Game Informer: Multiple Sources confirm new HD console at E3 for Nintendo

[quote name='Wolfpup']Yes, but all of those things are bad. I don't want patches, I want finished games. I don't want activation laden downloads, I want real games I own. DLC? Release expansion packs instead.[/QUOTE]

Patches are a good thing. Yes I want finished games as well but as a actual software developer I will say that people can find every fucking bug in something that you never thought possible and patches can help fix that. Plus some games like Gran Turismo 5 really use patches well by allowing new free content to be added. With that said, I don't like patches if they are an excuse to release an unfinished game, but I like the ability to have patches in case some flaw comes up that the devs never found.

With that said, I hate DLC. DLC is a cheap method to release an 1-2 hours worth of content for $5-10. I want good long expansions.
 
[quote name='Sir_Fragalot']
With that said, I hate DLC. DLC is a cheap method to release an 1-2 hours worth of content for $5-10. I want good long expansions.[/QUOTE]

2 hours worth of DLC for $10 is on par with a 12 hour game for $60. I don't see the issue here.

Longer is always welcome, but 2hr/$10 is reasonable, IMO, especially if you factor in sales on the DLC itself, or sales on point cards.


[quote name='io'] And 95% of Wii2 users probably will never need to upgrade the original 8GB. Now, we'll see if the price is, in fact, reasonable. If they price it at $300-$350 then I can live with the smaller initial storage. If it is $400 or over, then I expect more out of the box.[/QUOTE]

See I feel the exact opposite. Hard drives are dirt cheap. $300-$350 should get me more than 8GB out of the box. A $300 Xbox nets you 250GB of storage.
 
[quote name='Corvin']

See I feel the exact opposite. Hard drives are dirt cheap. $300-$350 should get me more than 8GB out of the box. A $300 Xbox nets you 250GB of storage.[/QUOTE]

I second this point, the $199 Xbox 360 includes 4GB of storage.

The controller & pack in game is going to need to be REALLY nice to justify a premium.
 
Its possible that eliminating the HDD would not only save Nintendo money on manufacturing (always an issue with them), but also reduce the possibility of modding consoles and ripping the games to the HDD (and then creating ISOs or disk images later). Nintendo is pretty paranoid about piracy so this would make sense.

But not having an HDD in a new console would be pretty backwards . . . hard to believe they'd actually cripple the system in this way, and not have learned from the first Wii about the importance of storage.
 
[quote name='chimpmeister']Its possible that eliminating the HDD would not only save Nintendo money on manufacturing (always an issue with them), but also reduce the possibility of modding consoles and ripping the games to the HDD (and then creating ISOs or disk images later). Nintendo is pretty paranoid about piracy so this would make sense.
[/QUOTE]

Actually I think they'll run into the same problem the original xbox* had. Down the road, even at launch, 8GB will cost more than a higher amount just because they will have to specifically manufacture that storage just for Nintendo vs. pulling from off the shelf parts.

It's also ironic given they go to the greatest lengths to prevent piracy and yet end up being the most pirated.

*for those that skipped out that gen, MS started installing 20GB drives and gimping them to 8GB because it became cheaper than buying 8GB drives.
 
[quote name='Corvin']2 hours worth of DLC for $10 is on par with a 12 hour game for $60. I don't see the issue here.

Longer is always welcome, but 2hr/$10 is reasonable, IMO, especially if you factor in sales on the DLC itself, or sales on point cards.

[/QUOTE]
Well it's not that I am paying $10 for 2 hours of content that's my problem. It's the fact that instead of making a 6 hour expansion and charging $30 for it, they give us these 2 hour chunks of gameplay every so often. I am so used to in the old days the expansions brought us new gameplay mechanics and what really felt like a expansion to a game instead of a $10 2 hour mission.
 
[quote name='chimpmeister']Its possible that eliminating the HDD would not only save Nintendo money on manufacturing (always an issue with them), but also reduce the possibility of modding consoles and ripping the games to the HDD (and then creating ISOs or disk images later). Nintendo is pretty paranoid about piracy so this would make sense.

