By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Could the Wii remain dominant another five years?

 

Could the Wii remain dominant another five years?

Yes, no new console needed 75 33.94%
 
No, the competition will ... 146 66.06%
 
Total:221
Resident_Hazard said:
patjuan32 said:

No it was not. Resident Evil 4 proved that the PS2 was very far behind the Gamecube. The Game had long load times and effects had to be cut from the game just to get it to run properly.

--

Not always. You are forgetting the art that may have to be done again, Just go read what Retro had to do to get Metroid Prime and Metroid Prime 2  to look like a standard Wii game.

That's your assuption about the Wii and it shows that you do not know much about technology. All I can say is that the Gamecube could not run Wii games that were developed by Nintendo, such as and it definately can not run a game like Monster Hunter or Red Steel 2.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Me:
You seem to be assuming that porting from the Xbox360 to the Wii is somehow cheaper and easier than porting from the Xbox360 to the PS3.  Which is just absurd.  For one thing, the Wii cannot even handle many of the new game engines such as that in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare or the Unreal 3 engine.
 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

During the development of World at War the team[Treyarch] figured out a process for porting down the COD4 engine onto Wii, which brought about a pretty impressive offering for fans that weren't afraid to jump into another World War II shooter.

http://wii.ign.com/objects/902/902591.html

Unreal Engine 3 IS in the works for the Wii

http://gonintendo.com/viewstory.php?id=12897s

If it happens it happens. If it does not. I doubt any one would care at this point.

Capcom Brings MT Framework to Wii

http://wii.ign.com/articles/103/1038907p1.html

Even if they never make a game for the Wii using this engine. It's there to be used.


Capcom used the Resident Evil 4 engine and the game 's development was outsourced,TOSE Software Inc. The original Dead Rising team did not work on the game.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Typical when a console gets a large boost in sales or a new model old games that were popular pop back into the charts. This shows that new buyers are purchasing the console. When old games that are popular do not resurface in the charts is a sign that current users are trading in consoles for a newer model or just upgrading their old console for other reason, different colors, speciality model like a Halo edition Xbox, or other factors.

Me:

Nintendo is also not going to follow Sony's blueprint for console/system development and sales.  They didn't the last two generations, why would they do it all of a sudden now?  Essentially, you're not using logic.  You're making really loose assumptions like equating the PS2 to the Wii in their respective generations, which is grossly innacurate.  The Playstation & N64, and the PS2 and GC/Xbox were in similar leagues with one another.  The Wii is at least a league behind the Xbox360.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The last two generations Nintendo consoles were in second and third place. Support for both systems were slim and they were at their five year life span. Also the returns for the systems were low and they'd already had drop the prices on the systems as far as they could. Lowering the price would have not increased the sales enough to Justify continuing to sale and support the system with software.

 

I enjoyed the debat.  Thanks, I look forward to us debating another topic someday.



Are you actually claiming the PS2 wasn't technically in the same league as the GC and Xbox?  It was mildly weaker than the GameCube--not a whole generation behind.  If it was a whole generation behind, they wouldn't have even bothered porting RE4 to it at all.  Altogether, the changes were minimal and largely unnoticable, and the PS2 version actually had more content and gameplay modes.  The Wii RE4 is actually, largely, the PS2 version of the game with Wiimote controls.  Look:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qz0LbKpZtI  The PS2 and GameCube versions are nearly identical with the exception of a few fancy effects.  Had Capcom put some effort into it, I'm sure the effects could have remained more intact, but I would imagine Capcom simply removed some of them altogether just to get the development done sooner.  You need to stop dismissing the power of the PS2.   You're essentially saying this: 
Where hardware is concerned, the Wii is to the Xbox360 what the PS2 is to the GameCube, and that's just plain wrong.  It's not even remotely correct. 
Essentially, on a technical level, it's more like this: The PS2 is to the GameCube what the Xbox360 is to the PS3.  You're either grossly over-estimating the power of the GameCube, or vastly under-estimating the power of the PS2.  Hardwar tech last gen went in this order from weakest to strongest:  Dreamcast-PS2-GameCube-Xbox, with the Xbox way out in the lead.  The GameCube is closer to the PS2 than the Xbox in overall hardware strength. 

Now, going by hardware strength, the Wii is to the Xbox360 what the N64 is to the Playstation 2.  Give the PS2 some credit.  It was not "very far" behind the GameCube.  It was only marginally behind the GameCube, and a bit further behind the Xbox. 

