XXXXXX

188 results
1
2
3
4

This topic is locked from further discussion.

1392

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 1392 Posts

If the Wii wins by a fair share, Nintendo will no doubt make a high def next gen console that supports the Wii controller, or something better, dunno yet but its a long way off. I think for gaming having the Wii win would force Sony and M$ to make better attempts at innovating gaming instead of rehashing the same ideas that have been going on pretty much since the release of the very first console which is just improving graphics. By the end of this gen though we will see a point where graphics will be at a standstill in terms of improvment and they wont get much better, this really could be a road block for Sony and Microsoft for the next generation of consoles if they choose to stick to their current methods. DSgamer64

Heavens to Betsy, I've never seen so much ignorance in one post :o

Lets see, you claim that nitendo innovates while microsoft and sony do not.

You have to then ask youreself, why is Brawl not using motion sensing controls? is it because the wiimote wouldn't work well with the game? if thats the case, what "innovative" about brawl? online with friend codes?

Games don't need an overglorified controller to be innovative. Innovation comes from design. And don't talk about rehashing the same ideas considering how rehashed TP was, and lets not forget the new brain training thats supposed to hit the wii, The innovation indeed. :roll:

17 years ago

14486

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#52 the-very-best

Member since 2006 • 14486 Posts

It's not up for some people on an internet forum to decide it is with people who just go and buy the product they like and if that happens to be the Wii then why cry about it? Nintendo is EXPANDING the market not replacing it with casual games just incorporating them so everyone can play. Jeez you act like the hardcore market will simply disappear well that kind of ignorance is probably just a sign of the anger coming from lemmings and cows.Metroid_Time

I didn't say hardcore games would disappear.

But what would you rather play, RE5 with excellent graphics which imo is perfect for creating an excellent atmosphere for horror games (as shown in RE4) or would you rather play RE for Wii which could still be good, but will focus more on new ways to play games?

Look at DQIX. It moved to DS. It could be so much better on a console but the devs went to the handheld because it will get them the most profit.

I mean, FFXIII looks fantastic for PS3 and that kind of graphics with the excellent gameplay FF already has will be awesome. If it were for Wii it would be FFXII with a new way to play it, and while I don't think that would be bad, I would just prefer to see it on the PS3 because I think it would be much more fun for that type of game.

Like Warioware or Wiisports, both are more fun for Wii and would not be as good for PS3 obviously due the controls.

17 years ago

3949

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 3949 Posts

Yes; we do want the wii to win. At least GAMERS do. We need to stop the trend of producing big budget games that are all presnetation/graphics and little gameplay. With systems like ps3/360, they might as well be the same dam thing, far too much time and money is spent on creating a visually engaging game and not much time or money is spent on the actual gameplay. Once these psuedo-movie games sell enough copies the pubs line up sequels which are essentially the same games but with new presentation. This is bad; we want GAMES not the same psuedo-movie-game after psuedo-movie-game. If the wii wins then the focus becomes GAMEPLAY and better games will be made. Because the method of control is so engaging, complex and intelligent game designers cant get away with making visually appealling games with basic, lowest common denominator, gameplay as it has been in the past generation. Developers will have to put the vast majority of time and money into developing the actual GAME and not trying to get HD resolutions and normal mapping on every little rock and item in the game. If the wii wins then we will see, in the next generation, incredibly powerful systems WITH motion contol gameplay; its not as though sony and MS are going to go "screw it lets just add motion controls" because once nintendo establishes, well it already has, that motion sensing is a viable method of control and that gameplay matters most people will take these concepts and implement them in their next consoles. We just arent going to see super expensive systems, $600 anyone, that do little to improve gameplay experience any more. We are going to see reasonably priced systems with reasonable hardware that focuses on delivering the best gameplay possible. IF wii wins GAMERS win; the industry wins. We are going to stop seeing this attempt to merge movies and video games into one form of entertainment as has been attempted by sony/ms with their focus on presentation >>>> gameplay. We are gonig to start seeing great games, great graphics and most importantly GREAT gameplay with depth and intelligence. This is why nintendo codenamed the Wii "revolution" .... the revolution is happening.

17 years ago

deactivated-57af49c27f4e8

14149

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 33

User Lists: 0

#54 deactivated-57af49c27f4e8

Member since 2005 • 14149 Posts

it's too early to tell, but i wouldn't mind the wii winning. i know the wii can put out some better graphics. well, i think.... anyways, it's got a lot of games i'm looking at, i'll be buying one within the next year.

17 years ago

3846

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 3846 Posts

I don't know? Why not? Maybe you should ask Nintendo why they totally skipped on R&D.RKFS
Maybe they actually wanted to profit from their console and not have it be a failure?

Nintendo was already profiting off their $99 Gamecube. There's no need to sell a near identical chipset for $250. I'm sorry, but Nintendo's not getting my sympathy this time.

17 years ago

deactivated-57af49c27f4e8

14149

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 33

User Lists: 0

#56 deactivated-57af49c27f4e8

Member since 2005 • 14149 Posts

[QUOTE="MaTT2011"]Yes; we do want the wii to win. At least GAMERS do. We need to stop the trend of producing big budget games that are all presnetation/graphics and little gameplay. With systems like ps3/360, they might as well be the same dam thing, far too much time and money is spent on creating a visually engaging game and not much time or money is spent on the actual gameplay. Once these psuedo-movie games sell enough copies the pubs line up sequels which are essentially the same games but with new presentation. This is bad; we want GAMES not the same psuedo-movie-game after psuedo-movie-game. If the wii wins then the focus becomes GAMEPLAY and better games will be made. Because the method of control is so engaging, complex and intelligent game designers cant get away with making visually appealling games with basic, lowest common denominator, gameplay as it has been in the past generation. Developers will have to put the vast majority of time and money into developing the actual GAME and not trying to get HD resolutions and normal mapping on every little rock and item in the game. If the wii wins then we will see, in the next generation, incredibly powerful systems WITH motion contol gameplay; its not as though sony and MS are going to go "screw it lets just add motion controls" because once nintendo establishes, well it already has, that motion sensing is a viable method of control and that gameplay matters most people will take these concepts and implement them in their next consoles. We just arent going to see super expensive systems, $600 anyone, that do little to improve gameplay experience any more. We are going to see reasonably priced systems with reasonable hardware that focuses on delivering the best gameplay possible. IF wii wins GAMERS win; the industry wins. We are going to stop seeing this attempt to merge movies and video games into one form of entertainment as has been attempted by sony/ms with their focus on presentation >>>> gameplay. We are gonig to start seeing great games, great graphics and most importantly GREAT gameplay with depth and intelligence. This is why nintendo codenamed the Wii "revolution" .... the revolution is happening.

can't agree more. most games are turning into the same thing. there are dozens of different genres waiting to be discovered out there, the wii is the first step.

17 years ago

1096

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 1096 Posts

[QUOTE="DSgamer64"]If the Wii wins by a fair share, Nintendo will no doubt make a high def next gen console that supports the Wii controller, or something better, dunno yet but its a long way off. I think for gaming having the Wii win would force Sony and M$ to make better attempts at innovating gaming instead of rehashing the same ideas that have been going on pretty much since the release of the very first console which is just improving graphics. By the end of this gen though we will see a point where graphics will be at a standstill in terms of improvment and they wont get much better, this really could be a road block for Sony and Microsoft for the next generation of consoles if they choose to stick to their current methods. mangobear

Heavens to Betsy, I've never seen so much ignorance in one post :o

Lets see, you claim that nitendo innovates while microsoft and sony do not.

You have to then ask youreself, why is Brawl not using motion sensing controls? is it because the wiimote wouldn't work well with the game? if thats the case, what "innovative" about brawl? online with friend codes?

Games don't need an overglorified controller to be innovative. Innovation comes from design. And don't talk about rehashing the same ideas considering how rehashed TP was, and lets not forget the new brain training thats supposed to hit the wii, The innovation indeed. :roll:

TP was a Gamecube game...

17 years ago

14486

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#58 the-very-best

Member since 2006 • 14486 Posts

I most def dont want to see the Wii win cause I have a fear that devs would see that u dont need to spend millions of dollars making indepth/amazing games, rather take shortcuts and create a bunch of casual related games.-Sir-Poof-

Could very well happen as shown by Ubisoft with Red Steel, Far Cry Instincts and more than likely their upcoming POP.

I'm not really worried because I don't see the Wii winning anyway but I wouldn't be happy if something like FFXIII was on the Wii rather than the PS3, or RE5 was on the Wii because both those kind of hardcore games look great with excellent graphics and both already have great gameplay and constantly evolve anyway.

17 years ago

1096

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 1096 Posts

[QUOTE="RKFS"]
I don't know? Why not? Maybe you should ask Nintendo why they totally skipped on R&D.Gamer556
Maybe they actually wanted to profit from their console and not have it be a failure?

Nintendo was already profiting off their $99 Gamecube. There's no need to sell a near identical chipset for $250. I'm sorry, but Nintendo's not getting my sympathy this time.

Yeah you really think Nintendo could survive with a console from 2001 with a traditional controller and no new market appeal plus no hype?

17 years ago

7695

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#60 VideoGameGuy

Member since 2002 • 7695 Posts

[QUOTE="Metroid_Time"]It's not up for some people on an internet forum to decide it is with people who just go and buy the product they like and if that happens to be the Wii then why cry about it? Nintendo is EXPANDING the market not replacing it with casual games just incorporating them so everyone can play. Jeez you act like the hardcore market will simply disappear well that kind of ignorance is probably just a sign of the anger coming from lemmings and cows.the-very-best

I didn't say hardcore games would disappear.

