going to accomplish something similar during this generation of consoles.
I think some Wii Fanatics have almost become "anti-graphics" because they feel slighted by the visual difference between the Wii and its competition. The "gameplay > graphics" argument (as though the high-graphics systems don't have gameplay) came out of this. It's ignorant to state the beautiful games such as Oblivion lack gameplay though - everything from the thousands of pages of text in the books on shelves to the skillful voice acting is executed beautifully.HD is just a resolution it has nothing to do with graphics, even on standard definition there's a huge difference. But its still proved you don't need good graphics to be successful, but thats not an excuse for poor visuals though. Either way Wii be successful no-matter whats goes on with the other systems, just by doing its own thing.
If you want to experience the best of gaming however people should always buy into multiple platforms. Its not a case of graphics versus gameplay as some suggest because there's quality gaming across the board.
Indeed it is true great graphics don't make the game but neither does a fancy new controller, you still need a quality video game to support it. Its down to designers to make the most of their resources and the fruits of this can be seen on all platforms.
tomarlyn
There is nothing stopping the Wii from having great graphics and sound though - Mario Galaxy looks fantastic, even by modern standards, and No More Heroes is one of the most promising games on the Wii. Frankly, the most important thing to me in No More Heroes was the impressive visual forbidden>With the move to games being on DVD for the Wii now though, and the major jumps in audio compression we've seen, I don't see a reason that major Wii games can't have the kind of cinematography we expect from Square Enix in some of their games - Metroid Prime with FMVs and voice acting? Why not?
[QUOTE="tomarlyn"]I think some Wii Fanatics have almost become "anti-graphics" because they feel slighted by the visual difference between the Wii and its competition. The "gameplay > graphics" argument (as though the high-graphics systems don't have gameplay) came out of this. It's ignorant to state the beautiful games such as Oblivion lack gameplay though - everything from the thousands of pages of text in the books on shelves to the skillful voice acting is executed beautifully.HD is just a resolution it has nothing to do with graphics, even on standard definition there's a huge difference. But its still proved you don't need good graphics to be successful, but thats not an excuse for poor visuals though. Either way Wii be successful no-matter whats goes on with the other systems, just by doing its own thing.
If you want to experience the best of gaming however people should always buy into multiple platforms. Its not a case of graphics versus gameplay as some suggest because there's quality gaming across the board.
Indeed it is true great graphics don't make the game but neither does a fancy new controller, you still need a quality video game to support it. Its down to designers to make the most of their resources and the fruits of this can be seen on all platforms.
subrosian
There is nothing stopping the Wii from having great graphics and sound though - Mario Galaxy looks fantastic, even by modern standards, and No More Heroes is one of the most promising games on the Wii. Frankly, the most important thing to me in No More Heroes was the impressive visual forbidden>With the move to games being on DVD for the Wii now though, and the major jumps in audio compression we've seen, I don't see a reason that major Wii games can't have the kind of cinematography we expect from Square Enix in some of their games - Metroid Prime with FMVs and voice acting? Why not? Especially seeing as though the Wii can take dual-layer DVD's (10 GB) like the 360, there's potential. Oblivion only fills 3-4 GB of space and half of that is dialogue.
[QUOTE="subrosian"][QUOTE="tomarlyn"]I think some Wii Fanatics have almost become "anti-graphics" because they feel slighted by the visual difference between the Wii and its competition. The "gameplay > graphics" argument (as though the high-graphics systems don't have gameplay) came out of this. It's ignorant to state the beautiful games such as Oblivion lack gameplay though - everything from the thousands of pages of text in the books on shelves to the skillful voice acting is executed beautifully.HD is just a resolution it has nothing to do with graphics, even on standard definition there's a huge difference. But its still proved you don't need good graphics to be successful, but thats not an excuse for poor visuals though. Either way Wii be successful no-matter whats goes on with the other systems, just by doing its own thing.
If you want to experience the best of gaming however people should always buy into multiple platforms. Its not a case of graphics versus gameplay as some suggest because there's quality gaming across the board.
Indeed it is true great graphics don't make the game but neither does a fancy new controller, you still need a quality video game to support it. Its down to designers to make the most of their resources and the fruits of this can be seen on all platforms.
tomarlyn
There is nothing stopping the Wii from having great graphics and sound though - Mario Galaxy looks fantastic, even by modern standards, and No More Heroes is one of the most promising games on the Wii. Frankly, the most important thing to me in No More Heroes was the impressive visual forbidden>With the move to games being on DVD for the Wii now though, and the major jumps in audio compression we've seen, I don't see a reason that major Wii games can't have the kind of cinematography we expect from Square Enix in some of their games - Metroid Prime with FMVs and voice acting? Why not? Especially seeing as though the Wii can take dual-layer DVD's (10 GB) like the 360, there's potential. Oblivion only fills 3-4 GB of space and half of that is dialogue. No More Heroes - let me say it now - if it were coming out tomorrow, I'd be sitting in front of an EBGames yesterday. Metroid Prime with FMVs and real dialogue? Absolutely. A lot of people forget about the Wii Speaker - yes I agree with the dual-layer DVD thing, people often forget how big a role sound plays in making a game great. A lot of audio-video fanatics with a 360 / PS3, HDTV, and surround sound system already knew this - but your average gamer sometimes forgets that what made the Final Fantasy series so great was the visuals AND sound. Dialogue, music tracks, sound - it could go a long way to making the Wii experience great. Third parties might not do it, but I'm expecting Nintendo to go far beyond the usual "beeps and bops" and produce some orchestral quality music in MP3 and Mario Galaxy.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment