Lionsgate imagines Wii movie store 'will launch worldwide soon'

The thing is: the people who bought the Wii don't care for or don't even know what HDMI is.

Wrong Ashitaka. I knew about HDMI long before I even got a Wii in '07.

It's optimum output is 480p. Using Component is almost overkill.

And i doubt many of your precious PS3 users know what HDMI is either, Ashitaka. It's not a mass-market technology at all.

It seems it isn't being used by xbox360 users as Epic's Mark Rein says, less than half the xbox360 owners own a HDTV, it wouldn't surprise me if the Wii has a bigger numbers of users than own hdtvs.

http://www.joystiq.com/2009/07/22/epics-mark-rein-were-not-ready-for-playstation-4-or-xbox-what/

Troll harder, Ashitaka. I really don't think you're trying hard enough when all you've got is, "But Wii ownerz don't haz HDMI, lulz!!!"

I'm sorry, but what is this HDMI? By the way, i only own a Wii.

"And i doubt many of your precious PS3 users know what HDMI is either, Ashitaka. It's not a mass-market technology at all."

I guess it depends on how you define "mass market", but HDMI it is at least as mass market as the Wii itself. It's on virtually every new TV, receiver, 360, PS3, and on many new computer monitors. Hell, my wife's new camera has HDMI output.

It's a question of use more than of availability. Sure HDMI is there, but i would be interested to see its usage statistics

I'm under the impression that its really only for the home theatre buffs, but i could be wrong.

Anyone care to add to this?

Hmm... yeah, I'm not sure how many people actually use it. But I think this goes back to the question of defining "mass market". It definitely has a heavy presence the electronics market and I'd bet that more people are at least familiar with it than you seem to think.

And it definitely has more use than just for home theater buffs. For the average person the simplification in wiring is a huge plus. One cable that does audio and video is worlds better for the non-technically inclined than previous options. The Wii is bigger PITA to wire up than the 360 or PS3.

I'd have most people who have a PS3 or 360 elite, or even some of the more recent PVRs that also have HDTVs (which is a lot of people) probably use the cables. In the UK at least there seem to be a lot of people with HDTVs, but a lot don't actually have anything with a HD output.

Wii owners also tend to come from well-doing middle class families, who are most capable of buying a hdtv. From my experience, i have 6 friends (college students) who own either 360 or ps3 with only a small tv, and 4 families (including my own) who have a wii WITH a hdtv. That's just based on my personal experience though.

"I'm under the impression that its really only for the home theatre buffs"

This is way, way off. Most people buying HDTVs nowadays are fully aware of what HDMI is, probably to the point where they think they HAVE to have it because that's what the blue shirt guy at Best Buy told them. I would wager that far more modern HDTV buyers know what HDMI is than know what component is.

The typical mass market consumer that walks into Best Buy to impulse buy a TV typically thinks "omg I have to get an HDMI cable to get the best picture". Clearly they don't UNDERSTAND it, but they are more than aware of it and probably use it to hook their TV up.

At this point, it is far, far, oh so very far from being just something for theater buffs. Joe Schmo that has never even thought about buying an HDTV probably doesn't know what it is, but among actual HDTV consumers I would say at this point it's pretty much 100% mainstream.

@ shadowbender
Great, a guy who has a Wii but that reads Joystiq knows what HDMI is, I guess that proves me completely wrong...

@ Mr Khan
I'd expect people who invest $400 on a product to at least know what that product is capable of. Even if they don't use it, I bet that there are more people with a PS3 who know what HDMI is and that the PS3 has it than people with a Wii who know what HDMI is and that the Wii does not have it.

@ WREturns
I wasn't trolling, I spoke the truth (although I should have wrote 'most of the people' instead of just 'people'). If you really think that I'm wrong, then you're pretty naive (to say the least).

I'm sorry, Ashitaka, how could I have doubted you? I mean, to make such a ridiculously asinine blanket statement you must be looking at some kind of survey or official report, right? You're not? Well, you must have some kind of evidence, no doubt accumulated with strict observance to the scientific method. Not that either, huh? But come on, surely you're not just speaking out of your ass with nothing to back you up but anecdotal evidence and your own depressing fanboy delusions that you as a PS3 owner are better than all the Wii owners out there. That can't be it, right?

Are you dumb? Or are you just completely ignoring the facts here?

Why do you think that the Wii has sold 50+ millions? Because it tapped into casual gaming. Of all those millions, do you really think that (let's just say) half know what HDMI is? 'Cause I'm pretty sure they don't.

That's the point, dipshit. There are no "facts" in what you're saying, just your elitist theory that "the casuals" are ignorant of HDMI cables. Here's a riddle to help illustrate my point:

I know 10 people that own Wii's and 3 people that own PS3s. If all 10 Wii owners know what HDMI is and only 2 out of the 3 PS3 owners know what HDMI is, is Ashitaka still a tool?