But what would you rather play, RE5 with excellent graphics which imo is perfect for creating an excellent atmosphere for horror games (as shown in RE4) or would you rather play RE for Wii which could still be good, but will focus more on new ways to play games?

Look at DQIX. It moved to DS. It could be so much better on a console but the devs went to the handheld because it will get them the most profit.

I mean, FFXIII looks fantastic for PS3 and that kind of graphics with the excellent gameplay FF already has will be awesome. If it were for Wii it would be FFXII with a new way to play it, and while I don't think that would be bad, I would just prefer to see it on the PS3 because I think it would be much more fun for that type of game.

Like Warioware or Wiisports, both are more fun for Wii and would not be as good for PS3 obviously due the controls.

You make a good point. I don't think every game should or even belongs on the Wii. However the graphics on the Wii haven't yet to be even realized. RE4 looked great on the GC and the Wii is 2 to 3 times more powerful! The graphical ability is still something untouched mostly due to Nintendo's trying to prove that with great gameplay graphics don't matter...i think later games will prove what the Wii can really do.

17 years ago

52901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#61 BioShockOwnz

Member since 2006 • 52901 Posts

[QUOTE="MaTT2011"]Yes; we do want the wii to win. At least GAMERS do. We need to stop the trend of producing big budget games that are all presnetation/graphics and little gameplay. With systems like ps3/360, they might as well be the same dam thing, far too much time and money is spent on creating a visually engaging game and not much time or money is spent on the actual gameplay. Once these psuedo-movie games sell enough copies the pubs line up sequels which are essentially the same games but with new presentation. This is bad; we want GAMES not the same psuedo-movie-game after psuedo-movie-game. If the wii wins then the focus becomes GAMEPLAY and better games will be made. Because the method of control is so engaging, complex and intelligent game designers cant get away with making visually appealling games with basic, lowest common denominator, gameplay as it has been in the past generation. Developers will have to put the vast majority of time and money into developing the actual GAME and not trying to get HD resolutions and normal mapping on every little rock and item in the game. If the wii wins then we will see, in the next generation, incredibly powerful systems WITH motion contol gameplay; its not as though sony and MS are going to go "screw it lets just add motion controls" because once nintendo establishes, well it already has, that motion sensing is a viable method of control and that gameplay matters most people will take these concepts and implement them in their next consoles. We just arent going to see super expensive systems, $600 anyone, that do little to improve gameplay experience any more. We are going to see reasonably priced systems with reasonable hardware that focuses on delivering the best gameplay possible. IF wii wins GAMERS win; the industry wins. We are going to stop seeing this attempt to merge movies and video games into one form of entertainment as has been attempted by sony/ms with their focus on presentation >>>> gameplay. We are gonig to start seeing great games, great graphics and most importantly GREAT gameplay with depth and intelligence. This is why nintendo codenamed the Wii "revolution" .... the revolution is happening.

I disagree. The PS3 and 360 allow developers to be creative thanks to the PSN and XBL. They can make small and innovative games at a low cost and distribute them. It's cheaper for them, and it helps their games get to more homes. You don't need a cheaper console with a remote to swing around to have a revolution in gaming.

17 years ago

1096

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 1096 Posts

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"]Yes; we do want the wii to win. At least GAMERS do. We need to stop the trend of producing big budget games that are all presnetation/graphics and little gameplay. With systems like ps3/360, they might as well be the same dam thing, far too much time and money is spent on creating a visually engaging game and not much time or money is spent on the actual gameplay. Once these psuedo-movie games sell enough copies the pubs line up sequels which are essentially the same games but with new presentation. This is bad; we want GAMES not the same psuedo-movie-game after psuedo-movie-game. If the wii wins then the focus becomes GAMEPLAY and better games will be made. Because the method of control is so engaging, complex and intelligent game designers cant get away with making visually appealling games with basic, lowest common denominator, gameplay as it has been in the past generation. Developers will have to put the vast majority of time and money into developing the actual GAME and not trying to get HD resolutions and normal mapping on every little rock and item in the game. If the wii wins then we will see, in the next generation, incredibly powerful systems WITH motion contol gameplay; its not as though sony and MS are going to go "screw it lets just add motion controls" because once nintendo establishes, well it already has, that motion sensing is a viable method of control and that gameplay matters most people will take these concepts and implement them in their next consoles. We just arent going to see super expensive systems, $600 anyone, that do little to improve gameplay experience any more. We are going to see reasonably priced systems with reasonable hardware that focuses on delivering the best gameplay possible. IF wii wins GAMERS win; the industry wins. We are going to stop seeing this attempt to merge movies and video games into one form of entertainment as has been attempted by sony/ms with their focus on presentation >>>> gameplay. We are gonig to start seeing great games, great graphics and most importantly GREAT gameplay with depth and intelligence. This is why nintendo codenamed the Wii "revolution" .... the revolution is happening.

I disagree. The PS3 and 360 allow developers to be creative thanks to the PSN and XBL. They can make small and innovative games at a low cost and distribute them. It's cheaper for them, and it helps their games get to more homes. You don't need a cheaper console with a remote to swing around to have a revolution in gaming.

But as most people are saying cheap and un-"hardcore" games are bad so now all three consoles are ruining gaming...

17 years ago

14486

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#63 the-very-best

Member since 2006 • 14486 Posts

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"]Yes; we do want the wii to win. At least GAMERS do. We need to stop the trend of producing big budget games that are all presnetation/graphics and little gameplay. With systems like ps3/360, they might as well be the same dam thing, far too much time and money is spent on creating a visually engaging game and not much time or money is spent on the actual gameplay. Once these psuedo-movie games sell enough copies the pubs line up sequels which are essentially the same games but with new presentation. This is bad; we want GAMES not the same psuedo-movie-game after psuedo-movie-game. If the wii wins then the focus becomes GAMEPLAY and better games will be made. Because the method of control is so engaging, complex and intelligent game designers cant get away with making visually appealling games with basic, lowest common denominator, gameplay as it has been in the past generation. Developers will have to put the vast majority of time and money into developing the actual GAME and not trying to get HD resolutions and normal mapping on every little rock and item in the game. If the wii wins then we will see, in the next generation, incredibly powerful systems WITH motion contol gameplay; its not as though sony and MS are going to go "screw it lets just add motion controls" because once nintendo establishes, well it already has, that motion sensing is a viable method of control and that gameplay matters most people will take these concepts and implement them in their next consoles. We just arent going to see super expensive systems, $600 anyone, that do little to improve gameplay experience any more. We are going to see reasonably priced systems with reasonable hardware that focuses on delivering the best gameplay possible. IF wii wins GAMERS win; the industry wins. We are going to stop seeing this attempt to merge movies and video games into one form of entertainment as has been attempted by sony/ms with their focus on presentation >>>> gameplay. We are gonig to start seeing great games, great graphics and most importantly GREAT gameplay with depth and intelligence. This is why nintendo codenamed the Wii "revolution" .... the revolution is happening.

I disagree. The PS3 and 360 allow developers to be creative thanks to the PSN and XBL. They can make small and innovative games at a low cost and distribute them. It's cheaper for them, and it helps their games get to more homes. You don't need a cheaper console with a remote to swing around to have a revolution in gaming.

Very true, and who ever said "GAMERS" don't want big budget games?

Look at GOTY 2006, Gears of War. Perfect example of great gameplay with excellent graphics. I'm confident in saying it would not win GOTY if it were on the Wii. It wouldn't be crap, but games like that really need the great graphics and if Wii wins next gen will be about less hardware upgrades and more "new ways to play games", which isn't bad but it will alienate games like Gears of War being as good as they are.

17 years ago

3846

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 3846 Posts

[QUOTE="Gamer556"]
[QUOTE="RKFS"]
I don't know? Why not? Maybe you should ask Nintendo why they totally skipped on R&D.RKFS
Maybe they actually wanted to profit from their console and not have it be a failure?

Nintendo was already profiting off their $99 Gamecube. There's no need to sell a near identical chipset for $250. I'm sorry, but Nintendo's not getting my sympathy this time.

Yeah you really think Nintendo could survive with a console from 2001 with a traditional controller and no new market appeal plus no hype?

I think they could survive with a console from 2006 with a traditional controller, and a greater focus on 3rd parties.

I would much rather have a powerful console from Nintendo with truely creative games than a weak, overpriced one with games only built to leverage the input device (see: all 3rd party Wii games).

17 years ago

13736

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#65 _LiquidFlame_

Member since 2007 • 13736 Posts

no

17 years ago

3949

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 3949 Posts

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"]Yes; we do want the wii to win. At least GAMERS do. We need to stop the trend of producing big budget games that are all presnetation/graphics and little gameplay. With systems like ps3/360, they might as well be the same dam thing, far too much time and money is spent on creating a visually engaging game and not much time or money is spent on the actual gameplay. Once these psuedo-movie games sell enough copies the pubs line up sequels which are essentially the same games but with new presentation. This is bad; we want GAMES not the same psuedo-movie-game after psuedo-movie-game. If the wii wins then the focus becomes GAMEPLAY and better games will be made. Because the method of control is so engaging, complex and intelligent game designers cant get away with making visually appealling games with basic, lowest common denominator, gameplay as it has been in the past generation. Developers will have to put the vast majority of time and money into developing the actual GAME and not trying to get HD resolutions and normal mapping on every little rock and item in the game. If the wii wins then we will see, in the next generation, incredibly powerful systems WITH motion contol gameplay; its not as though sony and MS are going to go "screw it lets just add motion controls" because once nintendo establishes, well it already has, that motion sensing is a viable method of control and that gameplay matters most people will take these concepts and implement them in their next consoles. We just arent going to see super expensive systems, $600 anyone, that do little to improve gameplay experience any more. We are going to see reasonably priced systems with reasonable hardware that focuses on delivering the best gameplay possible. IF wii wins GAMERS win; the industry wins. We are going to stop seeing this attempt to merge movies and video games into one form of entertainment as has been attempted by sony/ms with their focus on presentation >>>> gameplay. We are gonig to start seeing great games, great graphics and most importantly GREAT gameplay with depth and intelligence. This is why nintendo codenamed the Wii "revolution" .... the revolution is happening.

