The irony of the Wii

[snkcube]

Nintendo rarely produces a bad title (I´m looking at YOU Mario Party) however they usually extend the release dates in order to ensure that they have a quality product.

IIRC, the Mario Party games aren't developed by Nintendo, but by Hudson Soft.

[Panzer88]

yup, who better to make a party game than the makers of bomberman

still, they whore out their IPs, not quite as bad as Sega but almost ( I love you Sega but man you whore out your IPs)

[FitzRoy]

And maybe I'm sick of upgrading my PC and want access to a larger library of games than what the PC can offer.

no console as of yet has a library bigger then the PC.

What I probably should have said is that I want a larger variety of games. The PC's inability to promise that every user owns a gamepad with a standard layout of buttons has ensured that developers will publish certain genres (like fighting games) on consoles only. And with promises of less hackers and better mouse support, even FPS and real-time strategy games are going to start looking better on consoles. PC gaming all but died for me when LucasArts stopped making adventure games, Looking Glass went out of business, and Origin was gobbled up by EA. Fast internet and the resulting onslaught of MMORPGs changed everything.

I do miss Sega, Sega made the best hardware IMO, and all their handhelds kept being a portable version of their previous console (with full cart backwards compatibility).

That aspect was cool, except I question going about it the way the Nomad did. When I mean SNES portable, I don't mean being able to use existing SNES cartridges Nintendo's SNES ports to the GBA sold extremely well, so it's obvious that people aren't going to feel cheated buying the same game again.

Sega's consoles were always hit or miss, and the thing that pissed people off about Sega was the lifecycle of their consoles. It seemed like every time you went to the bathroom, Sega had released a new console. They constantly tried to one-up competition to stay on top technologically. It makes you at least somewhat appreciative of Sony's business model. They are the most considerate of backwards compatibility, they never rushed launches, and their consoles seem to be built with longevity in mind.

[Gil_Hamilton]

You're right, I was. With the same horizontal resolution of 256, the DS is basically a 4:3 cutdown of the NES and SNES. The GBA is a head-scratching 240x160. Also disappointing was that the 1991 SPC700 was still far superior to the 2001 GBA. Not to mention it had an inferior backlight to the 1991 gamegear. Sure it was a battery/cost issue then, but ten years later? So you can barely see the damn thing and it still sells like hot cakes. That's what I don't understand about Nintendo. The intentionally cheap out on hardware, yet with the profit margin they are making ($100 per wii?), is it really necessary to undercut the specs THAT MUCH? Especially when that profit will naturally increase over time as the console's static internals age and become less expensive to manufacturer?

I must've been one of the lucky few, as I never had visibility problems on the original GBA, except with Circle of the Moon.
CotM I'm chalking to a poor beta. They CLEARLY never played the thing on actual hardware, or they'd've changed the pallete(see: Aria of Sorrow(Harmony of Dissonance had the crayon outlines, or I'd score it too)).

I've got no clue what was up with the resolution, but the sad excuse for a sound system is because the GBA was a rush job. The Wonderswan and NeoGeo Pocket had genuinely scared Nintendo. They were EXTREMELY dependent on their handheld division, and they'd actually LOST market share for the first time in ever... to a pair of nobodies from a consumer gaming hardware standpoint.
The GameBoy was painfully dated, and Nintendo's monopoly was good only as long as nothing else was around. Once something else hit, they had to kludge the GameBoy Color together to distract everyone, then release a new system as fast as possible. This involved cutting corners, and GBA sound sucks because of it.




As far as the Wii. Nintendo's stated that they were planning to sell it cheaper than the current retail price.
They were targeting a $150 price point, if I recall. Basically, retailers told them they wouldn't carry it at that price, because it lent the impression it was cheap junk(See: GameCube).

Hence the specs are lower than they could've been.

they've got a good half of hollywood supporting them. Why would they support a failing format? in any case I care about neither, Digital Distro is going to take over physical formats, it's just a matter of time. it's a total moot point.

Maybe when a single person can afford to pay a T1 connection by himself.

I don't think you'd need a T1, but wireless speeds are going up all the time. On top of that I figure in the US a Fiber Optic network will be established sometime between 2o10 and 2o15, in time for the next console war. Microsoft is already preparing test markets in the major cities to provide service for Fiber Optics people with their XBOX platform.

in case you didn't know Fiber Optics go FAST.

The US tends to lag in network infrastructure.
Partially because there's so MUCH infrastructure to update.

I wouldn't predict any fast conversions. Especially with so much of the US still on DIAL-UP.








As far as SNES-CD...
We wouldn't have had Rondo of Blood on the SNES.
We'd've probably had Dracula X with better music. There wasn't anything technical keeping a game that played like Rondo and carried Rondo's maps off the SNES.



The only theory I've heard about SNES CD that really makes sense is that the ultimate problem was Sony had publication rights due to a clause in the SPC700 contract, and was bragging proudly that they would license anything and everything if you paid them.
So Nintendo bailed. Then made the N64 cart-based, despite the fact that it was an insane move, and left them behind Sega AGAIN(especially since the SegaCD was what got the Genesis to start selling in Japan).

