Wii Q&A Thread

[HaemishM]

You're complaining about the Wii's price. Seriously. YOU are complaining about the Wii's price, after all the shittalk you've given me about being too "cheap" for the PS3.

I plotz.

[schild]

I've been complaining about the $250 since day 1.

Where've you been?

Edit: To put it another way, the 360 has been worth more than $400 to me. The Wii has been worth less than a Gamecube thus far. Umbrella Chronicles probably isn't going to change that.

[Bokonon]

If they only had killer graphics, but still charged $250, it would have been enough.
If they had a killer online service, but still charged $250, it would have been enough.
If they had a slew of third party games announced before release, and charged $250, it might have been enough.
If it had come with 4 controllers (just wiimotes, not even chucks), and they charged $250 (or $300 with 4 chucks also), it would have been enough.

Instead we have shitty graphics, with no online service, one controller and b-string third party games and they're still charging $250.

It's not fucking enough.

Here's the thing though: Microsoft and Sony didn't do any of the above either (for $250).

What can I say about F13?  It's really my favorite website in the entire universe!  I love the irreverent banter and sly wit these keyboard jockeys produce.  And I especially love the staff, they're AWESOME.

[schild]

Eh? If Microsoft had just added Waggle to the original Xbox, we'd be sitting on a sub $250 system with a better online service, better graphics, better media capability, and more third party games.

I don't get what you're saying.

[HaemishM]

He's saying they didn't do that very thing you just said.

[Bokonon]

Eh? If Microsoft had just added Waggle to the original Xbox, we'd be sitting on a sub $250 system with a better online service, better graphics, better media capability, and more third party games.

I don't get what you're saying.

I don't concede the graphics argument. By most accounts the capabilities (if not the eventual leveraging) were more or less the same. And the Wii by all accounts has better graphics capabilities than the xbox.

You were complaining that the Wii (which I will lump into the "next-gen" label for comparison's sake) didn't satisfy those criteria at the $250 price-point; well, neither do the 360 and the PS3. Now you're shifting the argument, or at least expanding it beyond what most people were talking about, bringing in the previous generation of systems. Of course, if the xbox is so good, why aren't you playing it instead of the next-gen systems at their crippled functionality and/or >$250 price-points?

I guess my main point is that you go effing mad when discussing anything Wii-related, and complaining (and I think most would say strongly implying) that it should have had near 360/PS3 graphics capabilities... Yet still have the $250 price. I don't get it. Would it have been cool if they had rocked out the graphics a bit more, and upped the price? Sure, but I probably wouldn't have bought one around release time. I would have waited for a price drop (just like I'm waiting for the 360 to price drop).

If you don't like what the Wii offers, so be it. Different strokes for different folks and all that. The way you talk about it though, it's like Nintendo skull-fucked your Mom, and set your pony on fire. The reality is, your main hobby is video-gaming, and you spend a disproportionate amount of cash on it. Nintendo decided not to cater to you (or, I'll even admit, throw you a bone) this time around. I wonder if model hobbyists get as rip-shit at Matchbox for putting out cheap metal/plastic cars. I mean they are so much smaller! You can't customize them nearly enough! And all the glue sniffing, don't forget the glorious glue!

What can I say about F13?  It's really my favorite website in the entire universe!  I love the irreverent banter and sly wit these keyboard jockeys produce.  And I especially love the staff, they're AWESOME.

[schild]

Nintendo didn't skull fuck my mom. They're actively skullfucking my hobby and favorite industry.

Also, they did set my pony on fire.

The comparison to Matchbox is ridiculous btw. Model Cars and little matchbox cars don't have the same crossover as video games. Much like Gundam models don't have the same crossover as action figures.

Edit: I take that back. Nintendo isn't fucking the industry. The gamers are for allowing Nintendo to get away with it. It was always something that didn't bother me in the portable field since Nintendo was the only worthwhile player and their changes always ended up good their. But their home stuff has been shit for too long, and finally they carry over the BABY STEPS mentality of the portable field to the home systems, and people eat it up. Retaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarded.

[HaemishM]

Let me get this straight: Changing the entire control scheme of consoles is baby steps, but adding more pixels is a huge leap forward in innovation?

