My Opinion (Wii and 360 Related)

Post by **Triton** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 12:38 pm

i dont see why not getting crap halfassed ports of current gen games is a problem at all! yes the wii is currently in a bit of a game drought but with some real blockbuster games coming out in the next year or 2(brawl, metroid prime 3, mario galaxy, NiGHTS!! and a crapload of others i dont see why you crap on the wii so much ben. yes it is horrifingly underpowered compaired ot the PS3s 8 cores that nobody can program for or the 360s 3 core processor but its not like it isnt an improvement over last generation, it can do 480P it has a faster processor a new GPU by ati more ram etc and judging by previews of mario galaxy and whatnot its going to be plenty capable in my opinion, sure its not gonna make your eyes bleed with insane HDR lighting and resolutions so high your hair ignites but that doesnt mean its gonna look like crap either!

tl;dr basically i see it like this. I do not have a HDTV therefore 1080i etc dont matter to me, i thought the gamecube had good graphics and the wii is better yet, it has a lot of good games on the way and several decent ones out now!

Jongamer · Post by **Jongamer** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 1:07 pm

Benheck wrote: but remember no real games are coming for the Wii.

Since when?

Super Smash bros Brawl
Metroid Prime 3: Corruption
Super mario Galaxy

Since when there are no real games coming out for the wii.

unless a more uniform controller is introduced with the ability of a standard controller

Ummm can you say Classic controller, thats what being used for Super Smash Bros brawl, or you can use a Gamecube controller, and I am sure that SSBB will not be the only game to use the Classic controller, soon 3rd party developers will pick up on it after they see how well SSBB sells just like they see how horribly the PS3 sold and moved all their Exclusives to 360. and not to mention that they have loads of ways to expand the Wii controller.

Benheck wrote: Graphics aren't important? OK how about they release Spider-man 3 with all the CGI work left in post wireframe, solid color mode? By that theory that should be good enough

I never said they were'nt important, your just saying this to combat all the Nintendo Fanboys who say gameplay is eveything (Which its not)

Enterthehatrix wrote:gimmick

Thanks to Wikipedia

In marketing language, a gimmick is a unique or quirky special feature that makes something "stand out" from its contemporaries. However, the special feature is typically thought to be of little relevance or use. Thus, a gimmick is a special feature for the sake of having a special feature.

In marketing, product gimmicks are sometimes considered mere novelties, and not really that relevant to the product's functioning, sometimes even earning negative connotations. However, some seemingly trivial gimmicks of the past have evolved into useful, permanent features. According to the OED, the word is first attested in 1926, defined in the Wise-Crack Dictionary by Main and Grant as "a device used for making a fair game crooked". Finding a successful gimmick for an otherwise mundane product is often an important part of the marketing process. For example, toothbrushes are often given various gimmicks, such as bright colors, easy-grip handles, or color-changing bristles so they appear more exciting to consumers. This is often done when trying to appeal to children, who often get more excited about the gimmick than the product.

Harshboy · Post by **Harshboy** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 1:36 pm

When Ben posted about the no games for Wii thing, i think he means that there wont be some new game that sells (Like Zelda, but a new game) He means the same old games come over with a bit better gfx and more characters (such as Brawl, which i think will kickass anyway)

teraflop122 · Post by **teraflop122** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 6:44 pm

The most successful consoles have the most third party support. The consoles with the most third party support are the best consoles. The PS1 had an incredibly huge number of games made for it, as did the PS2.

Oh, and the Wii's hardware is the least capable of the next-gen consoles. You can dance around the fact any way you want, but no one can make it dissapear. The Wii's hardware does not match that of the 360 and PS3. In the end, no matter how much effort a developer dumps into a Wii title, it will be graphically inferior to a 360/PS3 title. Face it. Accept it. Embrace it.

I am not here to attempt a prediction on the success of each console. The Wii may come out on top, the PS3 may come out on top, Microsoft may vanish from the face of the Earth in a fiery explosion. I do not care. However I simply cannot stand it when fanboys go so far as to lie to themselves about the merits or lack-there-of of a console. Go ahead and support your favorite consoles, but do not make fools of yourselves. Accept the facts.

