Do any of you seriously consider the wii to be a next gen console?

Name one "next-gen" game on the wii(ie one that you couldnt play on a gc). HA name one game that even uses bump maping. Lets face it the wii is a gamecube with a fancy controller. Therefore i have to conclude that the ps2 is beating the wii. The wii isnt even in competition with the real next gen consoles(x60 and ps3).

What is a next genconsole? WellMS SONY and various pc game devs think it is highpowered graphics, photorealism, and larger more complex games. Ifx360 and ps3 were just ps2 andxboxs witha new controller than the wii would be next gen.The gamming industry is moving with the x360 and the ps3 notthe wii.The wii is losing to ps2. You cant even compare x360 and ps3 to wii. Its like comparing alienware sales to Dell sales:they arent even in the same league.

crazedweasle

I completely agree with you till the last sentence. Since Dell bought out Alienware, they are kinda the same thing. Dell XPS high end systems are on par with high end Alienware. They're pretty much identical.

[QUOTE="Benny_Blakk"][QUOTE="ballasteve"]

meh. ill prolly spend about 300$ or so on games, then save it. all i really want before christmas is folklore, assassins creed, lair, warhawk, and FFXIII

ballasteve

FFXIII isn't due out till 2010! Earliest, 2009! Mark my words! They are really trying to go over the top with this one!8)

yeah yeah but it still says TBA 2007 and the reports of it being pushed back are unconfirmed, as far as we know, it could be almost done right now :D but i do want it to be amazing, so if i have to wait a year or so, so be it haha

Even if it did somehow get released this year, that would be the Japanese version. There's a lot of text and dialogue in FF games, and it takes Square a minimum of 6 months to a year for localization from Japan to NA.

how can you say the ps3 is done when it is built for the long run. It was smart to include blu-ray because as good as game look, you need a place for all that info.

And please tell me you cant think that when GT5, God of war 3, tekken, FF13, MGS4 and other sony franchises that people know and love that they wont sell a ton of hardware. I can promise you that when sony comes out, and they will, with sony games for the sony system that we will be blown away. It really is the only system ready for true next gen games,...native 1080p,...7.1 audio....blu ray (space)

folks this is a marathon not a sprint, and sony is catching up i assure you.

futures_past

Now I love and support Sony as much as the next guy, Final Fantasy and Metal Gear Solid are not Sony franchises. People need to stop saying that. FF13 and MGS4 are PS3 exclusives, and will almost definitely stay that way, but Sony has no rights whatsoever to those IPs. FF is developed and published by Square Enix. SE owns the franchise, not Sony. They have jumped from one manufacturer to another before, and may again someday. Likewise, MGS is developed published and owned exclusively by Konami. Sony has no say in what they do with the franchise. There is a difference between a first party franchise and a third party franchise that is (at least for the time being) exclusive.

[QUOTE="ianuilliam"][QUOTE="GoodkupoBan"]

[QUOTE="ianuilliam"]I think the official rule is it depends on who owns the franchise. Some publishers hire 2nd party devs to make a game, but they own the rights to the IP. That makes it a first party franchise. Other times, publishers allow the dev to retain the IP rights. That makes it a second party franchise. And if the dev and publisher who own the rights have no hard affiliation with the console manufacturer, its third party.GoodkupoBan

Yeah, I believe a poor choices of words got me in that one. But it does however prove, that not all first-party tittle are developed by Sony themselves.

Manufacturers: the guys that make the console (Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft)

Publisher: the guys with the money (may be the same as the manufacturer)

Developer: the guys that make the games (may be the same as the publisher)

IP: Intellectual Property-this is the franchise. Mario is an IP owned by Nintendo.

If the IP is owned by the manufacturer, it is first party. If sony publishes a game developed by Studio X, and the contract stipulates that Sony owns the rights to the IP, it is a first party franchise. If the contract instead says Studio X owns the IP and can do what they want with it, it is not. Make sense?

You are correct, but that's not what im trying to say here. I'm talking about the developers.

I just wanted people to appreciate the real developers more. It's like how I would call Mass Effect a gift from BioWare not Microsoft. They're the ones that working hard, trying to raise the bar but it's the publisher that are just making money.This is why it pissed me off when 2k renamed Irrational games to 2k Boston.

Edit: Blame bforrester for the entire who develop what topic.

I totally agree with you. We were just making different points then. As a student majoring in game and simulation programming, I believe in giving the devs credit for developing good games as well. Resistance wasn't great because Sony threw money around, it was great because Insomniac make great games.

[QUOTE="ianuilliam"]I think the official rule is it depends on who owns the franchise. Some publishers hire 2nd party devs to make a game, but they own the rights to the IP. That makes it a first party franchise. Other times, publishers allow the dev to retain the IP rights. That makes it a second party franchise. And if the dev and publisher who own the rights have no hard affiliation with the console manufacturer, its third party.GoodkupoBan

Yeah, I believe a poor choices of words got me in that one. But it does however prove, that not all first-party tittle are developed by Sony themselves which was the original argument.

How dare you edit while I am replying?! J/K, my original arguement was that Sony owns more franchises, and is therefor not a '3rd party system' as someone else called it.