Five Thoughts on the Nintendo Wii

[CmdrSlack]

I don't think he was endorsing anything. Margalis asked what he was playing. He answered.

Uh, thanks there, hoss.  It's a valid question, is flOw on the PS3 any different than the version that is/was out there for free?  Aside from an indie game making good, I really don't see the point of putting it on a console in the first place.  Good for them that there's exposure, but it doesn't seem like it would require a PS3 to run, ya know?

My question to Schild was moreso:  So yeah, are those three games really worth it or does it de-shittify the current PS3 library?  ETA -- Hence my saying, "Maybe that was your point." 

But hey, way to clarify things for me there...

[stray]

But hey, way to clarify things for me there...

Is there something wrong with that? Why the attitude? I'm not trying to fight you, just trying to help you out here. You were making this about "shining endorsements" when all Margalis asked was what games we were having fun with. Your question came off like Schild was making a big deal about flOw or something.

And yes, it's the same game.

[schild]

Of course flOw doesn't require a PS3 to run. Shit, it doesn't require a Pentium 2 and you said you had the FLV on your hard drive.

I don't worry about games de-shittifying a library. See, that's the thing about game systems. Once a library isn't shit, it never is again. For example, the Gamecube, despite Smash Bros and Resident Evil 4, that library is Shit. There's no fixing it. It is not a system you buy because of a lot of games or any sort of notion like that, no, you buy it for one of two or three games and end up playing some other stuff. The PS2 library isn't shit, sure, there's 10x the number of games out for it - and a lot of that is shit, but I could give 50-150 reasons to BUY the system. And then you have a good 100-200 more games you could HAVE FUN with.

Now, to answer the question, the PS3 is in it's first year. While some systems can have a strong launch (Dreamcast) and some can have bad launches (every Playstation system), I know that even the best launches can't tide someone over for a year, and most of the time that first year sucks balls. I've gotten over that and everyone knows damn well the PS3 won't have a shitty library when it's time to count the beans at the end of this generation. Hell, from the looks of it, after this Fall, the PS3 is going to have a shitload of reasons to be owned. But right now, it does a good job of being a next-gen PS2 - blu-ray and all.

And yea, Virtua Fighter 5 is really fucking awesome.

Edit: And no, Stray, it's not quite the same game. The PC version plays like a feature limited demo compared to the PS3 one.

[Margalis]

VF5 *is* awesome. T5:DR on the other hand, while a good game, could easily have been a PS2 game.

[HaemishM]

It's not wrong on the Wii because a) it's way less cash, and b) people just don't play as much on it.  They don't want to, not becuase they dislike it, but because they're not that "hardkore".  They like gaming on a Wii, but they like other things too, whether that be another console or another hobby.

Nintendo needs people who buy at least 20 games.

What do you base that on? Unlike Sony or Microsoft, every console with copy of Wii Sports the Big N sells, it makes a profit on. Now, would they like every person to buy 20 games over the life of the console? Sure. But it isn't an absolute necessity, unlike the other 2.

[stray]

VF5 *is* awesome. T5:DR on the other hand, while a good game, could easily have been a PS2 game.

Just picked up my copy. Won't get around to it until tonight though.

That being said, awesome or not, I put it in the same category as Wii Sports actually. I'll have a good time unlocking things by myself and all, but this is the type of game you definitely want friends around for (and it's too bad there isn't an online mode...but...that'd probably end up pissing me off anyways. Heh).

[Yegolev]

I just noticed the PSP closing the gap on monthly sales with the DS. I wonder why. Boosted by strong PS2 and PS3 sales maybe?

Well, there's the PS1 emulation thing.  There's also the Ratchet & Clank for PSP which is actually giving me the urge to buy one (fuckers).  Maybe some people are getting one so they can milk their $600 PS1/2 emulator for all they can.  Or could be that they already have a DS and have gotten $150 back on their tax returns.  Theories are fun.

Re. Cube library: Eternal Darkness.  Paper Mario: TTYD.  Metroid Prime.  Not Double Dash, though.  Wind Waker causes arguments but it was a solid game.  I'd even say Baten Kaitos, but I don't think I'm near the median on that one.  But yeah, that list is too short no matter how you do it.

As for what I, a PS3 owner, am playing: Final Fantasy XII and Rogue Galaxy as primary.  Backup rotation consists of Shin Megami Tensei: Digital Devil Saga, Okami, Metal Saga, Children of Mana.  I will probably start up Sam + Max: Situation Comedy soon; I'm a bit behind there.  I am also supposed to play more Planescape but making time is hard.