The PROBLEM with the theory is that much of japanese business is apparently conducted with oral contracts, implied understandings, and brief outlines of agreements written on fast-food napkins.
Which is why Sony couldn't nail Nintendo for breach of contract after they bailed on the SNES CD. They DID try, and it was thrown out because there wasn't anything in print. It was He Said, She Said: Big Spender Edition.

But it's interesting that Nintendo NEVER made a CD-capable system.
Even the Wii can't read CDs.

[Panzer88]

I do miss Sega, Sega made the best hardware IMO, and all their handhelds kept being a portable version of their previous console (with full cart backwards compatibility).

That aspect was cool, except I question going about it the way the Nomad did. When I mean SNES portable, I don't mean being able to use existing SNES cartridges Nintendo's SNES ports to the GBA sold extremely well, so it's obvious that people aren't going to feel cheated buying the same game again.

sure sure, but you have to admit it was pretty cool and pretty convenient with backwards compatibility. I don't see sega as releasing that many consoles like you make it out to be. the Sega CD to a degree and especially the 32X were the reason people got that impression but if you didn't get either you didn't miss out on much (at least I didn't feel that way, sure I thought it was cool but no great loss)

I mean there was ample time between the master system, genesis, saturn, and dreamcast, and they were all great systems for their time, ESPECIALLY for their launch year.

It's funny that so many people have the cheap impression of Nintendo in their mind because at least for me they at least also have the "build to last" feel to them like they could survive a house of 5 year olds where as PlayStations just feel cheap. I believe any console if you take care of it will last but I've seen so many PlayStations bite the dust (not my own, I don't have younger siblings )

furthermore I don't see PlayStations as built to last, I just see them as lucky to last, they were so successful there was no way they were going to stop cashing out on that system till they absolutely had to, if it weren't for Dreamcast I'm sure all the next gen consoles would have been pushed back another year or so. This generation marks the first generation that Sega hasn't kick started the entire industry into action since the atari days.

[Neo Kaiser]

You're right, I was. With the same horizontal resolution of 256, the DS is basically a 4:3 cutdown of the NES and SNES. The GBA is a head-scratching 240x160. Also disappointing was that the 1991 SPC700 was still far superior to the 2001 GBA. Not to mention it had an inferior backlight to the 1991 gamegear. Sure it was a battery/cost issue then, but ten years later? So you can barely see the damn thing and it still sells like hot cakes. That's what I don't understand about Nintendo. The intentionally cheap out on hardware, yet with the profit margin they are making ($100 per wii?), is it really necessary to undercut the specs THAT MUCH? Especially when that profit will naturally increase over time as the console's static internals age and become less expensive to manufacturer?

I must've been one of the lucky few, as I never had visibility problems on the original GBA, except with Circle of the Moon.
CotM I'm chalking to a poor beta. They CLEARLY never played the thing on actual hardware, or they'd've changed the pallete(see: Aria of Sorrow(Harmony of Dissonance had the crayon outlines, or I'd score it too)).

I've got no clue what was up with the resolution, but the sad excuse for a sound system is because the GBA was a rush job. The Wonderswan and NeoGeo Pocket had genuinely scared Nintendo. They were EXTREMELY dependent on their handheld division, and they'd actually LOST market share for the first time in ever... to a pair of nobodies from a consumer gaming hardware standpoint.
The GameBoy was painfully dated, and Nintendo's monopoly was good only as long as nothing else was around. Once something else hit, they had to kludge the GameBoy Color together to distract everyone, then release a new system as fast as possible. This involved cutting corners, and GBA sound sucks because of it.




As far as the Wii. Nintendo's stated that they were planning to sell it cheaper than the current retail price.
They were targeting a $150 price point, if I recall. Basically, retailers told them they wouldn't carry it at that price, because it lent the impression it was cheap junk(See: GameCube).

Hence the specs are lower than they could've been.

they've got a good half of hollywood supporting them. Why would they support a failing format? in any case I care about neither, Digital Distro is going to take over physical formats, it's just a matter of time. it's a total moot point.

Maybe when a single person can afford to pay a T1 connection by himself.

I don't think you'd need a T1, but wireless speeds are going up all the time. On top of that I figure in the US a Fiber Optic network will be established sometime between 2o10 and 2o15, in time for the next console war. Microsoft is already preparing test markets in the major cities to provide service for Fiber Optics people with their XBOX platform.

in case you didn't know Fiber Optics go FAST.

The US tends to lag in network infrastructure.
Partially because there's so MUCH infrastructure to update.

I wouldn't predict any fast conversions. Especially with so much of the US still on DIAL-UP.








As far as SNES-CD...
We wouldn't have had Rondo of Blood on the SNES.
We'd've probably had Dracula X with better music. There wasn't anything technical keeping a game that played like Rondo and carried Rondo's maps off the SNES.



The only theory I've heard about SNES CD that really makes sense is that the ultimate problem was Sony had publication rights due to a clause in the SPC700 contract, and was bragging proudly that they would license anything and everything if you paid them.
So Nintendo bailed. Then made the N64 cart-based, despite the fact that it was an insane move, and left them behind Sega AGAIN(especially since the SegaCD was what got the Genesis to start selling in Japan).