I disagree. The PS3 and 360 allow developers to be creative thanks to the PSN and XBL. They can make small and innovative games at a low cost and distribute them. It's cheaper for them, and it helps their games get to more homes. You don't need a cheaper console with a remote to swing around to have a revolution in gaming.

But those games arent accessible to everyone. The percentage of people who get those systems and then go online to purchase those games is small compared to the individuals who buy the system then buy the specific, for the platform, games like gears of war and final fantasy; thats where the big money is at so that is where developers/pubs are going to put their development cash and investments. Plus those systems dont allow next generation control; they rely on old, inefficient, uninvolving, unintuitive and archaic gamepads which further limits the accessibility of those games. Pushing buttons is not nearly as deep, involving or intelligent as motion controls + button pushing. The revolution has to come from developers and publishers; they make the games that are then purchased by consumers. And if they are forced to adopt a gameplay >>>> presentation philosophy, the core of the revolution, because of the success of nintendo's platfom then the games they make will reflect that revolutionary philosophy.

17 years ago

1096

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 1096 Posts

[QUOTE="the-very-best"][QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"]Yes; we do want the wii to win. At least GAMERS do. We need to stop the trend of producing big budget games that are all presnetation/graphics and little gameplay. With systems like ps3/360, they might as well be the same dam thing, far too much time and money is spent on creating a visually engaging game and not much time or money is spent on the actual gameplay. Once these psuedo-movie games sell enough copies the pubs line up sequels which are essentially the same games but with new presentation. This is bad; we want GAMES not the same psuedo-movie-game after psuedo-movie-game. If the wii wins then the focus becomes GAMEPLAY and better games will be made. Because the method of control is so engaging, complex and intelligent game designers cant get away with making visually appealling games with basic, lowest common denominator, gameplay as it has been in the past generation. Developers will have to put the vast majority of time and money into developing the actual GAME and not trying to get HD resolutions and normal mapping on every little rock and item in the game. If the wii wins then we will see, in the next generation, incredibly powerful systems WITH motion contol gameplay; its not as though sony and MS are going to go "screw it lets just add motion controls" because once nintendo establishes, well it already has, that motion sensing is a viable method of control and that gameplay matters most people will take these concepts and implement them in their next consoles. We just arent going to see super expensive systems, $600 anyone, that do little to improve gameplay experience any more. We are going to see reasonably priced systems with reasonable hardware that focuses on delivering the best gameplay possible. IF wii wins GAMERS win; the industry wins. We are going to stop seeing this attempt to merge movies and video games into one form of entertainment as has been attempted by sony/ms with their focus on presentation >>>> gameplay. We are gonig to start seeing great games, great graphics and most importantly GREAT gameplay with depth and intelligence. This is why nintendo codenamed the Wii "revolution" .... the revolution is happening.

I disagree. The PS3 and 360 allow developers to be creative thanks to the PSN and XBL. They can make small and innovative games at a low cost and distribute them. It's cheaper for them, and it helps their games get to more homes. You don't need a cheaper console with a remote to swing around to have a revolution in gaming.

Very true, and who ever said "GAMERS" don't want big budget games?

Look at GOTY 2006, Gears of War. Perfect example of great gameplay with excellent graphics. I'm confident in saying it would not win GOTY if it were on the Wii. It wouldn't be crap, but games like that really need the great graphics and if Wii wins next gen will be about less hardware upgrades and more "new ways to play games", which isn't bad but it will alienate games like Gears of War being as good as they are.

Then games like those will migrate to the PC where their full and greater potential can be reached...

17 years ago

1096

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 1096 Posts

[QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"]
[QUOTE="RKFS"]
I don't know? Why not? Maybe you should ask Nintendo why they totally skipped on R&D.Gamer556
Maybe they actually wanted to profit from their console and not have it be a failure?

Nintendo was already profiting off their $99 Gamecube. There's no need to sell a near identical chipset for $250. I'm sorry, but Nintendo's not getting my sympathy this time.

Yeah you really think Nintendo could survive with a console from 2001 with a traditional controller and no new market appeal plus no hype?

I think they could survive with a console from 2006 with a traditional controller, and a greater focus on 3rd parties.

I would much rather have a powerful console from Nintendo with truely creative games than a weak, overpriced one with games only built to leverage the input device (see: all 3rd party Wii games).

But there were already two other consoles doing that vs. none being like the Wii and they'd also loose money durning the first few years if it survived that long.

17 years ago

30

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 30 Posts

a little creativity doesnt hurt

17 years ago

52901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#70 BioShockOwnz

Member since 2006 • 52901 Posts

[QUOTE="the-very-best"][QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"]Yes; we do want the wii to win. At least GAMERS do. We need to stop the trend of producing big budget games that are all presnetation/graphics and little gameplay. With systems like ps3/360, they might as well be the same dam thing, far too much time and money is spent on creating a visually engaging game and not much time or money is spent on the actual gameplay. Once these psuedo-movie games sell enough copies the pubs line up sequels which are essentially the same games but with new presentation. This is bad; we want GAMES not the same psuedo-movie-game after psuedo-movie-game. If the wii wins then the focus becomes GAMEPLAY and better games will be made. Because the method of control is so engaging, complex and intelligent game designers cant get away with making visually appealling games with basic, lowest common denominator, gameplay as it has been in the past generation. Developers will have to put the vast majority of time and money into developing the actual GAME and not trying to get HD resolutions and normal mapping on every little rock and item in the game. If the wii wins then we will see, in the next generation, incredibly powerful systems WITH motion contol gameplay; its not as though sony and MS are going to go "screw it lets just add motion controls" because once nintendo establishes, well it already has, that motion sensing is a viable method of control and that gameplay matters most people will take these concepts and implement them in their next consoles. We just arent going to see super expensive systems, $600 anyone, that do little to improve gameplay experience any more. We are going to see reasonably priced systems with reasonable hardware that focuses on delivering the best gameplay possible. IF wii wins GAMERS win; the industry wins. We are going to stop seeing this attempt to merge movies and video games into one form of entertainment as has been attempted by sony/ms with their focus on presentation >>>> gameplay. We are gonig to start seeing great games, great graphics and most importantly GREAT gameplay with depth and intelligence. This is why nintendo codenamed the Wii "revolution" .... the revolution is happening.

I disagree. The PS3 and 360 allow developers to be creative thanks to the PSN and XBL. They can make small and innovative games at a low cost and distribute them. It's cheaper for them, and it helps their games get to more homes. You don't need a cheaper console with a remote to swing around to have a revolution in gaming.

Very true, and who ever said "GAMERS" don't want big budget games?

Look at GOTY 2006, Gears of War. Perfect example of great gameplay with excellent graphics. I'm confident in saying it would not win GOTY if it were on the Wii. It wouldn't be crap, but games like that really need the great graphics and if Wii wins next gen will be about less hardware upgrades and more "new ways to play games", which isn't bad but it will alienate games like Gears of War being as good as they are.

Exactly, that is why the PS3 and 360 are better for developers. If the developers have enough money to spend on creating a big budget game, then they can. But if the developers are small and indie, then they have the option to create a game for the PSN or XBL. Why would a smaller developer want to create a Wii game where they have to pay for the packaging and everything, when they can just create a game for the PSN and XBL for digital distribution. It's much easier and cheaper.

17 years ago

3949

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 3949 Posts

[QUOTE="the-very-best"][QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"]Yes; we do want the wii to win. At least GAMERS do. We need to stop the trend of producing big budget games that are all presnetation/graphics and little gameplay. With systems like ps3/360, they might as well be the same dam thing, far too much time and money is spent on creating a visually engaging game and not much time or money is spent on the actual gameplay. Once these psuedo-movie games sell enough copies the pubs line up sequels which are essentially the same games but with new presentation. This is bad; we want GAMES not the same psuedo-movie-game after psuedo-movie-game. If the wii wins then the focus becomes GAMEPLAY and better games will be made. Because the method of control is so engaging, complex and intelligent game designers cant get away with making visually appealling games with basic, lowest common denominator, gameplay as it has been in the past generation. Developers will have to put the vast majority of time and money into developing the actual GAME and not trying to get HD resolutions and normal mapping on every little rock and item in the game. If the wii wins then we will see, in the next generation, incredibly powerful systems WITH motion contol gameplay; its not as though sony and MS are going to go "screw it lets just add motion controls" because once nintendo establishes, well it already has, that motion sensing is a viable method of control and that gameplay matters most people will take these concepts and implement them in their next consoles. We just arent going to see super expensive systems, $600 anyone, that do little to improve gameplay experience any more. We are going to see reasonably priced systems with reasonable hardware that focuses on delivering the best gameplay possible. IF wii wins GAMERS win; the industry wins. We are going to stop seeing this attempt to merge movies and video games into one form of entertainment as has been attempted by sony/ms with their focus on presentation >>>> gameplay. We are gonig to start seeing great games, great graphics and most importantly GREAT gameplay with depth and intelligence. This is why nintendo codenamed the Wii "revolution" .... the revolution is happening.

