Messages

426

TalkBack / Re: Wii U Has 8 GB of Internal Storage

« on: June 09, 2012, 04:52:35 PM »

Honestly, people talk as if all "casual" gamers can't walk and chew gum at the same time.

Actually, I think people are just cheap and lazy.  $90 would certainly fix the issue by picking up an external hard drive.  But my entertainment stand is already cluttered and has plugs everywhere so why add an hd and a wii-u?  I'd probably not buy DL games rather than buy an external hard drive, unless there was a killer ap I felt I needed.  And thus, I think by having a bigger DL solution up front, Nintendo could encourage people to purchase DLC and thus they would make their money back ten fold on whatever the HD costs since DLC typically has big margins.

$90 start up cost for downloadable games is a deterrent to me.  $5-15 that they typically cost is not.  Plus early adopters are already getting screwed with all the other stuff you have to buy on top of the console that you're just adding one more thing.   

427

TalkBack / Re: Wii U Has 8 GB of Internal Storage

« on: June 09, 2012, 04:17:57 PM »

XBox 360 4 GB - $199
XBox 360 250 GB - $299

1 TB External Hard Drive from Newegg... $89.99

So... do I spend $100 on a smaller hard drive that I can't use on anything else ever... or spend less on a hard drive that's more than four times the size that I can use on any PC ever?

The 250 gb comes with a headset, and it seems there are only bundles now for the 250 gb.  Either Forza 4 with a steering wheel or the two game holiday bundle.  All for $299, and they let you use an external hardrive.  But don't let that cloud your vision, obviously the harddive is overpriced because that other crap adds $0 value. 

Also, why are you so focused on the 360?  PS3 uses 2.5" hard drives, why can't the Wii-U?  I mean Microsoft is the only proprietary drive on the market and we are acting like this is a big win? 

I also like it how you've gone from I never tell people what to buy to telling everyone the Wii-U is not for them.  We are all Nintendo fans here or we wouldn't use this site.  No reason to get bitter because people are passionate. 

428

TalkBack / Re: Wii U Has 8 GB of Internal Storage

« on: June 08, 2012, 10:26:18 AM »

Those are PS3 operating system patches, not in game patches which I thought was what we were discussing.  None of those should take up additional space because they are just overwriting the existing used memory. 
 
I think alot of the GAME patches add value and clearly the developers do or they wouldn't waste their time doing it.  But that's subjective.  What's not subjective, is if you don't patch you'll lose access to multiplayer components because they aren't going to have multiple versions of the game running on their servers.  So unless you want to lose a significant part of the game, you'll patch.  Doesn't matter what is in it. 

429

TalkBack / Re: Wii U Has 8 GB of Internal Storage

« on: June 08, 2012, 10:01:10 AM »

A lot of the patches for PS3 have absolutely nothing to do with games was the overall point.  Nothing to do with the games.

Please enlighten me then.  What are these 2 gig patches doing if they don't fix known glitches, make the online experience better, or enhance the overall utilization of the game?  Just a few examples would be great.

430

TalkBack / Re: Wii U Has 8 GB of Internal Storage

« on: June 08, 2012, 09:43:43 AM »

"Is it right to make all four of us pay for 32 GB cards when only one of us used it?  Does it make a lick of business sense to price your item higher and limit those who you can sell it to based on a feature that few will use and those that do will be able to easily and optionally take care of on their own?"

The model has already been set by the xbox.  You want to sell a gimped 8 gig model fine.  But have a higher gig model available for the core.  Right?  Not too hard to figure out.  Well I guess it is. 
 

"Anyway, if you're bitching about this, you shouldn't be, and you should be happy that the price will be lower because of this, and you certainly will not *need* a larger HDD at launch (or probably any time soon after), and you can just add whatever USB HDD you want."

That's where I gaurantee you're wrong.  The Wii-U will not be cheaper because it doesn't have a hard drive.  It will only drive Nintendo profits because it is cheaper.  The Wii-U will cost what the market will bear.  Remember the time period when the xbox 360 was cheaper than the Wii?  Is that because those Wii components were just so darn expensive? 
 

"I see a lot of people comparing this to the PS3.  Which is a false comparison because its more like the 360.  You have to take in addition to gaming functionality patching the PS3 gets patched most of the time to enable more media functions.  New Codex, more efficient video support, etc."

