Gaming Forums => Nintendo Gaming => Topic started by: Link_ on December 19, 2006, 03:38:04 PM
Title: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Link_ on December 19, 2006, 03:38:04 PM
I will make this short.
in the last gen wars the clear winner was the ps2,regardless of its "inferior" hardware,as always its all about the games.the xbox and gamecube went head to head for an almost tie,with the xbox winning by a small margin.so the 2 "superior machines" loss.
but here is a fact.when you compare the ps2 to GC or xbox the diference its notable but not outstanding.examples.soul calibur 2,the splinter cell series,metal gear solid series and so on,thats because the technical specs from each console are not too separate,xbox 700 processor 64 ram,GC 485 processor 24 ram,ps2 300 processor 32 ram.
to the point. in this next gen wars we see that nintendo took the gameplay over graphics aproach,but i think the wii specs are too weak compared to the competition.that means that we can see a good game play well on the xbox and the ps2,but not potentially on the ps3 or 360 to play on wii,examples far cry,call of duty.this games look way too crappy on the wii,and this is just the beggining,as well as the wii development improves so the ps3 and 360's.
the point i see is that maybe third parties would dump wii in the long run for the "more powerfull machines".
i think if nintendo at least got a 1ghz processor and 256 ram,that would do as a last gen ps2 compared to the competition,the way i see is that the wii stand as a nintendo 64 compared to a ps2 and xbox.
by the way this is not a nintendo bashing thread,im a nintendo fan since i can remember.
later dudes.
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: ShyGuy on December 19, 2006, 06:20:59 PM
I think we need to see the second batch of Wii games before we make any conclusions about the Wii hardware.
BTW, your avatar is 50 pixels too wide.
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Infernal Monkey on December 19, 2006, 06:24:40 PM
Master System beat the NES Nintendo 64 beat the PlayStation Xbox beat the PlayStation 2 PSP beat the DS
WATCH OUT WII!
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: denjet78 on December 19, 2006, 06:54:07 PM
It is strange how the weakest system always seems to win out. I think Nintendo finally noticed that trend and decided to use it to their advantage. They purposefully made the Wii the weakest system because they know weak=winner!
Generation after generation that point has been proved.
Beyond that though. I'm sick of super realistic shiny graphics. I'm tired of games where it looks like they put all the effort into making the character models look good while the backgrounds are crap. I'm tired of developers throwing effects at horrible are direction hoping to make it look better. And I'm really tired of games not being fun anymore because the entire budget was squandered on getting the specular highlights to reflect off the gun barrel a little more realistically than they did last generation.
I just want fun, well built games.
Graphics can be damned for all I care.
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Zach on December 19, 2006, 06:57:58 PM
Quote Originally posted by: ShyGuy BTW, your avatar is 50 pixels too wide.
I find that kinda funny coming from somebody who's avatar is 50 pixels too long. (yes I know its not heavily enforced since it does not widen the margin)
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: NWR_pap64 on December 19, 2006, 06:59:00 PM
You icon is too big...BRING ON DONKEY KONG!
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: willie1234 on December 19, 2006, 07:00:25 PM
it's not that strange really, weaker system generally means lower price.
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Kairon on December 19, 2006, 07:07:14 PM
Quote Originally posted by: Zach
Quote Originally posted by: ShyGuy BTW, your avatar is 50 pixels too wide.
I find that kinda funny coming from somebody who's avatar is 50 pixels too long. (yes I know its not heavily enforced since it does not widen the margin)
This just in! Shyguy is Link's duplicate account! *gasp*
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red Kairon@aol.com
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: ShyGuy on December 19, 2006, 07:14:20 PM
I will shorten my avatar when Jonny shortens his. Ooh I'm a rabble-rouser!
But back on the subject, the Mario Galaxy vids from E3 looked good. Really good. I think we will all be saying wow by next christmas. To further illustrate, look at what Squenix is squeezing out of the DS nowadays, You give a good developer enough time with the platform, and they can impress.
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: TerribleOne on December 19, 2006, 07:14:42 PM
Threadstarter has a point... the difference is a bit disturbing.. this topic has been done a thousand times but now that games are coming out it is NOT COOL to see them with exact Gamecube graphics
It's a bit difficult playing Gears of War and pickin COD up. Yes, things are slow at the beginning but not THIS slow. and if you take a peak at the schedule you'll notice no time soon a game might show us any different.
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: IceCold on December 19, 2006, 07:52:05 PM
It isn't even close to the difference between the N64 and the Xbox. From the 64 era to the Cube, you could clearly see the jump in graphics. From the Xbox to the 360, for example, the difference is much more subtle. Now, there is more detail, more resolution etc, but overall I don't see it as a huge jump.
If you look at the videos of, say, Mario Galaxy, and compare them to PS3 or 360 games, there is a difference, but it's not a big one at all. To me, Galaxy is more pleasing to the eye because of the art direction. The third party games you see right now are the result of the rush to get them ready for launch. We always knew that the Wii would get horrible third party ports visually, especially at launch. A better indicator would be the exclusives..
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Chozo Ghost on December 19, 2006, 11:00:36 PM
Seriously, do graphics even matter at all any more? Once a video game's graphics look as good as real life then you just can't improve them anymore than that.
I think Nintendo made a wise decision in choosing to greatly improve gameplay and more or less neglecting graphics. That is not to say that there is no graphics improvement, though. Isn't the Wii supposed to be 2-3 times more powerful than the cube?
