Wii not really a next gen console confirmed (56k no)

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

Well isn't it? Don't we as consumers determine what is "next-gen", and not some overpaid PR guy?
Hewkii

how would we determine it? sales? what?

Its up to you to decide. If you think the Wii is next-gen, then it is.

Here's the key quote from the article that proves this thesis.

Jonothan:"I would say next gen consoles but the Wii isn't really next gen, is it? Of course not."

JiveT

Just one question: What makes this guy a "professional" confirmation?

Its up to you to decide. If you think the Wii is next-gen, then it is.

Teufelhuhn

so, therefore you admit that there is no universal definition of next gen.

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="Hater3000"]

I might have to wait to get a wii with (Please dont can it)Proyect Hammer or Resident Evil Chronicles before arguing but those are awful screen-shots.

Anyway how powerfull is the wii?,I have heard is more powerful than 2 gamecubes and with better graphics than the xbox but didn't the GC had the better graphics in the last gen?.

CJL13

And there's the motion sensing, online play, photo voting and internet channels, and VC.

[QUOTE="Nickman71"][QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="metroidfood"]

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]We've known for a long time now that its basically a GameCube under the hood.

Who's this guy that you linked us to?
Teufelhuhn

More like 2 gamecubes.

kthxbi

LOLWAT?

2x is 100%. You're telling me that from PS2 to PS3 the graphics increased 10,000%?

HAHAHA!

I'm telling you that the PS3 and 360 were about 50-100x more powerful then their predecessors, not that the graphics look 50-100x "better". There's a big difference, perceived graphics quality is very subjective thing.

I highly doubt the PS3 is 10,000% more powerful than the PS2. Learn some math kid. That will probably prevent future embarrassment.

Excuse me, topic poster, but here in reality we have this thing called "logic" that comes in very handy when it comes to NOT making a complete arse of yourself.

Here, i'll show you how to use it:

What determines whether or not a system is "next gen" or not has VERY LITTLE to do with its graphical capabilities. If that were the case then the only next gen system out would be the one that currently has the most graphical capabilities.

What DOES determine whether or not a gaming system is next gen or not has entirely to do with whether or not it provides a means, to developers, to the end of new gameplay design and dynamics. The wii does this by creating a revolutionary motion based control system that also has many traditional qualities to it such as buttons, triggers and analog sticks/d-pads. Because the wii offers such a comprehensive method of control it provides the widest range of gameplay possibilities for developers to create and for players to experience. The other systems simply provide more graphical capabilities; which at this point in the evolution of gaming is adding very little to the overall range of gameplay possibilities that the system can provide. In fact the majority of games on the so called next gen systems of x360 and ps3 seem to be last gen games with much better graphics; but the gameplay remains relatively the same as many of the games provided in the last generation of gaming.

So the Wii IS a "next gen" system by this definition and many, many, others. The only reason you havent reached this conclusion is because of your lack of logic or an extreme flaw in logic. You have no argument, you have no evidence and judging by your initial post you have NO credibility such that you yourself could determine and then dictate to others the "next gen" status of gaming systems currently available.

Now that you have been owned i expect a civil apology ... or you could just leave, read some books, study logic and argumentation and THEN come back and make some threads.

Until then; ZIP IT.

MaTT2011

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

Its up to you to decide. If you think the Wii is next-gen, then it is.

Hewkii

so, therefore you admit that there is no universal definition of next gen.

Well yeah, that was part of the point.

Nuff said!

DSgamer64

Looks pretty meh.

[QUOTE="CJL13"][QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="Hater3000"]

I might have to wait to get a wii with (Please dont can it)Proyect Hammer or Resident Evil Chronicles before arguing but those are awful screen-shots.

Anyway how powerfull is the wii?,I have heard is more powerful than 2 gamecubes and with better graphics than the xbox but didn't the GC had the better graphics in the last gen?.

Teufelhuhn

And there's the motion sensing, online play, photo voting and internet channels, and VC.