The PROBLEM with the theory is that much of japanese business is apparently conducted with oral contracts, implied understandings, and brief outlines of agreements written on fast-food napkins.
Which is why Sony couldn't nail Nintendo for breach of contract after they bailed on the SNES CD. They DID try, and it was thrown out because there wasn't anything in print. It was He Said, She Said: Big Spender Edition.

But it's interesting that Nintendo NEVER made a CD-capable system.
Even the Wii can't read CDs.

Well about Rondo of Blood if Nintendo where to release the SNES CD at the appropriated time then the SNES Dracula X won't had existed on the first place. The only game to remember would be Rondo of Blood. But since history failed ROB is giving the PSP a boost and that's good.

[Panzer88]

Well about Rondo of Blood if Nintendo where to release the SNES CD at the appropriated time then the SNES Dracula X won't had existed on the first place. The only game to remember would be Rondo of Blood. But since history failed ROB is giving the psp a boost and that's good.

wow, that is some crazy shit logic.

[neo_bahamut1985]

Yeah, I couldn't help notice how successful those SNES to GBA ports sold (especially FF1-6), now only if they'd put those on the Virtual Console....not that I'm giving a little hint to Nintendo. Since they have the rights to publish them.....

[Gil_Hamilton]

Well about Rondo of Blood if Nintendo where to release the SNES CD at the appropriated time then the SNES Dracula X won't had existed on the first place. The only game to remember would be Rondo of Blood. But since history failed ROB is giving the psp a boost and that's good.

Except that it wouldn't work that way.

Rondo of Blood only exists BECAUSE it was Castlevania on a Non-Nintendo system.
Nintendo was jackasses. So Konami, to avoid pissing them off, put spinoffs on the "other" systems instead of mainline Castlevania games.

It's the same reason the Genesis got Castlevania: Bloodlines.
It just happened that Rondo was badass enough to eclipse the original series games.

[snkcube]

Yeah, I couldn't help notice how successful those SNES to GBA ports sold (especially FF1-6), now only if they'd put those on the Virtual Console....not that I'm giving a little hint to Nintendo. Since they have the rights to publish them.....

Sadly, that won't happen for a while. It'll draw away sales from the remakes they have out.

[whicker]

The SNES-CD was basically an underpowered GBA inside a cart, along with a 6502 microprocessor for controlling access to the CD. Throw into the mix a bizarre CD caddy with built-in save ram.

Ad the worst of all, it had to play CD-i games flawlessly... If you can even call Zelda: The Wand of Gamelon "flawless".


I don't think it would ever have been revolutionary, save for it is interesting how they ALLEGEDLY were able to expand the SNES's available video memory by another 128KB by tying the "PS-RAM" into the B-Bus. 11-bit per pixel direct color mode would have been very interesting to program for, to say the least.

[Panzer88]

well, we're talking about things that never where, I mean they COULD have stuck with the original Sony deal and then there wouldn't have been any phillips/cdi deal.

and it prolly would have been called the playstation (nintendo's name) but would have just been a CD add-on, not like the playstation we all know today.

[Gil_Hamilton]

The SNES-CD was basically an underpowered GBA inside a cart, along with a 6502 microprocessor for controlling access to the CD. Throw into the mix a bizarre CD caddy with built-in save ram.

Ad the worst of all, it had to play CD-i games flawlessly... If you can even call Zelda: The Wand of Gamelon "flawless".

You're mixing things up.
For starters the CDi Zelda games didn't come about until AFTER Nintendo bailed on the Philips CD expansion.


I don't recall ever seeing an SNES CD that wasn't intended to boost the SNES' capabilities.
By most counts it was going to include a SuperFX.
I lend said accounts very little credit when taken literally. I believe the original intent was "3D graphics capbilities similar to those found in SuperFX games," but Id have to dig through my old game mags to confirm that(or even to confirm which version of the expansion was announced first).

I don't think it would ever have been revolutionary, save for it is interesting how they ALLEGEDLY were able to expand the SNES's available video memory by another 128KB by tying the "PS-RAM" into the B-Bus. 11-bit per pixel direct color mode would have been very interesting to program for, to say the least.

It would've been as revolutionary as the SegaCD was. Take that how you will.

[Panzer88]

By most counts it was going to include a SuperFX.
I lend said accounts very little credit when taken literally. I believe the original intent was "3D graphics capbilities similar to those found in SuperFX games," but Id have to dig through my old game mags to confirm that(or even to confirm which version of the expansion was announced first)

most certainly, this was their tactic had the competition not started releasing entirely new consoles. They had a whole line of FX software (starfox 2, mario , FX Fighter) and if it was going to use a disk then the chip would HAVE to be in the system.

good call, good call.

[Neo Kaiser]

The screen shots of the canceled Mario CD shows what Nintendo goal was.

[Nightcrawler]

The SNES-CD was basically an underpowered GBA inside a cart, along with a 6502 microprocessor for controlling access to the CD. Throw into the mix a bizarre CD caddy with built-in save ram.

Ad the worst of all, it had to play CD-i games flawlessly... If you can even call Zelda: The Wand of Gamelon "flawless".


