Nintendo announces record year, thanks DS and Wii

@Jack of No Trades

"Neither does gameplay."

True, however there is more emphasis on high end graphics than gameplay nowadays. The "If the game looks good, then it must be good" mentality.

@Sheppy

Awesome!

Why cant you love games instead?

"High end graphics are great but they don't constitute a great game."

It adds! If the wii had HD and 360 graphics for zelda and other nintendo games at the same price.. people would be like those homeless people in the last south park episode "wii!! anyone have wii!!??"

I personally, even at a higher price, would be trying harder to get a wii if it was hd and had graphics that are around the 360.. I've wanted for a long time great graphical nintendo games, especially zelda.. but it does wonder by itself with a great artistic direction. I loved wind waker, and it's one of the best looking games IMO.. it just sucks nintendo will probably never do another game with that style. *cries*

@ 37 Eric,

That's a shame man. My roommates and I have, between us, a 360, a PS2, two XBOXs, and three Wiis. If someone is playing a videogame it is either: Gears, Halo 2, Guitar Hero 1/2, or one of the 15 Wii games we own between us. Any "novelty wear-off" hasn't affected our playtime. We still put a handful of hours a week into Wii Sports, play Excite Truck, SSX Blur, and Tiger Woods for a few hours a week each. I've yet to finish TP, and we have a ton of VC games to play around with. I'm trying to finish everything I have before I start SPM.

I guess it really just depends on what you are into. My roommates and I have spent more than $2000 on the Wii systems, accessories, and games and we don't regret a penny of it.

PS - Of course the desire (demand) for the console will drop once more people own it!

"'High end graphics are great but they don't constitute a great game.'

Neither does gameplay."

Um, what? Gameplay is kinda the most important thing about games. People still play the NES because the games have fun gameplay. Graphics are nice, but no game is ever going to make it to the "hall of fame" solely on good graphics.

@Todd

I shoudl probably provide a link where that stuff is gonna go then, shouldn't I? I'll dump it in my deviantart account.

http://sheppyboy2000.deviantart.com/

Also, if you browse the account, stay away from the fiction. Fair warning, I'm a horrible writer.

@6

Who are you calling a gaming journalist?! They are bloggers and bloggers have many more rights and privileges than gaming journalists.

"So sheppy... where can I see some of your work??? I live in Laredo, Tx. I work as a designer in the local newpaper, and I have my own bussiness of publicity, printing and graphics desing in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico (its border, at only 5 min) with 12 employers (the name is Punto Creativo, Creative Point), and you think that your collection impress me, and you think that the PC in the pic impresses me, and that TV impresses me... you make me laugh when you say that you are an artist..."

Ok, seriously, Fernando....you're just getting, like, obsessively creepy, now.

Alright Nintendo, Wii is a hit, you and your friends can start releasing actual games for it now

Jack, I don't know if you answered this question yet after making that dumb statement, but how the heck does gameplay not constitute a great game? I know all the features are necessary but gameplay has, is and always will be THE dominant most important part of any game to be even remotely good, no matter how advanced the graphics look, how sonorous the soundtrack plays, or how epic the story is. This is not the movie, music or book industry, this is the GAME Industry

That pic will never get old.

Alex

I mean controls.

How do you confuse gameplay and controls?

If you're going to troll, troll right, Jack.

hopefully these strong as hell wii sales will mean that publishers and developers will all get off their asses and start making more wii games. the system is selling without the existence of a boatload of so called AAA games...that should tell the people in charge out there something.

Jack, this is a serious question and I am not trying to insult you or your intellegence by saying it, but...

What has Nintendo done to you personally? Did they force you to buy their stuff? Do they blatently insult you in their Public Relations? Did they steal your money? Are they threatening to overthrow all you hold dear and close to your heart?

Did Miyamoto kick your dog and spit on your mother? Where on the doll did Link touch you last night? Okay, scratch those last two.

Seriously though, your anti-nintendo antics were funny and endearing the first few times. Now though? Its beginning to wear thin even the most thick skinned of posters. Please start using at least constructive trolling when posting.

Or bad things might happen...



Eh, I got nothing.

Oh and Fernando lay off sheppy for a bit. He might put a restraining order on you if you continue to lurk in his magnolias every night.

Lastly,
IT PRINTS OVER
N I N E
T H O U S A N D
D O L L A A A A R R R R R R!

"hopefully these strong as hell wii sales will mean that publishers and developers will all get off their asses and start making more wii games. the system is selling without the existence of a boatload of so called AAA games...that should tell the people in charge out there something."

That... they don't have to try for sales anymore? I'm trying to find the upside of a console selling tons without any really good games (Except, Zelda, Paper Mario, Raving Rabbits, Trauma Center, and Warioware... of course) and the possible positive message this could send developers. Someone needs to hide this info from Ubisoft before they REALLY start slumming the console.

