Wii won't be more than $250 says Nintendo

This is what I don't get. How do you all know what the Wii specs are? The IGN leak? We knew the 360 specs from a leak, and that changed too. It even changed from E3 to release.

All these post are all under the idea that it was just weak specs, when none of you even know what the specs are, at all.

All of this discussion about the performance of the PS3 and the Wii is at best pure speculation. Neither Sony nor Nintendo has shown ANY ACTUAL production console hardware. The Wii is going to use a dual-core PPC-based IBM processor, and a customised ATI GPU. Neither are available now, so anything being shown as Wii or PS3 console performance is suspect at best. Sony has been using Dev Kits that apparently have NO PS3 console hardware in them, and have more memory than the console is going to have. Thus far the only console I am impressed with is the 360, delivered on-time by MS and exactly as specified.

Of course Nintendo's going to go out of business. I mean, the only reason they've stayed alive is because of the STELLAR success of their other consoles, right? Like how awesomely the N64 did, that totally was the only thing keeping the company afloat. And hell, they've only been around, what, 120 years? What the hell do they know about the business world? Obviously they are going to lose. I know this because I'm a genius, and you people are not geniuses.

You're all idiots for thinking you know anything.

KwadDamyj, your rant is like complaining that theme parks pale in comparison to opera and the theater.
Games (are at their core) are supposed to be about having fun. They're not supposed to really be about some "epic" quality of emotion...if one manages to hit those chords, fine.

However, I will agree that most people dying to jump into the games industry have a total misconception of what it's really all about. Of course, the same could be said about young eager people interested in movies, music, or any other "hot" industry with recreational/fun output. There will always be the completely clueless.

Im not getting a Wii, dont like the idea of exercise

Just to show the blind hypocrisy, idiocy, and fanboism of the gamer, Joystiq prints a story so relevant to our discussions it is mind boggling! Seriously for anybody crying about this sites content, they need to read past blogs and come to this one, and see these guys do a really great job.

THAT BEING SAID! So nintendo annouces it will be under 300 dollars and the fanboys run in here to yell anything over 200 can't be justified. Yet a 600 Dollar price tag can be justified because you deem the system "WORTH IT". This right here is exactly the reason why the videogame industry is in a very chaotic state. The ideas put forth by the "Hardcore" or the so called knowledgable gamers are ones that are fan fueled rather than gamer fueled. In other words, fans champion a system that puts forth a price tag for a system that does everything else other than videogames that is 600 dollars. Then when a competing next gen videogame system offers a price for far less fans tear that idea apart.

Nintendo WII's price is not justifiable in the eys of the gamer fan base because it is a "GameCube" with better graphics, but it cost only 250 dollars,(Just giving the Ney sayers benefit of the doubt). Now lets examine the PS3 in which hunders of fans chimmed it is TOTALLY justified in price. 1080p HD support, lets examine that. As of right now in america only 17 milllion families have HD televisions, 85% of which do not pay to watch HD content on their televisions. Only 5% of that 17million are actual gamers that would use the HD tv for games. THe way the market is going now it is said that HD tvs will not hit 50% of the people in america before the year 2012, yet you are paying for the ability of 5% of 17million who actually will use and HD tv with their PS3 when they get it. But 250 is to much, lets go on to blu-ray, ahhh yes the awesome blu-ray capabilites. In which: 1. There are no blu-ray movies availible for the public to buy yet(Not Even from SONY). Second it is a media format publicly denouced by hollywoods movie industry, in which the PS3 might not be able to play movies on the system in any circumstance if they don't come to a deal with the movie industry. So you are paying for the hope, and the dream of what may happen in the future, but 250 dollars is to much for you.

SO if I am right 600 dollars is a justifiable cost for everything that MIGHT happen in the future, but 250 dollars is to much for good gaming right now? Yup you "hardcore" "knowledgable" gamers really know how to sell a system, and make a valid point. It is thinking like that, which has deffinetly put the gaming world in the state that it is in today.

Wait a sec let me get something straight the psp $250 price is worth it but the wii isnt zomg wtf o_O.
I am betting sony fanboys would protect the price of the ps3 down to the last if it was announced at $1000

Seriously if it is released for $250 i wont have the slightest bit of problem for me its worth i couldnt give a shit least wheter its slightly more powerful than the gamecube or not if it was up to me i would rather be playing snes games than most of the crap that past as games nowadays and like i said i have been a pc gamer for a long time so pretty graphics isnt nothing new to me is a matter or fact most of the recent games focus more on looking pretty than playing well hell i would play zelda twillight princess even if it looked like zelda ocarina of time to be the grapgics is just an added bonus that is not neccesarily needed but thats just me.
Now go ahead and bash me all you want but my mind is set Nintenwo at 250 is worth Sony ps3 at 600 I dont even think the Xbox360 is worth its price either i have yet to see a game for it worthy of my time I hate halo a matter or fact i am getting to hate first person shooters in general One of the few first person shooter than i have liked was serious sam yes serious sam and i like it not for its graphics but because the game was as fun as hell .

