Nintendo doing it right, or everyone else doing it wrong?

[Caliostro]

So why would non-casual gamers, to whom the "wiimotes" only has around a 5 minute appeal (2 if you actually use it), buy a wii?

Here's my reasons:
1.) The games - Brawl, Super Mario Galaxy, Metroid Prime 3, No More Heroes, WarioWare: Smooth Moves, Super Paper Mario, Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn... just to name those I can think of off the top of my head that I want.
2.) Virtual Console - I'm a big fan of SNES-era games, and I'm not a fan of piracy.
3.) Backwards Compatibility - Gamecube remains my favourite console ever in terms of exclusives, and the fact that the Wii can play these is icing on the cake.

Those are my top three reasons for buying a Wii. Note how they all revolve around the game lineup, which in my opinion is the sole valid reason for preferring any single console over the others. The graphics are a non-issue for me. The gimmicky controller is a non-issue for me because if a game is too gimmicky, don't buy it. Doesn't detract from the console itself that someone designed a bad game for it.

tl;dr version: Because I like the games it has. And that should be reason enough for anybody.

My Nintendo fanboy alert went off after I read your favorites apparently are Nintendo, Nintendo and Nintendo... BUUuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut anyways... I'll disregard it.

Let me make one point clear: OFF COURSE that in this "topic" I'm over generalizing, there's no way not to in a topic like this. If your favorite games ever are all on the amiga it's clear that to you the amiga was the best piece of hardware to ever have any games in it. However, when discussing something of this "range" I have to generalize and take into account personal experience. For instances, to me anything with "super mario" (or company) on the title instantly turns me off as they're generally yet another uninspired Super Mario 64 rip off with a different "skin" and better graphics or yet another shameless attempt to milk the franchise by trying to pass off a subpar fighting/driving/sports/tetris/etc game by just "dressing" them in a "Mario skin". I'm sure a lot of people love it, but if you're to take a couple steps back and get some distance most of these games are...well, I guess "uninspired" is a nice way to put it... "Shamelessly and effortlessly milking the franchise because fans will buy into it" would be a slightly more cruel but equally more accurate way to express it.

Overall the majority of Wii's games (not all though) to me are games that only a fan could love. To non-fans they're generally ok games, which aren't lousy or even particularly bad ("general exception" made for the mario franchise "spin of"s such as Mario Kart...)... But they're not particularly good either.

Virtual Console is, yet another, unnecessary gimmick. Emulators are widely available and even the oldest of computers that can effectively run Windows XP (or even millenium) can emulate old SNES titles.

As for backwards compatibility... Is that really a good enough reason to justify buying/not buying a console? Mostly you want backwards compatibility to play the games you have... For the older console you have... So why not just play it on that console? Sure it's far more comfortable to just open the tray and switch the disk than to hook up the older console, but it takes a whole 5-10 minutes, at most if you're incredibly ham-handed, to setup a console... I know time is money but I don't think the average consumer is payed 3000 dollars an hour...

Change that from 14-24, that's generally the age of the shiny = good demographic. Honestly, the Wii has a lot of innovative games (and doesn't play nearly as badly as you say).

Can you honestly say that better graphics are a BAD thing? No. Better graphics are better, always. You can argue that graphics aren't everything, but by itself, better graphics = better.

Moving on cause I have a lot to answer.

Then why do some people (me included) prefer the graphical style of Wind Waker to Twilight Princess? Which one had the 'better graphics'?

You're comparing different styles. It's like arguing whether a portrait of a photograph are better. You can argue the photograph, if well taken, will always have more detail and be more visually accurate than the portrait, but the portrait captures something the picture can't: essence.

In other words, Wind Waker goes for a cartoony cell-shaded style while Twilight Princess goes for a more realistic one. Personally I prefer Twilight Princess's style visually, but it's a matter of preference as they're not even in the same cathegory.

But, for instances, can you honestly say this screenshot [http://wiimedia.ign.com/wii/image/article/760/760189/super-mario-64-virtual-console-20070131013937793_640w.jpg] looks better than this one [http://www.trustedreviews.com/images/article/inline/6326-SuperMarioGalaxy.jpg]?

