Note to Sony and Microsoft: Nintendo is your competition

@ #2
""i still believe the biggest draw for the wii outside of the revolutionary (read: novel) control- is the price.

If by some stroke of wild imagination, MS or Sony dropped their consoles to 300 (not the crippled ass core model 360) or to 250.... all that nintendo talk would *POOF*""

With how high end and thus costly PS3 and 360 are, it's highly unlikely they'll dip that low anytime soon. Not impossible. It could happen, but not likely anytime soon.

It's like saying if luxury cars like Mercedes and Lamborginis only costed $30K, Toyota, Ford, and the like would be doomed since everyone would want a luxury car now. If ppl could work retail/floor at Walmart and make $50K instead of just a paltry $20K, then the US' poverty and health insurance situation would be much better. Unfortunately, that's just not reality.

.

@ #3
""MS has little interest in non-hardcore gamers. Hardcore gamers buy 10 games a year, casual gamers, maybe 1 or 2. And games sales, not console sales, are how MS (and Sony) make their money.""

I'd like to think, with how some ppl i've met have volumes and stacks and bookshelves of games, that hardcore gamers could buy up to 25 games a year. Not just 10 which seems understating it to me.

Personally i think calling yourself a hardcore gamer and just owning a Wii, is a bit of stretch unless you play a lot of older GC games, because as of right now the ONLY next gen system that can hold its weight on its own games is the 360.

As an owner of all 3 current gen systems, to be honest, outside of Zelda, i play my Wii the least, to me its the party system, but most of my gaming comes from either my 360 or PS2 games on my PS3.

Now dont get me wrong the Wii is a neat system, but it (like the PS3) just doesn't have the software right now to back up its hype so i couldnt see owning ANY of the 2 new systems by themselves unless i had the backup of their last gen offerings and even then if i had to choose i'd go with the PS3 over the Wii simply because of the wealth of titles afforded to hte PS2 over the GC.

Now that is just my opinion, because i know hardcore gamers who dont own any of the current gen systems and just a PS2 or xbox, but then those systems have a lot more titles available for them than the current systems do (especially in the case of PS2) and lets be honest, a good GC game hasn't come down the pipes in a while.

But also dont forget manny, the PS2 has what counts the most over power and motion sensing controller hype....Games.

and it still has a lot of big games slated for release on the system. Which is why it continues to outsell the competition. Price is helpful too, but price doesnt mean much of anything if you dont have games people play.

"I think it applies to videogaming too. The more you project your "hardcoreness", chances are good that you're a big closeted Hello Kitty Island Adventurer yourself."

"40. #27: "No gamer would own just a wii."

This is because you don't define people who own a Wii as gamers."

Funny story.... See, Most games I've mentioned.. I've played. From Dead Rising, to Elebits and Wii Sports. On top of that, I think i stated in an earlier comment that I don't consider myself Hardcore. I'm in the middle ground between hardcore and casual. I like games cause they are fun, not because Nintendo did or didnt make them. It's funny, my boyfriend.. oh yeah, i'm gay too.. but anyway, we joke about how if we're enjoying an Xbox game or PS2 game, we can't be having Fun, cause only Nintendo games are allowed to be fun.

But then according to the later comment, i'm not a gamer at all, cause I own a Wii. Had one on Launch. Already own 4 wii games. nono.. 5... excludeing Wii Sports... that's more of a tech demo. But I've got Zelda, Monkey Ball, Rayman, Super Swing Golf, and Wario Ware.

But i've realized that I have to play catch up on Genesis games, because I was only faithful to the SNES when I was a kid. I missed out on Gunstar Heros, Phantasy Star, Toe Jam and Earl... cause somewhere I believed that One system was better then the other.

A hardcore dosen't own one console, they plan to own all three. If you are dedicated to owning a Wii and call yourself Hardcore, then only Hardcore you are is a Nintendo fan.

For me, Innovation is, and will always be in the Software. Any console is capeable of Innovative gameplay. DDR and Guitar Hero were on the Same old systems, weren't they. Katamari Damacey kame up with a new way to use Analogue sticks. Yhe Wii remote is cool, and offers new options, but only if the games use it as such. For now, besides the sports games, and a few gems (Wii sports, and Wario) The remote is simply a substitution for doing the same old controls. Monkey Ball's tilting the remote feels like a wannabe analogue stick. Zeldas slahsing feels like it's just another way to say "Press the a button"

With the Wii, i hope it can at least start looking closer to Xbox games, and not 2nd generation PS2 games. AND I hope Nintendo's new Development tools help fix the frustrations with the remote's inaccuracies. I'm sick of missing in Wii Sports Tennis, because it read my hand moving to swing wrong and registerd that as my swing... or Trying to throw a pot in zelda, and instead dropping the pot and taking out my sword.... or missing a beat in Rayman's rhythm game because, for some idioc reason, it reads the upswing as an action. Or.. They release a new Sensor bar, so I can sit as close to the TV as i need to, so I can actually see. I have very poor vision, and sitting 3+ feet away from a 27 inch HDTV, dosen't allow me to play any FPS.. or hell anything that emplys the use of the pointer... to a point of fun.