Features like those have EVERYTHING to do with whether or not a system is next-gen and since that is the topic of discussion it is VERY relevant to this discussion.

You cant simply pick certain parts of a product to codemn the console as a whole....it just doesnt make any sense.

If gaming became "GRaphics Whoring" then you might have a point; but since gaming has more to it than simply graphics it stands to reason that those features are entirely relevant to the discussion.

[QUOTE="OpiateE"][QUOTE="magiciandude"][QUOTE="DSgamer64"]

Nuff said!

magiciandude

The Sega Genesis has better graphics than that!

Am i gonna have to post the before and after pics of Red Steel?

I wouldn't count on the mario game looking that good if i was you...

Why bother? It's not like Red Steel was made by Nintendo in the first place. :|

Red Steel was like the Ultimate Wii Hyper when it was first released, infact i dont remember any other game getting as much comercialism from nintendo like Red Steel, im sure they had a part in this horrible creation..

Well yeah, that was part of the point.

Teufelhuhn

and hence there is no way to determine officially that it is next gen or not.

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

Its up to you to decide. If you think the Wii is next-gen, then it is.

Hewkii

so, therefore you admit that there is no universal definition of next gen.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/next-generation

This is another dagger from the article. Its hard to argue with the author.

"Nintendo isn't trying to get the attention of true gamers."

This is another dagger from the article. Its hard to argue with the author.

"Nintendo isn't trying to get the attention of true gamers."

JiveT

I guess im not a true gamer?

[QUOTE="magiciandude"][QUOTE="OpiateE"][QUOTE="magiciandude"][QUOTE="DSgamer64"]

Nuff said!

OpiateE

The Sega Genesis has better graphics than that!

Am i gonna have to post the before and after pics of Red Steel?

I wouldn't count on the mario game looking that good if i was you...

Why bother? It's not like Red Steel was made by Nintendo in the first place. :|

Red Steel was like the Ultimate Wii Hyper when it was first released, infact i dont remember any other game getting as much comercialism from nintendo like Red Steel, im sure they had a part in this horrible creation..

You'd be wrong there. When a company creates a game, it's up to that ocmpany to code it, model it, build it, and comercialise it. Most nintendo can do is give mention to it at the occasional press conference.

I should remind the fanboys here that so far the Halo 3 beta looks like it could be done on a computer from 2 years ago graphics wise, its not that great. Dont forget about Warhawk, which looks graphically on the level of Unreal Tournament 2004, which is almost 4 years old. May I remind folks that Smash Bros Brawl's site gets updated 5 daysa week and the graphics have yet to change, just means that the game is going to look great. Galaxy is far from being done, or at least new screens have not been shown in a while.DSgamer64

There's self ownage written all over your post. I'm not even going to bother.

where is it stated that next gen requires advanced technology?Hewkii

[QUOTE="Hewkii"][QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

Its up to you to decide. If you think the Wii is next-gen, then it is.

Jandurin

so, therefore you admit that there is no universal definition of next gen.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/next-generation

I'm just using what he's saying. whether or not something actually exists or not is moot if he doesn't use it.

I should remind the fanboys here that so far the Halo 3 beta looks like it could be done on a computer from 2 years ago graphics wise, its not that great. Dont forget about Warhawk, which looks graphically on the level of Unreal Tournament 2004, which is almost 4 years old. May I remind folks that Smash Bros Brawl's site gets updated 5 daysa week and the graphics have yet to change, just means that the game is going to look great. Galaxy is far from being done, or at least new screens have not been shown in a while.DSgamer64

Warhawk is a Download game, correct me if im wrong? Halo 3 beta, did you play it? because i thought it looked better than most 360 titles, it wasnt trying to be gears of war, and it was multiplayer.

btw. Am I the only one that has never heard of this sight before?

Edit: grr sucky freaking keyboard my space bar is breaking.

I'm just using what he's saying. whether or not something actually exists or not is moot if he doesn't use it.Hewkii

This is another dagger from the article. Its hard to argue with the author.

