Topic: I do want the Wii U to fail

[Chozo Ghost]

Just an FYI to everyone. 

[ShyGuy]

I'm afraid you are going to be GRAVELY disappointed.

October is Spooky Pun Month

[Chozo Ghost]

Someone did change my title a day or two ago, but now its back. Why beat a dead horse? I have it in my signature and I even made this thread about it. Everyone knows I said it. I don't deny it. Why can't we just move on? You know people say things in the heat of the moment they mean at that time but they might not always mean. It doesn't need to be there as a permanent reminder. All it does is make me look like a troll, and I don't want that.

It isn't even in the context I said it. I said more than this, but someone (Uncle Bob?) snips only this out and removes it of all context. That ain't right. If you're going to quote something someone said, quote the whole thing, not just a piece of it that makes them look bad.

Its in my signature too, so what do you want from me? What is your goal?

[UncleBob]

Was it something said "in the heat of the moment"?

Because you constantly ride the "Nintendo is stupid, I hope they fail" train to the point where it's obsessively annoying.

This is good, because if the Wii U fails then it won't be a death blow for the company. That said, I do want the Wii U to fail because it would be a wake up call and it would force them to reconsider their focus and start catering to their core gamers. They have enough money in the bank that the Wii U could be a total disaster, but the company would still survive, and my hope is Iwata and Reggie would face a vote of no confidence and replaced by someone who will steer the company back on course.

The core statement you made was "I want the Wii U to fail because it isn't what I want."  You don't care about Nintendo, the folks who work there, the gamers who are excited for the system, nothing.  Your sole desire is that the Wii U fails so that you get what you want, everyone else be damned.

How's that for context?

[lolmonade]

Like the applaud/smite system for this website, you're the only one that cares, which is the reason why you're the butt of jokes for it.

[Tamazoid]

Don't we all? 

[MrPhishfood]

I was beginning to wonder what these points were. I knew there was a connection between negative points and the angriest users.


Who actually gives out these points?

[Ceric]

I was beginning to wonder what these points were. I knew there was a connection between negative points and the angriest users.


Who actually gives out these points?

Older Users.  I think its 3000 post or something like that.

[ShyGuy]

Isn't UncleBob 'Spooktacular' at falsifying user's statements?

[ThePerm]

this was my wii u mockup



this is what Sony ought to do.

[Retro Deckades]

You know people say things in the heat of the moment they mean at that time but they might not always mean.

The beautiful thing about the internet is that people need not post their knee-jerk reactions. Unlike a face-to-face argument, we can allow the "heat of the moment" to pass and respond after we fully articulate our thoughts.


Of course, that's not always the case, but people often seem to go to extremes on internet forums, and if they don't mean to, it's often interpreted in such a manner. If everyone remembers this, we all might get along just fine. 

[MrPhishfood]

The Internet is a little more sinister these days.

Some users are even professional trolls. People paid by companies to hype products and perform damage control when things go wrong.

http://www.cinemablend.com/games/EA-Viral-Marketing-Exposed-Big-Buyout-Horizon-40885.html

[Pixelated Pixies]

I'm in an odd position whereby I've owned almost every Nintendo console and handheld (excepting the GBC and Virtual Boy) and I currently only own Nintendo systems (Wii & 3DS), yet I'm not a fanboy. Given my history with Nintendo I might be classified by some as a Nintendo fan; yet, my appreciation of Nintendo games and previous Nintendo systems has not impeded me from stepping back and assessing things objectively, and for me the Wii U is simply not appealing.
 
I think alot of the negative marks you see to the left of this post are probably the result of people who disagree with or feel uncomfortable about my opinions (which is fine), or perhaps even some people might find their excitement being sapped by my arguments. People don't seem to like it when your arguments threaten their enjoyment of something.
 
As an enthusiast of video games, however, I feel a natural urge to discuss these things. All I can do is give my thoughts and speak truthfully. If people disagree with my opinions on the Wii U so be it.
 
Personally, I agree with Chozo Ghost to a certain extent. Nintendo as a company has always been conservative, and slow to change. Nintendo only seems to recognise the rest of the industry when their back is against the wall. Embracing online, switching to a disc format, doing more to engage third parties, these were things that Nintendo ignored until it was too late and the industry had moved on and left them behind.
 
It's not so much that I want the Wii U to fail, but I do feel that Nintendo is not currently meeting the needs and expectations of a large section of core gamers. I'm actually a little worried that the company might be sleep walking into a third place position in this next generation (or perhaps worse). If it takes the Wii U to falter in order to prompt Nintendo to stop d***ing about with tablet controllers, motion controls and 3D, and for them to make something that is more console than toy, then perhaps that wouldn't be the worst thing in the world.

[TJ Spyke]

I was beginning to wonder what these points were. I knew there was a connection between negative points and the angriest users.


Who actually gives out these points?

Older Users.  I think its 3000 post or something like that.

You get the ability to applaud/smite at 1,000 posts. Some people smite regardless of the quality of the post (which is why mine is so high).

[MrPhishfood]

I've always felt that consoles were just an extension of toys and Nintendo as a toy manufacturer. All of Nintendo's game ideas are centered around just having fun. Sure all games are supposed to be fun, but Nintendo seems to define it better than anyone and on a consistent basis.

There's this kid I know and he asked if I wanted to do some multiplayer with him online on PS3. I told him I can only play on 360 and he was disappointed. The reason being his dad has a 360 but the control pads are too big for 11 year old hands. While the online services of 360 and PS3 are okay for us who are technologically inclined, I don't think this is true for children.

So yeah Nintendo didn't have a good online infrastructure for the Wii and I think that's because they couldn't think of a way to make it safe and enjoyable for Children. Microsoft and Sony didn't really have that problem because they market their stuff to teens and adults.

If you were you ask me what defines a games console as a games console? I would tell you it does a great job at being a toy.

I'm not really certain what the needs and expectations of core gamers are but browsing around the web I would think its something like:

• significantly better graphics than previous generation
• standard dual analogue control pad
• online + social infrastructure

I get that these core gamers want to be treated like adults but that's expecting too much from Nintendo because adults aren't the only audience they cater to. I think while children exist in this world and still like to have fun, Nintendo will never die out.

[Chozo Ghost]

Was it something said "in the heat of the moment"?

Because you constantly ride the "Nintendo is stupid, I hope they fail" train to the point where it's obsessively annoying.

This is good, because if the Wii U fails then it won't be a death blow for the company. That said, I do want the Wii U to fail because it would be a wake up call and it would force them to reconsider their focus and start catering to their core gamers. They have enough money in the bank that the Wii U could be a total disaster, but the company would still survive, and my hope is Iwata and Reggie would face a vote of no confidence and replaced by someone who will steer the company back on course.

The core statement you made was "I want the Wii U to fail because it isn't what I want."  You don't care about Nintendo, the folks who work there, the gamers who are excited for the system, nothing.  Your sole desire is that the Wii U fails so that you get what you want, everyone else be damned.

How's that for context?

Not true. I said I want the Wii U to fail, which was in the context of the dismal E3 showing. Since then a lot more games have been announced and my position has softened.

Also, I only said I want the Wii U to fail. I never said I wanted Nintendo to fail. The reason I said I wanted the Wii U to fail was so Nintendo could be like they used to be. The NES and SNES were the consoles I grew up with and to this day they remain my favorites of all time. So what do you have to say about that?

I also actually liked the Gamecube even though most people didn't.  It was only with the Wii that I was actually disappointed and it made me jump ship to another console. I don't want the Wii U to be a repeat of that. That is why I said I wanted it to fail. It has "Wii" in the name, and that name has a bad taste in my mouth.

But to put it simply I hate the brand, but not the company behind it. BTW, I also have a DSi and you don't hear me hating on that. The only problem I have with the 3DS is it doesn't have dual analogs integrated into it by default. I'm still holding out hope this is going to happen in a revision, but even if it doesn't I probably will still pick up a 3DS at some point.

Again, its only the Wii I have a problem with. And that's because of the casual waggleware and little else available. The other Nintendo systems weren't like that. The N64 and Gamecube had droughts, but at least when there were games they were awesome.

[Adrock]

If it takes the Wii U to falter in order to prompt Nintendo to stop d***ing about with tablet controllers, motion controls and 3D, and for them to make something that is more console than toy, then perhaps that wouldn't be the worst thing in the world.

Except that's most likely not what would happen. Nintendo doesn't play follow-the-leader because they know that means they're never the leader. They would just try a different strategy. In some ways, that's a much better way. The idea is to leapfrog the competition rather than catch-up to them. Sometimes that works; sometimes that doesn't. A few people here like to attach themselves to all the times that it doesn't while ignoring all the times it does.

I wish Nintendo would try to balance that out more. Microsoft (and to a lesser extent Sony) have had decent ideas, namely in the realm of online gaming. If they at least acknowledged some of those ideas, they would be in a better position to anticipate the curve. I don't think Wii U (or any Nintendo hardware) has to fail for this to happen. In fact, I think we're kind of seeing it with things like the Wii U Pro Controller's shameless resemblance to the 360 controller. People generally like the controller so that's not a bad thing to takes cues from (which is itself an evolution of Nintendo's own SNES controller). It's definitely important for Nintendo to add their own flavor to things. That's what makes them Nintendo.

[Chozo Ghost]

The beautiful thing about the internet is that people need not post their knee-jerk reactions. Unlike a face-to-face argument, we can allow the "heat of the moment" to pass and respond after we fully articulate our thoughts.

Everyone was disappointed over E3 and that was the time when I said that. When I said it I meant it. Since then a lot more has come to light and my position has softened, even though I still have some concerns about a few things. Knowing what I know now I probably wouldn't say what I said back then. But back then? Sure. It was a different time and I meant it 100% then. If Nintendo hadn't held back so much from E3 people wouldn't have been as disappointed by it as they were. That's not my fault, and I'm not the only one who felt that way at the time.

[NWR_insanolord]

Nintendo doesn't play follow-the-leader because they know that means they're never the leader. They would just try a different strategy.

This is exactly true. Really, if you want Nintendo to play the same game as Sony and Microsoft, the Wii U is probably as close as they're going to get. Standard controller (plus screen) and what I think is going to be closer in terms of hardware power than most people expect.

[Mop it up]

Nintendo doesn't play follow-the-leader because they know that means they're never the leader.

Isn't this what got Sony great success?

[NWR_insanolord]

Sony's success was more of a result of Nintendo's business practices and the way Nintendo designed the N64 than of anything Sony did themselves. As far as I know, Sony and Microsoft aren't currently hated by third parties to anywhere close to the extent Nintendo was in those days.

[Adrock]

Isn't this what got Sony great success?

Only if you ignore the fact that Nintendo and Sega both made some obscenely boneheaded decisions at roughly the same time. Sony were successful by default. They just had to be not Nintendo/Sega. If you think you can count on that, sure, that's an excellent strategy.

