Yes, HDTVs are not widely adopted, but many people have computer monitors. You can run the 360, for instance, on a computer monitor using their VGA cable. So, hi-def gaming can be had on the cheap and you don't have to kick the wife and kids out of the living room to play.Bongo Bill said:
Nintendo's Fils-Aime Speaks Out
- Thread starter Shawn Andrich
- Start date
I think that the people saying that the Wii's lack of power is a major minus are not gamers but technologists. My rationale for this is that processing power improvements have traditionally gone hand-in-hand with new hit games, ever since the beginning of videogaming. And many self-professed video gamers, from the beginning, were attracted to the idea of technology and its potential to show a beautiful virtual reality, or at least to show off their new system.
So a confusion of purpose developed; while Nintendo has always been about total game craftsmanship - in all aspects, from franchising and licensing to art style to core tech decisions(and they've always done things that would save them money; no FMV games or Oblivion-styled ultracomplex epics) - we've also seen the rise of companies like iD and Epic that made themselves technology-driven enterprises, and companies that are entirely marketing-based(most major publishers). Until the mid-90s, the distinction wasn't that clear, since everyone desired better technology. But around the time that 3d came into vogue, we saw a split. The tech-and-marketing companies have helped give the market "what they want," which is a game that doesn't suck and looks awesome in screenshots and video. Nintendo never really followed this; it was the games that they were selling, not the system, after all. After three consecutive generations of lower market share and console sales(SNES through GCN) they finally figured out this distinction, its causes, and what could be done to move the market forward in other directions. Gunpei Yokoi probably recognized this with the Virtual Boy project, but that system was a misfire in many ways; an unappealing cyberpunkish concept, rushed out and marketed as a stopgap for the N64, without the kind of solid vision and planning that the DS and Wii have recieved.
It should come as no surprise that we see people complaining about bad graphics. Those people don't matter to Nintendo. They constitute a "false majority." The real problem is, how are they going to follow up on the DS and Wii? (other than the obvious ways)
So a confusion of purpose developed; while Nintendo has always been about total game craftsmanship - in all aspects, from franchising and licensing to art style to core tech decisions(and they've always done things that would save them money; no FMV games or Oblivion-styled ultracomplex epics) - we've also seen the rise of companies like iD and Epic that made themselves technology-driven enterprises, and companies that are entirely marketing-based(most major publishers). Until the mid-90s, the distinction wasn't that clear, since everyone desired better technology. But around the time that 3d came into vogue, we saw a split. The tech-and-marketing companies have helped give the market "what they want," which is a game that doesn't suck and looks awesome in screenshots and video. Nintendo never really followed this; it was the games that they were selling, not the system, after all. After three consecutive generations of lower market share and console sales(SNES through GCN) they finally figured out this distinction, its causes, and what could be done to move the market forward in other directions. Gunpei Yokoi probably recognized this with the Virtual Boy project, but that system was a misfire in many ways; an unappealing cyberpunkish concept, rushed out and marketed as a stopgap for the N64, without the kind of solid vision and planning that the DS and Wii have recieved.
It should come as no surprise that we see people complaining about bad graphics. Those people don't matter to Nintendo. They constitute a "false majority." The real problem is, how are they going to follow up on the DS and Wii? (other than the obvious ways)
Hmm. Sometimes I feel like I am preaching to the choir on this site and other times I feel like I am banging my head against a brick wall.
Nintendo is selling you a short bag of goods. It's not really an opinion, it's a fact. They are selling their Gamecube 1.2 at a profit and have contrived a gimmicky control scheme to somehow convince everyone that Nintendo is the company of innovation. Say goodbye to quality third party titles by the way, courtesy of the Wiimote and low end specs. When Nintendo is willing to put their money where their mouth is like Sony and Microsoft, I will ease up. Until then, they are nothing but snake oil salesman in my opinion. If you would like to spend $200 on a repackaged Gamecube with a new controller, by all means enjoy.
