[QUOTE="roxlimn"] *stands up and starts a slow clap* surrealnumber5
hakanakumono:
No, not really. I've seen Mario Galaxy in HD. It's not substantially better. Neither was Muramasa, for that matter. For some games, it just doesn't matter. Sure, you can put all kinds of crazy effects on a Tetris game, but it's got a very marginal effect for the most part. It's still blocks.
Communistsheeep:
"That's irrelevant, this isn't about industry in general, this is about ethics, i mean why the hell should i pay 250 for something that just is plain a gamecube with motion controls, i will not buy it, i won't until i have games that satisfy me, but that doesn't give you the attitude to say ''don't like, then shut up'', which is essentially what you are saying."
First of all, your grammar and vocubulary need work, young man. Read more books - they're really quite good forms of entertainment.
Secondly, Nintendo's pricing is not ethical because we don't like in a society where pricing is dictated by ethics - it's called a market economy. In a market economy, people make money by selling things that other people want, for more than they were made for. That is how a couple kids can sell lemonade at 200% markup on a hot day.
Don't like it? Don't buy it. No one is forcing you.
"But i don't accept it, and it's something i complain about. Wrong, The wii does infact target much more younger audiences, however, older ones have also found affection in it, sadly, most of these are merely casual, usually don't have a large gaming history, and know little about it, you may be a exception. But that isn't the point, what if i want something with just more then ''just plain fun'', i also want something that can also showcase more deep titles, which don't consist of me flailing my arms around like a fool for an hour."
Luckily for you, Sony and MS probably have you covered. Have you checked out their gaming products? I think you'll find them much to your liking. The Wii has an attach rate comparable to the 360 and the PS3, which is really something if you consider that it's got twice the install base, just about. By and large, older gamers buy exactly what they want, after much research. They aren't buying Carnival Games because they don't know any better - they're buying it beause it contains something they want.
You see, they're NOT you. They don't essentially have the same tastes as you. You're assuming that they'd like something like No More Heroes, but they're too stupid to know that NMH exists. This is not true. All those soccer moms? Yeah, they communicate with each other through the blogosphere. When one person tries out a game, they let everyone else know. By and large, as a group, they're surprisingly well informed about the Wii's library.
"How many of these games are good, and how many target my audience (racing, shooters, WRPG'S, online centric?) They may buy it, but then again, the general consumer is usually not informed about alot of things, in terms of hardware it's overpriced, period."
You don't know what overpriced means, kid. Look it up. And no, the Wii is not for you. Why the hell did you buy one? Evidently, you are less informed than all those soccer moms who got exactly what they wanted.
"But there is a fallacy in your arguement, you assume fun factor is the only reason one would buy a game, if i find a game fun, i won't go straight and buy it, i always think, ''are the graphics good, will i play it alot, is it worth it'' Seriously, if you think you can base something on a single subject, then you should research more into gaming."
Firstly, that is not a fallacy. Look up the definition of "fallacy."
Secondly, I'm not assuming. I'm TELLING you that fun is the only factor you should consider when buying a game, other than pricing. Graphics? Psh. Replayability? Maybe. But that factors into "fun."
"In terms of hardware they are using outdated techs, they may have some newer controls, but in general thats it. If you think that's why nintendo made it, then you are wrong even more. They made motion controls because they knew that it would appeal to a casual market, who somply wants to play for an hour, they wont make any changes to gaming society, they are just another buyer. But then again, MS and Sony are making similar controlsm does this mean they are doing this for the future, no. They are doing what nintendo is doing, FOR THE MONEY. This shows how little you know about gaming, most people including my don't like motion controls."
Controls ARE hardware. It's, like, in the definition of hardware.
50 million consumers argue against you. Most people DO prefer motion controls to traditional controls. That's why Sony and MS are doing it. And yes, it's for the money - because more people like it, more people will buy the product. Duh.
Nintendo made motion controls to appeal to a wider market. They didn't know it - they theorized. It has already changed the gaming industry. Look around you, kid. Motion controls are everywhere and they're here to stay.
roxlimn
Someb hakanakumono:
No, not really. I've seen Mario Galaxy in HD. It's not substantially better. Neither was Muramasa, for that matter. For some games, it just doesn't matter. Sure, you can put all kinds of crazy effects on a Tetris game, but it's got a very marginal effect for the most part. It's still blocks.
Communistsheeep:
"That's irrelevant, this isn't about industry in general, this is about ethics, i mean why the hell should i pay 250 for something that just is plain a gamecube with motion controls, i will not buy it, i won't until i have games that satisfy me, but that doesn't give you the attitude to say ''don't like, then shut up'', which is essentially what you are saying."
First of all, your grammar and vocubulary need work, young man. Read more books - they're really quite good forms of entertainment.
Secondly, Nintendo's pricing is not ethical because we don't like in a society where pricing is dictated by ethics - it's called a market economy. In a market economy, people make money by selling things that other people want, for more than they were made for. That is how a couple kids can sell lemonade at 200% markup on a hot day.
Don't like it? Don't buy it. No one is forcing you.
