Topic: Wii stronger then the first Xbox ?

[Kairon]

Developers don't decide what platforms to make games for. Publishers do. And all Publishers care about is $$$. We all learned this the hard way last generation.

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com  

[jasonditz]

In the long run I still see myself probably getting a 360 as a second console... though I'm open to persuasion by Nintendo that the Wii is all I need.  

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: Adrock  Nintendo is coming off of last place. A company's placement in the market cannot be ignored.

Like how Sony's first place finish last gen is clearly what's carrying the PS3 into first place this gen?

Dude, no offense, but wake UP. EVERY generation is a completely new battlefront, a whole new war and Nintendo has seen to it that this war has a whole new set of rules. Currently, Sony is in dead last and there are NO games coming out for the PS3 this year which even begin to offer a glimmer of hope of changing that. You're honestly going to look at that situation and tell me that last gen still counts?

And the DS vs. PSP argument stands. Why? Because the PSP was outselling the DS until Nintendogs hit (aka. the blue ocean software). The PSP was the console which everyone was lauding as the system which would finally kill Nintendo in the handheld market, and despite boasting superior graphics and a new media format for watching movies, it went on to FAILURE.

Oddly enough, the PS3 also boasts superior graphics and a new media format for watching movies, and we all know where IT is at present.

Quote
A more powerful console is a more attractive money making endeavor.

Wrong. A more powerful console means higher development costs. Did you miss Namco's statement about how Ridge Racer will need to sell at least 500,000 copies on the PS3 before it will break EVEN as a development project?

Quote
Graphics are the first thing consumers see. If publishers can't use that to sell their games, support is likely to wane. If 3rd parties can't make the games they want to make on the console, support will decline as well. Wii titles look dated now, in the next year or so they'll look even more dated next to PS3 and 360. If Nintendo isn't on top or close to it by then, it's going to be tough for them.

And the PS2 titles looked IMMENSELY dated no less than a year after the GC and Xbox launched, and clearly, that's what did the PS2 in, right? I mean, it's not like it went on to have a 50 million console lead over both its competitors despite having inferior graphical capability or anything...

Seriously, think about this crap before you say it. More than a month after the xmas rush has come and gone, people are STILL lining up in the morning to get Wiis as though the console was first launching. This didn't happen for the 360 and it sure as hell ain't happening for the PS3.

Graphics don't matter: it's ALL about gameplay. Historically, graphically inferior systems have won the console war EVERY SINGLE TIME! If what you're saying was even remotely true, Wiis would be gathering dust all over store shelves and PS3s would be impossible to find.

[jasonditz]

Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother

Quote
Originally posted by: Adrock  Nintendo is coming off of last place. A company's placement in the market cannot be ignored.

Like how Sony's first place finish last gen is clearly what's carrying the PS3 into first place this gen?

Dude, no offense, but wake UP. EVERY generation is a completely new battlefront, a whole new war and Nintendo has seen to it that this war has a whole new set of rules. Currently, Sony is in dead last and there are NO games coming out for the PS3 this year which even begin to offer a glimmer of hope of changing that. You're honestly going to look at that situation and tell me that last gen still counts?

I agree with him to some extent... the PS3 wouldn't be doing as well as it is (which isn't very well) were it not for the success of the PS2. There's absolutely no reason to buy a PS3 right now besides using it as a cheap Blu-Ray player. But a lot of people loved the PS2 and that fact alone got it a lot of sales that it otherwise wouldn't have.

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: jasonditz I agree with him to some extent... the PS3 wouldn't be doing as well as it is (which isn't very well) were it not for the success of the PS2. There's absolutely no reason to buy a PS3 right now besides using it as a cheap Blu-Ray player. But a lot of people loved the PS2 and that fact alone got it a lot of sales that it otherwise wouldn't have.

I agree that the brand name had some power, but the point is, brand name didn't carry ENOUGH power and it never will.

The GC likewise didn't besmirch the Wii's good name to the point where people aren't buying it. Quite the opposite: people who probably never even heard of a GC are buying a Wii without having any prior knowledge that Nintendo still makes games at all.

I bet there are a lot of people who bought a Wii and then LATER saw the Nintendo logo and said, "Oh, cool: they're making games again!"

Like I said, new generations aren't just a rehash of all the same sh*t from the previous generations again. This time, Nintendo is using its market disruption strategy to throw everything up in the air, including the definition of the word "gamer".

