I like the Wii, I do. I love how Nintendo is targeting non-gamers and gamers who like to play simplistic mini games. That said, who thinks it will be just a fad? Sure Wii sports is fun the first few times I played it, but the games have no depth or replay value to me. It's boring beating up non-gamers who are inexperienced in video games. If they included online play with Wii sports, that would've been killer. With the technology in the Wii, I don't think it has enough processing power to enable online play for these type of games.

I looked at 07's line up on gamestop + ign and I simply don't see any games I want to play. Sure if I was a Nintendo fanboy Metroid Prime 3 and Mario Galaxy/Party could hold me over, but I'm not. I'm sure there are some people who absolutely love these games so it's worth it for them, but what about the people who aren't fans of Nintendo first party games? If Nintendo made the Wii a little more powerful so developers could do more with their system, I think they could've been number 1 easily.

If a publisher could release a boxing/tennis game that could offer true 1:1 motion, that would definately make the Wii worth it for me. Unfortunately, I'm not sure if it's possible because the Wii already has a hard time with simple motions like Wii sports. Anyways, this is just my two cents, please don't talk about "other" systems or reply with fanboy comments. Im only interested in reading other prospectives regarding the long term success of the Wii.

The same thing was said about the gamecube, and in many cases people counted Nintendo out many times.... the only thing we can do is wait, be patient and enjoy what we have..... Or, if the purchase has been made, take it back to the retailer and hit the manufacturer in their pockets and possibly spark some sort of change.

I still do not understand why people are tearing the new systems limb from limb when they have only been in the homes of consumers for a month or so. Why the need to break things down and criticize so early in the game?

Games and systems are made for specific target markets. Of course not all things are going to appeal to all people.

The Wii, which I own, has seen just as much play time in my home as my 360 and does not collect dust like my PS3. Why? Because the games are fun. Graphics are not exactly "on par" with the other systems, but the fun factor is definitely there. Of course, others would beg to differ and would prefer to have their eyes and ears overly dazzled while mashing buttons.

Of course these are my views which are unique to me... Maybe these debates would have more validity a year from now, but I don't see people waiting that long to give these systems a fair change.

Look, it was an issue of cost vs. processing power, and its obviously a trade off. What good would it have done anyone if Nintendo had put out something similar to 360 or ps3 for a much higher price than what the wii has now? We already have expensive, HD platforms, wii can fill a diferent niche, and that is good for gamers.

As far as it being a "fad" there is no real answer to that. Actually there is in a way, and it lies with software developers. A steady stream of compelling software will be the best way to insure that it does not happen that way. As far as you not liking Nintendo's first party titles, then let your money do the talking and don't buy them. That's capitalism! There are plenty of other games for you to buy.

Online wasn't ready for launch. Well start seeing it soon, maybe with SSX:blur.

If a publisher could release a boxing/tennis game that could offer true 1:1 motion, that would definately make the Wii worth it for me.

Fight night will probably do it. Wii boxing is close to 1:1 but you have to slow down your movements. Im guessing nintendo did this so people couldn't shake the crap out of the controller and throw 1000's of punches a minute. wii sports 2 online is given.

2007 partial list
Super Paper Mario
Metroid Prime 3: Corruption
Super Mario Galaxy
Super Smash Bros. Brawl
Fire Emblem Wii
Battalion Wars Wii
Super Mario Strikers Wii
Project: Hammer
Forever Blue
Pokemon Battle Revolution
Donkey Kong Jet Racing
Wii Motor Sports (Airplane, Jet Ski, etc.)
Wii Music
Wii Fitness
Wii Play
Big Brain Academy
Wario Ware: Smooth Moves
Mario Party 8
Animal Crossing 24/7
Resident Evil
SSX:Blur
Sonic
Dragon Quest Swords
Final Fantasy: Crystal Bearers
Medal of Honor
prince of persia
red steel 2
madden
fifa
fight night
nhl
No More Heroes
sims
spore

Namco, Sega, konami, Ubisoft, capcom, squarenix etc have announced they are working on multiple projects but haven't given details yet. im guessing one of segas games will be virtua cop or house of the dead. daytona 3 online would be cool too.
expect surprises in 2007... nintendogs online is a given.
then there's the virtual console.... plenty of stuff coming on wii to keep you busy.

You should give games like mario and metroid a try though. mario might be bright and colorful but the gameplay is some of the best out there. Smash brothers online will be amazing.

I'll be happy if 3 or 4 truly brilliant titles come out next year for the wii.. Im talking about decent multiplayer titles with longlasting gameplay and innovitive or otherwise well crafted controls. I probably dont have time to play much more than that anyway, and its mainly a multiplayed toy for me.

Wii music, and a few other games featuring Mii's would be a good start! (but please sell them separately.. I dont need more controllers)

I hope it lasts. I guess only time will tell. I wish there were more wii sports similar games already out.

Didn't they initially call the telephone a novelty?

:D

...Sure if I was a Nintendo fanboy Metroid Prime 3 and Mario Galaxy/Party could hold me over, but I'm not...

I love this. You've got to be a "fanboy" to enjoy quality games. I suppose if you enjoy Halo you're also a fanboy. What about PS2 / PS3 exclusives? Fanboyism there?

The "console wars" sure bring out the stupidity in people. I feel sorry for anyone who's so close-minded that they can't enjoy a game simply because it's fun. How pathetic.

---Multiplayer---
The online functionality of a game takes VERY little processing power compared to just getting graphics on the screen. Remember, the OLD PC game Quake used to run WITHOUT hardware acceleration, provided multiplayer, and did it all on a 8MB 33Mhz 486...


---Graphics---
With each day that passes, I get more of the feeling that Nintendo severely underpowered the Wii. It really is an overclocked Gamecube with the addition of great Input/Output.

Nintendo should have released its BEST graphics libraries as part of the developer package in order to release the full visual power of the Wii from the start. Instead, I get the feeling they've left developers to roll their own (or use old, and I mean OLD Gamcube libraries).


---Controls---
While we'll continue to be surprised by innovative control schemes for the first year or so, the 'novelty' will start to wear off sometime in 2008. Why? The bulk of publishers will settle in on a core set of control schemes and copycat game mechanics that appear to resonate with consumers (happens with every console). The only way to continue to foster innovation is to get something like Xbox Live Arcade running as soon as possible and rely on Indie developers to push the limits of control/gameplay.

the line up above looks promising and should be intresting how the game companies intergrate the controls into the games. I think the true test will be EA Sports and if they can get the motions down like with golf simliar amongest other titles...it will be a solid system

It's this simple. If people keep buying them the games will come and with each new game the wiimote and how it is used will be refined.

If I had to judge it right now, I'd say it's pretty novelty-ish, and I really was hoping it wouldn't be.

The only games I'm looking forward to are the Nintendo made ones (just like GC), and once again, it's become my secondary system to my PS2/PS3.

The amount of games I want to play next year looks like it will stay that way.

Of course, I bought the Wii pretty much ONLY for an online (crosses fingers) SSBM, as I've probably logged hundreds of hours on that game alone on GC.

And even that game will use the GC control, not the Wiimote.

I swear these types of gripes and so forth bother me to no end. I seems that people spend more time complaining on forums like these than actually playing their games.... and the very people complaining half of the time do not own the systems in question.

If you don't like something don't buy it - Period, no one is forcing you to spend your money on anything, the companies will make their money regardless. Leave the Wii, PS3 or 360 on the shelf for someone who really wants one and will appreciate the hard work that was put into developing a machine for ENTERTAINMENT......

My $5 (versus 2 cents)

I swear these types of gripes and so forth bother me to no end. I seems that people spend more time complaining on forums like these than actually playing their games.... and the very people complaining half of the time do not own the systems in question.

)


and you are right kysorsose already mentioned we complain about financials of a game company vs complaining about a game more. We complain about stats console vs console vs playing any games on the system. In fact most members here complain that this processor is more powerful than the next console before deciding on the system and when they get the system they leave it in the box and still complain about it They complain about how many cents/share a company game console makes per quarter than any game.

When the Nintendo DS first came out people called it a novelty... 30 million+ units later it is the greatest handheld (with the greatest library of games) ever made. I hope the Wii is the same.

Ok, so here's the deal. . . my wife hates video games. Hates 'em with a passion. She thinks they're stupid and game consoles are a waste of money, etc. Enter the Wii. My son and I both got Wii consoles for Christmas. We set up our accounts and made some Miis. Each Mii looked just like us! That was not only cool, but funny as all get out once we started playing Wii Sports.

About two frames into bowling, my wife said "This is the best game console ever made." THIS type of statement, ladies and gentlemen, is what the Big N was after. This type of sentiment. She and I went a few rounds in boxing and that was a blast. We were both feeling some of the exertion required in playing that game! She was incredibly impressed with how responsive the Wiimote was to movement, how well it synched with the console, and how easy it was to play the games. Literally, just pick it up and play.

I've been playing Red Steel, Rayman Raving Rabbids, Zelda, Trauma Center, Wii Sports, and Elebits today at length. IMHO, Nintendo hit it outta the park with this console. In one day, I've enjoyed this console a heckuva lot more than my PS3. Guess what? I played through Resistance and now what???? Sit on my butt and wait for Motorstorm and Lair, that's what! The Wii has so many FUN games out right now that it's just plain silly! Unlike a previous poster misconstrued, the Wii isn't relegated only to mini-games. Red Steel isn't a mini-game - neither is Splinter Cell Double Agent, COD3, Madden, etc.

We've already got the 360 and the PS3 for bad ass processing power and between 720p-1080p graphics. I don't think a third super console would have been a viable choice for Nintendo. This game system is VERY well designed. The controllers are awesome and the game play is completely engaging. I don't think we're looking at a fad here with the controls. I think we're looking at Evolution (a reminder: Sony seemed to think so, hence the Sixaxis).

I can't believe anybody who's actually played the Wii can knock it. My entire family gets in on these games and that's reason enough to return to play them over and over again. It's a little thing called family - this console let's us play some really engaging games together as a family - not an online clan or a solo player campaign. Truth be told, if I'm going to play any game online, I'm looking to Xbox Live for the real quality experience. Until somebody can top that service, I'm not considering "online" capabilities in my other choices for games or consoles. Nobody's been able to touch MS on this one.

Prior to getting the Wii, I've been plowing through Gears of War on single player campaign on the Insane mode. I've been engrossed in that game. All I can tell is that it was a blast to play hide and seek with a capture gun and tear a house apart looking for Elebits! That's precisely what I like about the Wii. It gives me options. I can play a bunch of fun mini-games or I can play a story-like game with single/multi-player campaigns. It has a whole lot to offer not only a serious gamer like myself, but it is completely enchanting to a decided (until today) non-gamer like my wife.

Ok, so here's the deal. . . my wife hates video games. Hates 'em with a passion. She thinks they're stupid and game consoles are a waste of money, etc. Enter the Wii.
About two frames into bowling, my wife said "This is the best game console ever made." THIS type of statement, ladies and gentlemen, is what the Big N was after. This type of sentiment. She and I went a few rounds in boxing and that was a blast. We were both feeling some of the exertion required in playing that game! She was incredibly impressed with how responsive the Wiimote was to movement, how well it synched with the console, and how easy it was to play the games. Literally, just pick it up and play


EXACTLY!!!
My wife hates video games with a passion. After I bought the Wii for my son, the only reason she wasn't ready to slit my throat in my sleep was bceause I told her about the fact that you have actual body movement to play many of the games. She was skeptical, but accepting.

Flash forward to today... she's sinking putts & serving to her Wii opponent, smiling as the kids are breathing heavily after a good boxing match. ;)

If a publisher could release a boxing/tennis game that could offer true 1:1 motion, that would definately make the Wii worth it for me. Unfortunately, I'm not sure if it's possible because the Wii already has a hard time with simple motions like Wii sports.
I do think that Wii Sports Boxing is almost unplayable, but I don't think that your statement about the Wii having a hard time with simple motions can be applied to any of the other games in Sports. Chalk it up to the programming on that game, and since it was developed they have created better tools for programming the controls.

With the technology in the Wii, I don't think it has enough processing power to enable online play for these type of games.
As Gamedev123 said, online capability has very little to do with the processing power. The DS has online play and it's nowhere near the power of the Wii.

While we'll continue to be surprised by innovative control schemes for the first year or so, the 'novelty' will start to wear off sometime in 2008. Why? The bulk of publishers will settle in on a core set of control schemes and copycat game mechanics that appear to resonate with consumers (happens with every console).
I think that Nintendo will continue to push the envelope, they're very good at that. Other companies will either have to keep up to sell games or they will become frustrated trying to do so and give up on the Wii. Then Nintendo's only hope would be the indie developers you spoke of.

When the Nintendo DS first came out people called it a novelty... 30 million+ units later it is the greatest handheld (with the greatest library of games) ever made. I hope the Wii is the same.
Gotta agree that I was not a believer in the DS (still don't own one, wanted a PSP but never bought one due to lack of games), but it has been a huge success. Nintendo really seems to know what they're doing right now.

Totally agree with Irunnoft. I've seen exactly the same reactions from my girlfriend, my mum and dad, and several of my (non gameplaying) collegues.

Its never going to match Xbox Live for online play, because its been designed from the ground up for getting around a big screen with your pals and having fun.

From what I've seen, I think its going to be a roaring success, and theres no need to alienate hardcore gamers if Nintendo can get some heavyweight titles out there.

Never been so immedietly impressed with a console ever.

Never been so immedietly impressed with a console ever.


If I had to summarize my Wii experience and distill it down to one sentence, I couldn't have said it better myself, Goldenbone. Nomad, you and I seem to have had a similar experience not only from our perspective, but also from decidedly 'non-gamer' perspectives.

I'm not a console fanboy by any stretch of the imagination. I have all three next-gen consoles. The PS3 and the 360 are in one arena (online gaming, pushing the graphics envelope, etc.) and the Wii is in a totally different arena of it's own creation. I applaud Nintendo for creating an entirely new arena for us to play in. This console just continues to blow me away.

I'm about to head out and brave the "Day After Christmas" insanity to return a TV to CC and exchange it for another. All the time, I'm going to be biding my time until I can return home, hook up my Wii and begin playing again! I can't wait to get back home and play some more! Even though they're calling for snow here in the mountains of NC, my son and I have a baseball game scheduled. . . Wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!!!!!!!

Just a couple of points observations...
1) Many people can relate to stories about how mom/wife/grandparent who never played or liked games fell in love with Wii sports. I agree that this was one of Nintendo's main goals and they have succeeded. There is no doubt that the Wii is fun and offers entertainment opportunity for just about everyone. The question that follows is this: Will mom/wife/grandparent suddenly become game enthusiasts and be checking the stores to buy the newest releases or will they just be more likely to join in when the gamers in the family fire up the Wii?

2) I also see alot of people whose praise for the Wii is based on statements like "I already have a PS3/XBOX 360 for impressive graphics and/or online games; the Wii offers something unique and different." What I wonder is how many people would be satisfied with the Wii if they did not have the PS3/360 to scratch that itch for hi-tech/HD/online gaming?

I guess what I'm thinking is that the question should not be "Is the Wii a novelty?" but rather "Can the Wii exist as a primary video game console that satisfies the needs of hardcore as well as casual gamers across a wide spectrum of tastes and preferences?" or, if you prefer, "Will the Wii establish itself as a dominant player in the existing video game market or will it create its own space in a different type of entertainment market?"

Personally, I think the Wii is alot of fun. It has been designed well, marketed well, and has alot of potential for profit and success. However, it is so different from the other systems that I don't see it attracting the same type of third party development. Look around at all the talk lately of exclusive games and take note of the talk of MGS 4, DMC 4 going to 360 or the release of once exclusives such as Fatal Inertia, Assassin's Creed, and Virtua Fighter 5 going to PS3 and 360. Notice that it almost accepted as a given that the Wii is not a contender for any of these titles? Even Nintendo refers to Wii as "new-generation" not "next-generation." I think that for Wii to sustain itself long-term, it will have to continue to emphasize its uniqueness and play to its strengths. While that will increase its chances of long-term success, I think it will also move it farther and farther from the mainstream videogame market and create its own niche. And I'm not so sure that wasn't Nintendo's plan all along...

We bought a Wii for my sister in laws home and gave it to them XMas eve. Again a long day of playing... Wii Sports.

I believe the Wii is going to have a long term software problem. The fact is using the Wiimote is what makes it special and honestly you do not need more than a game or two.

A few games into the system non-gamers are going to realize: I don't need anymore games to have fun, I have Wiisports and another party game.

I do not think the Wii is a gimmick, but its not a traditional console really. Its one of those motion sensing game systems the Wiimote rips off, (Baseball, Bowling, Tennis... remarkably Wii Sports like!) People have fun with them but its not like you need another game that does something similar. Wii sports will be entertaining people years from now... and that means less game sold in the future.

We bought a Wii for my sister in laws home and gave it to them XMas eve. Again a long day of playing... Wii Sports.

I believe the Wii is going to have a long term software problem. The fact is using the Wiimote is what makes it special and honestly you do not need more than a game or two.

A few games into the system non-gamers are going to realize: I don't need anymore games to have fun, I have Wiisports and another party game.

I do not think the Wii is a gimmick, but its not a traditional console really. Its one of those motion sensing game systems the Wiimote rips off, (Baseball, Bowling, Tennis... remarkably Wii Sports like!) People have fun with them but its not like you need another game that does something similar. Wii sports will be entertaining people years from now... and that means less game sold in the future.
I don't agree with that. People will get tired of the wii sports games not being in-depth enough and then will enter the in-depth ones. Not talking about more "complicated", just more to them, more than a whopping 3 innings in baseball and not controlling the fielders, etc... And there are probably a lot of types of games which could be fun which nobody ahs dreamed up yet. I don;t know how pool is on wii play, but a pool game could be fun, I would think. And some type of game we probably have no clue about until Nintendo announces it.

I specifically referred to non gamers. These people are not interested in 18 round sof golf or playing a season of Football. They are the pick up a Wii people who do not think of consoles. They just do not notice anything wrong with the simple games if Wii sports or Rayman or Monkeyball. And they are not going to suddenly change. They find the shallow games ideal.

I had similar thoughts in another thread. I'm actually kind of glad you can't get em right now so I don't buy one impulsively. At 250 bucks, I really think it is overpriced for what it is. I feel that for what they contain/can do, the other 2 consoles are much better bargains (especially the ps3). I'll wait a bit for the hype to wear off and maybe get one. I will say though, I got the DS for Christmas and what great system it is!

I've had one since launch. My experience echoes those across the web and here. Non-game playing relatives can suss the Wii in a way that they cannot or chose not to do with other consoles. My six year-old and I play Zelda. My wife and I play Elebits. Me all play Rayman and Wii Sports. I just got Madden '07 yesterday. It's just FUN. Do some titles lack depth? Yes...by design. I can play Wii Sports or Rayman for five, ten or fifteen minutes....or I can play Zelda for HOURS.

When I downloaded the demo for Lost Planet onto my 360...a friend and I was literally stunned by the control scheme picture. It's a good game...but that graphic was intimidating, at first. Same for Splinter Cell: DA. That doesn't mean I don't enjoy Marvel:UA on my 360...but it's a different experience. The Xbox lets me play with strangers and maybe a couple of friends...the Wii lets me play with my family and any friends about.

Where Nintendo continually falls down is online...and I suspect that will continue to be their Achilles heel. But onlike Sony, who's coming with a knife to the Xbox 360 Gun Fight, Nintendo at least doesn't pretend to be competing with Xbox Live.

Suprisingly fun Xmas moment: we got a VcamNow (http://www.hasbro.com/tiger/default.cfm?page=vcamnow) for my daughter for Christmas this year. It takes an SD card for storage. It was a pleasant surprise to be able to pop the card out of the Wii, into her camera and then back again to watch the videos and pictures she'd shot through the day with literally no thought at all.

I think the greatest advantage from Nintendo viewpoint "IS" the non-HD graphics. Lets be honest here, to truly take advantage of the 360 or PS3 you need an HDTV. A lot of people are buying these systems and are paying for features they can't utilize. Gears of War and Resistance don't look near as good on my parents 27" RCA TV, as they do on my Panny Plasma.

We bought a Wii for my sister in laws home and gave it to them XMas eve. Again a long day of playing... Wii Sports.

I believe the Wii is going to have a long term software problem. The fact is using the Wiimote is what makes it special and honestly you do not need more than a game or two.

A few games into the system non-gamers are going to realize: I don't need anymore games to have fun, I have Wiisports and another party game.

I do not think the Wii is a gimmick, but its not a traditional console really. Its one of those motion sensing game systems the Wiimote rips off, (Baseball, Bowling, Tennis... remarkably Wii Sports like!) People have fun with them but its not like you need another game that does something similar. Wii sports will be entertaining people years from now... and that means less game sold in the future.

Yeah, thats kind of what I was getting at when I said 3 or 4 good multiplayer games a year will be fine for me. I've got a gaming PC for strategy games and other Mouse/keyboard-centric gamestyles, and an Xbox360 for more traditional (and online) play.

Dont know how well it'll stand Nintendo, but it suits my pocket just fine. When I think about it, 75% of my time with the gamecube was spent playing monkeyball 2 minigames with my pals (I mourn the current version however).

Bottom line is that Nintendo have wandered straight out of the box with this one, and applying comparisons with the two current silicon juggernaughts is almost pointless. Thats not to say they cant satisfy hardcore gamers, but its almost as a bonus.. Im sure casual gamers can more than pay their wages for a good few years if they sell enough hardware.

Bring on Wii Music, Wii Dance, Wii Art, Wii Race, Wii Shoot, Wii Circus, Wii DJ, and Wii Fight. Those titles (Imaginary or otherwise ;)) would probably do me for the duration of its lifespan.

I think the greatest advantage from Nintendo viewpoint "IS" the non-HD graphics. Lets be honest here, to truly take advantage of the 360 or PS3 you need an HDTV. A lot of people are buying these systems and are paying for features they can't utilize. Gears of War and Resistance don't look near as good on my parents 27" RCA TV, as they do on my Panny Plasma.

Sure doesn't look near as good, but it still looks good, still looks next-gen.

My cousin thought Resistance looked amazing on his 25" TV at 480i.
Of course he agreed it looked better on my HDTV.

Bottom line is that Nintendo have wandered straight out of the box with this one, and applying comparisons with the two current silicon juggernaughts is almost pointless.
Yes, comparing it to the competition is pretty pointless, but there is an apt comparison. The DS.

It's not so much a novelty as it is a niche. But that's not necessarily a bad thing.

The Wii is hardly a novelty. I don't even have the strength to argue this point but it was said about the DS too and the DS kicked everyone's butt.

I have a similar experience to a lot of the posters here. I brought the Wii to my wifes familys xmas where there were about 70 people of all ages, gamers and non-gamers alike. EVERYONE played that thing and had a blast! My wife absolutely abhors video games and I cant get her to stop playing! Needless to say I probably sold 20 Wii's that day at least. Now, what that means to me (and you) is that there will now be more sold Wii consoles out there. What that means to deveolpers is that there is a larger market to sell games to (and cheaper to develop for). In turn that means more and potentially better and innovative games for me and everyone else. Which leads to more consoles sold etc etc etc. It is a virtuous cycle. Nintendo hit it on the head with this system. PLAYING IS BELIEVING! If you have not played it you are doing yourself a disservice. I would wager to say that you cant NOT have fun playing at least the Wii sports game that comes with it. And watching my entire family having that much fun for the entire day was worth the $400+ (with controllers and nunchucks). ;)

I have a similar experience to a lot of the posters here. I brought the Wii to my wifes familys xmas where there were about 70 people of all ages, gamers and non-gamers alike. EVERYONE played that thing and had a blast! My wife absolutely abhors video games and I cant get her to stop playing! Needless to say I probably sold 20 Wii's that day at least. Now, what that means to me (and you) is that there will now be more sold Wii consoles out there. What that means to deveolpers is that there is a larger market to sell games to (and cheaper to develop for). In turn that means more and potentially better and innovative games for me and everyone else. Which leads to more consoles sold etc etc etc. It is a virtuous cycle. Nintendo hit it on the head with this system. PLAYING IS BELIEVING! If you have not played it you are doing yourself a disservice. I would wager to say that you cant NOT have fun playing at least the Wii sports game that comes with it. And watching my entire family having that much fun for the entire day was worth the $400+ (with controllers and nunchucks). ;)

I agree that the Wii will appeal to lots of people who would never buy a console, but I am not sure how much that will translate into future game sales. The hardcore gamer will surely buy (hell, even pre-order) many of the new games that will come out for the Wii, but will the casual gamer?

