Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ScrambledGregs]

The best PC gaming platform of all time was the Commodore 64: true or false??

[0bsessions]

False. Amiga > Commodore 64. n00b.

[jhocking]

Last time i said that while chatting, I swear I felt the attempt to kill me through the internet.

I don't read threads in the computer/videogame forum often, not sure why I'm reading this one, but I'm glad I did because this line is the funniest shit I've read in a while.

[Skinnaird]

Jings! Crivvens! Help-ma-bob! And many other Scottish exclamations of surprise!

Inteligent game discussion. On the internet.

I love Questionable Content.....

[Scarychips]

I had my Wii by chance, We just saw an EB Games store and decided to see if they had the Wii and we just bought it, I don't have to buy a 360 cause I'll have a free one and I don't find the PS3 interesting enough to buy it and I can't play games on my computer, I have a crappy graphic card.

I read on Wikipedia that Microsoft will only begin to make profits with the 360 in 2008 and I read somewhere (I'm gonna put the link when I'll find it) that EB Games said that 0% of the Wii consoles had problems, 1% of the PS3 consoles had problems and 33% of the Xbox 360 had problems.

[Bunnyman]

PC gaming is the absolute, far and away worst place for the casual gamer. It's a landscape pretty much dominated by MMOs and FPS and they really don't wander far out of that pair of genres. The selection of even viable PC games is few and far between, much less a variety of them. Pretty much everything available for PC ends up on consoles these days as the console market is exponentially larger.

Actually, the PC is far and away the best place for casual gamers.  The vast majority of homes in the industrialized world have a computer, even if it is a five-year old Compaq so loaded down with spyware it takes seventeen minutes to boot.  Where else can mom play a few rounds of bejewled or junior play Lifesavers Pool or whatever's on PopCap?  Kids hanging out in the computer lab at lunch aren't going to play Gears of War; they're going to dig up a flash game on Newgrounds.  While there are certainly console casual games (Wii Sports/WiiPlay being the most recent obvious examples, but XBox Live Arcade's offerings also being notable), PCs have vastly more penetration, due to their other, 'productive' uses.

I think you have a different definition of 'casual gamer.'

[0bsessions]

You're working off a flawed perception of the term. The generally accepted definition of a "casual gamer" is someone who has more than a passing interest in video games, but isn't considered "hardcore" in any particular genres. Your textbook casual gamer is the type who won't go out and play an MMO or check out the new Ninja Gaiden/Resident Evil, etc, but will pick up the yearly edition of Madden or enjoy a pickup game of Halo.

[ScrambledGregs]

Actually, 'casual gamer' is kind of a nebulous term now that Nintendo is trying to reach out to everyone and get them interested in videogames. Granted, the kind of stuff that sells to this new audience--your Wii Sports, your Nintendogs, your WiiFit, your Brain Training What's Its--aren't videogames in the same way that I think Resident Evil 4 or the upcoming Smash Brothers are 'traditional' videogames. Yet they still are.

The PC is a shockingly good platform for casual gaming because of all the simple, free games you can find online. Even stuff that costs money can be easy to pick up and play, like Bejeweled clones or most of PopCap's games.

[Ozymandias]

Hey, Tommy, if the Wii is the first console you've ever purchased, it might be worth your while to get some old GameCube games, then. See if you enjoy them.

[Storm Rider]

Well, if you enjoyed RE4, there was the RE1 remake for Gamecube and Resident Evil 0, which I assume is some sort of prequel but I honestly know nothing about. Also, Eternal Darkness. It's 5 years old now so it looks a little dated, but it's still got a level of atmosphere that no other game I think has matched since. No other survival horror game has a meter measuring how fucking insane the stuff you're encountering is driving you, much less a meter that actually starts to affect how you perceive the game. As your sanity goes down, walls start becoming covered in blood and portraits start turning into scenes of murder and shit. It's mindbending and at the top of the short list of games-as-art in my mind.

Other good games for the Gamecube not involving Mario or Zelda:

Metroid Prime 1 and 2
Soul Calibur 2
Killer7 (apparently, I never played it)
Viewtiful Joe
Timesplitters 2
F-Zero GX
Wave Race: Blue Storm

I also think all 3 Prince of Persia games were released on Gamecube as well, but go ahead and skip 2 because it was badly marketed to the point of idiocy. They threw Godsmack on the soundtrack or something equally ridiculous, made his hair longer, added a scantily clad female villain, and so on. You might like Tomb Raider Legend and Gun, but those are a bit harder to recommend because, well, they aren't as good the ones listed above.

[Ozymandias]

And, honestly, it might have Mario in it, but Smash Brothers is the funnest shit ever.

If you have any friends at all, it's worth every penny.