That being said, Wii is only hardware. It's simply a canvas. it's a medium for which content is on. It;s only as good as those who can use it well. People complained about Activision's lazy 360 ports, but Ubi's lazy Wii ports are 10 times worse. Too many companies are already learning they can take their gamecube game, and change "Press A" to "Flick wrist" and release a new $50 game.

As for graphics. The Wii is almost right. Graphics are good enough. But looking at the games, they either a) stepped in right below that point, or b) because of the low ceiling, it's still just as hard as it was before to push those visuals. Graphics, that I'd count as good enough is where RE4 detail is average, and Ninja Gaiden Black detail is high end. Sudeki is still one of the pretties looking RPGs out there. Incredible detail, and such. If the Wii proves capeable of that, then it's got NOTHING to worry about. But I doubt the Wii will reach that point.

I'll admit that the hardcore games aren't there for the Wii. We all knew this before it was released. But I have a feeling there will be lots of games the hardcore guys are going to want in the near future. My guess is there are so many Wii games in development currently, some of them are going to pique the curiosity of the hardcore crowd. Looking at games like The Godfather for both the PS3 and Wii, I see more buzz for the Wii version. Once online games hit for the Wii, it will be a whole different ballgame for all of the consoles.

Honestly, I'm curious to see how it will turn out. It can only mean good things for everyone.

"The fact that you can mention that many games for Wii a short two months after its initial release should tell you a little something about the software powerhouse the Wii will be. Could you have named more than 3 360 games 2 mo nths after its launch?"

Yes I can actually. Perfect Dark Zero, Call Of Duty 2, Project Gotham 3, Ridge Racer 6, Geometry Wars, Dead Or Alive 4 and Fight Night Round 3 (demo) oh, and Smash TV. with online multipllayer.

The Wii is a much of a software powerhouse as the Gamecube was. Nintendo has always excelled in the first party arena. How about 3rd parties.. Can you name 5 upcomming 3rd party games worth playing on the Wii? can you name 3? I don't hear about those.. it's all about Metroid, Mario and Smash bros... and the 3rd one, is on the Wii, only because that's the dominant system. It's using the 'cube grpahics, and a 'cube controller. Why is it on the Wii? No reason at all. So out of those 3 games, Mario looks like i may be the only major Nintendo Title that needs to be on Wii. Metroid.. "Same old scene that you seen for so long"

Unfortunately for the Wii it does not seem to have matched the grafx or sound of Xbox 1. I would think it would need to achieve this to be up to date. Initially I was hoping for grafx a little bit worse than 360 running in SD. I was dreaming. And dreaming is what Wii owners can look forward to a lot of. Can someone mention a use of the remote that is superior to gamepad? When playing Zelda i wanted to use a gamepad. I have big man-hands and found the nunchuck uncomfortable. I realise that this systemhas found new followers in the same way the DS did but what about the cost of alienating traditional fans? Maybe we'll return when the library fleshes out over time. I also don't buy the notion the system is cheap. For example i just bought 360 premium for AU$600 with PGR3.
A wii with component cables costs AU$440 without a game. Oh and another $50 for the wifi USB adapter if you want to get online. The Wii is the only videogame console I have ever bought and been unimpressed and disappointed. How did Nintendo manage that? Oh and in case you want to call me a fanboy of any description here is my gamers resume:
Atari XE (I won it in a competition,okay!)
Sega master system
Sega Megadrive
Atari Lynx
Super Nintendo
Goldstar 3DO (Lol!)
Sony Playstation
N64
Gamer PC
Dreamcast
Gameboy Advance
Xbox
Gamecube
Nintendo DS
Xbox 360
DS Lite
Wii
My strongest bias has always been anti-sony you will notice i missed all the great and cheap games on PS2. However if PS3 can offer things 360 doesn't I might go there because I'm not afraid to admit to being a grafx whore because this seems to be a cornerstone of the industry. Grafx are still important for example the DS lacks power but the grafx are great what other system nails 2D this well? I don't think Wii does trhe same thing yet. Just my 2cents if you're sister is happy then good.

@ Duscrom

If Nintendo wanted to copy XBL, they'd charge people for it, which is why you have to wonder why they haven't already.

XBL is not perfect, it's outstanding for customers but Nintendo knows that it is a costly service. If XBL was readily manageable I'd doubt MS would be promoting TV, Music, and video downloads as much as they are now.

and http://www.wiicade.com

Wii has inspired people to spend time making their own games. Some might not be very good, but it's practice. AND free. There's no pursuit of money in their ventures, either.

Nintendo is stealing nothing. Now don't make me regret saying that I'm considering a 360 on account of your "Nintendo is stealing!" hostility.

Each time a person says Zelda is a GameCube game with tacked on controls a little piece of me dies inside.

Please stop buying Final Fantasy games. Final Fantasy is just a NES game with tacked on graphics. Guitar Hero is just DDR with a tacked on guitar. Halo is just Quake with nothing new tacked on. Actually, all FPS games are just graphical updates of Wolfenstein 3-D. Seriously, when was the last time anybody here played a game with a single original idea? IDEA, not graphics.