EDIT: Damn you, insano. 3 minutes...

[Mop it up]

Sony still followed (copied) the leader and then became the leader, so the strategy can work.

Thinking about it, has the market leader ever changed without the current leader messing themselves up? Nintendo became the leader when Atari killed the market with saturation, Sony became the leader by doing things right when both competitors did things wrong, and then Nintendo became the leader after Sony priced themselves out of the market with the PS3. So it would seem the strategy for becoming the leader is to wait until the current leader does something stupid.

[Pixelated Pixies]

@MrPhishfood

I don't disagree. Nintendo are totally hitting that market for children and with the Wii were able to attract alot of people who don't normally buy games. That's kind of the point I was making though, Nintendo in recent years has not been as good at attracting what might be called 'core gamers'. It's not a term I like using but there is definitely a difference between people like myself who play more complex games and who also play them more regularly, and those people for whom video games are a novelty.
 
I personally don't think it's too much to expect Nintendo to design a console which redresses the balance between the more casual friendly approach they took with the Wii and something which would be more appealing to 'core gamers'. There's a reason why the Wii plummeted in popularity in the last few years. Casual gamers bought a handful of games, got bored and moved on to 'Draw Something'. There were people like me who stuck around and continued to buy First and Third Party games, WiiWare games, and Virtual Console games, but that insane band of people wasn't enough to support the system. Most core gamers simply went to Sony and Microsoft.
 
@Adrock
 
I'm not smart enough to predict what might happen to Nintendo in the hypothetical scenario that the Wii U fails, lol. All I meant was that if it took something on the scale of a bodged system launch to turn the boat around then from a purely selfish perspective I'd be ok with that. I agree though, in all likelyhood Nintendo would not take the lessons I might hope they would from such a failure. Nintendo is a weird company and I don't think I'll ever fully understand their decisions.
 
I agree that Nintendo's huge success has been due in large part to their ability to walk their own path, but I also feel that their intransigence has been their biggest weakness. I do wish they would take what has been proven to work and which is popular and incorporate it into their own designs. Instead, however, they continue to fall down their own little rabbit hole.

Having one circle pad on the 3DS only to release not one but two versions of the circle pad pro, not having analogue sticks on the Wii U gamepad, having a touch screen on the gamepad which is far less functional than those screens which most people are now familar with, having a Wii U pro controller which does not have force feedback, offering only 32 GB of internal storage, these are all things which Nintendo has either not acknowledged as being issues or has chosen to ignore for cost purposes. You can also see this complacency in some of their games. Not having leaderboards in NSMB 2, not having online in Pikmin 3, their decision to release year old games digitally on eShop for full retail price. These decisions just seem bizarre to me.
 
True, Nintendo's bizarreness has helped to distinguish them in the market, but having gone through all this before as a Wii owner, I'm feeling a little weary of their wacky decision making. Ultimately, I just want something that isn't a chore. I don't want friend codes, I don't want poor online services, I don't want 8 and 9 month gaps in the release schedule, I don't want to have to use 3 different controllers, or motion controls, or tablet controllers. I want my games to be complex, engaging, challenging and, yes, I would like for the graphical capability of the system to not be a hinderance to the imaginations of the game designers. I want exactly what you've stated. I want Nintendo to gain a certain level of equality with their competitors rather than continuing to play catch up.

What I don't want is a Wii U, lol.

[NWR_insanolord]

Why are you so against the tablet controller? It does literally everything any other controller does, and then some.

[Pixelated Pixies]

Why are you so against the tablet controller? It does literally everything any other controller does, and then some.

Let me ask you something. If there wasn't a screen in the middle of it, but it was exactly the same shape and design, would you think it looked as good or felt as comfortable as say a 360 controller or a Gamecube controller? I think people are giving this controller more credit simply because it has a touch screen. For people like myself who aren't all that into touch controls the disadvantages of having an unwieldy controller are not offset by the benefits of having a touch screen.
 
You could of course argue that for people like me there is the Pro controller. From recent reports I've read and heard, however, that controller feels incredibly cheap, very light, and for lack of a better word 'plasticky'. I also believe that it lacks certain features like clickable sticks and force feedback. It sounds as though it's basically a Classic Controller in other words, and while that's fine for virtual console games, I don't really want that to be my primary means of playing modern games.

[Oblivion]

Your argument is invalid, considering everyone that has used the controller said that it is extremely light and comfortable. If you can't handle that, I suggest that you start lifting weights.

[MrPhishfood]

I use to remember a time when things got smaller and lighter it meant that technology was improving and therefore worth more. People said the same thing about the iPhone 5, it was too light and so therefore felt cheap despite having been improved in almost every aspect.

[Pixelated Pixies]

Your argument is invalid, considering everyone that has used the controller said that it is extremely light and comfortable. If you can't handle that, I suggest that you start lifting weights.

Your comment is invalid because you think 'everyone' came away with the same impressions of the controller when they most certainly did not. I've listened to several podcasts in which people who have had hands on time with the controller have raised concerns about how the controller feels.

[NWR_insanolord]

Why are you so against the tablet controller? It does literally everything any other controller does, and then some.

Let me ask you something. If there wasn't a screen in the middle of it, but it was exactly the same shape and design, would you think it looked as good or felt as comfortable as say a 360 controller or a Gamecube controller? I think people are giving this controller more credit simply because it has a touch screen. For people like myself who aren't all that into touch controls the disadvantages of having an unwieldy controller are not offset by the benefits of having a touch screen.
 
You could of course argue that for people like me there is the Pro controller. From recent reports I've read and heard, however, that controller feels incredibly cheap, very light, and for lack of a better word 'plasticky'. I also believe that it lacks certain features like clickable sticks and force feedback. It sounds as though it's basically a Classic Controller in other words, and while that's fine for virtual console games, I don't really want that to be my primary means of playing modern games.

The GamePad's a lot more comfortable than it looks. It's bigger, but is no heavier than a 360 controller, and although I didn't spend extended time with it, it felt good in my hands. I wouldn't call it unwieldy by any means. The Pro controller is very (very) light, but I didn't think it felt cheap, and I'm pretty sure it does have both clicking sticks and rumble.

[Pixelated Pixies]

@NWR_insanolord
 
In terms of it being 'unwieldy' I was actually referring to it's size, not so much it's weight. Most of those who have used the controller have said it feels good to hold, which is reassuring, but it's still an awefully big controller. Which makes sense given the screen, but again that's not really what I'm after from a controller.
 
As to the clickable sticks and rumble, that's very possible. I was listening to an episode of 1Up's 'Games Dammit' in which Jose and Rich George from IGN had mentioned that it did not seem to have those features, but they did seem slightly unsure.

[Chozo Ghost]

Your argument is invalid, considering everyone that has used the controller said that it is extremely light and comfortable. If you can't handle that, I suggest that you start lifting weights.

lol

But to be fair, most of the people who have used the controller so far have only played it for like 15 minutes or so. What about someone who plays it for hours on end? We aren't going to know that until the system is out and we are able to give it a proper test. 15 minutes isn't going to give you the whole story.

[NWR_insanolord]

@NWR_insanolord
 
In terms of it being 'unwieldy' I was actually referring to it's size, not so much it's weight. Most of those who have used the controller have said it feels good to hold, which is reassuring, but it's still an awefully big controller. Which makes sense given the screen, but again that's not really what I'm after from a controller.
 
As to the clickable sticks and rumble, that's very possible. I was listening to an episode of 1Up's 'Games Dammit' in which Jose and Rich George from IGN had mentioned that it did not seem to have those features, but they did seem slightly unsure.

But why is it being big a problem, then? It's not what you normally see, sure, but I really don't see how it being bigger is in and of itself an issue.

[Pixelated Pixies]

@NWR_insanolord
 
Bearing in mind that I haven't yet held it myself, based on it's dimensions I would have thought it would be more cumbersome. I tend to be most comfortable lying on my side with the controller in my hands, I don't quite see how that would work while holding a 10 inch wide tablet. I'm not saying it's a huge issue, but there's no getting around the fact that a larger tablet design is more cumbersome than say a Gamecube controller.

[broodwars]

*looks at the thread title*

My...someone's begging for attention.  Are we sure Tendoboy isn't your clone? 

*looks at the rest of the thread*

Yeah...I think NOT (no!).  I've said my piece on this subject, my view hasn't changed, and I'd rather watch this movie here than type another 3,000 words describing my thoughts on the Wii U.  Well, back to watching this inevitably-forgettable Direct-to-Video Resident Evil: Damnation movie (yes!).

[NWR_insanolord]

No offense, but you're not the only one who'd rather that you didn't do that.

I completely get why some people aren't excited for the system at this point. There's a lot we don't know about it, and we haven't seen too many exclusive titles yet. That's only going to change with time, so continuously arguing about it now is pointless.

[broodwars]

No offense, but you're not the only one who'd rather that you didn't do that.

None taken. Like I said, even I'm tired of the subject until there's actually any new information/the console actually releases.  And my time's pretty limited these days, so I'd rather not spend it on pointless forum wars.

[UncleBob]

Not true. I said I want the Wii U to fail, which was in the context of the dismal E3 showing. Since then a lot more games have been announced and my position has softened.

I swear, it's like we're speaking two different languages.

That's exactly what you said.  And you repeated it below.  "I want the Wii U to fail so Nintendo could be like they used to be because that's what I want".  It's all about you, you, you.

Also, I only said I want the Wii U to fail. I never said I wanted Nintendo to fail. The reason I said I wanted the Wii U to fail was so Nintendo could be like they used to be. The NES and SNES were the consoles I grew up with and to this day they remain my favorites of all time. So what do you have to say about that?

Same thing I've said about it before.  Nintendo hasn't changed.  They're still practically the same company they've been since the beginning.

Someone go link to that topic where we break down all the first party titles from each generation and compare them.

That is why I said I wanted it to fail. It has "Wii" in the name, and that name has a bad taste in my mouth.

Wait, do you want the Wii U to fail because you want Nintendo to be more like your idealized vision of Nintendo or because it has "Wii" in its name (which is an even more insane reason....)

Everyone was disappointed over E3 and that was the time when I said that.

No, not "everyone".

A few general replies.

First, I *love* how some folks complain that they want Nintendo to be more like they were in the olden days, then turn around and complain about all the things that Nintendo did in the olden days (sticking to Cartridges, alienating third parties, etc.) that put Nintendo where they were in the N64/GCN-era, then talk about how they loved the N64/GCN-eras.

Second, I also *love* the folks that want Nintendo to do things more like Microsoft and Sony.  Sure, they could do *some* things similar... but, overall, I don't *WANT* Nintendo to be another Microsoft or Sony.  We already have those companies.  Instead of Nintendo being a cheap imitation of one of those two, I'd rather them continue to be Nintendo.