I guess we will have to wait and see.

BTW, I am not saying it is just a novelty, just wondering how many games are going to be sold later. Seems like many would be happy with sports, wario, and mario (when is mario coming out anyway?)

Like with the 360, how GoW sold big, I don't think we will see any single titles on the Wii that will be bought by large percentages of the installed base. (except of course for wario & mario)

Come Xmas 2007, the Wii will REALLY, REALLY need an ORIGINAL interactive puzzle game, of Tetris/Bejeweled-level quality... One that fully utilizes the Wii controller, and is virtually unportable to any other system (without a dedicated controller for that system). Even better if it includes online multiplayer and local multiplayer.

In fact, such a game could propel the Wii to an unassailable position as the #1 console of this generation.

...don't quote me on this.

Have Nintendo brainwashed everyone into being concerned about non gamers?

As gamers, why exactly would we want our grandparents, wives, little sisters and all the "non gamers" playing dumbed down video games on our consoles? They might enjoy playing your Wii but will not buy their own, because they're non gamers.

Who cares about non gamers.

I wany deep and immersive games for myself, not simple games my grandma wants to play.

I feel the Wii will get tiresome real soon. Nintedo will continue to prioritize their handhelds over their consoles, subsequently leaving gamers with long waits between good 1st party games.

I'll buy a Wii in 5 years when all of Nintendo's first party games (Honestly, they're the only reason to buy a Nintendo console) are already out and cheap.

The future remains to be seen, but I predict Nintendo in 3rd once again after the initial shine of the salt & pepper shaker gameplay wears off.

Have Nintendo brainwashed everyone into being concerned about non gamers?

As gamers, why exactly would we want our grandparents, wives, little sisters and all the "non gamers" playing dumbed down video games on our consoles? They might enjoy playing your Wii but will not buy their own, because they're non gamers.

Who cares about non gamers.
I know more than a few people who would not normally have bought a console who want the Wii. Since the non-gamer market is larger than the gamer market, I would care about the non-gamers.

And they release games for gamers also, so who loses here? Every game doesn't have to be immersive, you know. A short game of something where you don't have to allocate a weekend to advance 1 level is nice also.

Who cares about non gamers.
I also believe there are a lot of former gamers out there. People who were really into gaming back in the NES, Super NES, and maybe even the Playstation/N64 days. Gaming changed and there were fewer and fewer games that appealed to different audiences. I still bought the XBox, but after Halo rarely played anything on it at all. Eventually I bought a Gamecube, and though it didn't have many games there were enough for me because the first party games that were available were great.

I own a 360 now, but only because Amazon had that amazing deal, had the console for a month and just bought my first game this morning. On the other hand I looked forward to the Wii all year long, waited in line for a few short hours on launch day and have had a ton of fun with the games. I'm sure I will enjoy games on 360 (Gears of War is pretty cool), but I have no doubt that I will play the Wii more, as has been the case so far.

I still bought the XBox, but after Halo rarely played anything on it at all.

Me niether and that's the main reason I wasn't that interested in the 360. Granted the 360 a lot more going for it as it can double as a media center.

Eventually I'll probably pick up a Wii. I consider myself a lite gamer nowadays and the Wii appeals to me in that respect. Something that is fun that I can pick up and play for a short while. I'm also tired of the standard console controller and the Wii of course offers up a new gaming experience in that respect. Unfortunately I've yet to even play a Wii so I'm trusting you guys that it's all that.

The future remains to be seen, but I predict Nintendo in 3rd once again after the initial shine of the salt & pepper shaker gameplay wears off.

I don't see it. The PS3 is really having a dog of a launch and I'm thinking Sony is going to have to drop the price considerably (and thus lose even more money) before the masses start buying it. Sony locked themselves into blu-ray and will have to pay the price for awhile. If they would of released a DVD based PS3 for $300 and in greater quantities for the holidays they would of had a much more successful launch.

But back to the Wii: Having not played one I can't really tell you if the controller is a novelty or not. However based on the feedback it's more or less a revolutionary way of playing games that is appealing to both gamers and non-gamers. If they can nail the FPS genre and keep up the strong first-party titles I see the Wii being the number one "next generation" console.

The Wii is hardly a novelty. I don't even have the strength to argue this point but it was said about the DS too and the DS kicked everyone's butt.

This is a common misconception. The DS has less than a 50% lead over its competition, the PSP.

Sure thats huge and its bound to get bigger... but lets be honest here. The GB series never has less than 95% of the market. The DS has given up many times the marketshare the GB series ever did.

The competiton is $70 more at least (One version is $120 more) and yet its been the strongest competition Nintendo has ever had in the handheld arena.

When the DS hits 95% market share then it will be "kicking butt" like the GB series. For now its being carried by its huge lead in Japan. (It leads everywhere but by significantly smaller margins outside of Japan)

I haven't looked into the DS, but I would bet that a large number of people who bought the PSP did not own handheld systems previously (not saying most, but a healthy number). Percentages don't really tell much of a story, I'd be more interested in install base numbers and how they relate to other handhelds at the same time in their histories.

Having said that it is true that people thought the DS was a mistake/novelty/what have you (including myself), but it has done much better than was ever anticipated.

GBA VS DS Week by week in N.A.:


1 GBA Jun 01 1,031,000 1,031,000 DS Nov 04 542,000 542,000
2 GBA Jul 01 427,500 1,458,500 DS Dec 04 843,000 1,385,000
3 GBA Aug 01 392,500 1,851,000 DS Jan 05 172,000 1,557,000
4 GBA Sep 01 384,500 2,235,500 DS Feb 05 153,500 1,710,500
5 GBA Oct 01 335,500 2,571,000 DS Mar 05 155,500 1,866,000
6 GBA Nov 01 1,094,500 3,665,500 DS Apr 05 74,000 1,940,000
7 GBA Dec 01 2,024,000 5,689,500 DS May 05 64,000 2,004,000
8 GBA Jan 02 202,000 5,891,500 DS Jun 05 127,500 2,131,500
9 GBA Feb 02 484,000 6,375,500 DS Jul 05 93,000 2,224,500
10 GBA Mar 02 591,500 6,967,000 DS Aug 05 117,000 2,341,500
11 GBA Apr 02 361,500 7,328,500 DS Sep 05 188,000 2,529,500
12 GBA May 02 372,500 7,701,000 DS Oct 05 153,000 2,682,500
13 GBA Jun 02 648,000 8,349,000 DS Nov 05 417,000 3,099,500
14 GBA Jul 02 384,000 8,733,000 DS Dec 05 1,207,500 4,307,000
15 GBA Aug 02 311,500 9,044,500 DS Jan 06 179,500 4,486,500
16 GBA Sep 02 322,500 9,367,000 DS Feb 06 170,500 4,657,000
17 GBA Oct 02 361,000 9,728,000 DS Mar 06 208,000 4,865,000
18 GBA Nov 02 1,420,000 11,148,000 DS Apr 06 156,500 5,021,500
19 GBA Dec 02 2,533,500 13,681,500 DS May 06 165,000 5,186,500
20 GBA Jan 03 308,500 13,990,000 DS Jun 06 670,000 5,856,500
21 GBA Feb 03 331,000 14,321,000 DS Jul 06 426,000 6,282,500
22 GBA Mar 03 826,000 15,147,000 DS Aug 06 314,000 6,596,500
23 GBA Apr 03 495,500 15,642,500 DS Sep 06 456,000 7,052,500
24 GBA May 03 449,500 16,092,000 DS Oct 06 407,000 7,459,500
25 GBA Jun 03 768,000 16,860,000 DS Nov 06 1,037,500 8,497,000

GBA by Eight MILLION units. Gaming is growing, especially the handheld sector. The DS should by all accounts be ahead of the GBA, not at about half the units sold in the same time period.

In Japan the DS is ahead by 4 Million over the same period further cementing the DS as the Japanese system of choice theory.

The DS is a success for sure, but its not a success of GBA proportions yet.

N.A. 21 weeks from release for both PSP and DS:

PSP Nov 06 465,500 6,460,500 DS Jul 06 426,000 6,282,500

We bought a Wii for my sister in laws home and gave it to them XMas eve. Again a long day of playing... Wii Sports.

I believe the Wii is going to have a long term software problem. The fact is using the Wiimote is what makes it special and honestly you do not need more than a game or two.

A few games into the system non-gamers are going to realize: I don't need anymore games to have fun, I have Wiisports and another party game.

I do not think the Wii is a gimmick, but its not a traditional console really. Its one of those motion sensing game systems the Wiimote rips off, (Baseball, Bowling, Tennis... remarkably Wii Sports like!) People have fun with them but its not like you need another game that does something similar. Wii sports will be entertaining people years from now... and that means less game sold in the future.

Just like we only ever really needed Pong. I don't follow this line of thinking at all in every facet of life people like "new" and "fresh". This is just trying to find some "wayout there reason" to rain on ones parade.

Have Nintendo brainwashed everyone into being concerned about non gamers?

As gamers, why exactly would we want our grandparents, wives, little sisters and all the "non gamers" playing dumbed down video games on our consoles? They might enjoy playing your Wii but will not buy their own, because they're non gamers.

Who cares about non gamers.

I wany deep and immersive games for myself, not simple games my grandma wants to play.

I feel the Wii will get tiresome real soon. Nintedo will continue to prioritize their handhelds over their consoles, subsequently leaving gamers with long waits between good 1st party games.

I'll buy a Wii in 5 years when all of Nintendo's first party games (Honestly, they're the only reason to buy a Nintendo console) are already out and cheap.

The future remains to be seen, but I predict Nintendo in 3rd once again after the initial shine of the salt & pepper shaker gameplay wears off.

I think there are a few psych reasons:

1. You get your wife playing and enjoying you can perhaps play more often and not lead your marriage towards divorce.

2. If all the non-gamers play to, your not the nerd so much anymore and instead of sitting around and talking all day or playing Parcheesi you now get to play video games with them instead!

A couple of reasons it's good to bring them in. Just because they aren't traditional gamers I still feel they are family and friends that you like. Or are you saying "I don't really like any of them, I'm an introvert, I wish they all would go away so I can play my game?". Yeah if your like that the Wiii is a threat to that person.

This is a common misconception. The DS has less than a 50% lead over its competition, the PSP.

That's true...in hardware sales. In software sales and sell-through, the PSP is going horribly. The DS has several titles that, by themselves, have sold more than the entire PSP library in toto. Sony isn't making much money on the software licensing, and that's where the money is truly made on a console.

To date, the PSP has one game that has sold a million or more copies: Wipeout Pure. The DS has had thirteen of them so far (Brain Age has hit 8 million world-wide, Nintendogs 7 million, New Super Mario Brothers 6.7 million, etc), and most of those have sold at least half of that number in the US.

I have three friends who own them, but only use them for media playback or not at all. They actually all went and purchased DS Lites for games. Sony's relative lack of enthusiasm at pushing the PSP as a game machine has resulted in a unit with a terrible attach rate, compared to the DS.

And the DS continues to increase it's lead. In November, Nintendo sold 918,000 DSes and 661,000 GBA SPs, compared with 412,000 PSPs. Sony's constant bungling of the PSP makes it worse. The PS1 emulation offerings sounded like a great idea....forcing you to use a PS3 to get them? Not so much.

This same idea applies to the Wii. Attach rate for games is much higher on the Wii than on the PS3 (but not the 360, with it's one year lead). Nintendo will be successful if they can capitalize on that attach rate and continue to offer both games that appeal to a general audience and games that appeal to the hardcore.

I thought I would chime in on this debate. I have always been a gamer ever since I was young starting out with the Atari 2600 in my early days, all the way through the SNES/Genesis war at the end of high school. That said, when I went off to college, I got more involved with girls, partying, etc, and didn't game at all for many years, and missed all of the 32-bit systems & the N64.

I got back into gaming a few years out of college with a purchase of the Dreamcast, but sold that off after a year, and didn't really get back into gaming until the Xbox. I have pretty much been a steady gamer since then, and now own a 360, Wii, and a DS-Lite. Even though I game semi-consistently these days, and have multiple systems, I rarely have the time or inclination to pick up games that require hours upon hours of my time, and that are complicated and take a siginificant effor to learn all of the buttons and the controller. Enter the Wii.

Ever since I picked up the Wii at launch, I have played it almost exclusively, even with my Xbox 360, Live Gold Subscription, and Gears of War sitting in my entertainment center. I love Gears, being online and all, but sometimes it's a hassle to get online, etc. With the Wii, I just turn it on and play for a quick 15-30 minutes, have A LOT of fun, and it's easy, no hassle or stress at all.

My point to all of this is that everyone keeps talking about how the Wii is built and garnered to pull in non-gamers, which I think is great. That said, I think people are missing the boat in that there is a large segment of gamers out there that are early adopters, pick up the new systems, etc, that just don't have a lot of time to game these days with families, work, other interests, etc, and get game time in when they can. For me, the Wii is fantastic in this regard as I can crank it up, play 30 minutes, have a great time, and go about my day. I really think people are overlooking this.

I've got to think that there are A LOT of other gamers like me that love the 720P graphics, have an HDTV, surround sound, etc, but just don't have that much time to game, and sometimes get turned off by the time committment some games have as well as their complexity. For me, the Wii is definitely a hit, and I don't see it as a novelty or something that will wear off over time.

Just like we only ever really needed Pong. I don't follow this line of thinking at all in every facet of life people like "new" and "fresh".

Gamers want new and fresh. Thats why there are 7 console versions of Zelda, two Halo and 5 or so GTA. You want the next one...

Casual folks though... they want to spend time together and swing the Wiimote. They are the same types of people who have been playing Chess, Checkers, UNO, monoply and poker for their entire lives. Same games over and over just like tens of millions of families like them.

You cannot tell me the board game/card crowd cares that Wii Sports 2,3 and 4 are coming. Again they spent their entire lived breaking out the same damn monopoly box over and over to spend time together.

I think you are trying to blur consumers more than you should. Families want family friendly entertainment and they are not looking for the next revision. (Unless you count all those versions of custom Monopoly)

Yeah they might not buy as much, but they'll still pick things up a helluva a lot more then someone that doesn't own the system at all. lol

I just don't really know where you are going with the idea really, definately high on speculation and yeah they aren't hardcore so they are not buying a few per month. But the Wii has profit on everything, so anything sold is better then nothing sold at all. They still became a positive Nintendo consumer the day they bought the wii. Casual gamers are people to! lol

The DS should by all accounts be ahead of the GBA, not at about half the units sold in the same time period.

Yeah, there were a couple of missteps on Nintendos part. Well, maybe not missteps, but definitely strategies that did not serve them as well in hindsight.

(1) "Gameboy" moniker. The DS was initial seen as a stopgap system since it didn't have the Gameboy name. Folks kept expecting a new system to be released...

(2) GBA represented dramatic performance leap above the Gameboy Color. The performance difference between the DS and the GBA did not appear as dramatic.

(3) GBA SP represented a dramatic redesign of the original GBA handheld and saw many players buying a second GBA to have the MUCH smaller form factor, rechargeable batteries and backlight. DS Lite is primarily a cosmetic refresh with slight improvements in screen quality.

(4) GBA had more focused marketing initially (DS found its marketing legs with Brain Games and Nintendogs)

(5) GBA had no real competition for several years

(6) DS was directly competing with GBA for first two years of release, before strongly DS branded games came out and the "DS gameplay difference" was firmly established

If Nintendo stays true to form, in late 2007 we'll see a DS Lite system redesign or a completely new DS (Wii free?). Most likely with motion sensing, 2x processor capability, rumble and wireless download of GBA games from a Wii channel (makes no sense to keep the GBA cart port since it takes up so much space and since most GBA games are selling USED now).

PSPs reliance on 'rich media' games and optical storage, while initially a key differentiator, has turned out to be a liability. While using optical media, it will never have battery life approaching the DS. And never achieve a comparable form factor.

If Sony is smart, the PSP2 will drop UMD, switch to mem cards, integrate motion sensing and touch screen, and be available by Xmas 2007. There is no other winning path. The PSPs current design is a dead end for them and a step backwards in terms of gameplay functionality. But Sony won't do this... Instead, they'll keep UMD and try to differentiate with non-games related media functionality, all the while subsidizing the price of the console to the tune of $50-$100 per system ... they'll be crushed by Nintendo in one direction, and ALL the portable media players in the other direction.

Questions about Nintendo's IMMEDIATE FUTURE as a going concern, having been 'answered' on the console front by the Wii, will have trickle-down effect to the handheld line. Expect additional publisher support and consumer confidence. All exacerbating the PSPs problems.

Hmmn... Maybe we should get back on topic here? ;-)

You cannot tell me the board game/card crowd cares that Wii Sports 2,3 and 4 are coming. Again they spent their entire lived breaking out the same damn monopoly box over and over to spend time together.


These folks do care. These are the same people who update their cars every few years because the auto companies market strongly to them. Same with clothing, home electronics, personal electronics, etc...

Board games haven't traditionally been marketed with heavy print, radio and TV campaigns, so breakout hits are usually sold through word of mouth or in-store adverts (posters, end caps, etc) until they achieve critical mass. The 10 or so games that do receive heavy seasonal advertising (in the U.S.) can't really change their mechanics substantially, or they'd be different games altogether (Battleship, Monopoly, Trivial Pursuit, Scrabble, Sorry, Trouble, Simon, Connect 4, etc).

Wii Sports is a 'brand' rather than just a game. So it can change itself and market to the same casual crowd. Same goes for Trivial Pursuit, since it can offer new trivia packs. But 99% of other board games only get a cosmetic refresh...

I expect Ma and Pa Kettle to make a new game purchase 1x per year for an attach rate of AT LEAST 4 games per Wii, per casual housefold, over the life of the Wii. This number could increase substantially with proper use of inexpensive niche-market Casual Games sold over a Wii channel.

To met its simple...I can buy a 60gb PS3 in every store I go to...the Wii I can not.

You know why I bought more xbox than ps2 games last generation - multi platform titles looked better on it.

I think the wii titles will be cheaper to make and harder to port - this will be good for them.

PS3 and 360 are going to be a fight of the exclusives - which sony will stomp the **** out of the 360 when FFXIII, MGS4, etc come out....Halo 3 and GoW 2 just don't stack up in comparison for units sold.

I don't have a ps3 yet, because the launch titles are recompiled EA crap and a shooter - let me know when a killer title comes out and ill go buy one.

BTW if you have a wii you really should get zelda - I've been playing games since 1977 and it ranks in the best ones EVER made for any platform. In comparison FFXII, DQ8 are merely very good games, not best ever.

Nintendo screws itself by competing heavily with 3rd party developers (can you imgaine your B level game coming out the same day as a Pokemon? omg)

Sony is starting to, but doesn't have the mass yet.

MS is doing the same thing as they do on PCs - here is the base, now go make money off it...very smart.

Wii games that are just ripoff of flash games need to be priced much less than $50...I think they will need tier pricing for the short mini game stuff.

buy them all, have fun - I have for years.

In my opinion, the Wii is powerful enough to satisify the mainstream gamer. Remember, the Wii > XBox > GC > PS2. In fact, compared to a PS2 the Wii is considerably more powerful. Yet, the PS2 was/is powerful enough to satisify the greatest number of home console gamers ever -- and was home to graphics that people still consider fantastic and good enough. Last generation went to the PS2 despite it being the least powerful of the systems. For some reason, people didn't seem so suprised about that as they now are with the Wii versus everyone else issue.

SD resolution rendering on a Wii has the capacity to look extremely good, I simply think most games developed up to this point have treated the Wii more like the GC and haven't really taken advantage of this power. Heck, most GC games didn't take advantage of the GC's power either and looked worst than PS2 games. Star Fox Adventure, as old as it is, is probably the best looking GC game (480p, 16:9 too) followed by Metroid.

The only real graphical advantage the Wii is lacking is HD resolution, which really isn't that important unless you're using a 50"+ HDTV, sit fairly close to the screen, and spend more time gawking at the game than playing it. I love HD movies and TV because I have the setup for such and spend the entire length of the show staring at and admiring the image; when I game, I'm spending more time playing the game and getting immersed than I am looking at the image. Do I want an HD Wii? Absolutely, but it's not a deal breaker for me this generation.

Each generation needs to bring something new to the table that really expands gaming. The SNES brought 6-buttons (yay, arcade fighters!), improved color depth, and enough RAM to make some impressively large "zones" within games. The PS/N64 brought 3D gaming and everything that such entails, with the PS also bringing low-cost, high-capacity CD formats that supported things like streaming audio and full-motion video. The PS2/Xbox/GC brought 3D graphics that actually looked good (seriously, Final Fantasy 7 is ulgy; and the N64 Zeldas are just barely acceptable), DVD support (finally, no 4+ disc RPGs), and in the XBox's case successful online gaming. This generation has HD graphics, motion-sensing, and Blu-ray as the three "new" features. Again, HD isn't yet a deal breaker for the mainstream in my opinion. Unlike the ROM->CD->DVD move, the DVD->BD move is largely unecessary for games assuming people use the PS3's power to do in-game rendering rather than just using a ton of pre-rendered FMVs. The motion-sensing is the only thing that's really new and improves gaming -- honestly, you couldn't do Wii Sports of Elebits on anything but a Wii.

Like all console generations past and future, power isn't the key anyway. It's software. The weakling PS2 is still getting better third-party support than the Wii, and that needs to change if the Wii will end up a primary, hardcore system. I'm the SquareEnix sheep that'll eventually buy a PS3 for Final Fantasy 13, so I know that a single third-party developer can make/break a system. If Nintendo could get mainline Final Fantasy and Metal Gear titles exclusively on the Wii at better than XBox/PS2 graphics, I don't think the average hardcore gamer would complain nor see the need for the HD systems.

Since I doubt that'll happen, this gen. will be like last gen for me - Nintendo/Sony with Nintendo being the primary system and the Sony being used for about 2 games a year when games that actually matter come out (ie. Kingdom Hearts/FF/etc).

(PS. My only real complaint is that Wii games better start using the hardware anti-aliasing that Hollywood supports over Flipper. I expect jaggies on my PS2 and GC, but it's fricken 2006 already Nintendo -- jaggies must die.)

Star Fox Adventure, as old as it is, is probably the best looking GC game (480p, 16:9 too) followed by Metroid.
Resident Evil 4 is widely considered the best looking GC game, and I have to agree with that. Twilight Princess is right up there too I'm sure.

Resident Evil 4 is widely considered the best looking GC game, and I have to agree with that. Twilight Princess is right up there too I'm sure.

Sure, add them to the list. I haven't played RE4 in ages so I forgot about that, and I keep considering Twilight Princess a Wii game and thus never include it any lists that attempt to showcase the GC. They're both good example though. The point I was trying to make, however, is that there are only a handful of GC games that fully utilize the GC hardware and look stunning -- the majority don't. The PS2, on the other hand, has several developers who utilize the hardware to it's fullest. Aslong as the Wii gets the love and attention it needs during development, there will be quality games on it that even the most hardcore gamers will enjoy. The question is, will it? The only way the Wii won't be able to standup to traditional gamers is if game developers treat it as a novelty system and only produce novelty games; the hardware is more than capable of out-classing the multi-million dollar blockbusters of last generation.