Post by **bicostp** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 7:31 pm

FANBOYS BEWARE! ANTI-WII RANT!
Do not read this post if you can't handle that. You have been warned!

Jongamer wrote:Super Smash bros Brawl
Metroid Prime 3: Corruption
Super mario Galaxy

How about third party titles? I agree with teraflop, they're what make or break a system. I don't see a whole lot of third party Wii support coming. Why? Creating an impressive game that takes advantage of the majority of home consoles, then haing to water it down for an essentially last-gen console and its offbeat controller doesn't make much sense.

All the games I've seen for the Wii are updates of old first party franchises (what you listed above), party games (WarioWare and that one with the rabbits), and the occasional watered-down version of a franchise game (Tony Hawk downhill racing or whatever). If Nintendo really wants to appeal to a broad spectrum of users they're going to have to lose some of the kiddy image and get games similar to Gears / God of War or some decent Tom Clancy games. I know a lot of people in my classes think the Wii is kiddy stuff, mainly due to the software.

Face it, most people over the age of 15 would rather opt for a more future-proof, up-to-date console like the 360 or PS3 because it does have better graphics and the capability to play next generation video discs. Now I know you're going to tell me "HD isn't everything", but I believe the contrary. Back in 2001 not many people had broadband internet (or at least it's not as prominent as it is today), and online gaming was looked at as a gimmick. Skip ahead 6 years and *gasp*! EVERYTHING'S online! The same is going to happen with HD once SD starts getting phased out around '08/09.

Not including DVD playback was stupid. really, REALLY stupid. I know, I know... "who doesn't have a dvd player?" Well, it would only have added a couple dollars to the price. I mean, a standalone DVD player is, what, $20 at Wal-Mart? That includes a whole motherboard, case, power supply, and disc drive. I bet if you priced the parts out the DVD licensing would only be a couple bucks. It would be another feature they could oush, and besides if the TV in the kids' room doesn't have a DVD player they'll have to get a whole seperate unit so they can watch Spongebob while their parents are watching CSI on the living room TV.

I can understand not including a HD-DVD or Blu-Ray drive because they would have cost as much as the Wii itself, but it could also be a bad move. We all say "the PS2 and Xbox killed the Dreamcast because they had DVD players". Well, the Wii is a lot like the DC this way. No movie playback at all. One of the selling points of the PS3 and 360 is that they both can run HD video discs, which (like it or not) are the future.

The Wii is underpowered, undersupported, stuck in the past. and will probably sell as well as the Gamecube before it. It won't fail, but it won't be spectacular. If you think the games are fun, fine. I have no roblem with fun games. I have a problem when people act like Nintendo is the innocent, heroic underdog of the gaming industry and Sony and Microsoft are the big evil corporations that want nothing more than to shut Nintendo down so their dark reign or tyranny can claim the land. That's far from the truth. It's an industry. It's business. That's it.

That's all I have to say about that. Please direct all hate mail to the nearest trash can.

Post by **Triton** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 8:02 pm

shiney words there bic and i agree to a point. here are a few statements i have to make towards that

first off, third party games for the wii and third party ports of games for other systems to the wii are two different things entirely of course ports are going to be mediocre at best for the reasons you mentioned but you completly! leave out third party games that will be made specifically for the wii, i am fairly sure companies like square enix and other big name devs will have games for the wii, and you say a strong first party showing like its a bad thing!

secondly, you cant really properly judge how a console by its first year out (which the wii isnt even to the halfway point yet) just look at the 360, the damn things were practically catching on fire had crap for games and cost 500$ and now people love them! the wii has started strong and if the list of releases is any indication will probably continue as such.

third, i sort of agree that no dvd playback was a stupid move especially when they announce a DVD compatible wii to be released in the coming years, what i figure is they will pull some stunt and be like "supprise,we lied all it needs is an update!" and boom, dvwii. as to the HD it MIGHT become an issue in 2 or 3 years but its not like TVs will stop showing resolutions below 720P or anything like that and like you love to go on about its not like little kids have HDTVs in their rooms anyway.