Do these video games turn into full length blu ray movies?  I get the Wii wasn't close to PS3 as an online console.  But the Wii-U is supposed to bring 1080p, voice chat, better online experience?  I fail to see how Wii-U games won't at least compare to PS3 games as an experience unless you are already conceding that Wii-U won't have as good of online as current gen. 
 


 

431

TalkBack / Re: Wii U Has 8 GB of Internal Storage

« on: June 08, 2012, 01:18:41 AM »

Count me in the I don't care camp.  The 8GB drive doesn't particularly bother me, either...as long as the Wii U is a reasonable price and their aren't any proprietary hardware restrictions on the external drives that can be used. I already have SD cards and external hard drives collecting dust that I could use.   If it also keeps the size of the base unit down, I'm all for it.

Seriuosly, how do you people just have this stuff laying around?  I have two USB external drives.  But I paid about $100 each for them, and I'm *gasp* actually using them or I wouldn't have bought them in the first place.  Thus they will not be earmarked for the Wii U.  And I have a few SD cards, but nothing bigger than 8 gig.  With my PS3 having an 80 gig hd, I know adding another 8 gig will be woefully inadequate. 

432

TalkBack / Re: Wii U Has 8 GB of Internal Storage

« on: June 08, 2012, 01:05:39 AM »

Dear Nintendo: Curse you for not including more storage with your system!  You should pack in an oversized hard drive that the vast majority of your userbase won't ever use and then charge extra for the privilege.  I mean, I know I already have plenty of storage space I can use with my Wii U at home, but since I *need* more storage space (even though all I've done is complain about the lack of games and how I probably won't even get a Wii U anyway), it should be included.

And why make me pay for a tablet, I'm only going to be using the pro-controller.  And why make us pay for composite cables, does anyone use those anymore?  And why paint the console, I'm going to stick it behind my PS3 so I don't care what it looks like.  I mean why include things with the console that actually help me use the console?

Seriously though, did you read this article?  http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/news/30584

Apparently, that internet thing isn't going away.  70+% of people are online.  The average person online purchased 5 things and the 3ds hasn't been out that long.  This generation there are a bunch of download only games and I can only imagine next gen there will be more.  It's also really cheap for Nintendo to add, actually probably wouldn't have cost them much more to just stick a 120 gig hard drive in there instead of flash memory.  It's also the standard since xbox 1, so it makes Nintendo look silly.  But hey, I bet you didn't buy a car or house that had features that you don't use.   

433

TalkBack / Re: Wii U Has 8 GB of Internal Storage

« on: June 08, 2012, 12:51:42 AM »

"Storage? That's pretty trivial in comparison."

The games are certainly underwhelming, but to me storage leads back to a shortage of games.  Excuse me if I missed confirmation, what I've read in the past is although the Wii-U won't play Blu-Ray it will use the Blu-Ray format for games.  Thus, a retail game has the possibility to have 50 gig (dual layers blu-ray) of info.  It's a joke that Nintendo is planning to release retail games and it's very likely you won't be able to fit a single retail game on the Wii-U.  More third parties are moving to DL only games to price thier games more competitively in an ipad world, why would they release them for the Wii-U?  PS3 DL games routinely run 4-6 gig and that's for non-retail release.  Unless people buy external support and start buying DL content like hotcakes, 3rd party DLC support won't come to the Wii-U.

434

TalkBack / Re: Wii U Has 8 GB of Internal Storage

« on: June 07, 2012, 06:44:44 PM »

"Gimped storage seems to be the trend and hey, Apple is making a killing with it."

Yeah, but they are mainly selling $.99 games or giving the game away free.  Not too hard to delete a game I have nothing in.  Also, they aren't selling a 1080p capable system. 

"I don't want a download-only or DLC-dominated future, I don't want tons of mandatory installs and patches to get software working that should run out of the box, I don't want my console to be a PC-lite experience.  So not having a huge hard drive isn't really that bad in a lot of ways."

It'd be nice if all games came complete, but Nintendo is one of the best at testing a game for bugs.  And Mario Kart 3ds proved even they can benefit from having patching ability.  Patches aren't bad, games could spend years in testing if it wasn't for patching ability and still they couldn't catch everything.  It's really only bad if a company like Ubisoft releases a game without testing just to patch it later.  But Ubi, they are supporting the Wii-U nicely. 