Considering how far I have not gotten in VF4:Evo or Tekken 5, I will probably skip VF5 and Tekken 5: Subtitle unless something wacky happens.  I don't have people coming by to play against, which takes out a great deal of the fun.

[Velorath]

This isn't Genesis vs. SNES.

You're right, it isn't.  In that era buying both systems didn't cost me over a grand, and they both managed to have libraries that justified purchases.

[HaemishM]

I'm mostly playing FIFA07 on the X-Box because that's all I have time for on consoles. A full game of Madden on the Wii will take me 1.5 hours and lately, I just don't have the time. I do manage to squeeze in some VC'ed Contra 3 (boy do I suck at this game), Street Fighter 2 or Streets of Rage lately, and if I have an hour or so, some Zelda.

But now that I'm playing WoW and the UEFA Champions League is back in full swing, my console time is reduced.

[CmdrSlack]

Is there something wrong with that? Why the attitude? I'm not trying to fight you, just trying to help you out here.

Sorry man, I really shouldn't be posting in the mornings.  ETA -- I wasn't trying to really do much but ask a question in an indirect manner.   Check your PMs as well.

[CmdrSlack]

I'm mostly playing FIFA07 on the X-Box because that's all I have time for on consoles.

So how are the controls for Xbox sports games in comparison to the PS2?  I need more games to justify my Xbox purchase.

[schild]

You want to justify the Xbox? Mod it.

[CmdrSlack]

You want to justify the Xbox? Mod it.

I'm not sure if my soldering skills are up to snuff...unless I totally misunderstand the required skills.  I haven't fooled with modding electronics beyond building a computer since I used to sell "chingers" in college.  A chinger, of course, being the little black box that used to fool pay phones into thinking you were paying for long distance, direct dialed calls.

[stray]

I'm mostly playing FIFA07 on the X-Box because that's all I have time for on consoles.

So how are the controls for Xbox sports games in comparison to the PS2?  I need more games to justify my Xbox purchase.

I think controls are a matter of preference. Schemes are pretty much the same, so it's just about feel.

Sports games on the Xbox are better for other reasons though. Slightly better graphics, more storage space (kind of nifty if you like creating a lot of franchise stuff in Madden), and....Some other little things that the hdd makes possible. Like in the 2K Sports games, for instance, a halftime highlight reel is in full motion, while on the PS2, it's just screencaps.

[schild]

You want to justify the Xbox? Mod it.

I'm not sure if my soldering skills are up to snuff...unless I totally misunderstand the required skills. I haven't fooled with modding electronics beyond building a computer since I used to sell "chingers" in college. A chinger, of course, being the little black box that used to fool pay phones into thinking you were paying for long distance, direct dialed calls.

Soft Mod. Google it.

[HaemishM]

I'm mostly playing FIFA07 on the X-Box because that's all I have time for on consoles.

So how are the controls for Xbox sports games in comparison to the PS2?  I need more games to justify my Xbox purchase.

I originally bought my X-Box over a PS2 because of sports games, specifically the graphics being a bit better on the X-Box than the PS2. The controls are just fine if you like the XBox controllers more than the PS2 controller, which I do. I never have liked the placement of the analog sticks on the PS2, whereas the S-controller on the X-Box has always felt more natural to me. The hard drive certainly helps like Stray said, not having to fuck with memory cards. Some of the sports games allow custom soundtracks with imported music; it was cool to hear the opening strains of Tom Sawyer when my field goal kicker hammered one through in NFL 2k5. YMMV

[Merusk]

Y'know what? Fuck the Wii.  Nearly 4 months later and I still get laughed at when calling around about it.  I'm going to buy trees with the money instead. 

[stray]

Doesn't it break your heart that there are resting homes full of 80 year olds out there that have a Wii, and you don't?  :-D

[schild]

And they're still playing the same launch game all the other Wii owners are playing.

OH, SICK BURN.

[Trippy]

And they're still playing the same launch game all the other Wii owners are playing.

OH, SICK BURN.

And they are enjoying it, unlike some people.

[schild]

If I had absolutely NOTHING better to do, I could probably take the Atari Jaguar around to some retirement homes and entertain them long enough to get a decent shot and some smiles and write up a fluff piece.

Seriously, this sort of news doesn't mean shit to me. My post was completely in jest. Though, that article does just further my hypothesis that the Wii is competing with the board game industry.