We can scratch are chins, wax philosophic, and try to have a "dialogue," but sometimes this site gets a little to intellectual for its own good and needs a good dose of common sense. Nothing in Nintendo's history or in its current offering shows me they have fundamentally taken a substantive interest in console gaming at all. They are perfectly willing to sell cheap rigs to fanboys, kids, and casual gamers in just enough numbers to stay in third place, but still make a whopping profit from day one. They care nothing about gamers or creating innovative games. At least Sony and Microsoft are willing to put up tens of millions of dollars in losses over years to provide the consumer what it wants. Or at least what they think we want. People having been bashing Sony for its pre-launch arrogant statements, yet everyone seem OK with Nintendo selling them another Gamecube in a new Applesque skin. The good old NES was a great system and is probably the most important console ever made. But those days are over.
Screw it. Pointless. Flame over. I'm going back to finish New Super Mario Brothers on the DS....while I take a dump. Thus, this officially ends my Nintendo bashing. All future rants will be directed at the PC, 360, and PS3. Peace.
Nintendo is selling you a short bag of goods. It's not really an opinion, it's a fact. They are selling their Gamecube 1.2 at a profit and have contrived a gimmicky control scheme to somehow convince everyone that Nintendo is the company of innovation. Say goodbye to quality third party titles by the way, courtesy of the Wiimote and low end specs. When Nintendo is willing to put their money where their mouth is like Sony and Microsoft, I will ease up. Until then, they are nothing but snake oil salesman in my opinion. If you would like to spend $200 on a repackaged Gamecube with a new controller, by all means enjoy.
We can scratch are chins, wax philosophic, and try to have a "dialogue," but sometimes this site gets a little to intellectual for its own good and needs a good dose of common sense. Nothing in Nintendo's history or in its current offering shows me they have fundamentally taken a substantive interest in console gaming at all. They are perfectly willing to sell cheap rigs to fanboys, kids, and casual gamers in just enough numbers to stay in third place, but still make a whopping profit from day one. They care nothing about gamers or creating innovative games. At least Sony and Microsoft are willing to put up tens of millions of dollars in losses over years to provide the consumer what it wants. Or at least what they think we want. People having been bashing Sony for its pre-launch arrogant statements, yet everyone seem OK with Nintendo selling them another Gamecube in a new Applesque skin. The good old NES was a great system and is probably the most important console ever made. But those days are over.
Screw it. Pointless. Flame over. I'm going back to finish New Super Mario Brothers on the DS....while I take a dump. Thus, this officially ends my Nintendo bashing. All future rants will be directed at the PC, 360, and PS3. Peace.
My rebuttal is directed towards your toiletheavyfeul said:
While your viewpoint on the Wii and Nintendo at current is fair - I think you a) sell them short on what they've accomplished, irregardless of their motivation. and b) are giving WAY too much credit to sony and microsoft with the statement "At least Sony and Microsoft are willing to put up tens of millions of dollars in losses over years to provide the consumer what it wants.".
To A) I say Nintendo has chosen to make profitable hardware, the hardware is most certainly more powerful than the gamecube, It's jump in power is fairly close in line with previous jumps from generation to generation. Nintendo's consoles traditionally are about the same relative power wise to personal computers available at the same time. What they have succeeded in doing right now is making the market FEEL less closed than it did. The number of people who have been visiting my house regularly just to play Wii Sports is pretty incredible to me. My DS has attracted more attention than any other platform I've ever seen. People want a turn at what I'm doing. The platforms have allowed for easier development of the quirky games that everybody can play. Nintendo is most certainly in it for the money. They've attempted to disrupt the games market.
B) Sony and Microsoft do NOT care about what the gamer wants. They care about what the gamer will buy, and they desperately want control of the living room computer. They want to be your multimedia solution. Sony is approaching from the hardware side of things, and Microsoft from the software side.
Remember the lessons of market share vs profit. One doesn't mean the other, and if you're going to ignore Nintendo because they're content to make a profit as opposed to burn up the funds from their companies other divisions, feel free. I wont force you to play. I don't even need you to see the brilliance of gaming that is the new Zelda. I just want you to remember that all three companies are in this business to make money, and of the three, the only one who has catered to what I want in a gaming system is Nintendo.
I understand hardware specs better than most people. Not all MHz are equal (See AMD vs Intel or even IBM for that matter). Not all Power is usable power (See development issues in Multicore processing). A more powerful engine doesnt always translate into a better looking game (Doom 3 anybody? that's the ugliest game I've ever played). I don't care if I can see the hairs on a person's chin while I box them, I care that it doesn't lose / gain framerate dramatically during a special effect. I want smooth, and I want easy.