While not all DLC is great, it's not all bad either.  Today it's a viable business model to release DLC game for $15.  I have a PS3 and many download games are are 2-4 gigs, and some are much much more.  From a developer standpoint, if you wanted to release a download only game for $15 and it was going to be 4 gig, are you even going to think about releasing it for the Wii-U?  You know most people only have 6 gig available (after operating system and game saves).  That's of course assuming Nintendo doesn't cap it at 1 gig or something relatively ridiculous. 

From the consumer point it's bad too.  SD cards are available up to 64 gig I believe for about $50, or a USB drive for $70.  Add in a second controller at the rumored $100 and the system at the rumored $400 and you are getting dangerously close to the PS3 launch point in a recession no less.  So you can ramble on about non-proprietary storage, but at $400 I expect to not have to buy storage.  Of course maybe consumers aren't that smart.  No one seems to mind that a $300 xbox + $300 for 5 years of live comes to $600. 

Lastly, I still don't get what the Wii-U is trying to accomplish.  They are saying they are coming for the hardcore, but their big game was Nintendoland?  I'm sure all the Sony/Microsoft fanboys are lining up for that.  And while 3rd party support appears decent, I get the deja-vu feeling from the Gamecube days.  Line up a bunch of ports for the Wii-U and then when they don't sell as well as the large user-based Sony/Xbox systems, say there is no market in the Wii-U for these kind of games and move from Nintendo.  Plus of course, 8 gig storage isn't exactly screaming hardcore or that they will have a comprehensive online plan.  70% of 3ds are online?  8 gig isn't going to be enough for 70% of Wii-U owners if they have the same trend. 

435

TalkBack / Re: 'Majority of Nintendo-Published' Retail Titles Available for Download

« on: April 28, 2012, 06:56:38 AM »

It helps save on fuel costs.

Except that shipping is free if you purchase most places on the internet.  Or odds are that you go grocery shopping once a week at either a place that sells games or is a 5 minute walk from the place you buy groceries.  Not to mention sales make physical media much cheaper than the cost of fuel in most instances.  At least a couple buy 2, get 1 free sales each year.  When's the last time you saw that for digital media?  Maybe Steam does it, but Nintendo certainly doesn't.

436

TalkBack / Re: 'Majority of Nintendo-Published' Retail Titles Available for Download

« on: April 28, 2012, 06:46:09 AM »

Yes, the fact that there are more options is clearly a sign that gaming as we know it is about to come to an end. Never mind that this doesn't affect people who want a physical copy in the slightest; the mere chance that this might possibly lead to a future without any physical media years and years from now is a horrible thing and must be fought against.

Life will go on when video games go digital only, so it's not worth getting that worked up over. 

But this is all about a money grab.  Putting more money into the developer and publishers hand by removing the middle man "retail".  This is not about providing more options or the "digital copy" with retail purchase would be a no-brainer, but it is unlikely to happen as it's never happened in the digital realm.  I think it's really hard to argue that the removal of physical media is a slippery slope as you seem to be implying. 

1.  A system was already released that was download only, PSPGo.

2.  PSN/XBox Live/WiiWare already have a bunch of games that are not available in a physical form of any time. 

3.  We, as video game consumers, are constantly berated that we don't buy enough $60 games.  Because we all know used game purchases and rentals are stealing trillions from developers and producers pockets.  Digital is a lock down method to ensure multiple purchases by the same person. 

I like convenience as much as anyone which is what digital offers, but it strips so many benefits that I find it hard to believe anyone would purchase digital given the choice of a physical media. 

1.  Price point is the same as physical media or higher when both are available.  Simply doesn't make sense.  They save money on the physical stuff and on the retail cut. 

2.  Can't take games with you to enjoy with friends.  Sure, carrying a 3DS is probably not that big of a deal.  But if I want to play Mega Man 9/10 with my friends?  No problem.  Either rebuy the game on their system, or lug my 20 pound PS3 over to their house, set it up with their system, enjoy, and then move the system back.  Sure a Wii weighs less, but it's not any less of a pain, and I don't really want to get my systems scratched up. 

Locked to sytstem is brutal.  Have 3 kids?  Buy 3 copies of the game.  Want to play with friends?  Carry around the system. System died and there's a new iteration of the system with exclusive games as a bonus?  Buy the scratched refurb if you want to keep your content. 