I don't think it would ever have been revolutionary, save for it is interesting how they ALLEGEDLY were able to expand the SNES's available video memory by another 128KB by tying the "PS-RAM" into the B-Bus. 11-bit per pixel direct color mode would have been very interesting to program for, to say the least.

And just where are you getting technical spec information on the SNES CD? To my knowledge no official specs were released.

[byuu]

I don't think it would ever have been revolutionary, save for it is interesting how they ALLEGEDLY were able to expand the SNES's available video memory by another 128KB by tying the "PS-RAM" into the B-Bus. 11-bit per pixel direct color mode would have been very interesting to program for, to say the least.

I can say with 99+% certainty that expanding the SNES' Video RAM via an add-on unit would not be possible. The VRAM and S-PPU are too directly tied together. And there's certainly nothing on the B-bus that would allow that to happen. At best, there could be a custom DMA that could blit up to 3.58 million pixels per second to the 64k available VRAM via $2118 writes. That's actually enough bandwidth to fill almost the entire screen with 8-bit RRRGGGBB color data at 30fps. The bigger limitation is vblank window time for the writes.

The B-bus connector on the bottom really is mostly useless from a hardware point of view. It's mostly useful because of the audio mixer pins. Games could use the B-bus to ask the base unit to play redbook audio through those pins, for example. If there were an SNES-CD, I can guarantee most of its power would come from a cartridge that you had to connect to the top, ala the BS-X.

As for 11-bit direct color mode, the SNES can already do that. But it's a ruse. It's really 8-bit direct color, and the extra three bits comes from the tilemap -- since the tiledata is now the palette index, the 3-bit tilemap palette index can extend the tiledata colors. The format is thus: 0BBb00GGGg0RRRr0, where uppercase is from tiledata, and lowercase is from tilemap.

The obvious problem here that makes "11-bit color" bullshit is that each tilemap entry addresses at least 8x8 pixels at a time. Hard to really make use of such a "feature", most definitely. Even worse, since the lowest bits are always zero, and the next lowest require tilemap addressing, the end result is that your blacks may end up dark gray, and your whites always end up light gray. It would've been better to extend the 8-bit color ala:
r = (r << 2) | (r >> 1), g = (g << 2) | (g >> 1), b = (b << 3) | (b << 1) | (b >> 1);

That would've eliminated the black/white extreme color problem. Figure out some other gimmicky trick for the three tilemap palette bits. Perhaps make it a luminance scale or something for cheap gradient effects.

[Neo Kaiser]

I don't think it would ever have been revolutionary, save for it is interesting how they ALLEGEDLY were able to expand the SNES's available video memory by another 128KB by tying the "PS-RAM" into the B-Bus. 11-bit per pixel direct color mode would have been very interesting to program for, to say the least.

I can say with 99+% certainty that expanding the SNES' Video RAM via an add-on unit would not be possible. The VRAM and S-PPU are too directly tied together. And there's certainly nothing on the B-bus that would allow that to happen. At best, there could be a custom DMA that could blit up to 3.58 million pixels per second to the 64k available VRAM via $2118 writes. That's actually enough bandwidth to fill almost the entire screen with 8-bit RRRGGGBB color data at 30fps. The bigger limitation is vblank window time for the writes.

The B-bus connector on the bottom really is mostly useless from a hardware point of view. It's mostly useful because of the audio mixer pins. Games could use the B-bus to ask the base unit to play redbook audio through those pins, for example. If there were an SNES-CD, I can guarantee most of its power would come from a cartridge that you had to connect to the top, ala the BS-X.

So that cart to be inserted would be the equivalent to the PC-Engine's System Cards?

[Gil_Hamilton]

I don't think it would ever have been revolutionary, save for it is interesting how they ALLEGEDLY were able to expand the SNES's available video memory by another 128KB by tying the "PS-RAM" into the B-Bus. 11-bit per pixel direct color mode would have been very interesting to program for, to say the least.

I can say with 99+% certainty that expanding the SNES' Video RAM via an add-on unit would not be possible. The VRAM and S-PPU are too directly tied together. And there's certainly nothing on the B-bus that would allow that to happen. At best, there could be a custom DMA that could blit up to 3.58 million pixels per second to the 64k available VRAM via $2118 writes. That's actually enough bandwidth to fill almost the entire screen with 8-bit RRRGGGBB color data at 30fps. The bigger limitation is vblank window time for the writes.

The B-bus connector on the bottom really is mostly useless from a hardware point of view. It's mostly useful because of the audio mixer pins. Games could use the B-bus to ask the base unit to play redbook audio through those pins, for example. If there were an SNES-CD, I can guarantee most of its power would come from a cartridge that you had to connect to the top, ala the BS-X.

So that cart to be inserted would be the equivalent to the PC-Engine's System Cards?

No. Very no.

The PCEngine system cards were JUST the BIOS and maybe some RAM(depending on hardware/software version).
In the right configuration, they were totally optional.

The SNES CD interface cartridge would've been the primary hardware connection, and would have a cable running down to the system. Like the FamiCom Disk System, which ONLY connects through a cartridge on the top.