"Nintendo isn't trying to get the attention of true gamers."

JiveT

Not when the author is spouting blind opinion and not any real substantial argument. Honestly, give it up, your argument is the verbal equivalent of running head on into a brick wall over and over.

I highly doubt the PS3 is 10,000% more powerful than the PS2. Learn some math kid. That will probably prevent future embarrassment.

Nickman71

Ya know, using percentages to make the numbers look bigger won't make you right. The PS3 is tremendously more powerful than its predecessor. Polygon counts, bandwidth, memory size, fill rates, flops...all orders of magnitude over what the PS2 could do. Why is this so hard for you to believe? Its nothing new, consoles are always orders of magnitude more powerful than their predescessors.

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="CJL13"][QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="Hater3000"]

I might have to wait to get a wii with (Please dont can it)Proyect Hammer or Resident Evil Chronicles before arguing but those are awful screen-shots.

Anyway how powerfull is the wii?,I have heard is more powerful than 2 gamecubes and with better graphics than the xbox but didn't the GC had the better graphics in the last gen?.

MaTT2011

And there's the motion sensing, online play, photo voting and internet channels, and VC.

Features like those have EVERYTHING to do with whether or not a system is next-gen and since that is the topic of discussion it is VERY relevant to this discussion.

You cant simply pick certain parts of a product to codemn the console as a whole....it just doesnt make any sense.

If gaming became "GRaphics Whoring" then you might have a point; but since gaming has more to it than simply graphics it stands to reason that those features are entirely relevant to the discussion.

btw. AmIthe only one that hasnever heard of this sight before?

laughingman42

No, you're not the only one.

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

Well yeah, that was part of the point.

Hewkii

and hence there is no way to determine officially that it is next gen or not.

[QUOTE="JiveT"]

This is another dagger from the article. Its hard to argue with the author.

"Nintendo isn't trying to get the attention of true gamers."

metroidfood

Not when the author is spouting blind opinion and not any real substantial argument. Honestly, give it up, your argument is the verbal equivalent of running head on into a brick wall over and over.

LOL weakest damage control ever. "not any real substantial argument" Let's get real.

[QUOTE="DSgamer64"]I should remind the fanboys here that so far the Halo 3 beta looks like it could be done on a computer from 2 years ago graphics wise, its not that great. Dont forget about Warhawk, which looks graphically on the level of Unreal Tournament 2004, which is almost 4 years old. May I remind folks that Smash Bros Brawl's site gets updated 5 daysa week and the graphics have yet to change, just means that the game is going to look great. Galaxy is far from being done, or at least new screens have not been shown in a while.-Sora

Warhawk is a Download game, correct me if im wrong? Halo 3 beta, did you play it? because i thought it looked better than most 360 titles, it wasnt trying to be gears of war, and it was multiplayer.

actually, that halo beta 3 looked really bad, i felt like i was playing halo 2 with a few touch ups, the only thing that impressed me was that water effect that they used, idk but i think gears of war is way more superior than that.

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

He asked how powerful it was, I answered. Features like those are a different discussion.
MaTT2011

Features like those have EVERYTHING to do with whether or not a system is next-gen and since that is the topic of discussion it is VERY relevant to this discussion.

You cant simply pick certain parts of a product to codemn the console as a whole....it just doesnt make any sense.

If gaming became "GRaphics Whoring" then you might have a point; but since gaming has more to it than simply graphics it stands to reason that those features are entirely relevant to the discussion.

Why are you attacking me? He asked a simple question about the hardware and the hardware only.

Perhaps you could take it down a notch here, and lighten up? No need to jump into defensive mode every time the subject of the Wii's hardware comes up.

[QUOTE="mikl1018"]This thread is just begging for some GUN picsa_ratchet_fan

Your complaining about graphics yet you have a PS2 game as your avatar...Okami no less.:?

