DFC states the obvious: Wii needs to be more than a fad

Ah, how I love ingnorant people like this. Ignorance is bliss...

the hype for wii is ridiculous. its gonna suck when people realize its nothing more than a toy that you get sick of quickly

It's a level-headed assesment of the situation. Why are you so bitter, Blake?

No Dip Sherlock. Anyone on the street could say this.

Just goes to show you how screwed up the gaming media is.

Next thing they're going to tell us is that being a successful videogame company has nothing to do with how profitable you are, it's how many consoles you sell at a huge loss that counts.

Oh wait...

Yeah, just like the mouse was a toy that was not suited for playing games... I'm not saying the Wii controller is guaranteed to be a step forward but it is possible that you'll feel pads are outdated after playing with it.

And as for the Revolution vs. Evolution thing, the revolution referred to a radically different, new and (according to nintendo) better control scheme. That has nothing at all to do with whether the industry is financially healthy or not.

That graph (in the link) basically summarises Nintendo's console predictament. Between NES and GC, they basically went from near complete dominance (90%+) to a bit player (~15%) while the market as a whole was expanding.

And so, all their talk about needing to expand the market to 'save' the industry is complete bull; the market has been expanding very nicely over the past few.. they have just not been able to capitalise on it.

I still think the lack of any real graphical (and raw horsepower) improvements over the previous generation (FF12 looks way better than Zelda Wii or even RedSteel) will come back to bite them once the hype and dust settle.

"[Thanks, Optimus Prime]"


GRRRRR, NINTENDO!

Gavin:

Any unintended "bitterness" can be attributed to the fact that I'm coming down with a cold today. That aside, I felt the DFC analysis was bashfully obvious, though maybe I misinterpreted the tone. I think the author should have tackled the subject with a more Socratic tone, i.e. "Is Nintendo emphasising controls too much?" Or better yet, examine the tough job ahead in executing said Nintendo goals.

Funny, this information is obvious, yet not following it will be the reason the Wii fails.

Oh man this thing is going to fall harder than Snakes On a Plane.

Interestly enough the only thing that stood out to me in that post was the "Thanks, Optimus Prime". That just didn't sit well with me for some reason...

how can a system fail if everyone and litterally their mother buys it all while nintendo makes a profit every step of the way.

please enlighten us people.

cause to me that doesnt mean failure.

and to the guy who said FF12 looks better than Zelda ....that is EXACTLY what game companies need to be doing. maxing out hardware. if the pos ps2 can deliver a game like that then i really dont see how the wii which is way more powerful falls so short in terms of horsepower. what we NEED (for all systems)is developers to put in the time to make good games instead of the the crap they deliver so consistently.

if nintendo delivers a user base on hype the games will surely come. its cheaper to develop on ..theres more "gimmicks" some might call those "features" to play with ...rumble motion sensing controller addons virtual console etc etc etc. then the developers will come.

how long you think developers will support a system that is having trouble launching their system with even 400k units? user base = more money to game companies. especially when it costs them so much money to make use of the horsepower that ps3 has. it all comes down to making money. you think developers give a rats ass about loyalty? its all about which system will line their pockets more.

the fanboism has grown to levels that is pretty retarded here when people stare at specs instead of the big picture. the PS2 wasnt successful because of awesome hardware specs ..it was the worst of the bunch. think about that a second.

also to come back to the original post. does anyone else find it refreshing that the controller has two peices with a cord between so you can hold it in different ways and move your arms around? i always found it restricting to be playing a game for hours and having my arms locked into that position with the standard controller.

"because the latter implies a totally broken system that current industry growth contradicts."

Except that most (and in fact all, if you count worldwide sales) of the industry growth is being created by the DS - which itself has the same sort of new idea in control scheme. Without the DS, industry sales are flat (US) or falling (worldwide).

So I think it could pretty rightly be argued that the current industry system *is* basically broken. And I applaud Nintendo for doing something different with the Wii. The *execution* of the Wii I think is a bit off, and I'm not personally lining up to buy one, but I do think they're the only company of the three manufacturers that really "gets it" - that gaming is supposed to be about fun and that a lot of us just aren't having any with the way the industry has gone lately. That *idea* I think has been categorically proven correct with the DS, which was pretty much a home run in both concept and execution (especially the Lite) and fits the portable game space perfectly while altering the way we play games in fun and fundamental ways. The Wii, to me, doesn't appear to be quite as good of a fit in the home console market, but I think they're at least on the right path.

Okay, on one hand, I agree that Nintendo has to do more than make a bunch of same-old games that use the Wiimote instead of a gamepad. But I think that's a GIVEN for the system. On the other hand, some of his comparisons are just plain silly. Like suggesting that a console would launch with the DDR pad as its primary interface as proof that a wacky controller does not make a console a success.

