Yea I do agree the PS3 is great value for what it contains, the 360 less so. It's frightfully short sighted not to stick in Wifi, and for a media/HD device a 20gb is disgusting.
w00t. Please be back! Bit of an old thread though
Hey I've always protested against the 360's lack of WiFi. And now the PS3 is here with an actual final set of features and price it's easy to judge it on value
Nonsense - the PS3 came out after the 360, it has a better form of wi-fi (a as well as b and g), and the hard drive isn't used as a "media/HD device" much at all. In America, it's used for the renting of films, plenty of space on a 20GB but if that doesn't suite, get an Elite. Microsoft don't charge you for the wi-fi, Sony do (and it's poor in comparison). Using the 360 as a media centre means streaming music and films from a computer, or playing films from disc or memory stick. That can be done with a Core.
The Wii is doing great because its an innovative console and its cheap to boot, you can't deny the influence of price on the Wii's success, it would be foolish.
And theoretically the Wii should be about new ways of playing games but tell me, how much has the Wii really innovated?
Right, this little essay of yours doesn't make sense. You cannot judge specifically how innovative a product is. You have already decided for yourself in your opening paragraph that it is innovative, but by how much you say? That's up to you.
I mean the best games for the Wii are just standard gen games with tacked on wii controls, same thing happens for the DS, some of the best games don't make much use of the dual screen/touch screen/mic, etc.
The point is you can create good games for any darned platform and the only reason the Wii is doing well is because it has Nintendo behind it and everyone knows Nintendo makes some of the best games around, couple that with a low price and an innovative feature set and you have a winner, it is not however, the revolution of gaming.
What's a "standard gen"? You seem to be making stuff up now. Do you mean last generation? Current generation? Neither? Who knows, I'd hoped you would. The controls are a fundamental part to enjoying Wii Sports, Wii Play, Wario etc, they were built with the controls in mind, otherwise the first two would be simply party games that got old quick. Here they have really taken it all on board and made it accessible to everyone.
Correct, some of the best DS games don't make use of every single feature, but most make use of two screens, most (if not all) use the touch screen in some way, it's called choice and the availability of options that the develop has open. They can use a feature, but they don't have to.
No, the reason it is doing so well is because it is marketed well and is very appealing to the mass-market, Nintendo haven't put their name all over it, it's slyly inserted onto the box and actual console, it's very discreet. If everything 'Nintendo' sold well, then the GameCube would have trounced the other consoles, but it didn't.
To me, it seems it is the revolution of gaming, it has brought everyone into gaming, rather than the teenagers that love the PS2, the alpha male stereotype for the Xbox and the kids of the DS. The Wii is for everyone, that is a revolution.
If devs really want to revolutionize games they better make intelligent and different games, graphics are good and all but art style will always be better, motion controls are good just as long as they are not tacked on. Just stop following the formula everyone seems to be following and create something awesome, Will Wright is this kind of developer, Bungie used to be this kind of developer until money ruined them. Blizzard was doing great until they made WoW.
Here, you lose yourself even more. Making intelligent games doesn't revolutionise gaming, it adds another intelligent game to the pile. Art style has always existed, art direction is a major part to games development. The "motion controls" haven't been tacked on for the Nintendo games on the Wii, they are developed with the controls in mind.
"Just stop following the formula.." - what? Nintendo have, and it's brought them great success. Do you realise what you're arguing against? Art direction is present, look at Rez, look at Okami, intelligent games? Depending on your interpretation they could be anything from Brain Training, Pokemon, Shenmue, Rez, Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy, any of them. Making them more intelligent doesn't make anything a revolution, it just makes them intelligent.
Blizzard is doing great, how can you not see that? They've made a MMORPG that appeals to everyone, they've made it accessible yet deep and rewarding. They're making millions and it has millions of fans. Bungie are doing great, they're making hugely successful games with the biggest software producer in the world behind them. How couldn't that be good?
And what you guys don't get is that its not a matter of the console, despite what you might like to think all consoles have the potential for ground breaking experiences, blame it all on developers and the industry as a whole. Games are great but they are declining more and more, the industry will never crash again but I'm afraid true classics will disappear and the gaming industry will become pretty much like the film industry. This is evidenced by even the most original and dedicated of developers like Blizzard and Bungie not striving to best themselves, just develop whatever comes out of their asses and follow the same industry recipe. Not that I hate WoW or Halo, its just that they really have nothing special compared to other titles of the companies... like Warcraft/Starcraft/Diablo and Marathon, it is almost as if they had sold their soul to the devil.
What's wrong with developers? They're making games that people want. How are they declining, exactly? You seem stuck in a time-warp, yet I don't know when exactly this time-warp is as this thing you speak of hasn't happened, nor does it look like it will. We have many independent developers and many major ones too. True classics exist in the games industry and are always being developed, we've had Oblivion, the Halo series, the Metal Gear Solid and Final Fantasy series, the Pokemon series, Capcom who are constantly bringing out classics (Dead Rising, Lost Planet), you're extremely jaded and it really doesn't seem like you have any interest in games anymore, I suggest something else to pass the time away. Film classics are always eing made too, what the heck are you on about?
Blizzard have bettered themselves, as have Bungie. Blizzard made a massively popular online RPG, that's a step up from what they were at before. They've launched the most successful add-on to a game ever, there, they've bettered themselves. Bungie released the sequel to Halo, it sold more, it had a great online element to it, now they're making it bigger and better and working on non-Halo products afterwards. They're bettering themselves. To the devil, you say? What bollocks, I say.
But I digress, really what I wanted to say is that all consoles have the potential to be great and have awesome games, it all depends on the developer not the platform.
What a terrible and blatantly obvious ending.
Next post..
The GameCube lost because it had no third party support and it was just the same as an xbox and ps2, nothing innovative about that.
It had third-party support, but the first-party games just weren't good enough, nor was the marketing.
Why is the DS and Wii succeding? Not because their control options are better because they are not they are just new and fresh and have a gimmicky happy feeling to it, coupled with a good price, some decent 3rd party support and Nintendo and its a winner, the Wii and DS are doing good because its something new not necessarily because the control is so good.
The control options cannot be called better or worse specifically, there is no certain or correct answer, as with anything, yet you continue to issue these points. The controls are better for tennis games (in my opinion) as it actually feels like you're playing tennis rather than clicking buttons on a pad.
Nintendo still don't have great third-party support, people buy Nintendo consoles to play Nintendo games, not many people bought a GameCube to play Need for Speed, they bought a PlayStation.
Again, your last point in that paragraph is silly, the form of control is innovative to people and appeals, people prefer it so it's better to them, right?
In the end, most consumers do no research, they just buy on impulses and the Wii is doing great because its something different, different means people will want to try it, regardless of whether its better or not. That reels them in, Nintendo games keep them interested.
What do they need to research, exactly? How silly.
Just look at some of the best DS games... most could be done without all the DS's gimmicky features... take Mario Kart, Pokemon Diamond/Pearl, New Super Mario Bros, Final Fantasy remakes, Castlevania, etc as a few examples.
Mario Kart only uses the map on the bottom screen, very helpful, Pokemon uses the 'Poketch' feature, showing what Pokemon you have with you, the time and other things, it's not essential, but it's there so why not use it? Most games can be done on a Spectrum, but we move on. You could argue all day about how we don't need new consoles and that the graphics were fine - of course they are. But if we stand still we get stagnant and stale.
What was the most sold and arguably best Wii game of 2006? Twilight Princess of course... See where I am getting at?
Wrong, actually. The best-selling game was Wii Sports. Twilight Princess didn't perform as well as they expected. Wii Play has also outsold it.