I disagree. The PS3 and 360 allow developers to be creative thanks to the PSN and XBL. They can make small and innovative games at a low cost and distribute them. It's cheaper for them, and it helps their games get to more homes. You don't need a cheaper console with a remote to swing around to have a revolution in gaming.

Very true, and who ever said "GAMERS" don't want big budget games?

Look at GOTY 2006, Gears of War. Perfect example of great gameplay with excellent graphics. I'm confident in saying it would not win GOTY if it were on the Wii. It wouldn't be crap, but games like that really need the great graphics and if Wii wins next gen will be about less hardware upgrades and more "new ways to play games", which isn't bad but it will alienate games like Gears of War being as good as they are.

Firstly; you ignored the vast majority of my post. Secondly; There is a very good argument for why GeoW is a presentation >>>>> Gameplay kind of game. You pretty much admitted it yourself; "I'm confident in saying it would not win GOTY if it were on the Wii. It wouldn't be crap, but games like that really need the great graphics" You just said that if it doesnt have great presentation that the gameplay would mean nothing. But i submit to you, sir, that if the game WAS on the wii it would have vastly superior gameplay thanks to the use of motion controls. How much more entertaining would it be to use the chainsaw by making the appropriate motion instead of just hitting a button? Much more. And it would be much more fun despite the low res textures and resolution because its more involving, more intuitive and simply more satisfying than pushing a button and rubbing nubs (analog sticks) But thanks for proving my point, its always good to see people inadvertently play into my argument; it illustrates lack of understanding which further supports my claims and arguments.

17 years ago

52901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#72 BioShockOwnz

Member since 2006 • 52901 Posts

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"]Yes; we do want the wii to win. At least GAMERS do. We need to stop the trend of producing big budget games that are all presnetation/graphics and little gameplay. With systems like ps3/360, they might as well be the same dam thing, far too much time and money is spent on creating a visually engaging game and not much time or money is spent on the actual gameplay. Once these psuedo-movie games sell enough copies the pubs line up sequels which are essentially the same games but with new presentation. This is bad; we want GAMES not the same psuedo-movie-game after psuedo-movie-game. If the wii wins then the focus becomes GAMEPLAY and better games will be made. Because the method of control is so engaging, complex and intelligent game designers cant get away with making visually appealling games with basic, lowest common denominator, gameplay as it has been in the past generation. Developers will have to put the vast majority of time and money into developing the actual GAME and not trying to get HD resolutions and normal mapping on every little rock and item in the game. If the wii wins then we will see, in the next generation, incredibly powerful systems WITH motion contol gameplay; its not as though sony and MS are going to go "screw it lets just add motion controls" because once nintendo establishes, well it already has, that motion sensing is a viable method of control and that gameplay matters most people will take these concepts and implement them in their next consoles. We just arent going to see super expensive systems, $600 anyone, that do little to improve gameplay experience any more. We are going to see reasonably priced systems with reasonable hardware that focuses on delivering the best gameplay possible. IF wii wins GAMERS win; the industry wins. We are going to stop seeing this attempt to merge movies and video games into one form of entertainment as has been attempted by sony/ms with their focus on presentation >>>> gameplay. We are gonig to start seeing great games, great graphics and most importantly GREAT gameplay with depth and intelligence. This is why nintendo codenamed the Wii "revolution" .... the revolution is happening.MaTT2011

I disagree. The PS3 and 360 allow developers to be creative thanks to the PSN and XBL. They can make small and innovative games at a low cost and distribute them. It's cheaper for them, and it helps their games get to more homes. You don't need a cheaper console with a remote to swing around to have a revolution in gaming.

But those games arent accessible to everyone. The percentage of people who get those systems and then go online to purchase those games is small compared to the individuals who buy the system then buy the specific, for the platform, games like gears of war and final fantasy; thats where the big money is at so that is where developers/pubs are going to put their development cash and investments. Plus those systems dont allow next generation control; they rely on old, inefficient, uninvolving, unintuitive and archaic gamepads which further limits the accessibility of those games. Pushing buttons is not nearly as deep, involving or intelligent as motion controls + button pushing. The revolution has to come from developers and publishers; they make the games that are then purchased by consumers. And if they are forced to adopt a gameplay >>>> presentation philosophy, the core of the revolution, because of the success of nintendo's platfom then the games they make will reflect that revolutionary philosophy.

These games are small and aren't as popular yet because they are a new breed in console gaming. The 360 and PS3 are the first consoles to allow developers the tools to easily create a fun and innovative experience for a low cost to both the gamers and themselves through digital distribution. Once digital distribution starts to grow, then you will see more smaller developers abandoning making games on the Wii or the PS2.

17 years ago

1096

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 1096 Posts

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="the-very-best"][QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"]Yes; we do want the wii to win. At least GAMERS do. We need to stop the trend of producing big budget games that are all presnetation/graphics and little gameplay. With systems like ps3/360, they might as well be the same dam thing, far too much time and money is spent on creating a visually engaging game and not much time or money is spent on the actual gameplay. Once these psuedo-movie games sell enough copies the pubs line up sequels which are essentially the same games but with new presentation. This is bad; we want GAMES not the same psuedo-movie-game after psuedo-movie-game. If the wii wins then the focus becomes GAMEPLAY and better games will be made. Because the method of control is so engaging, complex and intelligent game designers cant get away with making visually appealling games with basic, lowest common denominator, gameplay as it has been in the past generation. Developers will have to put the vast majority of time and money into developing the actual GAME and not trying to get HD resolutions and normal mapping on every little rock and item in the game. If the wii wins then we will see, in the next generation, incredibly powerful systems WITH motion contol gameplay; its not as though sony and MS are going to go "screw it lets just add motion controls" because once nintendo establishes, well it already has, that motion sensing is a viable method of control and that gameplay matters most people will take these concepts and implement them in their next consoles. We just arent going to see super expensive systems, $600 anyone, that do little to improve gameplay experience any more. We are going to see reasonably priced systems with reasonable hardware that focuses on delivering the best gameplay possible. IF wii wins GAMERS win; the industry wins. We are going to stop seeing this attempt to merge movies and video games into one form of entertainment as has been attempted by sony/ms with their focus on presentation >>>> gameplay. We are gonig to start seeing great games, great graphics and most importantly GREAT gameplay with depth and intelligence. This is why nintendo codenamed the Wii "revolution" .... the revolution is happening.

I disagree. The PS3 and 360 allow developers to be creative thanks to the PSN and XBL. They can make small and innovative games at a low cost and distribute them. It's cheaper for them, and it helps their games get to more homes. You don't need a cheaper console with a remote to swing around to have a revolution in gaming.

Very true, and who ever said "GAMERS" don't want big budget games?

Look at GOTY 2006, Gears of War. Perfect example of great gameplay with excellent graphics. I'm confident in saying it would not win GOTY if it were on the Wii. It wouldn't be crap, but games like that really need the great graphics and if Wii wins next gen will be about less hardware upgrades and more "new ways to play games", which isn't bad but it will alienate games like Gears of War being as good as they are.

Exactly, that is why the PS3 and 360 are better for developers. If the developers have enough money to spend on creating a big budget game, then they can. But if the developers are small and indie, then they have the option to create a game for the PSN or XBL. Why would a smaller developer want to create a Wii game where they have to pay for the packaging and everything, when they can just create a game for the PSN and XBL for digital distribution. It's much easier and cheaper.

Why couldn't the Wii have digital distribution games too as hinted, all it would need would be maybe a memory expansion...

17 years ago

2568

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#74 peaceful_anger

Member since 2007 • 2568 Posts

Well look at the alternative to Wii winning. It would be Sony/MS domination, and it will show MS and Sony that people are willing to shell out up the $600 for a gaming console. And you can bet the next generation of console will just get more and more expensive. The next XBOX or PS could be $800 if they both won.

I will admit that I would rather Nintendo win over MS. The reason I feel this way is because the one company that has the power, resources, and money to have a monopoly over the gaming industry is definitely MS. If MS became the market leader, do you think they would just stop there? The answer is HELL NO, and you can see that with their operating systems because there is hardly any competition, which only hurts us, the consumer. I would hate for the same thing to happen to the gaming industry.

And I don't understand why lemmings and cows are complaining about Nintendo's new route because if Nintendo did the same thing as MS or Sony and just gave us a gamecube 2, yall wouldn't have bought their system anyway. Just because Nintendo took a detour this generation doesn't mean they will take the same path next generation. What I think Nintendo is trying to do this generation is help developers try think outside of the box, and get gaming out of the rut it's in IMO. At the end of the day, what is wrong with that. And yes, I know Nintendo rehashes their main franchise over and over, but so do many other developers. At least Nintendo is giving us a new way to experience them. Do yall really want to be playing the same games the same exact way for the rest of your lives. I know I don't. And no I'm not saying traditional controllers are bad. I would just like to see controllers evolve. Everything evolves eventually, and gaming is no different.