I think the point was that standing alone, better graphics is a good thing. That however may be overruled by game play and story and delivery etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_Valley

Actually, I believe that, if anything, the more advanced graphics nowadays are on the opposite "safe" side of the uncanny valley while something like the Wii stands dangerously closer to the "depression" in that graphic.

All right first of all, don't rip ofoff Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw, when rightingwriting in forums,.What, can't think of anything witty of your own.?

D - Not good. Needs work.

And my apologies, I wasn't aware Yahtzee had copyrighted the entire English language or something. Apparently expressions that have been around since before Yahtzee was even posting on youtube, let alone on the escapist, are now his exclusive "intellectual property".

I don't exactly recall "ripping off" Yahtzee on purpose, but I do share his views of most games, if I happened to use words he did in a circumstance it was merely a coincidence. Our brains do retain memory of what we hear and read, it's how we learn most of our vocabulary, to be entirely honest.

(ps: I know I totally ripped off Yahtzee on the whole "correcting the misspelled anger mail" thing, even though I've been doing it for about 5 years now, but I thought the irony would be AMAZING. I was right.)

 

[asacatman]

I tried the Wii, was bored, and now want either a 360 or a PS3.
Sorry, but the Mario game was a bore, Zelda was a joke, Red Steel was atrocious, and if I DO buy The Force Unleashed it'll be a knockoff version.

If you hated mario AND zelda then you need to go and get a checkup, because by god I did not hate those games!
I suppose everyone's entitled to there opinions but... mario galaxy is one of the most critically acclaimed games this generation, and zelda is a triple a game, so your disagreing with most game reveiwers there. And before you buy force unleashed why not buy Zack and wiki or De blob or no more hereos or any game published by nintendo? There aren't just 4 games on the wii, you know.

 

[PureChaos]

you may down-talk th wii but i know of 4 separate university student houses where each one has a wii and non have a ps3 or xbox. at least nintendo mix things up. look at the ps, its had the same controller system for each console, at least nintendo mix things up and try new things, they havnt had the same controller system twice. the x box is a good console and if i had the money and free time i would get one.
nintendo do milk their franchises (mainly mario, zelda and metoid) but each game in the series is vastly different and has its own story line. and, besides, nintendo has been around over 100 years, give them a break

 

[meglathon]

It true that we learn to speak by what we here, but it?s a might big coincidence that you put the exact right word/phrases with the right game or context as Yahtzee did and that much similarity Is way more that a coincidence that I am willing to swallow.

B.T.W, my grammar and spelling is bad since my native language is French

 

[meglathon]

It true that we learn to speak by what we here, but it's a might big coincidence that you put the exact right word/phrases with the right game or context as Yahtzee did and that much similarity Is way more that a coincidence that I am willing to swallow.

B.T.W, my grammar and spelling is bad since my native language is French

So why would non-casual gamers, to whom the "wiimotes" only has around a 5 minute appeal (2 if you actually use it), buy a wii?

Here's my reasons:
1.) The games - Brawl, Super Mario Galaxy, Metroid Prime 3, No More Heroes, WarioWare: Smooth Moves, Super Paper Mario, Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn... just to name those I can think of off the top of my head that I want.
2.) Virtual Console - I'm a big fan of SNES-era games, and I'm not a fan of piracy.
3.) Backwards Compatibility - Gamecube remains my favourite console ever in terms of exclusives, and the fact that the Wii can play these is icing on the cake.

Those are my top three reasons for buying a Wii. Note how they all revolve around the game lineup, which in my opinion is the sole valid reason for preferring any single console over the others. The graphics are a non-issue for me. The gimmicky controller is a non-issue for me because if a game is too gimmicky, don't buy it. Doesn't detract from the console itself that someone designed a bad game for it.

tl;dr version: Because I like the games it has. And that should be reason enough for anybody.

My Nintendo fanboy alert went off after I read your favorites apparently are Nintendo, Nintendo and Nintendo... BUUuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut anyways... I'll disregard it.