[whicker]

I don't think it would ever have been revolutionary, save for it is interesting how they ALLEGEDLY were able to expand the SNES's available video memory by another 128KB by tying the "PS-RAM" into the B-Bus. 11-bit per pixel direct color mode would have been very interesting to program for, to say the least.

The obvious problem here that makes "11-bit color" bullshit is that each tilemap entry addresses at least 8x8 pixels at a time. Hard to really make use of such a "feature", most definitely. Even worse, since the lowest bits are always zero, and the next lowest require tilemap addressing, the end result is that your blacks may end up dark gray, and your whites always end up light gray. It would've been better to extend the 8-bit color ala:
r = (r << 2) | (r >> 1), g = (g << 2) | (g >> 1), b = (b << 3) | (b << 1) | (b >> 1);

That would've eliminated the black/white extreme color problem. Figure out some other gimmicky trick for the three tilemap palette bits. Perhaps make it a luminance scale or something for cheap gradient effects.

Well, I never realized the 11-bit color was so useless.

Yeah, thanks for confirming the B-Bus thing, I thought it had something to do with DMA. But it had to be possible SOMEHOW to get near full-screen video working.

As to which SNES-CD I was talking about, it was the final one. http://www.n-sider.com/articleview.php?articleid=279 and the undated, copyright-violation scanned EGM article that pops up in Google image search for snes cd. There's some old threads over on the assembler site where they tried to track down the unit with the "blood stain" in the corner. The one that seems to always be photographed with an unrelated prototype Playstation controller nearby.

[blackmyst]

Alright, sorry about the late reply, here's to make up for all the lost time!

Okay, what about sand?

What about it? You mean like sand kicked up while walking that we had back on the N64? Or a deformable heightmap which was easy to do even last console generation?

Or hair?

Characters haven't had hair up till now? Lara had a completely correct physics-influenced ponytail in Tomb raider 2 on the PSX (let alone what developers could do with hair on the PS2 and after). Or do you want every single strain to behave realistically? What?

What about the ability to grab clothing?

What, you mean like a grab move? You need physics-simulated clothes for that? Because that's all that would ever amount to, a grab move. Even if it was location-based.

What about a puzzle which requires you to bend a malleable object inwards with blunt force from another object in order for it to fit through something?

Now you're just grasping at straws. What kind of gameplay mechanic is that? Besides, you seem to be overestimating the processor power required for relatively simple things, which is something I see a lot of people do who need to justify their expensive purchases (be it PC or console hardware).

How about long, realistic landscapes that aren't fogged out in fifty feet,

Purely aesthetic. Don't know why you would need it. Though if you're talking about seeing landmarks from afar, Trespasser did it way back when, using impostors (sprites replacing 3D meshes after a certain distance).

or two massive armies in 3d without slowdown.

Done last generation (a few games on the original Xbox that I don't remember the name of). And if you want it on an even earlier console, use 3D billboard sprites. I guarantee you it would have zero effect on the gameplay, yet still achieve that huge army type feeling. In fact I'd be surprised if that hasn't been done before, too.

What you seem to be saying is that if everyone was drawn as a box, that has no effect on gameplay, right, because it's purely aesthetic to care about what a character looks like?

First of all: why yes it is! Second, you seem to be under the assertion there that you cannot possibly have a good-looking character on a console like the Wii, or some nonsense. I don't think I even have to say anything there since I have an entire generation of consoles with good-looking characters well-equipped to convey personality, behind me.

This is stuff that once wasn't or still isn't possible.

What was, again?

Some of it may not have gameplay implications by your standards, but you have to understand what most 3D representations of worldly things are trying to accomplish. If it's a game that takes place in our world, like a civil war game, it's a great bonus to have that world look and act more like our own. It will eventually give people the ability to experience things that the average person never would. And in the case of fictional worlds, what no one would.

That's great, but then you're still talking about aesthetics. Let's just accept that and move on.

Now that we've moved on: You seem to think that it is absolutely impossible to show anything that evokes any kind of emotion without 32 pixel pipelines and shader model 5.0. What you keep doing is talk about some ridiculously high standards for visual realism that very few games really need, and then discount the Wii in its entirety as a platform based on that. It's irrational, like some PC fanboys calling the Xbox360 and PS3 "underpowered" or some crap.

You want to talk about immersion? Play RE4. You want beauty? Play Zelda and ride through the Ordon province forest on horseback. I cannot think of a moment in Oblivion that looked a lot better than that. Oblivion might have the procedural generation, Zelda has the art direction. Seriously, compare the horse in Zelda to the horses in Oblivion. Compare how they look as they move, the animation. There is no question which looks superior.

Nintendo does not have the production capacity or R&D clout to compete with companies like MS or Sony.

Where do you get this info? I clearly remember Nintendo's console having been technically superior to Sony's the last two generations. They could have gone with yet another graphics upgrade, why not? But it's fairly obvious that they needed a change of strategy since simply making a console technically equal to the competition wasn't netting them a lot of third party support.