SCHWHA?

I fail to see how bringing traditionally non-gamers into the video game market, whether they buy fewer titles than core gamers or not, is fucking the industry. More gamers = more money = more games.

This is teh gud.

[schild]

They didn't change the control scheme, now my wrist is an analog stick. How fucking exciting. Still less accurate than a mouse.

[Margalis]

Since when is schild an EA marketer?

"What's going to be innovative about your 360 titles?"
"HD graphics!"
(Everyone looks confused)

Schild is living in some sort of bizzaro world where more pixels is an amazing coup d'etat but different gameplay is not.

[stray]

Both Saturn and 3DO flopped HORRIFICALLY. You might as well mention the Neo-Geo and Turbo-Grafx for their generation, because they were both technoogically superior to what was going on at the time, but were more expensive and flopped. They were huge fucking miscalculations about what price people would pay for "better" tech.

That's all fine, but it also has nothing to do with what Velorath said. He said there weren't multiple consoles of the same gen that were expensive (or something like that), like there is with the 360 and PS3. I thought it was worth pointing the 3DO and Saturn out. Whether they failed or not is beside the point. His statement, and mine, were just addressing expense. Not failure.

Made their mark? Atari went on to release another console and a bunch of computers. Intellivision? DEAD but still remembered. The others? Didn't even make it out of that generation.

The console market from the beginning has had serious resistance to being gouged. The most expensive consoles, especially those which pass the $300 mark, haven't succeeded.

They made their mark by sparking off a home video gaming revolution. They created a market -- the one we enjoy to this day. We'd be nowhere without them -- and the people who bought them.

You can make whatever argument you like about pricing or whatever, but don't use these machines to do it.

[schild]

Since when is schild an EA marketer?

"What's going to be innovative about your 360 titles?"
"HD graphics!"
(Everyone looks confused)

Schild is living in some sort of bizzaro world where more pixels is an amazing coup d'etat but different gameplay is not.

The alternative is shitty graphics and shaking a stick. Go tell the artists who work on games that graphics don't need to be upgraded. Go tell them we're OK with detailed shit being a blurry mess sometimes. Go tell the God of War guys that including that full buffer mode was a waste of time.

[stray]

I think what Schild is trying to say is:


If Microsoft can offer the base capabilities of an XBox360 for $299, which are undeniably superior to the hardware in the Wii (which is $249), then the Wii is a ripoff.

If that's what he's saying, then I agree.

The same could be said for the PS3. The thing that makes the price so jacked up for now is the Blu-Ray drive. Without it, it'd be priced in the 360 range as well. Possibily cheaper.


Basically, the core hardware of those two platforms (i.e. core models that were hypothetically configured and stripped down like a Wii) could be offered in the sub-$300 range. The Wii, on the other hand, is just one and half GameCubes taped together -- with a couple of additional features (like card readers and wireless). Relatively speaking, it's trash. That hardware is worth $150 to the consumer at best --- and if you want to jack up the price because of the Wiimote, then it should be $200 at best.

It's a ripoff, in terms of what kind of power it offers. The 360 and PS3 are not -- They're actually cheaper than they really should be.

[schild]

And Wii Sports isn't a motherfucking game.

Super Mario Bros. was a game.
Super Mario World was a game.
Tetris, even, was a game.
Wii Sports is not a game.

[stray]

Just to use one example to illustrate how much Nintendo is boning people :

The 360's Xenon setup offers triple cores clocking at 3.2Ghz a piece. They're offering this shit in a $299 system.

The Wii, while using a PowerPC based architecture like the 360, is still using one that's a generation behind (basically a G3), and that only clocks at 729Mhz. Not only that, but it's just one core. They're offering this in a $249 system.

Basically, for something that's only $50 more, you get triple cores, AND --- Cores that individually clock more than triple the fucking speed of the one inside the Wii. Just one of those cores blows it out of the water, and yet, you get three of them.

[EDIT] This is not meant to say the Wii isn't fun blah blah blah. I'm just trying to point out who's really screwing you, as far as prices go.

[Kageru]

Yes, damn that nintendo for not being a huge multi-national that can afford to product dump / sell at a massive loss in order to skew the market in their favor.