For some reason, people didn't seem so suprised about that as they now are with the Wii versus everyone else issue.

Well, to be fair, the real issue isn't the PS/2s relative power to it's competition at the END of its lifecycle, but to it's contemporaries at its launch. The PS/2 was easily the equal of the Dreamcast (itself quite a potent machine...Shenmue and Soul Calibur still impress to this day). The Wii is NOT the equal of the 360 or PS3, by design. Some people confuse pure power with quality.

The fact of the matter is that any console that is being worked on by people who are experienced with it and who have a sufficient amount of art direction can do some amazing things.

Look at God of War, Okami or Shadow of the Colossus for the PS/2, Resident Evil 4, Zelda: Wind Waker, Starfox Adventures and Zelda:Twilight Princess for the Gamecube, for example. Clever art direction coupled with experienced artists, designers and coders make for some compelling visuals. The art direction was far more important on these games than the actual number of polygons being pushed.

Excite Truck is not the sharpest looking racing game out there...but it feels FAST and it's FUN. The graphics are in service to the gameplay, as they should be. Twilight Princess has some amazing visuals that have nothing to do with resolution....they're just pretty to look at. Elebits has clean, simple and fun graphics that complement the gameplay. Katamari Damacy had stylized and very simplistic, even basic, graphics...and yet it is widely considered one of the PS2s best games (and rightfully so).

The single greatest determiner of the Wii's continued success in the market will be it's games, plain and simple.

Software is the most important thing, but the uniqueness of the Wii's controls will be enough for the Wii to succeed - regardless of the success of the PS3 and/or the XBox360. The others' graphics certainly allow for a more "real" visual experience, but that doesn't necessarily make it a more realistic or immersive experience.

XBox Live added a completely new dynamic to gaming with Halo2 or any squad-based game. It made communicating and coordinating an attack with other gamers much more "real" than anything that improved graphics or video could accomplish. The more real, the more immersive, but what you look at or hear are not the only things that determine how real it is. I haven't played a bowling game on the PS2 or 360, but I guarantee it will not come close to the authenticity of Wii Bowling even if they used actual video from a bowling alley.

I happen to think that the last really fun NHL and Madden NFL was circa 1994 and the increasingly more complex "realism" added since then has gradually decreased the fun factor and the dramatically improved video quality and player recognition doesn't offset that loss. I've played all of them since, but my last purchase was Madden '96 and I ended up playing '94 all the time anyway. So take my opinion with that in mind, YMMV.

BTW - I'd love to play a Wii Football game - and I don't care if I can't tell Morten Andersen from Michael Strahan - or if all the players were made up of my Miis.

A brief update...

My daughter (5) made 25 mii's this morning and my wife bowled 10 frames of bowling...neither have ever played games on a console in ANY fashion.

I got in one frame of bowling I think.

If SOs start buying these cause they want them...and not just a gift for J6P...holy crap its gonna be big.

We need to be sure we dont whip our wives asses in games and let their interest blossom...so they will buy us more gaming stuff without the associated furniture penalty purchase.

This is cool...like a interactive flash game imho...which the games should be 19.99 but ill see how it goes - 49.99 for flash games is not gonna fly with me.

My girlfriend told me she wasn't coming home from visiting her family until I had gone and found a wii :eek:

My girlfriend told me she wasn't coming home from visiting her family until I had gone and found a wii :eek:

I got it to turn a buck on eBay (let the bullets fly...) cause I got lucky and found it at Target. Curiosity got the best of me, and I opened it and started messing around. A little later, my fiancee came home and played a bit. We took it over to my parents later that night, and now she doesn't want me to get rid of it. The girl has NEVER touched a video game... EVER. I like being encouraged to play with my toys!!

The Wii has had diminishing returns for me, luckily it was my brother who bought it. I’ve always been a Nintendo person; owned every Nintendo system, and I’ve never owned a Playstation system. But I did buy an xbox for Halo and for me it looks like I’m going to get a 360.

The Wii was really neat at first! But after playing Wii sports, Link, and COD 3 I just don’t think the remote is good enough. I’m not writing them off yet completely because I can’t wait for supersmash and hopefully they will come out with a new Mario Kart.

Just my .02.

Chris

Its had the opposite effect on me. I've found it difficult to go back to playing on a standard controller because I just enjoy having more interaction in my games. Games like Madden, Zelda, and Monkey Ball are just more enjoyable for me and bring me that much more into the game. I can't wait for other games to come out.

The Wii has had diminishing returns for me, luckily it was my brother who bought it. I’ve always been a Nintendo person; owned every Nintendo system, and I’ve never owned a Playstation system. But I did buy an xbox for Halo and for me it looks like I’m going to get a 360.

The Wii was really neat at first! But after playing Wii sports, Link, and COD 3 I just don’t think the remote is good enough. I’m not writing them off yet completely because I can’t wait for supersmash and hopefully they will come out with a new Mario Kart.

Just my .02.

Chris

I suggest you go out and rent Elebits and give that a shot. After the first 15 minutes getting used to the game, it's addictive and amazingly fun. It's also a game that really couldn't have been done on any console besides the Wii, as the remote is absolutely essential to the game's mechanics. Wii Sports and Elebits are really the only two games that absolutely require the new controller.

I'll buy a Wii in 5 years when all of Nintendo's first party games (Honestly, they're the only reason to buy a Nintendo console) are already out and cheap.

The future remains to be seen, but I predict Nintendo in 3rd once again after the initial shine of the salt & pepper shaker gameplay wears off.

I'm a PC gamer-ish and I dont mind skipping the Xbox360 and PS3. My kids are only 18 months plus theres not many exclusive titles to die for. PC games are much more immerse.

So same as you with a different feel for consoles. I do own the Wii because I dont like mashing buttons.

Theres yet another audience the Wii appeals to other than my grandma who are both dead.

I would call the Wii complete with a virtual world helmet.

Does anyone have any numbers on how many of these consoles are hooked up to HDTV's verses SD. Even for households that have a HDTV, i would suspect that a lot of consoles are hooked up to childrens tv's or tvs in a gameroom that may not be HD.
So I suspect that the Wii will not be a fad for the simple fact that most consoles will still be hooked up to SD tv's for quite some time.

I spent less than an hour playing my nephews Wii on a small 20" sd tv and am now madly trying to get one.

Does anyone have any numbers on how many of these consoles are hooked up to HDTV's verses SD. Even for households that have a HDTV, i would suspect that a lot of consoles are hooked up to childrens tv's or tvs in a gameroom that may not be HD.

No such numbers are available for any console. However, it is fairly telling that originally, Nintendo was only planning on selling the component cables for the Wii online...until the day they announced them for sale and HAD THEIR SERVER CRASH UNDER THE LOAD. They sold out within an hour, shifted existing stock and sold out AGAIN. They then announced they would ship them to stores, too...in a few weeks. 3rd party solutions have also arrived.

A game like Wii Sports or Rayman works better with a larger screen...and the Wii tends to be in the living room, where people converge. While the Wii only does 480p, it does support 16:9 and all the installed units my friends have are in the room with the largest TV.

Last night, my daughter again specifically asked to play Wii Sports. We've had the Wii since launch, and it hasn't diminished in appeal to us. Rayman is another game my kids beg to play, as well. Elebits is game that just wouldn't be the same on another console...the controls make the game, pure and simple (and both are not first-party games, btw).

It's not the perfect control scheme for every game. I can't imagine playing Marvel:Ultimate Alliance on the Wii when better alternatives exist...but Zelda:TP's controls feel so natural, I would never want to go back to the gamecube controller to play it.

I suspect the Wii will follow the DS pattern, eventually: lots of ports, lots of games with tacked-on controls...and then true innovation and proofs of concept coupled with understanding of the console's strengths. In that respect, it's shocking that a game as good as Elebits or Rayman was there in the launch window.

I received my Redsteel the other day and the first thing I wanted to do was read the manual for the controls as this part was given the worst review.

I'd have to say that game authors have to rethink how the game will be controlled on the Wii and think how it will work more naturally.

Once they have a "standard" of how to use the controls naturally I think the Wii will be a hit and possibly drive more interesting titles to it.

I would think that Metroid will do just that for FPS on the Wii come March. Nintendo has always led IMHO when it comes to developing control schemes that work.

Its had the opposite effect on me. I've found it difficult to go back to playing on a standard controller because I just enjoy having more interaction in my games. Games like Madden, Zelda, and Monkey Ball are just more enjoyable for me and bring me that much more into the game. I can't wait for other games to come out.

yup - i can't imagine rayman being as much fun on the other consoles.
the game with the choir bunnies nearly broke my friend's sanity with its absurdity. we couldnt get him to stop laughing for a good 15 minutes. no alcohol involved.

i've no doubt that the "deep" games some people are worried about will be here soon enough, and as most of the folk here have one of the other consoles, this almost seems like a non-issue.

Frankly the Wii for me was a gut-instinct purchase. I knew what it was (and what it wasn't) going in, but I saw one on sale online one day and I instinctivelys nagged it. Got an extra set of controllers and Excite Truck, and Red Steel.

I then went and got a GC controller, a GC extension cord for the controller, and a bunch of used (dirt cheap, less than $5 bucks a pop) GC games to play, games that have been widely reviewd as excellent last-gen games (star wars, metroid, etc).

Now, I also own a PS3 60 gig (yes, we whomped the wallet hard pre-xmas). I also ordered a stack of used Xbox and 360 games before xmas.

I still use my 360 all the time...the Wii is a distant second and the PS3 sits basically unused until some more games or BD's come out for it....so thats the scope right now.

The Wii, however, is far more than a fad.....oh my yes. While it doesn't have the horsepower to even hope to compete with..hell, there are xbox 1 games that might not be attainable on the Wii, the simple fact is that the Wii is designed to be an overall experience for non gamers. Gamers who aren't hung up on graphics will enjoy it.

The PS3 and 360 are both "plop on the couch and game till your eyes melt out of your head". The Wii is much more about getting into the game...simpler, sure, but more emphasis on the "doing" of the game.

My wife is enthralled by the Wii......and couldn't care less about the high-tech graphics or ultra-violent gameplay of the 360 or PS3 games.

For me, the Wii will always be a 3rd place system...something to fiddle with on evenings when I'm burned out on 360 or PS3 games, or when I crave something just different....but its hardly a passing fad.

Someday I'll wind up with lots of used Wii games...because each one will have some fun element that makes it worth checking out. Even Red Steel and COD3, with their 480p graphcis and limited textures....the experience itself, the "doing" of the game is what sets it apart from the other systems.

If all you're doing is comparing graphics and framerate, then sure..the Wii shouldn't be on your radar.

hell, there are xbox 1 games that might not be attainable on the Wii,

Quick point: the Gamecube could handle anything the Xbox could put out in terms of power...only the ps/2 lagged behind in terms of speed and ability (being the oldest console). The only issue that stood out was the lack of developers working on it to push it's limits. One only needs to compare Resident Evil 4 on the gamecube to it's lesser cousin on the PS2 to see the difference in power. The Wii is NOT a graphics powerhouse, but it certainly is more powerful than the original Xbox, just not the Xbox 360.

Well, let me say this: I agree that hte Cube should have been able to match if not trump the Xbox, and I also agree that the Wii should be able to do that more soundly...certainly all those extra Mhz mean they can push up the last gen effects.

But they didn't really do it in most 'cube games (a few OEM titles come to mind), but the real shocker is that the first batch of Wii games seem to have taken a back seat to even what the Cube was doing. Excite Truck is, shall we say, an N64+ caliber game (graphically), hardly even up to cube standards.

I mean...compare Excite Truck with the Star Wars games, Double Dash, or the Fzero cube games....

The Wii needs to step up in that department a little bit...I can forgive the over simplistic graphical touches on Wii Sports, but if I'm dropping $50 on a title, I need more than just a 3D control scheme.

But, I agree, its potential sure is there.....

Excite Truck is, shall we say, an N64+ caliber game (graphically), hardly even up to cube standards.

Those are rose-colored glasses you're wearing, my friend. :)

Let's look at Ridge Racer on the 64:
http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/screenshots/5/198475/ridgerace_screen004.jpg

Now here's Excite Truck:
http://www.gamingtrend.com/screenshots/Wii//39363.jpg

I'm curious...do you have component cables for your Wii? Because they make a difference. Excite Truck is pretty nice at a consistent frame-rate, with 16:9 support, 480p, real-time terrain model changes, motion blur, lens flare and so forth.

Now I agree that most of the games we've seen so far have been pretty much Gamecube level games...but we're at launch. I expect we'll see some more impressive work starting with Super Mario Galaxy and other titles later in 2007.

Bump up the resolution on RR N64 and I think Excite Truck looks just like it, with some added reflections on the trucks :)

The terrain sure looks the same...it looks worse than Cube launch titles IMHO.

IMO those two game pcitures could have been on the same console if I wasn't told any better.

Just before x-mas I bought myself a Wii, and I received a DS Lite from a friend over the holidays.

Honestly of the two... I'm more impressed with the DS Lite. I'm actually shocked at how good Mario Kart DS is (easily the best of any other in the series), and playing Metroid Prime: Hunters online has one of the best control schemes for a FPS I've ever used.

I really like the Wii. I have Wii Sports, Rayman, and Zelda. I just completed Zelda the other day.

The whole time I distinctly felt like I was playing a GameCube game. Other than the pointer function for aiming I didn't feel like the Wiimote was used well at all. It would have been nice to actually have to pull the string on the bow and slingshot for instance, and guiding Link's shield with the nunchuck would have been nice as well.

From an immersion standpoint I found I got a lot more "into" Wind Waker's world simply because they DIDN'T try to make it look realistic. I could identify with it like I would The Simpsons or something. Twighlight Princess on the other hand never drew me in because they just don't have the ability to make it real enough, and it wasn't "fake" enough to flip that switch in my imagination to have it take over.

The short of it is... I don't care if the graphics are "last-gen" when the control scheme seems like it simply couldn't be done without the Wiimote. However most of the time I was playing Twilight Princess I kept thinking, "I just spent a lot of money to get a GameCube, and my old one is sitting right over there."

I'm kind of hoping internet enabled games start coming fast and furious, because I think that will set the Wii enough apart from the GameCube to avoid some buyer's remorse.

I have neither a 360, nor a PS3, though I plan on getting a 360 at some point if one of the game shops runs a good trade-in deal on old Xbox systems toward a 360 again. The PS3 makes no sense to me. It's too much money, has next to no games, and seems like almost daily has dev houses jumping ship for the 360.

People seem to over exaggerate games compared to old consoles. Saying that games on the Wii look like N64 games or PS3 games look like PS1 games is something I seem to read all the time.
To quote Dr. Phil, let's get real. The Wii's graphics are not currently comparable to PS3 and 360.
It's a waste of time even talking about Wii graphics. The point of the system is that it provides a new and unique interaction between players and the games.
The first batch of games are designed more on the Cube so we aren't really seeing what the Wii can do. Wii sports is just a give away so you can't really look at that either.
Point is, if you bought the Wii for the graphical abiltities alone you bough the wrong system.
When people come over by my house these days it's not the Xbox or the PS3 anyone is gathering around, it's the Wii.
I walk into the room and find guests at my house all playing the Wii that my kids are showing them. 70 year old grandma is swinging away and having a fun time I may add.

70 year old grandma is swinging away and having a fun time I may add.

Tell her to be careful. She may throw her hip out. :D

Excite Truck Wii looks DRAMATICALLY better than Ridge Racer N64. Saying they are comparable is a major stretch.

Now if you compared Golden Eye 64's graphics to Far Cry Vengence for Wii, you might have something there...

IMO those two game pcitures could have been on the same console if I wasn't told any better.

Well, setting aside the fact that pictures don't look that representative of these games, as their emphasis is speed and movement, the differences are so significant, I can only assume you're not really looking that closely.

Take note of the textures and geometry, for example. Look at the guard rails and the poor anti-aliasing of the graphics. Look at the other cars in that screenshot of RR64. Look at the draw distance. Notice that the road is mostly flat and pretty straight. Now take note of Excite Trucks geometry: you're driving on a low hill on that shot, about to do a jump. There are about two-dozen destructible trees in the shot, all of them with much more detail to their shape than that bridge structure in RR64. Compare the textures of the ground that the truck is driving on to the road or the hill in RR64. Now consider that RR64 was the pinnacle of N64 graphics (and a damned fine game!), while Excite Truck is a launch title.

Compare these blocky Youtube videos:
Here's Ridge Racer 64 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmPwtjxWpKU) and here's Excite Truck (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEx7lf4_cbo). If you think these two games look the same, then I'm guessing you may need to see a doctor for your vision problem. ;)

My point isn't that the Wii is a graphics-powerhouse...it clearly isn't. Anyone who compares Marvel Ultimate Alliance, for example, will see exactly how inferior the Wii's graphics are (which is why I have it on the 360...and that I think the control scheme is unsuited for the Wii). But they do the job just fine.

The terrain sure looks the same...it looks worse than Cube launch titles IMHO.
That depends on which game you compare it to: THPS3, Madden and every game that wasn't from Nintendo were PS/2 ports and it showed, badly. The only two graphically impressive games were Rogue Squadron and Wave Race. And if you compare Rogue Squadron's terrain to Excite Truck's, you'll see a noticeable difference.

Of course, being a launch title doesn't mean that a game has to look bad. Soul Calibur for the Dreamcast is still one of the best looking home console games EVAR. Shenmue, too, for that matter....although that game made the Dreamcast cry and ran up against it's limitations.

Now if you compared Golden Eye 64's graphics to Far Cry Vengence for Wii, you might have something there...

GameDev123, FTW! (and very true, unfortunately).

When the Nintendo DS first came out people called it a novelty... 30 million+ units later it is the greatest handheld (with the greatest library of games) ever made.
Hate to tell you, but the GBA is the greatest handheld (with the greatest library of games) ever made. :)

Most N64 games ran at a resolution of 320x240. Later in the console's life (starting with Turok 2), some games supported 640x480 "high definition". But they required the memory expansion pack, which was packed in with Turok 2.

Probably the best game to compare Excite Truck to would be F-Zero X for the N64. Why? Because F-Zero X was designed to run at a constant 60fps. As such the graphics didn't look as good as other N64 games at the time. The same can be said of Excite Truck. That and it is a first generation title.

As for the person who commented that playing Twilight Princess felt like playing a GameCube game, that's because Nintendo made a conscious decision not to update or improve the graphics for the Wii, beyond 480p support. So in essence, Twilight Princess is a straight port with the exception of a mirrored world and a different control setup.

I think Super Mario Galaxy and Metroid will probably be the first titles to really start making halfway decent use of the Wii's capabilities. So I'd expect them to look much better than what we have now. The next Zelda for the Wii, which will most likely be a 3rd generation title, should blow away anything we have on the Wii today, as far as graphics are concerned.

Im finding the Wii perfectly compliments the rest of my gaming setup.

I play strategy and rollplaying games on my PC

I play shooters and racers on my 360

and I sit around the livingroom with my girl and other friends with the Wii.. normally playing fun minigames and throwing stupid shapes.

Its such a well targetted piece of kit that I dont think it can fail

As for the person who commented that playing Twilight Princess felt like playing a GameCube game, that's because Nintendo made a conscious decision not to update or improve the graphics for the Wii, beyond 480p support. So in essence, Twilight Princess is a straight port with the exception of a mirrored world and a different control setup.

I think Super Mario Galaxy and Metroid will probably be the first titles to really start making halfway decent use of the Wii's capabilities. So I'd expect them to look much better than what we have now. The next Zelda for the Wii, which will most likely be a 3rd generation title, should blow away anything we have on the Wii today, as far as graphics are concerned.

Um... Super Mario Galaxy...

http://www.1up.com/do/media?cId=3150586&sec=IMAGES

...looks just like a GameCube game too.

And Metroid Prime 3: Corruption...

http://www.1up.com/do/media?cId=3141680&sec=IMAGES

...looks like a PS2 game.


Now I'm not saying I expected the graphics to be much better than a GameCube. I'm saying that Nintendo is going to have to do a MUCH MUCH better job making sure every top tier game uses the Wiimote in such an immersing way that you feel like there's no way the game could be even interesting played with a regular gamepad.

Otherwise I'll distinctly feel like I just bought a second GameCube for more than the original cost me at launch.

Also the idea that somehow there's untapped potential in the Wii from a computing power standpoint strikes me as specious. We have no idea what the hardware is in the Wii. For all we know it's a straight up GameCube with exception of a slightly faster CPU, which could easily have it's surplus clock cycles soaked up by having to continually process information coming from the Wiimote. We just don't know.

However the state of current releases, and the images from slated future releases don't give me much indication that we've got anymore than a GameCube on our hands.

That said. I absolutely LOVE the Wii when playing games that suit it. Wii Sports is still more fun than anything else I've played, and based on the artistic style Nintendo chose for Zelda I would have rather played it on the XBox360.

Um... Super Mario Galaxy...

http://www.1up.com/do/media?cId=3150586&sec=IMAGES

...looks just like a GameCube game too.

And Metroid Prime 3: Corruption...

http://www.1up.com/do/media?cId=3141680&sec=IMAGES

...looks like a PS2 game.


Now I'm not saying I expected the graphics to be much better than a GameCube. I'm saying that Nintendo is going to have to do a MUCH MUCH better job making sure every top tier game uses the Wiimote in such an immersing way that you feel like there's no way the game could be even interesting played with a regular gamepad.

Otherwise I'll distinctly feel like I just bought a second GameCube for more than the original cost me at launch.

Also the idea that somehow there's untapped potential in the Wii from a computing power standpoint strikes me as specious. We have no idea what the hardware is in the Wii. For all we know it's a straight up GameCube with exception of a slightly faster CPU, which could easily have it's surplus clock cycles soaked up by having to continually process information coming from the Wiimote. We just don't know.

However the state of current releases, and the images from slated future releases don't give me much indication that we've got anymore than a GameCube on our hands.

That said. I absolutely LOVE the Wii when playing games that suit it. Wii Sports is still more fun than anything else I've played, and based on the artistic style Nintendo chose for Zelda I would have rather played it on the XBox360.

I highly recommend looking at videos (recent ones) of Super Mario Galaxy and Metroid Prime 3. Screen shots don't do it justice. There are some fantastic effects in both of these games that definitely showoff some graphical muscle on the Wii.

Just followed the suggestion to check out some video footage.

I went to gametrailers.com and checked out some "HD" clips of gameplay for both games.

Mario looks decent because of what they're trying to accomplish with the art style.

Metroid Prime 3 looks like Metroid Prime 1 & 2. Low poly counts in the environment, washed out palette, and bland textures. Which are ALL PERFECTLY FINE if the control scheme can make me forget about all that.

If you want to make a comparison to style for Metroid look at the footage for Lost Planet on the 360. You're free to make a case that Metroid 3 may look marginally better than either of its GameCube predecessors, but come on.

Control scheme is paramount. When I'm playing games that don't have it a lot of buyers remorse sets in, but when they do there's no games I'd rather be playing than those Wii games.

Yeah, Metroid Wii isn't looking radically better than its last incarnation on Gamecube (if it weren't for the PS3 and 360 I'd probably be saying it was FREAKING AWEEEEEESOME).

Mario Galaxy does look quite good. Gives me reason to think that Spore will be very nice on Wii if coded right. But the gameplay (what I can discern of it) is not exciting me. Looks so childish... Must Mario ALWAYS be a game targeted at 9-14 year olds? Not saying I want Mario with 5 'oclock shadow and a hooker on his arm... But I guess Mario has always been an entry point for young gamers into the world of Nintendo. If it aint broke...

