How Nintendo could lead in home console market share

"Nintendo has a shot at getting the number one spot back."

Have a shot? Both Microsoft AND Sony want Nintendo as an ally. That means a definite win for Nintendo.

Nintendo have won with backing from both Sony and MS. as Marc pointed out, and if the DS is anything to go by, which, it is, the Wii has a pleasant future ahead of it. Everyone wants one. Nintendo win.

It also shot itself in the foot by not having HD support. I use an HDTV as my main set, and the Wii is going to look awful on it, as does everything SD displayed on an HDTV, and there's no way I'm buying an upscaler either.

That's assuming the other guys are not innovating beyond better graphics, and that Nintendo is.
Nintendo does certainly innovate with the Wiimote, but hardly with the games: we're going to see the usual remakes of Mario and Zelda, then Mario Golf, Mario Tennis, Mario Curling... ad nauseam.
Microsoft is innovating with Live, gamer scores and achievements, which are the things that make me play every day as opposed to about once a day one year ago.
Sony is innovating with BluRay.
So I'm not sure this Apple-like aura around Nintendo as being the only innovator in town is entirely justified...

alas, GunForHire, you'll be the one missing out!
I have a HDTV. composite looks bad on it but component is fine. you might need a better TV perhaps? S-Video or Composite will produce a worse image as they're not digital.
hell I played through Tomb Raider on the 360 before realising it was in 480p with component. And guess what? it was still a good game :o

GunForHire,

not EVERYONE can afford a HDTV. Some of us have to save money for lunch instead of spending it on what ever new gadget Sony comes out with (as i'm assuming your HDTV will be playing PS3 games).

You gotta learn to stand up and actually CHOOSE a console. Don't let Sony decide for you. Stop letting Sony bone you in the ass and then taking all your money as if you were a cheap whore.

I'm SURE that you are smarter than that. For once, stand up to the big company, and choose the more humble type that can still give you the gaming experience that you need.

we're going to see the usual remakes of Mario and Zelda, then Mario Golf, Mario Tennis, Mario Curling... ad nauseam.

Nintendo has like the largest catalog of franchise video game characters. They didn't accomplish this by recycling the same two characters over and over. They have, with each new generation, added to their catalog. They continue to make new games with familiar characters because they sell. They sell, whether or not you agree, because people find these games entertaining.

Sony is innovating with BluRay.

BluRay is not innovative. All BluRay is, in terms of video games, is a higher capacity storage medium. While bigger might be better, it is not necessarily innovative.

@ GunforHire, gee I dunno, Smash Brothers on Gamecube in 480p is still gorgeous.

@ bertrand...hmmmm don't know if I can completely agree with you there. I see your point though. I do think Nintendo has to try not to have the "everything Mario" attitude on Wii. New characters and Ips would be great and needed. But, The Wii represents something truly different and I think that's what has people talking, either in favor, indifferent or against. I can't say MS innovates with scoreboards and online rankings and such because these things are not anything that hasn't been done to death already elsewhere.

The difference with the Wii is that even though there have been other motion sensitive controllers, there has never been a console dedicated to it or build around it. That's a huge difference and a point that has been made here on Joystiq more than a few times. There's not much risk in giving gamers online ranking systems and the like.

Sony innovating with Bluray....I can't take that seriously. Forcing bluray on consumers is not innovation. That's the corporate overlords trying to enforce their will. Bluray is not in the best interest of the fanbase when it's priced outside the mass market.

Will Nintendo win out this round....I have no clue. To be honest, I would rather see the entire industry put more effort into better game development than continue on with the love affair with graphic power. What better example than Oblivion? Beautiful game. Drop dead gorgeuos. But the developers still couldn't take the time to get the animation right and do proper bug testing?

''The author goes on to say that Nintendo's traditional lack of "gritty fare" realistic games is the Achilles Heel for both the DS and Wii, and a sign that "Nintendo hasn't yet learned every lesson it might have."''

Is that entirely fair? I mean Nintendo has already got disaster day of crisis and project hammer both of which are ''mature''. " And then theres the fact we already know sadness and resident evil are in development (could sadness be the eternal darkness of the wii?). I think nintendo are trying much harder with the Wii themselves to bring more ''gritty'' games. I mean the new zelda is more ''mature'' than the last one. (dear god i hate having to put stuff in quotation marks)


And Bertrand you said ''Nintendo does certainly innovate with the Wiimote, but hardly with the games: we're going to see the usual remakes of Mario and Zelda''
Well erm remember the new mario got a lot of praise at the show and infact used the wii remote in new ways. Likewise while zelda didn't add too much since it is really a port of the gc version they added the ability to fish with it, aim arrows etc. So its hardly fair to say the usual remakes.

And gunforhire I can only imagine you are a pc only gamer because thats where the real graphical power is, not on consoles. And with the right set up games on pc can completly blow console games out of the water. Just have a look at the comparison gamespot did with oblivion, the difference between high end pc-360 was the same as mid range pc-360. And with the mods thrown in, high end pcs simply made the 360 version look outdated. Hd-tv really isn't that great, its nice thats for sure but its never hit me as being that impressive.

I think Pocket Gamer is right in saying that the DS is sign of things to come in Japan for the Wii. Look at the DS sales in Japan today. The DS/DS Lite sells more than PS2 and PSP sales combined. They can't keep those things on the shelves in Japan. And when PS3 comes out with its outrageously high price and the Wii and its very low price, Japanese gamers will choose between these two being than XBox 360 is really not even a relevant factor there. The huge difference in price and the Wii's similarity to the DS is going to turn the scales on Sony. The Wii should benefit from a DS coattail effect.

wi will have component cables.

and really i dont feel bad for peopel that have hdtv's and have crappy images for non digital input, you decided to buy teh technology before it was done right.