"True, but... the Wii really doesn't have any game that really takes advantage of the wiimote to the point where you can't imagine that game being on anything else. More specifically, none of the available Wii line-up are games that I can't imagine can be done on the DS... oddly enough, a good portion of it's games originated on the DS (Trauma Center, Big Brain Academy, etc.). It doesn't help that there aren't a lot of good games regardless of whether they use the Wiimote or not... flash could help the Wii quite a bit right now since the substance is lacking, but it doesn't even have that. The Wii isn't in an enviable position game-wise."

-arachetfan

Sure it does; Wii sports. Theres one. Want another? WarioWare smooth moves. Theres another. Want more? How about Rayman Raving Rabbids? Trauma Center (on any other console)? Or even what about the Definitive edition of one of the highest rated games EVER; Resident Evil 4? That game alone proves that once you go wii theres no going back to the past versions of the game. This illustrates the incredible ability the system has to make games BETTER through better, more engaging, control schemes.

Certain games CAN be done on DS but those games, like trauma center, are simply BETTER by virtue of being on the Wii. Trauma center and big brain academy are very much better than their DS counterparts.

Sure some graphical flash might help a little with engaging gamers but thats only in comparison to the "flash" that other systems provide. They dont make or break a game...it simply makes it more pleasent to look at when you actually are NOT playing...but when you are playing you are concerned most with PLAYING...not stopping to admire hi-res textures or how shiney some faceless NPC's boots are.

The wii is in the most viable position to provide an INCREDIBLE range of gameplay possibilities for designers to employ and for gamers to enjoy. It has enough graphical capability to replicate anything its competitors could produce....merely with less effects, less polygons and other things that really have very little to do with the quality of the gameplay possibilities. But its competitors, unlike the wii, cant do ANYTHING the wii can do and if they can, think psHOME bowling, its executed poorly and with a complete lack of ease that the wii brings to the table.

[QUOTE="-Sora"]

[QUOTE="DSgamer64"]I should remind the fanboys here that so far the Halo 3 beta looks like it could be done on a computer from 2 years ago graphics wise, its not that great. Dont forget about Warhawk, which looks graphically on the level of Unreal Tournament 2004, which is almost 4 years old. May I remind folks that Smash Bros Brawl's site gets updated 5 daysa week and the graphics have yet to change, just means that the game is going to look great. Galaxy is far from being done, or at least new screens have not been shown in a while.OpiateE

Warhawk is a Download game, correct me if im wrong? Halo 3 beta, did you play it? because i thought it looked better than most 360 titles, it wasnt trying to be gears of war, and it was multiplayer.

actually, that halo beta 3 looked really bad, i felt like i was playing halo 2 with a few touch ups, the only thing that impressed me was that water effect that they used, idk but i think gears of war is way more superior than that.

i dunno, i really liked how it looked, i thought it looked better then Rainbow Six Vegas

[QUOTE="Hewkii"][QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

Well yeah, that was part of the point.

Teufelhuhn

and hence there is no way to determine officially that it is next gen or not.

Its kind of hard, if i decide to build something like a pentium 3 pc with 256mb at this moment does it automaticaly make it a next gen computer? i dont think so. it has to meet the standards with the current time, I dont think the wii is next gen because it lacks the high def and a few other things that other recent systems have, well its part next-gen and part last-gen because of the wiimote.

DSgamer64

OMG.:o He trying to eat Kirby. Run Kirby run!

Certain games CAN be done on DS but those games, like trauma center, are simply BETTER by virtue of being on the Wii. Trauma center and big brain academy are very much better than their DS counterparts.

Sure some graphical flash might help a little with engaging gamers but thats only in comparison to the "flash" that other systems provide. They dont make or break a game...it simply makes it more pleasent to look at when you actually are NOT playing...but when you are playing you are concerned most with PLAYING...not stopping to admire hi-res textures or how shiney some faceless NPC's boots are.