Third, I have no issues with those who have valid complaints against Nintendo.  I have more than a few myself (ask NinSage, who thinks I'm some kind of Anti-Nintendo-Extreme or something ).  But there's a difference between disagreeing with them and interjecting your negativity into every other thread whenever you manage to create yourself an opening to do so.  A huge difference.

[NWR_insanolord]

I've been kicking around the idea of writing an editorial for the site talking about how the people who think Nintendo has changed are crazy because they're basically the same company they've always been. I don't know that that's necessarily a good thing, mind you, but you're fooling yourself if you think there's been a significant shift in the way the company operates.

[Oblivion]

How about we all just stop bitching and get along? I swear, I've seen 13-year-old girls bitch less than you guys.

[NWR_insanolord]

We don't necessarily all have to get along for the bitching to stop, which it most likely won't, ever. And the real problem right now is we've been having essentially the same argument over and over again since E3.

[Spak-Spang]

All I can say is there was a time I wanted Sony and Sega to fail.  Then I saw what happened to Sega when it failed, and I saw what happened to Nintendo as it struggled and Sony as it struggled.  Some good things and some bad. 

In the end, I don't want any of the companies to fail anymore.  I hope they can all have some sort of success, and that each others successes do not hurt the other competitor, but in a way makes them stronger. 

What I really think about is what would happen to Nintendo is it failed, how would it respond.  If Nintendo had failed with the Wii...I do not pretend to know where Nintendo might be now...though I am sure motion controls would not be in any of the companies futures...which would be a shame sense good motion controls are a great addition to the gaming industry.  I tend to think worst case scenario and believe Nintendo could have been out of the home market and only in the portable market if the Wii failed. 

Now, Nintendo is going with a new system that is conservative...but also quite more focused on traditional gamers and pushing for better online play and HD graphics...if Nintendo fails with the Wii U do you think they would move forward the right direction or take steps backwards? 

The same could be said for all the companies.  Failure does not mean the company is going to rise again start making the best choices and make you and everyone else happy. 

 

[ShyGuy]

This thread is a Monster!

Get it? Huh? Huh?

[UncleBob]

Someone go link to that topic where we break down all the first party titles from each generation and compare them.

Well, we never did get quite as far into it as we started out with... Could still be fun to do.  Wonder if I can find the spreadsheet I had made...

[Adrock]

So it would seem the strategy for becoming the leader is to wait until the current leader does something stupid.

That's hardly a strategy. You get no where if you sit on your hands and wait for someone to trip on a rock. You have to be proactive. It's important to acknowledge what your competitors are doing right, but you can't just copy them entirely. Why should anyone choose you over them? It can also backfire. If you simply copy a competitor, don't you just put yourself in the same position they're in? That's like watching someone walk off a cliff, then following them off the same cliff.

...having a Wii U pro controller which does not have force feedback...

Rumble in the Pro Controller has been confirmed. I read it on Kotaku. Apparently, it's not very strong though.

I don't want friend codes, I don't want poor online services, I don't want 8 and 9 month gaps in the release schedule, I don't want to have to use 3 different controllers, or motion controls, or tablet controllers.

I do not like them in a house. I do not like them with a mouse. I do not like them here or there. I do not like them anywhere. I do not like green eggs and ham. I do not like them, Sam-I-am.

[Pixelated Pixies]

Well, I've tried to be patient, to answer some of the questions put to me, and I've also attempted to state my thoughts as clearly as I can to help explain why I have the impressions I do. There are clearly people who disagree with me, which I have no problem with. There are, however, clearly some people in this thread that simply want to brand mine and others opinions as 'crazy' and to put them into a certain 'negative' camp so that they can feel better about disregarding them. If you were to read through my posts and replys on this thread I believe my criticisms are pointed but also amicable and reasonably well argued (as well as your likely to get on a forum at least). In other words I've made my points as clear as I'm likely to without being facetious.
 
I do, however, regret even speaking up in the first place. Perhaps the lurkers are on to something.

[Adrock]

Stop being so dramatic. I quoted Dr. Suess to you.

[Kairon]

What I really think about is what would happen to Nintendo is it failed, how would it respond.

Nintendo failed with the GameCube. They responded by giving us the Wii. <3 Iwata.

[Chozo Ghost]

I swear, it's like we're speaking two different languages.

That's exactly what you said.  And you repeated it below.  "I want the Wii U to fail so Nintendo could be like they used to be because that's what I want".  It's all about you, you, you.

Well, if its my own personal opinion then naturally its going to be about what I want. Just as your opinion is about what you want, and everyone else's is about what they want.

We all may have different opinions, but we are all here because we like Nintendo as a company. That doesn't mean we have to like every product they make, or agree with every policy, or even like every person who works there. But as a whole we like the company and the franchises overall. I think on that we are in perfect agreement.

But I don't make it any secret that I am not fan of Wiis, or Miis, or Carnival games or any of that stuff. If you do, that's fine. I respect your opinion. But please also respect mine. People don't have to agree 100% on everything in order to get along with each other.

Same thing I've said about it before.  Nintendo hasn't changed.  They're still practically the same company they've been since the beginning.

Someone go link to that topic where we break down all the first party titles from each generation and compare them.

I remember that.

But the Wii brand is a new phenomenon. The casual focus is also a new phenomenon. I understand Nintendo has made casual games in the past, but never has it been the primary focus of the company like its been this generation.

Yes, Mario Paint is considered a casual game, but for some reason I actually enjoyed that and would be happy if they made a modern version of it, but for some reason I didn't like Wii Sports or Wii Music. I gave both of those games a chance, but they didn't appeal to me at all. So why is it that I enjoyed the casual Mario Paint but not these? I don't know. Maybe its the Miis or the waggle controls. I don't know. But there is definitely a difference with this generation than all others.

Also, Wii Sports was the pack in of the console. With the NES it was SMB, and with the SNES it was Super Mario World both of those were core titles, but the Wii was the first console to have something casual as the packin. And this set the tone for the entire generation.

Wait, do you want the Wii U to fail because you want Nintendo to be more like your idealized vision of Nintendo or because it has "Wii" in its name (which is an even more insane reason....)

I don't want the Wii U to fail at all as long as the core game support is there and its not a repeat of what the Wii was. I can live with the name, even though personally I don't like it. The games are what will make or break the Wii U for me. Right now its still a big question mark as to whether developers are actually going to give it the same  respect and support that the competition will receive.

But my point is I can be won over, and I want to be won over. I don't criticize just to criticize. There is a reason for it.

No, not "everyone".

You know what I mean though.

First, I *love* how some folks complain that they want Nintendo to be more like they were in the olden days, then turn around and complain about all the things that Nintendo did in the olden days (sticking to Cartridges, alienating third parties, etc.) that put Nintendo where they were in the N64/GCN-era, then talk about how they loved the N64/GCN-eras.

Well, personally I am a fan of cartridges. They are a lot more durable, have no load times (not that optical discs really do anymore), and are just nice to have. Alienating third parties wasn't a cool thing, though, and I understand why there was a need to move over to optical discs. I don't complain either that Nintendo stuck with cartridges or moved on to optical discs. Both have their pros and cons, so in the end for me as a gamer either way is fine, but understandably for developers discs were the way to go.

As far as Nintendo's tyrannical dealings with third parties go, I don't condone that, but it didn't really impact the level of support Nintendo received in those days because they were a monopoly and were able to get away with it. It was only in later generations that they suffered the consequences for it. But from the perspective of a gamer (and especially one who was just a kid in those days) I was oblivious to that. Now I'm aware of it, but back then I didn't know any better. But what I do know is that Nintendo has surely suffered enough for being dicks, and there's no reason for third parties to continue hating on them and holding a grudge like some of them still seem to do.

Second, I also *love* the folks that want Nintendo to do things more like Microsoft and Sony.  Sure, they could do *some* things similar... but, overall, I don't *WANT* Nintendo to be another Microsoft or Sony.  We already have those companies.  Instead of Nintendo being a cheap imitation of one of those two, I'd rather them continue to be Nintendo.

That's the wrong attitude to have about that. Instead of being a "cheap imitation" of those two, Nintendo should be striving to be a "Superior Imitation" or whatever you want to call it. Nintendo should be competing in all genres of gaming. The problem is they seem to have this attitude that competing with Microsoft/Sony is "too hard" so rather than try they just ignore certain demographics (like FPS) entirely. In my opinion this is the wrong attitude to have. You shouldn't just give up and not try, but at the same time you are right that they should be a cheap watered down imitation either. What they should do is compete with the intention of winning and dominating and owning the market. This is the attitude they should have.

The way the Wii U kinda comes across is as a hybrid platform geared towards both the casual and the core market. But there is a proverb which says when you chase two rabbits you lose both of them. So maybe that is what will happen here. By taking the "middle of the road" path and going half for casuals and half for core gamers, Nintendo may just end up alienating both of them. Microsoft and Sony are probably gearing up to go all out with their consoles, just like they did last gen with their behemoths. If the Wii U appears to be a "cheap imitation" then are developers going to want to support it, and are core gamers going to want to buy it?

This is a very legitimate concern. I'm not saying it to troll or anything like that. This already happened last gen, so there is a very good chance it could happen again. I don't want Nintendo to repeat these mistakes. That's why I'm speaking out.

[Spak-Spang]

Pixelated Pixies:  You will find this group of people to be the most open you can find in supporting differing opinions.  However, allowing differing opinions to be posted and discussed is quite different than agreeing with them without a debate or at least a discussion on the topic.  We have Ian Sane as the perfect proof.  We love him.  We hate him...but he always has valid opinions and points to discuss about Nintendo and no matter how negative (or positive) he gets I always want him here to discuss Nintendo, because he loves Nintendo...when they do great things...and calls Nintendo out when they don't.

Now, the difference might be you created a thread specifically to wish ill-will on a company many people support...and although your reasons are valid reasons for you not to support Nintendo...they are not valid reasons to create a thread or even to actively hope a company fails. 

Again, I am just expressing my opinion about your opinion...the funny thing is...when you get melodramatic that people are attacking your opinion and not validating it...you are invalidating their opinion about your opinion. 

[Kairon]

I generally agree with the sentiment that Nintendo as a company is still centered around the same values and thinking they had back in the 80's. Back then they said they were a company for gamers aged 2 to 92, and Reggie is still saying that same thing today.

We can have our opinions about how well we liked individual games (I love Wii Music, I hate Twilight Princess), but I'm skeptical of any perspective that doesn't see how, despite their personal gaming tastes, games like Brain Age are actually Nintendo continuing to make games for the people they've always been trying to make games for.

[Stogi]

This whole thread....er this whole argument could really be put to rest if Nintendo were to make a new IP garnered toward the troubled Nintendo fan.