I wont buy an hdtv yet because of that, and Im still not happy on how long they last. Ill pay for it once they know how to make them work.

"we're going to see the usual remakes of Mario and Zelda, then Mario Golf, Mario Tennis, Mario Curling... ad nauseam."

If you believe the sentence above....then you need to read this:

http://wii.advancedmn.com/article.php?artid=6986

Excellent article on Nintendos strategy to introduce the new controller using existing franchises (Zelda, Metroid, Mario) while not shocking gamers with too much too fast (new controller and new game). Opening the door for later titles to be more innovative and groundbreaking with the new control system (new game and new controller). Similar to how the DS stylus has been handled.

While the article over at PocketGamer was informative and thought provoking, I just don't think his main argument really stands. The handheld market is an entirely different beast compared to home consoles. And such, Sony and Nintendo are going to have separate marketing strategies for the handheld systems and the home consoles. So to compare the two different areas in video games is a bit of a stretch.

The problem with PSP is that most of the games are standard remakes of games already on the consoles - not a good strategy. The whole point of handhelds is something to pick up and play (that's why Lumines is one of the rare gems on PSP) and that's why Nintendogs, Brain Age, Super Mario Bros. are doing so well on the DS.

I do believe that the next generation will really test Sony and I don't believe we'll see a clear winner until a couple years down the road, because each console is going for an entirely different strategy. And that's what's really exciting from a consumer stand point - we're going to see the best games yet this generation because I think all three companies will be pulling out all the stops this generation to lure gamers and more non-gamers.

I lean Nintendo in any fanboyism I might have, but I have to agree that we've yet to see any of the real "blue ocean" titles. For all of the expanding-the-market talk we've been hearing, it seems the titles on display at E3 were aimed at the regular old market.

But whatever. I think it's pretty obvious at this point that the Wii will at least do better than the Gamecube (which was a profitable system). As for the #1 slot? Hard to call at this point. I look forward to whatever wacky blue-ocean titles Nintendo may be hiding.

*sigh*

If I hear yet another message board post or editorial comparing the Wii/PS3 battle to the DS/PSP battle, I think I'm going to scream.

Two more conflicting scenarios could NOT be envisaged.

Since when has the portable market ever had a bearing on the console market? The GBA was a runaway success, whilst the GameCube was not, despite having a similar design, touting cross-connectivity and being affordable.

You have two markets here, the home console market, and the handheld market.

In the home console market, Sony has been the dominant player, whilst in the portable market, Nintendo has always been the leader, crushing all opposition. Then Sony releases the PSP, and for the first time in portable HISTORY, Nintendo is running neck-and-neck with a competitor.

In the portable market, simpler graphics and gameplay go over well - people aren't missing out on realistic graphics and in-depth storylines because they have them on their console at home - hence why the PSP isn't a runaway success (though it would be considered as such compared to the Game Gear or N-Gage).

But to assume that because gamers are satisfied with DS graphics on a portable system that they'll be happy having a home console that's lacking in terms of power and performance (and isn't all that far removed from what they already have) is another thing entirely. The DS was a huge step-up from the Gameboy Advance in terms of power (about a generation's worth - SNES to N64). The Wii is not.

If the portable market were an accurate yardstick of console performance, then the N64 and GameCube should have been the top-sellers in their respective generations. And if Japan is considered a sign of things to come, then the Sega Saturn should have sold like hotcakes in the States.

Apples and Oranges, people. Apples and oranges.

"The author goes on to say that Nintendo's traditional lack of "gritty fare" realistic games is the Achilles Heel for both the DS and Wii,"

i'm a nintendo fanboy.
but even i have to agree here.

but nintendo is still rockin' it out!
even without great graphics and HD support.

but if they added that.
oh man!
that'd be awesome!

I personally won't be buying a Wii. The wii would sort of contrast my living room's HD set up way too much, and i already have all three of the last gen systems on there. I understand that people like me aren't in the majority, even as an HDTV owner. I bought all my a/v equipment for a reason, and that's for HD gaming, movies, and TV watching, though it doesn't hurt serving as a 50 inch PC monitor for those late night WoW runs= )

My somewhat superficial mindset is shared by a lot of people here in the U.S. The PS2 became such a hit from both PS1 owners and non PS1 owners because at the time it offered amazing graphical potential. Even if the launch games really didn't show much of it, it still had the hardware inside that excited many people. Xbox came out, and it's launch games looked comparatively better then the PS2's launch titles, but at the same time such hits as FFX, MGS2, and GTA3 came out that REALLY showed the power of the PS2, games that looked a lot like, if not better then the xbox games of the time. Thats why even a year after the xbox came out...people still bought the PS2 in droves

it wasn't till 2003 that the xbox started picking up steam, and by then they had a whole buncha games come out, and 2004 was its definitive year. and only because the games that were released in those years started looking GOOD, that showed off effects and physics that really stuck the fact that the xbox was the hardware superior of the three into everyones head. Xbox 360 came last year, and that got people REALLY excited, it could have easily sold as many units as Microsoft could have possibly produced

I think what's going to happen here is that the casual gamer crowd are in for a real rude awakening this fall. Wii will hardly be a step up in anything except it's control function, and when launch PS3 titles look nowhere near as good as the titles shown in E3 (i doub t many of those titles will make the launch WINDOW)...and graphics are the most obvious improvement that can be seen by anyone, which might instead give the 360 the lead this november. I dont think the average gamer is going to justify a 200 dollar purcahse for a system that looks little different then what they've seen on the gamecube, let alone an xbox. nor will they be willing to dish 500-600 for a PS3 with similar features and underwhelming graphics. People here in the U.S tend to be a bit more superficial then those in Japan.

as for me, im a proud owner of an xbox 360 and a home theater pc, and the last three gen systems...bring on next-gen HD gaming = )

How is Japan an indicator of how something is going to do in other parts of the world?