"Hey, it's canasata saturday!"
"Shut the fuck up, we're playing Wii Sports."

[stray]

Yep.

But before I say it, I do think it's neat that this is happening.

It's just....

Well....

Screw old people. Screw all casuals. This is a karaoke machine to them. They are non factors to what gamers should be talking about. I hate to see people use this (or similar stories) as a means of saying how popular a console the Wii is.

It's not a popular console to them. It's a popular toy.

There is a strong attachment rate with Zelda, so that's encouraging -- actual gamers are buying the Wii too. I'd just like to keep it that way. I want to see it championed for GAMERS, not casuals.

For gamers, this is bad press. Seriously. News like this actually gives Nintendo the wrong idea, and only encourages them to make more games for these casuals (and they won't even buy those). That means less Zeldas in the future. Even worse, it gives third parties the wrong impression too. That's the last thing you want.

[edit] I get bitter just thinking about it.

[CmdrSlack]

For every person that gets added to the market due to an accessible system like the Wii, at least a few have to get converted to rabid poopsockers like the rest of us.

So that is a net gain for the industry.  If the elderly don't, well, they're gonna die soon anyway, right? 

[Calantus]

There is a strong attachment rate with Zelda, so that's encouraging -- actual gamers are buying the Wii too. I'd just like to keep it that way. I want to see it championed for GAMERS, not casuals.

For gamers, this is bad press. Seriously. News like this actually gives Nintendo the wrong idea, and only encourages them to make more games for these casuals (and they won't even buy those). That means less Zeldas in the future. Even worse, it gives third parties the wrong impression too. That's the last thing you want.

You mean you think games could start becoming more and more dumbed down and casual to serve the tastes of the mass market? Lol? That would never happen. Developers and publishers wouldn't sell out those who supported them for years just to make a buck.

Yes, that should be in green.

And yes it does annoy me too. Every time I hear people go on about Runescape and Habbo Hotel I just don't understand WTF the relevance has to me at all. It makes money? Yeah... so does Nike. It's just not relevant to me though. I want to know about video games, not simulators or electronic boardgames. Pointing it out for discussion is fine though, that's what we're here for. I don't want to give the impression I'm coming down on Trippy, it's just that my side of the discussion is going to be that we aren't 80 year olds in a home who have no interest in games in general.

[Kageru]

I seriously dislike having to pay once for a high power computer (so I can get my MMORPG fix) and then again for a low power, lobotomized computer with crappy input options (thumbsticks blow). Nor am I impressed by HDTV specs, by computer standards that's last generations resolution, and I've little doubt the monitors are slower on the refresh. For me the only thing consoles offer are a locked environment to tie proprietary market manipulation too, and that's not something I want to support. Heck, the consoles are now so complex that they have all the hardware issues of computers. Have microsoft actually release a PC gaming hardware standard (as if the 360 isn't a computer, and they *own* PC gaming), and perhaps a small card to contain their ultimately futile attempts at copy protection, and you can dump all the 360's and PS3's into landfill for all I care.

The wii (and PS2) work somewhat differently, because they are true consoles, a glorified elctronic toy for when you want to blow some time playing with friends or sitting at the TV.

Of course the serious AV heads approach the matter differently. Since their money goes into massive screens, huge speakers and sub-woofers intense enough to register on earthquake monitors they want their investment maximized. And since the screens are low res and fuzzy, and a sofa is an apalling environment for computer peripherals like mice or keyboards, they're not interested in using the functions of a general purpose computer.

[stray]

I don't want to give the impression I'm coming down on Trippy, it's just that my side of the discussion is going to be that we aren't 80 year olds in a home who have no interest in games in general.

Ah shit. I'm not trying to come down on Trippy either. Though it probably looks that way.

I'm just following up from what he pointed out. I see more links like his all the time from other gaming sites. That's who I had in mind. And just the press in general.

[stray]

I seriously dislike having to pay once for a high power computer (so I can get my MMORPG fix) and then again for a low power, lobotomized computer with crappy input options (thumbsticks blow). Nor am I impressed by HDTV specs, by computer standards that's last generations resolution, and I've little doubt the monitors are slower on the refresh. For me the only thing consoles offer are a locked environment to tie proprietary market manipulation too, and that's not something I want to support. Heck, the consoles are now so complex that they have all the hardware issues of computers. Have microsoft actually release a PC gaming hardware standard (as if the 360 isn't a computer, and they *own* PC gaming), and perhaps a small card to contain their ultimately futile attempts at copy protection, and you can dump all the 360's and PS3's into landfill for all I care.

