Now UKers can complain about the price of the Wii as well as Apple stuffs

Yep and i'm betting the Irish Euro price will actually increase too - as we always get that little bit more ripped off than the UK

would rather have an xbox 360 arcade for a similar price any day

I wonder how much the stores will add? I can't imagine them charging the full increase to customers, or will but throw in a "free extra game!" that is likely something terrible.

coronel mustard said:

would rather have an xbox 360 arcade for a similar price any day

Click to expand...

I wouldn't for one that 360 Arcade couldn't play Brawl so that's a dead end right there!

"well the Wii takes TWO Gamecubes taped together... so you know... plus a $0.75 bluetooth dongle... OH! and a DVD drive... Christ those are what.... $10 now? And ya know... we need to.... ya know port over Gamecube games.... and then add Wii controls... that costs more... so...I mean... jeez.... our profit margin is only like 191%... I mean... how the hell can we run a business that way?!"

I taped two GameCubes together and not only was it MUCH larger than my Wii, there was no place to insert Galaxy. I also could not plug both them into my TV at the same time... Were you joking...

Hey, where can you get a BlueTooth dongle for that cheap? Maybe Nintendo should make it optional, then charge $100 for it, like that 0.2¢ wi-fi adapter MS jacked up to an unrealistic price.

^

lol sarcasm on my part. And I bet when you buy millions of them, like Nintendon't does, you get them for pretty damn cheap.

I guess the last 15 years of us having a better economy than Japan is over. It'll be expensive goods all round from now on.

Maybe Nintendo should just stop their blatant profiteering? A £20 increase is pretty huge, and will probably just mean Nintendo keep their massive profit margin on the system.

How much can a Gamecube, DVD drive and some new radio chips really cost? It isn't like they're using bleeding edge technology with the associated R&D cost. The DS is similar, including the new DSi - slap a new case on it, add a few cheap features (cameras) and job's done for a few more years.

peskaa said:

How much can a Gamecube, DVD drive and some new radio chips really cost?

Click to expand...

Except it's not. Faster CPU, faster GPU, Intel style "lets make our chips thuper effecient". And the DSi isn't a new system either. It isn't a DS2 or whatever will be coming up, just a slight update with some exclusive new features added. Kinda like the PSP-1000 to 2000 with Skype or the GB to GBC.

Oh and it's not just the hardware the money goes towards. A lot of R&D goes into these machines and arguably maybe more so in the Wii than the PS3/360, since they're just the usual 'insert new CPU, insert bigger HDD, insert new graphics chip' cycle of old consoles. Else all systems would just be the cost of a few silicon boards and a bit of plastic

Bring it on, I already got mine!

raggedjimmi said:

Except it's not. Faster CPU, faster GPU, Intel style "lets make our chips thuper effecient". And the DSi isn't a new system either. It isn't a DS2 or whatever will be coming up, just a slight update with some exclusive new features added. Kinda like the PSP-1000 to 2000 with Skype or the GB to GBC.

Click to expand...

Actuall you are a bit wrong there Jimmi

The DSi is more of a DS 2 than the PSP hardware revisions. The DSi will carry a new line of software that will only work on DSi systems. The PSP hardware revisions were just that, hardware only (minus skype which really doesnt count imo).

The DSi has its own line of software, this alone makes it more than a slight hardware revision.

Like the GBC.

Just with sucky region locking.

raggedjimmi said:

Except it's not. Faster CPU, faster GPU, Intel style "lets make our chips thuper effecient". And the DSi isn't a new system either. It isn't a DS2 or whatever will be coming up, just a slight update with some exclusive new features added. Kinda like the PSP-1000 to 2000 with Skype or the GB to GBC.

Oh and it's not just the hardware the money goes towards. A lot of R&D goes into these machines and arguably maybe more so in the Wii than the PS3/360, since they're just the usual 'insert new CPU, insert bigger HDD, insert new graphics chip' cycle of old consoles. Else all systems would just be the cost of a few silicon boards and a bit of plastic

Click to expand...

I'll admit the Wii is a bit better than a GameCube, but not much. We're still looking at 480p maximum output resolution, and the overall graphical polish isn't that much higher to the eye.

Can you explain how the Wii would have cost more in R&D than a PS3 or 360? The PS3 has exactly the same use of motion controls as the Wii, and as the Wii is using existing technology then it'll turn out fairly cheap. The PS3 on the other hand was at the centre of the development of a whole new CPU (the Cell) which hadn't existed before, rather expensive no?

The fact that the DSi isn't a new system was my point. Nintendo are trying to flog it as a whole new generation, but they've used the same hardware as the previous generation with a few extra bells and whistles.

peskaa said:

The PS3 has exactly the same use of motion controls as the Wii

Click to expand...

