Next Gen War

[Joust Williams]

btn

[Brand X]

lol at I LOVE PLAYSTATION THREE annoying people with him being extremely lame and douchbagish. This thread has gone exactly like I had expected it too.

[Melf]

A Price is what is moving Wiis, not Zelda.

That and the fact that you can actually find the Wii in stores.

I went to TRU today and they had "no PS3 consoles in stock" signs plastered everywhere.

LAWL@ Sony.

[MechDeus]

While the SCE division keeps Sony afloat, the Xbox division continues to bleed for Microsoft, so that's definitely not a true statement for the first five-ish years.

Wrong. As I said, according to their business model. Years ago Microsoft said they expected the Xbox to be a money sink while the succussor (I can't spell right now) would be where they start to bring in cash. And that's occured exactly as planned, reports as of late indicate that MS is already earning profit on each 360 sold ($140 or something, IIRC) not to mention the market share and public viewpoint it's currently doing so well in.

[Anthony]

"The (to my knowledge) undisclosed R&D costs of developing the Wii as opposed to the PS3 and Xbox360. This is not to say that it was indeed more than its competitors, but that is a strong possibility"

No it isn't. The hardware architecture is virtually identical (other than using a different type of RAM). The controller has been around for years. There is no RnD here.

I have never really used anything like this that ever felt too responsive, but truthfully I have only messed around with a few things. Updating and improving the usefulness of technology is still a measure of R&D, something Japan in quite famous for in fact. But, if you were to say that there were some really responsive controllers using this technology beforehand, I would believe you, because you care more than I do.

[sethsez]

Nintendo released the Wii to piss off Joust.

Piss him off? It's like giving a mouse to a cat.

[TaekwondoNJ]

PGR3, Kameo (like it or not) and Condemned, as well as other games on the system, look miles better than anything on the last gen and they were launch titles.

I don't think anyone is debating that the 360's launch titles looked better than the normal Xbox's. I'm debating wether or not that actually added anything substantial to the gameplay, something so substantial that it absolutely could not be done on the Xbox. Personally, I'd say the 360 absolutely did NOT do that with their launch, in fact I thought a lot of their titles looked like they COULD be last gen titles. Oblivion is probably the first game I've seen that really took advantage of the 360's power, and from everything I've heard, GoW is really the first true "next-gen" title, meaning there is absolutely no way you could have made anything close to it on the old Xbox. And THAT came out a year after launch.

And don't get me wrong here, I would have been just as happy if Nintendo had made a more powerful system and sold it for 500 bucks rather than making the 250 dollar Wii. But they didn't, and I'm fine with that too.


Your argument of "if its Nintendo, people think it's amazing" is complete horseshit. The majority of the gaming community has been hugely disenfranchised with Nintendo since the N64. Let me give you a small number of titles that a LOT of Nintendo fans found disappointing:

Majora's Mask (Zelda fans are very split on this game I've noticed)
Wind Waker
Super Mario Sunshine (find me someone who DIDN'T think this game was a let down after Mario 64)
Metroid Prime 2
Yoshi's Story
Yoshi's Island 2 (the one on DS)
anything Starfox since Starfox 64
Zelda:Minish Cap (worst Zelda game IMO)

I could probably name a few more, but I think those are probably the most strongly disliked games from Nintendo in the past generation or so.
Super Mario Sunshine is probably the best example, because its Mario, Nintendo's flagship series. But you don't see people running around praising the game for its amazing innovation and gameplay JUST because its a Mario game, do you? No, most people are probably actually TOO hard on the game since it had such a namesake to live up to. I'm just tired of you saying that Nintendo fans will eat anything up thats given to them, when actually the opposite seems to be true.

And don't give me that "there's fanboys that'll support Nintendo no matter what" because thats true for ANYTHING.

[TaekwondoNJ]

It doesn't look attractive because they are afraid that no one will buy games for the system after a few months. And they're probably right! So they price it in a way that it's not about the games. It's about the overpriced hardware. It's cowardly...they don't sound confident in the system.

I'm not buying this either. If you want to see a system that Nintendo wasn't confident in, look at how they treated the DS before it launched. You could TELL they were treating it as an expirement and were completely covering their asses in case it failed. Look at how they called it the DS insteade of the next Gameboy. That way they had another future handheld to fall back on in case the DS failed. They haven't done anything like that with the Wii, they've pushed the system much harder.

[EvilMog]

I know everyone hates Microsoft but you really have to applaud them for trying to give a shit about gamers. Nintendo seems to care somewhat and I really dont know what the fuck Sony thinks.

[TaekwondoNJ]

GAMERS DON'T WANT HD
GAMERS DON'T WANT ONLINE
GAMERS DON'T WANT GOOD TEXTURES
GAMERS WANT A MARGINALLY IMPROVED 1998 ZELDA GAME WITH THEIR 300 DOLLARS

lawl

I... can't say I've ever seen Nintendo say that, but ok. I think their stance is "the majority of consumers don't own HD TVs, aren't hugely interested in online play, and graphics are at a point that people don't want to spend 300 dollars more just to have better textures." And considering a lot of gamers believe OoT to still be the greatest game ever made, a "marginally improved" version would be the best game ever, so yes, I DO think it would be worth 300 dollars.