But not having an HDD in a new console would be pretty backwards . . . hard to believe they'd actually cripple the system in this way, and not have learned from the first Wii about the importance of storage.[/QUOTE]


And since the Wii didn't have a HDD, this stopped the pirates from adding HDD functionality to load/play iso's??? -_-

Didn't happen then, won't happen now once the hacker's find a way in. A knee-jerk reaction to not put in hardware because of what might happen isn't a good reason to not put in what they need in the system especially if they are SERIOUS about competing against the competition.

If they don't "hit it out of the park" Sony and MS, are going to sit back, have a nice laugh and wait for 2-3 years announce/release their new systems and Nintendo is back to the same place they are now, underperforming / underwhelming hardware that "core" (
 
[quote name='Corvin']
*for those that skipped out that gen, MS started installing 20GB drives and gimping them to 8GB because it became cheaper than buying 8GB drives.[/QUOTE]
That's terrible. Why the hell didn't they just pass the benefit down to the customer?
 
8gb is adequate.

ps3/360 have huge hard drives because you're required to install the games before you play. i'm unsure what's the biggest install size that's there, but the biggest i've ever had on the ps3 was 5gb. with nintendo, it's likely not the case where you'll have to install the game first to play. if you'd have to install, than forget it.

with downloaded games on wii virtual console and wii ware, it'll likely retain standard resolution [480] and sizes capped at 100mb-200mb. no one really seems to complain much that castlevania symphony of the night is at standard resolution, nor do people complain about those bit trip games.

btw, the wii 2 won't be 1080i/p. the wii 2 will likely be 720i/p.
 
There isn't a single game that requires you to install anything to the hard drive on the 360. Not sure where you got your info pochaccoheaven.

[quote name='KingBroly']Not true. the 20gb drives had a 7gb cache, so 13gb were usable.[/QUOTE]

ORIGINAL Xbox. Not the 360.

[quote name='Friend of Sonic']That's terrible. Why the hell didn't they just pass the benefit down to the customer?[/QUOTE]

Not sure. Probably so early adopters didn't feel ripped off.
 
[quote name='uncle5555']And since the Wii didn't have a HDD, this stopped the pirates from adding HDD functionality to load/play iso's??? -_-

Didn't happen then, won't happen now once the hacker's find a way in. A knee-jerk reaction to not put in hardware because of what might happen isn't a good reason to not put in what they need in the system especially if they are SERIOUS about competing against the competition.

If they don't "hit it out of the park" Sony and MS, are going to sit back, have a nice laugh and wait for 2-3 years announce/release their new systems and Nintendo is back to the same place they are now, underperforming / underwhelming hardware that "core" (
 
[quote name='pochaccoheaven']8gb is adequate.

ps3/360 have huge hard drives because you're required to install the games before you play. i'm unsure what's the biggest install size that's there, but the biggest i've ever had on the ps3 was 5gb. with nintendo, it's likely not the case where you'll have to install the game first to play. if you'd have to install, than forget it.

with downloaded games on wii virtual console and wii ware, it'll likely retain standard resolution [480] and sizes capped at 100mb-200mb. no one really seems to complain much that castlevania symphony of the night is at standard resolution, nor do people complain about those bit trip games.

btw, the wii 2 won't be 1080i/p. the wii 2 will likely be 720i/p.[/QUOTE]

I think you're wrong; if the Wii2 is 720i/p, it will have failed before it even released. Nothing more to say on that really, for a next gen console it isn't even something to consider.
 
[quote name='chimpmeister']I think you're wrong; if the Wii2 is 720i/p, it will have failed before it even released. Nothing more to say on that really, for a next gen console it isn't even something to consider.[/QUOTE]

remember that it's not trying to be like the ps3/360 and that means it's not trying to out perform in technical specificity on those two console.

most tv or rather all tv on the market are either 720-1080. there are no tv's higher than those two resolutions [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_resolutions].

when sony and microsoft release their next console, do you really believe it will support uhd [ultra high definition, 4320]? no they will not. they will support either 720/1080. btw, could you tell the difference as you go higher up?

remember that nintendo is about being cost effective and efficient in performance.

the noise in the 360 is inefficient in terms of a product nintendo would make, so the necessity of installation on the 360 is mandatory to reduce noise, though it's an option. the wii lacks noise in the optical drive in their console and it's likely that nintendo will follow this idea.