2A.  Nintendo is still the worst digital distributer.  Not that I'm a fan of any model, but the content needs to be tied to the account, not the system.  Nothing like having to send a system back to Nintendo to get a refurb as the same cost as new because you don't want to lose hundreds of dollars worth of games. 

3.  Obviously I'll get chasticed like everyone else that tries to bring up this point.  But I have two functioning NESs that I still play today, almost 30 years later.  Now most people think that they won't care about these games in 30 years, that's fine whatever.  The 3DS may still be functioning in 30 years because it's not a disc based system.  But your Wii?  Severly unlikely.  And redownloading the game 30 years from now or servicing the sysetm will clearly not be an option. 

I only buy digital media if it is one of two things: 

1.  Digital Only - nothing else you can really do here.

2.  An amazing deal.  WiiWare never seems to have any deals, but PSN has quite a few games that will go on sale for sub $5.  That's kind of a sweet spot since to get a free game shipped is usually at least $3. 
Have we really reached the time where carrying a few 1x1 inch DS games is a major inconvenience?  I mean the system itself is pretty big and changing a disc takes about 5 seconds.  Guess the benefits of digital download elude me.  Especially when it's bring your own storage and that can cost a chunk of money too. 

437

TalkBack / Re: GameStop Says Goodbye to the GameCube

« on: March 23, 2012, 06:42:08 PM »

The Gamecube is one of my top 3 consoles of all time.  I loved it.  May not of had as many games as the PS2, but it had some of the best games of the generation.  I have a good collection and I wouldn't consider trading them in just to repurchase them in digital form at a later date.

438

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Official Wii Sales Thread

« on: March 19, 2012, 07:16:04 AM »

Your whole post in general sounds like Sony propaganda, especially the second paragraph. Did Sony pay you to say that?

Lol, I wish they would.  I'm just impressed with the Vita hardware, have you tried it out?  From a games/price perspective, the 3DS still wins.  But you can see the 3DS is an extension of the DS line whereas the Vita feels like a new piece of hardware.  Thus, my dissapointment in the 3DS.  You have to really be excited about 3D to make the 3DS hardware feel impressive.  As someone who has Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft, I don't get into the rah rah my favorite developer released a new system so it's automatically better than anything else on the market. 

439

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Official Wii Sales Thread

« on: March 19, 2012, 07:08:57 AM »

Yeah smallsharkbigbite, I've heard almost universally that if you get to try a PSPVita, you come away thoroughly impressed with the hardware. Are you thinking of buying one now that you've tried it?

Not at the moment.  Video games are still all about the games and the Vita is lacking in that regard.  Plus, like everyone else, I'm not willing to drop $250.  Not because I don't think it is worth $250, but I know in a year it'll be $200.  Or at least I can wait for a holiday bundle and get a free game with the system.  But I was impressed and it may be on my buy list at some point.  I have a 9 month old now, and while I don't have as much time for video games, I've found a portable system allows me to game in different rooms of the house while trying to keep my child maintained. 

440

Nintendo Gaming / Re: The OFFICIAL Big N rumor thread *bring your own salt*

« on: March 18, 2012, 08:27:06 PM »

I'm a litte confused by this.  Read the portion that is bolded. 

That makes sense, I'll have to work on my comprehensive reading skills a little bit.  The Wii U isn't finalized yet.  But then again I wouldn't hold my hope out for such an arrangement since that would require a greater console cost. 

I personally be dismayed to only be doing 720p on complex things.  Why?  Because PCs can support larger than 1080p and has for while.

That is a little baffling.  I know a decent computer would cost more than most consoles, but a console isn't running a large OS and dozens of programs in the backgrand.  Plus, you know what your getting with a console.  On the PC you have to code additional options to be able to handle all the different hardware possibilities. 

Whats baffling?  PCs have been able to do 1080p since before it was relatively standard on TVs.  Mind you maybe not very cost effectively.  With how Consoles can specialize it should be easier to obtain the same goal.

I was agreeing with you.  I.E. that is baffling that console's haven't pulled off 1080p yet(other than some token PS3/xbox360 games).  Then in my own way tried to list a couple of reasons why consoles should be able to hit those goals easier despite not having the same specs as modern PCs. 

441

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Official Wii Sales Thread

« on: March 18, 2012, 07:54:32 PM »

I'm actually surprised at how poorly the Vita is doing.  It makes me wonder if the constant price drops these game companies put out have people waiting. 