I then went and got a GC controller, a GC extension cord for the controller

Nooooooo you must buy the greatness that is the Wavebird. Next to the Wiimote that is by far my favorite wireless controller. It has great battery life, and the range on the thing rocks. You lose rumble :mad:, but you gain an excellent controller, and no wires to trip over :D

I just hope this Mario feels a little more like Mario than the GC version. It had no ties what so ever to the Mario frachise other than the character names.

I think there are a few psych reasons:

1. You get your wife playing and enjoying you can perhaps play more often and not lead your marriage towards divorce.

2. If all the non-gamers play to, your not the nerd so much anymore and instead of sitting around and talking all day or playing Parcheesi you now get to play video games with them instead!

A couple of reasons it's good to bring them in. Just because they aren't traditional gamers I still feel they are family and friends that you like. Or are you saying "I don't really like any of them, I'm an introvert, I wish they all would go away so I can play my game?". Yeah if your like that the Wiii is a threat to that person.

!. My wife was a non gamer before she tried Quake on the PC. She has played tons FPSs, Zelda OoT, Morrowind, Oblivion etc...She now is hopelessly addicted to Zuma. Oddly enough she didn't need a remote controller to help her understand the rocket surgery that is gaming. Not saying she wouldn't enjoy playing the Wii (god that sounds dirty) but it's not needed to get non gamers to play. Fun games are all it takes.

The Wiimote is gimmick to distract you from Nintendo's failure to spend the cash to upgrade it's console. Nintendo makes fun games for consoles not PCs, which is what the 360 and PS3 are. I don't think Nintendo honestly knows how to make a next gen looking game. Rare , Retro and Factor 5 truly exploited the GC hardware, Nintendo made N64+ style. graphics .

2. Nerd?
I'm not sure if you've noticed but gaming has been mainstream for a while now. Practically everyone plays video games now. And the non gamers don't play because they're aren't interested. And so what if the Wii now gets them playing Wii sports? How does this benefit gamers? It doesn't, it only helps Nintendo's profit margins (if these non gamers actually buy anything instead of playing on your console when they come over).

While it's too early to say it is or isn't a fad, I will stick to my prediction that the shine will wear off and people will tire of the gameplay the Wii provides. Shaking a stick instead of pushing a button is not innovative, it's the same poop different smell.

!. My wife was a non gamer before she tried Quake on the PC. She has played tons FPSs, Zelda OoT, Morrowind, Oblivion etc...She now is hopelessly addicted to Zuma. Oddly enough she didn't need a remote controller to help her understand the rocket surgery that is gaming. Not saying she wouldn't enjoy playing the Wii (god that sounds dirty) but it's not needed to get non gamers to play. Fun games are all it takes.

The Wiimote is gimmick to distract you from Nintendo's failure to spend the cash to upgrade it's console. Nintendo makes fun games for consoles not PCs, which is what the 360 and PS3 are. I don't think Nintendo honestly knows how to make a next gen looking game. Rare , Retro and Factor 5 truly exploited the GC hardware, Nintendo made N64+ style. graphics .

2. Nerd?
I'm not sure if you've noticed but gaming has been mainstream for a while now. Practically everyone plays video games now. And the non gamers don't play because they're aren't interested. And so what if the Wii now gets them playing Wii sports? How does this benefit gamers? It doesn't, it only helps Nintendo's profit margins (if these non gamers actually buy anything instead of playing on your console when they come over).

While it's too early to say it is or isn't a fad, I will stick to my prediction that the shine will wear off and people will tire of the gameplay the Wii provides. Shaking a stick instead of pushing a button is not innovative, it's the same poop different smell.

in the end bro its a game....and games have alway existed Wii is no different you can show the hatred, but you know its a game man....Im not out to cure cancer like PS3 or do super duper achievments and gang play online like 360 maybe thats not some folks tastes, but put it as the simplest form 360, ps3, and wii its all a game man...dont take it serious. If its fun its fun and people will play it

There's no hatred here. I'm just calling it the way I see it.

I tried giving myself reasons to buy the Wii, I showed my wife Wario Ware and explained it could be fun after a couple of cocktails. No Dice.

I guess this family needs a little more substance in their fun. Sure Zelda:TP is a tremendous game but it plays just fine on my GC. I just don't buy Nintendo's propaganda concerning gaming is tired and needs a new control method to make games "fun" again and that'll attract "non-gamers".

The Wii is fun to play no doubt, plenty of people will attest to that, but gaming is not tired and doesn't need a new controller to make it interesting again. I'm 37 and have been gaming for just under 30 years and guess what? It's more fun today than it ever was. With or without gaming's savior the "Wii".

I'm just tired of people being told what there opinions are, as Nintendo tends to do. Like a barber who screws up your hair and then tries to convince you that's the way you like it.

Nintendo: Online gaming is a fad. GBA connectivety is where it's at.

Joe Blow: Yea, online gaming is a fad, PC gamers and Xbox live users are an anomolly. GBA connectivety is where it's at.

Nintendo: Gaming is tired it needs a new control method to make it fun again.

Joe Blow: Yea, I never realized how boring gaming was until Nintendo mentioned it.

Nintendo:HDTV is a fad, here play our 480p 16:9 games on your...umm 16:9 HDTV.

Joe Blow: Yea, Im hip.

Nintendo: 5.1 surround? It's fad, use Dolby Pro Logic2...that..umm..can only be decoded by newer receivers that easily decode DD and DTS.

Joe Blow: Yea, why use 10 year old technology like DD and DTS which would force Nintendo to give us a hardware decoder in the system that would cut into their profits? Umm...this benefits us how?

Nintendo: You already have 10 DVD players in your house, why would you want one in your Wii that already has a DVD drive but we're to cheap to absorb the DVD lisencing fee and also give a console released in the year 2006 a digital audio out.

Joe Blow: Yea, bang for your buck is so over-rated. Less is more, right Nintendo?

Nintendo: Yes, less for you is more for us.

Ok, sorry that was a little over the top, but I hope it illustrates how my opinion of Nintendo the company was formed. Nintendo's games are almost always AAA, but the Bizarro management leaves a bit to be desired.

The Wiimote is gimmick to distract you from Nintendo's failure to spend the cash to upgrade it's console. Nintendo makes fun games for consoles not PCs, which is what the 360 and PS3 are. I don't think Nintendo honestly knows how to make a next gen looking game. Rare , Retro and Factor 5 truly exploited the GC hardware, Nintendo made N64+ style. graphics .


Spoken like a true non-Wii owner. Might want to play it before commenting ;)


2. Nerd?
I'm not sure if you've noticed but gaming has been mainstream for a while now. Practically everyone plays video games now. And the non gamers don't play because they're aren't interested. And so what if the Wii now gets them playing Wii sports? How does this benefit gamers? It doesn't, it only helps Nintendo's profit margins (if these non gamers actually buy anything instead of playing on your console when they come over).

Wow! Nintendo creating things to help make a profit. Crazy!
Despite what you think, bringing more people to videogames is possible and good for the industry. We've heard several times on this board that people love how they can now enjoy games with their significant others while playing the Wii. Its provided great fun for a lot of people who normally game by themselves and can now enjoy it with the entire family.


Shaking a stick instead of pushing a button is not innovative, it's the same poop different smell.

Again, spoken like someone who hasn't even played it.

Hey IVO, do you even own a Wii? See this if you don't have one: FORUM RULES (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=610135)

Sorry Todd, but this isn't the Wii board. I do own a GC and can by the rules be here.
I'm not attacking the Wii, I'm stating my views pertaining to the topic title. I do feel the Wii is a novelty and have stated reasons why I feel this way.

I'm sorry you don't like my opinion.

I own a Wii. The last Nintendo system I owned before it was a SNES. i'll reserve my opinions on the gamecube and the N64 so as not to incite the fires of the fanboys.

The Wii right now is cute, and I think the innovative control scheme is a breath of fresh air. But it'll never replace my 360 or my PS3..heck, it wouldn't replace my xbox.

Nintendo's arrogance is no different than Sonys or Microsofts, its called building hype. Now, personally, I think Nintendo has made more than a few questionable decisions with the Wii......the lack of 720p horsepower being one in particular.

I think Nintendo at this point is just having fun playing the "Crazy Uncle" role of the videogame race. M$ and Sony will beat their chests and proclaim ultimate power and ultimate superiority, but Nintendo will be the guys with the rainbow-colored afros who stumble out of a smoking garage after a huge explosion has happened, covered in soot, and hold up the next great innovation in gaming :)

Sometimes, it'll work...(Wii...maybe, assuming they can get some quality games out that make use of the controls)...sometimes it wont (Virtual Boy, Rob The Robot, card reading game things, etc). But we need Nintendo to be "that company" because Sony and Microsoft are taking the same path. Its the reason why we need "big 3" automakers, otherwise every car would wind up looking like a Taurus.

My wife turns up her nose at HD graphics on my 360 or PS3, while I'm wetting my pants about realisim she's like "yeah great super". But the minute I handed her the control for Nintendo Bowling, she was hooked, excited...about a video game.

Sorry Todd, but this isn't the Wii board. I do own a GC and can by the rules be here.
I'm not attacking the Wii, I'm stating my views pertaining to the topic title. I do feel the Wii is a novelty and have stated reasons why I feel this way.

I'm sorry you don't like my opinion.

If this thread were about the cube, then your opinion would have merit.
However, it has none because this thread is about the Wii, which you don't own and haven't played.

Sorry Todd, but this isn't the Wii board. I do own a GC and can by the rules be here.
I'm not attacking the Wii, I'm stating my views pertaining to the topic title. I do feel the Wii is a novelty and have stated reasons why I feel this way.

I'm sorry you don't like my opinion.
I don't think the issue is liking or disliking your opinion, it's more disrespecting your opinion because you obviously have not experienced Wii, yet you are making in-depth proclamations about it. There are some here who own it or have played it extensively and simply find it's not for them. I respect that and if you look through this thread, I think you'll see nobody has a problem with it. You, on the other hand, are simply ranting. Nintendo came up with the motto "playing is believing", and that couldn't be more true with the Wii. I recommend you take that into account.

I want to comment on the "same poop, different smell" comment.

Essentially this is still a video game and a console. But like the DS, the Wii changes HOW you play the game. It adds a new dimension in how you respond to the game.
Take even Resistance fall of man for the PS3, it's not enough that you shoot the enemies but at one point the aliens actually grab on to you and you have to shake the sixaxis controller to get it off of you.
It's a cool and surprising moment because suddenly your brain has to process differently how to accomplish a particular task.
With the Wii entire games are being built around how you react using the controller and your movements will now make a difference in the game. Although the actual game is still a video game you are now approaching it differently and for most people this will translate into something fun and different.
No longer are you relegated to just sitting there but when a person enters the room they are going to see that person moving around and controlling the on screen action in a more action oriented way and it's going to make that person want to try it.
Another bowling game? Yawn. But on the Wii it's a brand new experience because you seem to have more realistic control.

I think Nintendo at this point is just having fun playing the "Crazy Uncle" role of the videogame race. M$ and Sony will beat their chests and proclaim ultimate power and ultimate superiority, but Nintendo will be the guys with the rainbow-colored afros who stumble out of a smoking garage after a huge explosion has happened, covered in soot, and hold up the next great innovation in gaming :) LMAO!

My wife turns up her nose at HD graphics on my 360 or PS3, while I'm wetting my pants about realisim she's like "yeah great super". But the minute I handed her the control for Nintendo Bowling, she was hooked, excited...about a video game.

Same situation here sort of. If it wasn't for the Wii, there wouldn't be a game console in our house. It was my wife that suggested we get one for the kids for Christmas. Well, we are hooked on it too.

Wow.

I don't need a severed leg to know I don't want one.

I'm a gamer (for almost 30 years), I've owned all previous Nintendo systems and have decided for myself that I don't like Nintendo's direction and can't justify buying the Wii just yet becaue I've seen nothing that interests me so far and that I disagree with Nintendo's hype regarding gaming becoming stagnant (maybe in Japan) and needing a new gimmicky controller to save it.

So because of that my opinion has no merit?

Get over yourself.

It's my opinion and it has as much merit as anyone elses. I never said my opinion was law, just stating my view on the topic. There is no argument here, I made my educated guess regarding the Wii's future and that's it. The future remains to be seen.

Wow.
I don't need a severed leg to know I don't want one.
Watching people ride a roller coaster and riding roller coaster yourself are two completely different things. You cannot possibly extrapolate what the experience will be like just by watching. You are essentially saying you can with the Wii, but all of us who have played it simply know that's not likely.


I'm a gamer (for almost 30 years), I've owned all previous Nintendo systems and have decided for myself that I don't like Nintendo's direction and can't justify buying the Wii just yet becaue I've seen nothing that interests me so far and that I disagree with Nintendo's hype regarding gaming becoming stagnant (maybe in Japan) and needing a new gimmicky controller to save it.

So because of that my opinion has no merit?
No, your opinion has no merit because you've claimed the control to be a gimmick a couple of times, yet you haven't tried it.

Man this is funny, I dont understand how people can be so passionate about something as trivial as a game. Maybe if you had one and you really liked it and wanted everyone to know how great it is I could understand. But to hate it with such a passion, never having owned one, and then project your hatred and defend it with such predijuce is insane. If I dont like something I dont waste my time hanging out with people who do like it trying to convince them they are wrong, I move on.

That being said, I love where nintendo is going with this. Games are getting way to realistic and complicated. Granted there is a market for that, and I do have some intrest in it, most of the time I want to play a game to have fun and relax. Most of your systems now have so many buttons crammed onto a little controler and you are so encapsulated in the game the designers had to automate most of the interesting tasks just to keep it playable. Now the wii, its back to the basics. Simple controls, fun themes, generic graphics. Really, how many people here wouldnt have loved to see a sequel to Mario 64? same basic design just more new levels. Its taken Nintendo just 3 months to prove this market still exists.

Watching people ride a roller coaster and riding roller coaster yourself are two completely different things. You cannot possibly extrapolate what the experience will be like just by watching. You are essentially saying you can with the Wii, but all of us who have played it simply know that's not likely.


No, your opinion has no merit because you've claimed the control to be a gimmick a couple of times, yet you haven't tried it.
One doesn't have to personally smoke cigarettes in order to discover that smoking can be dangerous to one's health--i.e., I don't need be a smoker in order to offer an opinion as to whether smoking is or isn't good for my health.

Not trying to be argumentative against you...just trying to show that one doesn't always have to have personal experience in a subject matter in order to offer a qualified opinion regarding said subject. ;)

I love where nintendo is going with this. Games are getting way to realistic and complicated. Granted there is a market for that, and I do have some intrest in it, most of the time I want to play a game to have fun and relax. Most of your systems now have so many buttons crammed onto a little controler and you are so encapsulated in the game the designers had to automate most of the interesting tasks just to keep it playable. Now the wii, its back to the basics. Simple controls, fun themes, generic graphics.

Typical regurgitated Nintendo propaganda. Funny how no one had this opinion until Nintendo gave it to them.

Watching people ride a roller coaster and riding roller coaster yourself are two completely different things. You cannot possibly extrapolate what the experience will be like just by watching. You are essentially saying you can with the Wii, but all of us who have played it simply know that's not likely.


No, your opinion has no merit because you've claimed the control to be a gimmick a couple of times, yet you haven't tried it.

I'm sorry, but I have zero desire to try or buy the Wii. There just isn't a gaming hole in my life that facilitates the need.

I'm not saying it isn't fun, it does look like fun, but I just have zero desire to buy it because it seems gimmicky. If there really was a killer app that only could be done with the Wii then I would have to buy it. But as of now and what I see coming in the future, I just don't see the appeal.

Can we agree to disagree here? If you love it and think it'll last then great, I've got no problem with that. But for me the Wii has gone over my head concerning the need to play or own one. That could obviously change, like I said, when a true killer app is created then I'll jump on board.

I'm sorry, but I have zero desire to try or buy the Wii. There just isn't a gaming hole in my life that facilitates the need.


Good for you. Continue posting here and expect to be suspended.

We don't allow trolling in the gaming forum. Consider this your only warning!
Read the forum description posted by the site admin if you don't understand.

Kyser

I'm sorry, but I have zero desire to try or buy the Wii. There just isn't a gaming hole in my life that facilitates the need.

I'm not saying it isn't fun, it does look like fun, but I just have zero desire to buy it because it seems gimmicky. If there really was a killer app that only could be done with the Wii then I would have to buy it. But as of now and what I see coming in the future, I just don't see the appeal.

Can we agree to disagree here? If you love it and think it'll last then great, I've got no problem with that. But for me the Wii has gone over my head concerning the need to play or own one. That could obviously change, like I said, when a true killer app is created then I'll jump on board.

Please stop..... it's obvious you want a Wii & are trying to justify not buying one... why else would you be here?? We don't want to hear your negative thoughts. Thanks

I'm sorry, but I have zero desire to try or buy the Wii. There just isn't a gaming hole in my life that facilitates the need.

I'm not saying it isn't fun, it does look like fun, but I just have zero desire to buy it because it seems gimmicky. If there really was a killer app that only could be done with the Wii then I would have to buy it. But as of now and what I see coming in the future, I just don't see the appeal.

Can we agree to disagree here? If you love it and think it'll last then great, I've got no problem with that. But for me the Wii has gone over my head concerning the need to play or own one. That could obviously change, like I said, when a true killer app is created then I'll jump on board.

We can agree to disagree but I never really understand that statement when it's used. It doesn't really apply here. You have a blanket opinion and that is where the crux of the argument lies.
It's not like you are saying "I tried the Wii and I don't care for it".
You are saying the very idea of the Wii is a gimmick. That's a statement that you are implying as something factual that we all may agree with and you are doing it in a forum where people that will disagree with you because it's a Nintendo Wii forum topic.
It's not your opinion but it's your attitude towards the Wii.

I don’t think the Wii will be a FAD by definition. I do think that once the initial sell through has ended that it will be just like the gamecube though. I think you will have your HARDCORE fanboys that own them and then folks like myself that own 360 or PS3 or even both and have the Wii around for classic character Nintendo games (i.e. Mario, samus, etc.). Last generation I played mainly Xbox and PS2, but when me and my wife were looking to enjoy some gaming we fired up the Gamecube and played some Mario Party or SSB or she was addicted to Animal Crossing. We bought the Wii with the same purpose in mind. When we are in the mood we fire it up and pop in Wii Sports and have some fun or play some Rabbids while we wait for Mario Party 8. The good thing is the price point the Wii is at puts it in a place to be successful as just that, A fun secondary gaming system that you can sit back and relax with to get away from the blood, guts and intense online play offered on the other systems.

My family enjoyed the hell out of the gamecube and I look forward to clocking many fun hours on the Wii with them. Fad? Nope I don’t think so but will it be the One and only/Main gaming system in a Gamer’s house, I doubt it.

I'm not sure if you've noticed but gaming has been mainstream for a while now. Practically everyone plays video games now. And the non gamers don't play because they're aren't interested. And so what if the Wii now gets them playing Wii sports? How does this benefit gamers? It doesn't, it only helps Nintendo's profit margins (if these non gamers actually buy anything instead of playing on your console when they come over).

Says the hardcore gamer, speaking for the non-gamers. :)

Not to put too fine a point on it, but I call "Shenanigans!" If you define 18-40 year old males as "practically everyone", I might agree with you. Unless you're counting cell phones Yahtzee as a video game, the penetration of video games isn't as broad as all that. Yes, sales has steadily climbed skywards, but there's a variety of reasons for that. The video game playing audience has matured and arcades are gone....that contributes to the sales of consoles by that audience. In 1986, getting an NES was a big deal for me...now I can run out and buy a PS3 as an expensive impulse buy to sit next to my Wii and 360, if I so desired. As that core demographic ages, sales increase. There ARE more gamers, but the sales numbers are misleading.

As for how it benefits gamers, it benefits them in lots of tangible ways. For one thing, mainstream acceptance means things like "Gameboy electrocutes boy" and the endless "Won't someone think of the Children?" legislation would taper off. For another, it validates gaming as both a more profitable enterprise in general and a widespread practice that will, in turn, generate more and better games in both the general market and niches. Think 'long tail', here. If there are more games, there will be a more diverse selection to choose from.

Lots of so-called non-gamers are actually LAPSED gamers. Have you looked at the schematic for Lost Planet, for example? My jaw dropped when looking at the graphic of each buttons function. Compare that with the controls in Legend of Zelda or Excite Truck. Many gamers stopped wanting to fight the controls as much as the opponents in the games....they didn't leave gaming, gaming grew away from them. I know many of these gamers, all of who are eagerly trying to get a Wii. Is Lego Star Wars II a poorer game for not using every button on the controller? Of course not.

This isn't to say tha the Wii's controls can carry the console on it's back. Clearly only good games will determine it's success. But the Wii has a lot of people talking who don't normally talk about video games and has excited a lot of lapsed gamers in the process. I can't play Gears of War with my daughter or son...but I can play Rayman Raving Rabbids or Wii Sports...and I can play it against my Mother-in-Law, too. That's something that I can't say for the PS3...but you'll note that 360 is trying to broaden it's appeal in the same way. Example? UNO. Catan. Carcassone. Viva Pinata. Hexic. Microsoft knows that one way to make sure the 360 becomes a center-piece for the entertainment center is to ensure that it has something to offer everyone. And in my mind, that's a Good Thing (tm).

Nintendo: Gaming is tired it needs a new control method to make it fun again.

Joe Blow: Yea, I never realized how boring gaming was until Nintendo mentioned it.
I realized it. After the 16bit era I was tired of gaming, the PlayStation brought me back for a while. Got bored again, Xbox and Halo brought me back for a minute and a half, got bored again. Ended up with a Gamecube and just a few games on the cheap a few years ago, but between the xbox and GC last gen I only finished a number of games that I can count on two hands (maybe even one hand actually). I had pretty much given up on gaming again.

But the Wii piqued my interest, something new. It could be cool or it could suck, I thought to myself. Well it turned out to be something really fun. Did we NEED a new controller for gaming to be fun? No. As a matter of fact I got a good deal on a 360 and have been playing it quite a bit and enjoying the two games I own for it. But I already own 4 Wii games in the same timespan, and some of those are games that my wife likes to play. Quake may have brought your wife into gaming, but that's pretty unusual. I would say the vast majority of women have no interest in FPS games or shooters in general. On the other hand, a lot of them who look with disdain on games are actually trying the Wii and enjoying it. But we can't have that, if Nintendo is profitable that's obviously bad for everyone, right?

Nintendo: You already have 10 DVD players in your house, why would you want one in your Wii that already has a DVD drive but we're to cheap to absorb the DVD lisencing fee and also give a console released in the year 2006 a digital audio out.

Joe Blow: Yea, bang for your buck is so over-rated. Less is more, right Nintendo?

Nintendo: Yes, less for you is more for us.
Is there really anyone out there who cares about this? It would be nothing more than a bulletpoint feature. I know I would never use it (and wouldn't want to pay even a dime more for it), and even if it did play DVDs people would be complaining about how it doesn't upconvert to 1080p or something else. As for digital output, I agree with you on that one.

I have had wii since launch and Im very disapointed. The controller is fun and all but the games selection is just not my bag. Im 22yrs old and I really thought their would be some games for my age range but their is one or two maybe. To me the wii is for little kids and non-gamers. Yes the idea is cool, the controller is cool but for me im not impressed. Im not comparing this system to ps3 or 360, im judging my opionion based on my experience with the gamecube. Im not trying to bash the gamecube, but come on, lets just say i was more than disapointed. This will be my last nintendo product, I guess I have just grown past lil kiddy games and cheap played out franchises, mario,metroid,zelda etc etc. I think i was just expecting to much from nintendo, they could have at least put a little more effort in graphics department or at least in include a little higher rez wouldnt kill come on 720p. Im done

I have had wii since launch and Im very disapointed. The controller is fun and all but the games selection is just not my bag. Im 22yrs old and I really thought their would be some games for my age range but their is one or two maybe. To me the wii is for little kids and non-gamers. Yes the idea is cool, the controller is cool but for me im not impressed. Im not comparing this system to ps3 or 360, im judging my opionion based on my experience with the gamecube. Im not trying to bash the gamecube, but come on, lets just say i was more than disapointed. This will be my last nintendo product, I guess I have just grown past lil kiddy games and cheap played out franchises, mario,metroid,zelda etc etc. I think i was just expecting to much from nintendo, they could have at least put a little more effort in graphics department or at least in include a little higher rez wouldnt kill come on 720p. Im done

We are all so thrilled you could grace three different threads (probably more) with this identical post.