17 years ago

52901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#75 BioShockOwnz

Member since 2006 • 52901 Posts

[QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="the-very-best"][QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"]Yes; we do want the wii to win. At least GAMERS do. We need to stop the trend of producing big budget games that are all presnetation/graphics and little gameplay. With systems like ps3/360, they might as well be the same dam thing, far too much time and money is spent on creating a visually engaging game and not much time or money is spent on the actual gameplay. Once these psuedo-movie games sell enough copies the pubs line up sequels which are essentially the same games but with new presentation. This is bad; we want GAMES not the same psuedo-movie-game after psuedo-movie-game. If the wii wins then the focus becomes GAMEPLAY and better games will be made. Because the method of control is so engaging, complex and intelligent game designers cant get away with making visually appealling games with basic, lowest common denominator, gameplay as it has been in the past generation. Developers will have to put the vast majority of time and money into developing the actual GAME and not trying to get HD resolutions and normal mapping on every little rock and item in the game. If the wii wins then we will see, in the next generation, incredibly powerful systems WITH motion contol gameplay; its not as though sony and MS are going to go "screw it lets just add motion controls" because once nintendo establishes, well it already has, that motion sensing is a viable method of control and that gameplay matters most people will take these concepts and implement them in their next consoles. We just arent going to see super expensive systems, $600 anyone, that do little to improve gameplay experience any more. We are going to see reasonably priced systems with reasonable hardware that focuses on delivering the best gameplay possible. IF wii wins GAMERS win; the industry wins. We are going to stop seeing this attempt to merge movies and video games into one form of entertainment as has been attempted by sony/ms with their focus on presentation >>>> gameplay. We are gonig to start seeing great games, great graphics and most importantly GREAT gameplay with depth and intelligence. This is why nintendo codenamed the Wii "revolution" .... the revolution is happening.

I disagree. The PS3 and 360 allow developers to be creative thanks to the PSN and XBL. They can make small and innovative games at a low cost and distribute them. It's cheaper for them, and it helps their games get to more homes. You don't need a cheaper console with a remote to swing around to have a revolution in gaming.

Very true, and who ever said "GAMERS" don't want big budget games?

Look at GOTY 2006, Gears of War. Perfect example of great gameplay with excellent graphics. I'm confident in saying it would not win GOTY if it were on the Wii. It wouldn't be crap, but games like that really need the great graphics and if Wii wins next gen will be about less hardware upgrades and more "new ways to play games", which isn't bad but it will alienate games like Gears of War being as good as they are.

Exactly, that is why the PS3 and 360 are better for developers. If the developers have enough money to spend on creating a big budget game, then they can. But if the developers are small and indie, then they have the option to create a game for the PSN or XBL. Why would a smaller developer want to create a Wii game where they have to pay for the packaging and everything, when they can just create a game for the PSN and XBL for digital distribution. It's much easier and cheaper.

Why couldn't the Wii have digital distribution games too as hinted, all it would need would be maybe a memory expansion...

It can, but it hasn't happened yet. Nintendo just keeps releasing older games. There is nothing wrong with that though, since the back catalog of titles they have are outstanding.

17 years ago

3846

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 3846 Posts

[QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"]
[QUOTE="RKFS"]
I don't know? Why not? Maybe you should ask Nintendo why they totally skipped on R&D.RKFS
Maybe they actually wanted to profit from their console and not have it be a failure?

Nintendo was already profiting off their $99 Gamecube. There's no need to sell a near identical chipset for $250. I'm sorry, but Nintendo's not getting my sympathy this time.

Yeah you really think Nintendo could survive with a console from 2001 with a traditional controller and no new market appeal plus no hype?

I think they could survive with a console from 2006 with a traditional controller, and a greater focus on 3rd parties.

I would much rather have a powerful console from Nintendo with truely creative games than a weak, overpriced one with games only built to leverage the input device (see: all 3rd party Wii games).

But there were already two other consoles doing that vs. none being like the Wii and they'd also loose money durning the first few years if it survived that long.

Does that mean that we, as gamers, should allow them to deny us the benefits of powerful hardware and rip us off in the process?

17 years ago

9137

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2003 • 9137 Posts

[QUOTE="ninjiijitsu"]Even if wii wins; it's not going to stop sony, and m$ from upgrading their console. the-very-best

I don't agree. If Wii does win it sends a clear message to Sony/MS that less hardware upgrades and more "creative ways to play games" is needed.

Companies do what consumers want. It's not the other way around.

Tell that to Sony... Zing!

17 years ago

1096

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 1096 Posts

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="the-very-best"][QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"]Yes; we do want the wii to win. At least GAMERS do. We need to stop the trend of producing big budget games that are all presnetation/graphics and little gameplay. With systems like ps3/360, they might as well be the same dam thing, far too much time and money is spent on creating a visually engaging game and not much time or money is spent on the actual gameplay. Once these psuedo-movie games sell enough copies the pubs line up sequels which are essentially the same games but with new presentation. This is bad; we want GAMES not the same psuedo-movie-game after psuedo-movie-game. If the wii wins then the focus becomes GAMEPLAY and better games will be made. Because the method of control is so engaging, complex and intelligent game designers cant get away with making visually appealling games with basic, lowest common denominator, gameplay as it has been in the past generation. Developers will have to put the vast majority of time and money into developing the actual GAME and not trying to get HD resolutions and normal mapping on every little rock and item in the game. If the wii wins then we will see, in the next generation, incredibly powerful systems WITH motion contol gameplay; its not as though sony and MS are going to go "screw it lets just add motion controls" because once nintendo establishes, well it already has, that motion sensing is a viable method of control and that gameplay matters most people will take these concepts and implement them in their next consoles. We just arent going to see super expensive systems, $600 anyone, that do little to improve gameplay experience any more. We are going to see reasonably priced systems with reasonable hardware that focuses on delivering the best gameplay possible. IF wii wins GAMERS win; the industry wins. We are going to stop seeing this attempt to merge movies and video games into one form of entertainment as has been attempted by sony/ms with their focus on presentation >>>> gameplay. We are gonig to start seeing great games, great graphics and most importantly GREAT gameplay with depth and intelligence. This is why nintendo codenamed the Wii "revolution" .... the revolution is happening.

I disagree. The PS3 and 360 allow developers to be creative thanks to the PSN and XBL. They can make small and innovative games at a low cost and distribute them. It's cheaper for them, and it helps their games get to more homes. You don't need a cheaper console with a remote to swing around to have a revolution in gaming.

Very true, and who ever said "GAMERS" don't want big budget games?

Look at GOTY 2006, Gears of War. Perfect example of great gameplay with excellent graphics. I'm confident in saying it would not win GOTY if it were on the Wii. It wouldn't be crap, but games like that really need the great graphics and if Wii wins next gen will be about less hardware upgrades and more "new ways to play games", which isn't bad but it will alienate games like Gears of War being as good as they are.

Exactly, that is why the PS3 and 360 are better for developers. If the developers have enough money to spend on creating a big budget game, then they can. But if the developers are small and indie, then they have the option to create a game for the PSN or XBL. Why would a smaller developer want to create a Wii game where they have to pay for the packaging and everything, when they can just create a game for the PSN and XBL for digital distribution. It's much easier and cheaper.

Why couldn't the Wii have digital distribution games too as hinted, all it would need would be maybe a memory expansion...

It can, but it hasn't happened yet. Nintendo just keeps releasing older games. There is nothing wrong with that though, since the back catalog of titles they have are outstanding.

It doesn't need to happen yet.

17 years ago

11299

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 11299 Posts

How do we know this will happen? It's obvious the Wiimote will be copied, but that doesn't mean that so will the hardware.

17 years ago

3949

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 3949 Posts

[QUOTE="MaTT2011"][QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"]Yes; we do want the wii to win. At least GAMERS do. We need to stop the trend of producing big budget games that are all presnetation/graphics and little gameplay. With systems like ps3/360, they might as well be the same dam thing, far too much time and money is spent on creating a visually engaging game and not much time or money is spent on the actual gameplay. Once these psuedo-movie games sell enough copies the pubs line up sequels which are essentially the same games but with new presentation. This is bad; we want GAMES not the same psuedo-movie-game after psuedo-movie-game. If the wii wins then the focus becomes GAMEPLAY and better games will be made. Because the method of control is so engaging, complex and intelligent game designers cant get away with making visually appealling games with basic, lowest common denominator, gameplay as it has been in the past generation. Developers will have to put the vast majority of time and money into developing the actual GAME and not trying to get HD resolutions and normal mapping on every little rock and item in the game. If the wii wins then we will see, in the next generation, incredibly powerful systems WITH motion contol gameplay; its not as though sony and MS are going to go "screw it lets just add motion controls" because once nintendo establishes, well it already has, that motion sensing is a viable method of control and that gameplay matters most people will take these concepts and implement them in their next consoles. We just arent going to see super expensive systems, $600 anyone, that do little to improve gameplay experience any more. We are going to see reasonably priced systems with reasonable hardware that focuses on delivering the best gameplay possible. IF wii wins GAMERS win; the industry wins. We are going to stop seeing this attempt to merge movies and video games into one form of entertainment as has been attempted by sony/ms with their focus on presentation >>>> gameplay. We are gonig to start seeing great games, great graphics and most importantly GREAT gameplay with depth and intelligence. This is why nintendo codenamed the Wii "revolution" .... the revolution is happening.BioShockOwnz

I disagree. The PS3 and 360 allow developers to be creative thanks to the PSN and XBL. They can make small and innovative games at a low cost and distribute them. It's cheaper for them, and it helps their games get to more homes. You don't need a cheaper console with a remote to swing around to have a revolution in gaming.