720 because it's standard high definition, which means it's cost effective and efficient. you are able to provide a nice clean visual and at the same time provide a product that is cost effective.

i don't see a tv being released in the future at higher resolution than 1080.
 
[quote name='chimpmeister']I think you're wrong; if the Wii2 is 720i/p, it will have failed before it even released. Nothing more to say on that really, for a next gen console it isn't even something to consider.[/QUOTE]

I wouldn't say 720p vs 1080p is an issue. There are much more important aspects to consider such as 3rd party support. Is it considerable? I suppose to a point, just not make or break.

The overwhelming majoring of games this gen run at 720p (for technical limitations). Never do I find that to be an issue with my PS3. IIRC, our eyes cannot distinguish between the two resolutions in TVs under 50" at normal viewing distances.
 
[quote name='uncle5555']And since the Wii didn't have a HDD, this stopped the pirates from adding HDD functionality to load/play iso's??? -_-

[/QUOTE]

Yeah, that guy's argument doesn't make sense at all. The wii is probably the easiest of the three consoles to pirate. My friend has a hard drive full of games that he runs on the wii.

I don't think this is even possible with the xbox or ps3.

---

While using HD-DVD might be a stroke of genius to combat piracy (since nobody has them anymore), I don't think it's gonna happen. If only so sony/msft fanboys would stfu already.


----

I think the wii2 will have 1080. Even if nobody can tell the difference and games will only support up to 720, it's important for marketing reasons.
 
Yeah, the Wii's hardware is probably the easiest to exploit. This is why I hate looking through craigslist for other means of procuring games, having to go through all the crap listings.
 
[quote name='confoosious']Yeah, that guy's argument doesn't make sense at all. The wii is probably the easiest of the three consoles to pirate. My friend has a hard drive full of games that he runs on the wii.

I don't think this is even possible with the xbox or ps3.

---

While using HD-DVD might be a stroke of genius to combat piracy (since nobody has them anymore), I don't think it's gonna happen. If only so sony/msft fanboys would stfu already.


----

I think the wii2 will have 1080. Even if nobody can tell the difference and games will only support up to 720, it's important for marketing reasons.[/QUOTE]
Guess I'm nobody. ;)
 
[quote name='pochaccoheaven']remember that it's not trying to be like the ps3/360 and that means it's not trying to out perform in technical specificity on those two console.

most tv or rather all tv on the market are either 720-1080. there are no tv's higher than those two resolutions [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_resolutions].

when sony and microsoft release their next console, do you really believe it will support uhd [ultra high definition, 4320]? no they will not. they will support either 720/1080. btw, could you tell the difference as you go higher up?

remember that nintendo is about being cost effective and efficient in performance.

the noise in the 360 is inefficient in terms of a product nintendo would make, so the necessity of installation on the 360 is mandatory to reduce noise, though it's an option. the wii lacks noise in the optical drive in their console and it's likely that nintendo will follow this idea.

720 because it's standard high definition, which means it's cost effective and efficient. you are able to provide a nice clean visual and at the same time provide a product that is cost effective.

i don't see a tv being released in the future at higher resolution than 1080.[/QUOTE]
It'll most certainly happen, I have little doubt of that.
 
[quote name='pjb16']It'll most certainly happen, I have little doubt of that.[/QUOTE]

We already have 1440p, but we're kind of at the point where a viewer won't notice unless they're feet away from the screen and/or have a sufficiently large screen.
 
[quote name='Salamando3000']We already have 1440p, but we're kind of at the point where a viewer won't notice unless they're feet away from the screen and/or have a sufficiently large screen.[/QUOTE]
Well yes, it is the viewer's responsibility to properly set up their viewing area (sitting at the proper distance for their screen size given then resolution of the material on the screen).

You could have the nicest movie theater (and typical theatre screen), projector, and film, but it wouldn't do you much good (visually) if you tried to watch it from a seat in one endzone of a football field and had the screen in the other endzone.

That's hardly the same as saying people can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p content though (or 1080p and 1440p).
 
[quote name='pjb16']It'll most certainly happen, I have little doubt of that.[/QUOTE]

Oh, it'll certainly happen, but it won't have significant enough market penetration to matter for a LONG time.
 