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Majora on December 19, 2006, 11:08:57 PM
Graphics.... a thing of the past... lol
Seriously, how beautiful does Zelda Twighlight Princess look? Gamecube standard graphics, but that is all we need, and I could not have asked for more. Beautiful art direction, the graphics are rich in emotion and detail.
Hell, I wouldn't even care if the new Zelda games were produced to resemble the Ocarina of Time graphics! Would the Animal Crossing experiance change if the graphics didn't look like it was designed for the GameBoy Color? To me it wouldn't have.
Of course we have not seen the machine at it's potential, but we always new that it would be the weaker that the powerful units of the XBOX 360 or PS3 (which are both exellent machines)... I'd rather the innovative technology of the Wii, rather than being able to play Tony Hawks 27...... same gameplay, just beefed up graphics each time.
By the way, I was playing that Rockstar Table Tennis game on the XBOX 360 today, and I was having a ball, its great fun... But I couldn't help but feel I'd rather be playing it using the Wii remote, than have the graphics just that little bit better....
As for analysising the Wii in the console war... Who knows how it'll fair, but things look promising... (but I rememeber thinking that about the Gamecube too)
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Rhoq on December 20, 2006, 01:02:57 AM
Quote Originally posted by: Link_ call of duty.this games look way too crappy on the wii
Only if you are comparing it to the XBox 360 and PS3 version. Personally, I think COD3 looks damn nice on the Wii.
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Nick DiMola on December 20, 2006, 01:14:30 AM
This topic is retarded. Really how many times do we have to tread this same water. The Wii is graphically inferior, the games don't look super realistic. The world is not coming to an end. As long as developers can continuously make fun games, the Wii will continue to keep it's popularity. At the very least, Nintendo always has its big fans to fall back on ... and the DS.
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Pittbboi on December 20, 2006, 01:53:09 AM
Majora...I don't know which version you have...but my copy of Zelda looks like crap.
Great art direcion, but overall the characters are blocky and it looks no better than a Gamecube game. Which would be fine if this were last gen, but it's not. The truth is the worst Xbox360 and PS3 games look better than what the Wii has offered so far, and that might be the case for all of this gen. It's one thing to enjoy games on the Wii, but don't kid yourself into thinking that the graphics are great and they don't matter, because compared to the standard set this gen that's just not the case. I love the Wii, but it doesn't get the right of being judged in a vacuum.
An THAT'S what the problem is. Pretty much everyone knew that the Wii was going to be less powerful than the competition, but you're a deluded fanboi if you claim that you expected it to be THIS underpowered. Even the most dedicated Nintendo fan was a little shocked to learn that the Wii was not only underpowered, but it wasn't even in the same ballpark in the competition. Still, we were willing the cope because we were told in a-later retracted-statement that the Wii was 2 to 3 times more powerful.
But where are those games? I told myself that the graphical difference would be tolerable if we atleast started to see games that couldn't be done on the Cube. If we at least started seeing the difference, even if it wasn't going to be that major. But so far, not even THAT has happened, and it doesn't seem like it's going to for a long time. There has yet to be a single game shown that "inarguably" couldn't be done on the Cube.
And that might be Nintendo's fault for waiting until the absolute last minute to give out dev kits, but still...it's starting to feel like i spent $300 on a wimote.
" As long as developers can continuously make fun games, the Wii will continue to keep it's popularity."
WHERE are those fun games??? All Wii seem to be getting are crappy ports of what were fun games years ago.
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Ceric on December 20, 2006, 02:06:49 AM
You know if the GCN Version of TP wasn't ever in existance I but your tune would be very different. So around the very last game of the system they finally... top a most of its potential. It happens to look like games that barely top the new systems potential.
In the end the first generation will always be junk compared to the last. The problem is that the Wii has the same architecture as the Cube which developers only ever bothered to in general unlock at most 50% of its actual ability. So now we got this new system and everyone is playing catch up and have to break old stigmas to boot. Thats how a common architecture can work against you. If say Sony would have done the same thing as the Nintendo did with the Wii we probably see better looking games at launch because developers flogged the PS2 for every penny it was worth.
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Pittbboi on December 20, 2006, 02:34:44 AM
Well, pretty much everyone knows that with a system launch, you get a bunch of games that look thrown together, or that look like the best last gen had to offer. However, there are always one or two titles that make you go "wow, so this is what [system name] is all about. This makes it worth it." In my opinion Wii doesn't have those games yet (Zelda doesn't count because it's on the cube, and WiiSports is nothing but glorified demos). Since 3rd parties are so content with releasing crappy ports on the system it seems like the games that'll make Wii totally worth it are going to be, surprise surprise, Nintendo games. And their showcase titles don't seem to be coming out until late next year...
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: ryancoke on December 20, 2006, 02:42:45 AM
Just wait until metriod prime 3....
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: couchmonkey on December 20, 2006, 03:02:04 AM
Basically the question is, do graphics matter? Wii might answer that question once and for all, but I think DS vs. PSP (plus Game Boy vs. Game Gear) have already given us a sneak peek.
Quote the point i see is that maybe third parties would dump wii in the long run for the "more powerfull machines".
No, I don't think so. Smart third parties decide who to develop for based on money, not the power of the hardware. The smart money is on Xbox 360 right now, since it has by far the most users. However, Wii is also a good choice, it has quite a few users and its lower power means developers don't need as many man hours to create acceptable graphics.