V1L3

I think you are missing the point. The correlation between the portable and home console market isn't graphics.

Yes the N64 and GameCube didn't do so well. Before and during the Gameboy reign, there was no competition so naturally the yardstick back then during thee n64 and gc would have been very long if you were to do try and form a direct correlation, and the n64 and gc would have one.

However, the link people are making here is innovation. The DS, is innovative which is why it spanks the pants off the PSP. The Wii, is the same, it uses a new style of gameplay to attract new gamers and give the current gamers something new.

When I was looking at the PSP and the DS. I, and I repeat that this my opinion:

PSP, wow looks cool. Nice games. Wow I haved played these games before. Bored very quickly.

DS, wow Mario, i like Mario. This Dual touch screen thing is pretty cool. Then, I get games like Nintendogs and BrainAge. Constant innovation on the gameplay because of Nintendo doing something different.

I will spare you the 360, PS3, Wii comparison. But it comes out the same.

Plus that price tag... oh yeah.

I don't own an hdtv and won't for the forseeable future. So explain to me why the more powerful graphics of the PS3 should in anyway be relevant to my choice of nextgen systems? Why should I care about blu-ray when my current dvd player already hits the limits of what my tv can display?

Seriously I want someone to answer these question.

Anyway even if I bought an HDTV I wouldn't be able to afford a ps3.

Nintendo is growing the market. My GF wants a DS lite, yet refers to my 360 as "the machine." We're excited to play Wii together, somthing that takes quite a bit of searching to do on "traditional" home consoles.

I bet, I bet, I bet...Nintendo will finish third again.
Much closer to second this time.

I think they'll keep succeeding with kids, but I think more mature gamers will not resist the call of power in the 360 and the PS 3.

I already have the 360.
The PS 3 will be my other home console. I expect first-party PS 3 games to get the most attention. In fact, this time around, I think first-party titles will decide who wins between Sony and Microsoft. Third-party titles will mostly be developed on top of middleware platforms, never leveraging the specific advantages of any particular console.
The PS 3 will also be my entry Blu-ray player, until dedicated Blu-ray players become more affordable.

Excellent article.

I agree that the end-all-be-all issue for the coming home console generation is indeed related directly to the developers.

The majority of 3rd party devs in the past 1.5 console generations, especially at present, are being largely exploited; having had their workload force-fed and dictated to them by the necessities of investor/holder expectations, vis-a-vis, the sequal factory.

Several friends of mine who work in the industry are sick and tired of working on poker game after poker game, crappy RTS wannabe after crappy RTS wannabe, etc… Many of these folk have left or are planning on leaving the industry.

These problems and the related disgruntilization are being exasorbated and compounded by the absurd development requirements and precedent of the “NextGen standard” that the PS3 claims to represent. On paper these requirements aren’t short of overwhelming. Actually working them out with real-world resources brings up several concerning issues, In particular the need for redundant skillsets, 4 or 5 levels deep, thus forcing the need for a work force 3 x 4 times larger then previous dev staffs, and budgetary requirements possibly exceeding 10x that of the previous gen. Couple this with the C- reception and presentation that PS3 has thus far shown, and one can see exactly why developers may indeed “jump ship” to Nintendo.

Wii and its markedly less expensive Dev costs, and the fact that the system’s architecture is already well hashed out (being that it is an extension of Gamecube), represents a very inticing alternative for 3rd party independent developers. Rather then needing hundreds of employees, years of development hoop-jumping, and tens-of-millions of dollars, smaller devs can jump in and develop games quicker, cheaper, and with more emphasis on “Big Ideas” rather then “bottom line”.

I guess in this respect, Wii truly does represent a revolution!

=)

@V1L3 I get sooooo tired of people that will constantly talk about how the Wii and how underpowered it is. Have we forgotten already that the PS2 is the least powerful of the current gen consoles. This being the case, how did sony sell so many units (defective consoles put aside) Games....it was the games.

"ohhhhh, it's soooo terrible, the Wii doesn't support HD, wooooow it's just like, so lame. It can't possibly have any good games because it doesn't support HD."

Give me a break, HD is not even a standard and people are talking like they've had it in their living room for the last 10 years. Get off it. A crap game in HD is still a crap game. HD is not going to make a terrible game good but a good game is still good in any resolution.

Then there are the people that think the Wii is just a controller. Real Backwards compatibility is not a good selling point now? The Virtual Console is not a selling point now? The inexpensive price tag (of which we know little about) is not a good selling point? The fact that Nintendo still makes some of the best games is not a selling point for the Wii? Companies pledging support for Wii is not a selling point?

Whatever, to each his own and I can't say how it's going to end but I'll say this. The industry needs a change. The same games with better graphics and a higher price tag is only going to go so far before people get sick of it and just stop playing.