I think the majority of the angst and almost hatred toward this "new" Nintendo is the fact that there hasn't been a game marketed towards them completely. But the irony there is if Nintendo were to comply, they wouldn't be Nintendo anymore. They would become "new" Nintendo.

[BeautifulShy]

Just going to put my thoughts out here real quick.

Wasn't this thread over in the fun house? I know the first 3 posts were in over there and yesterday morning I see it moved over here to the Nintendo console section to be put on display for everyone. As much as I don't have much of a opinion on Chozo at the moment I think the mod should should have just left it alone and be neutral. This is kinda abusing his power to make a point. It probably should have been left to PMs to be quite frank.

@Insanolord About that editorial its been done before and it doesn't change minds because most people are going to be set in their line of thinking to think beyond those ways.

@Oblivion,PixelatedPixies I think that's the most logical thing I read in this thread.

[Chozo Ghost]

Wasn't this thread over in the fun house? I know the first 3 posts were in over there and yesterday morning I see it moved over here to the Nintendo console section to be put on display for everyone.

Much like my title. Now do you see my point? Someone is doing everything they can to try to make me look like a troll. Its a conspiracy. And you were the one who said I should be reported or whatever. Now do you see the truth about this whole situation? I was only stating an opinion. It didn't have to be dissected and blown out of proportion like it was.

[MrPhishfood]

You say opinion but you also try to state a lot of false information as fact and if its not false you skew your words so that "maybe" becomes "not" and "grey" becomes "black" etc.

I don't think anyone takes issue with you having an opinion. Its when you try to state facts to backup your opinions, your choice of words are almost always 1 or 2 degrees more negative than they should be as if you don't feel your opinions are justified enough. Then only when you are called up on it do you admit to using the wrong choice of words.

I don't see why you would do this unless you were being emotional about your opinion. In any case what you do doesn't have a place in intelligent discussion. If you start adding your own flavour to the truth then of course people are going to call you out on it and get mad.


@Pixelated Pixies
What is your ideal of a games console controller?

[BeautifulShy]

Wasn't this thread over in the fun house? I know the first 3 posts were in over there and yesterday morning I see it moved over here to the Nintendo console section to be put on display for everyone.

Much like my title. Now do you see my point? Someone is doing everything they can to try to make me look like a troll. Its a conspiracy. And you were the one who said I should be reported or whatever. Now do you see the truth about this whole situation? I was only stating an opinion. It didn't have to be dissected and blown out of proportion like it was.

I said that because you were being disruptive in most of the threads you were in with your posts. Also please don't try to be a victim here. Both you and the mods are at fault and I think the best thing to do at this point is to just drop this. Chozo there is ways of putting your dislike for a company without being so entititled and negative about it. There is a happy medium.

Also mods can we get this thread locked?

[Pixelated Pixies]

Now, the difference might be you created a thread specifically to wish ill-will on a company many people support...and although your reasons are valid reasons for you not to support Nintendo...they are not valid reasons to create a thread or even to actively hope a company fails. 

I didn't create this thread.
 
Neither was I invalidating over peoples opinions. Again, if you look at my previous posts in this thread you'll see that many of them concede ground on certain points and many of them have me saying 'I agree'.
 
With regards being dramatic, lol, perhaps that post doesn't read as it was intended because there was nothing dramtic about it. I was just pointing out that some people who are defensive about the Wii U tend to make it more personal than perhaps I'm comfortable with. It's not a big deal, just thought it was worth highlighting.

[Adrock]

Microsoft and Sony are probably gearing up to go all out with their consoles, just like they did last gen with their behemoths.

Maybe that happens and maybe that blows up in their face. Maybe. We just don't know. It wasn't all roses for Sony and Microsoft this generation. Additionally, Sony recently admitted that the Vita has been a "hard sell" to 3rd parties. Is that a sign of things to come? What happens if Sony and Microsoft overextend on hardware and 3rd parties don't want to support them? There are a lot of variables here, many you're not considering.

Some of your concerns are valid albeit grossly overstated and one-sided. Just as Nintendo's strategy worked but didn't work, so have Sony's and Microsoft's. They were on opposite ends of the spectrum, succeeding and failing in different ways. "The man who chases 2 rabbits catches neither." Is that the proverb you were referring to? Point taken and partially agreed upon, but I don't think Nintendo have a choice. They have to go after both or risk leaving money on the table. It's a delicate balance for sure. However, Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft should all be subject to the same concerns (minus the sensationalist doom card, of course).

And while I enjoy the discussion (to a point), I agree that it is approaching pointlessness (if it hasn't arrived there already), considering we don't know where Sony and Microsoft stand in all this. We all have opinions on whether what Nintendo is doing is good or bad, but there's nothing to compare it to. Many of us are taking the middle ground in all this due to the sheer number of unknowns, of which I'm specifically referring to all the nothing we have on Sony's and Microsoft's next machines.

With regards being dramatic, lol, perhaps that post doesn't read as it was intended because there was nothing dramtic about it.

Really?

I do, however, regret even speaking up in the first place. Perhaps the lurkers are on to something.

Could have fooled me.

[Spak-Spang]

Now, the difference might be you created a thread specifically to wish ill-will on a company many people support...and although your reasons are valid reasons for you not to support Nintendo...they are not valid reasons to create a thread or even to actively hope a company fails. 

I didn't create this thread.
 
Neither was I invalidating over peoples opinions. Again, if you look at my previous posts in this thread you'll see that many of them concede ground on certain points and many of them have me saying 'I agree'.
 
With regards being dramatic, lol, perhaps that post doesn't read as it was intended because there was nothing dramtic about it. I was just pointing out that some people who are defensive about the Wii U tend to make it more personal than perhaps I'm comfortable with. It's not a big deal, just thought it was worth highlighting.

Then I apologize on some of my points about your dramatizing...that is the problem with message boards context is lost even when you carefully word your posts, you can not always ensure people read them like you intended to sound.  Such is any medium in which the audience must interpret and extrapolate meaning from the source.

[Pixelated Pixies]

Then I apologize on some of my points about your dramatizing...that is the problem with message boards context is lost even when you carefully word your posts, you can not always ensure people read them like you intended to sound.  Such is any medium in which the audience must interpret and extrapolate meaning from the source.

Yup. It's really difficult to intonate on the internet, but I guess that's what smileys are for. 

[UncleBob]

It didn't have to be dissected and blown out of proportion like it was.

Aren't you the one who started an entire topic for the purpose of dissecting it and blowing it out of proportion?

[ThomasO]

Well, personally I am a fan of cartridges. They are a lot more durable, have no load times, and are just nice to have.

Not necessarily. Some of my Nintendo DS cartridges don't work anymore because the pins have started to rust. Meanwhile, my copy of Luigi's Mansion works just fine...

[UncleBob]

Not necessarily. Some of my Nintendo DS cartridges don't work anymore because the pins have started to rust.

Dang... what do you do to those things?

[BeautifulShy]

It didn't have to be dissected and blown out of proportion like it was.

Aren't you the one who started an entire topic for the purpose of dissecting it and blowing it out of proportion?

I'd argue it didn't pick up stream till it got moved over here. Nobody posted in the topic for 2 days and that was when it was moved over to this section of the forums. No one was paying any attention to it in the funhouse for 2 days till it was brought here.If people don't pay any mind to a topic it usually will go away after a while.

[UncleBob]

Umm... Your time line is off.  It was posted two days ago, late in the evening (October 07, 2012, 11:09:39 PM).
The first main reply (aside from ShyGuy's Punny reply and CG's own thread bump) was early in the morning on the very next day (Yesterday [October 08] at 07:46:46 AM) - roughly 8 1/2 hours later - not bad, as that time was "overnight".

The topic hasn't even been posted for two days.

[BeautifulShy]

My main point still stands that it shouldn't have been moved. Mods are supposed to be neutral. If you needed to talk to Chozo about the topic in the funhouse it could have been handled differently. I mean the post in question that you brought up was from back in June at around E3. 5 months ago... Was that really worth bringing up again? That goes for both Chozo and Unclebob.

[UncleBob]

A topic about the new Nintendo Console shouldn't have been moved to the Nintendo Console Discussion forum?

And for the record, CG created this thread, sent me two PMs, then posted his first reply in this thread all before I had a chance to reply to any of it (sorry, was too high on Catdrugs at the time).  When sent confrontational messages, I often try to wait a bit to reply so I can try to reduce the chances of me saying something completely stupid in the heat of the moment.  Had CG stuck to the PM method, I would have been happy to discuss the issue with him via PM.  I've discussed multiple issues with individuals over PM that I've been kind enough not to take public (though I do CC some of the other forum leaders).  CG is the one who chose to make this public.

I supplied the post in question because it provided the "context" that CG wanted his quote to have.

And no, Mods aren't supposed to be neutral.  We should strive to be fair.  There's a difference.

[BeautifulShy]

First of all there is already a Wii U topic on this section of this forum. The only purpose I see with this topic was to bring attention to it which quite frankly has done its job. Yeah he may have responded to this topic before you got back to him but you still could have gotten back to him via PM instead of responding to the thread.

Okay I said my peace I am going to do something more productive.

[UncleBob]

First of all there is already a Wii U topic on this section of this forum.

First of all, there are multiple Wii U topics on this section of the forum.  I wasn't aware there was a limit on how many topics any single console was allowed to have...

The only purpose I see with this topic was to bring attention to it which quite frankly has done its job.

As opposed to all the topics that get posted with the purpose of no one giving them any attention?

Yeah he may have responded to this topic before you got back to him but you still could have gotten back to him via PM instead of responding to the thread.

Could have.  Didn't.  My decision.

[Ian Sane]

I realistically want Nintendo to make a product that appeals to my tastes.  They used to fairly consistently and now they mostly don't.  Is it selfish to ask for that?  Yeah, I guess it is.  But this isn't like me stealing food from a starving person or anything.  This is just entertainment.  And everyone wants this.  Everyone wants there to be shows they like on TV and movies they like in the theatre and music they like on the radio.  If the TV show you likes retools itself into something you don't, you get upset.  If the movie you loved gets lousy sequels, you get upset.  If your favourite band changes their style of music to something you don't like, you get upset.  That's normal and if Nintendo turned into something YOU didn't like you would be upset about it too.

Now why should I expect Nintendo to cater to my tastes?  Well because I was here first.  I've been a customer of Nintendo since I was a kid.  Why should I get squeezed out in favour of a new customer base?  And this customer base ignored Nintendo for years.  They had to get "tricked" into trying videogames by this motion control stuff.  So non-customers who have always been close-minded towards Nintendo get priority over loyal customers who have supported the company for years, including the rough Gamecube years?  The Gamecube was their nadir financially and yet I was there on launch day buying the system.  I bought a lot of games on that system, both first and third party.  I defended them as a company and I tried in vain to convince others to buy the Cube.  My reward for this is was to be pushed to the side in favour of some flash-in-the-pan fad audience.