[ScrambledGregs]

I'm your friend, Thomas.

As for other Gamecube games: you should go buy Wind Waker as soon as possible. If you're not so immature that you think it looks "too kiddie!!" then you'll love it like I do.

Also, the Paper Mario for Gamecube is good or great.

[Ozymandias]

Super Paper Mario is great or better.

[Storm Rider]

Yeah, the Gamecube Paper Mario game is definitely the worst of the three, but they're excellent games, so that's sort of an unfair distinction.

[0bsessions]

And if you end up enjoying the latter two, the original Paper Mario was released on the Virtual Console this week.

[ackblom12]

I want this cake!

[est]

I am pretty happy that the PS3 is getting the spanking it deserves in the sales figures.  Anyone who knows me knows that I am not a fanboy of any particular platform, but also that I hate Sony's increasingly arrogant and inept flailing.

Anyway, my contribution to the PC/Console debate is this:  I play FPSes, RTSes, MMOs, some RPGs and some 3rd-person shooters/whatevers on the PC.  I play sports, fighting, racing, 3rd-person shooters, RPGs, brawlers, platformers etc on the consoles.  Up until the other day I owned one of each of the past gen consoles (traded the xbox and some games for a DS Lite) and will probably wind up getting at least the Wii and the 360.  I have totally written the PS3 off until it becomes something approaching a good investment of my money.

With all of these purchases I'll still upgrade my PC so that I can continue to play the latest PC games, because it just doesn't feel right playing certain types of game on a console.  I know that other people don't seem to have this problem though, and good for them. 

[Storm Rider]

My Nintendo fanboyism ended when I bought a PS2 three years ago. Console wars are stupid, there's no reason why the 3 companies currently in the business can't coexist. The only good thing about the constant atmosphere of competition is the pressure on the console-makers to produce excellent first-party games. I will say that the PS3 will be a substantially better investment if their holiday lineup turns out to be as good as it looks. Whether or not I'll finally give in largely depends on whether or not there are 60 GB models left, and/or whether or not the new 80 GB model will still be 600 dollars. The decision to buy a 360 at 400 was a difficult one for me a year ago, but I'm not going to pay 600 dollars for a console, full stop. The entire reason consoles are chosen over PCs by most people is because the monetary cost is much less, and Sony seems to have lost track of this.

[aeMaeth]

I have several points to make here, each combating specific fallacies used in this discussion.

The PS2 was HORRIBLY undersold, until something magical happened. DVD's broke through and became mainstream. At that time the $300 ps2 was the cheapest fullscale stutterless DVD player out there. To get a good progressive scan DVD player back then was gonna cost you about what buying a ps3 costs now.

Sony did do something either really smart or really stupid, Personally I think they aren't as dumb as they appear. When the PS2 came out there was a backlash against sony back then as well. It paid off in the end. XBox only does HD-DVD so far, PS3 does Blu-ray. HD-DVD is the better of the two formats RIGHT NOW. but NOT next year. How long was it until the DVD reached the limit of it's capacity? 6 months? Blu-ray has alot longer life span before they have to make 3 Blu-Ray disc "Special Editions" HD-DVD as of today can barely contain full 1080p resolution full feature with 2 hours of extras. Blu-Ray? You get that 1080p, and you can also get the entire special features on it (hours upon hours upon hours, why do I get the sinking feeling that it's going to be Quintin Tarintino and George Lucas that will push the boundries of that aspect?) As well as a FULL game + a fuck ton room for alot of other shit. Blu-Ray will win out in the end, because of ease of use (Go buy a season of any TV show on HD-DVD you'll still end up with more than one DVD to sort through, where as it'll all fit on ONE FUCKING BLU-RAY!) Scalability, and the simple fact that not just Sony but alot of other Hollywood studios are behind it.

Next one, "PC games are becoming a niche market", I would have no issue with this but I didn't see a j/k after it.

Are you serious? REALLY SERIOUS? PC's are the only platform to play the most engaging to play and watch competitive  games. Yes I know CGS has DOA and Project Gotham in it (yes xbox again ftw) BUT, Have you watched a PGR match? Short boring, no upsets, who takes the lead in the beginning keeps it, you get one chance to pass and if you miss you can't get there the rest of the match. Yes the skill level is amazing, but it's disinteresting after the first 30 friggan seconds, the rest of the match is just waiting for the win to be sealed.