Anyway i am out

To #101 Geist:

Please make it clear whether that is sarcasm or not. You're contradicting yourself.

If by any chance that is not sarcasm, you may want to read this: http://nintendoinsider.com/site/EEEZuAypVuTuOJPzyb.php

So many fanboys here, it's so irritating! A lot of the Sony and M$ fanboys come to bash on the Wii because they got ripped off (or will be ripped off) on their "awesome graphics" machines. Yes, there are actually people that don't give a rats ass about how shiny the graphics are. I just wanna play fun games. I'm no Nintendo fanboy, but I'm sold on the Wii because I can't afford the other 2, so you can put me in the category of Cheap Bastards.

ZSavior: "1080p HD support, lets examine that. As of right now in america only 17 milllion families have HD televisions, 85% of which do not pay to watch HD content on their televisions."

"Only" 17 million have HD. How many systems does Nintendo plan to sell within 6 months? "Only" 7 million.

Please note that this system has to survive at least a five year production run, too. Unless, of course, Nintendo wants to repackage Wii every two years. Nintendo is definately watching Apple's marketting tactics very closely.

As for $250, I think that's pretty steep given that you still have to buy an Ethernet adapter seperately, and Nintendo wants to sell a dedicated controller for Virtual Console. Don't kid yourselves -- Nintendo is cheap and wants to make money on the hardware at launch. $200 should be the max for this thing.

But then, millions of people bought a glossy music player for $300. It seems like people will pay pretty much anything, value be damned.

Personally, I think the $250 offer is quite interesting... that is, if you compare it to the $500 price range of PS3 and XBOX360. But if it really is what everything I've heard, such as horrible graphics(a hair better than GameCube graphics)compared to XBOX360 and PS3, then I'd suggest lowering it to a $149.99-$199.99(considering that GameCube costs about $99.99 now). The graphics would barely raise the price, but I'm thinking that the main price raise would be because of the new generation-looking controller and how it would work.

I'd just like to note that my previous post was sarcasm. Except for that last part about you (and me) being all idiots for thinking you know anything. Nintendo's been around for a freakin' long time, they know exactly what they're doing, and if anyone think that they know what's going on, then they're fools.

Nintendo lost me long ago. When I was a kid and I read the story of Peter Pan I always wondered why the kids didn't stay in Neverland. They would never get old and they could have adventures forever. Now that I'm grown the answer is clear. They wanted to become adults have kids, party, drink, have sex and do mature sh!t.

I've outgrown Nintendo and the things they make just don't appeal to me anymore. I was the most hardcore Nintendo fan back in the Sega vs Nintendo days. When they unvealed Wind Waker I was like WTF. Mario Sunshine is a joke. Metroid Prime should have been 3rd person. This machine is for kids.

I've grown. I no longer want to play with just my friends that come over. I want to connect to Live and play against players across the globe. I don't want Pokeman red, blue, silver, gold, ruby, platinum or green. I don't want to see Mario against NBA players in a basketball game. When will Link actually say something? Wii is for the kids that were not here when the NES came out.

If I hear the phrase "hardcore gamer" spew forth from some dork's mouth again, my head is going to explode!

What makes you call yourself a "hardcore gamer?" Is it becaues you lock yourself into only owning ONE gaming system? Is it because you only enjoy TWO types of game platforms? Is it because you own an HD TV?

If someone calls themself a "hardcore gamer," don't listen to anything else they have to say. They don't know what gaming is really about. I find that 90% of the time, they entered the gaming world during the PS2/Xbox/GC era (aka: the Mountain Dew era).

For the rest of us who have been gaming since the Atari and Colecovision; we know what gaming used to be and we're excited about where it's headed.

First person shooters have gotten old and tired. There has been little to no innovation in that genre since Goldeneye. The only interesting one I've seen is Bioshock (and that's based purely on graphics). How many friggin' war-based shooters can you play?

A console can't be considered the "best," since each SHOULD offer a different experience. And no judgements can be made about the Wii or PS3 until they come out.