Except not really at all.

peskaa said:

The fact that the DSi isn't a new system was my point. Nintendo are trying to flog it as a whole new generation, but they've used the same hardware as the previous generation with a few extra bells and whistles.

Click to expand...

Are they trying to flog it as a "whole new system"?

@peskaa,

The Wii's a lot more capable than you're giving it credit.

The Wii is firmware locked to 480p. Maybe Nintendo should pull a MS and unlock support for next rez up, when the systems really can't handle it.

From my experience, the biggest improvement in visuals wasn't higher resolutions, but post processing effects, but I'n not discounting that 720p doesn't offer a clear advantage over 480p as an example.

For the games that do actually push the Wii, so all two of them -- Ok, there's a couple more, there's a clear leap over previous Cube games. Not only do they look notciably better, they run at 60 fps.

The problem lies on the developers and their lack o experience, as most of them only know how to speak shader, so have absolutely no clue when it comes to the TEV. So we end up with PS2 looking games that run poorly on a system that is substantially more capable than that antique.

Jimmi can explain his cost part. The Cell was an expensive beast to develop. Sony is still in the hole. But I wouldn't say that the six-axis has the exact same motion controls, because it's missing a few components. And for the CPU, that was probably more work than the GPU, as Nintendo redesigned it from the ground up to be a low-power high-performance chip.

I'm not really sure about the DSi either. Nintendo tends to only offer up tech, when it's in a certain price range, but this new portable seem like a DS-lite+.

The Cell wasn't limited to the PS3 though. The first machine to use a cell chip was a Linux based computer.

And Nintendo's whole motion control thing went back to Metroid Prime 2 in 2003 (IIRC). Microsoft and Sony just took their old systems, installed (insanely) faster chips, bigger storage, newer and standard off-the-shelf radios and transmitters/receivers, USB ports and (PS3 only) new but standard media drive. Nothing was specifically invented just for either system other than the tilt sensor in the PS3. And no it doesn't work the same as the Wii's not by a long shot.

@JackAxe
Nintendo made the sensible choice of locking it to 480p, as juddering and dropping frames would be nasty - but in this era of HD everything, it seems like they're just behind the curve. Give a kid a PS3/360 and a Wii and they'll notice the difference. I still think they should have pushed the envelope a bit more and gone for a system that can push out true HD visuals in some form - Component is a bit old hat.

Saying all this, I do own a Wii - it just hasn't been used since Galaxy came out.


@raggedjimmi
Whilst the Cell wasn't limited to the PS3 alone, SCE played a massive part in the development, along with IBM and Toshiba. The PlayStation3 remains the single biggest commercial use for the Cell, and it's fair to say Sony paid a fair chunk of cash for its development.

Nintendo use off-the-shelf parts as well, including accelerometers for the motion sensing that are the same in principle as those found in the SIXAXIS/DualShock3. Where the Wii differs is the new motion-sensing add-on which will be a marked improvement over what is currently in the PS3 and Wii right now. They all share a use of USB, Bluetooth, WiFi and standard media drives (DVD or BD). That said, the PS3 was heavily involved in the release of Blu Ray as well, so add on another pile of R&D there.

Sky Blue said:

lol wat

Click to expand...

*sigh*
In current forms they all use accelerometers as the basis for the motion controls, with the Wii adding the IR sensor bar on the TV. The main difference is the the way in which they're used - the Wii's 'bar' controller lends itself to a totally different method of playing. However, the underlying technology is the same.

Now MotionPlus will be different, but as it stands right now, not much in it.

@peskaa

I agree that Nintendo should have at least reached for 720p.

When the Wii was first released, I figured it would be able to do more than the previous gen, which it's proven it can, but I never really expected much of it, as it is just a TV console. I always looked to my consoles as a different gaming experience than my PCs. But what I didn't expect, which still dismays me, is how poorly the Wii has been treated by so many developers -- I figured it would be a first year thing, then it would start to get better, but 2 years later and there's still so much garbage being made for it and it seems like some developers are getting worse.

I just want games on the level of Galaxy's quality, or with controls as refined as MOH2. I want my Wii games to show actual effort opn the developer's part, but that seems like it's asking too much from some.

And yeah, component is long in the tooth. It has to be the most annoying cable setup.