But those games arent accessible to everyone. The percentage of people who get those systems and then go online to purchase those games is small compared to the individuals who buy the system then buy the specific, for the platform, games like gears of war and final fantasy; thats where the big money is at so that is where developers/pubs are going to put their development cash and investments. Plus those systems dont allow next generation control; they rely on old, inefficient, uninvolving, unintuitive and archaic gamepads which further limits the accessibility of those games. Pushing buttons is not nearly as deep, involving or intelligent as motion controls + button pushing. The revolution has to come from developers and publishers; they make the games that are then purchased by consumers. And if they are forced to adopt a gameplay >>>> presentation philosophy, the core of the revolution, because of the success of nintendo's platfom then the games they make will reflect that revolutionary philosophy.

These games are small and aren't as popular yet because they are a new breed in console gaming. The 360 and PS3 are the first consoles to allow developers the tools to easily create a fun and innovative experience for a low cost to both the gamers and themselves through digital distribution. Once digital distribution starts to grow, then you will see more smaller developers abandoning making games on the Wii or the PS2.

The wii could also have such distribution; its entirely possible. In a way its already doing that; through the internet browser you can play a wide variety of innovative and entertaining flash games for FREE. These games are being made by incredibly passionate groups of people who dont have to submit to investor will like many of the developers who currently have to get money to get the tools to create digital D games on ps3/360. The wii is JUST as capable as the ps3/360 in those regards AND it allows for a much wider variety of gameplay possibilities which are going to be far more compelling to consumers thanks to the use of motion controls. No matter how you look at it you still have to play those ps3/360 games with a controller and you still have to pay for the incredibly expensive system. plus when people pay for a 360 and a ps3 they are going to look to maximze their investment by playing and buying games which take advantage of that fancy hardware which further continues the employment of the presentation >>>>>> gameplay philosophy.

17 years ago

1096

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 1096 Posts

[QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"]
[QUOTE="RKFS"]
I don't know? Why not? Maybe you should ask Nintendo why they totally skipped on R&D.Gamer556
Maybe they actually wanted to profit from their console and not have it be a failure?

Nintendo was already profiting off their $99 Gamecube. There's no need to sell a near identical chipset for $250. I'm sorry, but Nintendo's not getting my sympathy this time.

Yeah you really think Nintendo could survive with a console from 2001 with a traditional controller and no new market appeal plus no hype?

I think they could survive with a console from 2006 with a traditional controller, and a greater focus on 3rd parties.

I would much rather have a powerful console from Nintendo with truely creative games than a weak, overpriced one with games only built to leverage the input device (see: all 3rd party Wii games).

But there were already two other consoles doing that vs. none being like the Wii and they'd also loose money durning the first few years if it survived that long.

Does that mean that we, as gamers, should allow them to deny us the benefits of powerful hardware and rip us off in the process?

It's not ripping you off if you choose not to buy it... There's the two other options you know...

17 years ago

14486

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#82 the-very-best

Member since 2006 • 14486 Posts

[QUOTE="MaTT2011"]Firstly; you ignored the vast majority of my post. Secondly; There is a very good argument for why GeoW is a presentation >>>>> Gameplay kind of game. You pretty much admitted it yourself; "I'm confident in saying it would not win GOTY if it were on the Wii. It wouldn't be crap, but games like that really need the great graphics" You just said that if it doesnt have great presentation that the gameplay would mean nothing. But i submit to you, sir, that if the game WAS on the wii it would have vastly superior gameplay thanks to the use of motion controls. How much more entertaining would it be to use the chainsaw by making the appropriate motion instead of just hitting a button? Much more. And it would be much more fun despite the low res textures and resolution because its more involving, more intuitive and simply more satisfying than pushing a button and rubbing nubs (analog sticks) But thanks for proving my point, its always good to see people inadvertently play into my argument; it illustrates lack of understanding which further supports my claims and arguments.

:| Why avoid my point?

I clearly state that certain games should be on consoles with superior graphics...

Example: RE5 VS RE Wii: I can already tell which will be better because games like RE need the great graphics to pull off the right atmosphere needed. And who says chainsaws are more fun with the Wiimote just because you move your hand in the same action? If you've played Gears you'll realize that devs can easily create a great feeling with normal controllers used to rip people apart with chainsaws. It's like saying Gears would be better on DS because you can use the touch pen to move the chainsaw!

Certain games just need good graphics and most of those type of games are hardcore games, some are casual.

Halo, GTA, GT, RE, FF, MGS all need great graphics because all of those series constantly evolve in gameplay and don't need a "new way to play games" to be fun!

17 years ago

24516

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 24516 Posts

I don't want anyone to win. Market share should be split 1/3 three ways.

17 years ago

3846

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 3846 Posts

[QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"]
[QUOTE="RKFS"]
I don't know? Why not? Maybe you should ask Nintendo why they totally skipped on R&D.RKFS
Maybe they actually wanted to profit from their console and not have it be a failure?

Nintendo was already profiting off their $99 Gamecube. There's no need to sell a near identical chipset for $250. I'm sorry, but Nintendo's not getting my sympathy this time.

Yeah you really think Nintendo could survive with a console from 2001 with a traditional controller and no new market appeal plus no hype?

I think they could survive with a console from 2006 with a traditional controller, and a greater focus on 3rd parties.

I would much rather have a powerful console from Nintendo with truely creative games than a weak, overpriced one with games only built to leverage the input device (see: all 3rd party Wii games).

But there were already two other consoles doing that vs. none being like the Wii and they'd also loose money durning the first few years if it survived that long.

Does that mean that we, as gamers, should allow them to deny us the benefits of powerful hardware and rip us off in the process?

It's not ripping you off if you choose not to buy it...

Let me rephrase that then: The Wii, as a box of parts, is a really bad deal. When someone purchases a Wii for $250, they are getting about $100 of stuff in return. I don't see why you're trying to defend this, especially when the competition is selling each unit at a loss for the benefit of you, the consumer. It's a dirty move on Nintendo's part , and it's a damn shame that it's working out for them.

17 years ago

1096

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 1096 Posts

Certain games just need good graphics and most of those type of games are hardcore games, some are casual.

Wait so graphics=hardcore?

17 years ago

3034

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 3034 Posts

No console will win because they are all good and bad in equal ways.

17 years ago

FFVII_Madness55

5504

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#87 FFVII_Madness55

Member since 2005 • 5504 Posts

Hell to the no!!! If the Wii wins, this will the be the most embarrasing thing the gaming community has faced.

17 years ago

1096

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 1096 Posts

[QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"]
[QUOTE="RKFS"]
I don't know? Why not? Maybe you should ask Nintendo why they totally skipped on R&D.Gamer556
Maybe they actually wanted to profit from their console and not have it be a failure?

Nintendo was already profiting off their $99 Gamecube. There's no need to sell a near identical chipset for $250. I'm sorry, but Nintendo's not getting my sympathy this time.

Yeah you really think Nintendo could survive with a console from 2001 with a traditional controller and no new market appeal plus no hype?

I think they could survive with a console from 2006 with a traditional controller, and a greater focus on 3rd parties.

I would much rather have a powerful console from Nintendo with truely creative games than a weak, overpriced one with games only built to leverage the input device (see: all 3rd party Wii games).

But there were already two other consoles doing that vs. none being like the Wii and they'd also loose money durning the first few years if it survived that long.

Does that mean that we, as gamers, should allow them to deny us the benefits of powerful hardware and rip us off in the process?

It's not ripping you off if you choose not to buy it...

Let me rephrase that then: The Wii, as a box of parts, is a really bad deal. When someone purchases a Wii for $250, they are getting about $100 of stuff in return. I don't see why you're trying to defend this, especially when the competition is selling each unit at a loss for the benefit of you, the consumer. It's a dirty move on Nintendo's part , and it's a damn shame that it's working out for them.

What about the people who, enjoy it and would feel rip-off for paying $400+?

17 years ago

26840

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

Member since 2002 • 26840 Posts

If Wii wins, then gaming will start sucking pretty bad.

17 years ago

52901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#90 BioShockOwnz

Member since 2006 • 52901 Posts

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"][QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="MaTT2011"]Yes; we do want the wii to win. At least GAMERS do. We need to stop the trend of producing big budget games that are all presnetation/graphics and little gameplay. With systems like ps3/360, they might as well be the same dam thing, far too much time and money is spent on creating a visually engaging game and not much time or money is spent on the actual gameplay. Once these psuedo-movie games sell enough copies the pubs line up sequels which are essentially the same games but with new presentation. This is bad; we want GAMES not the same psuedo-movie-game after psuedo-movie-game. If the wii wins then the focus becomes GAMEPLAY and better games will be made. Because the method of control is so engaging, complex and intelligent game designers cant get away with making visually appealling games with basic, lowest common denominator, gameplay as it has been in the past generation. Developers will have to put the vast majority of time and money into developing the actual GAME and not trying to get HD resolutions and normal mapping on every little rock and item in the game. If the wii wins then we will see, in the next generation, incredibly powerful systems WITH motion contol gameplay; its not as though sony and MS are going to go "screw it lets just add motion controls" because once nintendo establishes, well it already has, that motion sensing is a viable method of control and that gameplay matters most people will take these concepts and implement them in their next consoles. We just arent going to see super expensive systems, $600 anyone, that do little to improve gameplay experience any more. We are going to see reasonably priced systems with reasonable hardware that focuses on delivering the best gameplay possible. IF wii wins GAMERS win; the industry wins. We are going to stop seeing this attempt to merge movies and video games into one form of entertainment as has been attempted by sony/ms with their focus on presentation >>>> gameplay. We are gonig to start seeing great games, great graphics and most importantly GREAT gameplay with depth and intelligence. This is why nintendo codenamed the Wii "revolution" .... the revolution is happening.MaTT2011

I disagree. The PS3 and 360 allow developers to be creative thanks to the PSN and XBL. They can make small and innovative games at a low cost and distribute them. It's cheaper for them, and it helps their games get to more homes. You don't need a cheaper console with a remote to swing around to have a revolution in gaming.