The wii is in the most viable position to provide an INCREDIBLE range of gameplay possibilities for designers to employ and for gamers to enjoy. It has enough graphical capability to replicate anything its competitors could produce....merely with less effects, less polygons and other things that really have very little to do with the quality of the gameplay possibilities. But its competitors, unlike the wii, cant do ANYTHING the wii can do and if they can, think psHOME bowling, its executed poorly and with a complete lack of ease that the wii brings to the table.

MaTT2011

[QUOTE="MaTT2011"][QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

He asked how powerful it was, I answered. Features like those are a different discussion.
Teufelhuhn

Features like those have EVERYTHING to do with whether or not a system is next-gen and since that is the topic of discussion it is VERY relevant to this discussion.

You cant simply pick certain parts of a product to codemn the console as a whole....it just doesnt make any sense.

If gaming became "GRaphics Whoring" then you might have a point; but since gaming has more to it than simply graphics it stands to reason that those features are entirely relevant to the discussion.

Why are you attacking me? He asked a simple question about the hardware and the hardware only.

Perhaps you could take it down a notch here, and lighten up? No need to jump into defensive mode every time the subject of the Wii's hardware comes up.

Nothing defensive or aggressive about it; Im simply pointing out that when considering the worth, or next-gen-ness, of a system we cant isolate certain features and then attack them only to use those attacks to label the whole as either "lacking" or not "enough" to be qualified as next gen.

Im pointing out that in a discussion like this we need to realize that doing such things gets us nowhere and only encourages pointless conversations and illogical fanboy rambling because those same fanboys will use such discussions as further validation, even though its not, for their preconcieved notions for other systems.

1st of all, the wii is current gen.

second, screens posted in an article called "The worst looking wii title" is no sign of what the wii is capable of

[QUOTE="MaTT2011"]

Certain games CAN be done on DS but those games, like trauma center, are simply BETTER by virtue of being on the Wii. Trauma center and big brain academy are very much better than their DS counterparts.

Sure some graphical flash might help a little with engaging gamers but thats only in comparison to the "flash" that other systems provide. They dont make or break a game...it simply makes it more pleasent to look at when you actually are NOT playing...but when you are playing you are concerned most with PLAYING...not stopping to admire hi-res textures or how shiney some faceless NPC's boots are.

The wii is in the most viable position to provide an INCREDIBLE range of gameplay possibilities for designers to employ and for gamers to enjoy. It has enough graphical capability to replicate anything its competitors could produce....merely with less effects, less polygons and other things that really have very little to do with the quality of the gameplay possibilities. But its competitors, unlike the wii, cant do ANYTHING the wii can do and if they can, think psHOME bowling, its executed poorly and with a complete lack of ease that the wii brings to the table.

Teufelhuhn

How about you respond to the post instead of being a complete coward by doing nothing but throwing around insults?

Is it THAT hard for you to engage in a discussion? If it is then next time you see a post you dont agree with instead of responding how about you just leave when you dont have anything of substance to say? I would recommend actually responding to the content of the post.....this is a discussion board after all...so ... discuss.

Its kind of hard, if i decide to build something like a pentium 3 pc with 256mb at this moment does it automaticaly make it a next gen computer? i dont think so. it has to meet the standards with the current time, I dont think the wii is next gen because it lacks the high def and a few other things that other recent systems have, well its part next-gen and part last-gen because of the wiimote.

OpiateE

Xbox1 is only as powerful as the PSone :shock:

*pic*

Xbox1 is only as powerful as the PSone :shock:

Dencore

What in the world is that game?

Nothing defensive or aggressive about it; Im simply pointing out that when considering the worth, or next-gen-ness, of a system we cant isolate certain features and then attack them only to use those attacks to label the whole as either "lacking" or not "enough" to be qualified as next gen.

Im pointing out that in a discussion like this we need to realize that doing such things gets us nowhere and only encourages pointless conversations and illogical fanboy rambling because those same fanboys will use such discussions as further validation, even though its not, for their preconcieved notions for other systems.

MaTT2011

[QUOTE="CJL13"][QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="Hater3000"]

I might have to wait to get a wii with (Please dont can it)Proyect Hammer or Resident Evil Chronicles before arguing but those are awful screen-shots.