 The "REAL competitive video game" I speak of is of course Counter-Strike: Source. Though the community is a bit elitist (but what "niche community" that is being forced into the mainstream isn't? Remember how the internet was a few years back? You probably don't remember the communities back then. But you follow their lead. Emoticons, netspeak, 13375|>34|<, IM, BBS/Forums video games, CG animation, yeah blame those elitists back then for all that.) Now there's the emergence of a new professional sport, though the pay isn't as high as it's more "physical" brethren it will get there. Video games are coming of their own, you get to sit and watch it pass. But console games will NEVER be as competetive as PC games. The skill level isn't there. Yeah, the best and the worst in the world at a console game have a huge skill gap between them, but they are BOTH hampered by the controller, the Wii's controller is slowly getting to the intuitive and accurate nature of the PC's Mouse//keyboard.

This gap, if it can be called that it's more like a chasm, between skill levels for PC and Console Controller. There's a reason why bungee // microsoft don't allow for cross platform play. It's not a "compatibility issue" it's an "ownage" issue. Any halfassed decent pc player would STOMP the everlasting FUCK out of your random average XBL halo player. And of course there would be plenty of PC gamers out there willing to roast servers and clear them out for halo console players. (I myself would be one of them, if Halo 2 was crossplatform.)  Anywho I'm losing my train of thought I figure I should trail off here....


No point, yes I made a forum account to post in this thread. Eh....

[Storm Rider]

Because everybody cares about Counterstrike in this day and age. And everyone makes their video game purchasing decisions based on which platform has competitions. Pro gaming is a big, big deal and everybody pays attention to it.

Now I will give you a 'j/k'.

[Ozymandias]

Oh, yeah. Professional gaming sure does represent the mainstream.

The needs to be an emoticon making the jacking off motion. Just to emphasize that I feel like being an internet fuckwad at that post.

[Storm Rider]

Besides, the whole 'mouse-and-keyboard-are-superior' argument makes no difference because when you are playing a console game everyone else is using a controller too. I'm not quite sure why this is a point in favor of PCs at all, but people seem to act like it is.

[aeMaeth]

Ok, then how's about this, there has YET to be a console game yet that can match the sales of Half-Life 1 yeah, that's a 10 year old game. Not to mention the fact that HL2 has out sold the better portion of the xBox catalog. But that MAY just be me. And oh, pro gaming IS mainstream now, it's televised and it's got a LARGE viewership.

http://www.thecgs.com/

But don't take my word for it.
-Levar Burton

And if you are going to hold to the line about "Not everyone decides game purchases based on the competitive playability." Isn't that the point of the whole concept of a "game" that it's competitive, so if a "game" is good enough to be played for money wouldn't that also TEND to SUGGEST that it is itself a "good game"?

Wait, how did my 2 cents worth turn into someone flaming me? So in response to your flame, go fuck yourself.

The whole 'mouse and keyboard are superior' argument makes a BIG difference, why the FUCK do you think Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo spend MILLIONS to attempt to come close in a console form the intuitive grasp most people have of the mouse and keyboard? Why is the Wii doing so well? because the "learning" the controller isn't as hard as well the xbox. Yes the xbox controller is a piece of work, it should be immortalized in the Museum of Modern art, but it still, takes ALOT of time to learn it, and use it well. Most people already know how to use a keyboard and mouse, and can pick that up pretty quickly, it's the finesse that takes the learning on the PC.

Console is superior for such things as Guitar Hero, Fighting games, racing games (unless you buy the logitec force feedback steering wheel), and RPG's (not MMO's mind you). BUT, the RTS and FPS genre's should be left to the PC, the control just isn't there on the console.

So to sum up:

You're an asshole who started flaming for no apparent reason, you parrot back what I said then mock it, good debate method. (Storm Rider and Ozymandias that is)

Professional Gaming IS coming into the main stream, notice my points as to that (http://www.thecgs.com/) there's already alot of sponsor money in this gig, more than baseball started with.

You ignored my mention of why the Playstation 3 may or may not pull a Playstation 2 (becoming a less expensive HD movie player with more features than other ones, just like the PS2 did with DVD's)

Counter-Strike (and Counter-Strike: Source) are in the top 5 played online games, also among the best selling games ever. PC games sell more copies than console games, THAT's a FUCKING FACT.

You're an asshole that started flaming for no reason.

[ScrambledGregs]

So sales determine whether a game is the best or not?? I don't think so. Half Life 1 and 2 are great games to be sure, but I would hardly call them the best ever. I think you have a very skewed perspective as someone who mainly games on PCs and is hardcore about Counter Strike.

Also, what's this shit about the PS2 being undersold?? It sold a fuck lot when it first came out, and then kept going, despite having no good games because everybody expected good things were coming AND it was a cheap DVD player, as you mentioned. The PS3 has some good games coming, but it's still too stupidly expensive to get people into either it or blu-ray DVDs. The PS3 is barely less expensive than a modern blu-ray player, while the PS2 was significantly less expensive than concurrent DVD players. I believe at this point the PS2 has outsold the PS1, and that's saying a lot.