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Darc Requiem on December 20, 2006, 03:10:06 AM
Quote Originally posted by: Link_ I will make this short.
in the last gen wars the clear winner was the ps2,regardless of its "inferior" hardware,as always its all about the games.the xbox and gamecube went head to head for an almost tie,with the xbox winning by a small margin.so the 2 "superior machines" loss.
but here is a fact.when you compare the ps2 to GC or xbox the diference its notable but not outstanding.examples.soul calibur 2,the splinter cell series,metal gear solid series and so on,thats because the technical specs from each console are not too separate,xbox 700 processor 64 ram,GC 485 processor 24 ram,ps2 300 processor 32 ram.
to the point. in this next gen wars we see that nintendo took the gameplay over graphics aproach,but i think the wii specs are too weak compared to the competition.that means that we can see a good game play well on the xbox and the ps2,but not potentially on the ps3 or 360 to play on wii,examples far cry,call of duty.this games look way too crappy on the wii,and this is just the beggining,as well as the wii development improves so the ps3 and 360's.
the point i see is that maybe third parties would dump wii in the long run for the "more powerfull machines".
i think if nintendo at least got a 1ghz processor and 256 ram,that would do as a last gen ps2 compared to the competition,the way i see is that the wii stand as a nintendo 64 compared to a ps2 and xbox.
by the way this is not a nintendo bashing thread,im a nintendo fan since i can remember.
later dudes.
Well the Gamecube had a total of 40mbs of RAM (24MB main, 16MB Auxilary), but thats not why I'm responding to your post. The reason most Wii games look like Cube games is because they are. A lot of company's just took GC titles and brought them over to the Wii with motion control. In Ubisoft's case everything thing they've released on the Wii is horribly rushed or a GC game with tacked on controls. Far Cry for Wii would be terrible looking for a Dreamcast game. I swear Far Cry for Wii began development 3 months ago. I mean there just isnt an excuse for a game to look that horrible. I mean honestly the only game that looks like it may have been developed with the Wii in mind from the beginning is Excite Truck.
I think the fact that the Wii is powered by an upgraded Gamecube chipset is going to allow a lot of lazy developers to continue to use current gen graphics engines for Wii. I seriously doubt you'll see EA develop all new graphics engines for their Wii titles. Ubisoft has severly disappointed me with their shovelware. Sadly most developers never even took at vantage of the GC chipset so we are going to end up with a lof PS2 port based game engines.
Unfortunately that means Wii owners are going to end up with a lot shoddy, cash in, shovelwave titles with a PS2 (or worse) level of graphic detail. The only good thing I can see coming from this is that the Wii will get a lot more game titles overall. So when you see a game that looks and plays head and shoulders above the rest. Buy it. Support developers that actually develop games that not only take advantage of the Wii-mote but he improved hardware as well. At the absolute worst, Wii titles should look like RE4, MP2, Chronicles of Riddick (Xbox), Halo 2 (Xbox), etc.
Lets hope the better than expected Wii sales will prompt developers to actually put some work into their Wii titles. Although I know it won't be read by them, I will say it anyway. Ubisoft, I know you all are desperate to make money to stave off an EA hostile takeover. That said, resorting to EA style rush job ports isn't the way to do it. I much rather have played Red Steel in February and Far Cry in June if would have meant you guys actually finished the games.
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Spak-Spang on December 20, 2006, 03:28:29 AM
You state that Wii Sports is a glorified demo and doesn't show off what Wii is about...but what do you have to support that belief?
The single launch game that shows what the Wii is about IS Wii Sports. It is easily my second favorite game for the system. I play the game atleast once a week. It isn't perfect, but it is beautifully simple and greatly inspired.
The game that shows that defines the potential of a system and "what the system is about" doesn't have to be about graphics. It doesn't have to make you say "WOW," because of graphics...but can make you say "Wow," because of concept and vision.
Wii Sports is fantastic in that regard, and really pulls the entire system's vision together. Miis to use as ingame characters and pull yourself and family into the game. Letters sent to your system announcing when you achieve something great in Wii Sports is like a nice reward for your hard work. Multiplayer games of Wii Sports push the community aspect of the system.
Wii Sports right now is the definitive Wii game, and above any other game it is selling the Wii system and concept.
Second would be Zelda...and Zelda is the killer App for the system in the fact, that If you own a Wii you will want to buy Zelda.
I think Graphics are important in gaming, but it is only important when graphics come at an affordable price, which gamers feel they can afford the system.
Make no mistake, if the PS3 and Wii were the same price, many would buy a PS3 and never consider the Wii.
How this will play out in later years of this generation will be interesting...but the Wii should already have a strong user base installed by that point.
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: ShyGuy on December 20, 2006, 03:51:13 AM
So what couple 360 launch window games made people go wow? King Kong? Gun?
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Pittbboi on December 20, 2006, 03:53:11 AM
If you own a Wii you'll want to buy Zelda because it's really the only game out there right now worth its salt, and you can get it on Gamecube if you still don't want a Wii. Face it: it doesn't count.
And don't get me wrong, I like WiiSports, but to me it's not a game. It's fun, but it's a small series of mini-games that are meant to demonstrate the "concept" of the Wii. It's good at showing what the remote can do, but as a game itself it's still too simple. Nintendo knows the US needed something like that, which is why they packaged it with the system (if they hadn't, I doubt many people would have bought it). Playing WiiSports makes me go, "Ok, this is fun, I believe in the Wiimote now...now bring on the real games"
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: TerribleOne on December 20, 2006, 04:12:36 AM
Quote Originally posted by: ShyGuy So what couple 360 launch window games made people go wow? King Kong? Gun?