Twilight Princess is a Wii game. I know this because I play it on my Wii, the box says "Wii" in the corner, and the little animation on the Disc Channel shows it loading a Wii disc, not a GameCube disc. If anything, the GameCube TP is just a Wii port with the controls taken out. Please shut up.

And to the guy who said that the only killer app coming out for the Wii is Super Paper Mario, have you been living in a cave? Smash Bros. Melee was the GameCube's best selling game. Brawl is coming out with online play and non-Nintendo characters. I think it might classify as a "killer app."

"And to the guy who said that the only killer app coming out for the Wii is Super Paper Mario, have you been living in a cave? Smash Bros. Melee was the GameCube's best selling game. Brawl is coming out with online play and non-Nintendo characters."

but are those games coming out SOON? no, they're coming out in the fall if you're lucky. Super Paper Mario is coming out in April, and it's gonna have to contend with 6-8 Killer apps between Microsoft and sony coming out SOON, which puts them in a bad spot.

oh and FYI: GTA4, MGS4, and DMC4 are all coming out in fall, so those killer apps you mentioned are in jeopardy also.

Keeping in line with Takahashi's argument, in the previous generation I didn't own an Xbox and I don't yet plan on buying an XBOX360 or PS3. I do believe I missed out on games like KOTOR, Ninja Gaiden, Fable, and Jade Empire. I also believe that GOW is a great game and I am possibley missing out on that too. But I strongly feel as long as I can play games that are the same quality and might have slightly graphical edge over games like Metroid Prime 2, Zelda TP, RE4, The first POP, Beyond Good and Evil and SSMB (to mention a few) then my technology is good enough.

JJ hit the nail on the head. Games will always be what determines the overall success of a console. Right now, the PS3 and Wii don't have enough games available that interest me. In 6-12 months, they might, at which point I might check them out. So far, for my gaming dollar, they're not even on the radar.

Taking the consoles on their own merits, I already have a 360, plan to buy a PS3, but am still uninterested in the Wii. While Nintendo is pushing gameplay over graphics, I don't see things as that black and white. Gameplay is obviously important, but why at the expense of graphics? The two work in tandem, with graphics enhancing the gameplay and vice-versa. My other issue is that i'm not sure that the Wiimote would adapt well to certain types of games. Without games that I want to play, why would I shell out cash to find out if it works well with games that I don't want to play?

Until the dust settles and more games come out that help give each system a certain distinct "flavor," everyone is in competition.

Everyone says lack of HD will hurt Nintendo. I say support of HD will hurt Sony and Microsoft.

1. The 360 and PS3 are significantly more expensive to manufacture. If they pass that expense onto the consumer, it will hurt sales. If they swallow the cost, it'll hurt their profits. It's a no-win situation.

2. Games for the 360 and PS3 are significantly more expensive to develop, and have to sell more copies in order to recover their costs (THQ says that developing a game for the Wii is less than HALF the cost of the PS3 or 360, and Namco says a PS3 game needs to sell at least 500,000 copies in order to break even). That makes developing a game for the PS3 or 360 financially riskier than developing a game for the Wii, and publishers are risk-adverse, which means we'll see fewer exclusive games, fewer new IPs, and smaller developers forced out of the industry.

As DojoRacoon said, this is NOT SUSTAINABLE!

Staying Standard-definition was the best move Nintendo could have made! If the Wii was HD, the high game development costs combined with the new control scheme would have been too risky for publishers. Instead, by staying standard-definition, the Wii is actually attracting publishers!

Guys?

Hardcore gamers don't matter.

Looking over how you all are defining "hardcore", the overarching definition seems to be buying as many games as possible as early as possible. Your money is already counted on by the various companies, and, quite honestly, shouldn't have any real impact on long-term mass market planning.

There are over 150 million total home consoles out there from last gen. Of the people who own those, most don't have HDTV. Most only own one system. Most are driven by value (real or perceived) rather than arguments over how many secret rooms they found in the hidden dungeon in Strangely Named RPG. They don't know 1080i vs. 1080p, and they don't want to pay $600 for a videogame system, no matter what it does.

For everyone who says that the Wii will always be a second system - you're completely wrong. By the time the 360 or the PS3 hit a mass market "time to get me an HD box" price point, the Wii will have occupied that space for years, and based on its game selection, will have either thrived and become many people's primary system, or failed and fallen by the wayside.

This is why hardcore gamers simply don't matter in the long term - they don't expand past a narrow view of what the medium is capable of, and their view of how a "normal" (read: valid) gamer games has little to do with how the vast majority of consumers will actually experience gaming.

"44. I think the sales of PS2 this holiday season show that graphics may have very well gotten "good enough""

Exactly! The Wii is the perfect system for _most_ of today's households that have SDTVs. Only a small percentage of housholds have HDTVs and a gaming system like the PS3 is not a good enough reason for _most_ households to go out and spend $2000+ on a HDTV plus another $600 for the PS3.