I understand that brand name can carry power, but once people try the Wii, all the power of brand just outright vanishes and the viral marketing effect takes over.

[segagamer12]

Lets look at it again from historical stand point.


Atari 2600 took on the Intellevision head on and lost, being graphically inferrior 2600 didnt have a chance.


NES took on the SMS headon and SMS being graphicaly superior won the console war.


SNES and Genesis were nearly dead tie, yet the vastly superior 3d0 and neo geo murdered them in sales.


The more powerful and Saturn and the super powerful n64 crushed the puny PSx


The Xbxo stood up and pissed on sonys grave.


or how Game gear killed GB before it even began. Or Nomad crushed the GBA.

Or PSP stopped Ds from taking off.



Yeah history repeats itself.    

[MarioAllStar]

Wow for a second I missed the sarcasm in segagamer12's post. The lies sort of got me worked up. Now I feel like an idiot.

[segagamer12]

I do my best.  

[Adrock]

Quote
denjet78 wrote:
...could everyone who actually thinks this is an honest and useful argument please put on tinfoil hats so we can recognize you as the idiots that you are from afar?

Are insults really necessary? Are you really that passionate about this? Dude, you're on an internet forum discussing videogames, for sobbing out loud......

Anyway...

Quote
smash_brother wrote:
Like how Sony's first place finish last gen is clearly what's carrying the PS3 into first place this gen?

PS3 is also $600. Regardless, Sony's coming in first place is one of the reasons anyone is even bothering with PS3. People trust that the Playstation brand will have the titles they want to play. The previous generation always counts. PS2 had nothing its first year, but people bought it and 3rd parties supported it. If Sony hadn't won last generation, they wouldn't have the 3rd party support it does now?

Quote
And the PS2 titles looked IMMENSELY dated no less than a year after the GC and Xbox launched, and clearly, that's what did the PS2 in, right? I mean, it's not like it went on to have a 50 million console lead over both its competitors despite having inferior graphical capability or anything...

Oh please. Sony also had almost every 3rd party eating right out of its ass. If Nintendo had that kind of near universal support from big name publishers, graphics wouldn't matter. But they don't, so their hardware is working against them.

Quote
Graphics don't matter: it's ALL about gameplay. Historically, graphically inferior systems have won the console war EVERY SINGLE TIME! If what you're saying was even remotely true, Wiis would be gathering dust all over store shelves and PS3s would be impossible to find.

I hate the "graphics don't matter" argument. They matter. You can't say they don't. People care about graphics. And it's not all gameplay. Otherwise, crappy games wouldn't sell, but they do. People buy crappy games all the time.... often because they look good.

Wii is selling because it's new. PS3 isn't selling because it's $600. This has nothing to do with graphically inferior consoles winning the console war. There is no connection there. That's like saying that all a company has to do is release a graphically weaker console to win the console war. You can't reduce any console war to a graphics battle because there are too many factors to consider.

I'm not saying that if Wii was more powerful, it would suddenly change everything. I'm saying it would help. Publishers are embracing this so-called HD era. Obviously, there's money to be made otherwise no one would make high-def games. It's easier to market a graphically impressive game. That's one of the reasons publishers push graphics so hard. Now, I've already said Wii didn't need HD and I still stand by that, but undercutting Wii's power was not the best thing Nintendo could have done.  

[Kairon]

Fortunately, hitting a low price point was one of the best things they could have done this Gen. Everything's a trade-off.

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: Adrock  
PS3 is also $600. Regardless, Sony's coming in first place is one of the reasons anyone is even bothering with PS3. People trust that the Playstation brand will have the titles they want to play. The previous generation always counts. PS2 had nothing its first year, but people bought it and 3rd parties supported it. If Sony hadn't won last generation, they wouldn't have the 3rd party support it does now?

I agree that what little support they're getting is due to the strength of the PS2 brand name, but look at the bigger picture here.

The PS3 is doing abysmally, developers are jumping ship due to immense development costs and the system is being blasted to hell by everyone.

Meanwhile Nintendo, last gen's loser, still can't keep their system on the shelves. How badly did the GC tarnish the reputation of Nintendo systems? We won't find out until the Wii actually stays on shelves so we can see how far the demand goes.