I got to try out a Vita today and I was impressed with it.  I had a PSP/DS last gen and haven't jumped into the new gen yet, but the Vita is a slick piece of equipment.  I think it's improved over the PSP in numerous areas.  The screen is supernice and the touch screen is great keeping in mind that people will be using their hands instead of a stylus.  The processor seems capable of putting out PS3 style graphics in the palm of your hand.   And the dual analog is a nice addition. 

The 3ds I didn't get the same feeling.  I bought an XL and it's painful for me to go back to a screen that small.  I can still notice jaggies which were omni-present on most of the DS games.  And I'm not a fan of the slide pad, I'd rather have a stick. 

442

Nintendo Gaming / Re: The OFFICIAL Big N rumor thread *bring your own salt*

« on: March 18, 2012, 07:44:55 PM »

I am surprised to find that rendering anything to the uMote effects the main screen.  Simply because the 3DS has a GPU for each screen if memory serves.  I be very surprised if the uMote doesn't have a smaller dedicated GPU of its own in the WiiU. 

But the Wii U console has to process the image and send it to the controller.  With the 3ds, each process can access the game information independently and thus they do not need to be linked.  The controller has no access to anything unless the console accesses it and sends it in a format that the controller can understand.  It would have to be plugged into the Wii console to do things independently of the system.

I personally be dismayed to only be doing 720p on complex things.  Why?  Because PCs can support larger than 1080p and has for while.

That is a little baffling.  I know a decent computer would cost more than most consoles, but a console isn't running a large OS and dozens of programs in the backgrand.  Plus, you know what your getting with a console.  On the PC you have to code additional options to be able to handle all the different hardware possibilities. 

443

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Official Wii Sales Thread

« on: March 04, 2012, 05:29:07 PM »

Multiple uMotes can be connected to the Wii U. According to one Nintendo Rep and several "insider" tips about the Dev Kits.

Noteably a little behind on the Wii-U since I'm not hyped about it.  Could support 2-4 tablets but should be costly since this is likely to cost as much as a kinect controller. 

I still don't understand what they are trying to do then.  The Wii was popular with casuals because of the ability to mimic movements.  While this table has motion controls, it's not like you could swing it like a golf club or point it at the screen like the Wiimote.  So it would seem a move away from the motion controls they've established.  But then why keep the Wii branding?  And if the Wiimotes are going to have a significant presence on the Wii-U, won't the market see that as dated?  The Wii won because it had motion control built in and a head start over the move/kinect with the casual market.  Having tried the move/kinect I believe they are more accurate motion controllers.  Most likely Sony and Microsoft will tweak these controllers and deliver an improved motion controlled system for each of their next respective systems and probably build it in. 

The only thing the Wii-U has me excited for as a core gamer is the "possibility" of a DS player, where I could play even 3ds games on the big screen with a 3d tv. 

444

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Official Wii Sales Thread

« on: March 04, 2012, 04:26:41 PM »

I see the difference, Ian, but I don't think it's an accurate description at all. No one's changing the game of soccer, they're just showing non-soccer fans that there's another sport called darts. No one's upending the foreign movie circuit, they're just pointing out that, well, there's a buddy comedy showing half a block away. No one's taking my many beloved genres of videogames away from me, they're just playing other types of games and genres, many of which are new and which I've grown to enjoy as well.

Videogames are bigger than any one genre, they're bigger than any one idea of perfect. They involve variety, change, growth, adaptation, and surprise. I treasure fleeting instances of momentary concrete perfection as much as the next guy(i.e. Pikmin, Pikmin, and more Pikmin), but life is a moving target, and I don't expect gaming to be any different.

Agree and disagree.  Videogames keep changing and I actually liked WiiSports and some of the "casual" efforts to hit the market.  Especially in the multiplayer region like with my wife for example. 

But I don't see the in addition.  While technically, I believe they have released the same # of core games as they did in the gamecube era, but it seems to me Nintendo is spending their time creating new ideas for the casual market and spending time for the core market creating sequels.  As stated, yeah, we got 3 Mario's which I believe is a first since the NES era, but where is our Pikmin?  We had some awesome 2d revivals, but those don't take as much time as a 3d game.  The extra time they could of spent coding was spent on casual games.