Maybe Sony needs to have a "buy a Sony HDTV and get a free PS3 sale"!! Heck, it may entice those (like me) that don't yet have an HDTV to get one and then get a cool PS3 with BR in the process.

For every "hard-core gamer" that reads this site, there are 10+ "non-gamer" households that make up the big buying numbers for game system purchases. The PS2 didn't reach its huge sales numbers selling to "gamers", it got there selling to households with kids for use in basements and kids bedrooms, all places the PS3 won't be for many years. I know two families that recently purchased a PS2 for the sole purpose of playing Guitar Hero, since the PS2 is now at a price point where one can afford to buy it for one uber popular game and then have the huge PS2 library to chose from, especailly when it is connected to the "old SDTV in the basement".

In a few years (2010+?) when the HDTV "cross-over" is likely to occur (i.e. more than 50% of households have HDTVs), I think you will more adoption of HD gaming systems like the PS3. Until then, the PS3, 360, and Wii all look the same on an SDTV, so it comes down to price and "SD level" gameplay, something the Wii is winning at right now.

I am a hardcore gamer. I own all 3 consoles. I got the PS3 on 12/1, having had the Wii since before Xmas and the 360 since midnight day 1.

Hardcore gamers matter because they buy games. It's that simple. You grandma can buy a Wii, and N is happy, they made money on the console itself. But EA is not happy because she'll never buy Call of Duty 3.

And as a hardcore gamer, I can tell yoy why Wii will always be a 2nd console. Because when I go to buy a game, I never consider buying it on Wii if it exists on 360 and PS3. Why? Because Wii isn't HD, and the controller is limiting for many games.

I bought THPS8 on 360 after considering how much I like the DualShock/SIXAXIS for control in THPS games. I rejected PS3 mostly because it didn't have online multiplayer (even though I rarely play online, I wanted to have that ability). But owning an HDTV, if a game is available on an HD console and a non-HD console, I'm gonna buy it on the HD console in almost every case.

As mentioned above, hardcore gamers will strive to own multiple systems, and any hardcore gamer is going to use graphics as a tiebreaker when buying multiplatform games, especially if they have an HDTV. So Nintendo will be at a disadvantage trying to sell games to hardcore gamers, specifically because they own other systems, systems where the game looks better and maybe plays better. The only time Wii will be chosen is when the controller outweighs the other things, and that's going to be relatively infrequently.

Thus, IMHO, Wii will remain a "2nd console" for hardcore gamers.

*complementary

For people who think that the Wii's "gimmick" will get old; well I thought the same thing about the DS 4 months after launch. Software consisted of half-ass mini games for the most part. 8 months later, develpers showed what they'd been working on for a year and the system was drowning in good content - this year was even better.

I think the Wii will follow the same pattern. Huge room for creativity, low development costs, and an istall base that will not slow down? I think it will have the same impact on gaming that the original Super Mario Bros did. Wait until the Wii/DS wi-fi connectivity kicks in too.

I've been sitting on 7-8 PS3's for three weeks now, got 21 Wiis in for Sunday and they didn't last 15 min. Nintendo isn't perfect by a long shot, but when it comes to getting new people into gaming they know what they're doing.

This is right on. Yes the industry does not understand the term 'good enough.'

@66

the DS is a hanheld, that's an entirely different demographic.

@Dean...

shhhhh... don't let them know!

I really don't understand why people are so stoked about the wii? It's got a nifty controller that is sure fun for party games. However, they went so far with making the system cheap and so many sacrifices were made to retain their outrageous profit margin. I mean the systems are 250 dollars and they make 50 dollars in profit per system at least. The system doesn't even have any sort of real online?

I mean COME ON! At least the playstation 3 has a some sort of online service. Difference being that they are taking huge losses while nintendo is making killer profits.

I swear that they could of simply added the wiimote/nunchuk(which is awesome no doubt) to the gamecube and most casual players would not of noticed graphically. The power difference between both systems basically means that the wii can just handle slightly better texturing, widescreen, and more data due to using actual dvds(why did nintendo use the smaller dvds to begin with?).

Just so you know I am not a ps3 fanboy because I own the xbox 360(have no intention of getting a ps3 unless a significant price drop happens and if blue-ray wins the format war) and my sister owns the wii. I just find the technical sacrifices nintendo made to maximize their own profits on the wii are simply too much.

Graphics matter and hd tvs are dropping in price MASSIVELY. I bought my 32' hd tv for 999.99 6-7 months ago. Now they are selling my same hd tv with better response times for 599.99. By next christmas that same 32' hd tv will be out for 399.99. By then everyone will have large hd lcd's in their house and the "not everyone can afford an hd tv" point will be moot.

"If by some stroke of wild imagination, MS or Sony dropped their consoles to 300 (not the crippled ass core model 360) or to 250.... all that nintendo talk would *POOF*"


Yes. Good thinking, Marlos Hill. If Microsoft and Sony decided to sell their consoles at several hundred dollars under cost, they'd move a lot of them... Good plan.

Sony and Microsoft are already taking a huge loss on each console.

If anybody can afford to lower their price, it's Nintendo.