They just make games, the losers, and for that they must burn.

[stray]

They just make games, the losers, and for that they must burn.

I'm just replying (or actually, replying to what Schild is replying to) to what others here are saying about MS and Sony offering overly expensive products. It has nothing to do with wanting to "burn" Nintendo. I don't go out of my way to spread FUD about them. I'm just replying to things. And I'm only saying that the price argument can go both ways.

[Big Gulp]

They just make games, the losers, and for that they must burn.

I wish that was the market they were in.  Shit, can you envision Mario, Metroid, etc on hardware that's worth a fuck?  That'd be fantastic.

Nintendo was headed down the Sega road, and it's just too bad that the Wii derailed that trajectory.  We could have had a great game company focusing on just games, but now we've got a great game company pumping out shitty party games for an obsolete system.

[schild]

Yar. Gulp and I don't agree much. But Ninty should have been a third party game developer 6 years ago.

[Azazel]

schild, you blow your point out of propotion, and I can't for the life of me understand why.

This is schild. He always does that.

If they only had killer graphics, but still charged $250, it would have been enough.
If they had a killer online service, but still charged $250, it would have been enough.
If they had a slew of third party games announced before release, and charged $250, it might have been enough.
If it had come with 4 controllers (just wiimotes, not even chucks), and they charged $250 (or $300 with 4 chucks also), it would have been enough.

Instead we have shitty graphics, with no online service, one controller and b-string third party games and they're still charging $250.

It's not fucking enough.

Is your Wii still under some kind of store warranty? Can you "break" it and take it back for store credit which you can instead use for 360/ps3 games? Or sell it so someone on the board here who is still jonesing for a Wii?

Seriously, if it's such a burden to you, get rid of the fucking thing and buy one later when it's $99 like you feel it should be.

[stray]

Am I missing something here? Wasn't some of you who made arguments about the other two consoles' prices first? I think Schild is just trying to turn it back on you, not offering random grievances about the thing.

[Azazel]

Basically, the core hardware of those two platforms (i.e. core models that were hypothetically configured and stripped down like a Wii) could be offered in the sub-$300 range. The Wii, on the other hand, is just one and half GameCubes taped together -- with a couple of additional features (like card readers and wireless). Relatively speaking, it's trash. That hardware is worth $150 to the consumer at best --- and if you want to jack up the price because of the Wiimote, then it should be $200 at best.

It's a ripoff, in terms of what kind of power it offers. The 360 and PS3 are not -- They're actually cheaper than they really should be.

For fuck's sake. Now you're just regurgitating schild's old posts near word for word.

And Wii Sports isn't a motherfucking game.

Super Mario Bros. was a game.
Super Mario World was a game.
Tetris, even, was a game.
Wii Sports is not a game.

You're being a tool again, schild. For the sake of being a tool, or to troll your own board. I'm not sure which. But when you flip out and act retarded like this, it becomes hard to agree with you when you're not being a tool.

Am I missing something here? Wasn't some of you who made arguments about the other two consoles' prices first? I think Schild is just trying to turn it back on you, not offering random grievances about the thing.

Speaking for myself at least, (lacking a HDTV for the forseeable future, at least) I've said that both machines are too expensive for me for what they do - Essentially souped-up PS2's with shinier shiney. I've said that I don't like the PS3 being artificially increased in price by the BR drive not being fucked over in terms of hardware backward-compatability. I've also said I like the PS3 being region-free, and that I'll eventually buy both the 360 and the PS3. Neither of them are overflowing with innovation, but that's alright. I said: "not for me right now - I'll get them later".
I also never implied that they tried to fuck my dog and steal my horse.


schild. I implore you. get rid of the Wii. You'll feel better. Unless having one less thing that's pretty insignificant to bitch about on the internet makes you feel worse.

[stray]

Basically, the core hardware of those two platforms (i.e. core models that were hypothetically configured and stripped down like a Wii) could be offered in the sub-$300 range. The Wii, on the other hand, is just one and half GameCubes taped together -- with a couple of additional features (like card readers and wireless). Relatively speaking, it's trash. That hardware is worth $150 to the consumer at best --- and if you want to jack up the price because of the Wiimote, then it should be $200 at best.