[0bsessions]

To aeMaeth:

Essentially, most of that was just outright misleading bullshit.

The PS2 was NOT undersold. Where you're getting that insane notion is beyond me. The PS2 was so largely hyped that it killed the Dreamcast before it was even released. It was the fastest selling console in gaming history. It would have sold even more units early on if they hadn't completely fucked their production rate.

I'm curious why you even mention Progressive Scan capable players, as the original PS2 model didn't even have that capability. Also, using the term "fullscale" is a bit disingenuous. The PS2 was, at its core, an utterly shitty DVD player. The reason Nintendo has, to this day, not included DVD playback in a console is that the drivers tend to shorten the console's lifespan.

Another HUGE flaw and hole in your argument is that DVD had absolutely zero competition. DVD was destined to be huge and Sony had the foresight to jump in at the ground floor. There was absolutely no argument for VHS over DVD: DVDs were cheaper to produce, did not deteriorate like VHS, were all digital, held significantly more capabilities, smaller storage, etc... Unless the marketting was botched beyond recognition, DVD could not fail.

Meanwhile, HD-DVD and Blu Ray are a race that's still too close to call. Studios keep flip-flopping between the two and neither is apt to have the runaway success of DVD in the next five or so years. Hell, DVD's likely not even going anywhere for at least that long. An HD-DVD player or Blu Ray player is just too expensive to rationalize the comparatively minimal technological jump from DVD to the new formats as opposed to VHS to DVD. Sure, it looks prettier and holds more info, but it's basically the difference between VHS and HQ VHS: minimal to the average consumer. It'll be years yet before either catches on, if one of them does at all. In the time it takes for either to be close to cracking the standard def DVD market, something better will likely come along and blast them both to shit.

Everyone else seems to have, quite expertly, dashed the rest of your argument to bits, so I'll leave well enough alone there.

[Ozymandias]

As for PC games selling more than console games-

Find the game that sold the most copies on this list

(Here's a hint: it's not in the PC section)

[TheFuriousWombat]

Ok, but that's because it's Mario. C'mon man, what's going to beat Mario?? If you look at the PC section though it seems like a lot of games on there have higher numbers than the non-Mario (and Pokemon) games on consoles.

[Ozymandias]

Mario and Pokemon beat out The Sims (which is hardly 'professional gaming...'), but then there's a huuuuuge gap between the Sims and Starcraft that contains more Mario, Pokemon, Grand Theft Auto, Gran Turismo, Final Fantasy, and Nintendogs.

By the time you get to Half-Life 1, as this fine gentleman keeps hyping, you've passed the entire top 20 best selling console games of all time.

Also, it's worth a look up at Halo 2's or Goldeneye's sales. Now look at Half-Life 1's.

8 million for both! Shocking proof that PC gaming is kicking console gaming's ass.

[ackblom12]

There's also the sales figures for earlier this year.

Consoles - $4.8 Billion (not sure if this includes rentals)

Handhelds - $1.7 Billion (not sure if this includes rentals)

PC - $970 Million (not including some sales, or subscriptions to games like Gametap. It is including the sales of Burning Crusade.)

That, and there has been no reason for the last generation or so for there to be anything but a graphical difference between the PC and console games gameplay wise. Especially now with the Wii-Mote making more of a simulation of the Mouse & Keyboard.

Edit: Forgot to post a link to one of several articles discussing the sales. Stuff

[Storm Rider]

Nintendo just released some statistics about their year to date now that the June NPD figures are out and we're effectively at the halfway point. I cherry-picked a couple of the good ones:

--For the first half of 2007, Nintendo represents nearly 70 percent of the industry growth in the United States and Canada combined.
--In June alone, Nintendo has six of the top 10 best-selling games in the United States, including the top four: Mario Party® 8 and Wii Play™ for Wii, and Pokémon® Diamond and Pokémon® Pearl for Nintendo DS.
--Of the top 30 best-selling games in the United States for all of 2007, half are for Nintendo systems.

All the hardcore fanboys keep saying that the Wii is just a fad and that its huge sales will die off soon, but with Microsoft and Sony bleeding money left and right, if Nintendo can keep making modest profits on the strength of their first-party games (which they always have, even in the Gamecube days), then even if Microsoft and Sony come back and pass them in the later years of the generation, hasn't Nintendo still won in the long run?

Anyway, the biggest reason console wars are stupid (besides that there's no reason all 3 can't coexist) is that no console is perfect and if you're acting like any one hardware maker can do no wrong you're an idiot. Sony obviously has the utter lack of top-tier software and the outrageous price point, but Microsoft has the horrendous hardware failure problem, and Nintendo, no matter their strengths, are still producing games with last-gen graphics and dragging their feet on online support.