The DS IS a handheld, and many people seemed to bash it to bits by comparing it to the PSP, yet it still managed to outsell the PSP and is still going to for who knows how long. It might not be the most powerful or media fusion that is the PSP, but what it does, it does right. It might be "gimmicky" because of its two screens, stylus and microphone integration into the gameplay, but for some reason it's selling.

True, the DS is a handheld and the Wii is a console, but Nintendo is (from my assumption) taking what it learned from the DS and implementing that into the Wii. It is most definitely underpowered if compared head to head with the latest offerings from MS and Sony, but like what has been reiterated a million and one times before on comment boards like this, each company is going about selling their consoles in their own ways. All in all, to me at least, I'm more than satisfied with my Nintendo Wii, and although the Wii remote might not be perfect, it works well for what it does at this point. Developers just need to continue to tap the potential of the Wii and its offbeat gaming.

Okay, has anyone ever heard someone comment that Euchre needs to innovate to keep their interest? How about bridge, poker, chess, checkers, monopoly, risk, any form of competitive sport from tennis to football to boxing or any other timeless game or sport?

So... why does an FPS (for example) suddenly need a massive revamp of it's controls to make it good?

I just bought Sid Meyer's Civilization IV and other than graphical improvements, it really only has tweaks in gameplay vs previous versions and yet I have pulled two all-nighters playing it in the last three weeks. The controls and gameplay are virtually identical and that's why I bought it. To be truthful, if they had changed it too much, I would have been -VERY- upset.

Despite this many Wii fans insist that video game controls are broken and need innovation. I even read through a discussion not too long ago where a Wii fan was trying to argue that the Wiimote would be the best controller for racing games. There was some decent points and counterpoints on both sides until he tried to stand his ground when someone suggested that a force-feedback wheel was actually the best controller out there and he disagreed.

Truth is, game control has evolved with gameplay. In situations where better control was possible, like racing or flying games, suitable dedicated controllers have been available. There will be some games where motion control will be unparalleled but this will probably be games designed for motion control from the ground up. Games where the action of the motion control IS the fun and not necessarily the game itself. Honestly, would anybody play Wii Sports if they were using a standard contoller? The gameplay itself is a massive step backwards (pong but pretty) and yet people describe the gameplay with words like innovation and groundbreaking. Really they are talking about the controller, not the gameplay.

I have read (even in this discussion) the '360/ps3 have graphics but can't do motion control and will adopt motion control as soon as they see wii take off'. It is true that Sony and MS can adopt motion sensing at any point, the technology has been around for a while and event tried on the pc. Truth is, motion sensing isn't exclusive to the Wii as it is. The 360 has a competent motion sensing package through the vision camera which has not been taken advantage of yet. The PS3 has the sixaxis and likely a camera based solution through the inevitable eyetoy 2. The Wii, however, will never be able to replicate the 360/PS3 graphics.

Food for thought.

I realize that Joystiq is very Nintendo centric and as such many will take my comments and opinions as direct and personal attacks. This is not the case. I believe I make good, valid points and always try to be open to counterpoints. Lets keep the discussion civil.

@RubangB: "If anything, the GameCube TP is just a Wii port with the controls taken out. Please shut up."

No, the GC one came first and was worked on long before the Wii version, and they made changes (other than the controls) to adjust for it. So yes, it is a port of a GC game.

@ DocEvil

Nintendo is not all about "FPS controls are broken", but at this point people can argue that PC controls are better than Console controls. They also don't want to make the FPS-killer. They are trying to make a controller that is more intuitive as well as add even more interactivity into the games. If Wii so happens to succeed in the claim that it improves FPS intuitiveness, then okay, but that wasn't the point behind Wii at all.

As a console company, Nintendo wants to help its own interests by better distinguishing console games from PC games and/or console ports of PC games, which are gaining more popularity on 360 and PS3. Sony is even marketing the PS3 as a computer.

Nintendo is truly aware of "If it's not broken, don't fix it.". An example being that Super Smash Bros. only uses traditional GC or Classic Controller controls. Nintendo would only impliment it if was going to add to the experience.

It doesn't replace a steering wheel or a lightgun, but as a STANDARD CONTROLLER it gives a pretty decent try without requiring peripherals, which leads to my next point.

You say PS3 and 360 can replicate the controls, but to me that would only be concession that Nintendo did something right rather than make a better argument for graphics and processing power. Plus if Sony and MS decided to do it mid-generation, they would be less successful because peripherals that are not included with the Console rarely have a big reach (one exception is the Xbox Live headset/subscribtion combo). Eyetoy can't contend with Wii. Eyetoy ate a lot of PS2's processing power and basically required an ultra-lit room. Wii overcame those hurdles as well.

You REALLY need to go back to WiiSports if you think it's "Pong but pretty". Even if your comparison were correct, Pong had a reach/impact on past gaming consumers that is taken for granted these days.

The controller matters just as much as the game itself. Many fighting game fans would swear to a traditional joystick, whereas you might swear to a keyboard/mouse setup. The Wiimote interferes with none-of-that, because you'll always have that option, and if not on Wii or with a peripheral, then with other consoles. A step backward, though? Unlikely.