Kameo, Perfect Dark, NBA Live
the problem is that the wii games look really bad... worse than RE4.. thats ming boggling.. i just paid $250 for this thing... a GC was at $99 and honestly its 2006 and the hardware is dirt cheap i doubt more than $75. with its "update" 250 right now is NOT cutting it. Perhpaps like some say it's only the first gen of Wii games... but 360 is only a year ahead and PS3 launched at the same time. We're paying for the R&D team's salary for the wiimote
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Pittbboi on December 20, 2006, 04:15:27 AM
ShyGuy:
I'm not saying the 360's launch was "stellar" or anything, but there's no denying that, strictly speaking games, the 360 had the best launch this gen. Lots of games sucked, but there were a few decent ones that showcased the system, if nothing else.
Nobody really expects the best the system has to offer to come out at launch, or even in the first year, but there should still be at one or two decent games that proove the system to you, that shows you what this system can do that the previous one can't. Xbox360 had that, even the PS3 has that with Resistance.
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: NWR_pap64 on December 20, 2006, 04:16:02 AM
What's with all the negative thinking noobs around here? Do they want to start something or what?
Its OK to be doubtful of some things, but some of the things mentioned here are retarded as hell. If you want to get the most out of your money in terms of graphics shut up and either buy a 360 or a PS3 because the Wii is clearly about new ways to play.
And the graphically impressive games WILL come, just give it some time.
Stupid noobs...
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Pittbboi on December 20, 2006, 04:25:02 AM
Oh wow, that was an impressive post, pap64. Totally put us in our place...
I bought a Wii because I want new ways to play...
But I want new ways to play NEW games that aren't ports of PS2 quality. "noob" or not, that's not too much to ask as a Nintendo fan, but it seems like I'm going to have to wait until late 2007 before anything of worth actually comes out.
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: ShyGuy on December 20, 2006, 04:50:38 AM
Oh yeah Kameo and Perfect Dark. People are still raving about those awesome games. OH WAIT. PHAIL.
Kameo was eye candy, I'll give you that. But Perfect Dark Zero was uglish. If you want to get "technical", RE4 character models had about double the polys that PD0 character models had.
Red Steel is graphically superior to PD0 from an artistic standpoint. Yeah, I said it.
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Arbok on December 20, 2006, 04:56:26 AM
Quote Originally posted by: Pittbboi And don't get me wrong, I like WiiSports, but to me it's not a game. It's fun, but it's a small series of mini-games that are meant to demonstrate the "concept" of the Wii. It's good at showing what the remote can do, but as a game itself it's still too simple.
That sounds like me in concept before launch. I had no interest at buying Wii Sports at all due to simplicity, and would have rather held out for a more "complex" game and disliked the thought of being forced to "buy it".
Yet on launch, it was the first game I cracked open and played, and I instantly fall in love. True, as a single player game there isn't a lot of depth, but Wii Sports is meant to be played with others. I have been amazed to see friends pick up the system, even those that wouldn't be caught dead with a Gamecube or didn't care much for video games at all beyond playing GTA III for a few minutes, and really enjoy themselves while getting the hang of things very quickly. The training segments are also loads of fun, including "power bowling" and "dodging" for boxing (and the quotes from "Dodgeball", as expected, followed).
So on one hand, as a single player game, I agree it's not the best, but as a multiplayer game its realy hard to beat. In terms of launch titles, I don't think Nintendo could have asked for a better title to sell their system and one would be fooling themself to believe that the current system hype isn't due largely to Wii Sports.
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on December 20, 2006, 05:04:17 AM
Ooooh a heated argument!?
*Pulls up chair and grabs popcorn* *then changes the channel*
CLICK
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Spak-Spang on December 20, 2006, 05:07:02 AM
I guess my thing is I don't agree with the tech demo assumption of Wii Sports.
We say that because we wanted a well rounded sports compilation, but each it isn't a simple tech demo.
Each Sport has several different modes of play, and there is more depth in the game than is available in a simple tech demo.
I also disagree that Zelda doesn't count because it is also available on the Gamecube. Both the PS3 and Xbox 360 launched with basically games you could play on other systems. (Specially the 360) but those games were still games you wanted to buy on the new systems because they were better.
Zelda for the Wii is THE definitive version of the game. It has better control, a wide screen version, and is a completely new experience in gaming when played on the Wii. Those differences are important and proves that the Wii's motion controls can work for several different game types when implimented with competant designers.
Also there are several other games that are worthy of playing on the Wii, despite the claim that ONLY Zelda is worth purchasing.
Rayman is a fun and enjoyable game.
Excite Truck is quite enjoyable and is vastly underrated.
Super Monkey Ball has its issues, but there are still several minigames that are enjoyable to play within it.
So at the beginning launch of the system there was 5 exclusive games for the system that are fun for the system. That is better than most launches. And you can argue that 5 number is actually larger.
Now a few weeks after launch we are getting Elebits, Super Swing Golf, and in less regards but still cool Megal Slug Anthology and all the Virtual Console games. This continues to define the Wii as a strong console early in its life.
And for nongamers you have the Weather channel released, and in many ways the virtual console can satisify them.