Self-proclaimed "hardcore gamers" use that phrase to make what they're doing sound "cooler." You're still playing with a toy, no matter what you fool yourself into thinking.

*Geist: "Nintendo's been around for a freakin' long time, they know exactly what they're doing, and if anyone think that they know what's going on, then they're fools."

How do you account for Nintendo losing so much market share over the last 10 years? Yes, they still make money, but their sales are WAY off from what they thought they would be. (BTW, they make money of more than just consoles. Profits from N64 and Gamecube alone were not good).

It's also worth noting that Gamecube's major competitor was the XBox. Given Microsoft's complete inexperience selling consoles, and the fact they screwed up so much, it's amazing MS and Nintendo were neck-to-neck in sales. That says something about Nintendo "knowing what they are doing."

People bought Gamecube as a secondary machine. Most people who own one have a PS2 as their primary system. No wonder Nintendo is stressing that Wii will be affordable. At $250, Wii will be all that much more difficult for people to buy as an also-ran.

As revolutionary as Wii may be or is supposed to be, Nintendo is not employing revolutionary business tactics. They are still Nintendo, they are still arrogant, and Wii will suffer from the same lack of developers as its predecessors (hence, Gamecube's status as a "backup" game system). It doesn't surprise me that Virtual Console is supposed to be a major feature of Wii. Selling obsolete games? Hey, it's pretty much free for Nintendo to do so, and lets them pad their software lineup. Everyone knows the purpose of buying new game systems is to play old games, especially if you have to buy a special controller seperately.

Trust me, after the death of Amiga, I've become very familiar with what destroys good products. Mostly, the answer is greed. Wii will survive by the "cool" factor, but I doubt it will do much better than Gamecube. Even without widely published specs, people know it will be underpowered at $250.

I also find it interesting that Nintendo is targeting non-gamers. Everyone knows it costs more money to get new customers than to keep old ones. The gaming industry has never been stronger. The reason people don't play games has nothing to do with games not being fun, as was the accepted reason for the game crash of the 80's. They just don't play games. I guess Nintendo figures that the people with the least experience playing games will not notice the lack of improvement from earlier, cheaper systems.

If you can't afford an XBox360 for $300, go ahead and buy a Gamecube for $100. If you think HD is a waste of money, and games are perfectly playable on low-spec hardware, get a PS2 for $120. Just don't tell me Wii is worth $250, just because Nintendo tells their sheep that specs don't matter.

Special effects in movies don't matter, either, but a movie with a good plot and quality acting may still be made or broken by special effects, image quality, and sound mixing. We can't have 15 "Blair Witch Projects" coming out every summer. Eye candy can't substitute gameplay, but games that use it well will still be better than games that don't. If people don't believe that, then there's no need to improve anything beyond just a tune-up.

*Cringer8: "For the rest of us who have been gaming since the Atari and Colecovision; we know what gaming used to be and we're excited about where it's headed."

I'm an old-fashioned Atari/Coleco gamer, too. I just don't like getting ripped off. Anyone who knows Moore's Law knows very well Wii should be better than it is, and Nintendo is cutting out modern features on purpose to pad their profit margin, not to reduce the cost of the hardware. If Wii costs $250, that will prove it.

No console should need an Ethernet adapter to get online, because the cost of adding it as standard is insignificant. Anyone who thinks otherwise knows nothing about manufacturing. I find it odd that Nintendo is stressing "we, as in the community," but they choose to cripple the primary means of connecting people. Hey, gotta draw people in with the "affordable" bait, then sell those adapters. At least the overpriced extras on the other consoles are optional and don't affect the core audience.

phew... 249 is less than 250.

Wii want 199 pricey!

Waccoon makes a good point on one hand, yet completely fails to take into account other perceptions which exist firmly in today's market. As a result, an incomplete picture derives his stance.

In-your-face theory isn't wrong, but it is often only one part of the big picture. I put GameCube's fall to be something rather different, but that's another huge debate so I won't go there.

I suspect Wii will be a surprise winner this generation simply because it would create a league of its own.

I think the Wii is worth it at $250. I can't wait till Metroid: Corruption come out. :Drools:. Do you realize how much game there will be if you can dl all those old games that you love so much from SNES NES N64. How about Secret of Mana, Zelda, Breath of Fire, and Final Fantasy. Imagine being able to play all those game and relive those memories. I dont mind paying that much for all those. The new controller will make gaming more fun also. I will also get the Ps3 also when the prices goes down of course. There is no way i gonna spend 500 on a game syster i rather save it for a new computer ^^. But i will get the Ps3 eventually when the price goes down. For now, I am really looking forward to WII.