Again, I hear what you're saying, but hear what I'M saying: the generation jump calls all bets off. What more proof of this do you need?

Quote
Oh please. Sony also had almost every 3rd party eating right out of its ass. If Nintendo had that kind of near universal support from big name publishers, graphics wouldn't matter. But they don't, so their hardware is working against them.

That's the point: despite having terrible graphics by comparison, the PS2 still won because it had the GAMES.

Quote
I hate the "graphics don't matter" argument. They matter. You can't say they don't. People care about graphics. And it's not all gameplay. Otherwise, crappy games wouldn't sell, but they do. People buy crappy games all the time.... often because they look good.

I like good graphics, too, but graphics have NEVER decided the winner in a console war, ever. When faced with that fact, what other conclusion can I come to? If graphics meant anything in a console war, somewhere along the lines, we would have seen a case where the more graphically capable system triumphed.

Quote
Wii is selling because it's new. PS3 isn't selling because it's $600. This has nothing to do with graphically inferior consoles winning the console war. There is no connection there. That's like saying that all a company has to do is release a graphically weaker console to win the console war. You can't reduce any console war to a graphics battle because there are too many factors to consider.

The Wii isn't winning because it has worse graphics. The Wii is winning because it has awesome gameplay and the gameplay is awesome enough that no one cares about the graphics. Also, the $250 price point is a huge selling factor for the console.

Quote
I'm not saying that if Wii was more powerful, it would suddenly change everything. I'm saying it would help. Publishers are embracing this so-called HD era. Obviously, there's money to be made otherwise no one would make high-def games. It's easier to market a graphically impressive game. That's one of the reasons publishers push graphics so hard. Now, I've already said Wii didn't need HD and I still stand by that, but undercutting Wii's power was not the best thing Nintendo could have done.

It's easier to market a graphically-impressive game, but the problem is, it's harder to sell a more expensive console because the internal hardware costs more and it's harder to convince developers to develop those games in HD when it increases development costs exponentially. Every Wii that gets sold is one more slap in the face to the whole "HD era" argument.

The fact is, these devs know they could have made the game for cheaper for the Wii due to the lax graphical standards. Combine that with its rapidly expanding userbase and you can understand why most devs are probably kicking themselves for not getting on the bandwagon sooner.

Also, I don't think they undercut the power on the Wii intentionally: I think the Wii is definitely capable of some very beautiful visuals, but the games that will push that envelope just aren't here yet.

Like I said, wait for MP: Corruption to show up: that's the game which will have been developed from the ground up to make proper use of the Wii's graphical hardware.    

[Adrock]

Quote
smash_brother wrote:
Meanwhile Nintendo, last gen's loser, still can't keep their system on the shelves. How badly did the GC tarnish the reputation of Nintendo systems? We won't find out until the Wii actually stays on shelves so we can see how far the demand goes.

I think the last two generations did some considerable damage to Nintendo's credibility in the market. Nintendo used to be synonymous with "videogames." Now, Playstation is. A lot gamers look unfavorably on Nintendo, despite how well Wii has some thus far. I agree that we'll have to wait and see. It's too hard to tell if these new gamers can make up for the gamers Nintendo lost over the years or if Nintendo can get them back. But I still think Wii is selling as a novelty right now. It's intriguing because it's new.

Quote
That's the point: despite having terrible graphics by comparison, the PS2 still won because it had the GAMES.

But Nintendo doesn't have the games. That's my point. The 2 best games on the system (Wii Sports and Zelda) are made by Nintendo. PS3 and 360, despite being more expensive hardware, still have significantly more 3rd party support than Wii. Developers aren't jumping ship, they're allocating less exclusives. Be that as it may, PS3 still has more higher profiles titles in the pipeline than Wii, namely Final Fantasy XIII, MGS4, Devil May Cry 3, Lair etc.

Quote
I didn't say they don't matter, but they have NEVER decided the winner in a console war, ever.

Yes, you did. I even quoted you saying that graphics don't matter.

And my point isn't that graphics decide the winner of the console war. I'm saying that graphics matter and they matter because publishers and developers care about graphics. Console power influences the decisions of 3rd parties. Factor 5 and Silicon Knights are no longer developing for Nintendo (well, SK might be, but Too Human is gone). Regardless of what you think of their games, the truth is that Nintendo just lost support from 2 developers who were staunch Nintendo supporters. Major 3rd party publishers are still supporting the competition more. It is about the games, but Nintendo is often getting the shaft.