"But i don't accept it, and it's something i complain about. Wrong, The wii does infact target much more younger audiences, however, older ones have also found affection in it, sadly, most of these are merely casual, usually don't have a large gaming history, and know little about it, you may be a exception. But that isn't the point, what if i want something with just more then ''just plain fun'', i also want something that can also showcase more deep titles, which don't consist of me flailing my arms around like a fool for an hour."
Luckily for you, Sony and MS probably have you covered. Have you checked out their gaming products? I think you'll find them much to your liking. The Wii has an attach rate comparable to the 360 and the PS3, which is really something if you consider that it's got twice the install base, just about. By and large, older gamers buy exactly what they want, after much research. They aren't buying Carnival Games because they don't know any better - they're buying it beause it contains something they want.
You see, they're NOT you. They don't essentially have the same tastes as you. You're assuming that they'd like something like No More Heroes, but they're too stupid to know that NMH exists. This is not true. All those soccer moms? Yeah, they communicate with each other through the blogosphere. When one person tries out a game, they let everyone else know. By and large, as a group, they're surprisingly well informed about the Wii's library.
"How many of these games are good, and how many target my audience (racing, shooters, WRPG'S, online centric?) They may buy it, but then again, the general consumer is usually not informed about alot of things, in terms of hardware it's overpriced, period."
You don't know what overpriced means, kid. Look it up. And no, the Wii is not for you. Why the hell did you buy one? Evidently, you are less informed than all those soccer moms who got exactly what they wanted.
"But there is a fallacy in your arguement, you assume fun factor is the only reason one would buy a game, if i find a game fun, i won't go straight and buy it, i always think, ''are the graphics good, will i play it alot, is it worth it'' Seriously, if you think you can base something on a single subject, then you should research more into gaming."
Firstly, that is not a fallacy. Look up the definition of "fallacy."
Secondly, I'm not assuming. I'm TELLING you that fun is the only factor you should consider when buying a game, other than pricing. Graphics? Psh. Replayability? Maybe. But that factors into "fun."
"In terms of hardware they are using outdated techs, they may have some newer controls, but in general thats it. If you think that's why nintendo made it, then you are wrong even more. They made motion controls because they knew that it would appeal to a casual market, who somply wants to play for an hour, they wont make any changes to gaming society, they are just another buyer. But then again, MS and Sony are making similar controlsm does this mean they are doing this for the future, no. They are doing what nintendo is doing, FOR THE MONEY. This shows how little you know about gaming, most people including my don't like motion controls."
Controls ARE hardware. It's, like, in the definition of hardware.
50 million consumers argue against you. Most people DO prefer motion controls to traditional controls. That's why Sony and MS are doing it. And yes, it's for the money - because more people like it, more people will buy the product. Duh.
Nintendo made motion controls to appeal to a wider market. They didn't know it - they theorized. It has already changed the gaming industry. Look around you, kid. Motion controls are everywhere and they're here to stay.
roxlimn
My grammar and vocabulary are irrelevant to the discussion, and you know this. I am not discussing the current state of the market, i am stating how things should be, you can't just simply go around blabbering that it's just how it is, or else there would be nothing do discuss in the first place.Again, there you go with the whole ''don't like it, then leave it'' crap. I will never buy one of those things, for obvious reasons, but does that mean i am not allowed to complain about it?
Their attach rate is however lower, and you do infact realize there are some different factors for that attach rate, pricing, bundles and so on, needles to say, i doubt you would be willing to pay 120 dollars for a wii game no would you? Explain this, much of these so called quality titles, that aren't first party usually sell pretty badly, so what do you ''older'' gamers buy, because according to sale charts, you sure as hell aren't buying the good ones.
You may find some form of pleaser, but with an avarage attach rate, of 4-5 i'f i'm right, there just isn't anything to be saying. Suprisingly well informed? Sellers on wii are usually low rated, needless to say a game like NMH, doesn't sell very well on a Wii, neither does game like the conduit, you know why, because they don't have that audience. Considering that i use my definition of overpriced, i think i do, you can blabber about the industry all you want, but frankly, when you can get a different console with the same price, with much better hardware, then you know that it's overpriced, that's from a complete objective point of view, you may go around claiming i should learn about the industry, but you should try and learn about hardware for once.
You know why i bought one, because nintendo promised some pretty good games, despite the lack of graphics, they promised great online games, shooters and awesome racing games. What did i get, a rubbish censored online.
Also, stop using my age as some insult, you will treat me like yourself, not like somebody that is inferior, money isn't an issue for me, i make roughly 1000 dollars with tax ammount, so money isn't an issue, but that doesn't mean i go around spending it simply because i can.
Except fun factor isn't the only factor when buying a game, it may be for you, but i am not going to buy a game for 60 dollars if it's only going to last me for a couple of hours, how wrong you can be sometimes. Why should it be, i find graphics an important factor, i find online and community an important factor as well, are you going to say they are irrelevant simply because you don't include them? I'm talking in terms of graphical hardware, not controls.
I don't if they do so, and another 57-8 million disagree with you, by that logic, most people prefer the traditional, and that's without including PC. Obviously, so stop with your whole, nintendo is doing this for teh future.
Log in to comment