Topic: Wii analysis in this next gen war.

[Pittbboi]

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.

[NWR_pap64]

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...

[Pittbboi]

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.

[ShyGuy]

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.  

[Arbok]

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.  

[BlackNMild2k1]

Ooooh a heated argument!?

*Pulls up chair and grabs popcorn*
*then changes the channel*

CLICK

[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.  

[Arbok]

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.

[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.
 

[Link_]

and i think that strategy may hurt nintendo in the long run.

[Spak-Spang]

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.  

[Pittbboi]

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....

[Link_]

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.

[Link_]

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?

[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.

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.

[Smash_Brother]

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.

[couchmonkey]

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.

[Hocotate]

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.

[Pittbboi]

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.

[Smash_Brother]

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?

[Arbok]

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.

[Hocotate]

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.    

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

This gen will have some big losers and big winners.

There.

[Ian Sane]

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.

[Pittbboi]

“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?