[quote name='pochaccoheaven']
remember that nintendo is about being cost effective and efficient in performance.
[/QUOTE]

That was their M.O. with the Wii. Up until then their motive was the same as the other companies. Bigger and better. They also took a loss, IIRC, on all of them at launch until the Wii. The Wii was the exception, not the rule. We have no idea what their motive this time around is. It's pure speculation.

However to release a console that on par, or barely more powerful than the current systems would be a huge mistake in the eyes of the 'core' gamer. They've already lost ground in this area thanks to the Wii's specs, forcing waggle in games and lack of third parties. They have a lot of ground to make up for, IMO, and launching a weak system isn't going to help.

720p is the training wheels of HD so that joe six pack can get an HD set at Wal-Mart for pennies on the dollar. I know we're asking a lot of Nintendo to skip the training wheels but they need to learn to ride on a big bike sooner rather than later.

[quote name='pochaccoheaven']
the noise in the 360 is inefficient in terms of a product nintendo would make so the necessity of installation on the 360 is mandatory to reduce noise, though it's an option. [/QUOTE]

I love the authority you use when speaking about a console you don't own. Sure the old 360s are noisy. Yes some of the old PS3's are noisy. The new slims from both companies are whisper quiet whether you install games or not. Installing games cuts down the wear and tear on the disc drive and improves load times. The noise isn't from the drive anyway, it's from the fan cooling the system.
 
It's CONFIRMED that Nintendo's new system will be a self aware AI. It will include a port that will connect directly with your brain (via a small surgical implant) making controllers obsolete. Games will be sent into your mind at 40000p but strangely only mono audio.

Also it will make cookies
 
[quote name='Waughoo']It's CONFIRMED that Nintendo's new system will be a self aware AI. It will include a port that will connect directly with your brain (via a small surgical implant) making controllers obsolete. Games will be sent into your mind at 40000p but strangely only mono audio.

Also it will make cookies[/QUOTE]

That is certainly a novel way to use the heat sink.
 
[quote name='Corvin']That was their M.O. with the Wii. Up until then their motive was the same as the other companies. Bigger and better. They also took a loss, IIRC, on all of them at launch until the Wii. The Wii was the exception, not the rule. We have no idea what their motive this time around is. It's pure speculation.

However to release a console that on par, or barely more powerful than the current systems would be a huge mistake in the eyes of the 'core' gamer. They've already lost ground in this area thanks to the Wii's specs, forcing waggle in games and lack of third parties. They have a lot of ground to make up for, IMO, and launching a weak system isn't going to help.

720p is the training wheels of HD so that joe six pack can get an HD set at Wal-Mart for pennies on the dollar. I know we're asking a lot of Nintendo to skip the training wheels but they need to learn to ride on a big bike sooner rather than later.



I love the authority you use when speaking about a console you don't own. Sure the old 360s are noisy. Yes some of the old PS3's are noisy. The new slims from both companies are whisper quiet whether you install games or not. Installing games cuts down the wear and tear on the disc drive and improves load times. The noise isn't from the drive anyway, it's from the fan cooling the system.[/QUOTE]

Agree completely with all of this . . . a new console released in 2012 SHOULD be better than ANY existing console on the market (the PS3 and 360 are 5-6 years old, therefore aging technology). If Nintendo goes the cheap route again (i.e. no HDD/8GB internal memory instead, more gimmicks like 3D and waggle, sub-HD resolution, inadequate RAM, limited graphics capabilities), then the prospects for their new system don't look good at all.
 
[quote name='Corvin']That was their M.O. with the Wii. Up until then their motive was the same as the other companies. Bigger and better. They also took a loss, IIRC, on all of them at launch until the Wii. [/QUOTE]

...not exactly. IDK about the N64 or previous (and am not really inclined to do the research), but the only time the Gamecube wasn't profitable was for a short period right after they dropped the price to $100.

The "Bigger and Better" was applied across all generations because the technology grew so rapidly in that period. That growth has slowed noticeably in the last several years. Nintendo took a big chance in not going for "RAW POWA" this generation, and frankly, while the "core gamers" sit back and thumb their noses at the kiddy Nintendo console, Nintendo is crying all the way to the bank with the revenue from the 3rd best selling console of all time and astronomical first-party software sales. Mistakes made? Sure, and they admit to most of them. But this statement in particular...