I have had wii since launch and Im very disapointed.

Not a bad troll. A solid 'B', I think. I'm going to have to deduct points for spamming three separate threads, though...and frankly, you lacked focus, there. Extra points for slamming the gamecube, but I'm afraid you lost points for referencing a game of year as played out. Don't worry, though, I'm sure you can improve. Keep Trying!

I just want to say I love most of you. The GAMEPAD for all games imo has always been "THE WORK OF THE DEVIL". I'm glad so many are starting to see it and how the 360 and PS3 are still stuck in that communistic rut called "gamepad for everything" mode. Big thanks to Nintendo for re-opening peoples eyes. Now remember the “mice” are people err are controllers to, just let it all in and let the player decide how they want to have their fun. The remote is brilliant.

Like I said back on page 3.

When playing Zelda on the Wii I often felt like I'd wasted my money on the new console. Hell it cost me more at launch than my GameCube did, and I got an employee discount on the Wii.

However every time I play Wii Sports I look forward to what might come down the pipe in the future.

If games don't seriously start to take advantage of the control scheme, ESPECIALLY NINTENDO'S TITLES, then I'm definitely going to feel a little sour about having just bought a slightly more modern looking GameCube with a different controller.

Nintendo really needs to work hard to separate the Wii from the GameCube from where I stand, and that's going to be capitalizing the hell out of the Wiimote and the internet capability. With regard to the latter I've been VERY disappointed so far.

Take Rayman as an example... the Wii can connect to the web. Why in the hell should I have to record some ridiculous string of characters, then put them into a website on my computer just to see how well I rank against other players at the mini-games? It's almost insulting, but at the very least it's retarded.

As I've said before, I've had a Wii and a DS for about a month now, and between the two I'm much more impressed with the DS. The fact that I can't play Wii Sports with my Wii Friends online is nuts, and worse still that I can't play Excite Truck with them. So far all I can do is trade weird little characters with them. I can't even voice chat with them (also something I think the DS should do more of. It's in Metroid, but only in a totally crippled way.

I just want to say I love most of you.

I can read between the lines.:D
Heck on some forums there are entire threads dedicated to bashing me so don't stop on my account. ;);)

Like I said back on page 3.

When playing Zelda on the Wii I often felt like I'd wasted my money on the new console. Hell it cost me more at launch than my GameCube did, and I got an employee discount on the Wii.

However every time I play Wii Sports I look forward to what might come down the pipe in the future.

Man, I just don't get the Wii Sports love. It's a game with sloppy controls, simplistic and shallow gameplay, a complete lack of subtlety and nuance outside of bowling, and (obviously) hideous graphical achievements.

The boxing game made me think that the Wii couldn't handle fast motion; the golfing game made me think it couldn't handle slow motion; the tennis game made me think that Wii motions were basically the equivalent of button presses; and the baseball game made me not care either way. Only bowling gave me any hope at all for the Wii control scheme, and even then, it's not THAT much better than Monkey Bowling on the Gamecube.

Take Rayman as an example... the Wii can connect to the web. Why in the hell should I have to record some ridiculous string of characters, then put them into a website on my computer just to see how well I rank against other players at the mini-games? It's almost insulting, but at the very least it's retarded.

From the perspective of someone who's been looking at leaderboards in $5 downloads like Joust on the 360, it's almost disgusting to read that whole code entry thing in the manual. I pretty much have to assume that Nintendo just hasn't given the infrastructure to game-makers to make sure there are servers available with information about who people are (there appears to be no persistent identity on the Wii the way there is with the 360's gamertag), and that people are who they claim to be, and all that. I guess in that case it's easier to farm it out to an outside dev team who can make a Web application.

But yes, it's highly lame. After having gotten used to the 360's persistent online social environment, it's difficult to take seriously the Wii's last-gen semi-connectedness.

I don't regret having gotten the Wii -- it's worth it to play Zelda alone (though perhaps not for everyone...) -- but I certainly don't think it's serious competition for the 360, which is just so much better on every axis.

Man, I just don't get the Wii Sports love. It's a game with sloppy controls, simplistic and shallow gameplay, a complete lack of subtlety and nuance outside of bowling, and (obviously) hideous graphical achievements.


Take significant note of the "things to come" nature of my Wii Sports mention.

I find all the games to be way too simplistic. Golf and Boxing are hardly workable much of the time.

However I can see an easy transition of those basic principles, refined for a game that's more than just a basic tech demo, and extended to something much more interesting.

I agree 100% about bowling. It was the only one of the bunch that gave me any confidence that a developer could capture subtle motion differences to alter gameplay in realistic ways.

Take significant note of the "things to come" nature of my Wii Sports mention.

I find all the games to be way too simplistic. Golf and Boxing are hardly workable much of the time.

However I can see an easy transition of those basic principles, refined for a game that's more than just a basic tech demo, and extended to something much more interesting.

I agree 100% about bowling. It was the only one of the bunch that gave me any confidence that a developer could capture subtle motion differences to alter gameplay in realistic ways.

Whereas for me, Wii Sports -- particularly after I'd read all the glowing press about it! -- made me think that the Wii remote actually would be hideously insensitive and clumsy, because this is the game that made everyone rave about the controls and which Nintendo put together specifically to showcase them, and it did that bad of a job? If it weren't for bowling, I may have returned it right there. Well, except that I'd already bought Zelda, I guess.

Anyway, though, I found the controls a lot more interesting in Rayman, which is so far the only game that's made me think the Wii is anything other than a hideously overpriced prev-gen machine with DS Lite styling. (It instead makes me think the Wii is a hideously overpriced prev-gen machine with DS Lite styling and nifty controller...)

I pretty much have to assume that Nintendo just hasn't given the infrastructure to game-makers to make sure there are servers available with information about who people are (there appears to be no persistent identity on the Wii the way there is with the 360's gamertag), and that people are who they claim to be, and all that.

I fail to see why they couldn't have at least provided what little information they do currently from the Rayman website (notice they don't really provide a sense of identity) by just pinging their existing web server and pulling the result.

Hell they could have even used their insane code system and just done it in the background from the Wii and automated the exact same process we all have to do manually.

It's just plain lazy, and I realize it isn't Nintendo's fault, but they need to be taking a MUCH more active role in pushing developers to utilize online play... regardless of whether or not they use Nintendo's infrastructure.

I have had wii since launch and Im very disapointed...the games selection is just not my bag...I guess I have just grown past lil kiddy games and cheap played out franchises...they could have...at least in include a little higher rez wouldnt kill come on 720p. Im done

So you would not have grown past "lil kiddy games and cheap played out franchises" if they were in 720p? :D

hey, any info if a mario kart game is in the works for the wii? thats my all time fav nintendo game! :O

hey, any info if a mario kart game is in the works for the wii? thats my all time fav nintendo game! :O

No info, but you can be certain one is in the works.

I have had wii since launch and Im very disapointed. The controller is fun and all but the games selection is just not my bag. Im 22yrs old and I really thought their would be some games for my age range but their is one or two maybe. To me the wii is for little kids and non-gamers. ...

Hey if you dont like it I'll buy it off you.. Seriously..

Typical regurgitated Nintendo propaganda. Funny how no one had this opinion until Nintendo gave it to them.


I've never heard Nintendo even hint at this, but then again maybe I havent been listending.

I only played the game cube about a week before I put it in the basement. I finaly did get it back out early last november and picked up Zelda WW, Mario shine, and starfox assault. Played it for a while, but while I was getting it out I noticed the 64 in the same box. Mid december I pulled the 64 out and the gamecube hasnt been used since. The game cube wasnt too bad, but Id really like to see a step back from it, but even keeping with it I would be okay I guess.

I don't think the Wii is a novelty...Nintendo created a completely different segment along side the 360 and PS3 in which it has no competition so the Wii will always sell.

That being said, I have disliked the Wii ever since it was announced. I agree with the minority of posters in this thread who is upset with the path Nintendo chose to take. Mass appeal to casual gamers is all well and good and the public/media loves the company for it, but anytime a somewhat hardcore gamer complains about the system, everyone jumps in and stones the guy to death. Why is it ok for Nintendo to alienate the more hardcore crowd? The crowd that has grown up with them from NES. I really don't understand that...

Before you guys all jump on me let me say that I HAVE PLAYED THE WII. 3 of my closest friends have it so I have had numerous chances to try the system out. Playing it did not change my opinion one bit. Wii Sports is plagued with control issues. Bowling is fun...for maybe a game or two but then it becomes boring when you can throw strikes 70% of the time. Tennis is pretty well done and it did pick up some of my top spins and backspins which I was happily surprised being an avid tennis player in real life, but the lack of controls for movement is quite bothersome and completely takes out the strategy in a tennis game. The rest of the games are quite laughable. After about an hour of Wii sports, we all decided to hook the 360 back up to play Gears and Marvel.

Now before you all say that Wii sports is just a tech demo and better standalone games are coming out, let me ask you this. Other than full versions of golf/boxing/tennis/bowling etc.. what other sports games can I play that uses "realistic and intuitive" controls? How would I go about playing soccer? basketball? hockey? The motion sensing remote is no better at these games than a regular old controller. It seems to be a hinderance even as EA and 2K7 series has not even ported basketball or hockey to the Wii.

Novelty or not, the Wii will always be a secondary/complimentary system to the 360/PS3 for the more serious gamers, but I guess that's exactly what Nintendo wanted.

---Multiplayer---
The online functionality of a game takes VERY little processing power compared to just getting graphics on the screen. Remember, the OLD PC game Quake used to run WITHOUT hardware acceleration, provided multiplayer, and did it all on a 8MB 33Mhz 486...


---Graphics---
With each day that passes, I get more of the feeling that Nintendo severely underpowered the Wii. It really is an overclocked Gamecube with the addition of great Input/Output.

Nintendo should have released its BEST graphics libraries as part of the developer package in order to release the full visual power of the Wii from the start. Instead, I get the feeling they've left developers to roll their own (or use old, and I mean OLD Gamcube libraries).


---Controls---
While we'll continue to be surprised by innovative control schemes for the first year or so, the 'novelty' will start to wear off sometime in 2008. Why? The bulk of publishers will settle in on a core set of control schemes and copycat game mechanics that appear to resonate with consumers (happens with every console). The only way to continue to foster innovation is to get something like Xbox Live Arcade running as soon as possible and rely on Indie developers to push the limits of control/gameplay.

OMG U JUST SAID QUAKE RAN ON A 33mghz machine.. LAF

I can read between the lines.:D
Heck on some forums there are entire threads dedicated to bashing me so don't stop on my account. ;);)

I'm sorry that happened to you.

You're welcome back anytime.

;)

OMG U JUST SAID QUAKE RAN ON A 33mghz machine.. LAF

http://www.bluesnews.com/guide/quake.htm

My bad. It could run on a 486 50 or 75mhz...

;-0

Why is it ok for Nintendo to alienate the more hardcore crowd? The crowd that has grown up with them from NES. I really don't understand that...


They simply dont have the bankroll to compete...ATI is in bed with Microsoft for a nextgen part, Nvidia is in bed with Sony now.......Nintendo isn't nearly as huge as either of those two massive companies.

So if you can't run with the big dogs, what can you do? YOu can find a new market to dominate.....namely the group of people who just want fun games, and dont want to spend hours on LIVE...etc. Right now I think we are seeing Microsoft take the crown away from Sony...and in another 10 years, someone will take it from Microsoft, just like it was taken from Nintendo...

Why is it ok for Nintendo to alienate the more hardcore crowd? The crowd that has grown up with them from NES. I really don't understand that...
First, the casual crowd is a larger and more diverse crowd. Thus, it's more potential customers.

Second, if you're that hardcore, you'd appreciate the games more than looks. I still play Mario 64 and it's still an amazing game.

http://www.bluesnews.com/guide/quake.htm

My bad. It could run on a 486 50 or 75mhz...

;-0


Barely. This is totally off topic, but the game ran reasonably well on a 90+ Mhz Pentium as long as you didn't try to push the resolution much beyond 320x240.

But we all digress...

Why is it ok for Nintendo to alienate the more hardcore crowd? The crowd that has grown up with them from NES. I really don't understand that...

Alienate? Mass appeal is certainly not alienation, it simply allows many more people to be a part of gaming. And the masses are going to find enjoyment in this kind of gaming from a far different perspective than the hardcore gamer. In the same way that most people don't get why a hardcore gamer can spend hours hunched over a controller, the gamer might not understand how a person new to gaming can spend hours waving a controller with apparently little nuanced control.

A perfect example of why the Wii is so popular is my situation. I've always considered myself a gamer at heart, but after I got married, gaming was pretty much over for me. They're a waste of time/money, they clutter up the living room, yada yada yada. The last system I owned was a N64. ...Then we got a Wii (amazingly, at my wife's suggestion). For the last 3 weeks, we've watched very little television; the game is always on, and somebody is playing it. My wife has gone from being totally against video games to playing them herself 20-30 mins a day. Remarkable!

I never owned a Gamecube, but I bought a few old GC titles, downloaded a few VC games and got a Wavebird controller, and now I'm getting to experience those generations as well thanks to the Wii. This is the only possible way gaming could be introduced to my family (besides handhelds) and it will hopefully be part of life in our house for a long time to come.

I think my comment about alienating the hardcore crowd was misinterpereted by some of you. I understand that it is more profitable to cater to a larger casual gaming crowd, my problem is why doesn't Nintendo also make an effort to bring more games tailored to active, non-casual gamer's tastes.

The general public has already deemed the Wii a casual console (and you guys posting are certainly agreeing with that statement), and because of this most 3rd party developers will likely also have the same view. Instead of developing a game that is deep/immersive etc they will be more willing to pump out simple party games because that's what the Wii population wants. Why would I, a more avid gamer, be interested in games like that? I won't be and that's what I meant by the alienation...

Second, if you're that hardcore, you'd appreciate the games more than looks. I still play Mario 64 and it's still an amazing game.

I don't believe I said anything about graphics in my original post but either way I am very tired of hearing that statement. There is absolutely NO reason why I can't have great visuals and great gameplay at the same time. The two are not mutually exclusive and should never be.

Like you I love playing old games. I still think Starcraft is the best RTS ever made and all the fancy new ones don't play as well as Starcraft did. However, if Blizzard came out with a Starcraft 2 that kept the great gameplay and balance as well as improved the graphics, which one do you think I'd play? Surely not the dated 640x480 game.

While the new remote is innovative and a good step in a new direction, there was nothing fundamentally wrong with the old controllers. Some people seem to bash Sony/MS for using the old style but those same people are probably paying for and enjoying the VC titles Nintendo puts out using the Classic Controller...

The general public has already deemed the Wii a casual console (and you guys posting are certainly agreeing with that statement), and because of this most 3rd party developers will likely also have the same view. Instead of developing a game that is deep/immersive etc they will be more willing to pump out simple party games because that's what the Wii population wants. Why would I, a more avid gamer, be interested in games like that? I won't be and that's what I meant by the alienation...

Not true. The best selling Wii game is Zelda Twighlight Princess.
Hardcore gamers own the Wii and are buying hardcore games. Its just a matter of developers stepping up and releasing more such products on the Wii. Nintendo certainly has shown that action/adventure games are capable and good on the Wii. Hopefully other companies will step up and flex their muscles as well.

Like you I love playing old games. I still think Starcraft is the best RTS ever made and all the fancy new ones don't play as well as Starcraft did. However, if Blizzard came out with a Starcraft 2 that kept the great gameplay and balance as well as improved the graphics, which one do you think I'd play? Surely not the dated 640x480 game.


Resolution of a game isn't nearly as important as art design. That's the important graphical element to nail for any good game. Game of the Year for IGN was Okami. The visuals are absolutely stunning in that game. Okami was up against games like Gears of War, and still came out on top. Resolution is very nice, but not the most important thing when it comes to graphics.

Personally, I think Twighlight Princess is an amazing looking game, and that's an essentially a cube game. I can't wait to see what Nintendo can do with the Wii when building a game from the ground up.

Graphics and gameplay are not mutually exclusive on the Wii, and Twighlight Princess proves it.


While the new remote is innovative and a good step in a new direction, there was nothing fundamentally wrong with the old controllers. Some people seem to bash Sony/MS for using the old style but those same people are probably paying for and enjoying the VC titles Nintendo puts out using the Classic Controller...

You're right, there's nothing wrong with the standard controller. However, it wasn't attracting new people to games either. It was designed mostly for existing gamers. Nintendo's goal howver, was to make something that existing gamers can still enjoy and attract new gamers at the same time. It looks like they've done it with the Wii so far.

Is the Wii better than the standard controller? Not necessarily. In some games it can be, and in others its not. However, the big key here is that it works and Nintendo has shown the industry that there's more than one way to play a game.

Personally, I think Twighlight Princess is an amazing looking game
Ditto. It is stunning and I love it. I don't care at all about the fancy graphics, I just love the whole feel to the design of TP and the music also. A lot of it is the same music from OoT though, but that doesn't bother me. Only thing that really bugs me about TP is 1. Nintendo lied about a lot about the game and 2. It doesn't have OoT characters in it.

Ditto. It is stunning and I love it. I don't care at all about the fancy graphics, I just love the whole feel to the design of TP and the music also. A lot of it is the same music from OoT though, but that doesn't bother me. Only thing that really bugs me about TP is 1. Nintendo lied about a lot about the game and 2. It doesn't have OoT characters in it.
I like the tie-in with the Temple of Time.

Doesn't Epona count as a character from OoT? :p

Not true. The best selling Wii game is Zelda Twighlight Princess.
Hardcore gamers own the Wii and are buying hardcore games. Its just a matter of developers stepping up and releasing more such products on the Wii. Nintendo certainly has shown that action/adventure games are capable and good on the Wii. Hopefully other companies will step up and flex their muscles as well.

This is only half true... Zelda sells the most in America but mainly because Wii Sports was bundled. In Japan, Wii Sports is outselling Zelda by a fair margin. 2nd place is also Wii Play (but that's not really fair since it is bundled with a controller).

The Zelda fanbase will generate sales no matter how good/bad the game is (luckily it is a good game) so that is not a real test case for hardcore games on the Wii. The only way to tell if people are buying hardcore games on the Wii is if they start buying 3rd party games with no prior installed fanbase (everyone knows Nintendo 1st party games will sell in boatloads). Games like Okami, God of War, Shadow of Collosus had no previous fanbase and sold exceptionally well on the PS2. If the Wii can accomplish this than I will acknowledge it as more than a party toy.

You brought up graphics again on your second response to my post...I didn't start this graphics discussion. I only made a mention to the resolution of Starcraft as a way to tell it apart from a supposed Starcraft 2.

This is only half true... Zelda sells the most in America but mainly because Wii Sports was bundled. In Japan, Wii Sports is outselling Zelda by a fair margin. 2nd place is also Wii Play (but that's not really fair since it is bundled with a controller).

The Zelda fanbase will generate sales no matter how good/bad the game is (luckily it is a good game) so that is not a real test case for hardcore games on the Wii.

Zelda games appeal to Zelda fans, which are typically hardcore gamers. I don't know anyone who bought Zelda that wasn't big into videogames in some way or another.

People who don't play games like the Wii for Wii Sports. People that do, like the Wii for games like Zelda. Zelda is, and has been, a hardcore gamer's game.


The only way to tell if people are buying hardcore games on the Wii is if they start buying 3rd party games with no prior installed fanbase (everyone knows Nintendo 1st party games will sell in boatloads). Games like Okami, God of War, Shadow of Collosus had no previous fanbase and sold exceptionally well on the PS2. If the Wii can accomplish this than I will acknowledge it as more than a party toy.



From what I hear, Okami didn't sell that well for the PS2, which is disappointing. Also, I believe God of War and Shadow of the Colossus were made by second or first party companies at Sony. The only true third party game on there is Okami.

Nonetheless, all of those above games you listed are great games. That's what it takes for third party games to sell well, is that the software has to be good. Right now, no third party has really stepped up to the Wii and released a quality game. For better or worse, Nintendo's own games are the best ones available on the platform. Hopefully, other companies can rise to the challenge and make some fantastic games, because once they do, I'm sure they'll sell well. However, if all we get from third parties are watered down ports, then the Wii will pretty much do what the cube did, which is have a fantastic first party lineup with mediocre third party games.

Nonetheless, all of those above games you listed are great games. That's what it takes for third party games to sell well, is that the software has to be good. Right now, no third party has really stepped up to the Wii and released a quality game. For better or worse, Nintendo's own games are the best ones available on the platform. Hopefully, other companies can rise to the challenge and make some fantastic games, because once they do, I'm sure they'll sell well. However, if all we get from third parties are watered down ports, then the Wii will pretty much do what the cube did, which is have a fantastic first party lineup with mediocre third party games.

Agreed.

The Zelda fanbase will generate sales no matter how good/bad the game is (luckily it is a good game) so that is not a real test case for hardcore games on the Wii.

Really? Might it have something to do with the fact that the Zelda series ranks as one of the best selling of all time and that it was the first series to ever score a 10 more than once in Famitsu? I mean, you seem to assume that the Zelda series has succeeded in spite of critical success and that the people buying Zelda are immune to the quality of the game. Since, in general, most Zelda games are extremely well-received, that becomes more of an opinion. And certainly not every Zelda game is as successful as another: Four Swords Adventures certainly didn't enjoy the same success as it's GBA counterpart, for example.

Games like Okami, God of War, Shadow of Collosus had no previous fanbase and sold exceptionally well on the PS2. If the Wii can accomplish this than I will acknowledge it as more than a party toy.

No previous fanbase? Shadow of the Collosus follows directly on ICO's coattails. Okami is Zelda with a very creative art style (see Wind Waker). God of War arrived five years into the PS/2s success., and was the result of several years work...and it shows. Take a good look at the launch titles for the PS2 (http://ps2.ign.com/articles/080/080661p1.html), for example, and you'll see the same thing you see at EVERY console launch....crappy ports, one or two standouts, a few good early adopters and a bunch of rushed out first-to-market sub-standard efforts. It's too early to say that the Wii is/is not a novelty, based purely on launch titles. That said, Zelda:TP is one of the strongest launch titles EVAR. The question is, will new franchises like Day of Disaster and Project HAMMER win audiences over?

You also seem to think that those of us who've been around since the NES (or, like some of us, the Atari VCS and PONG) are being negelected by Nintendo. Some of us, however, feel the exact opposite way...that Nintendo is welcoming many of those disenfranchised gamers (though not you) back. Many people who played video games in the 80s simply stopped when they got older and games continued to get more and more complicated. That doesn't mean that the Wiimote is ideally suited to every type of game: I have Marvel Ultimate Alliance on the 360, not the Wii. Compare the controls on Gears of War to Lost Planet...the former is intuitive and quick to grasp (especially with cover controls being context sensitive) while the later is dizzying at first.

The real question, ultimately, is whether or not Nintendo learned anything from the previous generation. Third party support is critical. A staggered but steady release cycle is critical. A diverse set of games is critical. Judging by early reports, they seem to have grasped this. The dificulty in achieving a Wii suggests it, and if the Wii sells really well, then developers will come to the platform.

Personally, I'd like to see more casual Wii gaems come to the Wii, in addtion to the hardcore.

Personally, having bought a Wii, finished Zelda and then returned the Wii, I kind of think that Nintendo themselves considers the Wii a novelty.