Koopaknight29

By your name I can tell why your so offended.

"What has Nintendo done to you?"

1. Overhyped controls for the Wii.
2. Bought a Gamecube and was dissapointed with games except SMB & WW.
3. Reselling the Gcube.
4. Saying graphics don't matter.
5. Cashing in on the ignorant casual gamer.
6. Releasing way too many mario's.

They lost all my respect last gen. I had a debate on whether to get a Xbox or Gcube last gen and decided to go with gcube, got pissed because there were hardly any games, sold it and bought a xbox and was happy ever since.

I must agree with Jack of No Trades, here's why:

1. I grew up with the NES, best console of its time, and the Super NES pushed the envelope with the best graphics, sound, and gameplay. (Well actually I liked the Genesis better...)This is when Nintendo was good.

2. The Nintendo 64, was hyped to no end with all the 64-bit bullshit but its library was pretty poor compared to the Playstation. I believe this was strike one. Sticking with expensive cartridges was another strike. And there were few if any AAA titles for the 64 other than the few good 1st party games on the system.

3. The Gamecube: was a joke. Probably strike 3 or 4. It had great hardware but its library paled in comparison to the variety of titles the Xbox and Playstation offered.

4. The Wii: Did not appear to me that Nintendo was attempting to revolution anything. Wii seemed more hype than anything. The motion controls are fun, for a while, but most of the Wiis library consist of mini games, PS2 and Gamecube ports, and terribly tacked on motion controls.

5. The Wii is not a step towards revolutionizing how we interact with our games. It doesn't do anything that hasn't been done before.

6. I do not buy into mediocrity.

7. Nintendo has falsely claimed that graphics don't matter but the fact is they do to some degree. Games should be about balance: great gameplay, sound, and graphics not just one aspect.

8. Nintendo doesn't feel like connectivity (online) or HD matters.

9. I feel alienated. I love games. But if this is all that Nintendo has to offer than I will wait until next generation to see if I feel Nintendo has gotten its act together.

10. I don't hate the Wii. I hate fanboys.

"1. Overhyped controls for the Wii."
I wouldn't say overhyped. I'd say underutilized. After all, how great is Sixaxis right now? Give it a couple years, Wii Controls will validate their existance.

"2. Bought a Gamecube and was dissapointed with games except SMB & WW."
Well, that's you problem. Personally, I enjoyed my Cube. And when it wasn't in a release storm (which was damn near all the time), I had PS2 to keep me busy. Nintendo as a main console hasn't been a safe bet since SNES. Even now, my Wii plays second fiddle to next gen.

"3. Reselling the Gcube."
Granted, but DS was reselling the N64 with minor enhancements. Meanwhile, DS has some great games. It's the games, not the hardware, that makes a system. Otherwise, we'd all be cranking Shelly Duval's Ocean Reef on our Panasonic 5DOs.

"4. Saying graphics don't matter."
Now this I can agree with. Because their statement was that faster processors and better GPUs equate directly towards just prettier graphics. Which is bullshit. When you push stress away from the CPUs onto GPUs, you free up CPUs to do more. Likewise, more advanced CPUs more more advanced gametypes, worlds, and AI routines. Proceedural game content creation may not even remotely be possible on Wii in the scale that Spore uses it. To equate faster processors and GPUs simply to "betR GraffX" shows a complete unwillingness to rethink the way games are made. Something which actually SHOWS with Nintendo software.

"5. Cashing in on the ignorant casual gamer."
All three are guilty of this, actually. Or do you thing Talledega Nights was for the "awesome hardcores?"

"6. Releasing way too many mario's."
I don't think there are enough. Calm down the spinoffs and bring back the biyearly drops. SMS definately did NOT expand beyond Mario 64 and waiting over 10 years for SMG seems painful enough. Especially when Insomniac can deliver 4 straight years of Ratchet & Clank and have it all rock.

Eh, not so much offended as annoyed, Jack. I've already known most of what you speak and they have annoyed me or have made me reconsider Nintendo's sanity as well, (well except the Mario thing, you can never have enough Mario), but I really don't see where all of your vitrol is coming from? You really can't have a personal vendetta against someone if they haven't done anything to you personally...

Sony and Microsoft were/are just as bad at some point in their time and I have taken shots at them in the past when they have deserved it, but I still give them credit where credit is due and admit mistakes when I make them. Can't you do the same?

All this "graphics dont matter" comments could come back and bite Nintendo 2 years later as HD penetration increases. Nintendo could have taken a risk given the huge profiy from DS sold the wii at a loss and increased the specs a bit. Maybe 256 MB RAM, a 1.6GHz processer, a somewhat better graphix card...wouldnt have hurt.