But those games arent accessible to everyone. The percentage of people who get those systems and then go online to purchase those games is small compared to the individuals who buy the system then buy the specific, for the platform, games like gears of war and final fantasy; thats where the big money is at so that is where developers/pubs are going to put their development cash and investments. Plus those systems dont allow next generation control; they rely on old, inefficient, uninvolving, unintuitive and archaic gamepads which further limits the accessibility of those games. Pushing buttons is not nearly as deep, involving or intelligent as motion controls + button pushing. The revolution has to come from developers and publishers; they make the games that are then purchased by consumers. And if they are forced to adopt a gameplay >>>> presentation philosophy, the core of the revolution, because of the success of nintendo's platfom then the games they make will reflect that revolutionary philosophy.

These games are small and aren't as popular yet because they are a new breed in console gaming. The 360 and PS3 are the first consoles to allow developers the tools to easily create a fun and innovative experience for a low cost to both the gamers and themselves through digital distribution. Once digital distribution starts to grow, then you will see more smaller developers abandoning making games on the Wii or the PS2.

The wii could also have such distribution; its entirely possible. In a way its already doing that; through the internet browser you can play a wide variety of innovative and entertaining flash games for FREE. These games are being made by incredibly passionate groups of people who dont have to submit to investor will like many of the developers who currently have to get money to get the tools to create digital D games on ps3/360. The wii is JUST as capable as the ps3/360 in those regards AND it allows for a much wider variety of gameplay possibilities which are going to be far more compelling to consumers thanks to the use of motion controls. No matter how you look at it you still have to play those ps3/360 games with a controller and you still have to pay for the incredibly expensive system. plus when people pay for a 360 and a ps3 they are going to look to maximze their investment by playing and buying games which take advantage of that fancy hardware which further continues the employment of the presentation >>>>>> gameplay philosophy.

You're missing the point. The PS3 and 360 allow both ends of the spectrum. Developers can create a big budget game or a small budget game. Some of the games on XBL look better then any Wii game. Take Roboblitz. It's a downloadable game using the UE3.

17 years ago

2559

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 2559 Posts

I know a lot of Nintendo fans see the Wii winning this gen due to the excellent sales it's already received, and it's a fair prediction, just like either PS3/360 winning this gen. I also know a lot of Sony/MS fans expect the Wii to win but I'm asking you right now:

Do we really want the Wii to win?

Think about the consequences for a second. If Wii wins both Sony and MS next gen will not upgrade their hardware significantly next gen and add something innovative like a touch pen, or Wiimote to their console to increase creativity among devs. Many seem to forget that devs can be creative or innovative with normal controllers/hardware too, like Okami for PS2, or Shadow of the Colossus. If Wii wins, next gen will be targeted mainly at non gamers who enjoy games like Wiisports, Nintendogs, Brain Training, Singstar etc.

I'm not saying "Don't buy a Wii" because I think it's a great console and I would like to see it fair much better than the GC but I certainly don't want it to win because it's quite obvious what effect that will have on the market. I just wanted to point that out. In any case I don't see it winning because I don't think it will be able to compete when GT5, Halo 3, GTAIV, FFXIII, MGSIV all arrive and take the media's attention.

What do you think? If Wii wins, would you be OK with MS/Sony not upgrading their hardware too much and focusing more on creativity or would you rather they take strong hardware + great graphics = good games route?

the-very-best

Honestly the Wii will lose steam and look dated in two years. I own one and it's obvious with list of games currently coming it's turning into a port station for all the games developers didn't bring to gamecube that were on PS2. How long til GTAIV and others come to wii. Scarface, Godfather, and Prince of Persia already are. Nintendo appeared to have learned it's lesson. But with the releases I'm seeing I wonder. Fact is if it wasn't for Zelda what other game is rockin on the Wii? I had fun with Rayman and Wii sports could be auesome if it had more depth. Anyway just my thoughts. So I don't see any worrying in it winning.

17 years ago

3846

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 3846 Posts

[QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"]
[QUOTE="RKFS"]
I don't know? Why not? Maybe you should ask Nintendo why they totally skipped on R&D.RKFS
Maybe they actually wanted to profit from their console and not have it be a failure?

Nintendo was already profiting off their $99 Gamecube. There's no need to sell a near identical chipset for $250. I'm sorry, but Nintendo's not getting my sympathy this time.

Yeah you really think Nintendo could survive with a console from 2001 with a traditional controller and no new market appeal plus no hype?

I think they could survive with a console from 2006 with a traditional controller, and a greater focus on 3rd parties.

I would much rather have a powerful console from Nintendo with truely creative games than a weak, overpriced one with games only built to leverage the input device (see: all 3rd party Wii games).

But there were already two other consoles doing that vs. none being like the Wii and they'd also loose money durning the first few years if it survived that long.

Does that mean that we, as gamers, should allow them to deny us the benefits of powerful hardware and rip us off in the process?

It's not ripping you off if you choose not to buy it...

Let me rephrase that then: The Wii, as a box of parts, is a really bad deal. When someone purchases a Wii for $250, they are getting about $100 of stuff in return. I don't see why you're trying to defend this, especially when the competition is selling each unit at a loss for the benefit of you, the consumer. It's a dirty move on Nintendo's part , and it's a damn shame that it's working out for them.

What about the people who, enjoy it?

I don't think anyone willingly enjoys the fact that they were robbed of $150.

17 years ago

7695

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#93 VideoGameGuy

Member since 2002 • 7695 Posts

[QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"]
[QUOTE="RKFS"]
I don't know? Why not? Maybe you should ask Nintendo why they totally skipped on R&D.Gamer556
Maybe they actually wanted to profit from their console and not have it be a failure?

Nintendo was already profiting off their $99 Gamecube. There's no need to sell a near identical chipset for $250. I'm sorry, but Nintendo's not getting my sympathy this time.

Yeah you really think Nintendo could survive with a console from 2001 with a traditional controller and no new market appeal plus no hype?

I think they could survive with a console from 2006 with a traditional controller, and a greater focus on 3rd parties.

I would much rather have a powerful console from Nintendo with truely creative games than a weak, overpriced one with games only built to leverage the input device (see: all 3rd party Wii games).

But there were already two other consoles doing that vs. none being like the Wii and they'd also loose money durning the first few years if it survived that long.

Does that mean that we, as gamers, should allow them to deny us the benefits of powerful hardware and rip us off in the process?

It's not ripping you off if you choose not to buy it...

Let me rephrase that then: The Wii, as a box of parts, is a really bad deal. When someone purchases a Wii for $250, they are getting about $100 of stuff in return. I don't see why you're trying to defend this, especially when the competition is selling each unit at a loss for the benefit of you, the consumer. It's a dirty move on Nintendo's part , and it's a damn shame that it's working out for them.

So Nintendo making money is a dirty move now? they invested billions in the Wii and now they're expected to lose more just because Sony and MS can't make a profit off of their consoles? I call that good business. More money in Nintendo pockets mean more games. Nintendo making money off the Wii from the get-go affords them the freedom to experiment and to truly innovate this industry.

17 years ago

1096

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 1096 Posts

[QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"]
[QUOTE="RKFS"]
I don't know? Why not? Maybe you should ask Nintendo why they totally skipped on R&D.Gamer556
Maybe they actually wanted to profit from their console and not have it be a failure?

Nintendo was already profiting off their $99 Gamecube. There's no need to sell a near identical chipset for $250. I'm sorry, but Nintendo's not getting my sympathy this time.

Yeah you really think Nintendo could survive with a console from 2001 with a traditional controller and no new market appeal plus no hype?

I think they could survive with a console from 2006 with a traditional controller, and a greater focus on 3rd parties.

I would much rather have a powerful console from Nintendo with truely creative games than a weak, overpriced one with games only built to leverage the input device (see: all 3rd party Wii games).

But there were already two other consoles doing that vs. none being like the Wii and they'd also loose money durning the first few years if it survived that long.

Does that mean that we, as gamers, should allow them to deny us the benefits of powerful hardware and rip us off in the process?

It's not ripping you off if you choose not to buy it...

Let me rephrase that then: The Wii, as a box of parts, is a really bad deal. When someone purchases a Wii for $250, they are getting about $100 of stuff in return. I don't see why you're trying to defend this, especially when the competition is selling each unit at a loss for the benefit of you, the consumer. It's a dirty move on Nintendo's part , and it's a damn shame that it's working out for them.

What about the people who, enjoy it?

I don't think anyone willingly enjoys the fact that they were robbed of $150.

That's like saying if you get PS3 you're robbed of $200... The Wii's experience is not the same as the Gamecube's... People who like it most likely are paying for the experience not the hardware...

17 years ago

3846

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 3846 Posts

[QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"]
[QUOTE="RKFS"]
I don't know? Why not? Maybe you should ask Nintendo why they totally skipped on R&D.VideoGameGuy
Maybe they actually wanted to profit from their console and not have it be a failure?

Nintendo was already profiting off their $99 Gamecube. There's no need to sell a near identical chipset for $250. I'm sorry, but Nintendo's not getting my sympathy this time.

Yeah you really think Nintendo could survive with a console from 2001 with a traditional controller and no new market appeal plus no hype?