It's a ripoff, in terms of what kind of power it offers. The 360 and PS3 are not -- They're actually cheaper than they really should be.

For fuck's sake. Now you're just regurgitating schild's old posts near word for word.

Hmm? What's that mean? I'm just telling you the differences between their processors, and what the prices are. They're facts. Something you guys are badly in need of, if you're going to bitch about price.

[schild]

If you don't own an HDTV, the 360 and PS3 are more a $2,000 investment.

But that's irrelevant, there's a reason a gamer wouldn't own an HDTV by now, and it surely isn't a lack of games.

[Azazel]

The Wii, on the other hand, is just one and half GameCubes taped together

For fuck's sake. Now you're just regurgitating schild's old posts near word for word.

Hmm? What's that mean? I'm just telling you the differences between their processors, and what the prices are. They're facts. Something you guys are badly in need of, if you're going to bitch about price.

Literally what I said. schild said that almost exactly word-for-word a few weeks ago. I'm not bitching about price, I could buy one if I really wanted to, and very nearly did get a 360 last week. I'm saying that it's not worth it to me at this point in time.

If you don't own an HDTV, the 360 and PS3 are more a $2,000 investment.

But that's irrelevant, there's a reason a gamer wouldn't own an HDTV by now, and it surely isn't a lack of games.

Not sure what you're getting at here. Is this some kind of "ha ha you're poor" thing? Or some kind of "you're not a real gamer" thing?

[stray]

Literally what I said. schild said that almost exactly word-for-word a few weeks ago. I'm not bitching about price, I could buy one if I really wanted to, and very nearly did get a 360 last week. I'm saying that it's not worth it to me at this point in time.

I've been saying it as long as he has been too. It's not meant to knock the Wii or anything. I only bring that line of argument out when people start bitching about 360 or PS3 price.

Secondly, I'm not trying to convince anyone to get a 360 or PS3, or to abandon their Wii's. Basically, I'm just saying that if you like it, have fun and leave it at that -- stop trying to justify it in relation to the other consoles prices. Because when it comes down to it, it's the only console out that's selling at a premium. It isn't any better for consumers any more than the other two are.

[schild]

If you don't own an HDTV, the 360 and PS3 are more a $2,000 investment.

But that's irrelevant, there's a reason a gamer wouldn't own an HDTV by now, and it surely isn't a lack of games.

Not sure what you're getting at here. Is this some kind of "ha ha you're poor" thing? Or some kind of "you're not a real gamer" thing?

Gaming is a bad habit to have when you're broke. Trust me. I didn't work regularly the first 2 years of college. But I gamed. Mostly Dreamcast because I was broke and Dreamcast games were... easily acquired. First thing I did when I got a job was buy most of those dreamcast games (the ones I could find).

Now, those gamers that can AFFORD an HDTV and a 360 (360 is simply the better value than the PS3 at this point), and don't have one, but have a Wii are just completely deluded. Sure, no reason not to call them gamers, about 10-20 reasons to call them Crazy though.

[Velorath]

I wish that was the market they were in.  Shit, can you envision Mario, Metroid, etc on hardware that's worth a fuck?  That'd be fantastic.

Nintendo was headed down the Sega road, and it's just too bad that the Wii derailed that trajectory.  We could have had a great game company focusing on just games, but now we've got a great game company pumping out shitty party games for an obsolete system.

It's more likely that they would have just switched their focus entirely on their portable stuff which is really what kept them afloat the last couple generations (well, that and the fact that they don't take losses on their hardware).

[Azazel]

Secondly, I'm not trying to convince anyone to get a 360 or PS3, or to abandon their Wii's. Basically, I'm just saying that if you like it, have fun and leave it at that -- stop trying to justify it in relation to the other consoles prices. Because when it comes down to it, it's the only console out that's selling at a premium. It isn't any better for consumers any more than the other two are.

uhh.. that's what I've been doing all along. I got it as an impulse purchase, and becaue I thought Fake bowling would be something my wife would enjoy, and as a non-standard dualshock PS-type game, it is. Like Guitar Hero. If it had been the price of a 360, I wouldn't have bought it (PS3 came out 3-4 months later than Wii here, remember.) If the 360 had been the same price as the Wii at the time, I may have bought that instead. But given the pile of unfinished/unplayed PS2/XBox games I have, maybe not. It's something different.