Darth Pixel,
Mature gamers sure resisted the power of 360 and PS3 at E3!

I didn't need to read the article. I already know why Wii will win, because I played it at E3. I watched Sony fanboys wearing shirts making fun of the "Wii" name walk, I mean RUN, right through the Sony booth to get to the Nintendo line as soon as possible. For anyone that hasn't played it, you wouldn't quite understand yet. Also, many people find that DVDs are good quality on HDTVs visually. Well DVDs have a resolution of 720x480. The Wii will have a resolution of 848x480. It's still only 480p, but it has more horizontal resolution than DVDs do. I think that will suffice for most people. Sure it's not HD, but I think it's good enough. I never once heard a person mention the graphics either positively or negatively at E3. It was like people didn't even care. Hell, I was having a blast just playing their tech demos with simple shapes as graphics.

Nintendo will never lead in the console market, well maybe theyll lead in Japan but theyll never lead overall. It has nothing to do with the the innards of the Wii and how far behind the 360 and PS3 it is graphically.

It has to do with Nintendo itself. How Nintendo has failed over the its last two consoles to have consistent good game releases a year. How else could a new comer such as Microsoft come into the console market and beat out Nintendo on their first shot.

Nintendo needs to step up their first-party games and stop thinking that one Mario, Zelda, Metroid title a year is enough to keep their system competitive, cause its not. Especially now since their newest system barely beats out the first Xbox in graphics. They also need to work on their third party software, which as of now appears to be getting a lil better.

I owned a Gamecube since launch, played it for the first 2 years (the Xbox had more play time though). After Mario Sunshine & Metriod Prime there was nothing until Resident Evil 4. After Resident Evil 4 which was released Jan 05' what is Nintendos next big thing, Zelda TP which comes out this Nov. Come on now, this is pathetic, no wonder they dont wanna comptete with Microsoft or Sony. The same thing happened with the N64, luckily the game that tided me over was Goldeneye. Its really sad...

Although Project Hammer and Twilight Princess are good signs that Nintendo is beginning to lean to more "mature" themed games, the truly graphic titles will still be needed if they really want to appeal to the hardcore GTA/Resident Evil 4 crowd. Nintendo seems to have realized this, if you ask me, as they have noted before that they are seeking other developers to make Wii games for particular genres "that Nintendo simply can't make", a la Red Steel, an FPS; we'll never see a "Mario Chainsaw Massacre (w/improved brain splattering!)" in the future from Nintendo--because that's not who Nintendo is.

#24, MrPolarBare (kind of a dirty name!):

Is E3 hype that great of an indicator of quality? Everyone stood in huge lines to watch Doom 3 trailers...we all know how well that game turned out. The Wii may well be big...but I think the staying power of the waving-your-arms-around thing is very much an open question.

pretty obvious has a point..

while nintendo is known for fantastic 1st party titles...they only drop one once in a blue moon.

and i think the brand identity will keep nintendo in 2nd or third place..

nintendo is like a VW beetle...its cute...economic...good for the money..fun to drive...but u wont see a dude walk within 50 ft of the drivers seat...is it becuase its a bad car..??..no...its because its a friggin VW beetle...

now does that justify not buying one..??..no...but LOTS of males think like that..especially in the 16-25 demographic...

i think the wii will be a hit for families with small children and the "never grew up" nintendo fans( basically the same market nintendo has now)...i dont think the largest market ( the GTA , halo , madden ) crowd will even consider the wii an option just off brand identity alone...

is it stupid..? yes...but most people are.

Nintendo has always done what ever they want, and it works, Sony sold 5 times as many consoles, yet they made only 1/10th of Nintendo’s profit.

So do you really think Nintendo gives a shit that they are in last for amount of units sold as they laugh their asses off to the bank?

I think Nintendo is making the right choices. the other companies are making things way more expensive then they should be and way to fast. think about ps3 and its huge dev costs because its so hard to work with, now think about mass shortages when they system hits, meaning game makers wont be able to sell enough of their games to make their money back. now imagine that happening to a few major companies.

there you have the makings of a collapse similar to what happened the industry over 20 years ago, until a company came out with a console that was affordable, new games, and a new controller.

Amazing how so little in the world changes as time goes by huh?

Microsoft should cut a deal with Nintendo to bundle the XBox360 Core and Wii together for $500. Then MS could back up their statement that people would rather buy a 360 and a Wii than a PS3.

I really hope Wii takes off. I actually, I don't hope, because I don't need to. I wholeheartedly believe they will. I mean, the Wii is the most innovative of the three consoles, has the best backwards compatibility (because it spans so many generations), it is least expensive, and it appears to be garnishing the most developer support (or at least developers are paying more attention to it than 360 or PS3). The only thing Wii doesn't have is superawesome graphics in HD.

If nothing else, if people keep saying "The Wii will win next generation" people will believe it, especially casual gamers that don't actually read up about other consoles. I mean, if you keep repeating something over and over and over, the masses will eventually believe it (it's one of the prevailing methods religions use to brainwash you). So if the Wii continues to grab all the attention away from PS3 and 360, people are gonna buy the Wii, because its the console they actually hear about.