Nintendo were the ones that took their loyal customers for granted.  They were the ones that assumed we would all just stick around and put up with anything as long as they gave us our Mario "fix".  And that worked pretty well because a lot of Nintendo fans were fine with the Wii as long as it had Mario and Zelda and all the rest.  Am I selfish or is Nintendo greedy for selling their longtime customers short for a more lucrative casual audience?  The way I look at it I was a loyal customer with some valid complaints and they told me to stick it.  I want them back and if that means they have to hit rock bottom to realize their mistakes and change, then so be it.

I only want the Wii U to fail if it deserves to.  I feel the Wii overachieved and did not in any way deserve the sales it did and that it was a calculated effort on Nintendo's part to sell a subpar product to rubes who didn't know better and loyal fans that they figured would stick around no matter what.  If the Wii U is the same idea then in a just world it WILL fail.  If it's a great system that deserves to succeed then I want it to.  I would rather Nintendo just get their **** together without having to learn lessons the hard way and I would love for the Wii U to exceed my expectations and be one of the best purchases I've ever made.

[rlse9]

Well, personally I am a fan of cartridges. They are a lot more durable, have no load times, and are just nice to have.

Not necessarily. Some of my Nintendo DS cartridges don't work anymore because the pins have started to rust. Meanwhile, my copy of Luigi's Mansion works just fine...

I'd say that discs may be more durable, if you take care of them, but there's no doubt that the drives that play them tend to wear out a lot more quickly than the non-moving components that play a cartridge.

[Adrock]

If the movie you loved gets lousy sequels, you get upset.  If your favourite band changes their style of music to something you don't like, you get upset.  That's normal and if Nintendo turned into something YOU didn't like you would be upset about it too.

Being upset ≠ complaining about it for 6 years. Not even remotely...

Now why should I expect Nintendo to cater to my tastes? Well because I was here first.  I've been a customer of Nintendo since I was a kid.

If you're going to play the I-had-dibs game like everyone's annoying childhood friend who always changed the rules when you were winning, then you still lose this round. Several people on this board are older than you, were fans before you, AND like what Nintendo is currently doing. This also applies to the rest of your post so no need to quote all that. Sorry, you're not the only one who matters.

(I'm not sorry)

[Evan_B]

Well, Ian... what are your needs? I mean, if you want quality Nintendo titles, you have to support them. Mario, Zelda, Smash Bros, and the like are their money makers and there's no doubt those games will do well, but what else do you really want? I'm legitimately curious.

Oh, and as for the original topic,  it's okay to be a Negative Nancy about some things, but judgement on the console and its games can only be passed when the console and games are released. Now, saying that Nintendo's handling of information about this new device was poor and all, I'm okay with that. But they've really surprised me with their lineup of games thusfar and it shows a strong blend of quality and catering to many niches of gamers. So I remain cautiously optimistic. But if I get the system and it sucks, well, maybe I'll come out and say I want it to fail. But it's not worth the effort now because you don't know if trends will continue or change or whatever.

[UncleBob]

I realistically want Nintendo to make a product that appeals to my tastes.  They used to fairly consistently and now they mostly don't.

How much of that is because Nintendo has changed their product vs how much is because your tastes have changed?

I really need to hook up with the Pietriots and create an "Evolution of First Party Games" chart - showing where each game draws inspiration from in previous generations....

[MrPhishfood]

If the TV show you likes retools itself into something you don't, you get upset.  If the movie you loved gets lousy sequels, you get upset.  If your favourite band changes their style of music to something you don't like, you get upset.  That's normal and if Nintendo turned into something YOU didn't like you would be upset about it too.

What if Nintendo never really changed as far as company values and direction but rather you changed?

[Mop it up]

I've been kicking around the idea of writing an editorial for the site talking about how the people who think Nintendo has changed are crazy because they're basically the same company they've always been.

Although I don't think Nintendo have completely changed, they are definitely different now than in the past. For one example, before the Wii, Nintendo never released a new system with the same specs as last generation in favour of other features like a new controller. Another, before 3DS, Nintendo have never vastly overcharged for a system.

Now, that said, I think a problem some people have is that Nintendo have not changed enough. They still rely on their staple of franchises for most of the big sales, and they still make the same kind of games, for better or worse. People who have been playing Nintendo games since the beginning may simply be growing tired of their designs.

You can say Nintendo's philosophies are the same, and to that end, I'd agree. But the way at which they approach those philosophies has changed.
 

That's like watching someone walk off a cliff, then following them off the same cliff.

Well, it's more like watching someone fall off a cliff and then turning to the left to avoid it. Examining what they did right and avoiding what they did wrong. As I pointed out, this is the way it's been throughout history. Now, it could very well change in the future, but so far, the market leader hasn't changed without them screwing it up for themselves.

That said, I'm not saying Nintendo should flat-out copy the competition. They need to offer enough of what the competition has on top of their own unique spin that makes them Nintendo, which is a tough balance to achieve. The Wii did not do this, but it looks like the Wii U is trying to.

[Luigi Dude]

Nintendo were the ones that took their loyal customers for granted.  They were the ones that assumed we would all just stick around and put up with anything as long as they gave us our Mario "fix".  And that worked pretty well because a lot of Nintendo fans were fine with the Wii as long as it had Mario and Zelda and all the rest.  Am I selfish or is Nintendo greedy for selling their longtime customers short for a more lucrative casual audience?  The way I look at it I was a loyal customer with some valid complaints and they told me to stick it.  I want them back and if that means they have to hit rock bottom to realize their mistakes and change, then so be it.

Once again, the Wii had just as many games aimed at Nintendo's longtime audience as their previous systems.  Just because they released a few games that appealed to a different audience doesn't mean **** when everything else they released is aimed at the same audience they've always been aiming at.

Nintendo isn't a band that's changed it's music style, it's a fast food restaurant that's still making the same food with a few new items added to the menu.  Just because they added a few new items to the menu doesn't mean the whole store has changed when you can still buy most of the same products they had before.  Wii Sports would be like the salads fast food restaurants introduce to appeal to a more health concerned audience, but you can still buy the same burgers and fries they always had. 


If you're sick of the food Nintendo has, then it's okay to find a new store but don't act like they've left you when the only new thing they've done is add salads to the menu.

[Mop it up]

Once again, the Wii had just as many games aimed at Nintendo's longtime audience as their previous systems.

But the system itself was designed for a more casual audience. Following your analogy, it's more like a fine-dining restaurant becoming a fast-food joint. They still have the same menu items, except now they're cheaper and less tasty.

[broodwars]

Nintendo isn't a band that's changed it's music style, it's a fast food restaurant that's still making the same food with a few new items added to the menu.  Just because they added a few new items to the menu doesn't mean the whole store has changed when you can still buy most of the same products they had before.  Wii Sports would be like the salads fast food restaurants introduce to appeal to a more health concerned audience, but you can still buy the same burgers and fries they always had. 

If you're sick of the food Nintendo has, then it's okay to find a new store but don't act like they've left you when the only new thing they've done is add salads to the menu.

My problem with Nintendo isn't that they've added new menu items that don't appeal to me.  It's that their longstanding menu items don't seem as well-made and don't taste as good as they used to.  They also aren't adding many new items to rejuvenate the menu that appeal to me.

I'm not sick of their food.  It's tried-and-true, and when I have a particular craving it's always there.  I just want to see their chefs allowed to experiment with new entrees that are fresh and exciting while still appealing to me.  Right now, the same recipes have been re-used for so long that the chefs clearly seem to be getting bored doing it and it shows in the final product.

Meanwhile, I see this other restaurant (Sony) that may not be so consistent in the quality of their food, but it feels like I'm constantly seeing their chefs (and the chefs they have on contract) experimenting with new recipes I haven't tasted before that I want to eat.  I just wish considering Nintendo's whole focus on "inclusiveness" that they wouldn't be so afraid to experiment with new flavors outside of their core recipes that would also appeal to those same patrons.  Sometimes just adding those flavors to existing recipes doesn't make them taste better.

And wow, this food analogy is stretched beyond belief. 

[Soren]

I'm hungry. Guess I'll eat my copy of Mario Kart Wii

[Ian Sane]

I think there are a lot of Nintendo fans for which it works like this:

Are there Mario and Zelda games being made?  Are they good?  If so, then content.

I'm a Nintendo fan because I'm looking for the next Super Mario Bros.  I don't mean the next literal Super Mario Bros. game I mean the next game Nintendo releases that moves videogaming forward like Super Mario Bros. did.  I looked forward to the next Mario and Zelda not merely because I liked the formulas of those series but rather that they consistently experimented with that formula and used it to innovate.  Being a Nintendo fan meant you never knew what new idea was coming up next, only that it would likely kick ass.

But this is the era of safe Nintendo sequels.  This is the era of NSMB where the whole goal of the series seems to be to just give people the same safe gameplay of Super Mario World.  This is the era of casual titles that are INTENTIONALLY unambitous so as to provide unintimidating gameplay for non-gamers.  The Wii was practically a repackaged Gamecube.  The whole idea was that Nintendo was NOT going to move forward and would merely stay the course with a new controller gimmick.  The company has become increasingly conservative and I became a fan specifically because they were daring.

Another part of Nintendo I liked was their commitment to quality.  There games typically did not have bugs or unresponsive controls - the two unforgivable sins of shitty games.  While the QA is still pretty solid the Wii was FULL of games with wonky controls and the whole design of the controller was from a marketting perspective instead of practicality.  This betrays a key element of what made Nintendo great.

So what do I want?

- A modern console for modern games instead of an out-of-date console with lousy third party support that lacks the gameplay experiences that the others systems offer.
- New ambitious ideas from Nintendo including both brand new IP and creative sequels to existing series (Super Mario Galaxy is good, NSMB is not).  The mere existence of these games is not good enough.  Games that do not fall into this category should be uncommon.  This is not to be a "sometimes" thing.
- A responsive and practical controller and game controls where I do not have to fight the controller the whole time to enjoy myself.

Of course Nintendo was slipping away from what inspired me to be a fan of them over the years.  Sticking with cartridges and staying offline for an extra gen were very out-dated dinosaur ideas that we all rightly **** on them for at the time.

[MrPhishfood]

I can see the reoccurring theme here is:

Me me me, its all about me. I want to be amazed like back in the old days. I can't tell you what I want specifically but I know it makes me want to go "wow"

[broodwars]

I can see the reoccurring theme here is:

Me me me, its all about me. I want to be amazed like back in the old days. I can't tell you what I want specifically but I know it makes me want to go "wow"

Well, let me put it to you this way: are you buying my hypothetical next Nintendo console?  Are you buying the games that would be in my library?  Are you going to play the games you bought for my library?  No?  Then in that case, I'd say it makes every bit of difference how such consoles and their libraries appeal to the individual buyer, and everyone else's opinion is pretty irrelevant in the end.