[Storm Rider]

No way. Third party developers won't ignore a platform with the Wii's install base size. Whether or not the games they do make are ones traditional gamers will be interested in is the question. I think there will be more than the Gamecube, certainly, because the Wii is rapidly approaching the Gamecube's sales for its entire five year lifespan and might get there before the end of 2007. How many more, there's no way to know. The success of Red Steel (regardless of the quality of the game) shows that there is a market for 'core gamer fare' on the Wii, and another important factor is that Wii design is much less costly than cranking out a game for the 360 or PS3 that is high enough quality to avoid getting lost in the shuffle. As such, I think that smaller developers will gravitate to the Wii simply because designing an impressive game in the HD-era is (at this point) still very expensive. The thing is, this is ultimately just more extremely shrewd business by Nintendo, because their bread and butter has always been the titles they develop themselves (they are at this point, the top-selling software publisher in all three major gaming regions), and by producing systems that don't require massive budgets for software development, they keep their costs low but their sell-through more or less the same as all their competitors, which is making them money like crazy and I honestly don't think that's going to change dramatically. Super Mario Galaxy and Super Smash Brothers Brawl will probably sell as well as any game not named Halo or Grand Theft Auto this holiday season, but I guarantee they both cost a hell of a lot less to make.

I think a big factor in the fate of 'core gamer' fare for the Wii is how well RE4 sells. That is a perfect example of both a high-quality port that was done with actual real consideration of the Wii controls, and an unabashedly M-rated game on a system identified as being more kid-friendly. Capcom is a large publisher, and has proven that they are willing to undertake pretty ambitious projects (Dead Rising was probably the first truly 'next-gen' game except for Oblivion). If they are willing to get behind the Wii fully on the basis of RE4's sales, I think a lot of others will follow.

[ackblom12]

I honestly think everyone who got a Wii and is complaining about it's lack of high quality releases seems to have forgotten that every console ever made has had a terribly shitty first year. Add in the fact that no one but THQ was developing anything for it until after E3 of last year and I'm amazed it got as many good titles it's first year as it's going to.

With it's install base already nearing that of the 360's within 8 months there's no way it's not going to get more developer support. I can't imagine core games won't be made for it. I mean seriously, I doubt there's many big name developers that won't give a shit that it won't be as pretty if it makes them a boat load of cash.

[Storm Rider]

It's true. The 360 didn't get it's first really good title until 5 months after it launched, and the next one came another 5 months later. Then in all the '06 holiday season is when it really started to stack up. The Wii does have the stigma of being a year late to the party on top of being inferior graphically, so it has to fight for attention with a system that's already pretty well established. It's sort of like how the DS started out and nobody really believed it was going to do well against the PSP, and then people bought the hell out of it, so third parties followed suit. Nobody was really convinced the Wii would be a success until around March, and you figure from-the-ground-up game development takes 8 months at the very least, so I'm expecting we'll see a lot of cool Wii games at the end of this year and next spring. That'll sort of be the proving time. If people keep buying it after all that stuff hits, then I think it's established for good.

[ScrambledGregs]

What you guys are missing is that, even with a large install base, developers aren't necessarily going to spend the time to craft 'hardcore' experiences for the Wii when they can crap out a casual game in a short amount of time and make the same profit. Now I'm not saying this is what will happen, but I wouldn't be surprised if, say, Konami or Capcom announce games for the Wii, but instead of things like Metal Gear Solid 5 or Mega Man Legends 3, we end up getting weird, casual aimed stuff.

Honestly, though, I want a Wii just for the Virtual Console. That's the only thing so far that's totally sold me on the Wii, because I don't want to play Twilight Princess that badly, and the 'hardcore' games have yet to come out as of this writing.

[0bsessions]

I don't see how we're missing that. Basic assumption would reason that third parties are most likely to put their best selection on the console with the largest user base. Wii will, by the end of the year, no doubt have the largest for the time being. From the largest user base springs the largest software base which brings a larger user base and it all moves in cycles from there.

Just because they can get away with casual stuff doesn't mean the companies are going to forget the non-casual audience. If they were going to avoid going to the trouble of making a deep gaming experience in favor of casual, they'd drop games for the other two in their entirety.

Look around at quotes from the industry. The biggest reason, far and away, is that comapnies underestimated the Wii's appeal. Suddenly developers are jumping on board left and right. Sega even went so far as to apologize for their earlier dismissal of the console. Hideo Kojima, the creator of the Metal Gear Solid franchise, has gone on record saying how he can't wait to test the boundaries of the Wii remote.

Problem is, all these developers were deep into production on releases for the PS3 and 360 expecting the Wii to get left in the dust.