Now before I get flamed to pieces, hear me out. The traditional business model for game consoles is for the manufacturer to sell the system at a loss and make up for the cost through royalties (which eventually pay handsomely if the install base gets big enough).

From all indications, the PS3 is sold at a major loss, the 360 is finally now just breaking even/sold for a small loss, and the Wii is sold for major profits. Despite protestations to the contrary, the Wii is (at heart) a beefed-up Gamecube. They increased clock speeds and ram, but they didn't have to spend loads of money redesigning the chipset or even overhauling their existing manufacturing lines.

They were selling the Gamecube for $99, with packed-in games, and making a profit then ... now they're selling a repackaged/redesigned Gamecube for $249 with a bare-bones pack-in. They simply HAVE to be making money on the system from day one, which (to my knowledge) is pretty unique for a game console.

Nintendo has to know that the so-called "casual" gamers they're targeting can't be expected to buy as many games as the kinds of people who read these forums. Every business decision they've made concerning the Wii has been to cater to the average, non-gaming person. A genius control scheme to rope non-gamers in, and old graphics to keep costs down. There's no need to compete with the PS3 and 360 if their core target doesn't have HDTVs. And let's face it. None of us are in Nintendo's core target.

Since these non-gamers can't be expected to buy more than one or two games a year, Nintendo priced the Wii to get as much profit as they could from as early-on as possible. Despite the fact software attach on the Wii is good so far, no one expects it to stay high. Or for all the grandpas and cat ladies who like the Wii now to support Metroid and Smash Bros a year from now. It could also be the reason they haven't opened other lines of production to meet demand ... they expect the novelty factor to wear off eventually.

Let's face it. The Wii was right up there with the TMX Elmo this past Christmas, and there's a fairly thin release schedule for 2007 going forward. Demand will fall, but they'll still be successful. They'll have gotten the Wii into millions of households and made a profit even if those systems collect dust. I have a feeling in a year from now we'll be able to pick up a used Wii pretty much anywhere.

For the past decade Nintendo's strategy has been to release an "event" game every few months, if that. They may say they consider themselves a "major" player and that the Wii is not a secondary system, but the excessive pricing of the Wii and its peripherals and razor-thin release schedule suggests otherwise. I'm sure they'd love if this new market opens up completely new revenue streams over the long-haul, but they have positioned themselves well in case the Wii ultimately proves to be the adjunct-novelty console some people see it as.

Personally, I hope the Wii has some amazing new games no one's though of yet, and succeeds so well they release an HD version in a couple years. I'll buy another when Mario is released.

They simply HAVE to be making money on the system from day one, which (to my knowledge) is pretty unique for a game console.

Not for Nintendo, it's not. This only came into practice around the time of the Sony PS1, really.

Let's face it. The Wii was right up there with the TMX Elmo this past Christmas, and there's a fairly thin release schedule for 2007 going forward. Demand will fall, but they'll still be successful. They'll have gotten the Wii into millions of households and made a profit even if those systems collect dust. I have a feeling in a year from now we'll be able to pick up a used Wii pretty much anywhere.

I don't doubt that...we can get new and used 360s as well, a year out from launch. Demand isn't infinite, after all. But a quick quiz: which can you buy on Amazon right now, TMX Elmo or the Wii? I think you know the answer. Yesterday, five major retailers ran ads for the Wii and sold out in the same morning. Demand still remains pretty high. While I don't disagree that the novelty will wear off for some, I think you're an outlier if you purchased the system, played one game and resold it a few weeks later.

Even if you're correct that many people will purchase few games, the profit margin on software for the Wii (as an upgraded gamecube) is significantly higher than elsewhere. Development costs are similarly lower, which is also part of Ninty's strategy. Every kid out there who gets a Wii will get games for holidays, birthdays and rewards. This was true of games dating back to the Atari and still is true today.

The real trick is if Ninty can get folks like Popcap and Gamehouse to make things like Bejewled for the Wii. New stuff like Wii Play, Brain Games, The Sims, Wing Island and other more 'casual' games are on the way. Stuff like Metroid, SSBM, Day of Disaster and Project Hammer are coming for the hardcore.

I agree with everything WizarDru said.
Taking a loss on hardware doesn't have to be the norm. Why should Nintendo take a loss when they can just as easily make a profit? They are a business, after all.

Also, I think people seem to get really confused when they compare the Wii with the cube. You're right, at its heart, it is a cube. However, how about all the money that was spent on R&D for the Wii? Making such a controller isn't something that happens overnight, it takes years to perfect it. Also, the Wii offers many new features the cube never did. Built in memory, wireless controllers out of the box, built in wireless for online connectivity, etc. So there are a lot more features that the Wii offers that the cube didn't, which also means extra cost.

Microsoft charges $100 for their wireless adapter for the 360, whereas that comes standard on the Wii. So, you need to see the big picture here when determining the actual costs of the Wii. There's a lot more costs that went into it other than what you see in the base unit.

The Wii is proving to be popular because people like interactivity with their games. Its why games like Guitar Hero, DDR, and Karoke games sell well. People like to interact with the games. Sure the initial craze will wear off as this interaction with videogames becomes more of a standard. However, if good games continue to come out, the system will still prove to be popular. As I said earlier, Nintendo has shown that there is more than one way to play a game. Its up to software developers to create quality software for the Wii. Without good games, the Wii is just an overpriced paperweight.

Also, I think people seem to get really confused when they compare the Wii with the cube. You're right, at its heart, it is a cube. However, how about all the money that was spent on R&D for the Wii? Making such a controller isn't something that happens overnight, it takes years to perfect it.

This was my problem with the Wii I had and returned. The controller. It's obviously the focus of the new system, but I found it awkward and in some cases unnecessary.

Wii Sports, in everything but Bowling, showed a surprising lack of responsiveness and precision. I tried it both on my HDTV and an old CRT, and the lag was evident on both. Towards the end of Zelda I found myself wishing for a controller, as the repetitive movements were tedious and bordered on annoying. With all the hype, I really expected it to be more accurate. Then again, I have a Widescreen HDTV, and the Wii really wasn't designed for me. The CRT was more accurate (probably because it was smaller) but still lagged.

Just based on my own experience with the Wiimote, I don't think the R&D of the controller approached the costs of the competition. That's all.

You're right that if they can get some PopCap games, or some simple games that really utilize the remote, they'll be much better off. But judging from the pricing on the Virtual Console so far, I can only imagine that new games will probably be rediculously expensive.

With all the hype, I really expected it to be more accurate. Then again, I have a Widescreen HDTV, and the Wii really wasn't designed for me. The CRT was more accurate (probably because it was smaller) but still lagged.

Odd, I've found the controller to be fairly accurate, particularly in Tennis and bowling, where your hand position and swing affect a lot. The same for stuff like many of the games in Rayman...with four people throwing knives (well, OK...plungers :p ) at moving targets, we didn't find a problem with responsiveness. Nor in elebits either, for that matter.

Microsoft charges $100 for their wireless adapter for the 360, whereas that comes standard on the Wii.
Well, let's be fair...the controller is $50. You get more than just a wireless controller for the extra cost of the Premium system. Personally, I think the 360s wireless controller is the bees knees, for different reasons than the Wii's controller.

But judging from the pricing on the Virtual Console so far, I can only imagine that new games will probably be rediculously expensive.
Expensive in what context? I purchased Dungeon Explorer last night for $6. That's less than I'd pay for Street Fighter II on XBLA, which is $10. Now, you'd be right to point out that most XBLA games feature some enhancements for Xbox Live...but I think right now they're identifiying the sweet spot on both services. How much of a value add is getting a leader board for Castlevania really worth? I think Nintendo is watching this week very closely to see how Leged of Zelda sells in the VC. It's relative success or failure will probably affect their pricing structure going forward, but I guess we'll see.

As for new games? Games like Zuma and Bejewled made a lot of money selling at $20. If I can download files from XBL or the VC for $15...or in the case of Popcap's Heavy Weapon at XBL, $10...well, I guess expensive is relative. I pay $10 just to get into a movie, these days. (Of course, that's why more people play video games more than go out to the movies, so there you are.)

I agree with everything WizarDru said.
Taking a loss on hardware doesn't have to be the norm. Why should Nintendo take a loss when they can just as easily make a profit? They are a business, after all.


Do you work for Nintendo? Are you a shareholder? Because unless you do, I don't see why Nintendo making money hand over fist should be considered a good thing in and of itself.

Well, let's be fair...the controller is $50. You get more than just a wireless controller for the extra cost of the Premium system. Personally, I think the 360s wireless controller is the bees knees, for different reasons than the Wii's controller.


That post was actually referring to the wireless adapter for online connectivity that MS sells for the 360 at a price of $100, not the wireless controllers. Absolutely "bending the customer over" if we want to complain about peripherals pricing. That said, I STILL think the Wii is about $50 overpriced. -Hope that doesn't derail the discussion and send it down the "is the Wii overpriced" path again, just wanted to be "fair".

Well, let's be fair...the controller is $50. You get more than just a wireless controller for the extra cost of the Premium system. Personally, I think the 360s wireless controller is the bees knees, for different reasons than the Wii's controller.


I was actually referring to Microsoft's Wi Fi adapter.
This retails for $99 and is not included with the $400 premium console.

Do you work for Nintendo? Are you a shareholder? Because unless you do, I don't see why Nintendo making money hand over fist should be considered a good thing in and of itself.

I got news for you. Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo are all in the videogames business to make money.

People get all upset when companies try and profit off of you, but the fact of the matter is that's the whole reason they are here to begin with. Its not a charity, its a business.

I was actually referring to Microsoft's Wi Fi adapter.
This retails for $99 and is not included with the $400 premium console.

Oh, right. Yeah, that is totally lame.

Do you work for Nintendo? Are you a shareholder? Because unless you do, I don't see why Nintendo making money hand over fist should be considered a good thing in and of itself.

Neither is it a bad thing. More to the point, I think CallMeJean was referencing the fact that by being profitable, Nintendo is effectively ensuring it's own survival, regardless of the relative success of the Wii. It's this strategy that allowed them to make the most money in the last generation even while they sold the fewest consoles. Microsoft, by contrast, has made it clear that if the 360 fails (which I see as unlikely, now) then they are out of the market. Sony has stayed mute on the topic, but I think if the PS3 doesn't perform well (the idea of it failing is highly unlikely) then it may be quite some time until we see a PS4 or further iteration of their hardware.

Ultimately, the market will judge whether or not any of the consoles are over-priced for what they are. At the moment, it appears that the Wii is not over-priced or over-priced enough to prevent demand exceeding sales. The 360 was in this place this time last year. The PS3, by contrast, clearly has a problem in this regard. The idea that Nintendo or Sony or Microsoft is making 'too much profit' is kind of silly. It's what they're in business to do. The advantage to the consumer is that if they succeed, we get more of the service that we paid them for in the first place.

Right, but from my own point of view as a consumer, I am looking for the best value for my dollar, which is in direct conflict with a company making larger (relative to its competitors) profits. If Nintendo took a loss on its hardware like the other two manufacturers, the Wii would be a better value for me as a consumer, and I would like it more. Consequently, unless you work for Nintendo or have some other personal stake in the company's success, you should not be citing Nintendo's profitability as a positive thing.

Right, but from my own point of view as a consumer, I am looking for the best value for my dollar, which is in direct conflict with a company making larger (relative to its competitors) profits. If Nintendo took a loss on its hardware like the other two manufacturers, the Wii would be a better value for me as a consumer, and I would like it more. Consequently, unless you work for Nintendo or have some other personal stake in the company's success, you should not be citing Nintendo's profitability as a positive thing.

As was pointed out, if you like Nintendo, and you want to see Nintendo products in the future, you want them to be profitable. Simple as that.

Let's say Nintendo took a loss on the Wii hardware with the hopes of making it up down the road. To you, its a better value. However, let's say many consumers don't show much interest in the Wii and it ultimately doesn't sell well in subsequent years. Well, now you have Nintendo which took a substantial loss on the product, and didn't make it up later. Does that threaten the idea we will see future products from Nintendo? Yes it does.

As a Nintendo fan, I want to see Nintendo profitable so I can continue to enjoy Nintendo products. As much as I love cheap game systems and games, I want Nintendo to keep making the quality hardware and software they currently make. In order for them to do that, they need to profit from it. Otherwise, there's no benefit for them to make it.

If you don't find the $250 Wii to be a good value, then don't buy it. You're letting Nintendo know the best way you can, with your wallet.

Well said. :)

Right, but from my own point of view as a consumer, I am looking for the best value for my dollar,

How about getting the best dollar value on the older systems with cheaper games? The companies can make their profits on the newer games and consoles, and once they are discounted you can get the same thing cheap.

I don't understand the mentality of "I want the next-gen and/or newest thing, and I don't want to pay much for it." If you want the companies to continue to make the shiny new toys, they are going to have to find their profits somewhere. If money is a concern, there are options available to you that don't involve the latest thing.

As was pointed out, if you like Nintendo, and you want to see Nintendo products in the future, you want them to be profitable. Simple as that.


I like Nintendo. I've had 3 of their consoles and every handheld they've released. I've also enjoyed consoles from Sega, Sony, and Microsoft. When Sega pulled out of the console business, I didn't shed any tears, even though I really liked the Dreamcast. Why? Because the other consoles were great, too. I just don't feel the kind of loyalty you describe to a company that is trying to take as much money as possible from me. I've owned consoles from all of those companies at different times because not one company has ever consistently provided the best value (my opinion, of course).

Suffice it to say, I cannot identify with your enthusiasm for helping to widen Nintendo's profit margins, and I also think that Nintendo's conservative business strategy is responsible for the loss of huge chunks of market share and billions in revenue. But that's a different topic.

How about getting the best dollar value on the older systems with cheaper games?

I believe the PS2 was the best selling console this past December, so a lot of people do feel that way. Value is a subjective thing, and for me, the console that provides the most bang for the buck is the Xbox 360.

I just don't feel the kind of loyalty you describe to a company that is trying to take as much money as possible from me.

Trust me when I say every console maker out there is trying to take as much money from you as possible. You like the XBOX 360? That's cool. If you want Wi Fi it costs you an additional $99. If you want online gaming, it costs you $50. If you want to download games, it costs you additional money. Are these things bad? No, because as you, people find value in them. I don't think anyone here will argue there's no value in XBOX Live. Its a great service. But, you do pay for it.

People buy things when they see value in it. If you see more value coming from the 360 than the Wii, then buy more 360 stuff. Again, let your wallet be the feedback you give to the gaming companies.

Make no mistake though, every one of them wants to profit off of you. Companies that lose money on hardware do so with the hopes of making a profit in the end. Its a gamble but has proven to work. They wouldn't take that gamble if they couldn't profit from it.

Nintendo doesn't make financial gambles as much as the other companies, but Nintendo isn't nearly as big as the other companies, so its understanding if they don't want to sell their hardware at a loss. For me, the value I get from the Wii (playing games like Zelda, Wario Ware, Madden, Monkey Ball, and Trauma Center) is well worth the $250 entry fee. To each his own.

Do you work for Nintendo? Are you a shareholder? Because unless you do, I don't see why Nintendo making money hand over fist should be considered a good thing in and of itself.

I have no problem Nintendo is making a profit on their stuffs (even though I didn't own any share), same as Sony and Microsoft.

What's the problem with making a profit? That's why people (e.g. shareholders) invested in businesses. I assumed you have some sort of retirement saving plan, etc. that invested in some sort of shares/common shares, funds, etc. They are, more or less, depends on businesses to make profits.

Whether or not Wii worth your hard earned money or "the best value" is your call. It has just come out so it may not be the "best value" in terms of game availability, etc. You may want to wait a bit for a price drop (probably not in the near future) and/or when there are more games on the shelves.

I just don't feel the kind of loyalty you describe to a company that is trying to take as much money as possible from me.
XBox 360 and PS3 games cost $60. Wii games cost $50, even epic games like Zelda. Do you honestly think it costs Microsoft $50/year per user to keep the XBox Live service running? Not a chance. I don't see Nintendo taking anymore money from us than Microsoft. It has been stated that MS is actually making a profit off of the 360 hardware now. Where's the price drop? It's nowhere in sight because they don't need to drop the price. Sony is not taking business away from them, and so now they can sit back and make money. How terrible.

If you want Wi Fi it costs you an additional $99. If you want online gaming, it costs you $50. If you want to download games, it costs you additional money. Are these things bad? No, because as you, people find value in them.

If the core Xbox 360 had been the only choice, and for component cables, wifi, wireless controller, harddrive, etc., you had to pay drastically high prices, I wouldln't have bought one. As it is, I think the wifi is a ripoff, and I didn't buy it. I think what MS charges for a 20 GB harddrive is a complete ripoff. But again, I didn't have to buy it separately.

Xbox Live is a fantastic value for the money, being the best online gaming service anywhere.

So I guess I just judge things on a case-by-case basis, rather than staying loyal to a particular company across all products. And in the case of the Wii, comparing it to what else is available and the actual technology that you get, I think it is about $100 too expensive. Like you said, to each his own.

If the core Xbox 360 had been the only choice, and for component cables, wifi, wireless controller, harddrive, etc., you had to pay drastically high prices, I wouldln't have bought one. As it is, I think the wifi is a ripoff, and I didn't buy it. I think what MS charges for a 20 GB harddrive is a complete ripoff. But again, I didn't have to buy it separately.

Xbox Live is a fantastic value for the money, being the best online gaming service anywhere.

So I guess I just judge things on a case-by-case basis, rather than staying loyal to a particular company across all products. And in the case of the Wii, comparing it to what else is available and the actual technology that you get, I think it is about $100 too expensive. Like you said, to each his own.

Who said about being completely loyal to one company?
I do own other systems besides the Wii. Again, I vote with my wallet. When a Wii game comes out that I want, I buy it. Same with any other system. You don't have to be loyal to any one system these days. I don't think one system can cover all the bases that I require as a gamer, which is why I own multiple systems.

Automatonjohn: are you a Nintendo user?

If you don't find the $250 Wii to be a good value, then don't buy it. You're letting Nintendo know the best way you can, with your wallet.

I think letting them know with your wallet is a good first way to vote however as a fan of Nintendo products I prefer to be vocal about their shortcomings in the hopes that they hear what our actual concerns are and make the necessary changes.
It's important to let these companies know what we like and dislike. I liked the Wii enough to buy it. I liked all the consoles enough to buy them all BUT each one has places they can make improvements. If the console is just really bad then I won't buy it but I prefer to make the purchase and then make my voice heard.

In the case of the 3 latest consoles I think they have listened. My only gripe with the wii is the lack of HD. I think they seriously missed the mark (for me) on that one.

Who said about being completely loyal to one company?

Well, you basically did when you explained why you are happy about Nintendo's profits. If you don't have a devotion to one company, I don't see why you'd be worried about their survival.

Well, you basically did when you explained why you are happy about Nintendo's profits. If you don't have a devotion to one company, I don't see why you'd be worried about their survival.
I made an investment in Nintendo by buying a Wii, so if course I want them to stay around. Do you think that everyone that bought a Dreamcast didn't care about Sega leaving the console business?

If Nintendo is making a profit, great. I personally feel that $250 is worth the Wii, hence I consider it a good value. It doesn't matter if Nintendo is making $5 or $100 per unit as long as I feel like I get my $250 worth of fun from it. If you feel otherwise, then don't buy it. It's as simple as that.

As gamers, why exactly would we want our grandparents, wives, little sisters and all the "non gamers" playing dumbed down video games on our consoles? They might enjoy playing your Wii but will not buy their own, because they're non gamers.I've seen quite a few people purchase the Wii strictly as a party game machine. This is similar to seeing people buy a PS2 + DDR gamepads just so they can play Dance Dance Revolution. I agree with the previous poster that this type of user will not necessarily increase game sales.

This thread reminds me of another thread from a few months back. In it people were adamant that they would be able to walk into any old store on launch day and pick one up. I revived that thread a few days after launch for a few laughs.

If I remember this thread two or three years from now, this may be another good thread to bring back up for a few laughs. Or even better, bring this thread back in 2011 after both Microsoft and Sony have unveiled their new systems, both with their own motion controllers.

This thread reminds me of another thread from a few months back. In it people were adamant that they would be able to walk into any old store on launch day and pick one up. I revived that thread a few days after launch for a few laughs.

If I remember this thread two or three years from now, this may be another good thread to bring back up for a few laughs. Or even better, bring this thread back in 2011 after both Microsoft and Sony have unveiled their new systems, both with their own motion controllers.

2011? The first XBOX only had a shelf life of 4 years. Chances are Microsoft will be releasing their new system in 2009 or 2010 at the latest. ;)

This thread reminds me of another thread from a few months back. In it people were adamant that they would be able to walk into any old store on launch day and pick one up. I revived that thread a few days after launch for a few laughs.

If I remember this thread two or three years from now, this may be another good thread to bring back up for a few laughs. Or even better, bring this thread back in 2011 after both Microsoft and Sony have unveiled their new systems, both with their own motion controllers.
I thought you were one who said it would be easy to walk right in too. But maybe not. lol

I can't believe that anyone who considers themselves invested with a hardware platform doesn't want their manufacturing company to be around a few years from now (that is, make money now). Why is it that people have such a problem with companies making large profits?

I work for a major US-based financial institution. The day we stop making large profits is the day we cease to exist. We WILL be bought by a more profitable company, it's as simple as that. And if that company doesn't like what we do, then our product will cease to exist (their decision at that point). Perhaps my customers are not as passionate as many gamers, but the exact same scenario will play out.... Nintendo stops making money (lots of money), and Nintendo is no longer around shortly thereafter. Game over. As for me, I want my Wii & my Wii Next-Gen to exist. Therefore, I want Nintendo to make a healthy profit today.

Trus and look at how when the GC was coming in last, many people truly believed Nintendo was abut to give up on making a new console ever again. So it's very good that they have been doing so well financially with the Wii. If Nintendo stopped existing, I would be mroe depressed than I already am becuase no more Zelda and Mario. I suppose they could sell the rights for other platforms to sue them, but I am sure that wouldn't end up working out sow ell.

I can't believe that anyone who considers themselves invested with a hardware platform doesn't want their manufacturing company to be around a few years from now (that is, make money now). Why is it that people have such a problem with companies making large profits?


It's not making a profit that's a problem, it's how it is made. As I said previously, if I felt like MS was making all of its money by charging ridiculous prices for all of their hardware (which in fact they are outside of the premium 360 package and the HD-DVD add-on), I'd feel the same way about the 360 and I'd probably have a PS3 now instead.

Are Bose and Monster great companies because they are so profitable? No. Each may have solid products and some hardcore fans. But conventional wisdom is that they are overcharging for what you actually get.

Automatonjohn: are you a Nintendo user?

Automatonjohn... the above question went unanswered.

Automatonjohn... the above question went unanswered.

I answered it earlier in this thread. I've had 3 Nintendo consoles and every Nintendo handheld.

What good would it have done any of us if Nintendo had simply been the third player in the market with an HD system similar to 360 or PS3? None. It's nice that someone is doing something a bit diferent, because we already have two consoles for big budget shooters or whatever...

Choice is not a bad thing, and I don't understand why people act like it is...people complain that the Wii is not like the other two consoles, etc. Then don't buy one, why do we need something we already have?

Remember too that the adoption rate for HDTV is still pretty low.

The one critique I have of the Wii that some of the people on this thread have voiced is the thin release schedule for the forseeable future. Not a lot there, and a lot is going to be crap. The first-party games will be great, as usual...but we have to hope that the third party support will be a LOT better than on the cube, because the system is selling so well.

Trus and look at how when the GC was coming in last, many people truly believed Nintendo was abut to give up on making a new console ever again. So it's very good that they have been doing so well financially with the Wii.

