Stringer: Wii not a competitor

Meh i've played the wii several times and hated it just about everytime once i passed the 10-15 minute mark..then its like "k, what else does this thing do?"....

There for i do not think everyone should own one like a pc (candidate for dumbest comment of 2008??). Come on really name 3 great 1st party games...oh wait you probably cant seeing as how theres 3 A titles in general (like ssb, mario world, and..?) can you name 3 I havent? My friend tells me all the time the wii has virtually no games....he got his when it first came out and no lie he hasnt played more than 5 different games on it to this date. Just for the record in addition to his wii, he owns a 360 (which broke - not rrod though) and a ps3 (which he bought after his 360 broke) and he thus far "loves the ps3"...AND hes the biggest gaming nerd i know. he has every system under the sun so thats gotta say something lol.

well said. he shouldn't have said it so plainly as it may come off as an insult to nintendo. although what he said is probably true and the wii isnt really a game console any more its become a cultural phenominon just like the iphone. it has a unique input method that looks more fun than its competitors which is causing people to buy it. i dont think half of wii owners bought the wii for games, unless you count wii sports, they only bought it for the wiimote. sony shouldnt aim to pass wii because that is nearly impossible at the rate it is selling. the ps3 passing the 360 should be their only goal right now.

That's a direct contradiction to all the multiplatform games on the Wii though and all the multiplatform games designed for the Wii. You're statement is just flat out wrong. Of course a game specifically DESIGNED for a specific console will not be multiplatformed but you make it sound like no games are being shared across the different consoles which is just wrong.

You could say the same thing about MGS4. Essentially not only is it NOT being put to those other systems but it CAN'T. The 50 gigs of game and hard drive install essentially means that none of the competition has any chance of getting it. Not only would it take 5 DVDs just to compete with the data compatibility but not all 360s and no Wiis have hard drives but the biggest part is that you have to remember, that any data that would be accessible across discs would mean that it'd have to be on each disk it appears on. That means that data replication would likely cause the game to end up on possibly up to 12 disks.

Therefore you can see the flaw of the argument. Something specifically designed for a system can not be multiplatform if it requires features that the other consoles dont' have.

Another fallacy is that the PS3 has motion controls and is possible to have even more motion controls avaible at a later date (since Sony plans their system to be relevant for 10 years and we're in year 2. just look at the PS2 still gaining games) which means that at some point there won't be a game that isn't multi platform capable between the Wii and PS3 depending on how Sony handles things.

The development cost for the Wii significantly lower which means a lot of developers make games for cheap at lower graphics. Remember that most of these games are absolutely terrible and make a profit due to low budget costs.

I believe the Sony statement was correct. It's a niche. This coming from a Wii owner who is playing it at the moment. There are some fun games, but it's not a system that holds a hardcore audience. Even games like Mario Kart Wii have been downgraded to fullfill a niche. If you're unaware of the definition please go to www.dictionary.com

3. a distinct segment of a market.

That's exactly what the Wii is. It's set for the casual non gaming sector. Sure it has a few hardcore but Nintendo's aim is the casual and non gamers. Different from what the PS3 can provide since it deals with HD and high production costs and can not possibly hope to entirely become as accessible as the Wii is. That's fine because we need Nintendo to fullfill a niche.

Saying that Sony's comment was wrong on that spot is like saying that Disgaea 3 and MGS4 are competitors. That's bullox considering that they are entirely different in every way shape and form and hit entirely different demographics as well as aim towards an entirely different audience altogether. There is some overlap of appeal within these targets, but otherwise it's apples and oranges to say the least.

I just wanted to get you to think about things in the context. The way you were making it sound was entirely out of context with the situation. I feel that Sony's comment on that spot was dead on and I feel I just proved the point.

There are multiplatform games that go to Wii, but they're usually only the AAA titles. A lot of the others, AA titles I'll call them, only go to X360 and PS3. Things like Dead Space, Assassin's Creed, Call of Duty 4 (which is AAA, sorry), etc... I just feel the Wii tends to put itself outside of the common multiplatform development. Usually any "ports" to the system end up being COMPLETELY different games altogether.


Also, as to his comment.... when the Wii has sold as many units as it has, I find it hard to call it a "niche". He may have a point, but I just feel he could've communicated his point more clearly.

The number of "multiplatform" games for Wii is fairly low. Even those games that are tend to redesign themselves for the system (See Force Unleashed as an example).

Other games simply don't even try. There's Assassin's Creed, Call of Duty 4, Soul Calibur IV, Devil May Cry, etc...

I'm not saying ports don't happen. I'm just saying it isn't the "trend". And when a product isn't really cutting into your product share, it makes it not a competitor.

Overall, though, I just feel he could've phrased himself better and more carefully to avoid much of the world pointing some hate the PS3's way.

I think his phrasing was honest, though he could have sugar-coated it a bit to make it easier to swallow.

And he is right to say "expensive". Every time I walk by my Wii I can't help but think of how much money I've pumped into that system (more than my PS3) and how little play time I get out of it. The cost/entertainment ratio is definitely better on PS3, then PC, then the rest. Of course that's all personal experience. It can be exactly opposite for someone else.

MH3 for the wii was bad mistake. The game would've made waay more sense on a traditional console such as the PS3 or even the 360. Why they chose the wii is simply because more ppl own the wii then the ps3 sadly...

Plus the wii has no hdd capabilities, how will they push updates or new quests is beyond me. Its a bad choice in my opinion to have chosen the wii.

Monster Hunter won't do hardly anything at all to Wii sales...