However to release a console that on par, or barely more powerful than the current systems would be a huge mistake in the eyes of the 'core' gamer. They've already lost ground in this area thanks to the Wii's specs, forcing waggle in games and lack of third parties. They have a lot of ground to make up for, IMO, and launching a weak system isn't going to help.
Click to expand...

Tells me that either you think you are the average game purchaser, or that the "core gamer" makes up a majority of anything. That's slowly being proven to be not correct.

It's not like being the console with the weakest graphics and the most shovelware hurt the PS2 at all in the prior generation.
 
[quote name='pjb16']Guess I'm nobody. ;)[/QUOTE]

do you have an hd-dvd reader or a recorder? even if you did own a recorder, where would you buy blank media? the likely method of pirating on the next console would be to have the image of the game on a hard drive, like what is done with the current wii.
 
[quote name='chimpmeister']Agree completely with all of this . . . a new console released in 2012 SHOULD be better than ANY existing console on the market (the PS3 and 360 are 5-6 years old, therefore aging technology). If Nintendo goes the cheap route again (i.e. no HDD/8GB internal memory instead, more gimmicks like 3D and waggle, sub-HD resolution, inadequate RAM, limited graphics capabilities), then the prospects for their new system don't look good at all.[/QUOTE]

:roll:

they could cure cancer with the wii2 and you'd still bitch.
 
[quote name='Iron Clad Burrito']
Tells me that either you think you are the average game purchaser, or that the "core gamer" makes up a majority of anything. That's slowly being proven to be not correct.

It's not like being the console with the weakest graphics and the most shovelware hurt the PS2 at all in the prior generation.[/QUOTE]

To the first point, that's why I said 'core' gamer. If they want to woo them back they have a lot of kissing ass to do. That means make a respectable machine that actually tries to offer things like HDD, HD, online, etc. that core gamers want, nay, EXPECT from a game console in 2012. Minority, majority, doesn't matter. Once the dust settles, I doubt the casual crowd will be ready to pony up for another system. That's where wooing the people that built their company prior to the Wii comes in. It's the hardcore crowd that make those launch day purchases and generates press. It will very much be a matter of how bad did they erode their fanbase with the Wii?

As for the second point, there is a big difference being the weakest console of three similar consoles and being the weakest console by being a generation behind, tech-wise. The Wii easily belongs in the Xbox, PS2, GCN generation, despite existing during the 360, PS3 era. Hell the original Xbox (released in 2001, miind you) with HD, a hard drive and a decent online community built around broadband is still more impressive than what the Wii brought to the table.

I have no problem with whatever route they take. Want to focus on casual again? Fine, it will be the first Nintendo launch I miss since the NES. That won't be all bad, I can wait for a price drop and a decent catalog before taking the plunge for a change. If they plan to offer a console that's not a generation behind, I'm all ears. I'm ready to be wooed back.

[quote name='Strell']Summarizing the last few pages of the thread:
[/QUOTE]

If you weren't busy threadcrapping you'd see a decent discussion/speculation thread going on. No real point in even stepping in here if you are expecting news before E3.

[quote name='confoosious']:roll:

they could cure cancer with the wii2 and you'd still bitch.[/QUOTE]

So expecting a console with better tech than a system(360) that will be 7 years old is bitching? :lol: Riiiight. Would you buy a 7 year old PC? fuck no. They gambled with the Wii and clearly won. If they gamble with the Wii successor in the same fashion, I'm willing to bet they lose (see first paragraph above). Now with rumor's of Microsoft competing in 2012, they really need to bring something special to the table.

I'm sure whatever Nintendo has up their sleeves is decent. They will trot out Mario or Link at E3 and that's all it takes to win some people over. It just depends on that bad taste that the Wii left in people's mouths. How quickly do gamers forget? It's not like I'm coming at this from nowhere. Hell just look at the CAG forums. The most active Wii thread is the Club Nintendo thread. :lol: Meanwhile the 360/PS3 forums are always a hotbed of activity. I'm clearly not alone around here.