A perfect example of this situation is the Nintendo DS. Its software library was abysmal for the first year. All of a sudden, they've got exclusive rights to the biggest franchise in Japan, Dragon Quest, for the next installment. They actually took a huge game franchise and decided to put it out on the weakest "system" currently being developed for. Why? Because it has the largest installed user base while maintaining innovation. I wouldn't be surprised to see the next installment wind up on the Wii.

Software developers like to play with pretty graphics, but they are a business first and foremost. They will go where the customers are and the customers are with Nintendo right now.

[Ozymandias]

Back to the original purpose of this thread:

June US:

NDS - 561,900
Wii - 381,800
PSP - 290,100
PS2 - 270,000
360 - 198,400
GBA - 113,000
PS3 - 98,500

Japan:

NDS - 697,000
Wii - 345,000
PSP - 162,000
PS2 - 65,000
PS3 - 52,000
360 - 19,000
GBA - 3,300

Total:

NDS - 1,258,000
Wii - 726,000
PSP - 452,100
PS2 - 335,000
360 - 217,400
PS3 - 150,500
GBA - 116,300

Not much changed in two months. DS is down a bit. PSP took a sharp turn upward. Everything else seems to have increased numbers ever so slightly.

[0bsessions]

For those wondering the total figures, that brings Wii's total to 9.27 million units (Sold, not just shipped), 3.8 million for PS3 (Also sold, rather than shipped) and Xbox 360 at 11.6 million units shipped (Couldn't find an up to date units sold, but it would obviously be less).

Crikey. I don't know how anyone is still trying to argue that Wii is just a fad. At its current pace, it will likely have surpassed 360's current total by next month while being out for less than half the time. That's pretty damn impressive.

[Chrasstor]

I don't enjoy the Wii, because despite what people say, it's just a gimmicky boring turd. I rented it for a couple weeks with Wario Smooth Moves, Wii Sports, Zelda and RE4... I already beat Zelda TP for GC, and I must say, I liked being able to move the camera at will much more than being able to move my wrist to slash my sword. Smooth Moves is kindergarden rubbish, and RE4 plays horribly. I ended up playing Wii Sports for the most of the time..

Wii is okay if you just want to play mini-games on it with a couple friends or something... But the sad truth is it has the depth of a plastic swimming pool. You can't play real games on it. Real games require a real game-pad...

Not to mention the graphical power isn't even much more advanced than the GameCube's... But graphics don't make the game, although they would help. I really don't see what people like about this system. So far, the only person I know irl that really enjoys his Wii is mentally challenged. I don't have any of the next gen consoles... So my opinion isn't biased either.

Not worth the money. Surviving solely on the fact that it's Nintendo's latest heir to the throne.


I know it's not what the fanbois wanna hear, too bad.
kthxbai

[Ozymandias]

Besides the fact that you made a grievous error in judgment when this:

fanbois

happened, the idea that it's "only surviving because it's Nintendo's heir to the throne" is suspect when the GameCube came in behind the XBox of all things and the Wii is currently a stone's throw away from taking the lead this generation.

However, your disdain for games because they are "kindergarten", referring to something as a "turd" without irony, and commenting that only mentally challenged people you know enjoy the Wii suggest more about your maturity than the Wii's problems.

Good day sir!

[Chrasstor]

Besides the fact that you made a grievous error in judgment when this:

fanbois

happened, the idea that it's "only surviving because it's Nintendo's heir to the throne" is suspect when the GameCube came in behind the XBox of all things and the Wii is currently a stone's throw away from taking the lead this generation.

However, your disdain for games because they are "kindergarten", referring to something as a "turd" without irony, and commenting that only mentally challenged people you know enjoy the Wii suggest more about your maturity than the Wii's problems.

Good day sir!

Call me immature all you want, my points remain valid. There hasn't been very many great games for the Wii that are exclusive non-Nintendo titles. That's boring and leads me to believe that the system is hard to develop for(unless you make a game that are simple mini-game grinders). I don't see how it's doing so well. I rented it whole-heartedly expecting to be amazed. I was thoroughly let down. Maybe I look for too much depth in games, hell, maybe I'm just plain old-fashioned...

Even the Sonic title that came out a while back was reduced to a mini-game in which you guide Sonic with the wii-mote into rings... That's lame.

I don't mean any offense by what I'm saying.. If you really want to be the bigger man, explain to me how the Wii is superior to any other next-gen consoles? All I heard just now is "Back off, I <3 Shigeru Miyamoto".

Different consoles for different people, I suppose. I'll digress by saying that I don't like the 360 either(not a shooter fanatic). I haven't even played the PS3, but I'm sure it's garbage considering the titles.

I'm just sick of everyone considering the Wiii as king shit of the next-gen, when to me, it just feels like a big Nintendo-gimmick(Virtual-boy anyone?).