Quote
t's easier to market a graphically-impressive game, but the problem is, it's harder to sell a more expensive console because the internal hardware costs more and it's harder to convince developers to develop those games in HD when it increases development costs exponentially.

I don't think they undercut the power on the Wii intentionally: I think the Wii is definitely capable of some very beautiful visuals, but the games that will push that envelope just aren't here yet.

Microsoft doesn't seem to having any trouble selling an HD console at a semi-reasonable $400, except in Japan because it's Japan and MS is an American company. If it's hard to convince developers/publishers to support the platform and release games in HD, why does 360 have significantly more support than Nintendo? Why are they getting higher profile games.

I agree that Wii is capable of beautiful visuals. As I've said in several topics, I support the importance of art direction above sheer power.  

[segagamer12]

Its hard to say really but I still don't think graphics are that improtant of an issue, plsu there is the fact that the Wii gfx arent realtl THAT BAD in the first place so whats the complaining about anyways?

Sure some 3rd party games look like ps2 ports instead of steller GC games. so what 3rd parties never really push a system in the first place as a rule. There are exceptions but even durring GCs life Nintendo had to show off what it could do and it was only a bare handful of 3rd parties that stood up to the challenge.


If, and only then, when MP3 comes out if it doesnt look better than GC then we have a right to bitch about gfx. Rightnow Zelda looks amazing and it IS a GC game. And I play Wii side by side a 360 alot and to tell you the truth Wii holds up nicely on regualr tv just like Nintedno said. ANd thats both consoles running progressive scan.  

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: Adrock

Microsoft doesn't seem to having any trouble selling an HD console at a semi-reasonable $400, except in Japan because it's Japan and MS is an American company. If it's hard to convince developers/publishers to support the platform and release games in HD, why does 360 have significantly more support than Nintendo? Why are they getting higher profile games.

I agree that Wii is capable of beautiful visuals. As I've said in several topics, I support the importance of art direction above sheer power.

Maybe because Microsoft was taking around a 200$ hit on each console sold too. Now why has MS been getting so much more support? Um that is a no brainer, the Xbox was relatively successful for publishers and the 360 was the first next-generation system on the market so they were hoping it would have a first mover advantage, while the Wii was a followup to the lackluster GC. But if you have been noticing third parties are starting to turn to Wii, and I would not be surprised to see that trend continue.

[segagamer12]

[sarcasm] yes bit Sony future proofed ps3 so its gonna last ten years not five so even if wii beats it it will out last the next ninty system by default. [sarcasm]


honestly I dont think PS3 can recover. 360 also has one HUGE thing going for it Wii and ps3 dont have figured out yet and thats LIVE until ps3 gets its act together and Nintendo also, dont count it out of the equation.


now what was I saying...



Oh yeah see Publishers are starting to announce games for Wii already that were neglected on GC so I think that in and of itself is a testament of how quickly things can change.





Oh and I think you CAN garuntee or at least assume the least powerful consil will do better than the powerhouses because of two things, first it will be cheaper, and second the manufactorure will try HARDER to sell it vs someone who things thier powerhouse will sell it self. thats a proven trend as well. I dont have time to give examples but theres other here who could help.    

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: Adrock
I think the last two generations did some considerable damage to Nintendo's credibility in the market. Nintendo used to be synonymous with "videogames." Now, Playstation is. A lot gamers look unfavorably on Nintendo, despite how well Wii has some thus far. I agree that we'll have to wait and see. It's too hard to tell if these new gamers can make up for the gamers Nintendo lost over the years or if Nintendo can get them back. But I still think Wii is selling as a novelty right now. It's intriguing because it's new.

1. The Wii tie-in ratio is something to the tune of 5:1 right now. Either these aren't all non-gamers or non-gamers violate their own nomenclature by purchasing twice as many games as gamers. These software numbers are pretty difficult to ignore as a "novelty".

2. Zelda has an 85% tie-in ratio for Wii purchases, meaning there are a lot more "gamers" coming back than one might think.

Quote
But Nintendo doesn't have the games. That's my point. The 2 best games on the system (Wii Sports and Zelda) are made by Nintendo. PS3 and 360, despite being more expensive hardware, still have significantly more 3rd party support than Wii. Developers aren't jumping ship, they're allocating less exclusives.