And before anyone gets all huffy, I bitch because I care. Like I said, I've been at every damn launch, ready to hand over hundreds of dollars, and loved every one of those consoles up until the Wii. So I want to be at the next launch and want to love the next system. And no, I don't hate the Wii either, it's just a very disappointing system. I'm actually playing through Kirby now and it's a freakin' blast. :)
 
[quote name='Corvin']
If you weren't busy threadcrapping you'd see a decent discussion/speculation thread going on.[/QUOTE]

Quick note for amateur etymologists: the term was invented and popularized by Thomas J. Threadcrapper, a moderator (aka "sysop") from the Compuserve forums back in the early 90s. I read it on Snopes.
 
Nintendo focused on everyone with the Wii. If you think it was only the casuals, you have to be one of those people who get bitter if Nintendo doesn't spend 100% of the time catering to you.


EDIT: Added comma. :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Look I like my protagonists with big chins, big guns and big stubble, with love interests who have big tits and tight outfits. Now this is what Nintendo is known for - Star Fox, Donkey Kong Country, Metroid - all these games had top notch frame rates and smooth 3d graphics. What's with all these kid shit? Why didn't they play to their gun-loving, repressed testosterone fan base with the Wii?
 
[quote name='Corvin']So expecting a console with better tech than a system(360) that will be 7 years old is bitching? :lol: Riiiight. Would you buy a 7 year old PC? fuck no. They gambled with the Wii and clearly won. If they gamble with the Wii successor in the same fashion, I'm willing to bet they lose (see first paragraph above). Now with rumor's of Microsoft competing in 2012, they really need to bring something special to the table.

I'm sure whatever Nintendo has up their sleeves is decent. They will trot out Mario or Link at E3 and that's all it takes to win some people over. It just depends on that bad taste that the Wii left in people's mouths. How quickly do gamers forget? It's not like I'm coming at this from nowhere. Hell just look at the CAG forums. The most active Wii thread is the Club Nintendo thread. :lol: Meanwhile the 360/PS3 forums are always a hotbed of activity. I'm clearly not alone around here.

And before anyone gets all huffy, I bitch because I care. Like I said, I've been at every damn launch, ready to hand over hundreds of dollars, and loved every one of those consoles up until the Wii. So I want to be at the next launch and want to love the next system. And no, I don't hate the Wii either, it's just a very disappointing system. I'm actually playing through Kirby now and it's a freakin' blast. :)[/QUOTE]

Yes, but by all accounts it IS going to be a better system than the 360/PS3. The only thing that set everyone off about it was the stupid HD. I was just trying to say that isn't 100% necessary for a high-tech next-gen console. Everyone just expects it because the 360/PS3 have had them. If you don't need to install games, DL large patches, or deal with lots of movies/music you can get by with a lot less space. And it will be expandable anyway (via SDHC card). I'd much rather they spend the tech budget on the processor and such than on storage. $70 (the "cheap" price quoted for HDs earlier) is a big chunk of the $200-$250 they will probably cap their expenses at for this thing. If they can put in the 8GB for a fraction of that and spend that extra money on core CPU/graphics issues, then I say go for it. If they do that, then I'll be happy with the 8GB system. If they also skimp on the processing power, then, well, we can all come here and bitch about it at that point ;).

And yeah, CAG is notoriously anti-Nintendo and that starts from the top down. How often have I heard Cheapy talk about playing crap games like Kane & Lynch and yet his Wii collects dust while he misses awesome games like Kirby and even SMG. I clearly remember him putting down Metroid Prime 3 because it was a single-player experience and thus nothing he needed to play any time soon. And yet when Mass Effect 2 came out, well, that's a different story for some reason (and I loved both by the way).

I admit I don't play the Wii very much at all any more either - but it is more of a time issue. I certainly have a lot of games for it and continue to buy more. I just never get to them... I think I will bust out Donkey Kong Country Returns though some time soon.
 
Just for the sake of the argument everyone is going to be hunting down wii games that have retrained there values and everyone is going to be like "OMG... I need to haz" just like they do now.
 
[quote name='io']Yes, but by all accounts it IS going to be a better system than the 360/PS3. The only thing that set everyone off about it was the stupid HD. I was just trying to say that isn't 100% necessary for a high-tech next-gen console. Everyone just expects it because the 360/PS3 have had them. If you don't need to install games, DL large patches, or deal with lots of movies/music you can get by with a lot less space. And it will be expandable anyway (via SDHC card). I'd much rather they spend the tech budget on the processor and such than on storage. $70 (the "cheap" price quoted for HDs earlier) is a big chunk of the $200-$250 they will probably cap their expenses at for this thing. If they can put in the 8GB for a fraction of that and spend that extra money on core CPU/graphics issues, then I say go for it. If they do that, then I'll be happy with the 8GB system. If they also skimp on the processing power, then, well, we can all come here and bitch about it at that point ;).