And while I have finally embraced "Wii" as a name (I held out for a long time), I disagree. The console market does need a revolution of sorts, because it's going down a path that screws gamers in favor of the desires of its industry leaders. The push by Sony to turn consoles into a home media center and the push by Microsoft to turn consoles into unupgradable PCs will ultimately hurt gamers by redirectly focus (and money) into a facet of the device that is not central to its function.

Don't get me wrong. I want my consoles to have HD support and immersive sound. I want them to go online and let me store files locally. And it'll be neat if I can browse the internet and such (though I can't imagine looking up much more than the weather via a console and television). But those are all bells and whistles compared to the games. Make my games more fun, and stop making me pay for a bunch of side crap I don't want.

The chart in that article tells a tale, but it also is rather misleading because the lines represent a percentage of total consoles sold rather than an absolute number. The SNES did better than that graph implies because the market expanded, not because the SNES flopped (though yes, it did undersell the NES in the end). Nintendo lost its market reliability with the N64 because it started to drift away from making a pure gaming system and, well, got cocky.

Nintendo started down the path that Sony and Microsoft are on, and the Big Red N got burned for it. I'm glad they did. They needed to learn a lesson: If it doesn't make the games more fun, don't do it. However, this cycle, Nintendo needs to be the teacher to its upstart rivals.

"Without the DS, industry sales are flat (US) or falling (worldwide)."

Thats not completely fair; the PS2/XBOX/GC console generation was nearing its end, sales peaked long ago and its the late adopters are buying (or people who need replace).

What important is overall trends (decade on decade); and so, within each year (or couple of years) there may be peaks and valleys which correspond to new console launches and mid-life, but, the over industry has expanded from NES-->2006.

"the push by Microsoft to turn consoles into unupgradable PCs"
Do you really think this? Because nothing about MS' gameplan or what they've actually done indicates this. You would think that an "unupgradable PC" would at least include a keyboard, mouse, and web browser no?
The only non-game oriented thing the xbox has thrown at us is media extension, and that's an add-on for PC users, not a replacement.

It's just not even feasible to seperate a dual analog controller with a bunch of buttons into 2 parts, Pierce. I know these fancy new ways of controlling a game on a screen are new and exiting.. even if you haven't tried for yourself (or if you have), but be realistic.

Instead of having to hold a single controller with 2 hands to play a FPS you're now just going to always have your hand pointed at the sensor bar, oh and don't forget to sit exactly in front of the thing either or you will be shooting like a Storm Trooper in Star Wars (all over the place).

I disagree about the concept of having the system's motion sensing be a supplimentary feature rather than a primary one. The system needs top focus on it's revolutionary controller as much as it can and be extremely creative with it. Because outside of the system's aesthetics, wi-fi, and controller, it doesn't have much going for it. You're looking at a system with last-gen graphics, no HD support, no DVD playback, poor online gaming structure (friend codes...), and a Virtual Console that recharges people for game sthey already own and could easily get for free on the internet, regardless of legality.

That's not to say I'm not buying a Wii. I camped out to preorder one, because I have faith Nintendo can pull it together here. I'm counting on this thing being a great alternative to my 360 when I don't feel like intense and serious gaming on my HDTV. However, unless Nintendo really pulls through here with the controller and making it easily possible for developers to code for it well, I'll wind up quite disappointed.

-D. Wells
Join me in boycotting EA's spyware and if you'd like, their games altogether: http://www.petitiononline.com/bf2142ad/petition.html

The biggest design issue with Wii is that with a controller you put in very litle input and get a lot back out. With the Wii, you put in a lot to get a lot. It is a very different design challange and I would expect a lot of traditional developers to have trouble with it. And users may well get tired of it too.

the DS's touchpad is not the reason the DS sells...as the article says it " suppliments" the traditional control scheme instead of overtaking it.which is the exact opposite of the wii.
which i think is the wii's problem.

i guess DFC stand for Dumb F-king C-ckheads. If they look at games like Red Steel, Exite Truck, Zelda, Rayman,virtual consoles. I'm buying a Wii.

I'm sooo smart. I'm an ANAL-ist and I ANAL-ize EVERYTHING! N-tendo bites. their new controller FORCES you to move. Hell, the Wii won't even play my DVDs. Not that my dvd player doesn't, but everything with a disc slot should, you know? IT is crippled people. It doesn't even have an ethernet jack. Who still uses 802.11G? Web browsers and MP3 functionality is old school. Flash plugins and RSS feeds are so 2002.

Crash bandicoot pwns Mario. Anyone play Bruce Lee on XBOX? sooooooooooooooo much better than any of that crappy nintendo rehash. everyone has an HDTV but nintendo doesn't care about everyone. only themselves.