PS-What's wrong with the word turd? Not classy enough for ya?

Post-post-script- I consider it a gimmick. I've played it, and it really doesn't add THAT much to the experience. Hell, I can elaborate by saying that I actually prefer the standard controller to it. It'd be great if it was way more attentive... But really, it's just another way of pushing buttons when 100 different movements just = 1 animation in game. It's just mainly there to grab that attention of people considering getting a next-gen console. I will say that it does work pretty well when just being used to aim at things, though.

[ackblom12]

I think what Ozymandias meant by his post, was that you sounded like you came in here to troll and tell those of us who are impressed with the Wii that we are intellectually on the same level as that of a mentally retarded individual. When you come into a discussion thread to actually discuss just try to use less abrasive language, or at least try and make it sound less like your calling anyone an idiot.

As for it having so few non Nintendo titles as exclusives, we already made our points about that a few comments up and it's pretty easy to confirm them with a simple Google search.

As for asking us to talk about how it's superior? That's a pretty silly rebuttal to make, since he didn't say anything at all about it being a better system than the PS3, 360 or PC. He just called you out on what he saw as you being an ass.

[Chrasstor]

Bah... I didn't say that you had to be mentally challenged to enjoy the Wii... I just said, that the only person I know who enjoys playing the wii is mentally challenged. I'm not saying it's like that everywhere, in fact, he's the only person that I'm friends with that has a Wii... I probably should've clarified that I only have 1 friend that has a next-gen system other than him, too. Most of my friends hardly play video games at all.

Anyway, I've got nothing against people who love their Wii... All I'm saying is, it's not ahead in sales because it's the superior system. There's 1000000 things that could be debated that would sway the superiority towards the PS3/360(same goes for Wii, however). The only reason the Wii has that much of a lead on them is because of how it plays(the novelty/gimmick w/e you want to call it factor), it's low price compared to the other systems helps too.

Sorry, I'm just sick of hearing "THA WII IZ THA NEXT BIG THING IN GAMING! TOTALLY REVOLUTIONIZES GAMING FOR THE BETTER!" when that's not the case at all. I've played it, it's a nice little system... But it's not that big a deal.

My apologies for coming on a little hostile.

[Ozymandias]

I love my 360. I think Microsoft did absolutely everything right with the 360's design. XBL is the single best online gaming service in the entire history of video games. That's not even hyperbole. No one, neither on console nor PC, has ever managed the service Microsoft brought to the table.

But they also took no risks with the 360. XBL was an extension of the service they already had on the XBox. The controller was a modification of the S-Controller, redesigned to perfecton. Everything was just improvement of known technology.

Sony took a risk on Blu-ray and are suffering the consequences. Nintendo took a risk on control and are reaping the rewards.

I never played Zelda on GCN, so I enjoyed the Wii version as much as I could (I thought it was rubbish for reasons completely unrelated to the controls). I can't seem to get into RE4, but I haven't tried very hard. I thought Super Paper Mario, however, was one of the best games I've played in a while, though thats also unrelated to controls.

I don't think anyone's quite grasped the full potential of the device. I think the minigame games are similar to the ten trillion minigames put on the DS when it first game out. Simple, fun ideas for the controls separate from having to put a plot or any complexity around it. The DS is only recently being used to full potential, I think.

Metroid Prime 3 will be the first full Nintendo game made specifically for the console. I think that's the first appropriate place to start fully judging the control sysem on its advantages and disadvantages.

[Chrasstor]

I love my 360. I think Microsoft did absolutely everything right with the 360's design. XBL is the single best online gaming service in the entire history of video games. That's not even hyperbole. No one, neither on console nor PC, has ever managed the service Microsoft brought to the table.

But they also took no risks with the 360. XBL was an extension of the service they already had on the XBox. The controller was a modification of the S-Controller, redesigned to perfecton. Everything was just improvement of known technology.

Sony took a risk on Blu-ray and are suffering the consequences. Nintendo took a risk on control and are reaping the rewards.

I never played Zelda on GCN, so I enjoyed the Wii version as much as I could (I thought it was rubbish for reasons completely unrelated to the controls). I can't seem to get into RE4, but I haven't tried very hard. I thought Super Paper Mario, however, was one of the best games I've played in a while, though thats also unrelated to controls.

I don't think anyone's quite grasped the full potential of the device. I think the minigame games are similar to the ten trillion minigames put on the DS when it first game out. Simple, fun ideas for the controls separate from having to put a plot or any complexity around it. The DS is only recently being used to full potential, I think.

Metroid Prime 3 will be the first full Nintendo game made specifically for the console. I think that's the first appropriate place to start fully judging the control sysem on its advantages and disadvantages.