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Arbok on December 20, 2006, 05:17:15 AM
Quote Originally posted by: Spak-Spang And for nongamers you have the Weather channel released, and in many ways the virtual console can satisify them.
That is actually the point that has me worried. I think Nintendo now needs to cater a little more to this newly developed "non-gamer" genre in the US, and I don't see it in the immediate future of the system. Wii Play hopefully will fill that gap for awhile, and while Wario Ware might be big in Japan in this respect, I don't think the same people who loved Wii Sports in the US will be running out to get it. Sadly I can't really think of much else that would work here either beyond more sports style games, although hopefully something will rise above that I hadn't "seen coming" before to keep this group interested. Be a great opportunity for a third party to really make a name for themself too.
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Link_ on December 20, 2006, 05:28:11 AM
ok read this, its not about beingthe less powerfull system,in history think......all ofthe less powerfull systemthat won where released a year or more ahead, Nes vs master system sega genesis vs super ness(but some records shows that in the americas the snes won by a small margin) ps1 vs n64 ps2 vs GC,xbox. DS vs psp
that time gives the oportunity to build a huge user base for the less system,but this time the less system does not have a year ahead,its comopeting head to head against the more powerful systems.
believe me that some kids may want to take on the more powerfull systems,so as adults that likes "technology"
regardless of what some here say,graphics sells systems.
and i think nintendo should have boost the wii's power just a little more.because for me its way underpowered compared to the competition,as i said on my first statement,the wii compares the ps3 and 360,as a n64 compares to a ps2.
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Link_ on December 20, 2006, 05:30:08 AM
and i think that strategy may hurt nintendo in the long run.
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Spak-Spang on December 20, 2006, 05:34:18 AM
Well I think Nintendo has several things coming that will make nongamers happy.
1)Wario Ware is being advertised mostly towards nongamers. Women being and adults being should playing it.
2)Internet Channel, News Channel, Weather Channel and virtual Console will all appeal to nongamers.
3)Wii Play will be great.
4)Brain Age Training Wii.
Remember with Non gamers, they will not buy a new game each month...and if they do they want more budget games instead $50.00 games.
I would also say that Excite Truck probably appealed to Nongamers.
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Pittbboi on December 20, 2006, 05:39:41 AM
Quote Originally posted by: Spak-Spang I guess my thing is I don't agree with the tech demo assumption of Wii Sports.
We say that because we wanted a well rounded sports compilation, but each it isn't a simple tech demo.
Each Sport has several different modes of play, and there is more depth in the game than is available in a simple tech demo.
I also disagree that Zelda doesn't count because it is also available on the Gamecube. Both the PS3 and Xbox 360 launched with basically games you could play on other systems. (Specially the 360) but those games were still games you wanted to buy on the new systems because they were better.
Zelda for the Wii is THE definitive version of the game. It has better control, a wide screen version, and is a completely new experience in gaming when played on the Wii. Those differences are important and proves that the Wii's motion controls can work for several different game types when implimented with competant designers.
Also there are several other games that are worthy of playing on the Wii, despite the claim that ONLY Zelda is worth purchasing.
Rayman is a fun and enjoyable game.
Excite Truck is quite enjoyable and is vastly underrated.
Super Monkey Ball has its issues, but there are still several minigames that are enjoyable to play within it.
So at the beginning launch of the system there was 5 exclusive games for the system that are fun for the system. That is better than most launches. And you can argue that 5 number is actually larger.
Now a few weeks after launch we are getting Elebits, Super Swing Golf, and in less regards but still cool Megal Slug Anthology and all the Virtual Console games. This continues to define the Wii as a strong console early in its life.
And for nongamers you have the Weather channel released, and in many ways the virtual console can satisify them.
Rayman, Excite Truck and Super Monkey Ball are decent games (emphasis on "decent"), but they are definitely second tier games. I mean, let's face it, if these games were released on the Cube excitement for them would be minimal. We're treating these games like they're the best thing since sliced bread because there's really no alternative yet.
And Elebits (more of a cult game than an actual headliner) and Super Swing Golf?? Yeah, I really see kids sitting around at launch talking about how they can't wait until "TOTALLY F-ING SWEET Super Swing Golf!" comes out....
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Link_ on December 20, 2006, 05:43:44 AM
Quote Originally posted by: Rhoq
Quote Originally posted by: Link_ call of duty.this games look way too crappy on the wii
Only if you are comparing it to the XBox 360 and PS3 version. Personally, I think COD3 looks damn nice on the Wii.
that and only that its my point exactly,COD 3 looks like crap compared to the ps3 and 360.thanks for bringing it.
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Link_ on December 20, 2006, 05:46:33 AM
Quote Originally posted by: Mr. Jack This topic is retarded. Really how many times do we have to tread this same water. The Wii is graphically inferior, the games don't look super realistic. The world is not coming to an end. As long as developers can continuously make fun games, the Wii will continue to keep it's popularity. At the very least, Nintendo always has its big fans to fall back on ... and the DS.
whos more retarded? the retarded or the retarded that follows him?
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: UERD on December 20, 2006, 06:31:30 AM
Third parties won't dump a console because it has inferior stats, they'll dump it because they're not selling enough copies of their games. When it comes down to the wire, the biggest factor motivating these companies is the bottom line. If a console has more installed units, they'll develop for it, even if the hardware sucks and the SDKs are impossible to work with, because more people will buy the games they make, and they'll make more money.