Anyway how powerfull is the wii?,I have heard is more powerful than 2 gamecubes and with better graphics than the xbox but didn't the GC had the better graphics in the last gen?.

laughingman42

And there's the motion sensing, online play, photo voting and internet channels, and VC.

Yeah all that stuff sounds cool but what it wont be able to do something better than Resident evil chronicles?.

How about you respond to the post instead of being a complete coward by doing nothing but throwing around insults?

Is it THAT hard for you to engage in a discussion? If it is then next time you see a post you dont agree with instead of responding how about you just leave when you dont have anything of substance to say? I would recommend actually responding to the content of the post.....this is a discussion board after all...so ... discuss.

MaTT2011

[QUOTE="DSgamer64"]

Wanderer5

OMG.:o He trying to eat Kirby. Run Kirby run!

Hahaha :lol: I love that image.I hope he gets to bite kirby hehe.

[QUOTE="MaTT2011"]

How about you respond to the post instead of being a complete coward by doing nothing but throwing around insults?

Is it THAT hard for you to engage in a discussion? If it is then next time you see a post you dont agree with instead of responding how about you just leave when you dont have anything of substance to say? I would recommend actually responding to the content of the post.....this is a discussion board after all...so ... discuss.

Teufelhuhn

I can readily acknowledge that the ps3/360 can do things the wii cant.....like super hi-res textures, tons of bump/normal mapping and various shader effects.

But that doesnt mean that the wii cant make the same GAMES that those systems can; it would just have to downgrade the graphics. Insted of super hi-res textures they will have to use lower res textures and other things of that sort.

But those systems cannot do the things that wii does because their method of control does not have motion sensing abilities on the level of the wii.

So you can see as many "red flags" as you want but the fact of the matter is that when it comes to GAMEPLAY, what determines whether or not something is a game, the wii can simply do a whole lot more and it can do things that those systems cannot.

"True, but... the Wii really doesn't have any game that really takes advantage of the wiimote to the point where you can't imagine that game being on anything else. More specifically, none of the available Wii line-up are games that I can't imagine can be done on the DS... oddly enough, a good portion of it's games originated on the DS (Trauma Center, Big Brain Academy, etc.). It doesn't help that there aren't a lot of good games regardless of whether they use the Wiimote or not... flash could help the Wii quite a bit right now since the substance is lacking, but it doesn't even have that. The Wii isn't in an enviable position game-wise."

-arachetfan

Sure it does; Wii sports. Theres one. Want another? WarioWare smooth moves. Theres another. Want more? How about Rayman Raving Rabbids? Trauma Center (on any other console)? Or even what about the Definitive edition of one of the highest rated games EVER; Resident Evil 4? That game alone proves that once you go wii theres no going back to the past versions of the game. This illustrates the incredible ability the system has to make games BETTER through better, more engaging, control schemes.

Certain games CAN be done on DS but those games, like trauma center, are simply BETTER by virtue of being on the Wii. Trauma center and big brain academy are very much better than their DS counterparts.

Sure some graphical flash might help a little with engaging gamers but thats only in comparison to the "flash" that other systems provide. They dont make or break a game...it simply makes it more pleasent to look at when you actually are NOT playing...but when you are playing you are concerned most with PLAYING...not stopping to admire hi-res textures or how shiney some faceless NPC's boots are.

The wii is in the most viable position to provide an INCREDIBLE range of gameplay possibilities for designers to employ and for gamers to enjoy. It has enough graphical capability to replicate anything its competitors could produce....merely with less effects, less polygons and other things that really have very little to do with the quality of the gameplay possibilities. But its competitors, unlike the wii, cant do ANYTHING the wii can do and if they can, think psHOME bowling, its executed poorly and with a complete lack of ease that the wii brings to the table.

MaTT2011

I can readily acknowledge that the ps3/360 can do things the wii cant.....like super hi-res textures, tons of bump/normal mapping and various shader effects.

MaTT2011