First of all, the Wii is in the first three months of its existence. NO system "had the games" that early on.

Second, look at the upcoming Wii release list.

Third, developers ARE jumping ship from the PS3.

Quote
Be that as it may, PS3 still has more higher profiles titles in the pipeline than Wii, namely Final Fantasy XIII, MGS4, Devil May Cry 3, Lair etc.

Yes, and look how much good those two year off titles are doing for the PS3.

Also, most of those are heavily speculated to be going multiconsole, especially if the PS3 continues to sell as abysmally as it has been.

Quote
Yes, you did. I even quoted you saying that graphics don't matter.

Reread my post. I edited it after I went back and checked if I actually did say that (before you posted this).

Quote
And my point isn't that graphics decide the winner of the console war. I'm saying that graphics matter and they matter because publishers and developers care about graphics. Console power influences the decisions of 3rd parties. Factor 5 and Silicon Knights are no longer developing for Nintendo (well, SK might be, but Too Human is gone). Regardless of what you think of their games, the truth is that Nintendo just lost support from 2 developers who were staunch Nintendo supporters. Major 3rd party publishers are still supporting the competition more. It is about the games, but Nintendo is often getting the shaft.

Developers follow the MONEY, repeat, $MONEY$. When the userbase of a console is large and the cost of development is cheap, games will follow. It's inevitable. The Wii already has 60% of the next-gen market in Japan, and that number can only increase as Nintendo pumps more Wiis out the door.

You think all of the Japanese devs aren't going to look at that and think REAL hard about which console they should be developing for?

And what's this nonsense about Nintendo getting the shaft? Nintendo is being offered more unique 3rd party games than both other platforms right now. 30 games promised from Banco, 15 from EA including exclusives and even Konami who has sh*t on Nintendo many a time before this has revealed four titles, one of them an original IP and another is a DDR game with Wiimote support, 4 player AND a completely new song library with no Mario attached as a crutch to sell the game.

At least two from Square (for the Wii), Ubi is offering support out the ass, Tecmo is supporting Nintendo again, SNK has pledged games, etc. etc.

Jeezus effin' Christ, what more do you WANT for a console only three months old?

Quote
Microsoft doesn't seem to having any trouble selling an HD console at a semi-reasonable $400, except in Japan because it's Japan and MS is an American company.

Actually, it's because the Japanese hate Microsoft. Apple is an American company and iPods are like air to the Japanese.

Quote
If it's hard to convince developers/publishers to support the platform and release games in HD, why does 360 have significantly more support than Nintendo? Why are they getting higher profile games.

Because the console has been out for a year already and it spent that year with no next-gen competition?

The rest is subjective: I happen to think a DQ game is a "high profile game", as is a FF, even if they're both spinoffs, and furthermore, it's only 3 months into the Wii's life. Let's wait at least the same amount of time it took the 360 to accrue all of these "high profile" games before we stamp our foot and declare the Wii undernourished.

Also, MS didn't make their 10 million mark which they had hoped to sell by this time. They fell short with something to the tune of 8.5 million sold (or "shipped").

In fact, given the year-long head start, MS has done horribly, basically squandering their lead by stumbling around with scant few decent titles. The Wii has already sold just under half of what it took MS a year to reach in three months.

I know you're trying to paint some doom picture for the Wii here, but I ain't seeing it. The 3rd party support being offered for the Wii is already better than most of the support the GC had and is CERTAINLY leaps and bounds above support being pledged for any console 3 months old.

On top of that, Nintendo still can't keep the Wii on store shelves, and this is true in the US, of all places, the location where Nintendo has traditionally had the hardest time moving product.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but even with its inferior graphics, the Wii isn't going anywhere but UP.

[NWR_pap64]

S_B, you forgot to mention that the Wii is also getting some surprising and un-expected mature franchises, like the Godfather and Scarface.

True, these games might be updated ports of the PS2/XBOX versions with added controls, but even then these are highly loved and respected mature franchises. These franchises are basically pop culture icons. They are constantly parodied, mocked, celebrated and presented through many mediums. Hell, go to any Hot topic and you are bound to find Scarface anything, even underwear, for sale.

Then there was the talks of Reggie talking to Rockstar about bringing GTA to the Wii. These games are games that we only DREAMED of seeing on the GC. The GC never got this type of support in its lifetime, yet the Wii was able to get these in a lifespan of 3 months.