Also, the other thing that drives me crazy is that, while Nintendo has made questionable hardware decisions in prior generations, this is the first generation that specifically made core games suffer.  I.E. I still cannot for the life of me understand why New Super Mario Brothers did not have a classic control scheme.  The classic controller was supposed to be the concession for core gamers.  But not only do they not allow it as an option, they require motion control in the game.  Everybody has played Super Mario Bros, one staple of the series has been the "tight controls".  Nobody will ever say that motion controls at this point are tight.  It was a gamebreaker, I enjoyed the game, but it could have been better if they just used the controls available. 

Sidebar, how will the Wii-U be different?  Unless Nintendo is subscribing to the in-house multiplayer is dead, the Wii-mote will again be the main controller since only one wii-u mote can connect to a system.  And I've been hearing since the N64 era how much Nintendo covets third parties and is doing this and that to get them on-board, but it hasn't happened yet.  Just because Wii-U has HD developers will hop on?  Not if the wii-mote is still the main controller.   

445

TalkBack / Re: Nintendo Increases Expected Losses for the 2011 Fiscal Year

« on: February 01, 2012, 08:03:20 PM »

Since the Wii U is Nintendo's first HD system, it's probably costing them a few billion to develop it and create all the new HD engines for all it's first party studio's to work with.

It probably is, but all those costs are an asset that Nintendo will expense over the life of the Wii U.  Doesn't affect the loss they have right now at all. 

There's no doubt in my mind that a lot of the falloff for 1st party support for the Wii is due to a strong emphasis on Wii U r & d.

Is Retro designing the Wii U? EAD?  Microsoft is rumored to pull the trigger close the Wii launch and they haven't had a drought.  I'd say Nintendo first parties are working on Wii U games, but based on previous history, the only available title at launch with be Super Mario Sunshine Wii U edition. 

The Wii lasted longer than the GameCube, longer than the N64. Sales have slowed down, but this loss is hugely attributable to exchange rate problems: a couple of years ago Nintendo earned 110 yen for every US Dollar, now it's more like 75 yen. I can't help but view the Wii as a good move from Nintendo, and a great console for me on which I have a huge backlog of games to play.

The Wii was great for Nintendo because it printed money for 4-5 years before tanking.  But sales rate exchange had little to do with the loss.  It's a convenient excuse.  If you read the financial report, they actually expected the rate to drop further than it did.  They had major drops in price because sales were off.  They expected to sale more and keep the price higher.  Unfortunately, you need to release games to keep people interested in a product. 

@Luigi Dude

Depends on your definition of a fad.  The excitement over the Wii is clearly gone as bargain bin (below cost) prices are what are moving inventory now.  At one point the Wii was selling 2:1 of PS3/Xbox360 combined.  Now it's selling in third place.  Some of that is due to saturation, but the Wii has only sold 95 million while the PS2 sold 150 million and was the only console selling at the end of its generation.  Ironically last gen and this gen approximately 200 million units were sold (blue ocean failed?).  Last gen it was 75% likely to be a PS2 and this gen it's 45% likely to be a Wii.  Still great for Nintendo coming from 3rd place, but I'm not excited about the Wii U and I don't know if I'll pick up a 3DS.  Seems like to me the definition of a fad.  Sold like hot cakes for a few years before grabbing Nintendo's usual market place at the bottom of the three consoles.  Because I'm sure this will come as a surprise to Nintendo management, but this console generation actually isn't over yet.   

446

TalkBack / Re: Nintendo Will Make 'Bold' Online Move 'When the Time Is Ripe'

« on: January 31, 2012, 09:49:23 PM »

If Nintendo was looking at the big picture they would look less at the five people in America who won't buy the Wii U because they're not online and more at the potential millions of people who are online and would potentially be turned off by an archaic out-of-date online implementation.  They can't have BOTH customers.  They have to pick one and these days the majority are online.  Fussing over the small minority that is not is ridiculous.

They can have it both ways.  Make games with good single player and local multiplayer games with the ability to play online and purchase additional content online.  This is how the other players do it.  I guess I'm just on the other side because I do live in a rural area.  The fastest internet I can get is 750k.  When I have to update GT5 on my PS3 I literally have to leave my PS3 on all night and then play the next day.  I would count in the online features because I use my Wii/PS3 online extensively.  But if too much online or online only games were required, I probably wouldn't buy that system because I don't see it as a fun experience. 

As a note, I live about 15 min from a city of >250,000 so I'm sure there are much more than a small minority that have sucky internet. 

