Forums - Nintendo Discussion - The newest Wii DDR game shows why GC-less Wii sucks.

Not sure if you've heard of the latest DDR game (confusingly called "Dance Dance Revolution II" in some places, and "Dance Dance Revolution Hottest Party 5" in others), but as I own just about every DDR game for the Wii and PS2, I'm going to pick this up when I can. The issue is that the pad uses the GC controller port.

This is why taking out the GC compatibility for the lastest Wii and Wii U sucks. It does not only take away the GC library (and I will be really pissed if that is for reselling those games on the Wii U VC), it also takes away that controller option for these games, and many others.

And no, homebrew options to possibly use GC to USB plugs (or worse, GC to PS2 and then PS2 to USB) is not an answer to this. Customers should not have to go through that trouble for their entertainment (why intuitive tech sells better than non-intuitive tech).

But as for this game, has anyone here played it yet?



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

Around the Network
I'm still sticking to DDR on ps2, but I just replaced my aging wii today and the store owner warned me exactly for this reason. The new models weren't even cheaper so I got a good looking refurbished unit instead.

Transferring saves on the wii is a big pain in the ass btw. It won't let you copy the save onto the new machine until you start each game on the new machine, then you have to manually erase the empty savegame first before you can copy it off a memory card.

If the system is not cheaper there is no reason to get it without gc support. As for this game I have not even seen a review for it yet.

GC ports only affect a few million people at best.

Nintendo saves money on less hardware and make money on potential VC purchases from people, like me, who didn't play the vast GC library... and I guarantee you there are many times more people in my category than yours on Wii now and eventually WiiU.

You're the 1%.

superchunk said:
GC ports only affect a few million people at best.

Nintendo saves money on less hardware and make money on potential VC purchases from people, like me, who didn't play the vast GC library... and I guarantee you there are many times more people in my category than yours on Wii now and eventually WiiU.

You're the 1%.


The fallacy there is you're assuming that only people who actually use those features care about them. Netflix learned the hard way that consumers don't like options taken out, even if they don't use them. So your "guarantee" is disproven by real life events.

And you don't make money on a "potential... purchase" of anything. You make money on actual purchases, but that doesn't excuse forcing people to pay.

And your "1%" line is wrong, since the Wii sales to GC sales isn't even at 5X, not 100X, which is what would be needed to make it 1 percent.



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

Around the Network
LordTheNightKnight said:
superchunk said:
GC ports only affect a few million people at best.

Nintendo saves money on less hardware and make money on potential VC purchases from people, like me, who didn't play the vast GC library... and I guarantee you there are many times more people in my category than yours on Wii now and eventually WiiU.

You're the 1%.


The fallacy there is you're assuming that only people who actually use those features care about them. Netflix learned the hard way that consumers don't like options taken out, even if they don't use them. So your "guarantee" is disproven by real life events.

And you don't make money on a "potential... purchase" of anything. You make money on actual purchases, but that doesn't excuse forcing people to pay.

And your "1%" line is wrong, since the Wii sales to GC sales isn't even at 5X, not 100X, which is what would be needed to make it 1 percent.

What blows my mind is that the model isnt even cheaper. WHen SOny did it, it was to lower the price, so what is the point of Ninty removing the feature?? What Superchunk said is crap, he'd rather spend more money on VC games than just going out and getting the orginal GC game?? That makes no sense



oniyide said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
superchunk said:
GC ports only affect a few million people at best.

Nintendo saves money on less hardware and make money on potential VC purchases from people, like me, who didn't play the vast GC library... and I guarantee you there are many times more people in my category than yours on Wii now and eventually WiiU.

You're the 1%.


The fallacy there is you're assuming that only people who actually use those features care about them. Netflix learned the hard way that consumers don't like options taken out, even if they don't use them. So your "guarantee" is disproven by real life events.

And you don't make money on a "potential... purchase" of anything. You make money on actual purchases, but that doesn't excuse forcing people to pay.

And your "1%" line is wrong, since the Wii sales to GC sales isn't even at 5X, not 100X, which is what would be needed to make it 1 percent.

What blows my mind is that the model isnt even cheaper. WHen SOny did it, it was to lower the price, so what is the point of Ninty removing the feature?? What Superchunk said is crap, he'd rather spend more money on VC games than just going out and getting the orginal GC game?? That makes no sense


I guess they might be thinking, IF there is a GC selection on the VC, that no one would buy them if they had the discs, since there is this myth of used sales hurting new game sales simply for existing (and not that the new games aren't worth full price a lot of the time).



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

LordTheNightKnight said:
superchunk said:
GC ports only affect a few million people at best.

Nintendo saves money on less hardware and make money on potential VC purchases from people, like me, who didn't play the vast GC library... and I guarantee you there are many times more people in my category than yours on Wii now and eventually WiiU.

You're the 1%.


The fallacy there is you're assuming that only people who actually use those features care about them. Netflix learned the hard way that consumers don't like options taken out, even if they don't use them. So your "guarantee" is disproven by real life events.

And you don't make money on a "potential... purchase" of anything. You make money on actual purchases, but that doesn't excuse forcing people to pay.

And your "1%" line is wrong, since the Wii sales to GC sales isn't even at 5X, not 100X, which is what would be needed to make it 1 percent.

Now the fallacy here is that this runs counter to what people have been proven to care about in consumer electronics. Fewer features don't bother anyone so long as the core content is there. There is a slight argument to be made that dropping GC functionality damages Wii's core content (and i mean Wii games only, disregarding the loss of the entire GC library). I mean, if consumers cared so much about features, Wii wouldn't be where it is...



New Smash, New Mains

"Also breakfast is an important part of a nutritious breakfast"

"Now the fallacy here is that this runs counter to what people have been proven to care about in consumer electronics. Fewer features don't bother anyone so long as the core content is there. There is a slight argument to be made that dropping GC functionality damages Wii's core content (and i mean Wii games only, disregarding the loss of the entire GC library). I mean, if consumers cared so much about features, Wii wouldn't be where it is..."

I wrote options, not features. Don't confuse the two.

A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

Around the Network
LordTheNightKnight said:
superchunk said:
GC ports only affect a few million people at best.

Nintendo saves money on less hardware and make money on potential VC purchases from people, like me, who didn't play the vast GC library... and I guarantee you there are many times more people in my category than yours on Wii now and eventually WiiU.

You're the 1%.


The fallacy there is you're assuming that only people who actually use those features care about them. Netflix learned the hard way that consumers don't like options taken out, even if they don't use them. So your "guarantee" is disproven by real life events.

And you don't make money on a "potential... purchase" of anything. You make money on actual purchases, but that doesn't excuse forcing people to pay.

And your "1%" line is wrong, since the Wii sales to GC sales isn't even at 5X, not 100X, which is what would be needed to make it 1 percent.

... and Netflix still increased its bottom line by a tremendous amount.

Anyone who cares about GC backwards compatibility already own's a Wii and Nintendo has never had BC for more than one generation on any of this systems, so to expect GC on WiiU was just bad form in the first place.