"3. The Gamecube: was a joke. Probably strike 3 or 4. It had great hardware but its library paled in comparison to the variety of titles the Xbox and Playstation offered."

Oh come now. The PS2 I'll give you, but the Xbox? It's library was mostly just a gimped as the Gamecube's.

"4. The Wii: Did not appear to me that Nintendo was attempting to revolution anything. Wii seemed more hype than anything. The motion controls are fun, for a while, but most of the Wiis library consist of mini games, PS2 and Gamecube ports, and terribly tacked on motion controls."

If we're going to extend the courtesy of giving the PS3 at least a year, and gave the 360 a year to get a good library up and running, why does Nintendo not get that same benefit of the doubt?

"5. The Wii is not a step towards revolutionizing how we interact with our games. It doesn't do anything that hasn't been done before."

The technology isn't brand new, but it's the first time we've ever seen it implemented RIGHT and effectively.
If by 8th generation of consoles all has advanced motion controls a la the Wii (and you KNOW they will), you can bet your ass that Nintendo is going to rightly get the credit for REVOLUTIONIZING how we control games.

"7. Nintendo has falsely claimed that graphics don't matter but the fact is they do to some degree. Games should be about balance: great gameplay, sound, and graphics not just one aspect."

Nintendo has ALWAYS stressed balance. I think it was Miyamoto himself who recently said developers should stop putting their B teams on the Wii, or something to that effect.
They HAVE said that they think graphics have reached a point where casuals/most players don't care. Personally, I also think they're wrong, based on personal experience.
But they're probably right. The current crop of consoles isn't exactly a HUGE graphical leap compared to past generations, if you ask me.
But maybe I'll eat those words in 3-5 years.

But considering all the stories we're hearing about development houses struggling to get the Wiimote to work, since they now have to take into account things like calculus and advanced mathematics (which they've mostly never had to deal with before), it's probably for the better that studios don't have the burden of ALSO worrying about advanced graphics on top of that.
If the Wii wasn't otherwise so simple to make games for, it probably WOULD have been the final nail for Nintendo.

"8. Nintendo doesn't feel like connectivity (online) or HD matters."

You could at least wait until the online system launches...
And given the small HD set adoption rates, they're right. It doesn't matter. Why add in the extra cost, if it's largely going to be wasted anyway? Come back in 2010 when it does.

"9. I feel alienated. I love games. But if this is all that Nintendo has to offer than I will wait until next generation to see if I feel Nintendo has gotten its act together."

What does Sony and MS offer in comparison??


"10. I don't hate the Wii. I hate fanboys."

No offense, but that's the pot calling the kettle black, buddy. Being an anti-fanboy is as probably WORSE that being a fanboy.

"1. Overhyped controls for the Wii.
2. Bought a Gamecube and was dissapointed with games except SMB & WW.
3. Reselling the Gcube.
4. Saying graphics don't matter.
5. Cashing in on the ignorant casual gamer.
6. Releasing way too many mario's."

1) Naw. Controls work like I expected them too, sometimes better (see: Tiger Woods, SSX Blur, aiming in Twilight Princess).
2) I bought a Wii. Sorry you picked the wrong box ;) I've only been disappointed in a few games, one being WarioWare because of its extremely short length.
3) No, the Wii isn't the GC. Sorry.
4) I agree with that one, but they never said that in the first place. Graphics do matter, that's why Nintendo is increasing visuals for the likes of SMG, SSBB, and MP3, among others. The true argument is that graphics aren't the ONLY thing that matters, and I'd like to see you fight for the other side of that argument.
5) I thought that was Sony? The ignorant part, that is.
6) Meh, a mascot is a mascot. To say SPM plays like (or is the same game as) SM Sunshine, SM Galaxy, Mario Strikers, etc, etc is to completely miss out on what makes these games so different. You could have the same thing going on with Master Chief. But if MC was in fighters and racers and puzzle games, etc, it would still NOT reduce the influence and fun of Halo, right?

And, LongShot, I'm not even sure what to say to all that. I'm with on the NES, SNES, and N64, though I still play N64 games but haven't touched the PS games ('cept for FF7) since I went to PS2. The GC did suffer a lot from a limited library, but to say it was poor is purely subjective. I can think of just as many influential games on the GC as were produced on the PS2 and XBOX.

Your judgement of the library now is fair, I suppose, though I'm loving what the Wii is offering even now. But you can't deny the strength of the Wii's coming lineup, just like that of the 360, in my mind. What of value is the PS3 offering now? What of value was the 360 offering last April?