Reactionary has ended up in profits every single time, unlike other companies.

But truly, Nintendo will never be like how you want them. The SNES generation is gone for good. Accept that.

Except this last year, when they lost about $845 million. 

The PS2 was very close(probably exceeded) to the SNES in terms of market dominance and getting the best multi-plat games.  The Wii seems like it should have been the natural successor, but Nintendo didn't capitalize on the hardware market penetration. 

447

TalkBack / Re: Wii U Controller 'Revolves Around the Original Concept of the Wii Remote'

« on: January 31, 2012, 05:18:42 AM »

Competition is good for the market, good for consumers. Monopolies are bad, very bad.

Not necessarily.  Microsoft has had a monopoly on the OS market pretty much since the inception of the PC.  They haven't increased the price of Windows since Win 95.  They are pretty much the reason that internet browsers and anti-virus programs are free.  Their dominance allowed a common format that allowed software developers to get a common set of tools cheaper which allowed developers time to optimize the game rather than learn the system.  They instituted a license free system which encourages developers to take chances on new types of software.  The only way a monopoly is bad is if you assume that the company is bent on destroying its consumer and inviting competition into the market.  And even in that case, the US regulatory body oversees areas like this and they wouldn't want to do that for fear of fines or the government breaking your company into multiple competing parts.

Right now in the console market, we have an oligopoly.  A few players have all the power and they set price amongst themselves.   All of the console makers charge very high licensing fees which prevent small developers from bringing many ideas to the market.  Big players are also afraid to take chances on new game designs because failure brings heavy financial losses for them and not for the big 3.  One console maker wouldn't make a difference today.  In a way, because of their internal studios, they have financial incentive to limit access to their own hardware because that breeds competition with themselves. 

448

TalkBack / Re: Wii U Controller 'Revolves Around the Original Concept of the Wii Remote'

« on: January 30, 2012, 07:06:44 PM »

"Calm down. Yes, Wii alienated third parties, but it's clear Wii U was designed specifically to avoid that. Being different doesn't HAVE to alienate.. and from what I'm see so far, they probably won't this time around."

Why won't they have it this time?  Sure, they fixed the HD problem, but they will still be behind the game power-wise.  Which means games that have complex physics will be hard to port.  Also, the controller issue still exists.  From what I've gathered only one controller with a screen can be connected, other than that Wiimotes are the main controller.  So one person gets a madden with a standard control and the other one has to play with motion control?  Nintendo hasn't been friends with 3rd parties since the N64.  At this point, I'd say it's personal.  I don't know what it will take to bring them back but sales wasn't enough as seen during the wii.  I do know I've heard them talk about how important third parties are to them for the last two generations while they've made no inroads into this area.  Thus, I'm going to assume third parties aren't on board until I'm proven otherwise. 

"If 3rd parties aren't willing to learn and adapt to an inventive, new way of thinking, and can't deliver compelling content unless it's me-too ports across the board, frankly I don't care that much about their games. (Granted, I now own a 360, so I can get the goods there if I feel so inclined.)
"

Problem is the wiimote wasn't accurate enough to do much besides waggle.  It adds lag because you have to perform a motion and the controller has to recognize it which means it's hard to do games that are twitch games.  It was fun with some games but it made a bunch of games worse.  Even Nintendo failed to innovate.  The Wiisports and Wiifit are the only games that used motion control well.  The rest of the time it was a waste of time.  Seriously, why not make New Super Mario Bros use the classic controller so it could be like the SNES version with better graphics.  The wiimote is not comfortable to hold on it's side and wagging the joystick to pick up items is pretty poor implementation.  Super Strikers Charged, waggle to tackle?  These things weren't game breakers, but I found myself longing for button presses that were 100% accurate.  Not to mention the big Nintendo titles are still an updated version of Mario Kart and essentially Mario Galaxy 3.  I think that classifies as me too even though they are copying themselves.

449

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Wii Successor and Glassess Free 3D: How Will It Work?

« on: August 21, 2010, 05:13:45 PM »

Mostly for financial reasons, I wish that videogames were more like movies and music, in that there were only one universal player. Then, people wouldn't have to make decisions about which system to buy, or which version of a game they should get, as every videogame out there would work in their player. This would also be beneficial to game companies too, as they wouldn't have to spend resources porting a game to two or three platforms, or research the demographic of each system, so they could focus on simply creating games. There could still be systems with special features as well, such as an expensive model that offered things like HD and online components, and a more basic model that just had the essentials. It would be similar to how some VCRs had special features like recording abilities, enhanced sound capabilities, slow/stop motion, etc.