As to the gimmicky control scheme, it may not be for you. But it's the best setup I've found for consoles. I hated console games because none felt right for me. Times are changing
If this becomes industry standard, I will not complain.Interesting post, Tom. I'd like to single out a few snippets, if you don't mind. First, a quick nitpick:
The "Broadway" will stack up somewhat better against the 360's Xenon and the PS3's Cell than it ought to, because the latter two are both in-order processors, while the PPC7xx series all support out-of-order execution. However, even on branchy code, that difference is nowhere near sufficient to make up the difference between a 729MHz core clock and a 3.2GHz core clock -- and that's without even considering the Xenon's three parallel CPU cores or the Cell's seven "synergistic processing elements."
I played it at her brother's place last weekend and we had a really good time. Wii Sports in particular was a lot of fun. I won't be buying one soon, though, for a few reasons: (1) my home theatre setup is too snug for multiplayer Wii Sports, (2) component video cables aren't readily available, (3) I'd like it in black, and, most importantly, (4) Metroid Prime 3 isn't out yet.
(I should note, though, that if Metroid Prime 3 doesn't have the same lock-on targeting scheme as its predecessors and the last several Zeldas, it may cost Nintendo a Wii sale. I would have bought a DS for Metroid Prime: Hunters if the lock-on feature hadn't been dropped; as it is, I don't own one.)
Just as one example, camera control in Twilight Princess is noticeably more complex than it was in Wind Waker. The lock-on targeting system largely obviates the need for direct combat control, but the loss of the second analog joystick shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.
Having said that, though, I do want to reiterate that I think the Wiimote/nunchuck scheme will be an improvement in comfort and approachability for a lot of people.
I think you meant "regardless" or "irrespective." "Irregardless" is a double negative. (Sorry, I just couldn't help myself.)TomBeraha said:
I don't think this is accurate. While I agree that not all MHz are equal, the CPU and GPU speeds of the GameCube were 5 times and 2.5 times faster than the N64, respectively. In contrast, the Wii CPU and GPU speeds are both reportedly 1.5 times faster than their GameCube predecessors. More importantly, though, the Wii CPU is from the same processor family as its predecessor. Provided the reported specs are accurate (and based on the tear-downs, they appear to be), it is not a generational leap. Not even close. The GameCube had a 485MHz PowerPC 750-family processor; the Wii reportedly has a 729MHz PowerPC 750-family processor.TomBeraha said:
The PPC7xx series (better known to Mac users like myself as the "G3" processor) was commonly in use in Macs back when the GameCube was released. In fact, the GameCube's "Gekko" was faster than the 400MHz G3 in the iMac I owned at the time. The Wii's "Broadway," however, is decidedly not faster than the dual-processor 1.8GHz PowerPC 970 ("G5") system that I replaced the iMac with almost three years ago; nor is it faster than the consumer machines available from Apple at that time. It pales in comparison to the consumer PCs and Macs of today. So I don't think that part of your statement has held for the Wii.TomBeraha said:
The "Broadway" will stack up somewhat better against the 360's Xenon and the PS3's Cell than it ought to, because the latter two are both in-order processors, while the PPC7xx series all support out-of-order execution. However, even on branchy code, that difference is nowhere near sufficient to make up the difference between a 729MHz core clock and a 3.2GHz core clock -- and that's without even considering the Xenon's three parallel CPU cores or the Cell's seven "synergistic processing elements."
This I completely agree with. My girlfriend's brother bought a Wii just before the American Thanksgiving holiday and took it with him to their older sister's place. In attendance were the three children, their parents, and the older sister's husband. They had it connected to their projector (8-foot screen) via composite cables (ugh). All of them loved the Wii, to the point that the older sister and her husband, who have been non-gamers since the arcade days, are considering buying one, and my girlfriend and I spent a lot of last weekend unsuccessfully checking Targets and Best Buys for stray Wiis becuase she really wants one.TomBeraha said:
I played it at her brother's place last weekend and we had a really good time. Wii Sports in particular was a lot of fun. I won't be buying one soon, though, for a few reasons: (1) my home theatre setup is too snug for multiplayer Wii Sports, (2) component video cables aren't readily available, (3) I'd like it in black, and, most importantly, (4) Metroid Prime 3 isn't out yet.