As I've said before, this time around all signs are pointing to Nintendo. Let's just hope they don't F--- it up somehow.

im buying the nintendo wii. if you don't like nintendo, don't buy their products, simple as that, no need to talk dirt on Nintendo. the only problem is that you will be missing out on some very cool games. if it wasn't for Nintendo, the video game market would not exist. graphics is not everything. it's about gameplay. i, like many gamers, CANNOT afford a $600 PS3 and a $500 XBox 360 plus a $5000 HDTV. for those that can afford these things, God bless them, have fun. but for those who don't have much money to spend, getting the Nintendo Wii is ideal because it will cost less than $250 and does not require an expensive HDTV. to me, Sony and Microsoft are targeting the rich, and are ignoring the "little" people, such as myself. lucky for me, Nintendo is still my friend.

brade lee wdf are u talking about...

and i have no idea where u get the absurd assumption that the wii has more 3rd party support..

the wii has the steapest up-hill battle..

All this talk about Nintendo creeping in to second spot... what does it matter to us gamers?

Why are we judging the success of a console on hardware sales?

As long as 1st, 2nd and to a lesser extent 3rd party developers support the console, and as long as Nintendo remain profitable enough to stay in the hardware market who cares if they sell more consoles than Sony?

The Gamecube had enough titles to justify owning one, and I played it just as much as my Xbox and PS2. I now pay the DS more than any of those consoles, and my XBox360.

Many of Sony's PS3 sales will come off the back of the Playstation brand, and have nothing to do with games.

Microsoft may say that they are in the gaming industry for the long haul, but it'll only take one or two big changes in the IT industry to see MS getting a bit worried about the money they are haemorrhaging over the XBox project.

Nintendo is the only company in the gaming hardware industry that has consistently shown a profit. Do you really think MS would take the calculated risks that Nintendo has with the DS and now Wii? Do you think Sony is a nimble enough company to do anything other than imitate and fall back on franchises that are growing tired and stale?

Nintendo are trying to do soemthing different. They are avoiding HD for a good reason... the uptake of HD TV's won't reach saturation until we start getting close to the NEXT generation of hardware.

Will Nintendo 'lead' the next gen market share? Probably not. The Playstation brand is too strong, MS are catering to the hardcore gamer while dipping its toe in the casual gamer market, and Nintendo still can't shake the (undeserved) 'kiddie' image.

I see a lot of nonsense above about how Nintendo will fail because "in the past" it was for kids and "in the past" Sony was a dominant player in the console space, but no one is talking about words like "reinvent" or "overconfidence" or "complete and utter failure."

Sure, Nintendo has been typecast in the past as "kiddie" and was in third place with consoles, but Sony was once upon a time made fun of for trying to enter the video games space with PS1, correct? How quickly we forget when a powerful carrot like the PS3 is dangled in from of our eager American eyes.


I also see a lot of posts dismissing Wii because "I have HD and it will look like crap." Even if this is remotely true, which I have a feeling it is not, the type of person who posts this is neither a sizeable % of the gaming market, nor are they relevant to the current conversation. Did NES have HD? Did PS2? Who was the big boss who claimed we must all move to HDTV to enjoy our new consoles? HD and consoles today is like looking at a pretty painting. I wil enjoy it for a spell, then I will move on to something fun outside or elsewhere. At no point in my history of gaming, now spanning 20 years, have I ever dismissed a really fun game just because I could not see the sweat pouring off of the hero's face in a tense battle situation.

And as far as the whole gimmick argument is concerned, look no further than the DS. People write this off as "portable market" only, but that's no proper logic. The DS is portable, yes, but it also fits in with Nintendo's much documented Blue Ocean strategy. It's a cog in their overall strategy, one I fear may be too deep for a majority of those above to understand. Read about it, then post, the results of those actions may amaze you.

""Is E3 hype that great of an indicator of quality? Everyone stood in huge lines to watch Doom 3 trailers...we all know how well that game turned out. The Wii may well be big...but I think the staying power of the waving-your-arms-around thing is very much an open question.""
Yes, and how many people played those trailers? Wii was hands on, won best of show, and had three games do the same. This is pretty meaningless, yes, but I'd say it's pretty significant for a player that has been written off here and in the press as kiddie and "out of touch" (pardon the pun) with modern gamers. Grown men and women... sprinting to a booth at E3! Reminds me of the glory days of when, well, Nintendo was king. PS3 had an equal opportunity to woo gamers at E3, and it didn't -- badly. That's not bias, that's fact. And from all indicaitons recently, they seem to actually enjoy making the most idiotic, arrogant press releases they can muster -- all because they are No.1 and we the gamers owe it to them to buy their powerful new system!

So to the HD heads, I say enjoy your sweat and your smoke effects. Apparently that's all there is to gaming anymore.

What I really want to know is how people can take this BS that Wii doesn't have an Ethernet port. "Wii the community", and Virtual Console... but you have to buy that hardware seperately. Yeah, "nobody" owns HDTV, but everyone is supposed to have wireless routers?

Slick remote or no, it's pretty obvious the system is not a good value. I mean, we're talking about real, bitter, penny-pinching, here. How much does a 10base-T Ethernet port cost these days? Pennies?

Also, has anyone else noticed that most Wii screenshots don't use anti-aliasing? That's a pretty big issue for a console that only supports standard TV resolutions. Any game looks ten times worse with aliasing, no matter how much geometric detail there is. You might as well get a Gamecube for less than half as much money.

The PS3 price is disappointing, but Wii is just plain annoying. No wonder Nintendo is trying to bury specs and target non-gamers... the ones who don't know what Moore's Law means and that they should be expecting better for what they're paying. If I want to play underpowered minigames, I'll download some Flash games for free.