And yeah, CAG is notoriously anti-Nintendo and that starts from the top down. How often have I heard Cheapy talk about playing crap games like Kane & Lynch and yet his Wii collects dust while he misses awesome games like Kirby and even SMG. I clearly remember him putting down Metroid Prime 3 because it was a single-player experience and thus nothing he needed to play any time soon. And yet when Mass Effect 2 came out, well, that's a different story for some reason (and I loved both by the way).
I admit I don't play the Wii very much at all any more either - but it is more of a time issue. I certainly have a lot of games for it and continue to buy more. I just never get to them... I think I will bust out Donkey Kong Country Returns though some time soon.[/QUOTE]

I would have never guessed.
 
A minor correction - I think it was the first Mass Effect that came out around the time of MP3 and that was the game I was thinking of as a specific comparison (though there are many others like the Kane & Lynch type stuff). I mean, I get it that the Wii isn't taken seriously and I understand why. Like I said, I don't play it too much myself while I do play my PS3 quite a bit (the 360, on the other hand, would be the dust collector in my house except for that my son plays Halo all the time).

And I'll also admit I haven't listened to the CAGcast in like a year but I did catch it a few weeks ago and there was an exchange between Cheapy and Wombat about using the Wii as a doorstop or something - so I assume nothing has changed in that regard ;).

My problem with the Wii is not the game selection or lack of online features - it has more to do with the DRM and the flaky system memory and lack of copyability of most of the save files. My launch Wii's memory got corrupted somehow (I blame World of Goo) and although Nintendo fixed it for free they wiped the memory clean even though when I sent it in all the games were still playable (and I specifically asked them not to do that and to in fact send it back if they couldn't fix it without wiping it). So we lost 100's of hours in non-copyable games like Animal Crossing and SSBB. I haven't touched it much since then as every time I think of playing a game in the back of my mind I'm worried about getting invested in a game only to have my progress wiped out. So I certainly hope they have a solution for that - if all games were copyable to the external SD card that would solve it right there. A hard drive wouldn't solve the problem as, if anything, they are more likely to go bad than flash memory.

I've actually bought a second Wii since then (got a good deal on the red one and sold the extras off to make it nearly free). I'd move everything over there and trade the other to GS, but, well, there's that damn DRM issue again. I don't feel like giving up my 10 or 15 virtual console games for nothing, even though I never play them... So I'll admit MS and especially Sony are miles ahead on the DRM front. I really hope they address that somehow. You should be able to transfer downloaded games to a new system at a minimum like MS allows (once per year or something). Though I much prefer the PS3 method of simply letting you use them on 5 systems. I think this is a much bigger issue than the friends codes which of course is the big complaint about Nintendo's online implementation from most people.
 
the wii has more life to it than what people are expecting. games like wii sports and wii resort are not graphically intensive and they are very enjoyable. nintendo should ditch the next generation and focus more on the current console. there is a lack of games that triggers the imagination of the gamer. if you look at the integration of the motion plus controller into the standard controller, it felt irrelevent to even bother integrating the two together because nintendo simply lacked to input games for them.

there is no blockbuster games for the motion plus other than wii resort. the overall feel of the wii is that nintendo failed what they promised, a game system that would stir the imagination of the user with new gameplay design on motion controls. with the next console, it feels that nintendo simply gave up on trying to make entertainment games for their owners.

what happened to all the action/adventure games [i mean that broadly and not just limited on those two words] on the wii. all the games nintendo made were short sample games that demonstrated their tech [wii sports and wii resort]. we all want a full game. why not a full flight game on the wii as we've sampled on wii resorts flying game. truly i find it that nintendo missed out. by releasing the next wii, they are simply fingering everyone and i certainly would not buy a new console from nintendo knowing that they didn't promise what they offered.
 