Let me make one point clear: OFF COURSE that in this "topic" I'm over generalizing, there's no way not to in a topic like this. If your favorite games ever are all on the amiga it's clear that to you the amiga was the best piece of hardware to ever have any games in it. However, when discussing something of this "range" I have to generalize and take into account personal experience. For instances, to me anything with "super mario" (or company) on the title instantly turns me off as they're generally yet another uninspired Super Mario 64 rip off with a different "skin" and better graphics or yet another shameless attempt to milk the franchise by trying to pass off a subpar fighting/driving/sports/tetris/etc game by just "dressing" them in a "Mario skin". I'm sure a lot of people love it, but if you're to take a couple steps back and get some distance most of these games are...well, I guess "uninspired" is a nice way to put it... "Shamelessly and effortlessly milking the franchise because fans will buy into it" would be a slightly more cruel but equally more accurate way to express it.

Overall the majority of Wii's games (not all though) to me are games that only a fan could love. To non-fans they're generally ok games, which aren't lousy or even particularly bad ("general exception" made for the mario franchise "spin of"s such as Mario Kart...)... But they're not particularly good either.

Virtual Console is, yet another, unnecessary gimmick. Emulators are widely available and even the oldest of computers that can effectively run Windows XP (or even millenium) can emulate old SNES titles.

As for backwards compatibility... Is that really a good enough reason to justify buying/not buying a console? Mostly you want backwards compatibility to play the games you have... For the older console you have... So why not just play it on that console? Sure it's far more comfortable to just open the tray and switch the disk than to hook up the older console, but it takes a whole 5-10 minutes, at most if you're incredibly ham-handed, to setup a console... I know time is money but I don't think the average consumer is payed 3000 dollars an hour...

Change that from 14-24, that's generally the age of the shiny = good demographic. Honestly, the Wii has a lot of innovative games (and doesn't play nearly as badly as you say).

Can you honestly say that better graphics are a BAD thing? No. Better graphics are better, always. You can argue that graphics aren't everything, but by itself, better graphics = better.

Moving on cause I have a lot to answer.

Then why do some people (me included) prefer the graphical style of Wind Waker to Twilight Princess? Which one had the 'better graphics'?

You're comparing different styles. It's like arguing whether a portrait of a photograph are better. You can argue the photograph, if well taken, will always have more detail and be more visually accurate than the portrait, but the portrait captures something the picture can't: essence.

In other words, Wind Waker goes for a cartoony cell-shaded style while Twilight Princess goes for a more realistic one. Personally I prefer Twilight Princess's style visually, but it's a matter of preference as they're not even in the same cathegory.

But, for instances, can you honestly say this screenshot [http://wiimedia.ign.com/wii/image/article/760/760189/super-mario-64-virtual-console-20070131013937793_640w.jpg] looks better than this one [http://www.trustedreviews.com/images/article/inline/6326-SuperMarioGalaxy.jpg]?

I think the point was that standing alone, better graphics is a good thing. That however may be overruled by game play and story and delivery etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_Valley

Actually, I believe that, if anything, the more advanced graphics nowadays are on the opposite "safe" side of the uncanny valley while something like the Wii stands dangerously closer to the "depression" in that graphic.

All right first of all, don't rip ofoff Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw, when rightingwriting in forums,.What, can't think of anything witty of your own.?

D - Not good. Needs work.

And my apologies, I wasn't aware Yahtzee had copyrighted the entire English language or something. Apparently expressions that have been around since before Yahtzee was even posting on youtube, let alone on the escapist, are now his exclusive "intellectual property".

I don't exactly recall "ripping off" Yahtzee on purpose, but I do share his views of most games, if I happened to use words he did in a circumstance it was merely a coincidence. Our brains do retain memory of what we hear and read, it's how we learn most of our vocabulary, to be entirely honest.

(ps: I know I totally ripped off Yahtzee on the whole "correcting the misspelled anger mail" thing, even though I've been doing it for about 5 years now, but I thought the irony would be AMAZING. I was right.)

It true that we learn to speak by what we here, but it's a might big coincidence that you put the exact right word/phrases with the right game or context as Yahtzee did and that much similarity Is way more that a coincidence that I am willing to swallow.