What did Retro do to move Prime 1 and 2 to the Wii?  Update a few textures and add bloom lighting?  Because aside from better particle effects, slightly better textures, and bloom lighting--Metroid Prime 3 didn't really look any better than the GameCube games.  http://www.gamespot.com/features/6178117/index.html  Take a close look, the only things that are tuly different are that the lighting has been sharpened and that increased lighting adds a lot to the overall look of the game.  In fact, lighting goes a long way when there's sufficient tech behind it.  Some texture detail is improved, but overall, polycounts appear to be largely the same.  It's not a very big leap, and judging by the fact that Retro pumped out the Trilogy compilation, what, only two years after Prime 3 hit, I'd say it probably wasn't too arduous a task.  After all, Prime 1 and 2 are massive games, and to bump up the textures and lighting for two such massive games--along with changing the control scheme, would take quite a while.  We also now know that Retro has been working on Donkey Kong for quite a while, probably as far back as late 2008 or early 2009, which means that updating MP 1 & 2 was a side project.  Prime 3 sure looks prettier, but not like it's a generational leap forward like going from Call of Duty 3 to Modern Warfare.  For that matter, have you even seen any of the God of War PS2 games?  I mean look at this:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goG14Lbl2_I  

 

I'm not going to go into detail where you accuse me of "not knowing about technology" since you have shown quite clearly, that you dismiss the power of the PS2 as if it was as puny as the N64 compared to the GameCube.  Either you're being deliberatly obtuse, or you actually understand next to nothing about hardware power.  Just that the GameCube could probably run Red Steel 2 or Monster Hunter 3--all it would take is the kind of minor downgrade that they gave to RE4 to put it on the PS2 because, let's be frank, the GameCube falls pretty much right in the middle between the PS2 and Wii in terms of overall power--and the Wii is about a match to the original Xbox. 



The original Dead Rising team did not make DR for the Wii for two reasons: 
1--There's no way in hell the game, in it's original form, would run at all on the Wii.
2--Capcom listened to Wii owners who constantly cried for another game "like RE4."  They got it, and they still weren't happy.

 

Going by the new engines running on the Wii--they are gimped versions with a lot of their vast tech removed.  It's the only way an engine optimized for HD-standards (X360/PS3/PC) will run on the Wii.

I ignored your comments about the PS2. Engineers can apated their engines to run on many different types of hardware. ID has a version of their Rage engine running on the Iphone. Capcom has their MTframe work (engine) running on the 3DS. I've also demonstrated through links that I provided in my previous post that Engineers have adapted engines, COD 4, Unreal 3, and the MTFramework, to run on the Wii. If you think the engines were gimped then provide links that prove your statements. The Engines are not gimped.

I would like to see your evidence that old, popular games suddenly all appear on sales charts when consoles are adopted.  Logically speaking, this means that if console sales are steady--as they typically are now--that game sales would remain steady throughout--which isn't generally true (except for a few Wii releases like Wii Play).  Again, not every game remains in production for the run of a console--as a matter of fact, almost no games remain in production during the entire run of a console.  Production of Bioshock, Burnout Revenge, Fable II, and several other titles had long ceased by the time that I got my Xbox360 in late 2008.  At the time, all copies of Bioshock were first-run copies that had been discounted to clear them out of stock.  In fact, my copy of Fable II is a Platinum re-release with two downloadable bits included. And that version is also no longer in production. 

This is a sales site and it's been discussed every time NPD, Media Crate, or Chart track data is listed in the forum. Games can be old like Mario Kart DS or GTA San Andreas for the PS2 but they stay in the charts because  new console owners are buying those games. Halo is another example and so is Halo 3. If the demand for a game continues. Retailers will continue to order and stock the game. The games that I mentioned perviously are examples of this.

How then, can sales of these titles--most of which would no longer be in production--suddenly shoot back up into the charts at any time just because hardware sales suddenly see a spike?  It's extremely rare to find any game, ever, that remained in steady production during the entire lifespan of a console.  Even Tetris wasn't constantly made for the entire run of the original Game Boy--and it's the highest selling title on that system because it was originally a pack-in.   By your logic, all "popular" titles would have suddenly jumped back into the charts just because the Game Boy Pocket was released.  I'm reasonably certain that many of those games, such as Metroid II and Super Mario Land were long out of production by the time the Game Boy Pocket brought new life to the Game Boy line. 