[quote name='pochaccoheaven']the wii has more life to it than what people are expecting. games like wii sports and wii resort are not graphically intensive and they are very enjoyable.[/quote]

Speak for yourself. IMO those aren't games, and they're garbage. I forced myself to play Wii sports only because I got it free, and doing so was painful.

nintendo should ditch the next generation and focus more on the current console.
Click to expand...

They already DID that. They've had the same system on the market since 2001.

Can you do more with it? Oh, absolutely. But third parties aren't. There are a handful of REALLY good third party stuff...The Munchables, Rabbids Go Home, and No More Heroes 2 spring to mind-but from the beginning only the current gen hardware has gotten 99% of serious development, except from Nintendo.

Nintendo's releases are too slow (and there's too much shovelware even from Nintendo) to support a system on their own IMO, so I'm pretty excited about having current gen hardware out there with Nintendo stuff on it.

with the next console, it feels that nintendo simply gave up on trying to make entertainment games for their owners.
Click to expand...

Why? From what we've heard, and from what we've seen even on the Wii the past couple of years, it looks like the exact opposite-that Nintendo's somewhat abandoning shovelware, gimmicks, and garbage, and going back to their roots making kick-ass games. I mean you see the trend even going back on the Wii a year or two, and the reports are it's continuing with this new system.

I mean you're right though that they certainly could continue doing great development for it, but hey, if they can do it on better hardware so it looks and plays better/different, and third parties come on board, sounds good to me.
 
[quote name='Wolfpup'] I forced myself to play Wii sports only because I got it free, and doing so was painful.[/QUOTE]

AHA HA HA HA HA :rofl:
 
[quote name='Wolfpup']
Why? From what we've heard, and from what we've seen even on the Wii the past couple of years, it looks like the exact opposite-that Nintendo's somewhat abandoning shovelware, gimmicks, and garbage, and going back to their roots making kick-ass games. I mean you see the trend even going back on the Wii a year or two, and the reports are it's continuing with this new system.[/QUOTE]

I agree. It seems they have been ramping up* for the core gamers which is a good sign for the new console, but it's far too late to avoid long droughts in quality games, given the lack of third party support on the Wii.

*2010 brought us Galaxy 2, Other M, Donkey Kong & Kirby. That's a helluva slate from a single company.
 
[quote name='Corvin']I agree. It seems they have been ramping up* for the core gamers which is a good sign for the new console, but it's far too late to avoid long droughts in quality games, given the lack of third party support on the Wii.

*2010 brought us Galaxy 2, Other M, Donkey Kong & Kirby. That's a helluva slate from a single company.[/QUOTE]
Not surprised. I think Nintendo knows they got extremely lucky with the Wii being both a core and casual system and it wont happen again. Either way more awesome Nintendo games is always welcome :D.
 
[quote name='io']Yes, but by all accounts it IS going to be a better system than the 360/PS3. The only thing that set everyone off about it was the stupid HD. I was just trying to say that isn't 100% necessary for a high-tech next-gen console. Everyone just expects it because the 360/PS3 have had them. [/QUOTE]

No, it doesn't have to be a HDD, but it clearly needs more storage than 8GB even if it's expandable. Hell I have more than 8GB in just Rock Band tracks. That's ignoring map packs, demos, downloadable games, DLC expansions,etc. No one wants to start out a new console behind in storage space like prior to the Wii SD patch.
 
[quote name='Corvin']No, it doesn't have to be a HDD, but it clearly needs more storage than 8GB even if it's expandable. Hell I have more than 8GB in just Rock Band tracks. That's ignoring map packs, demos, downloadable games, DLC expansions,etc. No one wants to start out a new console behind in storage space like prior to the Wii SD patch.[/QUOTE]

I agree, depending on how you read your post. I think 8GB is fine if one can expand, easily.

I would wager most folks will never see a 8GB limit, but the top ~5% will find such limit soon into the consoles lifespan.
 
[quote name='io'] You should be able to transfer downloaded games to a new system at a minimum like MS allows (once per year or something). Though I much prefer the PS3 method of simply letting you use them on 5 systems. I think this is a much bigger issue than the friends codes which of course is the big complaint about Nintendo's online implementation from most people.[/QUOTE]

I agree 100% here. I am worried that I wont be able to with the new console and all my virtual console games/Wiiware will be lost for good because I will have no use for my Wii and it will be traded for games probably or something when I do get my new Nintendo console.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top