The only way 'third parties would dump wii in the long run for the "more powerfull machines"' would be if consumers decided they wanted more powerful machines, stopped buying from Nintendo, and started buying more PS3s and 360s. If Wii became the predominant console, developers would not jump ship even if the other consoles' graphics were that much better. Why? Because they would NOT MAKE AS MUCH MONEY. Not only would it cost more for them to develop games, they'd also sell fewer copies, which means they'd spend more money to earn less revenue, something that makes absolutely no business sense.
If Wii sales fizzle out, developers will jump ship. They won't do it because of the graphics, though. Again, they'll do it because they WANT TO MAKE MONEY. If people stop buying Wiis and start buying more PS3s and XBoxes, those latter consoles will increase in market share, making them more lucrative to game publishers, because they'll be able to sell more games. In the end, it's not 'third parties' who care about graphics or performance, it's the consumers. If the consumers prioritize hardware power, they'll buy powerful consoles, and devs will develop for those more powerful consoles because the consumers purchased them. If the consumers prioritize less powerful consoles, devs will build games for those consoles. Third parties have very little to do with these decisions.
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Smash_Brother on December 20, 2006, 06:48:41 AM
Quote Originally posted by: UERD Third parties won't dump a console because it has inferior stats, they'll dump it because they're not selling enough copies of their games. When it comes down to the wire, the biggest factor motivating these companies is the bottom line. If a console has more installed units, they'll develop for it, even if the hardware sucks and the SDKs are impossible to work with, because more people will buy the games they make, and they'll make more money.
DING! DING! DING! WINNER!
And that's all there is to it, folks.
Cheaper to develop for + Cheaper to buy (if you can FIND one, heh) + easy to port to = $$$. $$$ = more 3rd party support. More 3rd party support = generation winner.
That's all there is to it.
Have you ever LOOKED through the PS2 library? 90% of the games are asstacular garbage, and yet it had the largest install base because more games, no matter HOW sh*tty they may be, means more people buy it which in turn means more support from GOOD developers.
The DS didn't get DQ9 over the PSP because of better graphics. It got it because of a larger install base, despite the fact that most games that come out for it are, in fact, crap.
And yes, the first generation of games will be lousy ports which look terrible because most of them spent the majority of their development time on other hardware. Wait for the second generation of Wii games to come around, the generation developed 100% on Wii hardware.
Comparing Gears of War to Wii launch games is unfair because GoW is a 2nd or 3rd gen 360 title.
Wait until the 2nd gen games come out and in the meantime, stop complaining.
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: couchmonkey on December 20, 2006, 06:56:05 AM
Quote Originally posted by: Link_ ok read this, its not about beingthe less powerfull system,in history think......all ofthe less powerfull systemthat won where released a year or more ahead, Nes vs master system sega genesis vs super ness(but some records shows that in the americas the snes won by a small margin) ps1 vs n64 ps2 vs GC,xbox. DS vs psp
that time gives the oportunity to build a huge user base for the less system,but this time the less system does not have a year ahead,its comopeting head to head against the more powerful systems.
believe me that some kids may want to take on the more powerfull systems,so as adults that likes "technology"
regardless of what some here say,graphics sells systems.
and i think nintendo should have boost the wii's power just a little more.because for me its way underpowered compared to the competition,as i said on my first statement,the wii compares the ps3 and 360,as a n64 compares to a ps2.
Bear in mind that DS only launched a couple of weeks ahead of PSP in Japan but it still won by a landslide. Elsewhere the lead time was only a few months. Furthermore, systems like Neo Geo, 3DO and Atari Jaguar offered much more power than the existing systems when they were released, but they failed to go anywhere.
Boiling the battle down to graphics is a mistake. There's a rainbow of sales points and business strategies at work here. If Nintendo successfully appeals to non-gamers and lapsed gamers, Sony and Microsoft's graphics won't matter, because they can't offer the same pricepoint or user experience as Nintendo.
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Hocotate on December 20, 2006, 09:04:54 AM
Pittboi, to argue that the only reason why the inferior graphics systems won was because of an earlier release date just doesn't hold up. DS and PSP launched too closely (especially in Japan) for it to be the decisive factor in the matter. And if you think about it... with the ridiculously low shipments of PS3 units, Nintendo might as well have launched earlier...
It’s getting harder and harder for people to think up more stuff to doubt or discredit Nintendo for. As stated before, the low end console with the "worse" graphics always wins. No Dragon Quest on Playstation pretty much sealed its fate.... You still can't give away an Xbox in Japan so MS is already a losing system... Nintendo won, accept it people.
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Pittbboi on December 20, 2006, 09:38:21 AM
Hocotate: Are you refering to something I said? Because I never made that point.
As for console sales...I agree. Third parties are loyal to a degree (I mean, look at how many developers are STILL making games for the PS3 in light of all its problems), but at the end of the day they will go where the money is. However, just because developers are on board with the Wii doesn't mean that their best titles are coming with them. Case in point? Take a look at the developers on board with Wii and look at the games they're making for the Wii as opposed to the 360 and PS3...
Mostly last gen ports, niche titles and cartoon games.
Despite how popular the Wii is right now and will continue to be, most developers are STILL saving their best and brightest for other consoles, and Nintendo needs to change that. I sincerely hope Nintendo's strategy to make the Wii the easiest and cheapest console to make games for doesn't backfire, because so far it seems like developers would rather be lazy and make cheap ports for the Wii to fund their other games for other systems, instead of using the Wii's ease of development to make truly outstanding games for a fraction of the cost it would take on the 360 and PS3. Nintendo really needs to do all they can to appeal to the developers. They have the hardware, now they just need to..well...do some serious A$$ kissing and get on their knees to please the developers. Because the Wii is pretty much set to be a port-haven for most of 2007.