You're right, though, that Nintendo wants to make money and let third parties create assembly line games instead of advancing technology. I don't know how you see supporting this helps gaming, though, or why all technological progress should just stop due to inevitable obsolescence. If they're not pushing graphics, what are they pushing? The same IP that would look better on other consoles?

That's nearing troll comment area there.

You damn well know what cheap low-risk games production is good for. It encourages innovation. The game industry is not going anywhere if every single game costs multiple billions to develop and thus everything becomes a bog-standard genre deal to prevent any risk whatsoever. Already we're seeing awesome games sell less because they're different, or or they make you fucking think too much. Games are becoming linear piles of boring simple crap so as to not confuse any high school teens as to where they should be going. Psychonauts sold like shit, Okami sold like shit, BG&E sold like shit, they were different. And if development costs keep going up, we're never going to see games like that ever again.

The wiimote that is too slow to aim with and has no applications for most genres?

Ok, now that's just some big fat bullshit. Plain, hard bullshit. I just finished Metroid Prime 3, and while I think it's the weakest in the series (mostly for being too much like Halo, but I'll save that rant for later) the aiming is way, way beyond anything that will ever be possible with an analogue stick. I mean, sticks were great for aiming... back on the N64. When all we knew were D-pads. These days though? I'm not sure if I can ever go back to flailing my gun around like a madman in an enemy's general direction and hope to score a hit.

There's a reason analogue stick shooters have auto-aiming, and Wiimote shooters do not.

I haven't noticed a decrease in game length, size, or quality in most of the new games I've played, unless you count the fact that old PC games used to do infinite randomly generated landscapes with no trees to give the impression of size. It is more expensive, but I think that this is a necessary transition to decrease the overall library of games coming out. Even with previous gen, we were getting so many shitty games on the shelf because they were cheap to make. A more expensive production cost may actually dissuade this kind of thing.

That's just horrible. I don't even know what to say. You basically want to excise all smaller studios from making games?

Sure, it looks good, but so does the gamecube version of Smash Bros. If this wasn't a new console they were pushing, your case would be much more convincing to me. I can't help but think a little before buying into this new strategy of deemphasizing graphics, but releasing a new $250 console for me to buy anyway.

I think it's been said before, but do you seriously, honestly believe people would have wanted to buy an addon controller for their Gamecube, a wifi-attachment, and a thing on top to make it play DVD's (Not to mention some kind of solution for the VC and the other channels)? And call that the Wii? And you think people who didn't have a Gamecube yet would suddenly rush out to buy one plus all the parts for it?

If you think that would have been in any way a sane solution... you're mad.

Since you can't look at two screens at the same time, it seems more logical to simply toggle the screen to show the map using a button. If you could go into more detail on how the two screens are necessary, I might agree with you, but I found myself doing nothing but darting my eyes back and forth when a bigger screen with toggles for special screens would have been totally sufficient.

This seems to have been addressed already as well... but you clearly haven't played MP Hunters, or Phantom hourglass, or a load of other games. If you had, you wouldn't be saying things like that.

When I think about all the PSX soundtracks I enjoyed, particularly Symphony of the Night, I think about how much poorer they would have sounded on the N64's synth chip, necessitated by the limited storage capacity of ROM cartridges.

LOL!!!

http://www.zophar.net/psf/

See that down there? Symphony of the Night, entire soundtrack, 231 KB.

Do you understand how it's difficult for me to take some people seriously anymore after something like this? There is bias, and then there is pure and simple delusion.

I want to know more about your last statement. What is Nintendo offering right now that is so different and important for the future of gaming?

You mentioned earlier how you thought the Wiimote has "no applications for most genres"?

That's exactly the problem with the industry. They're stuck. There's a few genres that work such and so... and that's it. Gamers were indeed getting bored, one more generation of polishing the same old thing, and I'm absolutely sure a few people I know would've quit gaming, quite possibly even me.

If developers don't know what to do with the new controls in a certain genre... then invent a new one. That is its importance. It forces developers to think in entirely new ways. Nintendo talk about disrupting the market, and it's exactly what it's doing, and exactly what the market needs.

And the generation after this, all consoles will feature motion controls, and it won't be Nintendo's exclusive thing anymore. And that's fine! It's good for the entire industry, Nintendo just kickstarted it like they did with so many other things that subsequently became industry standards.

Well, in some cases you really don't need to. In quite a few games, including metroid, it's a touchpad for aiming. This doesn't need a display and you don't need to look at it any more than you would a d-pad.

BZZZT. It's a touchpad for aiming, a button for the morph ball, buttons to change weapons, and some fairly nicely done slider thing to change your currently equipped weapon. Try all that with no visuals.

And even if it WAS just for aiming in Metroid... some games still might want to have their play field underneath the touch-sensitive area, and some might not. The only way you solve that for both cases is by having two screens and having one be touch-sensitive.

But regardless. So what if there's some vague application you can think of that might possibly not want to use both screens? So far it's proven mighty useful for most games and adds a whole new freshness to the experience. I can't imagine playing DS Zelda with just one screen, for example. Why not have it? It's not like every single game suddenly must cram all the info on the bottom screen (see Zelda, Metroid, Mario Kart, etc).

The Wii did have Zelda, but it was also on the gamecube, by the way, and you aren't missing much with that version.