How is a system in high demand and largely out of stock in so many areas going to get boosted in demand? Simple... it won't. Essentially the only thing that will drive Wii sales higher is more of them avaible to be sold.

I dunno where you've been saito, but technically the Wii has won already. It's been winning since it came out. The other consoles just can't compete with it.

I fully agree with you.

I also own all 3 systems and out of the 3 the PS3 has the widest selection in game choices, maybe not the largest, but the best overall in my opinion.

Of the 3 systems I only play the PS3 the most, and the 360 second. I haven't touched the wii since I bought Smash for myself (stoped playing around April) and the wii fit for my nephew. The wii I can honestly say is a fad at this point with its design and capabilities.

ok then.....i think someone's security just increased.....

Yea.
Did he really call the Wii expensive?
I could maybe see him thinking that if he didn't work for SONY. This guy sounds like a bigger dumba55 than Harrison who alone was almost annoying enough to convince me to not to buy a ps3. Almost.

I think he's go to say that because they're never going to see the kind of money out of the ps3 that nintendo has seen out of the Wii: as nintendo makes a profit on every machine sold while sony takes a loss with every machine sold. Sure the ps3 is a much more sophisticated machine but shareholders don't give a crap about that.

Stringer is right, and I agree with Makai's diatribe today. The Wii was never targeted at the hardcore, and never will be. Regardless of what Reggie says, Nintendo is happy serving fast food to children, because that's where the easy money is. They couldn't care less about "core gamers" and they never really have since the NES days.

Stringer is also correct if he called the Wii overpriced. Why? Because of how cheaply Nintendo manufactures it. Sony takes a loss, Microsoft takes a loss, but Nintendo's revamped Gamecube prints money.

It's too expensive, the controller doesn't add anything (not for me, and I tried to like it-- it's okay, it's novel but no big) and how is it that the best ps2 programming (Ratchet, Jak, Midnight Club DUB etc) look BETTER for WAY LESS?

Please form your eyes to definition 3 of Niche. Chasing after a specific segment of the market is a niche' you can't quite say that PS3 is a niche' because it's hitting the same market that gaming has generally always tried to hit. Wii is doing something entirely different to hit a different mark. That is what a niche' is. Just like LocoRoco is a niche' and Patapon is a niche' while the PS3 and 360 are hitting the same old markets over and over again. Not a bad thing. We need variety.

niche Audio Help /nɪtʃ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[nich] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation noun, adjective, verb, niched, nich·ing.
–noun
1. an ornamental recess in a wall or the like, usually semicircular in plan and arched, as for a statue or other decorative object.
2. a place or position suitable or appropriate for a person or thing: to find one's niche in the business world.
3. a distinct segment of a market.
4. Ecology. the position or function of an organism in a community of plants and animals.
–adjective
5. pertaining to or intended for a market niche; having specific appeal: niche advertising.
–verb (used with object)
6. to place (something) in a niche.

Looking at my own library, I think I could argue that the Wii has more decent hardcore games than the PS3 at this point.

You could... but then you'd be lying :)

I'm kidding. Everyone has their own definition of "hardcore". To some it may be stuff like Defend Your Castle, while to others (such as myself) it's games like Metroid. I love the Wii and Nintendo, but I submit to the fact that there are better party games on Wii and better "hardcore" games on PS3.

That game is also targetting the PS2... They're just trying to cover every single possible base. I already covered all this in a reply above. They aren't in competition with the Wii. That's like saying that MGS4 and Disgaea 3 are competing. They aren't, they're aimed in entirely different directions. That's like saying they're racing to get from America to Japan the other one is going from America to China. They both take different directions. Are they really competing to see who gets there first? No not really. They're focused on going their route. 360 and PS3 are in direct competition Wii is as much a competitor to the PS3 as the DS is to the 360... Entirely different markets. The PSP and DS are competing but that's because they're aimed similarly.

Do you understand why these statements are being made now?

That's a solid argument right there. One could see the loss of Monster Hunter 3 as proof of competition, since it was specifically pegged as a PS3 title

um... that's a stupid comment. Most experts agree that they're not competing. They are aimed entirely different directions. I've already covered this like 3 times. I'm not going to say it again.

Well , everybody has a PC , PC's aren't really gaming consoles , PCs are meant to DO EVERYTHING .

For what you get, a Gamecube with a remote, it is expensive. If the PS2 ever released a similar controller it'd be the same experience with greater availability at less than half the price.

Yeah, fantastic, great. Sony makes a beast that nobody needs and can't get away with charging any more than they already do for it (as evidenced by the price drops) and Nintendo puts out a console and charges what people are willing to pay. The PS3 is still too expensive, and people are perfectly satisfied paying $250 for a Wii.

As a owner of both Wii and PS3, I have to side with Stringer. I believe the Wii is expensive for what you get.

I paid $400 for my PS3. Then I dropped about $15 on 3 extra controllers. I paid $250 for my Wii, and $150 more for 3 controllers, plus $40 for 2 classic controllers (because the stupid VC games won't work with the Wiimote).

So $415 total for my PS3, $440 total for my Wii. Of course cost is relative to benefit as always, so it should be noted the PS3 is a more powerful machine, capable of more, with better games, cheaper DL games, HD graphics, movie playback, and so on and so forth.

It's kinda like paying the same amount for a Geo Metro as a Ferrari.

1) I'd like to know where you got PS3 controllers for $5 each.

2) You bought more stuff for your Wii so you spent more money. D'uhhhrrrr. Pay full price for PS3 controllers and then buy a bunch of optional controllers and see how much it costs you.

I'd love me some Metroid and Zelda in HD... so, yes.