The Wii is underpowered, undersupported, stuck in the past.

underpowered compaired to the ps3 and xbox yes but nintendo has stated that the wii was NOT designed to compete directly with M$ or sony. again i say its a non issue. just because its less powerful doesnt mean it automatically looks like crap or something, it can still have good games! and games that LOOK pretty damn good regardless of HD or not

bioniclebert · Post by **bioniclebert** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 8:41 pm

I havent read any posts on page 2, because they're long and I'm lazy. (putting it plainly). Not trying to offend anyone here with this, it's just my opinion. But who gets offended about videogames?

The problem with Wii is that you cant get nearly any of the good games that 360 and ps3 will have. (like GTA for example). Nintendo has to re-invent all their games (or any of the new ones) to accomodate for the new controller. With the new wii controller came a new way to play, but it also crushed the old way to the point where good games were no longer playable. And I think Nintendo's decision to keep the graphics simple was just purely to make the statement that nintendo was not in the same business as sony and microsoft, taking a new approach to their ideas. Which in turn I believe really backfired on the old generation of gamers, who thought that this "revolution" would change the way games would be played for the better, not for worse.
It's sad that the Wii cant play games like MGS4, but it's even worse that to be able to play it you'll need to toss in a load of cash for another system, not to mention there's nothing else real appealing on it right now. So as of right now I totally hate the video game market. Used to be a nintendo fanboy, still kind of am but I've grown to like the PC way better. Just pray the good games get ported to PC. (like resident evil 4 has done.)

Keeping it simple:
I'd really enjoy to play MGS4 or any other good shooter on the computer here. I'd say that anything that could be good for a console, the PC could do as well: just because I really don't want to use motion sensing when I'm trying to shoot down some enemies. Some games are going to be great on the wii, but others have turned for the worse. Nintendo took a huge risk on the wii, so when they did they wanted to make the next step so radical that they re-defined what nintendo was all about: Changing the way games could be played. And in my opinion quite frankly I'd just like to stay back at the old methods for now.

Mabye I'm just a FPS fanboy...

EDIT:
Just a sidenote, I do own a wii and am quite satasfied with it, just sometimes I really do prefer better graphics and more easy to control gameplay. So it goes well next to my computer. (and probably the same next to a 360)

johnbjuice · Post by **johnbjuice** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 9:35 pm

I HIGHLY disagree with the "no-games" crap about the Wii. I do agree that the Wii definitely does not have very many FPS's or M-Rated titles, but is that what makes a good game. Here's a short list of good Wii-exclusive titles. (And I won't even list Wii Sports/Play!)

Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
Red Steel
Warioware: Smooth Moves
Trauma Center: Second Opinion
Elebits (Sounds stupid but is AWESOME)
Excite Truck
More that I can't think of right now...

Plus they've got Super Smash Bros. Brawl and Super Mario Galaxy coming. The number of exclusive titles is much higher than either of the competing systems.

Yes the Wii isn't a media center with Blu-Ray or HD-DVD. Yes it doesn't have a hard-drive or other bells and whistles. But you know what? I buy a console to PLAY VIDEO GAMES WITH! What a novel idea! And so what if the console's processing power is somewhat behind. The games still look awesome. Because the PS3 and XBox 360 aren't using all of their processing power anyways. I mean - 8 cores??? That's overkill. Like using a rocket launcher to light a match! It will be years before game companies can utilize the massive capabilities of the 360 or PS3. And by then, I'll buy the newer console. Besides, it is the quality of game that matters, not the system.

And I have one more controversial thing to say - Although both are important, I think gameplay far outweighs graphics.

EDIT:

Let's get even more controversial - I disagree with bic - 1st party titles make or break a system. Because let's face it - you buy a console based on which titles are only available on it. And, personally, I only buy the best of the best when it comes to games. So a HUGE library of games doesn't appeal to me. I want the console with the best, and since Nintendo is so experienced, they're usually the good choice.