A lot of people thought that, but a lot of people really didn't understand that in the last generation, only one company never lost money on their console: Nintendo. Microsoft lost money hand-over-fist for the Xbox, and Sony didn't start getting on a return on the PS/2 hardware for several years. They didn't win, by any measure, but they remained consistently profitable.

The one critique I have of the Wii that some of the people on this thread have voiced is the thin release schedule for the forseeable future. Not a lot there, and a lot is going to be crap. The first-party games will be great, as usual...but we have to hope that the third party support will be a LOT better than on the cube, because the system is selling so well.

And this is both a legitimate complaint and a big problem for the Wii. New non-port releases are thin on the ground, post-launch. There's a ton of good games that are in development...but when will we get them? I'd like to hope this is like the DS launch and just a momentary lull that will eventually give way to an influx and not another Gamecube-like walk in the desert. The Virtual Console is cool and all, but I need more than that in the coming months.

If Nintendo took a loss on its hardware like the other two manufacturers, the Wii would be a better value for me as a consumer, and I would like it more. Consequently, unless you work for Nintendo or have some other personal stake in the company's success, you should not be citing Nintendo's profitability as a positive thing.
It's not making a profit that's a problem, it's how it is made.
So you don't have a problem with Nintendo making a profit as long as they don't make it on their hardware? So would you rather pay $60 per game? If Nintendo gave me a Wii for free I would like that more than paying $150 for it (a previously suggested price point). I agree that the Wii is a bit overpriced (been saying that since the announcement), but arguing that Nintendo's profitability is not good is just downright silly. As others have said if you don't like the price point don't buy it or just wait a little while. I didn't like the price of the 360 so I waited and ended up getting the premium console for less than the Wii. That's good value.

So you don't have a problem with Nintendo making a profit as long as they don't make it on their hardware? So would you rather pay $60 per game?

I think that since the Wii is cheaper to develop for, most games for it should be less than $60. A game like Zelda is worth $60. Most of the others should be $40 or less.

I think that since the Wii is cheaper to develop for, most games for it should be less than $60.
And yet, when the hardware costs more to develop and manufacture you want it sold cheaper than cost.

A game like Zelda is worth $60. Most of the others should be $40 or less.
Companies have been arguing for the longest time that, in adjusted dollars, we're paying less for games than ever before while the development costs have skyrocketed. It certainly costs more to make a game for the Wii (even one like Wario Ware) than it did for the Atari 2600, and yet the cost is the same, $50. In adjusted dollars that would be closer to $100 or more per game.

Oh, I forgot, the arguments of a dirty profit-seeking company shouldn't hold any weight, even when they're true. ;)

And yet as a consumer you have more choices than ever before. You can rent games online. One company has a plan where you get one game at a time for $15/month. So if you play a lot of games, beat them, and get bored you don't even need to buy them anymore. For the cost of 1 $60 game you can play an unlimited number of games for 4 months. That's value.

Personally I usually wait for games to go on sale. On the 360 I picked up Gears and R6:V for $40 each. I paid full price for my three Wii games, but in hindsight I should've waited on most of them. I'm very interested in value for my money, and if something isn't worth the money I don't buy it. I don't complain about the profitability of the company. Profit is a very good thing.

A lot of people thought that, but a lot of people really didn't understand that in the last generation, only one company never lost money on their console: Nintendo. Microsoft lost money hand-over-fist for the Xbox, and Sony didn't start getting on a return on the PS/2 hardware for several years. They didn't win, by any measure, but they remained consistently profitable.
Pretty sure Nintendo initially lost money on the GC.

Companies have been arguing for the longest time that, in adjusted dollars, we're paying less for games than ever before while the development costs have skyrocketed. It certainly costs more to make a game for the Wii (even one like Wario Ware) than it did for the Atari 2600, and yet the cost is the same, $50.

1. It's still what the market bears so really no argument it is what it is, Nintendo nor a single customer has much to say about it. If they want to do all that math to prove something it doesn't mean the people will buy into that. $60 is ridiculous for any game imo., games are mainstream enough imo that lower prices should be looked at for more massive sales then higher niche sales, hollywood should be their model as well as Sony's and MS's. But they make it easy for me with current prices, rent.

2. The old cartridges had rom chips in them that were a large part of that cost. Yeah that hurt as well back in the day and there was no place to rent.

Nintendo is simply different then Sony and MS, for them games is their only business and their model seems to be working quite well for them. World domination? No and not needed to get games to people.

What good would it have done any of us if Nintendo had simply been the third player in the market with an HD system similar to 360 or PS3?

It would have let me play Zelda, Mario, Metroid, and the other Nintendo exclusives with gorgeous HD graphics. Admittedly, this isn't quite as good as if Nintendo had just gotten out of the console business altogether, but it's still better than the current situation, where I spend $250, and I get to play hideously ugly low-res prev-gen versions of games.

I was willing to pay it still, because hey, Zelda. But I'm not exactly PLEASED about it, and almost any alternative would have been better.

It would have let me play Zelda, Mario, Metroid, and the other Nintendo exclusives with gorgeous HD graphics. Admittedly, this isn't quite as good as if Nintendo had just gotten out of the console business altogether, but it's still better than the current situation, where I spend $250, and I get to play hideously ugly low-res prev-gen versions of games.

I was willing to pay it still, because hey, Zelda. But I'm not exactly PLEASED about it, and almost any alternative would have been better.

Why do people think that if Nintendo goes 3rd party, it would make their games better? I highly encourage you to read this fantastic article that explains why Nintendo games are so high quality.

http://gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=21708

Any alternative would decidedly not have been better, but most likely far worse. Nintendo makes fantastic games, low res or not. You purchasing a Wii to play their games proves that despite low res graphics, they're still great games.

The Wii is proving to be hugely successful amongst consumers. If Nintendo had not released a new motion sensitive controller that fundamently changes the way we interact with games, would Sony or Microsoft have? Probably not. Be thankful that Nintendo is choosing to do something different and bring us fresh experiences.

As someone above pointed out, we already have 2 perfectly good standard consoles to choose from for traditional type games. The Wii offers us something completely different and I welcome the new interactivity.

I say piffle to that article. The reality is that Shigeru Miyamoto is a genius, and Nintendo management have built a studio around him that's capable of creating great games. If they had to make those games for another console, they'd still make great games.

As for the controller, yes I doubt that other companies would have come out with something like that. I'm not terribly displeased by that, either; the Wii controller enables some fun minigames, but I'm still not convinced that it's better than a good standard controller on something like Zelda. I would take, in a heartbeat, Zelda with a 360 controller and 360 graphics and 360 achievements over a Wii version.

Novelty may be fine for those who are burnt out on the "standard" game consoles. Me, I'm still impressed, and I'll take "much better" over "completely different" any time.

Novelty may be fine for those who are burnt out on the "standard" game consoles. Me, I'm still impressed, and I'll take "much better" over "completely different" any time.

Better is a relative term. Many people find Zelda to be better with the new Wii controller than with standad controls.

If Nintendo goes third party, it would be the end of great mario and zelda games, in my opinion.

(and by the way I find TP to be MUCH better with wii controls, not just a little better. I like having my hands separated for one thing)

1. It's still what the market bears so really no argument it is what it is, Nintendo nor a single customer has much to say about it.
That's not true, Nintendo could raise the price of their games. Who is to say that the market would not bear it? Some games have sold for higher prices in the past (and I'm not talking about adjusted dollars).

hollywood should be their model as well as Sony's and MS's. But they make it easy for me with current prices, rent.
Hollywood IS their model, if you compare the games market to the VHS market of a few years ago there are a lot of similarities. Release a product at high initial cost ($99 for a new release VHS tape, $60 for a new release game). Sell lots of copies to rental and people who just have to have it, and then lower the price ($10-15 for VHS tape, $20-$30 for a game).

Of course it might make more sense to follow Hollywood's current DVD strategy if it weren't for the console wars. A movie studio releases a DVD and almost anyone can watch it. If a game publisher releases a title for one system the market is fragmented with three different major systems. It takes even more development $$ to port a game to every system.

2. The old cartridges had rom chips in them that were a large part of that cost. Yeah that hurt as well back in the day and there was no place to rent.
Yes, and game prices went up with the size of the carts. I remember Phantasy Star III selling on the Genesis for $80 when it was brand new. But even so, game prices have dropped significantly since the days of early cartridges (in adjusted dollars). So development costs have gone way up, production costs have gone down significantly, and prices have dropped a lot.

Better is a relative term. Many people find Zelda to be better with the new Wii controller than with standad controls.
Agrees. And it's not completely different or a 'novelty', it adds additional ways of controlling the character.
It certainly is not for people who are 'burned out' on a normal controller. I can't agree with that statement.
Take Resistance fall of man for example on the PS3. The game requires that when an alien attacks you and grabs on you shake the controller to get it off of you. No one is calling novelty on that one. In fact it adds a fun new dimension to the gameplay.

"1. It's still what the market bears so really no argument it is what it is, Nintendo nor a single customer has much to say about it. "

That's not true, Nintendo could raise the price of their games. Who is to say that the market would not bear it? Some games have sold for higher prices in the past (and I'm not talking about adjusted dollars).

You misunderstood me. I'm saying it is what the market bears period.

I also was using today's movie market of $20-$25 dollars. Yeah they can do what they want. They simply pushed me straight to rentals. In fact I'm mainly a pc gamer and we don't have rentals so I do have to buy there. But when I got the 360 it seemed like a no-brainer to rent due to prices. I'm a little surprised so many people buy a lot still when they can rent. To me it makes a ton of economical sense because the prices per game usually are just way to high.

"1. It's still what the market bears so really no argument it is what it is, Nintendo nor a single customer has much to say about it. "



You misunderstood me. I'm saying it is what the market bears period.

I also was using today's movie market of $20-$25 dollars. Yeah they can do what they want. They simply pushed me straight to rentals. In fact I'm mainly a pc gamer and we don't have rentals so I do have to buy there. But when I got the 360 it seemed like a no-brainer to rent due to prices. I'm a little surprised so many people buy a lot still when they can rent. To me it makes a ton of economical sense because the prices per game usually are just way to high.

Renting is still very inconvenient and does not have the impulse factor.
Many of us have rental stores with a very linited supply of games and Gamefly certainly has an increase in turn-around time.
And some of us like to just have a core library of games to go back to every now and then.

That's fine, that is why I didn't say rent everything. But still imo if your not made of money I don't know how one wouldn't take advantage of renting. But sure go ahead and burn the money, it's not like I haven't over the years on the PC, man I have a ton of games and looking back so much waste on most.

HorrorScope, I agree that games are pricey and I don't buy very many. I usually rent, wait for sales, or wait for the "Player's Choice" or whatever versions (I'm not a fan of used games). I still refuse to buy Super Smash Bros. for the GC at $30 when all the other old games go for $20. On the other hand I picked up Rainbow Six Vegas and Gears of War for $40 each because they seemed like a good deal, and I wasn't disappointed.

I just have a problem with Automatonjohn's POV that hardware makers should give away the console, and then turn around and give the games away as well. I also disagree that a company making a profit is bad. If I've just got to have it I pay the premium, if I can wait a few months or a year I get good deals, the company profits however they can and then they make more games for us to play.

Pretty sure Nintendo initially lost money on the GC.

I meant over the life of the console. You're right...analysts guess that Nintendo was losing about $20 per system at launch....compared with over $100 per system for Microsoft at the same time. Nintendo recouped their loss much more quickly...while MS never fully recouped their loss on the hardware, AFAIK. Sony did after a few years, but I couldn't say when that was, exactly.


Why do people think that if Nintendo goes 3rd party, it would make their games better?

It certainly didn't work for Sega. They've had some good games, but they've had a LOT of really bad ones. One hopes that Sonic for the Wii will break the really long cycle of bad Sonic games (excluding Sonic Rush for the DS and including Sonic for the PS3/360).

One hopes that Sonic for the Wii will break the really long cycle of bad Sonic games (excluding Sonic Rush for the DS and including Sonic for the PS3/360).

I'd heard that the Wii Sonic will be a "throwback" but from looking at the videos it just looks like every other 3D Sonic title, albeit with smaller areas (perhaps owing to the Wii's capabilities relative to the PS3 and 360).

What I'd thought they meant by throwback was a new Sonic, rendered in 3D but with gameplay reminiscent of the original 2D side-scrolling games. Perhaps with some Nights elements thrown in as well. To be honest something along those lines is the only thing that will ever get me to buy a Sonic game again ... I've hated every single attempt at bringing Sonic into 3D, beginning with Sonic Adventure way back on the Dreamcast.

What I'd thought they meant by throwback was a new Sonic, rendered in 3D but with gameplay reminiscent of the original 2D side-scrolling games. Perhaps with some Nights elements thrown in as well. To be honest something along those lines is the only thing that will ever get me to buy a Sonic game again ... I've hated every single attempt at bringing Sonic into 3D, beginning with Sonic Adventure way back on the Dreamcast.

Most of the gameplay I've seen so far appears to be much more limited, control-wise, than previous outings. I like some aspects of the 3D Sonics, but most of them were loaded with total crap elements that ruined the idea of the game. Much of the reviews of the pre-releases seems to indicate that speed is emphasized instead of pointless jumping on robots (and the less said about Shadow, the better). How well it plays will be the real test.

Certainly, if Sega is the example to hold up for how Nintendo could work on their own, it's not a very good case. Especially given what hard times Sega fell upon after dropping their hardware division.

Guys... I was looking at the upcoming game release schedule and didn't see anything that made my pulse quicken...

The only names I saw that gave me a "slight" shiver were Mario and Metroid.

But where are the truly innovative Wiimote games?

...and where the HELL is my 'perfect' Wii puzzle game!!!?

;-)

I'm personally very excited about Sonic and SSX Blur.
Both of those games look fantastic.

Guys... I was looking at the upcoming game release schedule and didn't see anything that made my pulse quicken...

The only names I saw that gave me a "slight" shiver were Mario and Metroid.

But where are the truly innovative Wiimote games?

...and where the HELL is my 'perfect' Wii puzzle game!!!?

;-)
Well, you DID get Wii Sports when the system launched (for free), and now WarioWare. Those alone are fantastic showcases, if you ask me. I think Nintendo has a lot up its sleeve and is just waiting for an event to reveal it all. I think that goes for a lot of other developers too who, late in the game, realized that the Wii was going to sell like crazy. Some people predict that E3 will still have press conferences from all the big companies, so I think we won't have too long to wait for some major announcements. I'm on your side about the puzzle game, though. I'd LOVE to have one ASAP.

On an unrelated matter, you do realize the system hasn't even been out for three months, right?

In the meantime, I think Cooking Mama and Tiger Woods are going to be excellent Wii showcases. And I agree with CallMeJean in that SSX and Sonic appear to be excellent titles, if not quite the innovators you seek. I don't know, but considering this is the low season for games, I'm plenty busy with Wii alone. I find that quite unusual for any system, let alone one that just launched.

But where are the truly innovative Wiimote games?

Well, let's start with yesterday's announcement of Dewey's Adventure (http://wii.ign.com/articles/760/760616p1.html). Pretty interesting use of the Wii controls, and built from the ground-up with the Wii in mind.

SSX Blur has been mentioned, and I admit to looking forward to that one, too. My son and I were both fans of Godzilla: DAMM, so hearing a new Godzilla game designed primarily for the Wii (with 480p and 16:9 support), Godzilla: Unleashed (http://wii.ign.com/articles/759/759955p1.html) , makes me smile.

Sonic is coming in a couple of weeks, which I've been anticipating for a while. You may not be interested in Mario Party 8, but my family has already bought it, in their hearts. :)

There are a lot of games I'm looking forward to, but have no announced dates, yet. DragonQuest Swords, for example, Mario Strikers, Project HAMMER or Day of Disaster are others. I'm even interested, mildly, in the Godfather: Blackhand edition, since I passed on other versions.

Of course, with things like God of War 2 and other non-Wii games coming out, I'm not focusing on just Wii games.

But wait, there's more! The inevitable has finally happened. Konami has announced a new version of Dance Dance Revolution, DDR: Hottest, for the Wii. It will use the Dance Pad AND the Wii Remote and Nunchuk.

I think my new cross-training program has just arrived. ;)

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6165270.html?part=rss&tag=gs_news&subj=6165270

^ I think i've already lost a few pounds thanks to the Wii :D People need to give Ninty a break, they don't make money from any other markets other than gaming like MS and Sony.

If it is a novelty, it sure is a fun and useful one. Giving me daily news updates that I can look at what I want to, and weather that I don't have to wait for on the TV.

The games I'm looking forward to the most are:
Harvest Moon
Animal Crossing 24/7
Super Smash Brothers
Super Mario Galaxy
(A Good Boxing Game)!

All my friends seem to hate the wii. I thought it was kinda fun but I can see myself getting bored with it really quickly.

On an unrelated matter, you do realize the system hasn't even been out for three months, right?

Yeah... I guess I am being a bit of an ass. I forgot what its like to actually own a system in the first year of release! ;-)

There is the excitement phase, followed by the dust-gathering phase, followed by the intermittent use phase, followed by the regular use of new games and back catalog phase...

---

Thanks for cluing me in on those new games! I haven't been hiting the old Wii sites like I should.

There is the excitement phase, followed by the dust-gathering phase, followed by the intermittent use phase, followed by the regular use of new games and back catalog phase...

Yup, standard launch aftermath. I remember I was so starved for GCN title that I was actually counting down the days until NBA Street was released.

My backlog of GCN titles and new releases should hold me over until the AAA titles start coming. Until them I'm in rental mode - already saved $50 by renting Elebits instead of buying it based on reviews and reccomendations. Talk about your no-depth tech demos...

Lately I've found my favorite genres to be RTS, Puzzle Games and Online multiplayer FPS.

I'm hoping Spore and Metroid fulfill some of this.

(counting days...)

And yet, when the hardware costs more to develop and manufacture you want it sold cheaper than cost.


Companies have been arguing for the longest time that, in adjusted dollars, we're paying less for games than ever before while the development costs have skyrocketed. It certainly costs more to make a game for the Wii (even one like Wario Ware) than it did for the Atari 2600, and yet the cost is the same, $50. In adjusted dollars that would be closer to $100 or more per game.

Oh, I forgot, the arguments of a dirty profit-seeking company shouldn't hold any weight, even when they're true. ;)

And yet as a consumer you have more choices than ever before. You can rent games online. One company has a plan where you get one game at a time for $15/month. So if you play a lot of games, beat them, and get bored you don't even need to buy them anymore. For the cost of 1 $60 game you can play an unlimited number of games for 4 months. That's value.

Personally I usually wait for games to go on sale. On the 360 I picked up Gears and R6:V for $40 each. I paid full price for my three Wii games, but in hindsight I should've waited on most of them. I'm very interested in value for my money, and if something isn't worth the money I don't buy it. I don't complain about the profitability of the company. Profit is a very good thing.

The industry has also grown. Instead of 1 million copies they're selling 5 million copies. It's not necessary to maintain the same price to recoup costs due to volume.

That said, the Wii's lack of HD is inexcusable IMO. This is 2007, not 2001. I get the idea of gameplay and all, but that wasn't mutually exclusive with HD; I'd prefer a more expensive console with better hardware.

That said, the Wii's lack of HD is inexcusable IMO. This is 2007, not 2001. I get the idea of gameplay and all, but that wasn't mutually exclusive with HD; I'd prefer a more expensive console with better hardware.

And you can get one: it's called the Microsoft Xbox-360. Or the PS3, if you can wait for some better games. I wanted the Wii to be HD as well...but Ninty isn't shooting for that market, or trying even to fight for it...a mistake, I agree. That's probably why they were so surprised by the higher than anticipated demand for the component cables. AGAIN.

But going HD incurs costs beyond just the hardware: creation of the art assets and game engines become a whole new level of difficult, especially when coding for both HD and non-HD resolutions. Remember the debacles of King Kong and Dead Rising (and the first Lost Planet demo?) No one thought to check how the game looked on a non-HD TV. Take a look at how long it takes to produce a game, now.

Don't get me wrong: I think Gears of War justifies the purchase of an Xbox-360 by itself and validates my HDTV. It is a FANTASTIC game that is visually STUNNING. But that doesn't change the fact that Zelda:TP is one of the best games I've ever played, 480p or not. And my friends and family don't care the Wii Sports is only 480p or that Rayman Raving Rabbids is only 480i (though they lament it slightly)...it's the gameplay that makes these perennial favorites at group gatherings.

One thing I don't see of the Wii at AVS forum is a lot of feedback to those that do have it and if they enjoy it. Yeah it's selling out like mad, but I don't get any real feedback on the games. Is this thing for real? Or a gimmick? Is it fun? Or are you in a waiting for the real content to happen? Etc... Being quite isn't much of a selling pitch.

One thing I don't see of the Wii at AVS forum is a lot of feedback to those that do have it and if they enjoy it. Yeah it's selling out like mad, but I don't get any real feedback on the games. Is this thing for real? Or a gimmick? Is it fun? Or are you in a waiting for the real content to happen? Etc... Being quite isn't much of a selling pitch.
We're too busy playing them to post about it. ;)

Agreed! :)

One thing I don't see of the Wii at AVS forum is a lot of feedback to those that do have it and if they enjoy it. Yeah it's selling out like mad, but I don't get any real feedback on the games. Is this thing for real? Or a gimmick? Is it fun? Or are you in a waiting for the real content to happen? Etc... Being quite isn't much of a selling pitch.

I kind of thought it was implicit, but we're having a blast with it. Understand that different people enjoy it on different levels. We've had one since launch, but my daughter still asks to play Wii Sports. It's still fun, IMHO. My son and I are both still playing Zelda. Elebits is good fun, and like Katamari a game that's...well, it's relaxing, mostly. Not deep, but fun. Rayman comes out whenever friends come over. Excite Truck is a fun distraction. The Virtual Console is a big hit, too.

In short, while I enjoy my 360 (GoW FTW!) and some games are better there, the Wii sees the most play of my four consoles, currently. Yes, Wii Sports is fun. I can't wait for Mario Party 8 and Wario Ware to play with the family and friends, too.

Thanks for some info, I hope you guys can understand my question as there is very little talk of the games here. I’m planning on getting one for Jr. late March for his birthday if I can find one by then, lol.

And those canned responses of "we are busy playing" don't work either, because if the game is good enough you will find time to talk about them and for some odd reason you weren't busy enough to miss reading this post, doh! We've all been around this block countless times and the clichés have to be very tiring to all of us, no? I got it, know it, wrote a book on it. Do you have anything truthful and fresh? lol

Thanks for some info, I hope you guys can understand my question as there is very little talk of the games here. I’m planning on getting one for Jr. late March for his birthday if I can find one by then, lol.

And those canned responses of "we are busy playing" don't work either, because if the game is good enough you will find time to talk about them and for some odd reason you weren't busy enough to miss reading this post, doh! We've all been around this block countless times and the clichés have to be very tiring to all of us, no? I got it, now it, wrote a book on it. Do you have anything truthful and fresh? lol
It was just poking fun, but I'll make sure to run my responses by you in the future, to avoid repetition. :p

One thing I don't see of the Wii at AVS forum is a lot of feedback to those that do have it and if they enjoy it. Yeah it's selling out like mad, but I don't get any real feedback on the games. Is this thing for real? Or a gimmick? Is it fun? Or are you in a waiting for the real content to happen? Etc... Being quite isn't much of a selling pitch.

I invite you to look here (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=753150&page=6&pp=30&#=161) for my long first impressions post.

i'd link directly to my post, but i am not that savy with forum code so you'll have to scroll down manually until you find it.

meantime, Zelda awaits...

CMM.