@72 DocEvil

Remember the Expansion Pack for the N64? I wouldn't be surprised if a "POWAH" USB add-on would be made for the Wii, considering Nintendo loves milking their consumers for all they have.

You guys are over complicating the definition of a hardcore gamer. A hardcore gamer is a person who really likes video games. That's it. I am a hardcore gamer. I adore video games. When I'm not playing them, I'm reading about them and discussing them with other gamers online.

As a hardcore gamer, I own all three consoles from the previous generation. However, out of the current generation consoles, I currently only own a Wii. I would love to own a PS3 and a Xbox 360. However, I can't afford the damn things. The Wii is currently the only console that I could afford, so there are other factors to the number of consoles you own other than desire.

@ 75
The N64 Expansion Pak came FREE with Donkey Kong 64, one of the TWO games that needed it. As did the FX-Chip with the SNES games that needed it, Odama and the past 2 Mario Partys came with a Microphone, the Rumble Pak for N64... the list goes on. Chances are if a Nintendo game comes out that absolutely NEEDS something for functionality it will come out.

What are you complaining about? Nintendo stiffing their customers? With a $250 console and $50 games?

I'm at a loss for words.

Microsoft has enough problems if they want to chase after the wrong competitor again, let them, dont give them any more help

@ #64 Steve2

I respect your views on why you favor 360 over PS3 and esp. the Wii, but keep in mind...

1) sheer cost of all 3 consoles
with past gen systems, many people owned both a Gen + NES/SNES, PS + n64, and PS2 + GC + XB. This gen around, it's currently gonna set you back $1,250 as opposed to $800 during last gen's early cycle period. I'm sure prices will go down enough for all 3 to be affordable (or at the very least, more affordable), but that could take 4 to 7 years, which is practically the end of any console's lifecycle. In the meantime, ppl will have at most 1 to 2 consoles, with Wii most likely being one of them due to its low price

2) HD demographics
according to Wikipedia, US population is approximately 301mil. HD customers only range about 33mil users. That's about 9% to 15% of the marketshare with HD (give or take perhaps some margins of error). I hear outside US, HD adaptation is around that if not less. Those percentages sound familar? It should. That's the marketshare of OSX and other Mac OSes. It should be noted that not all Mac users play computer games, jsut as not all HD viewers will play vid games. So to be embracing HD technology now and providing support for is just as 'ideal' as making many computer games that only support Mac.

3) cost of games
I don't doubt that PS3 and 360 will be greater than they are now in graphics power and other 'powerhouse' attributes, but if the predictions of $60 to $80+ games for them are true, you'll be paying an extra $10 to $30 just for the HD content per game. (Extra material/bonus may be there too). If it's worth it to you, more pixels to you, but it ain't worth it to me.

4) "hardcore gamer"
back around 2004-2005, a hardcore PC gamer would have all the trimmings on their PC including......
-Large, widescreen LCD monitor
-dual core processors
-high performance DDR3
-ATI Crossfire or Nvidia SLI dual video cards

Except that according to Computer Gaming World, a hardcore PC gamer with this level of hardware would account for no more than 5 to 10% of PC owners out there. Hence, the vast majority of high tech PC games were still made to run on less than stellar configs, even games like Doom3. It was the casual and moderate level gamers that supported the PC gaming industry, b/c even tho hardcore gamers gladly pay premiums for their hobbies, it's the sheer number of buyers in the casual/moderate gamer's market that bring in the big bucks.

.

@ #66

""the DS is a hanheld, that's an entirely different demographic.""

Yes and no. Yes b/c in many ways, some gamers regard handhelds and consoles as different as night and day. No b/c 1) as the other guy posted, Nin seems to be taking its success with the DS to heart with the Wii, and so far in it's 2 month progress of a long distance 5 to 7 year track race, it appears to be doing quite well. 2) DS outsold all the nex-gen consoles put together. Some ppl may very well just be considering a console OR a handheld. Others want a supplemental handheld to their console which would mean less $$ for console systems that may have gone towards 360 or PS3. In those cases, the DS' marketshare is nothing to sneer at

I have 360 plus the Wii. Price wise, I find the Wii a bit steep for a system that's so last gen in quality. Nintendo popular platform games and the inovative controller are the main sell. If it wasn't for this, you would be laughing your ass off. This system without the controller has no future. It's main competition is the best seller PS2. There's only a couple of years left in this class of consoles and the Wii is going to die with them, because its not next-gen.

You know, I used to work as a rep for Sega back in the latter two years of the dreamcast. There's a reason I did it. Sega was screwed, and we all knew it. And the only strategy we saw was to take tremendous chances. I personally believe that a lot of those chances worked out, and that a lot of truly great games got made.

Nintendo is in a different, yet similar position. They can't keep up with the pockets of Sony and MS. And instead, they've chosen to innovate. The Wii can certainly be a gimmick, but it doesn't look to me like it's going to be. I've never felt how I feel for it about any other console.

Yes, innovation can sometimes lead to half-assed products. Yes, some people really love graphics.