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Smash_Brother on December 20, 2006, 09:49:17 AM
Quote Originally posted by: Pittbboi Despite how popular the Wii is right now and will continue to be, most developers are STILL saving their best and brightest for other consoles
Like Dragon Quest: Swords? Like RE: Umbrella Chronicles? Like Super Swing Golf (which is excellent, by the way)?
The only games I can think of slated for other consoles which are a big deal are FF13 and MGS4, both of which could go multiplatform at any moment, as far as I see.
What are the "best and brightest" which are supposedly going to these other consoles?
With Banco promising 30 Wii titles, Square bringing FF and DQ and EA opening an entire dev house for the Wii as well as promising 13 titles, some exclusive, Disney opening a Wii studio and Ubi's pledged support...where is the support lacking?
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Arbok on December 20, 2006, 09:57:52 AM
Quote Originally posted by: Pittbboi Case in point? Take a look at the developers on board with Wii and look at the games they're making for the Wii as opposed to the 360 and PS3...
There is a problem in your logic, and that is that game development isn't decided on overnight. Companies are supporting the 360 right now as its been out the longest and has the widest userbase, while others are supporting the PS3 due to expecting it to capture much of the PS2 marketplace... those feelings were in place before the Wii or PS3 launched. We aren't going to be seeing an effect just a month or two after they launch, even though third parties are likely drafting up their plans as we speak.
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Hocotate on December 20, 2006, 10:46:27 AM
Quote Originally posted by: Pittbboi Hocotate: Are you refering to something I said? Because I never made that point.
I mean Link. I saw flawed logic and assumed it was you. I'll look a second time to make sure, sorry.
Quote Take a look at the developers on board with Wii and look at the games they're making for the Wii as opposed to the 360 and PS3...
I'm seeing nothing for PS3 aside from MGS4 and FFXIII... both of which are rumored to being ported. 360 is already established as a no go for market leader.... If Blue Dragon couldn't take it there, nothing else they will get can. The bulk of Developer support is going to the DS right now. 360 and PS3 aren't getting any better than Wii.
Quote Because the Wii is pretty much set to be a port-haven for most of 2007.
Not everything for 07 has been announced I'm sure. Mario Galaxy, Metroid Prime 3, and SSBB match up well to Sony and MS' big titles imo. You are grasping at straws here.
Quote Despite how popular the Wii is right now and will continue to be, most developers are STILL saving their best and brightest for other consoles
No they aren't. If the user base isn't there, then the games won't be either.
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on December 20, 2006, 11:11:40 AM
This gen will have some big losers and big winners.
There.
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Ian Sane on December 20, 2006, 11:29:23 AM
I think some people are clinging a little too hard to the "weakest consoles always wins" rule. It's not a rule anyway since the SNES beat the Genesis and that is considered factual information so I'm getting tired of people claiming otherwise. And that also is the only generation where there was any serious competition anyway. In all other gens the winner walked away with a huge lead and it was clear as day who would win after about a year of competition.
The lesson is that hardware alone doesn't ensure victory. But too often I'm seeing it misinterpretted as weak hardware being the key of success. No. That's just a coincedence. No one ever bought a console specifically because it had inferior graphics. Plus those consoles actually were considered state-of-the-art at the time of release and then later competitors with better technology showed up. No one ever intentionally made a console with weaker hardware before. Prior to the Wii the Cube is the only example I can think of of a console launching with inferior specs and that was not intended (the T-16 might of as well which again was unintended). The Xbox just managed to launch a week earlier and the Cube did launch first in Japan. Nintendo's goal was to make superior hardware to the PS2 and Microsoft just kind of showed up later on and screwed everything up.
The Wii's success will not be based on it's weak hardware. Now the lower price may help things out but that's a symptom of weaker hardware. The price is why people will buy it, not the weaker hardware. The remote is everything. I think the Wii will either be number one or it will completely flop in the next few years. The remote has to be accepted as a new way to play games and one that is better than the old way. If the remote isn't seen as anything beyond a novelty the Wii has very little going for it. It's too early to tell. We're still at a point where die-hard Nintendo nuts who have been waiting years for this console can't buy one so we'll see how things go when anyone can walk into a store and buy a Wii off the shelf.
I definitely don't see the weaker hardware as an advantage. It never will be. Third parties will come for the remote or the userbase but there will be games that don't show up just because the developer's vision just won't be possible on the hardware. That won't necessarily screw things up but Nintendo has given Sony and MS at least one advantage over the Wii. The weak hardware can be a tolerable idea but I don't see how it could be a GOOD idea. Hell even the price isn't that great.
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Pittbboi on December 20, 2006, 11:31:11 AM
“Like Dragon Quest: Swords? Like RE: Umbrella Chronicles? Like Super Swing Golf (which is excellent, by the way)?”