Yeah... that's the only exclusive game the Wii has? If we're going by those standards, then the PS3 has NONE.

While that's true for me as well, you have to consider how you would likely prefer a streamed audio version if one existed.

No. If it would have added needless orchestral noise? No. Don't assume this. I vastly prefer most synth tracks to almost any redbook audio track because the former seems to make the composer focus more on the melody, while the latter often seems to make them go "yay I have an orchestra" resulting in a random cacophony of instruments that fails to convey any emotion whatsoever, and sounds the same as everything else.

It's safe to presume that we would have gotten something worse, yet equally adored, if it had been an N64 exclusive.

See, I'm very sorry but I don't really trust your judgment on these things anymore after that display up there.

But the point is that it had the potential, the support for it, and it resulted in some pretty cool things

Hey, I could have used this as an argument in favour of dual screens. ; )

i don't see myself trying to get a ps3 until FFXIII, at the earliest.

After the horrible trainwrecks that were FFX and FFXII I don't trust Squenix anymore. So, no reasons to get a PS3 for me in the foreseeable future.

consoles need a game to demand owning it, and THEN you buy the multi releases. perhaps that's just the way i think and no one else, but it makes sense.

No, that sounds about right to me as well.

The GBA is a head-scratching 240x160. Also disappointing was that the 1991 SPC700 was still far superior to the 2001 GBA. Not to mention it had an inferior backlight to the 1991 gamegear. Sure it was a battery/cost issue then, but ten years later? So you can barely see the damn thing and it still sells like hot cakes.

Inferior backlight? You mean no backlight? Until the GBA SP came along which blew it out of the water.

But, about the original GBA. Everybody complains it's dark.

I say it's bright. Even compared to the DS lite. "lol" I hear you say. But have you ever tried to play a DS lite or a PSP outside the house? During a sunny day? I did last holiday. Gone away with some fellow geeks, great weather, thought we'd play some multiplayer Tetris and kart. No dice. These newfangled screens are practically invisible in the daylight.

The GBA though? It's perfect. It's not dark. It's merely designed for environments where other handhelds become unplayable. Designed for people to take it outside (yes, scary word, to me as well).

Ok, I don't know this for a fact, that it was designed that way, even if it works out in practice. But knowing Nintendo? It might just be true.

And maybe I'm sick of upgrading my PC and want access to a larger library of games than what the PC can offer.

no console as of yet has a library bigger then the PC.

Well obviously it has a bigger library because it's been the same one platform for god knows how many years. It's also the platform with the least variety in game genres.

[corronchilejano]

Alright, sorry about the late reply, here's to make up for all the lost time!
0wn1n9 Fanboy comments

You sure make up for the lost time.

[Joe Camacho]

Sure, it looks good, but so does the gamecube version of Smash Bros. If this wasn't a new console they were pushing, your case would be much more convincing to me. I can't help but think a little before buying into this new strategy of deemphasizing graphics, but releasing a new $250 console for me to buy anyway.

I think it's been said before, but do you seriously, honestly believe people would have wanted to buy an addon controller for their Gamecube, a wifi-attachment, and a thing on top to make it play DVD's (Not to mention some kind of solution for the VC and the other channels)? And call that the Wii? And you think people who didn't have a Gamecube yet would suddenly rush out to buy one plus all the parts for it?

If you think that would have been in any way a sane solution... you're mad.

We could ask SEGA how did that worked for them, oh wait-, it didn't.

[Panzer88]

I can think of one game that could make use of all the asthetic stuff like sand, hair, etc. but it doesn't exist yet, at least not with computers. it's a pen and paper me and my friend made, but that won't be coming out for awhile yet

other than that, I think black is right, it's all just for pretty, and who really cares right?

as for the horse comparison, I say Shadow of the Colussus has Zelda and Oblivion beat out as far as intuitive control, REALISTIC control, and believable animation regarding the horse. Oblivion just makes my eyes bleed, it has like no artistic direction.

As for the Sega comment Joe made, that's right, it wouldn't have worked, it still ticks me off though at people for saying that. It's not like you had to buy that stuff to enjoy Sega's good games, you could have just bought master system, game gear, genesis, saturn dreamcast

just like you could have gotten Famicom, Gameboy, Super Famicom, N64, Gamecube

(Sega Nomad and Nintendo VirtualBoy don't count )

@ the characters conveying emotion, DUDE we had that in square RPGs on Super Famicom and Playstation.

Nintendo has fine R&D but they are a business so they decide to only spend so much money to make that much more money. They spent a lot of R&D on the Motion tech, they could have spent a ton more but I think it's pretty clear that they are getting away with not spending as much. You can be pissed at them and call it cheap, but they are a business, and why the hell would you spend more money than you need to, if you only spend money to MAKE money.