No, specs do matter. Specs are how we determine whether we are getting ripped off or not, and whether the new systems are better than the old ones. So far, I've seen nothing on Wii that can't be done just as well on Gamecube with that same controller. Why should I pay so much money, again? So I can have an overclocked Gamecube and still have to buy an Internet adapter and a Virtual Console controller seperately?

*** J B Cougar: "Did NES have HD? Did PS2? Who was the big boss who claimed we must all move to HDTV to enjoy our new consoles?"

It's not about whether HD is "needed" or not. It's about whether it is available. Do you need it? Of course not. Good games can be had on a Coleco Vision or 8-bit NES. Why don't we play Coleco Vision anymore? Because better stuff is available these days. That's especially true because these consoles are supposed to have a lifespan of 5+ years, and you can certainly expect 40+ million people in the US alone to have HD five years from now. That will likely be as many people who own 360, Wii, and PS3 combined.

Of course, the real reason Nintendo didn't support HD is so they could save lots of money by using an overclocked Flipper. The actual display connector has little to do with it. Hell, do you think they are even going to bundle an S-Video combo cable with the system? How much does that cost? Pennies?

I already suspect that nintendo will win market share this time. Not because of innovation, sure it will be a fun gaming system but all are. It will be because of a good low price...

Sadly, this is what will draw it high sale numbers...

Support seems strong as of now i just hope it continues and avoids the horrible support that GC had.

""No, specs do matter. Specs are how we determine whether we are getting ripped off or not, and whether the new systems are better than the old ones. So far, I've seen nothing on Wii that can't be done just as well on Gamecube with that same controller. Why should I pay so much money, again? So I can have an overclocked Gamecube and still have to buy an Internet adapter and a Virtual Console controller seperately?""

Really? What store do you shop at? I'd be sure to cancel my business there. The logic of this argument fails on many levels, mostly due to gross oversimplification, generalization and rampant speculation, not necessarily in that order. Specs sell? They tell us what? Then why was PS2 the winner last time around? Its specs were less than those of Xbox and GC, yet it won! Maybe I'm "special," but I determine whether or not I'm getting ripped off by the results of the system at hand. Again, I'm special, but I've never really been into specs, ever, and I've enjoyed many, many systems over my years. It's how we determine it's better than previous systems? Again, the games do that. Put three systems in a room without games, and they all suck equally to me, even if one has 100x the specs of the other.

Turning this bogus argument on its ear, can we not also say that the PS3 is an underclocked PC? Sure it's powerful, but the PC guys are laughing all the way to Slashdot when Sony tells us that we will no longer need PCs when the glorious PS3 comes out. Specs sell? Sex may, but that argument is a joke.

Nintendo will gain marketshare (the actual important part of sales, not the money gained/lost from selling their unit) this round.

They will still SERIOUSLY suffer from lack of 3rd party support and again the Wii will be the Mario iteration #1928 and Zelda version #3282 machine with very little new in regards to innovative and interesting titles.

@pr0cs

Actually their lack of third party support problems appear to be dissapearing. They had 27 playable games at E3. Here is a list of confirmed games comming to the Wii:
http://gonintendo.com/?p=3099
Take a look at the number of third party developers on that PARTIAL list.

Finally Nintendo has also stated that they are working at ensuring strong third party support for the whole systems life (at and beyond launch). You might just say that is something they would say no matter what but the fact is Nintendo has never really actually tried to focus on getting third party support. Something which has obviously changed if you have been keeping track of what has been happening with the Wii.

As for your comment on Mario and Zelda itterations? Well are you telling me that Mario 1 is the same as Mario 64? Because that would be one of THE most foolish statements you could ever make.

@JB couger man, you get a star from me, it's in the mail. I agree 100 percent, couldn't have said it better myself.

I've played games as long as you have.
I've seen the generations come and go and every generation there are those people that will dismiss a game or a console because it's not seen as "cool." This is the most ridiculous notion I've every heard. For example, people would totally diss the Saturn for the PS1 but when the arcade perfect Capcom Fighters came on the scene, where were the naysayers then? Oh, now they're not interested in Capcom fighting games because it's not on PS1? When the Capcom fighters finally started to arrive on the PS1 they were a joke because the PS1 isn't a 2D friendly machine. Where are your specs now?

If someone doesn't like the idea behind the Wii that's fine but to even suggest that Nintendo's first party develop is suspect is absurd. Nintendo still has the best first party develop of the major console developers. Ps2's library is what it is because of third party support. Period. Comparing Sony's 1st party dev. to Nintendo's is no contest. Sony WISHES they had Nintendo EAD teams.

@Waccoon, one thing you said is true. We don't play colecovision anymore, but the question about HD support is timing. When you have to spend at least $1000 on the TV, another $500 on a good reciever, $600 on the PS3 and 60 to 70 bucks on games, change has come too early. That's almost a $2000 investment in order to even begin to get the most out of the "holy grail" of HD support. Screw that. I don't want to see gaming become some elitist niche where only people with deep pockets can play. I definately don't want to see an industry where people dismiss new ideas because it's not the flavor of the month. DS is an example of this and needs no explanation because of Nintendo's overall strategy, which is well known.

Then we talk about specs...Xbox had better specs than PS2....GC has better specs than PS2.....64 has better specs than PS1...Neo Geo has better specs than Genesis and SNES...PSP has better specs than DS....PC has better specs than any console on the market... In each case, the consoles or hardware with the lesser specs won at the register and at the bank.