Yeah. Hi. /waves

The PC barely has any fucking games. In some cases, entire genres. Realize that.

[Stephen Zepp]

Yep.

But before I say it, I do think it's neat that this is happening.

It's just....

Well....

Screw old people. Screw all casuals. This is a karaoke machine to them. They are non factors to what gamers should be talking about. I hate to see people use this (or similar stories) as a means of saying how popular a console the Wii is.

It's not a popular console to them. It's a popular toy.

There is a strong attachment rate with Zelda, so that's encouraging -- actual gamers are buying the Wii too. I'd just like to keep it that way. I want to see it championed for GAMERS, not casuals.

For gamers, this is bad press. Seriously. News like this actually gives Nintendo the wrong idea, and only encourages them to make more games for these casuals (and they won't even buy those). That means less Zeldas in the future. Even worse, it gives third parties the wrong impression too. That's the last thing you want.

[edit] I get bitter just thinking about it.

I'm not trying to come down on anyone either, but what is it that makes you think that very console out there needs to be for you? (You in the plural sense, meaning gamers/hardcore gamers/etc).

Here's a totally off the wall thought about why it's good that the Wii and Wii games are appealing to non-gamers:

Who do you think it is that is supporting all this anti-game legislature? It's people that have never enjoyed games, and think that all games have to be fps shooters that include mass slaughter of things that move.

If every movie ever made were all slasher/horror filled with blood and torture, you can be damn sure the industry would be tied down with all sorts of legislative acts, but broad capability of the industry has given "something for everyone".

I don't watch disney flicks much, but the existence of disney flicks enhances my movie watching experiences, not lessens them. Why should every console out there be expected to meet the needs of the hardcore/"we want more xxx games" market segments?

Just trying to point out a different viewpoint here, and again not coming down on anyone here, so all you haters out there take a pill :P

[Trippy]

I don't want to give the impression I'm coming down on Trippy, it's just that my side of the discussion is going to be that we aren't 80 year olds in a home who have no interest in games in general.

Ah shit. I'm not trying to come down on Trippy either. Though it probably looks that way.

I'm just following up from what he pointed out. I see more links like his all the time from other gaming sites. That's who I had in mind. And just the press in general.

It doesn't bother me -- I don't own any of the latest gen consoles. The fact remains, however, that Nintendo really doesn't care all that much about you guys anymore. They are intentionally not trying to compete directly against Sony and Microsoft which means they are not targeting traditional console gamers with the Wii. We've known that since it was unveiled many months ago.

[Roac]

They are intentionally not trying to compete directly against Sony and Microsoft which means they are not targeting traditional console gamers with the Wii. We've known that since it was unveiled many months ago.

We've known that since when?  Nintendo was saying they didn't want to go hardcore with their system back in the NES days, leading to things like Mortal Kombat without blood splatters.  While you still get some games like RE4, they have almost always been about younger and more casual play.

[stray]

I'm not trying to come down on anyone either, but what is it that makes you think that very console out there needs to be for you? (You in the plural sense, meaning gamers/hardcore gamers/etc).

Here's a totally off the wall thought about why it's good that the Wii and Wii games are appealing to non-gamers:

Who do you think it is that is supporting all this anti-game legislature? It's people that have never enjoyed games, and think that all games have to be fps shooters that include mass slaughter of things that move.

If every movie ever made were all slasher/horror filled with blood and torture, you can be damn sure the industry would be tied down with all sorts of legislative acts, but broad capability of the industry has given "something for everyone".

I don't watch disney flicks much, but the existence of disney flicks enhances my movie watching experiences, not lessens them. Why should every console out there be expected to meet the needs of the hardcore/"we want more xxx games" market segments?

Just trying to point out a different viewpoint here, and again not coming down on anyone here, so all you haters out there take a pill :P

The reason why I care is because I fear those casuals won't support the industry anywhere close to how gamers do. I would go so far as to say that I'd be surprised if they bought more than five games during a console's lifetime. Especially the majority of them.

It's just a waste of money all around trying to appeal to these folks. In the end, they don't care.


The only way I see a wide variety of people from all walks of life and ages playing games is twenty years from now --- When WE, the gamers of today, are old farts ourselves.

It doesn't bother me -- I don't own any of the latest gen consoles. The fact remains, however, that Nintendo really doesn't care all that much about you guys anymore. They are intentionally not trying to compete directly against Sony and Microsoft which means they are not targeting traditional console gamers with the Wii. We've known that since it was unveiled many months ago.