No games released during the first two or three years of the Xbox360, no matter how popular, are still in wide release or production now--as we near the fifth anniversary of the Xbox360's launch.  The only exceptions will be massively popular titles like Halo 3, or rereleases in the Platinum Hits line.  The simple fact is, the new Xbox360 is selling, and not just to previous owners.  For instance, I didn't buy an X360 and upgrade later, the 60-gig Pro got me to adopt.  Same with the DS.  I didn't buy that original ugly thing--I wasn't sold until the Lite hit.  A lot of consumers are like that.  There will always be new adopters, but two things always create (sometimes brief) increases in sales--a new lower price point, and a new edition of the system.

Think about the software that you purchased? Did you go back and purchase a game that released a year before you purchased your systems? New owners typically do. They purchase games that their friends suggest or they'v played the game on a friend's console.

Finally, we seem to talking about two completely different things concering the final parts of our last two posts.  I have no idea what you're talking about.  Initially you said something about about Nintendo following Sony's methods of console development, which I dismissed, and now you're talking about average life spans of Nintendo systems (5 years), and seem to be agreeing with my original statement that the Wii will not remain dominant and that a successor is coming around 2011/2012.

Nope, I talked about their previous consoles, N64 and the GameCube. Not once did I say that the Wii would follow this pattern. Nintendo could continue to support the Wii like Sony continued to support the PSX and the PS2 even when the successor was available to the public.





If Nintendo is successful at the moment, it’s because they are good, and I cannot blame them for that. What we should do is try to be just as good.----Laurent Benadiba

 

Around the Network
patjuan32 said:

 

I ignored your comments about the PS2. Engineers can apated their engines to run on many different types of hardware. ID has a version of their Rage engine running on the Iphone. Capcom has their MTframe work (engine) running on the 3DS. I've also demonstrated through links that I provided in my previous post that Engineers have adapted engines, COD 4, Unreal 3, and the MTFramework, to run on the Wii. If you think the engines were gimped then provide links that prove your statements. The Engines are not gimped.

I would like to see your evidence that old, popular games suddenly all appear on sales charts when consoles are adopted.  Logically speaking, this means that if console sales are steady--as they typically are now--that game sales would remain steady throughout--which isn't generally true (except for a few Wii releases like Wii Play).  Again, not every game remains in production for the run of a console--as a matter of fact, almost no games remain in production during the entire run of a console.  Production of Bioshock, Burnout Revenge, Fable II, and several other titles had long ceased by the time that I got my Xbox360 in late 2008.  At the time, all copies of Bioshock were first-run copies that had been discounted to clear them out of stock.  In fact, my copy of Fable II is a Platinum re-release with two downloadable bits included. And that version is also no longer in production. 

This is a sales site and it's been discussed every time NPD, Media Crate, or Chart track data is listed in the forum. Games can be old like Mario Kart DS or GTA San Andreas for the PS2 but they stay in the charts because  new console owners are buying those games. Halo is another example and so is Halo 3. If the demand for a game continues. Retailers will continue to order and stock the game. The games that I mentioned perviously are examples of this.

How then, can sales of these titles--most of which would no longer be in production--suddenly shoot back up into the charts at any time just because hardware sales suddenly see a spike?  It's extremely rare to find any game, ever, that remained in steady production during the entire lifespan of a console.  Even Tetris wasn't constantly made for the entire run of the original Game Boy--and it's the highest selling title on that system because it was originally a pack-in.   By your logic, all "popular" titles would have suddenly jumped back into the charts just because the Game Boy Pocket was released.  I'm reasonably certain that many of those games, such as Metroid II and Super Mario Land were long out of production by the time the Game Boy Pocket brought new life to the Game Boy line. 

Nope, I talked about their previous consoles, N64 and the GameCube. Not once did I say that the Wii would follow this pattern. Nintendo could continue to support the Wii like Sony continued to support the PSX and the PS2 even when the successor was available to the public.

 

You shouldn't dismiss the PS2, and you're analogy of it essentially being a generation behind the GameCube is still foolhardy.  Wikipedia shows just how closely the PS2 and GameCube were in overall power.  Look at that, they really aren't that far apart:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_video_game_consoles_(sixth_generation)
Edit:  I also grabbed this so you could see just how far behind, well, everything, the Wii is:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_video_game_consoles_(seventh_generation) Now tell me that the Wii is comparable to the PS2, when compared to it's generational counterparts.  They are obviously not (technically) behind their genarational brothers in even remotely the same manner.