Let's add to this by asking:

Does knowing that the console has a HDMI port mean that the person also knows what difference the use of this HDMI port makes, except the requirement to plug the cable into a different socket in the back of the tv than the socket the Wii or DVD player etc would go into?

To argue that they know it has HDMI is different than to argue that they know why it has HDMI, or even that they really care it has HDMI (is a great game lessened in any way by use of Scart?).

Also, for the argument that the PS3 or 360 is easier to set up than the Wii: how lazy do you have to be? I assume the same applies in every other country as does the UK, but I have the standard power cable which every electronic equipment has, then I have my wire which goes from the Wii to the tv, and this can either be connected to the tv using a Scart socket, or by putting the 3 'jacks' from the wire into the corresponding coloured sockets in the back (or side in my case) of the tv.

Now, explain how much simpler you could get? It was never hard to set up a console - my N64 two generations ago only took a lead into the aerial socket to play.

Ok, nevermind, you -are- dumb.

Good one, Ashitaka. You got left back in the first grade, didn't you?

People clearly want the all-in-one device. The mass market obviously doesn't know tech as well as it could do, but the iPhone wouldn't have sold so well if users weren't interested in a device that can do everything.

I'd have to agree. Generally speaking, any device or software application that tries to do everything only does it averagely. For example, sure, my PS3 can play music and video files, but it sucks compared to FB2K and VLC. Hence the reason I have my PC hooked up in my home theater.

Really, it comes down to a limited amount of resources that developers can spend. I'd rather see their time and money spent on improving and optimizing the original use of the product rather than attempting to implement features that another product already does far better.

@Ducttape So you mean they should be improving their software rather than trying to make a better version of something already done by someone else? I agree completely.

Except that this generation, which includes this feature creep of extra stuff, has also brought with it the best actual game content as well. I cannot EVER remember being utterly overrun with so many games that I want to play but just no way to fit them all in like I have been this generation.

Remember that article a few weeks back on Joystiq where the developers were saying there were TOO MANY good games and everyone that commented was like "OMG it's so true!"

So yeah, if we were seeing a decrease in the quality and number of good games alongside these features then I could see your point, but we're seeing the total opposite. Not to mention that the console most focused on "just games" (the Wii), is the one that most people generally (individual opinions may vary, of course) has the worst and least game content of this gen, whereas the consoles adding tons of extra stuff (360/PS3), have the best and most game content this gen.

So really, the complete opposite of what you're saying seems to be true.

"Except that this generation, which includes this feature creep of extra stuff, has also brought with it the best actual game content as well."

I disagree. This generation has been horrible, with only the handhelds making it anyway redeemable. People are well too satisfied, or maybe this is their first generation of games consoles and the flashy lights are oh so still appealing, but all I see is rehashes, reinventions and rehashes of reinventions.

Unless your standards are low, there aren't too many good games. There are, in fact, too many games. Too many cookie-cutter me too games. Too many lackadaisical strolls down nostalgia lane. Too much sameness. Too much blandness. Take a look at what Ubisoft, one of the champions of the last generation, have been reduced to due to market forces and the pathetic chase for the lowest common dollar. Look at their release schedule for the last three years and tell me your seeing an increase in quality. You can easily substitute Ubisoft for Namco, Sega, Capcom (if we're pushing it), and a whole host of former giants. The creativity has been burnt out and what's left is an array of dazzling distractions with no genuine substance. But the mass market, of which you, Vcize, are so clearly a conspirator, are easily amused, and you don't care.

I have a few ideas, but nothing conclusive, but I know what I know. And I know genuine excitement is hard to come by in gaming these days (that's if we exclude the handhelds).

"Not to mention that the console most focused on "just games" (the Wii), is the one that most people generally (individual opinions may vary, of course) has the worst and least game content of this gen,"

Of the three consoles, the Wii has by far the strongest library. Nothing compared to the Dreamcast or PS2 last generation, but it's getting there. Purely based on the disc releases, the HD consoles are rather horrible.

@ Vcize

I think the reason you are seeing such a deluge of quality games is that it game companies have perfected their formulas over the past 3 console generations. Think about it, they have pretty much been making the same games over and over and have been improving them every time. When talking about the 360 and PS3, there hasn't been the major gameplay change that was seen from the SNES to Playstation eras, so it's been easy for developers to improve. Same controls, same controllers, same gameplay elements.

The Wii is still hard to figure out, as it represents a shift from this formula. I would compare the games we are seeing on it to the games we saw on the original Playstation. Some good ideas, but it's not all there yet.