I'm done complaining. I'm going to simulate life for a while and play "The Urbz". after that I'm going to bust a cap in a hooker and steal cars until I have six stars.

Wait, did Optimus Prime actually contribute meaningfully to Joystiq? Wow.

>Instead of having to hold a single controller with 2 hands to play a FPS you're now just going to always have your hand pointed at the sensor bar, oh and don't forget to sit exactly in front of the thing either or you will be shooting like a Storm Trooper in Star Wars (all over the place).<
That was disproven months ago. You don't need to sit 'exactly in front of" the sensor, and you don't need to point your Wiimote at it. It's only used for positioning. The position of the remote can be calculated when the end is pointed away, but it'll eventually drift. Which is why so few (revealed) games use the pointer and sideways versions of the remote. Basically, all you need is to have the sensor bar in the Wiimote's FoV.

"It's just not even feasible to seperate a dual analog controller with a bunch of buttons into 2 parts, Pierce. I know these fancy new ways of controlling a game on a screen are new and exiting.. even if you haven't tried for yourself (or if you have), but be realistic.

Instead of having to hold a single controller with 2 hands to play a FPS you're now just going to always have your hand pointed at the sensor bar, oh and don't forget to sit exactly in front of the thing either or you will be shooting like a Storm Trooper in Star Wars (all over the place)."

jabber track thats the stupidest thing ive read today. i didnt say you needed to make a duel shock into a two piece controller. i merely said i like having the two seperate controller idea. noone bats an eye at people playing FPS with a mouse and a keyboard so i dont see how this is any different. your hands dont need to be locked into the standard controller grip to play games .

and besides its not like your hands crossover on a dual shock controller. theres no need to have it locked into place. i suppose if you have no dexterity in your hands it would be tough. but then again people with little dexterity usually are pretty terrible at games that require fast reflexes in the first place.

the wii controller and for that matter a mouse and a keyboard proves you dont have to use standard controllers to play a video game. so why are we still using them? i cant think of a good reason cept that noone has ventured into new territory yet like the wii has done. some people see this as a gimmick but i like to think of it as a better way of gaming. some people prefer controllers over keyboard for FPS too. its all a matter of choice ...im just glad someone is finnally giving us a choice instead of beeing spoonfed the same crap again with better resolution.

@molatar

Yes, the Wii is a toy. So is the PSP, PS2, PS3, XBOX, The 360, Dreamcast, Saturn, Collecovision …etc. – LIVE WITH IT! That’s why they’re called “Video Games”, not “Video Job”… duh.

@s

Are you “High”? Because that little rant of yours was just... "WTF?" Seriously... say "NO" to Methamphetamines. Especially before posting a comment.

@ >,

Have you ever looked at a chart that compares total console units sales in comparison to population growth? There's a chart of such on the internet somewhere. It shows that the 100 million or so PS2s sold actually equates to a significantly smaller % of the population than the 60 million or so NESs sold. What that means is that the gaming market is shrinking, not expanding, if it can't even keep up with population increase. At the very least, the % population of gamers should stay the same, with more units sold to make up for the increases in population.

How do people define success? Raw sales? Profit margins? Customer satisfaction? Brand awareness? Nintendo made plenty of money on Gamecube, but they clearly said that if Wii doesn't out-sell Gamecube, they will consider it to be a failure.

What bugs me is that Wii really is about a controller. It isn't about the whole platform. Any system that relies so heavily on one factor gets lots of budget games that lack depth. Virtual Console consists of games we've already played before (literally). That should be a big clue.

I expect it to have mediocre sales, but due to its budget hardware, it will make Nintendo a ton of money. In that respect, Nintendo would still consider it to be a failure.

@justchris: You have to factor in the fact that Nintendo practically had a monopoly on the market, and the market was barren from the game crash. In the modern market, Sony has a lot more competition, so sales of "only" 100 million are not surprising.

Now, consider how many games have been sold in total on all platforms (billions), and add in the hand-held market that barely existed in the NES days, and you'll see that the market is huge.

Also, the NES had a lifespan far longer than the PS2 (so far). Most consoles these days are superseded after 6 years.

from #29
>QUOTE
What bugs me is that Wii really is about a controller. It isn't about the whole platform. Any system that relies so heavily on one factor gets lots of budget games that lack depth. Virtual Console consists of games we've already played before (literally). That should be a big clue.
>unQUOTE

That's how many new systems boil down. The PS3 pretty much boils down to HD and BR player.

VC oughtta do good. Ppl still buy stuff from iTunes, they'll appreciate the convenience of not having to hook up up to 6 consoles to the same TV and having to swap catridges/CDs