Anyway, logic dictates that any HD-specialized game engine rebuilt for the Wii will be gimped.  It will not feature, nor will it be able to handle the same levels of texture detail, poly counts, lighting, particles, etc.  Logically, if the engines weren't going to be gimped on the Wii, there would be no reason to rebuild them--they'd just use the same exact version of the engine found running smoothly on the Xbox360.

 

The games you pick out as "titles that sell to late console adopters" are of those very, very rare breed that are consistantly popular during the lifespan of the console.  Mario Kart titles are always  popular (for some reason) and GTA: San Andreas?  Dude, surely you must realize the fallacy in mentioning that title.  It's only one of the highest selling titles of all time.  Of course it was available throughout the lifespan of the PS2 (at least all they years after it's release).  And Halo?  Man, seriously?  Same category as GTA: San Andreas (or most GTA titles).  The plain fact is, the vast, vast, vast majority of titles released across any given system do not stay in production for more than a year.  Two at the longest.  And only the upper, say, 1% will ever reappear on sales charts when an update to a console is released.

Eternal Darkness on the GameCube sold about 250,000 copies--which isn't bad, but not what the game deserved.  It was not in production for nearly any of the GameCube's life cycle (though reports surfaced that a very tiny number of new copies were pressed during the GameCube's twilight for some reason--and only shipped, I think, to Wal-Mart).  If every game stayed in production the entire time, not only would there be no need to make new games, there'd also be no room for them in stores.  Yes, obviously some more popular titles will sell a bit more to late adopters--but again, that's not going to happen all at once.  When I buy a PS3, I'm not going to instantly buy all the older titles released the first couple years, thus adding to sales numbers--I'm going to buy the new title that has me interested (oh man, LBP2 is coming!), and maybe an older one if it's readily available--which they usually aren't unless I'm standing in GameStop.

The original point of this was that you essentially said that everyone (or most, anyway) of the people buying the new Xbox360 are just current owners "trading up."  And I agreed that a few of them would be, but more likely, a very large number of said people are new adopters--regardless of which games they might be buying.  Also, one should consider that late adopters may not necessarily be swayed by some of the more major titles.  For instance, when I bought my Xbox360 in 2008, Halo 3 was not one of the games I picked up.  One of the games I bought was used and no longer in production, so there was no way for it to reappear in sales charts anyway (Burnout: Revenge).  Which, I would imagine, is what makes up the bulk of games purchased by late adopters--used titles.

 

 

Simply pointing  out that this is a sales site doesn't instantly explain anything.  Aside from the fact that this is a sales site.  Which, I have to admit, I kinda already knew. 

Thanks for finally explaining what your final point was.  Now it makes sense.





No, but neither will the PS3 or 360. Sony and MS are going to be in for a rude awakening if they actually beleive their motion peripherals alone are going to magically extend the life of their consoles an extra 5 years.



ryuzaki57 said:

Wii is losing third party support as fast as a crashing plane is losing height. For 2011, there are only 2 third party games listed : Driver San Francisco and Ghost Recon Future Soldier. Those games will sell a lot more on HD systems so there's no chance they will lift Wii sales. With no games coming Wii hardware sales will only slow down as Kinect/Move appeal to people that have no system yet. Existing users surely buy whatever games Nintendo has to offer but hardware sales won't return 2008-2009 levels without outstanding exclusives.

As for Nintendo releasing Wii2, that certainly won't be a simple matter. Nintendo faces defiance from core gamers disappointed buy the orientation taken by Wii/DS software, so this audience is not likely to buy Wii2 without a rock solid line-up (which Nintendo can't have without third parties), especially if good games keep releasing on PS3/X360. Wii owners probably won't buy the system at once because it's bound to be expensive (at least if Nintendo puts the technology to compete with PS3/X360), and casual gamers (i.e. people who spend little time playing and don't consider video games as their primary leisure) won't see the necessity to upgrade especially with Wii is their first system.

Therefore whenever it releases, Wii2 probably won't see many early adopters unless it comes with something revolutionnary (like motion control was for Wii)

Eh, there's also arguably the most important 3rd party exclusive this gen coming to Wii still; Dragon Quest X.  There's also smaller 3rd party titles slated for next year you've missed, like Hudson's Lost in Shadow or THQ's de Blob: Underground (also on PS3/360, and also going to sell best on Wii, just to counterpoint).  Several licensed titles are also getting Wii versions next year, like The Avengers or Puss-N-Boots, and you can still expect the usual sports releases (Madden 2012, PES 2012, NHL 2K12, etc).