Again: its all about your personal tastes, but you can't judge what the console has or hasn't done in 5 months

If you based everything off the first 5 month projection, the 360 should have no viable games either, the Dreamcast should've annihilated everything

I know many people felt the GameCube was lacking in good mature titles, i say you're wrong, the only thing wrong with it was a lack of well-advertised mature titles (at least compared to the Xbox, also Online play)

But remember, people doubted the NES's capability to unseat such "Serious" game computers as offered by Atari and Commodore, and look where that went

You can't lump the N64 into your arguments. It was the most powerful console of its day. If you're arguing that the cartridge format hurt the system, you're arguing about storage space. So what you really want is storage space, not graphics? Make up your mind.

And where did everybody get the idea that anything less than HD is so ugly it hurts the gameplay? You ever have fun in an arcade once in your life people? Or playing a roguelike or a board game or a sport? Graphics are a pretty optional bonus for the eyeballs. That's it. They do not affect gameplay.

And how don't graphics contribute to gameplay? Would you be happy if SMSB had NES graphics?

Wait, what does SMSB mean?

Oops I'm sorry Super Mario Smash Brothers or whatever its called...

Ah. Well, I wouldn't care if the game was entirely in 2-D and looked like balls, as long as it's still fun. Don't flame me like I represent every Nintendo fan ever though. I just really really really don't care about graphics. If somebody made a fighter with 8-bit graphics, that would free up a lot of their development effort for better/more moves, better/more combos, better/more levels, and all that stuff, the fun stuff that I can use. I would buy a 2-D fighter that fit 8 players on the screen at once, no matter what it looked like.

I also think a lot of good games are coming out that combine 2-D and 3-D. New Super Mario Bros. looks great using 3-D sprites in 2-D environments, Super Paper Mario looks great using 2-D sprites in layered 2-D and 3-D environments, and I still love the original Doom, with its 2-D sprites in 3-D environments. Viewtiful Joe is also an amazing looking game due to the art and not the horsepower.

Hey download this free game and try it out. Tell me what you think about the graphics and/or the gameplay and/or whether it's fun or not. I love it.

http://www.spheresofchaos.com/

@ Rubang B

I'm glad you brought that link up. The graphics are no Gears of War but they definitely add in creating a Psychedelic-chaotic atmosphere, that create the backdrop to a fun, simple, and addicting shooter. Anyways I don't know what point you are trying to make but old technology can only take you so far. I like to see developers push the envelope in graphics, storytelling, art direction, gameplay, control, and audio.


And I'll pass on the 8-bit version of Soul Calibur, Street Fighter, Tekken, Virtua (Dot Matrix) Fighter, and Marvel Vs Capcom 2. Thank you very much.

The profit margin is too wide, that's why they are making this much money, they upmark both products considerably. The DS shouldn't cost more than a low-end pocket pc, but for some reason it's twice-three times as much. The Wii could be easily distributed for about 150-200, which would make it sell even better, but they prefer to rake in on the early buyers. Disgusting company, and no one talks about how the other 2 companies are/were paying out of their pocket to give consumers as much power out of the box. Since when has a big corporation making record profits meant it's good for consumers? The oil companies do great and do they get great press for it?

There are always gonna be arguements on who is the best, ect.

Keep in mind that the Wii is still the least expensive console out there of the current generation. This gives it a pretty big advantage.

Nintendo is experienced in taking on systems with better graphics. For instance, look at how the monochrome, non-backlit Gameboy won out over the Sega Gamegear. Nintendo has been very good about bringing out great games. The DS has been killing the PSP. I admit that the PSP is sexier, has a better LCD screen and other cool features. However the controls and gameplay of the DS are way cool. The DS also has a very nice lineup of games. The Wi-Fi works pretty good as well.

Graphics are important up to a point. You could have an absolute gorgeous game out, but if the gameplay sucks, that game still sucks. If the graphics are say, not quite as impressive, but it has hellacious gameplay, that game would still rock.

Older hardware doesn't always mean it will suck if it is used well. I'm not bashing new hardware, but sometimes things can advance faster then then the people who make the games can cope with. Let us see what happens with all three consoles after the developers work out more tricks to get more out of the hardware. As an example, I've seen people still working with the venerable Commodore 64 doing thing with it that I would not of thought possible.

If you have the money, you're probally going to get more then one console. That means a bigger selection of games for you. All three systems have thier pros and cons. I feel that the competition has been very good for all of us gamers. Nintendo just didn't want to get into a three-way horsepower war. Instead the focused on the gameplay. This generation will be very good to us, but look ahead to the next. All of the lessons learned in this generation will make the next generation of consoles even more impressive. The next Nintendo will be amazing, as well as the next X-Box and Playstation. But for now, I'll enjoy my Wii and whatever other console I'll pick up later.