B.T.W, my grammar and spelling is bad since my native language is French

 

[meglathon]

Down

 

[Caliostro]

It true that we learn to speak by what we here, but it's a might big coincidence that you put the exact right word/phrases with the right game or context as Yahtzee did and that much similarity Is way more that a coincidence that I am willing to swallow.

B.T.W, my grammar and spelling is bad since my native language is French

Well if I did, sorry, I did so unaware.

Mine's Portuguese

 

[WhitemageofDOOM]

Can you honestly say that better graphics are a BAD thing? No. Better graphics are better, always. You can argue that graphics aren't everything, but by itself, better graphics = better.

Yes. They cost money, money which could be buying me more polished gameplay. Money which makes it harder for new developers with new ideas to get in(or new polishes of old ideas.). Good gameplay trumps graphics, and graphics cost a LOT more than gameplay.

Also better graphics are usually sought for more realistic looks(no ones eyes burn from 8-bit kirby) and honestly, I'm no fan of a realistic look. I prefer stylized art direction. But that is personal preference not good debate material.

 

[MecaEcco]

both

 

[Caliostro]

Can you honestly say that better graphics are a BAD thing? No. Better graphics are better, always. You can argue that graphics aren't everything, but by itself, better graphics = better.

Yes. They cost money, money which could be buying me more polished gameplay. Money which makes it harder for new developers with new ideas to get in(or new polishes of old ideas.). Good gameplay trumps graphics, and graphics cost a LOT more than gameplay.

Also better graphics are usually sought for more realistic looks(no ones eyes burn from 8-bit kirby) and honestly, I'm no fan of a realistic look. I prefer stylized art direction. But that is personal preference not good debate material.

You're operating under the erroneous assumption that better graphics = worse gameplay.

I just said, graphics may not be more important than gameplay, but - BY THEMSELVES - better graphics = always better.

In other words, if a developer sacrifices the gameplay "budget" in favor of the graphics polishing budget, then the game itself will suffer. But if the developer can do BOTH, then better graphics are always better.

 

[axia777]

Who gives a crap? Nintendo is making cash hand over fist like no other company I know of. They are practically printing their own cash flow. That is the only sign I need to know that their business practices are right.

BTW, I hate the Wii. I wish Sony was doing this well. But their not, because some how Nintendo is smarter.

 

[Caliostro]

Who gives a crap? Nintendo is making cash hand over fist like no other company I know of. They are practically printing their own cash flow. That is the only sign I need to know that their business practices are right.

Organized crime usually pays well, although risky... Not what I'd call correct business practices.

Not to mention, as I said before, Sturgeon's law applies to consumers as well.

 

[WhitemageofDOOM]

You're operating under the erroneous assumption that better graphics = worse gameplay.

I just said, graphics may not be more important than gameplay, but - BY THEMSELVES - better graphics = always better.

In other words, if a developer sacrifices the gameplay "budget" in favor of the graphics polishing budget, then the game itself will suffer. But if the developer can do BOTH, then better graphics are always better.

When game designers have infinite money that might become legitimate. Any graphics budget right now comes out of the game play budget though, and the graphics budget tends to eclipse the game play budget.

But yeah, in and of themselves graphics are good ignoring the circumstances in them. But the reality of good graphics is that they are expensive.

 

[Caliostro]

When game designers have infinite money that might become legitimate. Any graphics budget right now comes out of the game play budget though, and the graphics budget tends to eclipse the game play budget.

But yeah, in and of themselves graphics are good ignoring the circumstances in them. But the reality of good graphics is that they are expensive.

Crysis had both AMAZING graphics and good gameplay. If anything the vehicles sucked a rather anomalously big cock. Crysis Warhead is quite the good shooter that excels in both graphics and gameplay. It's really a mistake if you think good graphics will suck up all the resources a company these days has.

