Originally Posted by ChvyVele
Yep, nobody said anything.
But the fact remains anyway. The Wii has outsold the PS3 and the 360, even if it doesn't have the best game library. Yes that has slowed down a little, but I'm sure that's why they are going to introduce something new.
Notice every quote you made was in correlation to the the PS3 and Xbox 360
. Not the next gen PS4 and Xbox. There is a major difference in comparison here. Damn right the next Nintendo console better have hardware that's more than the PS3 and Xbox 360. That'd just be damned pathetic. That's not just talking about graphics either try things like functionality, game mechanics, and so on. Can't exactly have a "open" Zelda world like Ocarina of Time with all the bells and whistles like size and sheer size the current consoles have if you can barely even put out HD resolutions. Can't exactly do anything more advanced gravity wise with
Super Mario Galaxy anymore than what they have right now. There isn't anything more the Wii itself can do with it's age-old IR sensor tech, unless you want to throw some kind of advanced motion tracking that'll suck up precious CPU cycles which the Wii barely has to begin with.
If they throw out a Wii that's the same with just HD resolutions, well, you're not progressing anything and the content remains the same.
It's entirely different than saying "graphics suck and won't beat the PS4 and next Xbox lulz". Hardware itself has to progress somewhere alone the line not just for graphics. Especially when the competition hardware is going on 5 years old now, you better be damned sure they're not releasing hardware that isn't better.
Originally Posted by Seeing Red
Quite a rant there. I agree with points 1 and 3 about why the Wii was successful. Point 2 is speculative conspiracy theory talk.
There was absolutely no reason whatsoever that even almost an entire year of sales that Nintendo couldn't keep production up to par with demand for the Wii. Then the same
thing happened with Wii Fit. Coincidence? It's pretty simple consumer study really.
It's like taking a look at any of the dolls on sale in the past 2 decades. Barbie, Ferbi, or for a more recent example: those Zhu-Zhu Pets. All 3 are pretty easy to obtain in stores now, but those hamster thingies when they came out were sold out everywhere. And even after several months, people were still buying the sames ones over and over and stores were selling out. Why? Because they were the "must have" item. Why couldn't production keep up with demand? Those hamster toys are small and are nothing special, why so little supply?
The Wii was really old hardware. There is not a single thing in the Wii that could possibly have held up production or slowed them down.
The newer, most popular, but yet hardest things to get ALWAYS sell like crazy. You bottleneck production, you get a craze.
Sure, I don't have any proof to back up what I'm saying like an article but it's pretty clear as day what Nintendo did. And again with the Wii Fit.
Pretty much what you are saying is that if the console doesn't have a "WOW" factor or lots of interesting content than it will fail compared to the next gen consoles which will ultimately have superior graphics because of the continuous trend in technology. That's a pretty obvious statement which wasn't really revealed in it's entirety until now. Before it sounded more like graphics was the only factor for it's possible failure. I can see now you were making the assumption that, based on past performance, Nintendo won't be able to provide another "WOW" factor or interesting content. That Nintendo won't try to better themselves and just let themselves be left behind. I don't think the gaming giant will allow that to happen, but then again I've seen other giants fall.
No doubt in my mind that Nintendo doesn't have something new to sell the next console. The question is, how well will it go this time around? Looking at the 3DS sales in both the US and Japan, consumers seem to be taking a little more of a conserved approach to the systems. It could just be the economics right now, but I believe it's because the Wii craze that everyone realized,"Gee - this thing kinda sucked for the most part." Especially parents who realized their kids played it maybe a few times, and never touched it again lol
The 3DS isn't doing OMGNOWAY sales but not bad though.
You said it yourself in other threads that the graphics of consoles like the 360 are pretty much "good enough" to the point where the leap in cost to the PC isn't worth it for most consumers. I think that as the jumps in graphical quality continue to diminish, the only differentiating advantages each console will have is that "WOW" factor or the content.
True, graphics for the 360 and the PS3 kinda are the "WOW" factors themselves. But now that both Sony and 360 have their respective motion-controllers, Nintendo better be on the offensive and originality.
Not at anyone really:
I guess a lot of fans of Nintendo are pissed because they went mainstream. Whenever something goes mainstream the content gets "dumbed down" and the quality drops as well. This is pretty much expected of anything popular, mainstream is where the money is. People blame companies for having corporate greed when in reality it's the same greed you or I have.