In one sense, I can see why they're doing it. They've pretty much fell on their ass taking the traditional approach. Something had to give. And believe it or not, I hope it somehow succeeds enough for them so they can be directly competitive next generation. I just hope it doesn't succeed in the sense that it completely changes the direction of the company by next generation.

[stray]

We've known that since when?  Nintendo was saying they didn't want to go hardcore with their system back in the NES days, leading to things like Mortal Kombat without blood splatters.  While you still get some games like RE4, they have almost always been about younger and more casual play.

You're talking about a completely different "hardcore". Blood splattering has nothing to do with saying this is a gamer's market.

This isn't about morals.

And no, they were not a casual gaming company. Wtf are you talking about? They pretty much built the gaming industry as we know it. The NES and SNES were generalized, monster systems like the PS2.

[CmdrSlack]

The reason why I care is because I fear those casuals won't support the industry anywhere close to how gamers do. I would go so far as to say that I'd be surprised if they bought more than five games during a console's lifetime. Especially the majority of them.

It's just a waste of money all around trying to appeal to these folks. In the end, they don't care.


The only way I see a wide variety of people from all walks of life and ages playing games is twenty years from now --- When WE, the gamers of today, are old farts ourselves.

First of all, you have no idea what motivates the people you're trying to discount.  Second of all, you assume a LOT about so-called gamers.  I own 5 xbox titles and about nineteen PS2 titles. 

Supporting the industry is all well and good, but people don't have to be invested to the point of being serious catasses to be a positive effect on the industry.  Not only do you have the "make games seem less like teh debil" aspect that Stephen Zepp mentions, but it makes games seem less "pasty fatass in mom's basement."  IMO, that's  a good thing.  I got over being part of a hardcore niche of people back in high school and college when I was so fucking punk rock that I couldn't get out of bed in the morning. 

Also, I don't get how you can discount "normal" people in one breath and then acknowledge that many of the gamers ("we") that you value are from divergent walks of life, are likely relatively normal, and are part of the normative trend in gaming.  We're just being followed by later adopters now.  They're not necessarily the phillistine hordes seeking to ruin all that is holy and sacred about gaming.  That ship has long since sailed, IMO.  The magic circle has been gone for a looooong time.

[stray]

Too much coffee again, I see?  :-D

Never said they were Phillistine hordes. In fact, I think it's cute.

What am I saying is that they are not worth marketing too on this level. Let alone championing. People who buy a Wii for Wii Sports will not go much beyond that. People who buy a DS for Brain Age or Nintendogs will not go much beyond that. If at all.

It's not about normal vs pasty fatasses in their mom's basement. There are plenty of normal gamers and plenty of abnormal non gamers. It's irrelevant. I'm just talking about consumer types. And gaming companies need a specific kind to sustain themselves. There's too much money involved. Even for some of the simplest of games.

[EDIT - needed to add this]

First of all, you have no idea what motivates the people you're trying to discount.  Second of all, you assume a LOT about so-called gamers.

The only thing I'm assuming about gamers is that they BUY GAMES. Simple as that. They don't have to own the entire corpus of the Final Fantasy series to be gamers or be subscribers to all rags -- but gamers do tend to actually be interested in the whole fucking thing at the very least. Gamers don't have to play 24/7 and be catasses, but they do acknowledge it's a part of their recreation time. Gamers go to stores for the express purpose of buying games. A casual would have to be reminded of it -- and then convinced it's even worth doing at all. Gamers buy across a variety of genres, and wonder at the future potential in their systems ("I hope this is coming soon", "I can't wait for this", etc., etc..). A casual is happy with the game they bought, and doesn't even care or anticipate future possibilities at all. At any given time, they are far more content than a gamer.

[Trippy]

What am I saying is that they are not worth marketing too on this level. Let alone championing. People who buy a Wii for Wii Sports will not go much beyond that. People who buy a DS for Brain Age or Nintendogs will not go much beyond that. If at all.

So? Nintendo has sold well over 8.5 million copies of Brain Age (probably well past 9 million by now). That's more copies than any of the Zeldas (though not all the Zeldas combined). Nintendogs is somewhere over 8.5 million as well. And there are a helluva lot more of "them" than "us" out there so even if it turns out they won't buy as many titles as we do that's still a humongous barely tapped market that only Nintendo is focused on right now and so far it's paying off for them.

Edit: is not if