Truth is, Graphics will usually suck up more financial resources because that's the only way to make them better: Buy a better engine, invest more on technology, more programmers and digital artists to spend a shitload of time designing the characters perfectly... Gameplay, however, can generally be tuned by simply thinking about stuff BEFORE you put it into play, planning shit instead of picking another existing game to rip off regardless of how adequate, so it's not really as financially intensive.

 

[weirdaljedifan2]

In my opinion, graphics don't matter, violent games aren't the ONLY way to have fun playing games(even though they are fun), and could someone tell me what exactly do you people mean by gimmicky because usually I get kinda confused when that's brought up.

From where I see it, the Wii is an interesting idea, but judging by the games, Nintendo didn't seem ready to use the motion control.

 

[Jumplion]

Everybody's doing their own thing, wether or not they are bad is debatable but non of them are wrong really.

I have a Wii and am throughly disapointed with it unfortuantely. I've played most of the games the Wii has to offr (the "must buy games!" ones) and I play them for maybe a week or two, then I just stop playing with it. I don't want to, I loved Okami when I played it but then I just...stopped playing it. I don't have the urge to play it again.

I also have a PS3 and I am very satisfied with it, it has the games that I want and I love the damn black shoe box.

My friend has a Wii, and he just recently got a PS3 and he's playing Oblivion and Soul Calibur 4 alot now. Each console has their ups and downs, their myths and legends, their facts and opinions, but none of them are doing anything "wrong" or "right"

That said, I do think Nintendo isn't giving enough credit to the kids/families they market to. Many kids I know do not like the "kiddy" stuff that Nintendo puts out and they love their action-packed FPSs and TPSs as do I (though Im more forigivng then them). In a way, Nintendo is sortof reinforcing the stereotype that all kids are stupid and brain-dead and are retards, but that's just what I think.

And can we stop with the "innovation!" and "gimmick!" crap now? Those words are getting heavily over-used and people seem to toss it around whenever something interesting pops up. People are calling the Wii both "innovation" and "gimmick" so which one is it? We didn't have to use those words in the 6th generation or the 5th or the 4th, 3rd, 2nd or 1st. Why are we using them now?

 

[Fanboy]

That said, I do think Nintendo isn't giving enough credit to the kids/families they market to. Many kids I know do not like the "kiddy" stuff that Nintendo puts out and they love their action-packed FPSs and TPSs as do I (though Im more forigivng then them). In a way, Nintendo is sortof reinforcing the stereotype that all kids are stupid and brain-dead and are retards, but that's just what I think.

You have to remember that the Wii is being picked up by many people who were recently unfamiliar with gaming. Those kiddy games are meant to be easy to pick up and non-frustrating for the noobs.

I do wish there were a bit more 'hardcore' games out for the Wii, but I'm satisfied enough with what there is now. Hopefully after this wave of new people have become hopelessly addicted they will start doing the hard stuff and we'll get some better games coming out.

And can we stop with the "innovation!" and "gimmick!" crap now?

Yes, please. It's just a feature, who cares whether you think it's innovative or gimmicky.

 

[Maddenfreak]

I've thought of buying a wii, but then I thought, I like GOOD graphics , not whatever the the hell thier trying to pass off, so I'm sticking to a PS2 till the PS3 either gets more games, or goes down in price

 

[Jumplion]

That said, I do think Nintendo isn't giving enough credit to the kids/families they market to. Many kids I know do not like the "kiddy" stuff that Nintendo puts out and they love their action-packed FPSs and TPSs as do I (though Im more forigivng then them). In a way, Nintendo is sortof reinforcing the stereotype that all kids are stupid and brain-dead and are retards, but that's just what I think.

You have to remember that the Wii is being picked up by many people who were recently unfamiliar with gaming. Those kiddy games are meant to be easy to pick up and non-frustrating for the noobs.

I do wish there were a bit more 'hardcore' games out for the Wii, but I'm satisfied enough with what there is now. Hopefully after this wave of new people have become hopelessly addicted they will start doing the hard stuff and we'll get some better games coming out.

And can we stop with the "innovation!" and "gimmick!" crap now?

Yes, please. It's just a feature, who cares whether you think it's innovative or gimmicky.