And you're not alone on putting the Wii aside. This recent drought of games has really sucked IMO. If anything, it pushed me to back to PC gaming almost full time, for more than just Warcraft 3 mods and I'm glad, because I missed some really great games in recent years.

raggedjimmi said:

Oh and it's not just the hardware the money goes towards. A lot of R&D goes into these machines and arguably maybe more so in the Wii than the PS3/360, since they're just the usual 'insert new CPU, insert bigger HDD, insert new graphics chip' cycle of old consoles. Else all systems would just be the cost of a few silicon boards and a bit of plastic

Click to expand...

I'm sorry but I seriously doubt that the Wii cost more for R&D, you're argument that the Next Gen consoles just 'insert new CPU, insert bigger HDD, insert new graphics chip' is only valid for the Wii.

The Wii uses a faster PPC IBM chip and a Faster ATI GPU, so all of the software and dev tools will have been built from the Gamecubes tools to save on costs. Whereas the PS3 and 360 had complete changes of architecture, the PS3 to the Cell chip (co developed by Sony), and the 360 moved from x86 and a nVidia GPU to PPC and an ATI GPU. Hardware wise all (apart from the cell chip) use off the shelf, or custom ordered through IBM or ATI components more or less.

So the 360 and PS3 will have been more costly to develop the software and SDKs for, not to mention the backward compatibility in the 2 systems (even though sony have now pretty much taken it away). Whereas the Wii is backward compatible because it uses the same (albeit clocked higher) components.

I personally think it's a bit cheeky to raise the price, but I can't blame them as the Wii just keeps on selling, and seeing how much the pound is worth now compared to the yen it's kind of understandable, but they should have had a price drop a year ago IMHO.

P.S. the above wasn't a 'I hate nintendo n00bz' rant, a lot of my childhood was spent playing their games, but the sad conclusion emerged recently that I've grown out of nintendos games, which completely sucks

myca said:

I'm sorry but I seriously doubt that the Wii cost more for R&D, you're argument that the Next Gen consoles just 'insert new CPU, insert bigger HDD, insert new graphics chip' is only valid for the Wii.

Click to expand...

They're all using faster, off the shelf chips.

My point being Nintendo have been developing their motion controls for their next console since 2003. I don't think Sony and MS had invented 2006 chips back then to R&D their next consoles.

raggedjimmi said:

They're all using faster, off the shelf chips.

My point being Nintendo have been developing their motion controls for their next console since 2003. I don't think Sony and MS had invented 2006 chips back then to R&D their next consoles.

Click to expand...

Sorry but your argument holds no water and your facts are skewed, alot of the technology in the Wii remote was licensed from Gyration Inc, and they reportedly started development in 2001.

And sony were involved in the design of the Cell chip, along with IBM and Toshiba. M$ may not have designed much processor wise, but nor do any console maker these days (with the exception of Sony). In fact all the current gen consoles use off the shelf components, or custom licensed parts, the days of consoles using completely (or mostly) proprietary designed hardware like in the 8/16/32 bit era are over.

Alot of the R&D costs for consoles will be in the software that runs the hardware, and the SDK that developers use to make the games on them, and Nintendo had a jump start this gen, because the Wii is built upon the foundation of the gamecubes hardware and software, granted few developers have made use of the increase in specs.

In your previous post you argued that the Wii would have cost more in R&D, and I doubt this, with the Wii being for want of a better term the Gamecube 2.0, whereas the PS3 and 360 have little in common with their previous incarnations, whole new architectures for those guys, completely new design and hardware.

As a good analogy, the Gamecubes jump to the Wii was akin to Macs moving from G3s to G4s, whereas the PS2 to PS3 and Xbox to the 360 was more like Apples shift from PPC to Intel, even though ironically Microsoft moved from intel to PPC.

What I don't dispute though is that Nintendo more than likely used some of the savings from not having to build a whole new system from scratch by doing what they do best, innovating in how games are played, something which they have always been fantastic at. Even though they do miss sometimes, remember the Virtual Boy?

myca said:

Sorry but your argument holds no water and your facts are skewed, alot of the technology in the Wii remote was licensed from Gyration Inc, and they reportedly started development in 2001.

Click to expand...

But it mostly comes from software, which Nintendo has been developing since at least 2003. And it may just be licensed tech but Nintendo had to build the controller and get everything working, even from the first introduction to the controller in 2005-ish to release in 2006 saw a huge design shift. And of course all this needs to be reflected in the SDK and tested for god knows how long.
I have only played with a Wii dev system a short while whilst at university, never got to see the GC one so I don't know how they compared.

And I'm not counting the Cell in with the PS3 dev costs since as I linked to before - it's not just for the PS3. The first Cell computer wasn't even a PS3. Would you count in Nintendo's disc encryption, or mini-DVD tech? Since Matsusha (or whoever) and Panasonic co-developed it with Nintendo?