Oh now that I think about it...on XBLA and VC aren't people ready to download old arcade games and 8 bit and 16 bit era games, where's the HD support for them? I don't see people crying about how the classics stink because they don't support HD.

I'm buying a wii for various reasons (i.e. I want to play Nes, Snes, N64, GC and wii games (some of them looks cool). But some of you sound so stupid when you say things like "not EVERYONE can afford a HDTV." or "I'm glad the wii does not come with HDTV Support since no everyone have one and I will no be buying one."

The point Waccoon made is very valid, "[nobody] owns HDTV, but everyone is supposed to have wireless routers?" or have and pay $39/$49 for broadband internet connection? ($468/588 a year)

How is having a HDTV a bad thing? Well, I also own a 360 and I tell you, I'm not on denial that I will be have fun with the new way I will play with the wiimote but oh boy I can't wait to play games like Halo 3, Forza, FFXIII, MG4 and all those games that will push graphics, sound and yes (game play) to the point that you think you are in it. I am 100% sure the wii will be fun but lets not lie to ourselves that we wouldn’t be happier if the wii would have the power of the PS3 or the 360 + the innovation of the wiimote. I wouldn’t drop my 360 or PS3 for the wii or the wii for the 360 or PS3 since they all offer something the others don't! I know due to price we are force to pick one, two, all (me :)), but at the end they are all good consoles and have something unique to offer.
Also, remember you will be with the wii for 5+ years. Are you saying that there is no possibility that you would buy an HDTV? HDTV are rapidly the standard and you will not find a tv without HDTV sooner than what you think (will not take 5 years). Now you can find tv for less than $800.00; only 2-3 years ago you had to pay at least $5,000 for one. I can’t wait for the wii, but the truth is the truth the wii It’s simply not visually ready for the inevitable future. Do I care? No, that’s where the Xbox 360 or the PS3 comes in.

striderhayasa, most of the games in Xbox live Arcade are HD (Uno, Geometry wars, etc). Maybe one or two are not (I can't think of any right now though; anybody help).

"They had 27 playable games at E3. Here is a list of confirmed games comming to the Wii:
http://gonintendo.com/?p=3099
Take a look at the number of third party developers on that PARTIAL list."

that list is bad, really bad. well I guess if you're not Japanese it's bad.
Really, if Nintendo ever wants to dig its way out of 3rd place they are going to have to get a lot more friendly with 3rd party developers. And not ones that say "We are very interested in the Wii!" and then go on "we're taking a wait and see attitude until 2008".

"the wii has the steapest up-hill battle.."

O RLY? so PS3 doesnt have to justify its 600 price tag to consumers? Ps3 doesnt have to justify its slight power over 360, while being way more difficult to devlop for to the developers?

I dont care what brand recognition Playstation has, people will notice the shitty after taste and stop eating it up.

I am always amazed when people say they have a 50" HDTV, xbox 360, powerful PC, will be getting a PS3, had all systems last gen, 50 games, etc., but they won't be getting a Wii because it is underpowered. ROFL. For one, it is only $250, so you can get it for next to nothing and have some fun with it. Hell, you can get it just to say you have it.

Also, you can't argue against Wii and for 360 and PS3 on a graphics scale that much. 360 and PS3 are just underclocked PC's that will soon be out of date in that respect. Yes, they are much cheaper than a stellar PC, but they are still in a sense the "lower tech", cheaper versions of PC's. If you put innovation aside, the Wii is to the PS3 what the PS3 is to the PC. Try to wrap your head around that.

@bladestar,

I feel you and no, I'm not saying I'm not going to by a HDTV in the future, what I'm saying is I want my gaming to be affordable. (keep in mine that I'm not the best person to ask. I haven't owned a television in 3 years. All my gaming and DVD viewing are through one of my computer monitors) Do I think HDTV is bad? No. Do I think bluray is bad? Hell Yeah! HDTV is like DVD back when it was introduced. It's the logical evolution in technology. NTSC (Never The Same Color - Twice) NEEDS an upgrade. But Standard DVD technology is still good and it's affordable. The biggest benefit of Bluray and HD-DVD is storage but there are other options for increased storage with more coming every day. Personally, I just don't want to re-purchase my DVD collection over again. Why should I support Bluray? Because Sony says so? Give me a break.
Like I mentioned in my earlier post, HD is not going to make a terrible game good, but a great game is still a great game in standard or HD.

"Have we forgotten already that the PS2 is the least powerful of the current gen consoles. This being the case, how did sony sell so many units (defective consoles put aside) Games....it was the games."

And all of a sudden people think the PS3 will fail because it is really powerful and really expensive... therefore the games will not be as fun. Something is amiss in that logic.

Yes, the wii is cheaper this generation.. but so was the gamecube in the last generation. The gamecube sold less than its competition. I think that throws a monkeywrench in the cheaper=better arguement.

"We don't play colecovision anymore, but the question about HD support is timing. When you have to spend at least $1000 on the TV, another $500 on a good reciever, $600 on the PS3 and 60 to 70 bucks on games, change has come too early."

I think your missing the point. This time around sony made a really powerful system because they aim for the PS3 to last at least 8 years in the mainstream. The "option" is all about timing. So you cant afford hd now, thats ok, because two years from now we will see a dramatic decrease in price ( because of technology and standards push) and in 4 years it wont even be an issue.