I invite you to look here (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=753150&page=6&pp=30&#=161) for my long first impressions post.

i'd link directly to my post, but i am not that savy with forum code so you'll have to scroll down manually until you find it.
Here you go: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9610556&&#post9610556

It was just poking fun, but I'll make sure to run my responses by you in the future, to avoid repetition. :p

I see "you were just poking fun". So yah go ahead and run them buy me first... lol

One thing I don't see of the Wii at AVS forum is a lot of feedback to those that do have it and if they enjoy it. Yeah it's selling out like mad, but I don't get any real feedback on the games.
Look around, do some searches on particular games. I posted thoughts about Wario Ware, Elebits, and Rayman a while back. There are plenty of threads about specific games, but there haven't been many new games for a little while as we're in a bit of a dry spell after launch.

If you go over to the 360 forum you'll see much the same thing, a lot of talk surrounding the system itself with a few threads here and there about specific games.

First, the casual crowd is a larger and more diverse crowd. Thus, it's more potential customers.

Second, if you're that hardcore, you'd appreciate the games more than looks. I still play Mario 64 and it's still an amazing game.

If games looked halfway reasonable that would be fine. But when your flagship Zelda title is a blurry mess of green and brown that looks inferior to Xbox games 2-3 years ago, you have problems.

And you can get one: it's called the Microsoft Xbox-360. Or the PS3, if you can wait for some better games. I wanted the Wii to be HD as well...but Ninty isn't shooting for that market, or trying even to fight for it...a mistake, I agree. That's probably why they were so surprised by the higher than anticipated demand for the component cables. AGAIN.

But going HD incurs costs beyond just the hardware: creation of the art assets and game engines become a whole new level of difficult, especially when coding for both HD and non-HD resolutions. Remember the debacles of King Kong and Dead Rising (and the first Lost Planet demo?) No one thought to check how the game looked on a non-HD TV. Take a look at how long it takes to produce a game, now.

Don't get me wrong: I think Gears of War justifies the purchase of an Xbox-360 by itself and validates my HDTV. It is a FANTASTIC game that is visually STUNNING. But that doesn't change the fact that Zelda:TP is one of the best games I've ever played, 480p or not. And my friends and family don't care the Wii Sports is only 480p or that Rayman Raving Rabbids is only 480i (though they lament it slightly)...it's the gameplay that makes these perennial favorites at group gatherings.

I don't think costs are a valid argument. Wii games are just as expensive as 360 games(I own a 360), and MS developers have to develop HD resolution support.

Gameplay is important, but I don't have personal interest in the lineup thus far. And while TP was an excellent game, I would have enjoyed it much more on my 360 giving up the swinging motion in full HD.

The Wii could have been an excellent system for me, but they made their choice, and I made mine.

If games looked halfway reasonable that would be fine. But when your flagship Zelda title is a blurry mess of green and brown that looks inferior to Xbox games 2-3 years ago, you have problems.
I really don't have that much of an issue with it.

If games looked halfway reasonable that would be fine. But when your flagship Zelda title is a blurry mess of green and brown that looks inferior to Xbox games 2-3 years ago, you have problems.

Exaggerate much?

Exaggerate much?
Not really. Whatever TP was, it doesn't change what it could have been if they spent more time on the artwork and textures.

Ocarina of Time pioneered the best graphics to date along with excellent gameplay. They didn't do that this time around, probably because they rushed it a bit for Wii launch.

Not really. Whatever TP was, it doesn't change what it could have been if they spent more time on the artwork and textures.

Ocarina of Time pioneered the best graphics to date along with excellent gameplay. They didn't do that this time around, probably because they rushed it a bit for Wii launch.

LOL. You realize TP was a cube game, right? It was designed for the cube from the beginning. Nintendo could've made it look better on the Wii, but made a conscious decision not to. Personally, Zelda looks amazing, considering it's technically a cube game. It just shows how powerful the cube was.

Anyone who has played RE4, or either of the Metroids at 480p knows what the cube is capable of. That is why I am suprised by the graphics not looking as sharp on the Wii. The graphics should be better on the Wii, no?

Gameplay is important, but I don't have personal interest in the lineup thus far. And while TP was an excellent game, I would have enjoyed it much more on my 360 giving up the swinging motion in full HD.


You know, the funny things is that I hate Zelda's blurry, ****** graphics - those aliased lines combined with low-res texturing looks horribly ****** - and generally speaking I hate all the consoles including that noisy, giant, laughable, ridiculous PoS X360 and PS3 and their retarded, useless PoS controller compared to my PC's kb+mnouse combo. The only thing moved me in Wii was its new controller system and it's hilarious to read your claims about Zelda on 360 when I think of 360's ******, crappy, pathetic stupid controller. :D
I love my Wii for it's controller. Wii is the first thing ever made in console world that is on-pair with PC when it comes to fun.

You know, the funny things is that I hate Zelda's blurry, ****** graphics - those aliased lines combined with low-res texturing looks horribly ****** - and generally speaking I hate all the consoles including that noisy, giant, laughable, ridiculous PoS X360 and PS3 and their retarded, useless PoS controller compared to my PC's kb+mnouse combo. The only thing moved me in Wii was its new controller system and it's hilarious to read your claims about Zelda on 360 when I think of 360's ******, crappy, pathetic stupid controller. :D
I love my Wii for it's controller. Wii is the first thing ever made in console world that is on-pair with PC when it comes to fun.

Wow, the s*** word used 3 times in one post. Did AVS turn the swear filter off? :confused:

LOL. You realize TP was a cube game, right? It was designed for the cube from the beginning. Nintendo could've made it look better on the Wii, but made a conscious decision not to. Personally, Zelda looks amazing, considering it's technically a cube game. It just shows how powerful the cube was.

Yes I fully realize that. They made a conscious decision to rush their game for launch rather than polish it for the current generation. That's precisely my problem.

I would hardly consider a game that's been years in the making a 'rushed' title. Zelda fans were already unhappy that the game got delayed on the cube to instead come out as a Wii launch title. I don't think a further delay to build the game from the ground up for the Wii would've gone over well.

Seeing as how Zelda received fantastic scores and by many sites has won game of the year honors, I don't know how much more anyone can ask of Nintendo. Its been pointed out time and again that cutting edge technology isn't required to make a great game.

Personally, having bought a Wii, finished Zelda and then returned the Wii


so earlier today i was at lunch w\ my boyfriend in this very crowded restaurant and we noticed as a table was leaving there was a guy holding a brand new PS3 box and somehow i remembered your above post.

i have two questions for nbuubu:

1. have you played Zelda:Twilight Princes on the GCN and how does it compare to the motion sensitive Wii version?

and,

2. how do you intend to play the next Wii (only) version of the Zelda game when it comes out?

are you going to buy the Wii AGAIN just to play the next zelda game (and then return it)?

i don't know you personally, but i suspect that you will come to regret your decision to return your wii after completing Zelda TP and that you will find yourself purchasing a Wii once again sooner than you think.

i wonder how much of a novelty you will believe the Wii is then.

Wow, the s*** word used 3 times in one post. Did AVS turn the swear filter off? :confused:

No, it's just you - you still need to learn how handle a filter works... :p

I would hardly consider a game that's been years in the making a 'rushed' title. Zelda fans were already unhappy that the game got delayed on the cube to instead come out as a Wii launch title. I don't think a further delay to build the game from the ground up for the Wii would've gone over well.

Seeing as how Zelda received fantastic scores and by many sites has won game of the year honors, I don't know how much more anyone can ask of Nintendo. Its been pointed out time and again that cutting edge technology isn't required to make a great game.

I don't ask for cutting-edge - I ask for anti-aliased lines, not totally blurry, 90-ish low-rez textures and voices instead of stupid titles.
Zelda, as it is now, rather a shame for Wii or it will be very soon.
Scores are totally inflated, nobody gives a damn about them, sorry.
Zelda is boring for me but that's a subjective term, I don't count it but it's also ugly, looks like a PC game from 2000 - I found it pretty ridiculous calling proper AA cutting-edge in 2006-2007...

Ignorance is blissed, you know.

I would hardly consider a game that's been years in the making a 'rushed' title. Zelda fans were already unhappy that the game got delayed on the cube to instead come out as a Wii launch title. I don't think a further delay to build the game from the ground up for the Wii would've gone over well.

Seeing as how Zelda received fantastic scores and by many sites has won game of the year honors, I don't know how much more anyone can ask of Nintendo. Its been pointed out time and again that cutting edge technology isn't required to make a great game.

The length of time in development is irrelevant...the point is that Zelda failed to showcase the new hardware. The game would have been fine if it was released in 05 on the Gamecube, not in Nov. 06.

Companies like to push games back to help sell new hardware. Microsoft did it with Perfect Dark 0, which ended up having mediocre graphics as well. A year later PD0 is forgotten due to real killer apps like Gears. If you're going to push it back, drop the cube version and make it look better, don't halfass both versions.

Want to turn things around? At least mandate 480p (like the 360 does 720p) and don't release crap like Raymans rabbits.

are you going to buy the Wii AGAIN just to play the next zelda game (and then return it)?

Why not? In 3-4 years the hardware will be rather cheap. Though I'd probably just borrow it from someone, or buy it then give it away as a gift.

I don't think costs are a valid argument. Wii games are just as expensive as 360 games(I own a 360), and MS developers have to develop HD resolution support.

Gameplay is important, but I don't have personal interest in the lineup thus far. And while TP was an excellent game, I would have enjoyed it much more on my 360 giving up the swinging motion in full HD.

If you define $10 less as 'just as expensive', then perhaps. And while you may think Zelda looks terrible, the general consensus among the 1.5 million owners of the game is that it looks pretty good. Is it jaw-dropping in the same way that Gears of War is? Certainly not. But on a SD-TV, most people can't quantify the difference as dramatically...and the overwhelming majority of Wii owners do not own HD sets, yet.

I also think you misunderstood my point. The issue isn't that MS developers have to develop HD content, it's that Wii developers DO NOT. We're already starting to see parallel development lines (see Sega: Sonic...note which one is getting the good buzz and which two aren't) and more and more announcements of licensees coming to the Wii based on it's success in the channel (such as Konami, Red Octane and EAs big announcements last week). It simply costs much less (and thus becomes that much more attractive to a developer) to work on the Wii, allowing a much quicker turnaround time on games. I would hazard that DDR: Hottest Party wasn't much more than a notion two months ago...now they're showing a beta at a trade show. Again, compare the DS to the PSP. The PSP is, on a graphical level, far superior to the DS. But it's getting pantsed in both hardware and software sales. Check the top 100 games sold last year...you'll note several DS million sellers...and not one PSP game.

How big of a millstone the lack of HD will be around Nintendo's neck remains to be seen. What is clear is that the demand for the Wii still far exceeds supply, while the HD capable PS3 lingers in the store, despite Jack Tretton's hallucinatory claims to the contrary. I can see how the lack of HD would immediately drive some people off and that's simply a matter of taste...but I don't think it's going to kill the Wii by a long shot.

If you define $10 less as 'just as expensive', then perhaps. And while you may think Zelda looks terrible, the general consensus among the 1.5 million owners of the game is that it looks pretty good.


Link, please. So far I have only seen a loud but small minority who confesses his feelings online. Majority of people doesn't.


Is it jaw-dropping in the same way that Gears of War is? Certainly not. But on a SD-TV, most people can't quantify the difference as dramatically...and the overwhelming majority of Wii owners do not own HD sets, yet.


This is completely rubbish - if one cannot see the difference, the blurry, crappy textures and those disgusting aliased lines on any SD TV above ~30" then urgent medical intervention needed there.

I think it's the classic mantra-based PR approach: let's repeat after me "It's gorgeous! It's gorgeous! How cute!" etc and if we do it enought times, it sticks.
Congrat Nintendo, you made it. :rolleyes:

Link, please. So far I have only seen a loud but small minority who confesses his feelings online. Majority of people doesn't.



This is completely rubbish - if one cannot see the difference, the blurry, crappy textures and those disgusting aliased lines on any SD TV above ~30" then urgent medical intervention needed there.

I think it's the classic mantra-based PR approach: let's repeat after me "It's gorgeous! It's gorgeous! How cute!" etc and if we do it enought times, it sticks.
Congrat Nintendo, you made it. :rolleyes:


I think the problem with this board is that its members do not represent the average gamer, much less the average consumer who is looking at the Wii.

We have to remember that everything is relative. Most of us have pretty kick ass HT setups and rightfully look at it as a bit of a travesty when our newest game system doesn't harness the full power of our setup.

but Nintendo is smarter than all of us. It is their business to understand who their consumer is and i'll say it again -- the members of this board and others like them are not the top priority for Nintendo.

now back to the theory of relativity. have any of you 360 owners w\ HDTV setups scaled back the graphics to 480p ? i don't own that many 360 games (and i own even fewer Wii titles at the moment) but from personal experience -- and i think you will agree with me if you try -- if you run Kameo, Phantasy Star Universe, Dead Rising, Enchanted Arms, and i know i'm forgetting one or two other titles here in 480p mode, my guess is that you will find Zelda:TP to be more visually pleasing than the above titles.

which brings us back to WizarDru's very valid point (which we all like to dismiss b/c we have amazing HT setups): 95% of the people playing the 360 and the Wii today cannot see what their 360 titles look like at 720p -- graphics-wise i;d sooner have them play Zelda TP on their setup than the above mentioned 360 titles. even Kameo which was supposed to be one of the launch titles that showed off what the 360 can do looks only "average" at 480p -- i have not even tried 480i so i cannot comment.

furthermore... i was a big believer in PLII audio being total crap. the built in DD was a big selling point of the original xbox for me. but i am currently playing thru the dessert temple in Zelda and i am often amazed at the surround sound usage i'm getting from this game. TP is one of the few games that is restoring my faith in PLII audio. but relative to the rest of the world, 95% of which can only here stereo sound, the difference between a DD xbox/360 and a PLII Wii or GCN is meaningless.

you can give people a 720p capable console all day long but without a component cable and a tv with component cable inputs you are wasting your time. it's totally important to understand that the members of this board are not a represenative sample of people buying consoles (gamers or otherwise) and until this comes to pass, it will make more sense to spend resources and console processing power on things that will effect the average consumer.

finally, T2k, just as you say that we are all touting the "classic mantra-based PR approach" i can tell you that comments like "DISGUSTING aliased lines" (my emphasis) totally betray that your statements are pretty much catastraphising. for you a non-HD capable consoles released on the eve of 2007 is unacceptable, period. And no matter how logical our comments are they could never change your mind. Personally, i believe you are being unreasonable, but i have seen it many times on this board in every single forum -- i guess its part of being an audio/video-phile.

most Wii users are not like us -- or not like you anyway. so if the Wii doesn't suit your gaming needs then don't buy one or sell yours. i'm sure you could do really well even w\ a used Wii on ebay

if games like TP don't offer the kind of quality you expect in a video game, the Wii is not for you. i on the other hand still cannot believe how much fun Wii-Tennis and Wii-Bowling are -- it never gets old! now that's quality! but again you and i obviously have different ideas of what quality is.

Nice post galve2000... well said and accurate.

I would counter that, for this forum, it's still fair to gripe about the Wii ignoring the new 720p standard for gaming. But I think you stated it right... I know why Nintendo made that choice, I just wish they didn't.

But with that said... I've had a lot of fun with TP and Excite Truck -- even on an HDTV.

Link, please. So far I have only seen a loud but small minority who confesses his feelings online. Majority of people doesn't.

I'm not sure what you'd like a link to, exactly? Perhaps to the various Game of the Year nominations? How about this review from IGN: (http://wii.ign.com/articles/746/746691p3.html) :
"Twilight Princess is a GameCube port and therefore not wholly indicative of what we can expect visually from truly ground-up Wii titles. It also happens to be a very pretty GCN effort that is made all the prettier on Wii because in addition to supporting a progressive-scan mode it also outputs an exclusive 16:9 widescreen display. The game world is vast and beautifully designed. Nintendo's artists have worked overtime to model the characters and locations that make up Hyrule and it shows. Link features more detail than ever before and many of the enemies that looked quasi-silly in previous Zelda titles are now genuinely spooky. Take, for instance, the Poes -- ghosts which now feature designs that resemble the grim reaper.

There are definitely visual standouts. The shimmering, realistic water in the game is gorgeous and looking at it we can't believe this was originally a GameCube effort. The Twilight Realm's bloomy art style is equally impressive. And the particle and lighting effects that highlight everything from flowing lava to fights with enemies are second to none. The whole game runs smoothly at 30 frames despite the fact that it spits out the biggest world in Zelda history and by a large margin. "

Or How about this review from Gamespot ("http://www.gamespot.com/wii/action/thelegendofzelda/review.html)? "The Wii was designed with relatively modest graphical capabilities, at least from a technical perspective. So if you spend a lot of time trying to pick apart the visuals of Twilight Princess, you'd notice plenty of low-res textures and jagged edges. But that would be missing the point. Twilight Princess is an excellent-looking game due to some terrific art design. Much has already been said about the art style reverting back to a more mature or realistic look after Wind Waker took the series in a decidedly cartoonlike direction. While there's nothing terribly "mature" about this T-rated game, it looks absolutely great from an artistic perspective. The world itself offers the sort of variety you'd naturally expect from a fantasy game, with everything from lakes to deserts to dungeons, but it's when you start seeing the twilight realm that the game really takes off, visually.

I'm not arguing that Zelda has better graphics than Gear of War. I'm saying that Zelda, despite the occasional low-res textures or jaggies, has a level of art design and visual splendor that is, it's own way equal to it. You may not agree, but clearly if the game was hideously ugly or even just functional, it would not be as tremendously popular as it is. Look at every review that you can get to from a place like Gamerankings or Metacritic. All of them agree: Zelda is a good-looking game, particularly in 16:9 at 480p, due it's design and art direction...in spite of it's technical limitations.

Several people in my office have sought me out to tell me that the Wii was fun, after they got it. Not "if only it had better graphics". Not "it's unacceptable that it only runs at 480p." Only "It's so Fun we have to buy more games, what do you recommend?" or "Do you know where we can find one for my sister-in-law?" While I understand that for you, 480p has become unacceptable as a standard for a video-game, for many, many consumers it is a non-issue. Consider that the PS2 was one of the best selling consoles of the holiday season and ask yourself...'did they buy it for the 480p God of War 2, or did they get it for the thousands of non-HD games out there?' I don't think it's mindless fan-service to point out the reality of the current video market, but YMMV.

I don't think its just a fad. With it outselling the PS3 3:1 in Japan alone, and it basically coming with a free Gamecube, its here to stay. Oh, yeah its fun to play too. What else could you want? Zelda is awesome, and Wii Games and Wii Play are also fun/addictive.

Thought I should add. This is coming from a person whe hasn't bought a game system since the Super Nintendo. I bought the Wii b/c of the "gimmick" and the VC. Niether has disappointed and actually surprised me! The only "gimmic" is that the games are actually fun compared to just being pretty graphics and no substance.

The Wii is what a gaming system should be...a system with fun/addictive games. And on my 90" 16:9 screen with 720p projector the graphics look pretty damn good. Even on the VC regular Nintendo games. The amazing world of upscaling my friends. If you aren't happy with 480p are you trhowing away all your DVDs as well? (and yes I have HDTV and HD DVD so I know what higher resolution looks like).

I didn't play Zelda:TP because the graphics looked horrible on my hdtv. Nintendo will always get ALOT of love from the media/masses because they are Nintendo. Alot of their games are overrated. Nintendogs, New super mario, etc. I was playing super mario world on gba a few days ago and it was more fun than most of the crap Nintendo poops out these days.

finally, T2k, just as you say that we are all touting the "classic mantra-based PR approach" i can tell you that comments like "DISGUSTING aliased lines" (my emphasis) totally betray that your statements are pretty much catastraphising. for you a non-HD capable consoles released on the eve of 2007 is unacceptable, period. And no matter how logical our comments are they could never change your mind. Personally, i believe you are being unreasonable, but i have seen it many times on this board in every single forum -- i guess its part of being an audio/video-phile.


I'm not following you - what the heck lack of HD has to do with lack of AA on Wii (sans the obvious fact the more you lower the rez, more AA you would need)?
:confused:

I think you're confused: AA is pretty much a must-have in SD.


most Wii users are not like us -- or not like you anyway. so if the Wii doesn't suit your gaming needs then don't buy one or sell yours. i'm sure you could do really well even w\ a used Wii on ebay

if games like TP don't offer the kind of quality you expect in a video game, the Wii is not for you. i on the other hand still cannot believe how much fun Wii-Tennis and Wii-Bowling are -- it never gets old! now that's quality! but again you and i obviously have different ideas of what quality is.

Indeed, you're confused. :)
I have no problem with Wii for being SD only - I have a problem with Zelda - and with all the current Wii games - for having ugly aliased graphics, blurry low-res textures etc.
It's a GC game, marketed as a Wii one and I resent it.

I don't think its just a fad. With it outselling the PS3 3:1 in Japan alone, and it basically coming with a free Gamecube, its here to stay. Oh, yeah its fun to play too. What else could you want? Zelda is awesome, and Wii Games and Wii Play are also fun/addictive.

Thought I should add. This is coming from a person whe hasn't bought a game system since the Super Nintendo. I bought the Wii b/c of the "gimmick" and the VC. Niether has disappointed and actually surprised me! The only "gimmic" is that the games are actually fun compared to just being pretty graphics and no substance.

The Wii is what a gaming system should be...a system with fun/addictive games. And on my 90" 16:9 screen with 720p projector the graphics look pretty damn good. Even on the VC regular Nintendo games. The amazing world of upscaling my friends. If you aren't happy with 480p are you trhowing away all your DVDs as well? (and yes I have HDTV and HD DVD so I know what higher resolution looks like).

Well after SNES Wii must look pretty damn good for you... :p

I think you're confused: AA is pretty much a must-have in SD.


I certainly know that most of the SD owners I know just can't even enjoy a videogame if there's no AA :rolleyes:

Seriously, if you're going to whine about no AA in games, then the Wii is not for you, plain and simple. Please buy a 360 or PS3 and enjoy it rather than coming here to whine about graphics on a console that for the last year and a half we've known would not be a graphics powerhouse.


Indeed, you're confused. :)
I have no problem with Wii for being SD only - I have a problem with Zelda - and with all the current Wii games - for having ugly aliased graphics, blurry low-res textures etc.
It's a GC game, marketed as a Wii one and I resent it.

Once Zelda was announced for the Wii, Nintendo never told us it was something it wasn't. They said from the get go it was exactly the same game as the cube version. The only difference was the controls and 16:9 support(and mirrored dungeons I guess). Everyone knew exactly what they were getting with Twighlight Princess well in advance. If you're disappointed with the end result and felt you were duped, then you are the one that is confused.

I certainly know that most of the SD owners I know just can't even enjoy a videogame if there's no AA :rolleyes:


Ummm so suddenly "no HD" has been forgotten as my sin? :rolleyes:

Ehh, moving goalpost too much? How pathetic.


Seriously, if you're going to whine about no AA in games, then the Wii is not for you, plain and simple.


I understand that your very limited knowledge on the subject blurs your vision but as far as I know you are quite a nobody to tell me what to do.
It's called don't post if you have nothing to add, you know.

As for AA: I am willing to bet we will see proper AA a year from now, latest 15 months on Wii. You seem to be confident it's not possible - are you up for a bet?


Please buy a 360 or PS3 and enjoy it rather than coming here to whine about graphics on a console that for the last year and a half we've known would not be a graphics powerhouse.


Still unable to interpret my first post? :rolleyes: I clearly stated why I bought Wii - yet you are telling me to buy the others... how about reading my post before coughing up another stupid rant like this?



Once Zelda was announced for the Wii, Nintendo never told us it was something it wasn't. They said from the get go it was exactly the same game as the cube version. The only difference was the controls and 16:9 support(and mirrored dungeons I guess). Everyone knew exactly what they were getting with Twighlight Princess well in advance. If you're disappointed with the end result and felt you were duped, then you are the one that is confused.

Sure, I am confused, not you, huh? Just reading back shows how "bulletproof" is your understanding about anything in graphics... :D