I think they could survive with a console from 2006 with a traditional controller, and a greater focus on 3rd parties.

I would much rather have a powerful console from Nintendo with truely creative games than a weak, overpriced one with games only built to leverage the input device (see: all 3rd party Wii games).

But there were already two other consoles doing that vs. none being like the Wii and they'd also loose money durning the first few years if it survived that long.

Does that mean that we, as gamers, should allow them to deny us the benefits of powerful hardware and rip us off in the process?

It's not ripping you off if you choose not to buy it...

Let me rephrase that then: The Wii, as a box of parts, is a really bad deal. When someone purchases a Wii for $250, they are getting about $100 of stuff in return. I don't see why you're trying to defend this, especially when the competition is selling each unit at a loss for the benefit of you, the consumer. It's a dirty move on Nintendo's part , and it's a damn shame that it's working out for them.

So Nintendo making money is a dirty move now? they invested billions in the Wii and now they're expected to lose more just because Sony and MS can't make a profit off of their consoles? I call that good business. More money in Nintendo pockets mean more games. Nintendo making money off the Wii from the get-go affords them the freedom to experiment and to truly innovate this industry.

:lol:

It doesn't cost *billions* to overclock and repackage a Gamecube.

17 years ago

1096

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 1096 Posts

[QUOTE="VideoGameGuy"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"]
[QUOTE="RKFS"]
I don't know? Why not? Maybe you should ask Nintendo why they totally skipped on R&D.Gamer556
Maybe they actually wanted to profit from their console and not have it be a failure?

Nintendo was already profiting off their $99 Gamecube. There's no need to sell a near identical chipset for $250. I'm sorry, but Nintendo's not getting my sympathy this time.

Yeah you really think Nintendo could survive with a console from 2001 with a traditional controller and no new market appeal plus no hype?

I think they could survive with a console from 2006 with a traditional controller, and a greater focus on 3rd parties.

I would much rather have a powerful console from Nintendo with truely creative games than a weak, overpriced one with games only built to leverage the input device (see: all 3rd party Wii games).

But there were already two other consoles doing that vs. none being like the Wii and they'd also loose money durning the first few years if it survived that long.

Does that mean that we, as gamers, should allow them to deny us the benefits of powerful hardware and rip us off in the process?

It's not ripping you off if you choose not to buy it...

Let me rephrase that then: The Wii, as a box of parts, is a really bad deal. When someone purchases a Wii for $250, they are getting about $100 of stuff in return. I don't see why you're trying to defend this, especially when the competition is selling each unit at a loss for the benefit of you, the consumer. It's a dirty move on Nintendo's part , and it's a damn shame that it's working out for them.

So Nintendo making money is a dirty move now? they invested billions in the Wii and now they're expected to lose more just because Sony and MS can't make a profit off of their consoles? I call that good business. More money in Nintendo pockets mean more games. Nintendo making money off the Wii from the get-go affords them the freedom to experiment and to truly innovate this industry.

:lol:

It doesn't cost *billions* to overclock and repackage a Gamecube.

Advertising and worker pay and...

17 years ago

26840

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

Member since 2002 • 26840 Posts

[QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"]
[QUOTE="RKFS"]
I don't know? Why not? Maybe you should ask Nintendo why they totally skipped on R&D.RKFS
Maybe they actually wanted to profit from their console and not have it be a failure?

Nintendo was already profiting off their $99 Gamecube. There's no need to sell a near identical chipset for $250. I'm sorry, but Nintendo's not getting my sympathy this time.

Yeah you really think Nintendo could survive with a console from 2001 with a traditional controller and no new market appeal plus no hype?

I think they could survive with a console from 2006 with a traditional controller, and a greater focus on 3rd parties.

I would much rather have a powerful console from Nintendo with truely creative games than a weak, overpriced one with games only built to leverage the input device (see: all 3rd party Wii games).

But there were already two other consoles doing that vs. none being like the Wii and they'd also loose money durning the first few years if it survived that long.

Does that mean that we, as gamers, should allow them to deny us the benefits of powerful hardware and rip us off in the process?

It's not ripping you off if you choose not to buy it...

Let me rephrase that then: The Wii, as a box of parts, is a really bad deal. When someone purchases a Wii for $250, they are getting about $100 of stuff in return. I don't see why you're trying to defend this, especially when the competition is selling each unit at a loss for the benefit of you, the consumer. It's a dirty move on Nintendo's part , and it's a damn shame that it's working out for them.

What about the people who, enjoy it?

I don't think anyone willingly enjoys the fact that they were robbed of $150.

That's like saying if you get PS3 you're robbed of $200... The Wii's experience is not the same as the Gamecube's... People who like it most likely are paying for the experience not the hardware...

\ $600 for $850 worth of machinery vs. $250 for $100 worth of machinery... How is that even comparable in terms of value? :?

17 years ago

1096

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 1096 Posts

[QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"]
[QUOTE="RKFS"]
I don't know? Why not? Maybe you should ask Nintendo why they totally skipped on R&D.Timstuff
Maybe they actually wanted to profit from their console and not have it be a failure?

Nintendo was already profiting off their $99 Gamecube. There's no need to sell a near identical chipset for $250. I'm sorry, but Nintendo's not getting my sympathy this time.

Yeah you really think Nintendo could survive with a console from 2001 with a traditional controller and no new market appeal plus no hype?

I think they could survive with a console from 2006 with a traditional controller, and a greater focus on 3rd parties.

I would much rather have a powerful console from Nintendo with truely creative games than a weak, overpriced one with games only built to leverage the input device (see: all 3rd party Wii games).

But there were already two other consoles doing that vs. none being like the Wii and they'd also loose money durning the first few years if it survived that long.

Does that mean that we, as gamers, should allow them to deny us the benefits of powerful hardware and rip us off in the process?

It's not ripping you off if you choose not to buy it...

Let me rephrase that then: The Wii, as a box of parts, is a really bad deal. When someone purchases a Wii for $250, they are getting about $100 of stuff in return. I don't see why you're trying to defend this, especially when the competition is selling each unit at a loss for the benefit of you, the consumer. It's a dirty move on Nintendo's part , and it's a damn shame that it's working out for them.

What about the people who, enjoy it?

I don't think anyone willingly enjoys the fact that they were robbed of $150.

That's like saying if you get PS3 you're robbed of $200... The Wii's experience is not the same as the Gamecube's... People who like it most likely are paying for the experience not the hardware...

$600 for $850 worth of machinery vs. $250 for $100 worth of machinery... How is that even comparable in terms of value? :?

Aren't we talking about um GAMES here? People pay for the gaming experience not the hardware, the hardware supports the gaming experiences... (any part of a game including graphics or entertainment value is part of this)...

17 years ago

3846

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 3846 Posts

[QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"][QUOTE="RKFS"][QUOTE="Gamer556"]
[QUOTE="RKFS"]
I don't know? Why not? Maybe you should ask Nintendo why they totally skipped on R&D.RKFS
Maybe they actually wanted to profit from their console and not have it be a failure?

Nintendo was already profiting off their $99 Gamecube. There's no need to sell a near identical chipset for $250. I'm sorry, but Nintendo's not getting my sympathy this time.

Yeah you really think Nintendo could survive with a console from 2001 with a traditional controller and no new market appeal plus no hype?

I think they could survive with a console from 2006 with a traditional controller, and a greater focus on 3rd parties.

I would much rather have a powerful console from Nintendo with truely creative games than a weak, overpriced one with games only built to leverage the input device (see: all 3rd party Wii games).

But there were already two other consoles doing that vs. none being like the Wii and they'd also loose money durning the first few years if it survived that long.

Does that mean that we, as gamers, should allow them to deny us the benefits of powerful hardware and rip us off in the process?

It's not ripping you off if you choose not to buy it...

Let me rephrase that then: The Wii, as a box of parts, is a really bad deal. When someone purchases a Wii for $250, they are getting about $100 of stuff in return. I don't see why you're trying to defend this, especially when the competition is selling each unit at a loss for the benefit of you, the consumer. It's a dirty move on Nintendo's part , and it's a damn shame that it's working out for them.

What about the people who, enjoy it?

I don't think anyone willingly enjoys the fact that they were robbed of $150.

That's like saying if you get PS3 you're robbed of $200... The Wii's experience is not the same as the Gamecube's... People who like it most likely are paying for the experience not the hardware...

Actually, it's nothing like that. Sony sells the PS3 at a loss. $600 is a lot of money, but you get more than that in return. Sony could not sell the PS3 at $400 without going bankrupt, while Nintendo could sell the Wii at $99-150, and profit even.

"People who like it most likely are paying for the experience not the hardware..."

The same could be said about any platform. Nobody would buy a 360 or PS3 for a box of parts that doesn't do anything. It's all a way of getting to the games, and it's the manufacturer's job to make that initial system purchase as small a hit as possible to the consumer. Nintendo is doing the complete opposite. They're milking that initial purchase for as much money as they can get without alerting the average ignorant consumer that he's getting robbed. It's a smart move, but a dirty one nontheless, and one that I will not support.

17 years ago

3962

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#100 nytrospawn

Member since 2003 • 3962 Posts

Nintendo would have failed instantly if they did most of whats suggested on this thread. They did the same thing with the Gamecube, it was a total failure. They couldnt even sell more than 5 million units in Japan. It was shameful and forced Nintendo to rethink its strategy. Not everyone has the luxery to stay on the well worn road.

17 years ago

188 results
1
2
3
4

Jump to Top

Please Log In to post.

Use your keyboard!

ESC

Log in to comment