But for a brief moment, somewhere around 2001, there was a chance that videogames could become more than insipid entertainment and redux copies of everything that came before. That instead of bigger explosions and great poly-counts, that art could lead the way.

I see that returning with the Wii. This machine has the potential--hell, it's more than potential at this point--to be a lot of pick-up-and-play fun. But more than that, the machine and the philosophy that created it have the potential to do something more than making yet another FPS or RPG or Sandbox game only prettier.

I grew bored of playing the same game with different sprites or models or guns or soundtracks years ago. And while it's true that there have been a bunch of titles that have been consumer friendly and technologically astute while still managing to be truly creative in the last few years (Okami and Shadow of The Colossus come to mind) it's only through fear and innovative strategy that something truly new will be forced to come about.

If anything is that, it's the Wii.

@81, Define "next-gen." What is next? The future? All 3 currently competing consoles are out. This is the 7th generation. They are all the same "gen." They are all 7th-gen. Anybody who says otherwise is either stupid, lying, or both. All 3 systems are out, and all 3 are getting trounced by the DS worldwide. Is the DS next-gen?

@72, I know. I was just pointing out how stupid the "tacked on controls" argument is. From now on I'm calling Gears of War "Wolfenstein with tacked on graphics." Because what do the graphics do really? They seem kinda thrown on at the last minute to make you spend more money on the same old game. Good guy shoot bad guy.

@everybody else, when was the last time you played a game with a single original idea? A single one, big or small.

Thank you formersegaguy. That's exactly how I feel. I love video games, but I must... keep... the dream alive! I hope some day games are valued by the art and not the resolution. I'm at a point where I'm so jaded with the same-old-game with new graphics that I'm latching on to anything new or anything old that I missed. Somehow with the remote and the VC the Wii lets me do both. I never had a TurboGrafx16 or a GameCube, but now I'm downloading the TG16 games and buying cheapass used GC games up the wazoo.

@ NintendoFanbot

I do believe that when a game company says that they needed to innovate with regards to the control scheme they are essentially commenting that the original scheme is somehow broken or not as capable which is not the case at all.

To me the real innovation here is Nintendo's ability to sell a concept to the consumer. Start where we are now and reverse engineer it to the conceptual stage. Nintendo has taken their market strengths, run them through the dreaded iPod-ulator and applied them to break out of the video game hardware business model. It's no secret that Nintendo fans are among the most loyal in the industry and, to me, Nintendo has used this to move into a for-profit 'less for more' business model for hardware.

Just because the control scheme is different does not mean it is advantageous yet this is exactly the concept that Nintendo has managed to sell its loyal consumers and in a big way. They are managing to sell a piece of hardware that is quite comparable technically to it's previous offering based on a new controller and they are doing it at a significant profit to boot. I would have, in fact, expected the cost of games to decrease under this model since they wouldn't need to recoup monies lost on hardware and companies would not have to go through development teething pains for more complex hardware but this isn't the case. It's now a business model built on the profit of hardware, peripherals and games. It's a rather brilliant and crafty piece of marketing that is sure to put a wad in Nintendo's pocket that I have to admire from the outside but wholeheartedly do not buy into.

I do have to conceed that Wii tennis is more complex than 'pong but pretty' but when compared to the likes of top spin, virtua tennis or even rockstar's table tennis gameplay mechanics, it is not much more than just that. The Nintendo argument, I believe, is that swinging a 4" rectangular piece of plastic standing 6 feet from the tv in your living room is somehow more 'immersive'. I disagree. I would also argue that if that is exactly what you are going for then for $50 you could buy a real raquet and actually take up the sport. Let's be truthful here, it's a video game, your videogame swing is clumsy and awkward and in no way resembles the skill required for the real life game of tennis.

I also have to admit that the wiimote can be more intuitive for simple games for the uninitiated but what happens when you have sophisticated controls like reloading a weapon or managing inventory. I can definitely see how the wiimote could be waaay more confusing. Atleast modern controller concepts are prevalent everywhere in today's society and easily adapted to. A directional pad appears in virtually everything that uses electricity these days and complex button sequences are used daily from debit cards to microwaves, from alarm clocks to automobiles. Frankly, I don't think games written for people that don't know how to set the time on their own watch could have any more than a passing fancy for me.

I think it's time to stop the "CRAP" about graphics.
Grapics matter but to what extend??? If graphics matter "SOOOOOOO MUCH" then why o why is the DS the biggest "GAME" console there is (and by biggest i mean most selled "GAME" console). And 1 more; is there anybody who finds the DS graphics ugly, really, really, ugly???? ps: (I own every console except 360 and i enjoy them all for the games that they have, not their power and i am not a specific fan of any of the consoles)

Funny thing is that around the time when the GC and xbox1 were launching i was using the 'superior graphics' arguement against all the ps2 fanboys (not this site but another) to explain why the ps2 will lose that particular generation. 5 years later i was proven wrong - dead wrong. The ps2s continued success today (out selling the GC and xbox combined by a factor of 2 to 1 despite the GC and xbox1 having superior graphics), 6+ years after launch still doesn't convince those ps and xbox fanboys that the 'winner of' a generation is (historically) never determined by graphics alone, so its amazes me how this arguement continues to be used. Although there are other circumstances involved in determining a winner - namely quantity of exclusives those who insist this will be the determining factor seriously are deluding themselves.
Let me point out to those 'graphics whores' that PCs are the superior graphics machines, so quit kidding yourself that the 360 or ps3 have superior graphics, because PCs soon will or already surpass any console in graphical capabilities. Deal with it.