Nintendo is even creating their own "adult' franchises, Disaster: Day of crisis and Project H.A.M.M.E.R. Not to mention there's still Sadness, Prince of Persia and many other serious franchises heading for the Wii.

HELL, people even have hope for freaking SONIC THE HEDGEHOG because the Wii might tremendously revitalize a dying franchise. The jury is still out on the quality of the game, yes, but not even the XBOX 360 and PS3 version of Sonic next gen has gathered this type of hype and attention, when it is more than likely that the game will disappoint.  

[GoldenPhoenix]

Even though I may not agree on all Arbock's points of the Wii, I can kind of understand the mentality. Nintendo has constantly let down the consumer in the past and thrown away potential success because of bone headed choices. I'll even admit I am still worried about Wii, I'm just waiting for PS3 and Xbox 360 to overtake it and throwing Nintendo back in 3rd place with limited 3rd party support. Do all the facts point that way? Perhaps not, but it is a feeling that has been imprinted in me since the days of the N64!

[Kairon]

That's weird Phoenix. Long ago I realized that as a Nintendo fanboi, I didn't want Nintendo in first place. I wanted Nintendo to do what they do best: keep pushing the envelope of what games are and can do according to their own vision and creativity. The N64 was a GOLDEN age for me because almost every release was an eye-opening experience and genre-defining moment. Who cares if Nintendo has bragging rights? We don't game to brag, we game to live a little piece of magic. As long as that magic comes through, and Nintendo's financially stable so they can keep delivering, I really am ecstatic as a fanboi.

Nintendo said themselves: If they sell more than the GC but the market doesn't expand, then they've failed. I hold them to THAT measure as a fanboi, not to any marketshare number.

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
That's weird Phoenix. Long ago I realized that as a Nintendo fanboi, I didn't want Nintendo in first place. I wanted Nintendo to do what they do best: keep pushing the envelope of what games are and can do according to their own vision and creativity. The N64 was a GOLDEN age for me because almost every release was an eye-opening experience and genre-defining moment. Who cares if Nintendo has bragging rights? We don't game to brag, we game to live a little piece of magic. As long as that magic comes through, and Nintendo's financially stable so they can keep delivering, I really am ecstatic as a fanboi.

Nintendo said themselves: If they sell more than the GC but the market doesn't expand, then they've failed. I hold them to THAT measure as a fanboi, not to any marketshare number.

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

Well it matters to me in the way of 3rd parties, and I do fear that Nintendo can still mess things up which could end up hurting them in the long run. I especially think it is important for gaming itself that Wii succeeds because of the controls and the potential for revolutionizing gaming for generations to come.

[Adrock]

Quote
smash_brother wrote:
1. The Wii tie-in ratio is something to the tune of 5:1 right now. Either these aren't all non-gamers or non-gamers violate their own nomenclature by purchasing twice as many games as gamers. These software numbers are pretty difficult to ignore as a "novelty".

2. Zelda has an 85% tie-in ratio for Wii purchases, meaning there are a lot more "gamers" coming back than one might think.

I'll have to take your word on that ratio. Still, an awful lot of Wii titles are based on either cartoons or CGI movies. And the tie-in of Zelda to a Nintendo console isn't even a point. This doesn't prove that "gamers" are coming back. Rather, that Nintendo fans love Zelda.

Quote
First of all, the Wii is in the first three months of its existence. NO system "had the games" that early on.

True, but the best game on Wii is also available on Gamecube and the second best game came with the system. Third party titles have been, for the most part, a joke so far.

Quote
Jeezus effin' Christ, what more do you WANT for a console only three months old?

PS3, for all its failings, still has more support. 3rd parties have bigger games and more of them lined up for it. Wii is getting a lot of ports made "new" because they use the Wii Remote. Thanks but no thanks.

And seriously, look at the list of developers you gave me and the titles Wii is getting. Ubi Soft... the same Ubi Soft that shoveled Far Cry Vengeance into stores. The same Ubi Soft that pimped Rayman Raving Rabbids on Wii yet released it on PS2 also. The same Ubi Soft that is rereleasing Two Thrones... and still porting said rerelease to PSP.