Spin-off, compilation, and niche title. These are all terrible examples of support on the Wii. RE: Umbrella Chronicles in a particularly damning because while we’re getting a compilation of clips from other games, 360 and PS3 are getting RE: 5. Wii has support, but there’s no way you can say that developers aren’t still holding back. And they need to change that
“There is a problem in your logic, and that is that game development isn't decided on overnight. Companies are supporting the 360 right now as its been out the longest and has the widest userbase, while others are supporting the PS3 due to expecting it to capture much of the PS2 marketplace... those feelings were in place before the Wii or PS3 launched. We aren't going to be seeing an effect just a month or two after they launch, even though third parties are likely drafting up their plans as we speak”
I’ve never disagreed with that. It just sucks because this means that, if ever, the Wii isn’t going to get major, quality titles from 3rd parties until late next year. It’s going to be up to Nintendo to keep the momentum going until then, because this could potentially lead to the type of drought that killed the gamecube.
“I mean Link. I saw flawed logic and assumed it was you. I'll look a second time to make sure, sorry.”
Oh wow, that was really smart. My flawed logic sure is doing a number on you, though.
“I'm seeing nothing for PS3 aside from MGS4 and FFXIII... both of which are rumored to being ported. 360 is already established as a no go for market leader.... If Blue Dragon couldn't take it there, nothing else they will get can. The bulk of Developer support is going to the DS right now. 360 and PS3 aren't getting any better than Wii.”
What’s up with everyone forgetting about RE: 5? Oh, and there’s Half Life, Killzone, Unreal Tournament, Devil May Cry, Assassin’s Creed, Gran Turismo 5 and a host of other major titles? All of these are major titles the PS3 is getting in the near future.
“Not everything for 07 has been announced I'm sure. Mario Galaxy, Metroid Prime 3, and SSBB match up well to Sony and MS' big titles imo. You are grasping at straws here.”
And you’re not reading my post. All of those games you mentioned are most likely going to be released in the latter half of 2007, which is exactly what I said. So who’s grasping at straws?
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Infernal Monkey on December 20, 2006, 12:12:02 PM
Quote Originally posted by: Link_
regardless of what some here say,graphics sells systems.
No. They don't. Not anymore at least. If graphics sold systems, the Wii wouldn't have made any impact at all. DS would be joining the Game Gear and the Lynx's tea(r) party. If graphics sold systems, Viva Pinata wouldn't have been a gigantic sales disaster. If graphics sold systems, Dreamcast might have been something more than a joke console to the general public.
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on December 20, 2006, 12:29:30 PM
New RE5 content hasn't been seen for practically the whole year, for either system. It's either so special it's still a secret, or development has been too slow to bring anything tangible to the table. Shows the teaser trailer really was just a hollow graphics demo.
Devil May Cry was the first big game to spearhead the "hardcore swishy slashy 3d action title" movement. The franchise has shown its ups and BIG downs and DMC4 is promising more of the same. But with God of War, Ninja Gaiden, and Prince of Persia in the mix, "more of the same" isn't a guarantee it's up to par.
Half-Li--- whuh? PC ports make a difference?
The first Killzone was completely laffo. Red Steel is mediocre, but people still dig it and it has novelty. Killzone was just mediocre, and nothing extra. Killzone's ps3 demo was already proven to be an FMV fake, so the game didn't exist in any functional form back then. Like RE5, Killzone Ps3 didn't have much to show this year, either. I wonder why.
Unreal, more porting, yay?
GT5, well only kinds exists since the whole GT HD idea as a "full game" fell apart. GT's existence is only natural, anyway.
Assassin's Creed, zero info, zero opinion. And it's from Ubisoft so it's automatically outside my radar.
Who said that "near future" for Ps3 actually means the early half of 2007? Some of these titles are practically vaporware until the next big tradeshow. Who says they won't be positioned to provide competition for the latter half of 2007?
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: couchmonkey on December 20, 2006, 01:36:01 PM
On Ian's comments: I totally agree on the "weaker hardware does not guarantee success" point, I also think people are taking that a bit too far. Why didn't Atari beat NES in that case? What about Saturn and Dreamcast? Hardware wins because of a combination of factors that change with each new set of systems.
As for "the price isn't even that great"...I agree with you from our perspective as hardcore gamers, but in my experience the casual/non-gamer audience actually sees it as a decent price, especially after hearing the competing prices. Besides, the system is still sold out everywhere, and it's safe to say Nintendo can do a price drop whenever it wants. The lower graphical power will restrict some games from appearing on Wii, but likewise the Wiimote restricts some games from appearing on other consoles. Rayman Raving Rabbids is out on PS2 and will be on the 360 and PS3, but anyone who's played it can tell you those versions will suck compared to the Wii version - just like Dead Rising might suck on Wii.
END POST THERE.
Title: RE: Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: NeoThunder on December 20, 2006, 04:25:41 PM
GameCube was more powerful than a PS2, PS2 still sold more
Title: RE:Wii analysis in this next gen war.
Post by: Hocotate on December 20, 2006, 04:50:58 PM
Quote All of those games you mentioned are most likely going to be released in the latter half of 2007, which is exactly what I said.
Yes, I know they will likely be released in the later half of the year... We can assume the same for Nintendo's competition as well. Are you telling me you expect Sony to have a large amount of major titles ready for Q1 and 2 of the year?
Quote Originally posted by: Pittbboi What’s up with everyone forgetting about RE: 5? Oh, and there’s Half Life, Killzone, Unreal Tournament, Devil May Cry, Assassin’s Creed, Gran Turismo 5 and a host of other major titles? All of these are major titles the PS3 is getting in the near future.
lol, define "near future." If you think all of these will be released in Q1 or Q2 of 2007 then you are sadly mistaken. Most on that list are multiplatform anyway.