Of course the real drivers for Wii have always been 1st party, and there's already several big or notable games for next year in that regard (Zelda SS, Mario Sports Mix, western releases for Xenoblade & The Last Story).  As of now Wii seems on even keel, if not better, with PS3 or 360 for "outstanding exclusives" next year, the real problem is the comparable lack of multiplatform support.

As for Wii 2, 3DS is pretty much laying out Nintendo next gen gameplan... which seems to ensure the core gaming audience gets in early on their system.  Maybe they'll manage the sort of support that needs (like 3DS), maybe they won't, but it's clearly the path they're taking, to try and reconsolidate the market under them.  Wii 2 will follow 3DS much in the same way Wii followed DS, at least in terms of how Nintendo positions and handles them.  By the end of 2011, putting together a PS3/360-plus spec machine for $249 shouldn't be any issue either.



Around the Network

Wii can live another 5 years, but not all of them as main Nintendo offer and market leader. It could have another 2-3 years as market leader, with best yearly sales, if supported by good Q3 and Q4 games releases (but not being the best seller every week, particularly in Q1-Q3 periods), and then another 2-3 years selling less, but making almost sure that this gen's competitors wouldn't surpass its total sales.



Stwike him, Centuwion. Stwike him vewy wuffly! (Pontius Pilate, "Life of Brian")
A fart without stink is like a sky without stars.
TGS, Third Grade Shooter: brand new genre invented by Kevin Butler exclusively for Natal WiiToo Kinect. PEW! PEW-PEW-PEW! 
 


With both competitors delivering improved motion control solutions, I think it is too late for the Wii. It's going to be the experience that everybody knows by now, and ofcourse people have fun with it but the hype is very over. However, if they lower price and focus more on the fact that fun doens't have to be expensive, then they may be able to retain some of their share in these times.

I think Nintendo should mostly focus on making the 3DS a success, as this may prove to be even more important than any progress on the Wii.



Everything you ever wanted to know about Kinect is right HERE
Killiana1a said:

I voted "no."

The longer this generation continues, the more the PS3 will shine. The PS3 has technical superiority over it's rivals allowing it to age more gracefully and a good number of exclusive franchises to rival Mario, Zelda, Samus and on. The PS3 may have had a rough going from 2006 until the price drops, but now that it has a more accessible entry price and blu ray discs gaining on DVDs, I can easily see the PS3 being bought for home movie viewing just as the PS2 was bought for watching DVDs. The PS3 as a multi-functional device with uses other than gaming is the main reason why the PS3 will gain steam like a locomotive the longer this gen continues.

The Xbox 360, while not far behind the PS3 in technical power just does not have the library of exclusives to define the Xbox experience other than Halo (I don't count Fable or Mass Effect because they are also PC games). A Halo game every 3 to 5 years will not assuage the fact that the 360 does not have a blu ray player to attract non-gaming customers who view a console purchase for their child or spouse as their movie player. Furthermore, the longer this generation continues, the more the 360's graphics will look dated pushing those bleeding edge hardcore types who place graphics as a top priority to either/both the PS3 or PC.

Nintendo as I have stated in many different posts, needs to end this generation come Holidays 2012 or 2013. The Wii has a great game library, but the arrival of Kinect and Move will encroach on the Wii's traditional customer base to a minor, uncomfortable extent. Coupled with a system that developers from Ubisoft deem as a "refurbished gamecube," Nintendo with the release of the 3DS needs to show 3rd party devs that Nintendo is serious again about making games with them. The 3DS will sate many 3rd party devs, but Nintendo needs to seal the deal with a new console kicking off the new gen ASAP.

I do agree with him entirely. The Wii will not remain dominant unless they release a special new SKU. But we don't know, Nintendo didn't use their biggest guns.



Metallicube said:

No, but neither will the PS3 or 360. Sony and MS are going to be in for a rude awakening if they actually beleive their motion peripherals alone are going to magically extend the life of their consoles an extra 5 years.


Yeah, the hope of 10 year lifecycles is utter tosh imo. The market is moving too fast for that. I don't think we'll ever see a console living ten years again, at least not with any kind of support and still being produced in any significant amount.



No.  None of the 5 consoles can or will.



 

Tired of big government?
Want liberty in your lifetime?
Join us @
http://www.freestateproject.org