I don't really give a damn what makes you content about a console's library (and likewise you shouldn't care what makes me content about a console's library), because if it doesn't make me content it really doesn't matter, does it?  I'm the one paying the bill in the end and making a commitment to this thing. 

By all means, enjoy what you like.  But other people will enjoy what they like, and if something they bought (or are potentially interested in buying) doesn't have what they like, they have every right to have an issue with it.

And that's all I have to say on that.  If a console purchase isn't all about "me me mem its [sic] all about me", you're a fool because what you want SHOULD be the most important thing in this case.  A console should always appeal to as many audiences as possible, and it makes good business sense to do so, but if you as the purchaser aren't happy with it it really doesn't matter.

[Adrock]

That's like watching someone walk off a cliff, then following them off the same cliff.

Well, it's more like watching someone fall off a cliff and then turning to the left to avoid it. Examining what they did right and avoiding what they did wrong. As I pointed out, this is the way it's been throughout history. Now, it could very well change in the future, but so far, the market leader hasn't changed without them screwing it up for themselves.

That said, I'm not saying Nintendo should flat-out copy the competition. They need to offer enough of what the competition has on top of their own unique spin that makes them Nintendo, which is a tough balance to achieve. The Wii did not do this, but it looks like the Wii U is trying to.

I'm confused. It sounds like you're correcting my statement, but then you just reiterated everything I said in the part of the quote you cut out. I'm not disagreeing with you. The cliff analogy was to illustrate how completely copying a competitor can lead to the same mistakes. That's why I said it can backfire. It certainly helps if the market leader does something stupid, but you can't wait for it. You have to keep coming up with new and better ideas.

[Mop it up]

You have to keep coming up with new and better ideas.

I was trying to explain that this is the part where we disagree. Would the Wii be the market leader if the PS3 didn't flounder at launch? Somehow, I doubt it would be. Why would all those PS1 and PS2 owners ditch the PS3 for a competitor if the PS3 offered them what they wanted? Whether you copy or be unique, you can't take over the market until the leader messes up.

[MrPhishfood]

Well, let me put it to you this way: are you buying my hypothetical next Nintendo console?  Are you buying the games that would be in my library?  Are you going to play the games you bought for my library?  No?  Then in that case, I'd say it makes every bit of difference how such consoles and their libraries appeal to the individual buyer, and everyone else's opinion is pretty irrelevant in the end.

I never said I cared about what you buy or what you like. Its pretty irrelevant to whine about things that will probably never change in a place where your voice will probably not be heard by the people responsible for such changes. The Wii U is launching soon, the hardware specs are finalised, deal with it. If dealing with it means coming to a Nintendo focused forum to voice your grievances then keep up with it. Just be aware it doesn't make a difference to anything.

[Kairon]

I can see the reoccurring theme here is:

Me me me, its all about me. I want to be amazed like back in the old days. I can't tell you what I want specifically but I know it makes me want to go "wow"

Well, let me put it to you this way: are you buying my hypothetical next Nintendo console?  Are you buying the games that would be in my library?  Are you going to play the games you bought for my library?  No?  Then in that case, I'd say it makes every bit of difference how such consoles and their libraries appeal to the individual buyer, and everyone else's opinion is pretty irrelevant in the end.

I don't really give a damn what makes you content about a console's library (and likewise you shouldn't care what makes me content about a console's library), because if it doesn't make me content it really doesn't matter, does it?  I'm the one paying the bill in the end and making a commitment to this thing. 

By all means, enjoy what you like.  But other people will enjoy what they like, and if something they bought (or are potentially interested in buying) doesn't have what they like, they have every right to have an issue with it.

And that's all I have to say on that.  If a console purchase isn't all about "me me mem its [sic] all about me", you're a fool because what you want SHOULD be the most important thing in this case.  A console should always appeal to as many audiences as possible, and it makes good business sense to do so, but if you as the purchaser aren't happy with it it really doesn't matter.

Ah, but doesn't this line of thinking mean that Nintendo owes us nothing and we don't owe them anything? That we are responsible for our own happiness, and that there is no such thing as "betrayal" unless we betray ourselves? That it's my right to love Wii Music, your right to dislike it, and Nintendo's right to make all a Wii Music 2?

All this talk about personal responsibility for one's own gaming tastes and choices almost sounds like Nintendo isn't to blame for any personal discontent... WE are!

[Oblivion]

[Evan_B]

Some games, though brilliantly made, don't appeal to everyone. Can you believe that I think Super Mario Galaxy is abysmal? Probably not, but it's not the messiah of 3D platforming everyone talks it up to be. I don't even think Galaxy 2 does much more. But for every game I wasn't fond of, there was a Xenoblade or Last Story or Muramasa or Cursed Mountain or Sonic Colors. I'm really in no way displeased with the first or third party offerings- if anything, it helped me pinpoint my tastes a bit more. Also, things on the Wii were way more colorful and exciting, and that's my personal niche. I'm just done with the brown and "grounded in reality" attempts that are so frequent on other consoles.

[Adrock]

Would the Wii be the market leader if the PS3 didn't flounder at launch? Somehow, I doubt it would be. Why would all those PS1 and PS2 owners ditch the PS3 for a competitor if the PS3 offered them what they wanted?

Yes. I'm not even going to say "probably." Nintendo's success with the Wii isn't inherently tied to Sony's troubles at launch. Look at many of the people who bought the Wii and made it so hard to find for such a long time. They weren't looking at a PS3 at all. Nintendo beat Sony by appealing to everyone outside of PS1/PS2 owners. In a separate post, I said Nintendo's strategy "worked but didn't work." This is one of the reasons why.

Whether you copy or be unique, you can't take over the market until the leader messes up.

To use a different example, Apple beat RIM in the smartphone market by changing people's perception of what a smartphone should be. RIM didn't really mess up per se. Had Apple never entered the smartphone market, RIM would likely have remained the gold standard of smartphones at the time. Apple just one-upped them and RIM lacked a counter-strategy. Did RIM mess up or did Apple just have better ideas? I suppose it depends on how you look at it.

I agree with this statement (especially since I pretty much said the same thing on page 1):

I'm not saying Nintendo should flat-out copy the competition. They need to offer enough of what the competition has on top of their own unique spin that makes them Nintendo, which is a tough balance to achieve. The Wii did not do this, but it looks like the Wii U is trying to.

However, I disagree with that "you can't take over the market until the leader messes up." You can; it's just significantly harder to do so. A market leader messing up is merely an open invitation to strike. However, waiting for that to happen is not a strategy. Having new and better ideas for when/if that happens is. And it's a good one to have. You keep forging ahead. You remain proactive. I believe that's what Nintendo is doing and always have. They could stand to acknowledge that their competitors have done some things better than they have, but they can't simply chase their competitors. They have to try to do those things better, easier, and more efficiently.

[Kairon]

Do I detect an invalid assumption here? I'm sure Nintendo would like to be market leader, but I don't think they're willing to do whatever it takes to get there. Maybe there are some avenues to market success that Nintendo won't want to take?

[broodwars]

Ah, but doesn't this line of thinking mean that Nintendo owes us nothing and we don't owe them anything? That we are responsible for our own happiness, and that there is no such thing as "betrayal" unless we betray ourselves? That it's my right to love Wii Music, your right to dislike it, and Nintendo's right to make all a Wii Music 2?

Certainly (I've said it before and I'll say it again: I'd only begrudge them a Wii Music 2 if they showed they didn't learn anything from Wii Music 1), and I don't believe I've been crying "BETRAYAL!"  However, I do think they have a responsibility as a platform-holder and business to ensure or provide experiences to cater to all those that bought their console.  Otherwise, they have not served their customers well, and those customers have every reason to abandon them.

All this talk about personal responsibility for one's own gaming tastes and choices almost sounds like Nintendo isn't to blame for any personal discontent... WE are!

As I said, Nintendo has a responsibility as a platform holder and business to ensure those that bought their console are happy with the purchase, and that means ensuring a wide variety of experiences (even if you can't make those experiences yourself).  Otherwise, they deserve to fail in the marketplace to better competition that does perform their duty.

So far, it looks like Nintendo could be on their way to doing that with the Wii U.  They haven't to my satisfaction just yet because games like Bayonetta or Zombi U just aren't my thing, but if they keep this up one day the Wii U just might appeal to me.

[Adrock]

Do I detect an invalid assumption here?

Please specify.

[Chozo Ghost]

Aren't you the one who started an entire topic for the purpose of dissecting it and blowing it out of proportion?

1) I created the thread in the lounge. Someone (you?) moved it out into the open where it is getting a lot of focus and attention. I didn't intend for that to happen.

2) I only created the thread after having to suffer with that title under my name for the last however many months since June, and even though other mods changed my title at least twice during that time period you kept changing it back. You were the one who dissected it and blew it out of proportion.

3) I tried to talk to you about it in private over PM but you ignored me.

So it just seems like you are out to get me for some reason and I don't understand why. I never did anything to you.

[Chozo Ghost]

I only want the Wii U to fail if it deserves to.

This eloquently and concisely matches my position on the Wii U.

Way back in June when I said I wanted it to fail I was basing that off assumptions. I was going by how the Wii turned out, and the lackluster E3 showing didn't help matters. So I said something that at the time I meant, but it was based on assumptions. I didn't know the full story, and I still don't. We won't know that until a few years from now.

So for my part I apologize for my part of it, but with that being said it didn't need to be put in my title for all these months and make me look like I'm an anti-Nintendo troll when that's not the case. Even if I don't like the Wii brand I am not anti-Nintendo because I do love their other consoles and that's the reason I am here.

Years from now when we can see the full picture of the Wii U and if it looks like it deserves to fail, then I will say it deserves to fail and mean it. But if it doesn't deserve to fail then I hope it succeeds. No one will know the final verdict for a long time yet.

I think things are going to get better once the console is actually out and then there will be a lot more to discuss instead of the same arguments over and over since E3. Only when we have the details will we be able to put the assumptions to rest one way or the other.

[Chozo Ghost]

I can see the reoccurring theme here is:

Me me me, its all about me.

Well, back in E3 2011 when Reggie unveiled the Wii U for the first time, didn't he say the name "Wii U" was chosen because it was all about "U" (the gamer)? The "Wii" was about families and friends swinging controllers around in a living room, but the "Wii U" was supposed to be about going back to the individual gamer experience.

Or something like that.

[Adrock]

I only want the Wii U to fail if it deserves to.

This eloquently and concisely matches my position on the Wii U.

Doesn't that go without saying? "I want that thing that deserves to fail to succeed," said no one ever.