(I should note, though, that if Metroid Prime 3 doesn't have the same lock-on targeting scheme as its predecessors and the last several Zeldas, it may cost Nintendo a Wii sale. I would have bought a DS for Metroid Prime: Hunters if the lock-on feature hadn't been dropped; as it is, I don't own one.)
Having seen it in action, I think Wiimote/nunchuck is at least as good a control scheme for the game as the traditional controller, but I also think it isn't a huge leap forward. I think the gameplay will be just as good on the Cube, with the main difference being the increase in comfort on the Wii because you can play with both hands in a "rest" position at your sides instead of having to centre them on your lap.TomBeraha said:
Just as one example, camera control in Twilight Princess is noticeably more complex than it was in Wind Waker. The lock-on targeting system largely obviates the need for direct combat control, but the loss of the second analog joystick shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.
Having said that, though, I do want to reiterate that I think the Wiimote/nunchuck scheme will be an improvement in comfort and approachability for a lot of people.
I wasn't trying to imply that Sony and MS are somehow altruistic in their strategy and are in it to please gamers. In fact I am pissed at Sony and Microsoft for putting so many superfluous features into their consoles like card readers, cameras, etc. I strongly believe that a really good gaming console should do just one thing...play games. They have wasted money and development time on trying to make the gaming console a multimedia computer for the living room. Those of us who want a console just for playing games? Well, we lose out. Many consumers probably like all those features, but personally I think they are a waste. All I need my gaming console to do is...TomBeraha said:
1) Have a simple OS/GUI for managing game files, system settings, IP addresses, etc.
2) Internet connectivity for multiplayer game servers
3) Xbox Live type service for manging friends list, online gaming, and game fixes/updates
4) Have a hard drive for storing save and game data (No load screens please!)
5) Voice over IP capabilities
6) Optical out for 5.1 surround sound
7) Cheap simple memory card for transferring account info and save data
8) Play games
9) Support connectivity to computer monitor for cheap HD graphics
Being able to play DVD movies and CDs is a nice feature to have and since the DVD drive is already there I see no problem with this feature.
NES: 1.79 MHz CPU / 2KiB RAM / 5.37 MHz GPUAjar said:
SNES: 3.58MHz CPU / 128KB RAM / Dual Core GPU (i don't know the speed)
N64: 93.75 MHz CPU / 4MB RAM / SGI 62.5 MHz GPU
GC: 485 MHz / approx 24MB RAM / 162 MHz GPU
Wii: 729 MHz / Approx 91 MB RAM / 243 MHz GPU
i'll grant you that the number change is smaller than in previous generations. however - my home pc at those times
NES - 286 PC (approx 8 Mhz) (4.4X as powerful)
SNES - 386 PC (i dont know which model we had, between 16 - 40 mhz) (8X as powerful)
N64 - Pentium Pro 133 Mhz (1.4X as powerful)
GC - P4 1.5 GHz ( 3X as powerful )
Wii - Athlon X2 3800+ 1.8Ghz x2 (hard to compare - but roughly 5X as powerful)
So - in my mind the Wii is not as underpowered as the SNES was and not quite as powerful as the N64 was relative to it's arrival. take from that what you will
I don't for a moment think that there weren't people with better hardware than what I had at home, and at all times consoles were inferior in terms of power. It's not a computer, it's point to me is to be a locked down reliable box that plays games well. The 360 and the PS3 aren't consoles, they're attempts at living room computers. I don't fault Nintendo for making a console instead.Ajar said:
I don't really care about HD, we've got a 1080p LCD thanks to my roomate and I really don't know why he wasted his money on it. I'm stuck in my ways, I think that people look realistic enough on my old SDTV and that if the games are coded right they're going to look fine anyway. I played HalfLife 2 the first time round in 640 by 480 while waiting to have money to upgrade my machine, it looks absolutely gorgeous at low res too. *shrug* I guess it matters to someone, just not me. Everything else I agree with on the whole. though admittedly I will rarely use the online features. Gaming for me is about being with the people I'm playing. Its LAN or nothingheavyfeul said:
One certainly gets that impression, LC.LordCancer said:
Anyway, I'm still pleased as punch about the Wii. To my mind, it does exactly what it ought and for a decent price. I just can't get motivated to be bummed out about the absence of features that I wouldn't use.