Companies have profit margins. There is no law stating how large your profit margin can be, only competition can drive that factor down. If you make your profit margin large and the product is still selling like hotcakes than who is to argue. If you say it's an ethical dilemma then no company should be making profit in the first place.
I do agree here, I never really blamed Nintendo for going "mainstream" but I do see your point.
The fact that the Wii sold so much says something. I don't mean to sound like I downplay it at all. But I dislike it when people try to use it to say,"Oh well the Wii won the console wars" for example or to try and say it's better. It might've won the popularity contest through sales, but that's pretty much it.
Originally Posted by Brutuz
You're completely forgetting that the Xbox 720 and PS4 may be not so far away, we've heard that the PS3 and 360 will be supported for 10 years, not that there won't be any consoles for that long, add in the fact that Microsoft and Sony would be stupid to not be designing their new consoles now and remember that the 360 came out a year before the PS3 and dominated it because of that and you see that this could turn into a significant marketing advantage for Nintendo.
True but if it were to come out in 2012 as rumors state, the PS3 and 360 would have to come out by 2013 for the "advantage" as you put it to work.
The 360 dominated the PS3 because it beat it to the punch line. True. Same could be said about Apple's iOS and Android.
BUT - the PS3 caught up plenty and kind of beat out the 360 in ratio of sales at certain points in time. Their sales skyrocketed, and for almost an entire year's difference of being on sales - the sales difference is surprisingly low around ~3M. 3M is alot but for almost a year's difference and a VERY VERY slow start for the PS3 that's saying something.
Same with iOS and Android. iOS beat it to the punch, and it's AppStore flourished. Android came around and had a rough time getting spotlight and AppStore support. Android played massive catch-up now and it too, like the PS3, is taking plenty of attention if not more in some areas.
So, I think Nintendo really needs to time it right. They can't be too early
if they want to take the advantage. And judging by Sony and MS, 2012 might be a little too early. I could be very wrong, but that's my speculation.
Then what does define winning the console wars? Which one people like more? That'd be the Wii, the Wii won in sales too and I'll bet it won in total revenue bought in, if you're going to say about games...Well, that's an opinion and how can you have a war with no victors or losers as opinions are neither right nor wrong?
Again, so the console wars is a popularity contest? I disagree personally.
Originally Posted by Ghoxt
It's ironic how polarized so many are, as if the Wii didn't completely outsell MS and Sony the last time around.
Nintendo made a console my grandmother bought and everyone else's grandparents, mom's, sisters, young cousins. It's like the difference between the Aliens movie and the Titanic movie.(At the time)
We are the minority. Almost like hardcore PVP'ers in MMO's.(Niche) The carebare service provider (12 million strong - Wow)
And here is Microsoft touting great things with it's Kinect, um how many years after Nintendo pioneered the "user motion" idea successfully? 5+ years later...damn.
Microsoft and Sony lead in graphics and wide selection of games granted, how many of them had a not so nice learning curve and were not fun for a wide range of people?
Nintendo owned Sales, which gets your next console(s) built sooner than later...Beancounters tend to approve getting it done as opposed to "wait until next quarter"...
Woah woah woah no no no lol
Nintendo did NOT pioneer the user motion idea, yet alone successfully.
Nintendo uses the same concept and technology any periphreal arcade game have used for years and years.
If that's not enough: Sony was the first to the market with a fully functional motion controller - the PSEye. In fact, that was in development since the PSX as far as they claimed. So, goodbye to the whole pioneered note you made.
Successfully? That can be argued too. The motion controller stuff in Wii games for the most part is flawed, useless, and actually the worst way to play most of the actual Wii games. I don't believe I've ever heard a single soul anywhere
say they wanted to use the Wiimote over a classic or GC controller if the option was available
. And for the games that did use the Wiimote (and used it well enough), didn't even use the motion controller part of the Wiimote really. Super Mario Brothers and Super Smash Brawl had you use the Wiimote in a classical controller method. So much for essentially the creators using their own damn technology lol
The PS3 and Xbox 360 have a very broad content library than most people, like yourself, give them credit for too. Especially the 360 for example, they've always had for the most part a large selection of downloadable Arcade games that are essentially "dumb" games for the most part. And I don't mean that in a demeaning way, they're jump in and play with no learning curve at all. The PS3 has been expanding on these games recently too, and with the PS Move especially. The Kinect itself, almost all of it's games as well, are no learning curve as well.Edited by OmegaNemesis28 - 4/16/11 at 10:11pm