Originally Posted by KSIMP88
No, but your points are ridiculous:
No, but your points are ridiculous:
- Applys equally to PS3/X360, which people have or can be brought at much cheaper with a better backlog.The Wii outsold the xbox and ps3 in the beginning, iirc.... It was the most talked about console, despite the low graphics. high graphics is an improvement. We are comparing Wii to the Wii U here, anyways. A lot of Nintendo fans don't even look at PS3 or 360.
- It has low resolution, poor battery life, is clunky, no multitouch, and I have heard that there are sync issues beyond 10-15ft, its a nice feature, but the implementation leaves much to be desired, + even Nintendo don't know what to do with it in their games (acts as a horn in MK8)It's the first of its kind. Never has a first been perfect. It serves its function, and I haven't met a person who doesn't love it.
- For 2013, that is frankly patheticIt's just fine for the Wii audience.
- True, although that's at the cost of having anemic hardware Anemic Hardware? That's your argument? That's not a counterpoint, that's a callback to your previous points.
- A()lot of these games, to the Wii audience, are very similar in nature to stuff that's on the Wii already.Every Nintendo title is similar to its predecessor.
- There are a thousand different devices that can act as a TV remote nowadays, why should one want a Wii U gamepad for that?When I play a game, I have a TV remote next to me. If I can just use my controller.... awesome. What's to complain about, here?
A. That was a completely different market when the Wii faze exploded. The casuals HAD to have a Wii, and once they got it they stopped using it just a few months later. My mom bought one, along with three games, and hasn't touched it in two years. The point of that argument was Nintendo has failed to convince anyone outside of their camp (fan or fanboy) to purchase the console because they get the same/better on what they already have. On top of that, Microsoft & Sony just revealed two new consoles for the mass to "ooh" and "ahh" over, and that are much more powerful according to the technological jargon they barely understand.
B. I don't love it. A lot of people don't love it. If they did, Nintendo might not be having this problem in the first place.
C. What Wii audience? The casuals that stopped playing it or the fanboys/legitimate fans that'll buy it no matter what Nintendo does?
E. Based on that statement, no one should be criticizing anyone else for liking FPS games or sports games if they continue to play Mario games, games a part of a franchise that's been around for 20+ years.
F. You missed his point. He's saying the Wii U being used as a remote isn't a good selling point. I already have two remotes for my TV. Why would I need a third? And why would I buy a Wii U to use the gamepad as a remote when I can go buy a better remote, or use my phone? That's like Sony telling me the PS4 plays DVD........yay, so does my 360 and my laptop.
The "games for younger people" that you look down on so hard are innovative and creative, and they are not constrained because they have to fit within a specific graphical art style.
Just Dance, Dance Central, whatever Madden & NBA 2K game comes out, Rayman, Mario, all "innovative", right? "Well how many times must you shoot someone before it gets boring? Zomg Call of Duty is the same thing every year". What kills me is people who scream this off the top of Mount Everest are the same people that'll run and buy the next Mario game that comes out, even though "Zomg Mario is the same platforming game every year". I've played Mario Kart for the 64, and I've also played it with the Wii. Felt like I was playing the same game with prettier graphics, new attacks, new tracks, new(er) characters.........kinda like how the CoD fans will say "new maps, killstreaks, weapons, attachments".