Haha... it's quite amusing to see someone try to argue about "substance" in favor of the Wii. IMO, the Wii easily has the highest percentage of shallow cash-in games.

Anyway, Bowser, even if you disagree with the game selection you are still wrong. You bring up Ubisoft, but what does Ubisoft have to do with any of these non-gaming features? Nothing. First parties are going to be the only people involved with adding features like this and unless you think they are periodically taking their game development studios away from game projects to work on a new non-gaming firmware features then your argument has no real merit.

Bowser, you are to gaming what emo kids are to music, so really there's no pleasing you.

Enjoy your Japanese Wii imports that you think are awesome because no one else has heard of them.

If you consider games like Mass Effect, Fallout, Mirror's Edge, etc just "cookie-cutter", then there is no helping you. You are one of those people that suffers from nostalgia disease, whereby everything old seems better than it actually was to you because you have fond memories of thinking "nothing will ever be better than this" and you've convinced yourself of this very thing.

You're the same kind of person that thinks it's heresy to ever compare a modern athlete to those of years past. Because they're old, makes them untouchable.

Someone could release a game that detected your brain synapsis and allowed you to interact with a world for of characters that each have digital brains capable of making them think as if they were each actual individual human beings and you would still say "I remember back in the day when games used to REALLY innovate".

Enjoy living in your dark, miserable world where every day is worse than the previous one because nothing can ever be as good as something that is older than it.

I agree that we're seeing a lot of games that really innovate, but Mirror's Edge was not one of them. That thing was a mess

This is the problem with Bowser, his game tastes are a bit.. eccentric. But I do have to stand up for Mirror's Edge. It was a long way from perfect but the running sections certainly did innovate.

"Mr Khan @ Jul 25th 2009 2:33PM
I agree that we're seeing a lot of games that really innovate, but Mirror's Edge was not one of them. That thing was a mess"

Wait... since when does innovation = success? They tried something different, but in the end it didn't turn out as successful as they had hoped. That happens all the time. I'd argue that innovation isn't defined by the end result being successful but rather by trying something different in the first place.

"If you consider games like Mass Effect, Fallout, Mirror's Edge, etc just "cookie-cutter", then there is no helping you."

Mass Effect is a smaller, less ambitious version of KOTOR; Fallout is a dumbed down version of Morrowind; King Khan has already addressed Mirror's Edge. Yeah, it seems like you're too easily amused, or you have very little experience as a gamer. For the latter I may forgive you, but, if that is a case, you shouldn't be so eager to bandy your world viewpoint as fact. The minority is not the majority.

Honestly I am a guy who got a Japanese Wii so I could play games people here in America wouldn't normally play so soon or get to play at all. Plus, their games always seemed cooler but then I realized for every game I thought that about, it was only because there were a bunch of anime/manga characters in it. I wonder if THOSE games would be considered cookie-cutter for Japan. Oh well, needless to say I stopped buying them as they were so overpriced for imports but really because the US would eventually get them anyways. And man did that suck when I found out No More Heroes was censored for the Japanese release. I got to play it earlier but I played through a censored creative artwork.

@the baron
The iPhone is great to do lots of things. I'm typing (inputting with a single index finger) this entire post right now on one. However I feel it's success is greatly related to it's portability/mobility. Not just a phone but an Internet browser with free Internet anywhere.

In all fairness, breathing is involuntary.

Not to mention, aren't action and horror movies pretty "mass market"?

I think what this guy was REALLY trying to say is "the Wii will have more movies aimed at girls". That's the only way what he said makes any sense at all.

I think the 1st part of his statement is pretty foolish, but I suppose he'd be correct in saying there would be broader appeal for more types of content. I certainly don't think they wouldn't be inclusive of action/horror, just that perhaps they'll skew towards having a broader offering in terms of more kid friendly titles, movies, TV shows?

I'd be a fan of the Netflix idea, as then I'd have another console that'd stream it in multiple rooms in my house.

Wii users like Horror/Action but that a good number of them might also like other types of movies that don't sell well on other the 360/PS3. Thats what he meant.

Barely on-topic, I saw Orphan last night. Absolutely, and utterly awful. Horrible movie.

They're already doing it in Japan. The only thing that would prevent them from doing it here would be if there were licensing problems

Standard def is fine if you have a SD TV. It's only when it's on an HDTV that it hurts.

Ahhh sub-par standard definition television.. I can feel my eyes starting to burn just thinking about it!

I own a 50" and I have no problem watching even lower then standard def videos on it.

How the Hell did you survive the past 75 years of TV's being only SD, if not worse quality? How old are you, 2?

While SD stuff on a big HDTV obviously doesn't look as good as HD content, I personally find it to be easily tolerated and don't think it's really *that* bad.