I'm assuming by Banco, you mean Namco Bandai. Nintendo owns stock in that company yet Tekken 5: Dark Resurrection  is available on Playstation Network and PSP. Tekken 6 is listed as a PS3 game. What are those 30 titles on Wii? I'm guessing we'll see some Naruto.

Tecmo released an anime styled golf game. That doesn't impress me.

Konami's new IP features a raindrop with a cutesy face. Talk about furthering stereotypes about Nintendo being "kiddie." Before you start tossing company names at me, look at the games they're bringing to Wii compared to the competition. It's not as impressive as you think.

Quote
I know you're trying to paint some doom picture for the Wii here, but I ain't seeing it. The 3rd party support being offered for the Wii is already better than most of the support the GC had and is CERTAINLY leaps and bounds above support being pledged for any console 3 months old.

No, I'm looking at the big picture. Nintendo isn't doomed. I'm not saying they're doomed, nor have I ever meant to say that. They're doing fine. It's just not as rosy as you're making out to be. My problem is when people are using early success as an indication that things have changed. I'd say things are in the process of changing but even that could change. As much as people like to brag about Wii doing well and PS3 not doing well, this picture isn't as clear as it seems. My fear is that as great as Nintendo is doing now, it won't last. It's too early. Most of the biggest games coming out for the platform are coming from Nintendo themselves. Despite Wii crushing GCN during the same time period in its lifespan, 3rd party support looks moderately better at best. Wii may have more games, but many of them are bad games.

I admit I'm cynical, but as a Nintendo fan who's seen Nintendo stumble so many times, I reserve that right. Nothing would make me happier than to see Sony fall (if you really want to know, I'd be happy to tell you). I'm a Nintendo fan and have been one my entire life though that's not the reason I hate Sony. I want Nintendo to succeed, but I'm not going to throw a party because they had a successful launch or because EA announced 15 titles (it's EA... please).

[IceCold]

Quote
I'll have to take your word on that ratio. Still, an awful lot of Wii titles are based on either cartoons or CGI movies. And the tie-in of Zelda to a Nintendo console isn't even a point. This doesn't prove that "gamers" are coming back. Rather, that Nintendo fans love Zelda.

You seem to keep forgetting the GameCube launch. It was lukewarm at best. The tie-in ratio definitely] proves gamers are coming back, because the GameCube had nowhere near the launch success of the Wii.

[Hocotate]

Quote
Originally posted by: Adrock

True, but the best game on Wii is also available on Gamecube and the second best game came with the system. Third party titles have been, for the most part, a joke so far.

Third party support for the PS3 has been a joke, not the Wii. Tell me what is out now for the PS3 that is worth it please. Better yet, show me that list of games that won't be out for 2 years and that will be ported to 360. You know the games that are supposed to save Sony?

The Wii is taking a dump on the PS3 in all regions and the 3rd parties have seen this. The big name PS3 titles that we know about were in the works before anyone knew about Sony messing up. You can bet that just about every dev w/ a high budget PS3 titles in the works is cringing right now. The only game that can save the PS3 now is FFXIII imo, which was announced as a 2008 release which is way too late to save Sony.

[Mario]

QUOTE WARS!

Quote
True, but the best game on Wii is also available on Gamecube and the second best game came with the system. Third party titles have been, for the most part, a joke so far.

It's the best launch in Nintendos history. Super Monkey Ball: Banana Blitz and Red Steel are quality third party exclusives.

Quote
Tecmo released an anime styled golf game. That doesn't impress me.

Nobody cares. It's a quality game and that's all that matters.

Quote
Konami's new IP features a raindrop with a cutesy face. Talk about furthering stereotypes about Nintendo being "kiddie."

Who gives a flying truck? Nobody. If you want blood, seek mental help and/or buy Mortal Kombat Wii.

Quote
No, I'm looking at the big picture. Nintendo isn't doomed. I'm not saying they're doomed, nor have I ever meant to say that.

You're not saying anything at all. You're just putting a negative spin on everything everyone else says. Nothing has gone wrong with Wii, it's had the best launch it could possibly have, it's OK to be happy! Healthy too!

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: Adrock
I'll have to take your word on that ratio. Still, an awful lot of Wii titles are based on either cartoons or CGI movies. And the tie-in of Zelda to a Nintendo console isn't even a point. This doesn't prove that "gamers" are coming back. Rather, that Nintendo fans love Zelda.