As for the Wii's lack of GTA, Halo, FPS's, ect - That's why I have a computer!

toby dawg · Post by **toby dawg** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 9:40 pm

I think i like ps3 better than 360 and wii.

I like the 360 more than the wii.

The only thing i like on the wii is Boxing.

Everything about the ps3 is awsome exept the price.

I think People get the wii because of the Wiimote and the price just like

why people got the gamecube but in 2-3 years when the price drops on

the ps3 it will sell a lot more.

Edit: I really think the wii is for a younger age group, sure there will be a

few mature titles, but only because the older people that have wiis will

stay happy.

As for the Wii's lack of GTA, Halo, FPS's, ect - That's why I have a computer!

.... no, it sounds like you are struggling defending the wii a bit....

Playing those on a computer is always a hassle and less fun than on the intended console.

JAY · Post by **JAY** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 9:57 pm

bicostp wrote:How about third party titles? I agree with teraflop, they're what make or break a system. I don't see a whole lot of third party Wii support coming. Why? Creating an impressive game that takes advantage of the majority of home consoles, then haing to water it down for an essentially last-gen console and its offbeat controller doesn't make much sense.

I don't really understand the latter part of this logic. If the Wii is able to snag some third-party exclusives, then why will the games have to be watered down? They're being made specifically for the system. And if a developer wanted to take "advantage of the majority of home consoles", they'd still be gearing their games towards the PS2, which is an even farther step down than the Wii. If your point is being made in regards to games being launched on all three systems, then it's not a very sound one, since in the past the Xbox version was usually the best version of the three, and yet the PS2 version would sell best simply because the userbase was much larger. If somehow there are 30 million Wii owners and 15 million 360 and PS3 owners, then it would make sense to water the game down in order to sell it for the Wii, since that's where the sales will be the best. A game being sold for all three systems isn't going to push sales for one console only; the systems themselves and their respective exclusives would be the primary factor.

bicostp wrote:All the games I've seen for the Wii are updates of old first party franchises (what you listed above), party games (WarioWare and that one with the rabbits), and the occasional watered-down version of a franchise game (Tony Hawk downhill racing or whatever). If Nintendo really wants to appeal to a broad spectrum of users they're going to have to lose some of the kiddy image and get games similar to Gears / God of War or some decent Tom Clancy games. I know a lot of people in my classes think the Wii is kiddy stuff, mainly due to the software.

Disney has a kiddy image, and yet look at how much the Pirates of the Caribbean and their Pixar movies raked in. And it looks like you're not aware of what Nintendo said they are aiming at with the Wii: to get people who don't usually play video games to actually start. That's called an attempt at broadening their audience. So how is their "kiddy image" going to interfere with that? Going after the people who don't want to buy the system because it's "kiddy" would be a stupid move, because these people will never be persuaded. I'm surprised that there are even people that petty and mindless that they would be concerned with the image of a system (well, not really; to set a trend you also need people stupid enough to follow it). On a side note, it appears that the people in your classes are more concerned about what others think of them than they are with playing games.

bicostp wrote:Face it, most people over the age of 15 would rather opt for a more future-proof, up-to-date console like the 360 or PS3 because it does have better graphics and the capability to play next generation video discs. Now I know you're going to tell me "HD isn't everything", but I believe the contrary. Back in 2001 not many people had broadband internet (or at least it's not as prominent as it is today), and online gaming was looked at as a gimmick. Skip ahead 6 years and *gasp*! EVERYTHING'S online! The same is going to happen with HD once SD starts getting phased out around '08/09.

And most guys would prefer to own a Ferrari or Porsche, but I'm still seeing a lot of them driving Hondas. If people wanted up-to-date, they'd all be migrating to PCs, so that they can upgrade every year if they want to keep up with technology. If people wanted up-to-date, the PS2 wouldn't have been outselling the 360 several months after it's launch. Speaking of "future-proof" video game systems is almost laughable, since it's obvious that they'll all get replaced in five years anyways. If Sony keeps to their claims that the PS3's lifespan will be ten years, then these people wanting "up-to-date" will be ditching it for something new regardless, since in five years even the PS3 will be outdated. But I just want to clarify that, since you believe the contrary, you're saying that HD is everything? I'd say, at the least, it still is something significant, but saying that it is "everything" is obviously oversighting all of the other aspects of a video game. Since the Wii is already so cheap, we may actually see an updated Wii get released in three years (which is not that far-fetched, considering the beef that some people have with Nintendo already).