Gaming is a bad habit to have when you're broke. Trust me. I didn't work regularly the first 2 years of college. But I gamed. Mostly Dreamcast because I was broke and Dreamcast games were... easily acquired. First thing I did when I got a job was buy most of those dreamcast games (the ones I could find).

Now, those gamers that can AFFORD an HDTV and a 360 (360 is simply the better value than the PS3 at this point), and don't have one, but have a Wii are just completely deluded. Sure, no reason not to call them gamers, about 10-20 reasons to call them Crazy though.

I could afford one, but it would be by no means an impulse or insignificant purchase and require some saving. My wife certainly wants to get a good, very large TV, but there are a couple of specific things holding me back, and likely will continue to for the next couple of years:

1) The state of Digital TV in this country. (Australia). Until the broadcasters and government actually manage to sort out what the fuck they're doing with Analog and Digital.
2) most of my gaming (like 80%+) is done on the PC.
3) getting a new PC is a higher priority. With a kickarse monitor.
4) lLaser Television. Considering all of the above, this makes me want to wait. Particularly given the quality, timeframe and quoted prices.

Oh, a couple other points on being a gamer. There's also real P&P RPGs, Tabletop Wargamers and so forth. (I won't go so far as to include LARPers and SCA, because then you may as well include the Paintballers and the 501st legion and the furries.)  Lots of us (and at least a few f13ers) split our funds and time amongst the various facets. I even finished 4 Iron Warriors so far this afternoon!

[schild]

We can split hairs, but it's a waste of time. When I refer to a gamer in a thread about video games, I'm referring to a video gamer. A term I hate. While you may enjoy other types of games, they don't even factor into the equation.

Also, I'm more talking about Americans, Europeans (England, France, Germany, Italy - the big ones), and Japanese folks. I have no clue about the state of digital shit in Australia. So yea, I could see that effecting your purchase. Most of the wiitards in this thread and across the other sites I read are American. That said, I've never piped digital TV through either of my HDTVs. Only games and blu-ray discs. Games > TV. I can download TV in 4 minutes and finish watching within the hour. I can download an HD episode of TV (@ 720p) in 7 minutes. Live TV is a waste of money these days - completely. So is Tivo, IMO. Computer + XBMC Equipped Xbox, k?

[Azazel]

Sure. But hey, being a former roleplayer and active wargamer as well, I use the term in a wider sense when I talk about games. Downloading TV is fine and dandy, and I do it as well, though your internet download speeds and limits make me openly weep. Aside from that, unfortunately most TV to be leeched is of sub-par qualuty anyway. An XBMC-Box is definately the win, but you hardly need a quality TV to enjoy it.

As for digital cable, though (as opposed to mainstream digital, which is the seperate thing that's all fucked up atm) I love it. It works extremely well for something to side-watch while on the PC, and then there's things like WWE/Daily Show/Crime Investigation Network/Food Channel/etc which I wouldn't bother downloading but am quite happy to watch when they come on.

I think the basic difference though, aside from when you rant about things like "Wii Sports is not a game" is that I'm more a PC gamer while you're more a console gamer.

[schild]

I don't differentiate myself between PC and Console Gamer. Once again, I play a shitload of PC Games that no one here cares about. There just happen to be MORE games for consoles. I just go where the good games are.

[Velorath]

wiitards

 

[schild]

wiitards

I know, it's too easy.

[Big Gulp]

As for digital cable, though (as opposed to mainstream digital, which is the seperate thing that's all fucked up atm) I love it. It works extremely well for something to side-watch while on the PC, and then there's things like WWE/Daily Show/Crime Investigation Network/Food Channel/etc which I wouldn't bother downloading but am quite happy to watch when they come on.

Discovery HD will absolutely convert you to HDTV.  Nature shows in 1080i are a delightful thing to watch, particularly that BBC Planet Earth series.  It's friggin' hypnotic, to the point where I wished I had some pot while watching it last weekend.