By virtue of the control method the Wii will continue to have 'exclusive' gaming experiences that cannot be played on the 360 or ps3. Whether they are better or not is a different matter (tacked on or built from the ground up). These 'exclusives' will definately be an advantage for the Wii, where as the ps3 and xbox360 battle it out for (console) graphical supremacy.

I know this comment won't stop those Wiis graphics are crap arguement but i'll post it anyway

I can't believe how many people don't understand the difference between compliment and complement. Compliment your systems? As in the Wii goes "Hey 360, you're looking mighty stylish today." Opposed to having a second system to complement your existing library.

@ 83 DocEvil

"To me the real innovation here is Nintendo's ability to sell a concept to the consumer. Start where we are now and reverse engineer it to the conceptual stage. Nintendo has taken their market strengths, run them through the dreaded iPod-ulator and applied them to break out of the video game hardware business model. It's no secret that Nintendo fans are among the most loyal in the industry and, to me, Nintendo has used this to move into a for-profit 'less for more' business model for hardware."

You do realize that that has been the business model for a while don't you. Do you think that the ps2/xbox/cube has been maxxed out yet??? No, there are plenty of things they can do to squeeze more juice out of it. Which is why the graphics get better over time.

"Just because the control scheme is different does not mean it is advantageous yet this is exactly the concept that Nintendo has managed to sell its loyal consumers and in a big way. They are managing to sell a piece of hardware that is quite comparable technically to it's previous offering based on a new controller and they are doing it at a significant profit to boot. I would have, in fact, expected the cost of games to decrease under this model since they wouldn't need to recoup monies lost on hardware and companies would not have to go through development teething pains for more complex hardware but this isn't the case. It's now a business model built on the profit of hardware, peripherals and games. It's a rather brilliant and crafty piece of marketing that is sure to put a wad in Nintendo's pocket that I have to admire from the outside but wholeheartedly do not buy into."

Doesnt that apply to the other systems as well. MS/Sony has managed to sell an expensive piece of hardware to its customers while their previous offerings were good enough. Now sure you can say that there is more power, but is God of War 2 going to sell poorly because its on a previous system, I think not. Also if none of these systems were annouced, we would all be fine with what we had.

"I do have to conceed that Wii tennis is more complex than 'pong but pretty' but when compared to the likes of top spin, virtua tennis or even rockstar's table tennis gameplay mechanics, it is not much more than just that. The Nintendo argument, I believe, is that swinging a 4" rectangular piece of plastic standing 6 feet from the tv in your living room is somehow more 'immersive'. I disagree. I would also argue that if that is exactly what you are going for then for $50 you could buy a real raquet and actually take up the sport. Let's be truthful here, it's a video game, your videogame swing is clumsy and awkward and in no way resembles the skill required for the real life game of tennis."

Once again this can apply to other systems. What do you mean by mechanics? Do you mean depth? or the fact that you press a button to swing? or how about the graphics. I can use the same argument as you. Why do you need to see each individual piece of grass moving in a game when you can go outside and actually look at grass? Why do I have to see them blink? I can look in the mirror to see blinking. You do realize that that is where graphics are heading, real life. If thats the case whats the point, real life is outside waiting for you and it doesnt need a 3.2ghz cpu or a 512mb video card.

@ 89. Billy Jean

"Graphics matter and hd tvs are dropping in price MASSIVELY. I bought my 32' hd tv for 999.99 6-7 months ago. Now they are selling my same hd tv with better response times for 599.99. By next christmas that same 32' hd tv will be out for 399.99. By then everyone will have large hd lcd's in their house and the "not everyone can afford an hd tv" point will be moot."

I have to disagree. Ill give two examples. My brother, currently had an xbox1 and a psp. Had the ds but hated it cuz of graphics. He has a infocus projector and harmon kardon 7.1 surround sound system in the living room. Watches DVDs for now, but I am building him a computer so that he can get into hi def properly. Hes played GOW on the 360 and loved it. He hates the wii because he doesnt believe in anything less than 720p and it has no optical out.He sold his xbox and psp to get a 360. Do you know what he plays now? POKEMON on an emulator in his pocket pc. explain that.

Ill use me next. I just bought a 23in widescreen hi def tv. Have it hooked up to my computer. Downloaded some hi def movies and am in love with hi def. Still own a gamecube. 480p is good enough for me. To me the 360/PS3 looks good, but thats about it. I would still rather play a round of N64 perfect dark with some friends in all its svideo glory on a 100ft screen than most of the stuff thats out there.

woops sorry for double posting. Lol. I really don't understand the posting system in this forum.