Realistically I know this will never happen, for the exact reason stated: the three current major game companies are all striving toward different goals.

I don't buy that the three major game companies are striving for different goals.  They are trying to protect their brands, but they are all striving for the same goal $$$$.  Nintendo has had a hard time breaking into the teen-young adult teen market.  But they certainly have tried by changing Metroid into a FPS and bringing about Eternal Darkness, etc, but they haven't been successful yet.  And Sony will love if there core market gobels up the move, but it is definately a move to infringe into Nintendo's core market of non-traditional gamers.  They aren't going to come out and say it (for fear of their core) but they want a little grandma love too, because Grandma has $$$$.
 
I also think that at some point in our lives we will see a universal console.  Heck with internet, stronger processors, SD slots, and USB ports, someone smarter than me could probably turn a normal TV into a game machine.  Interactive commercials?  The TV producers would love it.  So would developers.  You can say Nintendo is smarter than developers because they make more money but largely the current console cycles suck for developers.  They have to pour all this money into developing games and engines when a new console releases and they generally see very few sales because it takes 2-3 years for a market to mature (gain enough participants).  Then by the time they have developed efficiencies and understand the market, it's time to take their lumps again on a new cycle.  It's long been rumored that EA would try to splash into the world with a universal console.  Of course the big three would hate this because their middle man days would be over, but as more consumers moved over Nintendo would be forced to develop for the Universal Console or go nitcher than the N64 days. 
 
More likely what I feel really could really happen is that article a while back on Gamespot.  You'd essentially have a box (with minimal processing power for the controller and a wireless or wired internet connection).  The games you owned would be on a server and the server would provide all the in game processing power necessary to play the games.  The technology is there now, my work is actually already making the move to net based pcs (i.e. no local memory/hard drive/or processing).  The things holding back this tech now are 1.  Broadband to support steaming 1080p isn't sufficiently available across the U.S.  2.  Someone would have to manage the vault of computers and possibly dole out subscription fees.  3.  Consumers might not be ready for this jump yet. 

450

General Gaming / Re: PSP2 - It's coming and we know it

« on: April 03, 2010, 10:07:49 AM »

There are no hands on impressions of the 3ds.  Everything is speculation, including what 3d technology they will use, even though there are a few things that are most likely true.

Sorry, I mispoke of the 3ds hands on, but sharp's screens are likely to be the 3ds screens or at least very similar. http://www.gamespot.com/news/6254607.html?tag=latestheadlines;title;3  Here's another article on a 3d monitor http://www.pcworld.com/article/117303/sharp_ships_3d_monitor.html
 
My main concerns are
 
1. The need to be an exact distance from the monitor to take advantage of 3d.  It's hard to be emerged in a game if I can't move my head or arms (since they are attached to the screen). 
 
2.  Whether viewing 3d for long periods of time is good for an individual or will cause headaches/bluriness since it causes your eyes to converge/seperate simultaneously.
 
3.  I don't really get the 3d thing.  When I look around my house I see angles/depth.  When I watch a 3d movie, I see two 2d planes.  So if anything I see this limiting gameplay.  As in your charactor is going to be in the foreground screen and objects will start in the far screen and jump to the foreground screen. 
 
Maybe it's just me, but I do not see the gaming benefit of 3d, which is why I was hoping someone could explain to me what I'm missing.  While PS3/Xbox 360 use control schemes that have been around for a decade, the hope is that developers continue to innovate through gameplay.  While certainly some DS/Wii games are not currently possible on other systems (until Move/Natal) the control scheme also broke (or marginalized) other games. 
 
Games that require precise timing are largely unplayable on the Wii because gestures create input error.  A game marginalized in my opinion was New Super Mario Bros.  The SNES had customizable schemes, they can have gestures for certain moves as the default setup, but why can't I get a set up that allows me to use the classic controller with the SNES set up?  That would have made New Super Mario Bros an A+ game in my opinion.  While forcing me to use the small dpad, motion controls, uncomfortably small controller (wiimote on side) made it a B+ game.  Ideally, innovation shouldn't be a two steps forward, one step back proposition.