Really, all the consoles compliment eachother in a VERY complete way, and I personally think the best "fit" between these two are the Wii and PS3.

I don't know exactly why, but everything that Nintendo makes, without a Sony platform (mainly playstation) it just doesn't seem complete to me and vice versa for Sony being complimented by Nintendo.

Now, that doesn't mean that the games interest you on either platform, but this is the way I see it;

Nintendo has the good laid-back kind of games and the mascot franchises.
Sony has their own franchises that arn't necisarily their "mascots" and they also have those interesting games that nobody's really heard of or cared about yet really shake up the industry in some way (Indie in a way, but they're not) like Shadow of the Collosus or Ico.

I'm sorry if i sound biased against the 360, but I don't have one and only briefly played it from time to time so I don't have a definitive opinion on the 360. But it's a good, average console, in the middle ground. Good "hardcore" and "casual" games but nothing that really "shakes up" the industry. Plus, most of it's good games go out on PC eventualy so....

But that's my analysis, I've been thinking about doing a huge rant on each console and what i think of them though it would be hugely biased with the Ps3 since I love it so.

 

[Graustein]

My Nintendo fanboy alert went off after I read your favorites apparently are Nintendo, Nintendo and Nintendo... BUUuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut anyways... I'll disregard it.

Wow, no shit Sherlock. Guess what, I was listing games for the Wii that I want. Surprise surprise, they're overwhelmingly Nintendo. Whodathunk?

Let me make one point clear: OFF COURSE that in this "topic" I'm over generalizing, there's no way not to in a topic like this. If your favorite games ever are all on the amiga it's clear that to you the amiga was the best piece of hardware to ever have any games in it. However, when discussing something of this "range" I have to generalize and take into account personal experience. For instances, to me anything with "super mario" (or company) on the title instantly turns me off as they're generally yet another uninspired Super Mario 64 rip off with a different "skin" and better graphics or yet another shameless attempt to milk the franchise by trying to pass off a subpar fighting/driving/sports/tetris/etc game by just "dressing" them in a "Mario skin". I'm sure a lot of people love it, but if you're to take a couple steps back and get some distance most of these games are...well, I guess "uninspired" is a nice way to put it... "Shamelessly and effortlessly milking the franchise because fans will buy into it" would be a slightly more cruel but equally more accurate way to express it.

Yes, they're milking the franchise. However, they're still producing games I like.

Overall the majority of Wii's games (not all though) to me are games that only a fan could love. To non-fans they're generally ok games, which aren't lousy or even particularly bad ("general exception" made for the mario franchise "spin of"s such as Mario Kart...)... But they're not particularly good either.

The bolded is a matter of opinion. I'm yet to find a 360 game that can engage me as well as any of my favourite Nintendo games.

Virtual Console is, yet another, unnecessary gimmick. Emulators are widely available and even the oldest of computers that can effectively run Windows XP (or even millenium) can emulate old SNES titles.

I said this before. I. Am. Not. A. Fan. Of. Piracy. Therefore, I'd rather obtain my old games legally. Is this a difficult concept to grasp? I know there are other legal routes, namely buying a SNES, but this method is cheaper and easier.

As for backwards compatibility... Is that really a good enough reason to justify buying/not buying a console? Mostly you want backwards compatibility to play the games you have... For the older console you have... So why not just play it on that console? Sure it's far more comfortable to just open the tray and switch the disk than to hook up the older console, but it takes a whole 5-10 minutes, at most if you're incredibly ham-handed, to setup a console... I know time is money but I don't think the average consumer is payed 3000 dollars an hour...

No. Backwards compatibility is not sufficient reason to pick up a console. I never said it was a deciding factor, I said it was a nice little addition. That's what the term icing on the cake means.


tl;dr: Wii has games I like (and if you think that's anything other than me stating a subjective opinion you need to get your brain checked), Virtual Console is a legal way to obtain old SNES-era games, backwards compatibility is nothing more than a nice little addition, nor did I say it was.

Finally, to actually answer the question in the OP: I am yet to find more than 5 games on either 360 or PS3 that I am interested in and can't get on PC. So Nintendo must be doing something right.