I love nintendo but ever since the snes nintendo's game lineup and selection has benn getting steadly worse. The N64 started great but i can count on my hands the titles that I enjoyed, the power wasn't as strong as the snes lineup of completely fun and amazing games. The Gamecube, imo, had some great games but its entire library was mostly filled with mindless rehashed crap. If the Wii gets games that can bring back the feeling of the good ole' snes days then I will be one happy geek but I have a sneaky suspician that it may only provide momentary bursts of glee then continue to be ignored... much like my gamecube.

And Exo, You might be speaking a little bit to soon.

V1L3: "The DS was a huge step-up from the Gameboy Advance in terms of power (about a generation's worth -SNES to N64). The Wii is not." Maybe you're missing the fact that the Wii is supposed to be 2.5 times more powerful then the Gamecube, that is a step up. How old are you? Do you know your math yet grasshopper?

Colonel: "Thats why even a year after the xbox came out...people still bought the PS2 in droves" Mostly due to the fact that everyone's current PS2s, like mine, we're burnt out and it was time to get a new one.
Colonel: "Wii will hardly be a step up in anything except it's control function," So you're obviously a graphics whore, people like you are the reason most video games suck nowadays.

Pretty Obvious: "It has to do with Nintendo itself. How Nintendo has failed over the its last two consoles to have consistent good game releases a year." I don't konw where you live, but Nintendo has kept itself alive with first party games, their weakness is their lack of third-party developers, has been since N64.
Pretty obvious: "The same thing happened with the N64, luckily the game that tided me over was Goldeneye." Another "pretty obvious" reason you don't know what you're talking about. Anybody who really plays games knows about a little game called Perfect Dark, which is essentially the same game as Goldeneye, except a new story and characters and more guns/levels/options and probably the first multiplayer fps game to use bots, meaning you could play multiplayer with more than just 3 other friends, very innovative at that time.

embassy: "and i have no idea where u get the absurd assumption that the wii has more 3rd party support.."
It doesn't yet, but once developers can't profit off the PS3 because the kit is too complex, their aren't enough PS3 owners to buy their games, and the cost for such a big team to make a PS3 game overshadows the money they'll make from selling the game they'll "jump ship" and start making games for the Wii. But don't worry all you Sony fans, all the major companies with Sony will stay with Sony because they are big enough to be able to make that happen, also because they're puppets with Sony's giant hand up their ass.

And I'm not even gonna start with Waccoon, just saying shit when he doesn't know and hasn't done his research. Ignorant, really

Bladestar: "The point Waccoon made is very valid, "[nobody] owns HDTV, but everyone is supposed to have wireless routers?" or have and pay $39/$49 for broadband internet connection? ($468/588 a year)" You only have to if you want to play online. And if you're playing online with another console already, guess what? You are already paying 39/49 a month for that broadband. A wireless Router is not expensive and would help if you're gonna get more consoles, unless you want 3 or more ethernet wires running into your computer...

Pr0cs: "Really, if Nintendo ever wants to dig its way out of 3rd place they are going to have to get a lot more friendly with 3rd party developers." You're exactly right, this is Nintendo's big test. They seem to be doing most everything else right, now they need other companies to jump on board with their system. It looks like it might happen, too.

Also, I'd hate to get a PS3 at launch only to find out 2 years later that it's lifespan is the same as the other "quality" Sony products, then have to pay another at least $400. Sony is gambling, but the right cards probably won't come up in this hand for them. I plan on getting all 3 systems eventually, but the only one I'll get at launch is the Wii. Also, I remember reading that it's supposed to be internet ready out of the box with it's WiFi connection.

"I think your missing the point. This time around sony made a really powerful system because they aim for the PS3 to last at least 8 years in the mainstream. The "option" is all about timing. So you cant afford hd now, thats ok, because two years from now we will see a dramatic decrease in price ( because of technology and standards push) and in 4 years it wont even be an issue."

Static makes a very important point here that most people are ignoring. When you're doing the price number crunching that so many people are repeating ad nauseum, you absolutely *have* to take into consideration the life-cycle of the console, and that's what makes me weary about the Wii - it isn't even pretending like they're going to try to make it last for a long time. Sony and Microsoft are concerned with how their hardwear will be faring in 2011....Nintendo is concerned with marketing their remote gimmick so as to make a big splash now.

How will it feel to be a Wii-only user who was once so proud of all that money they saved, when High Def TVs are vastly more commonplace (people are throwing around ridiclous figures on this blog; I am hardly an early adoptor of anything and I got a fabulous 35 inch HD tv for $600 months ago just to watch sports and TV on...be resonable, those of you wailing and gnashing your teeth about expenses. The difference between a Wii and a PS3 is like...cooking instead of going out to a restaurant 10 or so times. hardly tragic)...at the point where Nintendo has released a few iterations of their handful of franchises, and the technology barrier is precluding graphics, sound, and many other types of innovations in Wii games (it requires large hard drives and massive storage space on disks to do things like, say, GTA-style persistent worlds)...and Nintendo will be releasing a new console for yet another $250 while the PS3 and 360 are still in their prime. If you contemplate the number of quality games that you will get to play, for the lifespan of the console, and then consider cost along those lines...then Wii users are getting relatively shafted by this neat marketing trick. But hey, free country.

One last comment - in reading Octorok's glowing, relevatory message, I couldn't help but love the fact that these two sentences were unabashedly so close to one another:

"and the fact that the system’s architecture is already well hashed out (being that it is an extension of Gamecube)"

"I guess in this respect, Wii truly does represent a revolution!"

So...the Big Idea that you talked about is that the Wii isn't much of an advance? How exciting, the revolution of what has been hashed out. Have fun with that.