If they aren't pushing graphics what are they pushing???

well for starters, I wouldn't consider the jump from 2d to 3d purely a asthetic thing, it's a total genre busting realism creating thing. I could argue that some 2D games that came out at the same time as other 3D games look better. So while you would probably argue that the jump from 2D to 3D was was just to make things look prettier and flashy then you're mistaken. So the deal is, the fundamental difference from generation to generation to me isn't the upgrade in graphics but the upgrade in the deepness of the gameplay experience. I think I would say that the gameplay deepness in some areas has start to stagnate, and making something higher res isn't really improving the games at all, I mean we've had "high res" games by defenition on PC for YEARS, but that isn't what is important, that's just what the tech industry is feeding customers these days because they finally decided to sell HD TVs.

So Nintendo decides that analog buttons and joysticks are limiting developers just like d-pads were limiting them. the joystick wasn't a new invention, but someone had to bring it into the gameing industry so developers could use it in games. The same could be said here, sure the motion technology isn't brand new, but they had to do some R&D and commit themselves to bring it in. I don't see why it shouldn't be part or the future of gaming. I would think someone who is arguing about increase in realism and getting more towards virtual reality would agree that motion control is a good thing to have in games.

I'd say the motion control in the wii is still pretty basic though and can be developed further.

Realize that increase in resolution and polygons does not equal increase in realism. It takes intelligent design and creativity to make something that works and will sell AND also provides a realistic immersive experience.

honestly if you just go out and create a game that is just hyper realistic, you have to realize it might not be cost effective, it might not be fun, and it might have all the physics but have no direction and actually might be a very shallow experience.

one of the most complex games I've ever played is XCOM-UFO defense and graphically it's very basic.

as far as the wiimote being to slow, you're out of your freaking mind.

enter Metal of Honor: Heroes 2

http://media.wii.ign.com/media/947/947233/vids_2.html

see the entire Blazing Fast Wii FPS Controls video. First it shows the standard slow speed, and then it shows how fast it can go. It goes faster than a normal mouse, you'd have to get a gaming mouse to go that fast. While you may not say it outdoes PC mouse controls it totally thrashes dual analog, sorry pal.

Look at Resident Evil 2 or Conkers Bad Fur Day and tell me that the cartridges were just "Too Small" it's bullshit just like "The saturn can't do transparencies" just like "the N64 silicon cartridges are just so much faster than CDs that those gaming experiences cannot be achieved on CD gaming systems" just like "PS2 can't do complex cel shading graphics as were achieved in Jet Grind Radio on Dreamcast" just like "3 processors are better than 1, sorry Sony" (even though that is kind of true, the whole campain was total bullshit like those games couldn't be done on Playstation)

it's all just corperate lies and advertising, don't actually buy into it.

the wiimote can cover PC genres like god games, RTS, FPS etc. I think that is a huge number of genres, how can it be said that it has no application for most genres?

a lot of games use motion controls as a gimmick, or button press right now, but that's because they don't have the time or money to build a new game so they take the old game with the button pushes and map them to gestures. Does this mean that the wii is incompatible with the genre? no, it just means that the developer is lazy but trying to catch the wave of cash.

FFXIII may be cool, but a lot of the core devs are either gone or working on on other projects.

the GBA may have had terrible backlighting, but the DS Lite has awesome backlighting. What's your point? they upgraded, isn't that the idea?

you have to understand that blowing all your money to get the latest tech out to consumers is bad business for you, and bad for them too because at that point it's overpriced. Sony did well in the last two generations by releasing conservative hardware.

If you really want to be crazy about it the Government has technology like 2 or 3 generations ahead of us, or heck, why isn't anyone making games for super computers that they make CG movies on? because there is no market. There is a market for PS3, but untill the price goes down more, if you are willing to spend that much money on gaming I'd really be more inclined to buy a PC.

and finally, big game library does not = good game library. Especially if you have specific, or different tastes then that platforms standard userbase and target audience.

[sweener2001]

i don't see myself trying to get a ps3 until FFXIII, at the earliest.

After the horrible trainwrecks that were FFX and FFXII I don't trust Squenix anymore. So, no reasons to get a PS3 for me in the foreseeable future.

consoles need a game to demand owning it, and THEN you buy the multi releases. perhaps that's just the way i think and no one else, but it makes sense.

No, that sounds about right to me as well.

wow that was a monster quote. i haven't tried FFXII yet, but I think I could get used to it. granted, it doesn't really follow the FF formula, but i think it would be better than my 360 offerings right now.

And as far as what games i would wait for, that boils down to opinion. i realize you weren't cutting me down there at all, i just wanted to make it clear for everyone. the fact that the game that convinces you to buy a console is purely opinion. heck, for some people, i suppose it could be madden, but what a waste.

and i just included that second one because it makes me feel all happy when people agree with me.

moving on....

i still see a place for graphics heavy "traditional" gaming machines. both the wii and the other current gen consoles want to immerse you in the game, they just go about it differently. what better way to get immersed in gta IV's locale, than to have it rendered so beautifully? or what better way to be immersed in manhunt II than to actually execute your finishing moves move by move? I see two different methods of immersion, and in the next generation, like blackmyst said, we'll more than likely have a combination of the two. hopefully it's more like nintendo's approach than sony's to motion.

it's also been said that the wii mote doesn't work so well for complicated or "hardcore" games because the gnarly shapes that your hand may be forced to take. i believe they used metroid as an example, but i haven't played it. clarity, please?