I got a bit tired of quoting (and typing in general), and there isn't much else to argue with in the rest on the post anyways. Although I thought that Nintendo would be releasing something soon on their Wii-online or whatever that will allow DVD-playback for it (not sure if it is free or not, either). I heard it somewhere in an interview with Reggie Fils-Aime, probably at gametrailers.com. [edit: I looked around for it with no luck, so maybe it was an older interview and thus not applicable anymore]

Metroid fan · Post by **Metroid fan** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 10:03 pm

These console wars are annoying, all you guys do is fight about things that won't even matter. If nintendo loses they lose and make another system next console war. So... yeah grow up guys.

johnbjuice · Post by **johnbjuice** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 10:06 pm

Just want to say - anyone who uses the "kiddy" argument against the Wii is highly immature themselves. Just because Nintendo's titles aren't as violent or M-Rated doesn't mean that they're bad. Super Smash Bros. Melee was the selling point of the Gamecube, but it was rated E. And many of these types of titles (FPS, M-Rated, ect.) tend to be released on the PC more than the E-Rated goodies (Example - GTA).

Rekarp · Post by **Rekarp** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 10:17 pm

you know what? Who cares which console "wins". All that matters is that YOU are happy with your gaming system and thats it.

Post by **Triton** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 10:53 pm

Playing those on a computer is always a hassle and less fun than on the intended console.

that makes very little sense! if you havent noticed many of your console shooters were PC shooters first! (doom 3, hl2 fear, farcry, splintercell etc) and many of the better console shooters were ported to pc with varying levels of sucess (GTAIII and VC are better on pc than ps2 in my opinion, halo was ok on pc but was a quick and dirty port at best) and nothing beats a mouse and keyboard for FPSes!

Post by **Gamelver** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 11:16 pm

Rekarp wrote:you know what? Who cares which console "wins". All that matters is that YOU are happy with your gaming system and thats it.

Not necessarily....the console that "wins" the "console war" (it's not really a war, just business

) will mean there are more people playing it and buying that company's products, usually meaning more support for the system/company. I really don't know much about it, but logically one can assume that the "winner" will undoubtedly reap some rewards.

Now, most people arguing the point are just expressing their opinions...it's pretty hard to get pure fact on this stuff, and even professional market analysts have a hard time of it (I believe

). Anyway, yeah, it may seem pointless, but then again the same could be applied to any discussion (i.e.-"Why bother?"

). Remember, perspective and opinion differ a lot between individuals. It's vital that you know that it's impossible to truly put yourself in one's shoes, and that they have they're own "universe" (as Douglas Adams actually wrote in one of his books...I hope you know which

). Anyway, what with everyone having different "universes" (meaning different experiences, personalities, and therefore exact opinions/feelings) I must ask.....Why bother?

Anyway, my predictions/insights: The 360 is easily winning, seems very solid, with many good to amazing games and plenty of momentum going for it. Releasing it a year early was very smart.

The Wii so far has gained popularity with the "common" folk, I suppose, but so far it has yet to really please the gamer crowd with some true games. Zelda was amazing, yes, but remember it was originally a GC game....so far no games REALLY take advantage of the controller to beat anything experience on the other consoles. I do believe the Wii has the potential to be a great system, though. As I've mentioned before, all it needs is some creative developers who can create good ideas and MAKE THEM WORK. It's pointless to have a great idea and then have crappy camera control or something....for example: lightsaber dueling/action game (I don't need to explain

). Easy concept, but just make it work right and BAM! it's a hit

.

The PS3 also has a lot of potential, but it will take time for it to gain momentum (hell, with its size...I'm not surprised

). It's got amazing power and should have some great games for it.

Basically, the winner needs the best games and the best support, in all aspects. Alternatively, the winner is the won that wins.