It proves that a lot of GAMERS are buying the console, since they're picking up a total gamer game along with it.

As for the ratio, last I checked it was 4.7:1 or something in all territories.

Quote
True, but the best game on Wii is also available on Gamecube and the second best game came with the system. Third party titles have been, for the most part, a joke so far.

How many 3rd party titles have YOU played?

I had a lot of fun with Red Steel, CoD3, Madden (three of my sports game-hating friends played it while I was away and loved it, especially the minigames), Rayman, Trauma Center, Super Swing Golf, Metal Slug and THDJ.

Quote
PS3, for all its failings, still has more support. 3rd parties have bigger games and more of them lined up for it. Wii is getting a lot of ports made "new" because they use the Wii Remote. Thanks but no thanks.

No, this is the support that developers promised Sony BEFORE the infamous Sony E3 press conference and the announcement of "599 US DOLLARS!!!!". The support that was promised BEFORE the PS3 launch was a dismal failure.

Guess what? That support probably won't remain exclusive: Square and Konami aren't such idiots that they would adhere to Sony's ridiculously pricey development costs and then not recoup their losses by porting these games to other consoles.

Quote
And seriously, look at the list of developers you gave me and the titles Wii is getting. Ubi Soft... the same Ubi Soft that shoveled Far Cry Vengeance into stores. The same Ubi Soft that pimped Rayman Raving Rabbids on Wii yet released it on PS2 also. The same Ubi Soft that is rereleasing Two Thrones... and still porting said rerelease to PSP.

Your point? It's support. It's not top-quality support, but these are the types of titles we laughed away when they were cancelled for the GC and released on the PS2. Total game library matters and in a very big way. I fully expect to get 90% crap, but that means that the 10% left over should be some excellent titles.

Quote
I'm assuming by Banco, you mean Namco Bandai. Nintendo owns stock in that company yet Tekken 5: Dark Resurrection  is available on Playstation Network and PSP. Tekken 6 is listed as a PS3 game. What are those 30 titles on Wii? I'm guessing we'll see some Naruto.

I admit, I'm taking a wait and see approach to this myself, but support is still better than nothing.

Quote
Tecmo released an anime styled golf game. That doesn't impress me.

That's fine because it impressed a lot of people who aren't you and they bought the game.

Quote
Konami's new IP features a raindrop with a cutesy face. Talk about furthering stereotypes about Nintendo being "kiddie." Before you start tossing company names at me, look at the games they're bringing to Wii compared to the competition. It's not as impressive as you think.

What are they bringing to the competition? Are you talking about the promise of MGS two years off? It ain't gonna stay exclusive, trust me.

Quote
Despite Wii crushing GCN during the same time period in its lifespan, 3rd party support looks moderately better at best. Wii may have more games, but many of them are bad games.

I don't know if you REMEMBER what support was looking like for the GC around this time, but it was pretty damn bad. No developers were announcing games for it in droves. No devs were opening entire studios devoted to the GC (like EA and Disney are doing), and the GC was certainly anything but hard to find.

Quote
I admit I'm cynical, but as a Nintendo fan who's seen Nintendo stumble so many times, I reserve that right. Nothing would make me happier than to see Sony fall (if you really want to know, I'd be happy to tell you). I'm a Nintendo fan and have been one my entire life though that's not the reason I hate Sony. I want Nintendo to succeed, but I'm not going to throw a party because they had a successful launch or because EA announced 15 titles (it's EA... please).

Why dismiss EA? They didn't get to be the largest 3rd party developer in the world because no one buys their games. On the contrary: EA is huge in the American market, a market where Nintendo typically gets clobbered, and yet EA offering such support for the Wii ensures that it will at least have the staple sports games for a game system in NA.

I understand being cynical. What I don't understand is acting like the competition has this tremendous leg up on the Wii when everything I've seen quite clearly indicates that it does NOT.

Furthermore, what did you expect the Wii to have at this time? It's a new and unproven concept, one which I expected more developers to be hesitant on than what we've seen already. JUST LIKE THE DS, I knew it would take some time for the concept to really sink in and for devs to start bringing out the good games for the console, but that didn't mean those games weren't coming.

FFS, give it some time. If after a year, we don't have announcements of these "high profile" games which don't matter in the grand scheme of things anyway, then you can complain about the Wii's lack of software.