[Kairon]

Do I detect an invalid assumption here?

Please specify.

I guess I'm responding to one of the undercurrents of this conversation, that Nintendo somehow has a responsibility to win EVERYONE into their camp and become number 1 in the market and have all the games and I mean ALL the games.

I mean, sure, Nintendo would LOVE to have that happen. They're definitely going to give it their best effort. But Iwata once said that if all the Wii accomplished was selling more consoles than the GC, it'd be a failure. I think Nintendo would happily settle for second or even third place, if they could continue to successfully explore what Nintendo games, and games in general, can become.

Certainly (I've said it before and I'll say it again: I'd only begrudge them a Wii Music 2 if they showed they didn't learn anything from Wii Music 1), and I don't believe I've been crying "BETRAYAL!"  However, I do think they have a responsibility as a platform-holder and business to ensure or provide experiences to cater to all those that bought their console.  Otherwise, they have not served their customers well, and those customers have every reason to abandon them.

The question then is aren't we talking about an aggregate? That is, Nintendo might not serve certain individuals well, but on the whole they might succeed. Would a console like that deserve to fail? If I'm a fan of on-rails shooters and only on-rails shooters, neither the 360 or PS3 would have satisfied me really until very late in the game, would they have deserved to fail?

I think basically what I don't understand is this "deserve" bit of it. If a console fails, it fails. If a console succeeds it succeeds. I don't begrudge the good fortune of people who can have fun at videogames I don't have a taste for. In fact, I don't care. My responsibility is to find my own fun out there, and everything else will sort itself out.

I don't think it's up to us to judge whether a console is objectively worthy or not. It's only up to us to judge whether we're going to buy it for ourselves. It's up to the console maker to convince us to buy it... but if they can convince 100 million people to buy it, why is it some sort of sin that you or me happen to not be a part of that?

Personally, I thought the every DS iteration between the Phat and DSi deserved to fail... but...*shrug* Millions of people thought otherwise. I am constantly amazed by people's willingness to rebuy hardware that does everything their old hardware already does, and not a whit more.

[Stogi]

I am constantly amazed by people's willingness to rebuy hardware that does everything their old hardware already does, and not a whit more.

*Cough* iphone *cough*

But to be serious, I don't think Nintendo made those iterations so people could buy them again. It's so new people could buy them. For instance, I skipped the phat but got the lite.

[Kairon]

I am constantly amazed by people's willingness to rebuy hardware that does everything their old hardware already does, and not a whit more.

*Cough* iphone *cough*

But to be serious, I don't think Nintendo made those iterations so people could buy them again. It's so new people could buy them. For instance, I skipped the phat but got the lite.

I get your case, but I think that a significant part of Nintendo's handheld hardware strategy is based on getting people to rebuy hardware, usually because of new colors. I guess I'm picking on the poor DSLite, which had its reasons for existing, but I'm just personally a little weirded out by all the hardware iterations in the handheld space... I want to buy my launch hardware and have it stand by me for the next 4-6 years.

Oh, and also the XLs (Both DSi and 3DS). If I used my own personal tastes as a way to judge them, I'd say they deserved to fail (don't fit in your pocket AND price increase?!?!? That's RIDICULOUS!!!1!). But there are people who think otherwise and I wish them joy, not heartbreak.

[Stogi]

I don't think that's going to be possible anymore...the "4-6 year" thing for consoles. Actually I think it already ended.

Companies are always trying to cut down on costs and making the hardware smaller and easier to build is just another way to maximize profits.

[Kairon]

I don't think that's going to be possible anymore...the "4-6 year" thing for consoles. Actually I think it already ended

THEN THEY ALL DESERVE TO FAILLLLL!!!!!! D&

[ThePerm]

yeah its going to be weird this generation. The graphics are already so good. 5th-6th generation ps3 and xbox 360 games will look great 2nd generation wii u games and on will look even better. 2nd and on ps4 and xbox3 games will look amazing. ITs going to be at a point where the push for better graphics isn't going to be as necessary.

I think we already saw a prototype 720 controller, so its all going to be game wars. Who has better games? I think Nintendo better watch out though, because Sony and Microsoft have some good stuff nowadays. I like Nintendo, but I think they are behind at this point. They haven't been in the forefront for a long time, and they had better get in gear. I know Nintendo isn't going anywhere though, but I would like them to make a greater effort.

[UncleBob]

1) I created the thread in the lounge. Someone (you?) moved it out into the open where it is getting a lot of focus and attention. I didn't intend for that to happen.

You intended to make a thread for no one to see?

2) I only created the thread after having to suffer with that title under my name for the last however many months since June, and even though other mods changed my title at least twice during that time period you kept changing it back. You were the one who dissected it and blew it out of proportion.

A) "Suffer"?  #FirstWorldProblems
B) One other mod changed your title to "makes horrible, offensive analogies." and "Puts the "ass" in in assumptions." - and you're telling me those are better than your own words?
C) I'd hardly say a title change is "dissecting" it.  Which is odd you'd say that, coming from the guy who was, just days ago, upset because having just that one line takes it "out of context".

3) I tried to talk to you about it in private over PM but you ignored me.

18 minutes.  There was 18 minutes between the time you sent me the first of two PMs and posted the second message in this thread.  I am NOT at your  beck and call.  I do not jump at your every command, wish or desire.  If you expect me, online or not, to respond to your aggressive PM in 18 minutes - after you had already created this thread and after you then sent me a second message (9 minutes before posting the second reply in this thread), then you have unreasonable expectations.  I don't always respond to text messages that quickly - let alone hostile messages from people on the internet.

So it just seems like you are out to get me for some reason and I don't understand why. I never did anything to you.

You think it seems like I'm "out to get you" because I gave you a goofy title that happened to be something you said and virtually no other reason?

[Oblivion]

This really needs to be taken to PM. Unclebob, follow the rules that you enforce and STFU. No one needs to see this farce any longer.

[Mop it up]

Yes. I'm not even going to say "probably." Nintendo's success with the Wii isn't inherently tied to Sony's troubles at launch.

I think the Wii would have been just as successful. But the Wii hasn't quite passed the sales of the PS1, and is pretty far from the PS2, so I think the PS3 would have sold even more than the Wii had it been competitively priced. As for markets, each one is different, and I think the videogame market will continue to play out as it has been. So we shall agree to disagree on that point.

Oh, and also the XLs (Both DSi and 3DS). If I used my own personal tastes as a way to judge them, I'd say they deserved to fail (don't fit in your pocket AND price increase?!?!? That's RIDICULOUS!!!1!). But there are people who think otherwise and I wish them joy, not heartbreak.

But bigger is better! And there are other ways to carry handhelds besides pockets, though I don't really play handhelds outside of home so the portability aspect doesn't appeal to me to begin with. Hence, I'll take a bigger screen and more comfortable design and forgo a smaller size.

[Evan_B]

I'd just like to state, for the record, that I think Chozo's current title is boring, and does not fit his persona.

[Chozo Ghost]

You think it seems like I'm "out to get you" because I gave you a goofy title that happened to be something you said and virtually no other reason?

You wouldn't let it die, and when it was changed you kept changing it back. I tolerated it, and when it was changed I thought that would be the end of it, but then the next day it was changed back. That's happened twice. I can tolerate something so long but it was starting to seem like you were going to force it to be a permanent thing. Its ran its course and everyone knows about it, so just let it die now please?

And btw, I LOLed at your new title. Thumbs up on that.

[Spak-Spang]

Yeah, its interesting.  Graphics can always get better.  We have not quite made it to the special effects of movies or animated features...not even close.

However, the question is cost effective graphics...and I don't see them getting much better than they are now, without just completely bloating the budgets and making it unprofitable.  Now, I think there are still improvements to be made in lighting, animation, and much more...but not significantly so...not to the average gamer. 

So, I really am really curious what happens this next generation, and beyond, because it will literally define the future of gaming...and really until gaming gains an audience the size of movies then I don't see that graphics can improve to movie standards or even gaming can make moves to make itself more affordable to appeal to larger market.

[UncleBob]

This really needs to be taken to PM. Unclebob, follow the rules that you enforce and STFU. No one needs to see this farce any longer.

I have been nothing but respectful in my replies to CG.  But let me assure you, if you were to talk like this ("STFU") to any other member of this forum, I would not hesitate to ban you.

You wouldn't let it die, [...]. Its ran its course and everyone knows about it, so just let it die now please?

Not letting stuff die and continuing to harp on it long after it's been ran into the ground?

That sounds familiar.  Would you like to bring up how incompetent you think Reggie is in yet another very vaguely related thread anytime soon?

Oh, and - all that hard work in replying to each question/concern you had and you only bother to acknowledge one part of my reply?

[Oblivion]

No need to get your cock hard, Unclebob. You've already proven your dominance with Chozo. Give us some breathing room.

[Chozo Ghost]

Oh, and - all that hard work in replying to each question/concern you had and you only bother to acknowledge one part of my reply?

1) I don't want to keep this dragging on so I only responded to one thing because I want it to get wrapped up, done, and over with.

2) I did give you a very detailed and lengthy reply earlier in the thread and I don't even know if you read it because you certainly didn't reply to any of it.

http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/forums/index.php?topic=39525.msg761392#msg761392

3) I'm trying to get along with you, so please stop hammering me on every single thing. I even gave you a compliment and an applaud for your title which I thought was funny.

[UncleBob]

I read your longer reply that addressed the specific "I do want the Wii U to fail" comment.  I didn't respond because A) A lot of it covered a lot of the same ground you've covered multiple times in multiple threads and B) It deals mostly with your opinions, which aren't really something that's "right" or "wrong".

I responded point-by-point to your other post because most of it was aimed at me and covered issues that could be resolved through factual analysis of the details (like giving me 18 minutes to reply to a PM and such).

[BeautifulShy]

As much as I enjoy this. Hint I don't really enjoy this I kinda think this has gone on long enough. It is like you two want to get in the last word or something.

[EasyCure]

If it takes the Wii U to falter in order to prompt Nintendo to stop d***ing about with tablet controllers, motion controls and 3D, and for them to make something that is more console than toy, then perhaps that wouldn't be the worst thing in the world.

I'd hate to break it to you but consoles are toys. One day you'll realize this and put petty internet squabble behind you as I did. And before you question why I'm even here calling you out on something like this, I'll be blunt; I'm going through some **** and need a familiar "hang out" so to speak and I've been a part of this community for years. Also, I like being a snarky bastard sometimes .

Personally I feel the outrage between "nintendo going casual" is just the fact that the Wii's success it made teens and long-time adult gamer's realize this fact, and like an insecure child, they lash out about it because their little bubble has burst. I'm honestly surprised that when Sony and Microsoft started trying to put out "casual" software that those fans didn't act like schoolyard children who stopped playing with their favorite toy because either everyone else had it, or girls played with it too, so it was no longer "cool".

