@abHS4L88 If its one thing the Wii failed at, and that everyone has pointed out and knows, is that the Wii DID NOT stand the test of time. To say so is just ignorant fanboy talk. Thats like me saying "The Xbox stood the test of time" it didn't, the Xbox 360 and PS3 did, the PS2 certainly did.
And I hate call of duty so I cant really understand your point, where nintendo are headed IS where call of duty is at right now, same games over and over. Super Mario on the SNES was incredible. Super Mario on the Wii? Not so much. Was it fun? Yeah, it was pretty fun. (But it doesn't compare to something like Super Mario on the SNES, that was MAGIC). Would I buy a console just for that one game? No.
And if anything, ive heard most wii owners say they wont be duped into buying a WiiU just for Mario or Zelda again and miss out on all the next gen 3rd party software like what happened with the wii
@FlakeyCrust And how has Nintendo "made consoles that show they stood the test of time " That is a ridiculous statement, they have showed us exactly the opposite with the Wii, honestly im trying to have a good discussion here with some facts and some good points and you post something you know is completely false!?
@FlakeyCrust 1. In all honesty thats a pretty dumb view of things, you could just as easily say "If it wasn't for Atari showing there was profit in videogames, Nintendo wouldn't be where they are today".
2. Nintendo was just starting out back in the day, they made good use of what they had and went with a nice, simple controller; Nintendo aren't "starting out" today, they are part of the Big Three now, they have CASH, more is to be expected from them, and rightfully so.
Nintendo can just as easily "pioneer new forms of playing" and still at least TRY and future proof there console. When your launching a NEXT GEN console that is on par with 7 year old tech and only a bit better, somethings wrong.
This isn't "Oh poor Ninty, they are some little company that cant afford to launch a console with next gen graphics"
Its "Nintendo, not wanting to invest a little cash in future proofing your console".
@FlakeyCrust Swinging a WiiMote is much more intuitive, natural and easy than a gamepad. The Gamepad is basically going back to the original controller design but with a touchscreen in the middle. When Nintendo launched the OG Wii they pointed out that casual playing adults and the elderly could easily pickup a wii mote and swing it even without having to memorize any buttons or anything like that, they can't do that with the WiiU, the whole point of the WiiU is the Gamepad, it'll be much harder trying to convey the Gamepad being more intuitive and natural and easty to pickup up (for adults and casual players) than the OG WiiMote.
I think those people who are thinking the WiiU will be as good or better than the Wii (in terms of sales) are missing a vital point: The original Wii targeted EVERYONE, kids, teens, adults who didn't like how "complex" videogame controllers were, grandparents, literally to EVERYONE. The problem here is that the WiiU cant do that, it can't target as wide an audience as the original Wii did. Grandparents wont be able to play the WiiU as easily as the Wii, neither will adults who think PS3 and 360 controllers are "complex". The little kids wont be able to just grab the wiimote and swing it, they now have a fairly big controller that they probably cant even hold.
@abHS4L88 @rarson It doesn't matter if they "prove" why they have to price it at $350. In this economy, if its out of peoples price range, it doesn't matter how much they wan't it, they literally wont be able to buy it. Buying a system is an investment, its not just $350 ( or whatever the price ends up being) its also the price of the games, and the controllers, and the memory, and other peripherals etc. etc. Pretty soon those $350 turn to $500+
@londenbridges05 Think about touchscreen controllers like the Wii with motion controllers. The touchscreen is the main selling point of the WiiU, just like motion controls were with the Wii. Sony and Microsoft then both did their own motion control thing, it was a peripheral though obviously. Same thing is going to happen again, Microsoft is incorporating touchscreen in the NextBox by using tablets or ipods that will work with the NextBox in much the same way that the WiiUs gamepad does. Sony is incorporating touchscreen into the NextStation by using the PSVita essentially as the WiiU's gamepad. This way, Microsoft and Sony avoid having to add more to the price of their next consoles and at the same time dipping into the touchscreen market. Touchscreen controllers wont be the main feature of their systems, just like motion controls arent the main feature of the 360 or PS3, but they will be another option, they will sort of be like next gens version of PSMove and Kinect
@londenbridges05 Yes you might be paying more up front but your getting much more out of your system than the WiiU. Your essentially investing in systems with much longer life spans, that are future proofed and will probably have an 8 year lifespan. And Microsoft is already incorporating touchscreen with the Xbox. I'ts like those who bought the Wii, sure they spent the least amount of money, but they also got the least out of their systems, horrible online, no future proofing, mainly shovelware games, none of the standard games like assassins creed or resident evil revelations.
@LindBergh2007 Theyve been working on it for years now dumbass, thats like saying nintendo will go bankrupt immediately after launching the Wii U because they are selling no Wii's and had to slash the price of the 3ds nearly in half. -__-
dreamfist11's comments