Oddly enough, I do agree with you here. But the thing is, why should we care if they're being daring? I mean, I'm for anti-conformity as the next person... But if something works, why not just improve on that until kingdom come? There are some things that revolutionize gaming and are needed... (Ex: From 2D -> 3D) I just personally don't think the whole remote thing is needed for gaming. It's a nice little add-on... But in my opinion, it will never-EVER make or break a console.

Heck, if it was some matrix virtual-reality shit, that would be needed revolution. Until then, I'd rather we stick to Evolution.

Just my opinion.

PostScript- From my experience, the fun I've received from trying to play RE is comparable to the pain you'd receive from fucking a meat grinder. Don't touch this one for the Wii(pick it up in a bargain bin for NGC or PS2, you'll have a blast), despite what IGN says. Honestly, one second you're strafing away from a zombie, the next you're suddenly looking at the ceiling. The controls are terrible on this compared to the NGC's. Zelda's controls weren't bad, but, again, I'm not the biggest Wiimote-Nunchuck fanatic.

Modification: I'm renting the Wii again come Smash Bros. Brawl. You can't not love a SB game.

[Johnny C]

Dude I haven't had as much fun playing a game in a long time as I did the first ten minutes playing Resident Evil 4. Motherfuckers cross me and I end them.

However you have a point in one spot, and that is that sales do not equal quality. Millions of people saw Norbit.

[0bsessions]

You should try reading a thread before jumping into it, pretty much every one of your judgments on the Wii has been addressed and torn assunder already and I'll avoid going into detail on them, as I've already done so.

Suffice to say, sales don't generally equal quality, but it tends to lean that way on something this expensive. Sure, it's cheaper than the others, but $250 is still a decent chunk of change to most adults. Few people are going to drop that kind of money in those kind of numbers on something like that. Millions of people buy shitty albums and see shitty movies because they cost about ten bucks a pop. Ten million people are not going to go out and spend $250 plus tax on something that is reputably shit.

In terms of the minigame nature, that's been explained to death. No one expected the Wii to be a runaway success. It's actually been stated by multiple developers that it's the easiest to develop games for (With the PS3, allegedly, being a beast to develop for due to the complex and overly advanced tech). That said, it still takes time to develop quality titles. The installed userbase is already there, now that it's in place, developers are chomping at the bit to develop for it.

In terms of Resident Evil 4, you are quite obviously insane. You are the first and only person I've met who claims either of the prior versions is superior. If you can't keep the reticle straight, you're either really bad or you've got parkinson's or something. I've never, in eighteen years of gaming, encountered a more intuitive and well polished control scheme. Resident Evil 4 proved that the Wii control scheme can be used to accomplish great things and soon enough, it'll yeild results.

[Ozymandias]

Man. I gave RE4 another go. I think I just don't want to play the game for the ten trillionth time. The controls are fine, though. Fast and accurate. I love being able to aim that fast. Shoot a fucker in the head, then while he's recovering, pop a couple in his ass. Delicious.

[0bsessions]

Exactly. That game's overall appeal and whether one is sick of it is entirely subjective, but there really is no way to say those are bad or inefficient controls. They really took what was a phenomenal game and somehow made it better.

I myself never seem to tire of it. When I first got it for Gamecube, I played through it a full four or five times before I found myself able to part with it for a bit. Then I'd still pick it up and play little bits occasionally (Until my dog ate one of the discs). As soon as the Wii edition was announced, I pretty much stopped playing so it would seem at least a little fresh when I innevitably tried it out and I was not disappointed.

[ScrambledGregs]

I don't know why everybody is so surprised and pissed off that the Wii ended up being aimed at casual gamers and bringing people who don't normally play games into the industry. I mean, even back when it was called the Revolution and they first showed off the controller, they were making it clear that they wanted your mom and dad to play videogames.

[ScrambledGregs]

The big thing for me is the price. The jump from $200/$300 consoles to this generation's $400/$500/$600 consoles means I, and many other people, are less inclined to buy the consoles. Then we have the whole PS3/360 games being $60 instead of $50 or below, and you're spending even more money on videogames that for all intents and purposes aren't worth the money because they're pretty much last gen experiences with tarted up graphics and online play.

I'm not casting doubts on Sony or Microsoft's game plans because they're going with what has worked for them in the past. However there is a point where bigger and better does not actually equal bigger and better. It's hilarious to me that both companies think they, too, can bring casual gamers onto their side even though for Average Joe Human Being, a $250 console with $30-$50 games is always going to win out over a $500 console with $60 games.

The portable wars are a whole 'nother can of worms because while Sony seems to be realizing that they can't make the PSP a genuine portable Playstation because home console experiences don't translate well/don't belong on portable gaming systems, they're also going to release a redesigned PSP that has TV out. So, yeah...