Guarantee my peers here didn't buy their first console, their parents did, and I also guarantee it was from a toy-store as opposed to an electronics store. Face it, these are games for your entertainment. Unlike say a card game, or a dice game, you're using a controller to manipulate the game, thus you're playing with a toy.

Funny how there's nothing wrong with playing with these toys as an adult, but that most adults playing them really need to grow up to realize it. I don't want to start the "are videogames art" debate here but honestly, for anyone out there that thinks having the best graphics matters; go watch a hollywood blockbuster like the Avengers instead, cuz even PS4 won't touch that level of detail, and that's a promise. For those that try to validate "core/mature" games with "deep stories" go read a novel because the majority of game's stories these days are nothing that hasn't been done before; they try to be movies which usually get their stories from a book anyway. Point is, you're playing with a toy. Deal with it.

Having one circle pad on the 3DS only to release not one but two versions of the circle pad pro, ¹not having analogue sticks on the Wii U gamepad, having a touch screen on the gamepad which is far less functional than those screens which most people are now familar with, having a Wii U pro controller which does not have force feedback, offering only 32 GB of internal storage, these are all things which Nintendo has either not acknowledged as being issues or has chosen to ignore for cost purposes.
 
True, Nintendo's bizarreness has helped to distinguish them in the market, but having gone through all this before as a Wii owner, I'm feeling a little weary of their wacky decision making. Ultimately, I just want something that isn't a chore. I don't want friend codes, I don't want poor online services, I don't want 8 and 9 month gaps in the release schedule, I don't want to have to use 3 different controllers, or motion controls, or tablet controllers. I want my games to be complex, engaging, challenging and, yes, I would like for the graphical capability of the system to not be a hinderance to the imaginations of the game designers. I want exactly what you've stated. I want Nintendo to gain a certain level of equality with their competitors rather than continuing to play catch up.


²What I don't want is a Wii U, lol.

1. I hope that part is a typo because I'm pretty sure the gamepad has analogue sticks. Perhaps you're referencing to the original version shown that appeared to have the 3DS-like circle-pads? Just wanted to point that out..


2. Fair opinion, but if you know you don't want one, why spend the time making post after post in such a negative tone about it? I understand this is a forum but.. look at me, I don't like the majority of PS3 and 360 offerings but I don't go into those topics and talk trash to people who have a differing opinion.

Yes, Mario Paint is considered a casual game, but for some reason I actually enjoyed that and would be happy if they made a modern version of it, but for some reason I didn't like Wii Sports or Wii Music. I gave both of those games a chance, but they didn't appeal to me at all. ³So why is it that I enjoyed the casual Mario Paint but not these? I don't know. Maybe its the Miis or the waggle controls. I don't know. But there is definitely a difference with this generation than all others.


...


As far as Nintendo's tyrannical dealings with third parties go, I don't condone that, but it didn't really impact the level of support Nintendo received in those days because they were a monopoly and were able to get away with it. It was only in later generations that they suffered the consequences for it. ⁴But from the perspective of a gamer (and especially one who was just a kid in those days) I was oblivious to that. Now I'm aware of it, but back then I didn't know any better.

Read point #3 and then point #4. Have you ever thought that perhaps the reason you like something like Mario Paint over Wii Sports/Music is because you were a kid in those days and were oblivious to the difference between casual/hardcore? Really think about that, all of you. If we didn't have gaming "journalism" the way we have today, if every person and their grandmother didn't have such easy access to spreading their opinions the way we do these days, if no one planted that seed in your head that "casual" gamers are girls and grandparents and that "hardcore" meant rated M FPS's or whatever; that you may just be able to enjoy something for what it is?

Part of me feels sad for the younger generation of gamer's being brought up in the "casual vs hardcore" war the internet keeps campaigning, then again when I was a kid Nintendo was "teh kiddie" and it didn't stop me from enjoying Mario Paint as much as I enjoyed something like Super Contra III. Maybe that's because it was only relegated to playgrounds and when I got home I was content playing my games instead of at a computer reading over and over and over again how nintendo sucks and they'll fail any minute now.

I miss those days. Oh wait, I can just choose not to go-online (to gaming sites at least).

Not necessarily. Some of my Nintendo DS cartridges don't work anymore because the pins have started to rust.

Dang... what do you do to those things?

ThomasO must be blowing in  his cartridges, OLD SCHOOL!!!!


@Iansane: See that's how you make a post with a differing opinion without coming across like you're trying to pick a fight. He's been doing this so long he's a pro. Sure there are the occasional flames he fans but I chalk that up to him being riled up after a long day of work or his hockey team losing, or something. I still can't help but feel that even if Nintendo gives him the next Super Mario World that he desires, he'll dislike it. That's probably because they have and I believe he didn't like it (Galaxy).


Also, I really feel that you just have this inner loathing for motions controls and are either lying about them not working for you in all games or are subconsciously (or not!) playing these games wrong because outside of games that are clearly buggy (the first Red Steel for example), I don't recall having any issues with motion controls in any of the 1st or 3rd party Wii games I've played/own. Maybe you've had a defective controller this whole time and didn't even know it.


One last thing: LuigiDude, damn you for making me hungry. Serano*: you won the thread with your comment


*I apologize if I got the username wrong.

I don't think that's going to be possible anymore...the "4-6 year" thing for consoles. Actually I think it already ended

THEN THEY ALL DESERVE TO DIE, AND I HOPE THEY BURN IN HELL!!!!! D&

Fixed

[UncleBob]

Guarantee my peers here didn't buy their first console, their parents did, and I also guarantee it was from a toy-store as opposed to an electronics store.

Well, my parents bought the first console we had in our home (Mattel Intellvision - whoo!), but it was bought at a local Electronics store (Risley's... chain still exists, but the local store is closed).  I remember renting BetaMax tapes there.

[EasyCure]

Guarantee my peers here didn't buy their first console, their parents did, and I also guarantee it was from a toy-store as opposed to an electronics store.

Well, my parents bought the first console we had in our home (Mattel Intellvision - whoo!), but it was bought at a local Electronics store (Risley's... chain still exists, but the local store is closed).  I remember renting BetaMax tapes there.

Dang you UB! My point still stands, they're toys!

Also, I don't know how much older you are so I maybe you don't count as a peer I'll be very specific about my definition of peer until I'm proven right

[UncleBob]

Geesh... I'm only 6 years older than you...

[Pixelated Pixies]

If it takes the Wii U to falter in order to prompt Nintendo to stop d***ing about with tablet controllers, motion controls and 3D, and for them to make something that is more console than toy, then perhaps that wouldn't be the worst thing in the world.

I'd hate to break it to you but consoles are toys. One day you'll realize this and put petty internet squabble behind you as I did. And before you question why I'm even here calling you out on something like this, I'll be blunt; I'm going through some **** and need a familiar "hang out" so to speak and I've been a part of this community for years. Also, I like being a snarky bastard sometimes .

I disagree strongly. Video games can of course be something for children to play with but that does not make all video games toys. Neither are video games, for me at least, merely an amusement or something of inconsequence. I don't want to go into the whole 'are video games art?' debate, but for me video games are a medium much like books and film. As far as I can see the only connection between video games and toys is that they both involve player agency. A toy, however, relys almost entirely on player agency, whereas with video games there's a dialogue between designer and player.

[UncleBob]

Video games can of course be something for children to play with but that does not make all video games toys.

Errr... Toys are things adults can play with too.

[MrPhishfood]

No need to get your cock hard, Unclebob. You've already proven your dominance with Chozo. Give us some breathing room.

lol, is this what it means to "stick it to the man" ?

"No need to get your cock hard" you know I have never even heard that before, is it a homosexual thing?

[Pixelated Pixies]

Video games can of course be something for children to play with but that does not make all video games toys.

Errr... Toys are things adults can play with too.

Fair enough. Replace children with people then. My point still stands.

[Chozo Ghost]

Consoles aren't toys. Lives are won and lost on them every day. Its serious business. J/K

[Adrock]

However, the question is cost effective graphics...and I don't see them getting much better than they are now, without just completely bloating the budgets and making it unprofitable.  Now, I think there are still improvements to be made in lighting, animation, and much more...but not significantly so...not to the average gamer.

I'm with you on this. Graphics can and will improve. However, we're at a point where games already look so good. New engines, techniques, and magic will make it easier to match or exceed what the best of today's most impressive games offer. Is it worth it to continue pushing graphics when the improvements are becoming less and less noticeable, especially in a gameplay environment? Would it, then, be better to keep budgets lower and get products out sooner?

This is one of the reasons why I'm not terribly worried about Wii U's capabilities. Companies have been dropping like flies and the ones that are left need to reevaluate their priorities. It will be increasingly more difficult to wow people with graphics when the improvements are becoming increasingly more marginal. I'm amazed that it's been nearly a decade since The Wind Waker launched on GameCube. Feel old? The game, mainly because of its art direction, still hold up today to me.

[Ceric]

Guarantee my peers here didn't buy their first console, their parents did, and I also guarantee it was from a toy-store as opposed to an electronics store.

Well, my parents bought the first console we had in our home (Mattel Intellvision - whoo!), but it was bought at a local Electronics store (Risley's... chain still exists, but the local store is closed).  I remember renting BetaMax tapes there.

You be Only Half Right.  My first system was an NES and My Sister and I pooled our money together to buy it from the Castle Toys'R'Us competitor back in the day.

[Mop it up]

Video games can of course be something for children to play with but that does not make all video games toys.

Errr... Toys are things adults can play with too.

True, but nobody wanted BMX XXX...

[ShyGuy]

UncleBob really is the worst. I didn't want to believe what everyone told me, but this thread proves it. Sorry I called you the worst, Insanolord, you are not the worst. Unclebob is the worst. Sorry I called you the second worst Crimm, you are not the second worst. Insanolord is the second worst. Sorry I called you the third worst Megabyte, you are not the third worst. Crimm is the third worst...


...Sorry I called you the seventy-fifth Worse, Mop it Up, you are not the seventy-fifth worst. Fatty the Hut is the seventy fifth worst.

I am now the twenty third worst

[NWR_insanolord]

I guess I'm just going to have to work that much harder until ShyGuy says I'm the worst again.

[Mop it up]

Why am I so low? I guess I need to visit more often...

[Kairon]

At least you got mentioned. Shyguy doesn't even care about me... T_T

[broodwars]

People really seem to be campaigning for this thread to be featured in NFR Episode 7's Now Posted segment...

[MagicCow64]

Video games can of course be something for children to play with but that does not make all video games toys.

Errr... Toys are things adults can play with too.

True, but nobody wanted BMX XXX...

I bought that game for $2 at the mall, and definitely had that amount of money in fun with it over that course of an hour.