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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Has anyone ever thought of this... maybe its a good thing Wii U had a rough first year?

 

Will the Wii U be a success?

yes 231 70.43%
 
no 97 29.57%
 
Total:328
happydolphin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
happydolphin said:

I think Sony and Microsoft will succeed off the back of the gimmick that is glorified graphics. Without that they can't do well.


Thats not a gimmick. Graphics are the visual backbone of the evolution of gaming. 

I think that value-adds like the wiimote and the ds touch screen are the backbone of the evolution of gaming, like the d-pad and the analog stick were before them.

Graphics are a gimmick and are the only way Sony and Microsoft were able to beat Nintendo last gen. They also need 3rd parties to survive.

if that were the case why did sony, MS AND NINTY put motion controls on the backburner, clearly they dont see it as the evolution of nothing. Graphics always evolve and is part of the evolution anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool IMHO otherwise we still would be playing 16 bit 2d games. touch controls are here to stay. 

THe last sentence is just pathetically wrong, Sony beat Ninty twice in the row with two systems that had weaker graphics.



Around the Network
oniyide said:

if that were the case why did sony, MS AND NINTY put motion controls on the backburner, clearly they dont see it as the evolution of nothing. Graphics always evolve and is part of the evolution anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool IMHO otherwise we still would be playing 16 bit 2d games. touch controls are here to stay. 

THe last sentence is just pathetically wrong, Sony beat Ninty twice in the row with two systems that had weaker graphics.

1) Did I say motion controls? I said value add such as the wiimote and the padlet.

2) Sorry, but the PSX didn't have weaker graphics. It could pump out more polygons, had better 2D support and full FMV support. All gimmicks, but they all gave Sony an edge. And I did say last gen also.



happydolphin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
happydolphin said:

I think Sony and Microsoft will succeed off the back of the gimmick that is glorified graphics. Without that they can't do well.


Thats not a gimmick. Graphics are the visual backbone of the evolution of gaming. 

I think that value-adds like the wiimote and the ds touch screen are the backbone of the evolution of gaming, like the d-pad and the analog stick were before them.

Graphics are a gimmick and are the only way Sony and Microsoft were able to beat Nintendo last gen. They also need 3rd parties to survive.


Nintendo needed third parties to beat Sega. So what? 

Graphics are a natural element to videogames. It seems to frustrate you that high end graphics dont matter to Nintendo because they like to keep their costs low and profits high. You're discounting them but for all the wrong reasons. Without graphics you have no primary visual and this goes all the way back to pong. Pixels, the visual element...is graphics. You're knocking the competition just because Nintendo doesn't excell with it.

Sony is an entertainment brand that owns movie houses of course they are going to try to dazzle an audience with the best spectacle they can, but sometimes its needed for a great story and Last of Us proved it. Hell...they proved it with barely any story in SOTC. The gameplay was the story...and what a beautiful one it was indeed. Sony takes chances. Thats just how it is.



happydolphin said:
oniyide said:

if that were the case why did sony, MS AND NINTY put motion controls on the backburner, clearly they dont see it as the evolution of nothing. Graphics always evolve and is part of the evolution anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool IMHO otherwise we still would be playing 16 bit 2d games. touch controls are here to stay. 

THe last sentence is just pathetically wrong, Sony beat Ninty twice in the row with two systems that had weaker graphics.

1) Did I say motion controls? I said value add such as the wiimote and the padlet.

2) Sorry, but the PSX didn't have weaker graphics. It could pump out more polygons, had better 2D support and full FMV support. All gimmicks, but they all gave Sony an edge. And I did say last gen also.

FMV is a gimmick? Now you tell me...thats probably why the movie industry is dying. :)



happydolphin said:
oniyide said:

if that were the case why did sony, MS AND NINTY put motion controls on the backburner, clearly they dont see it as the evolution of nothing. Graphics always evolve and is part of the evolution anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool IMHO otherwise we still would be playing 16 bit 2d games. touch controls are here to stay. 

THe last sentence is just pathetically wrong, Sony beat Ninty twice in the row with two systems that had weaker graphics.

1) Did I say motion controls? I said value add such as the wiimote and the padlet.

2) Sorry, but the PSX didn't have weaker graphics. It could pump out more polygons, had better 2D support and full FMV support. All gimmicks, but they all gave Sony an edge. And I did say last gen also.

you said wiimote which is a motion device is it not? and the gamepad isnt really evolving anything they just took the DS concept and moved it to a console and guess what? Didnt work

the PS didnt have weaker graphics than N64? News to me.



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Nintendo needed third parties to beat Sega. So what? 

Graphics are a natural element to videogames. It seems to frustrate you that high end graphics dont matter to Nintendo because they like to keep their costs low and profits high. You're discounting them but for all the wrong reasons. Without graphics you have no primary visual and this goes all the way back to pong. Pixels, the visual element...is graphics. You're knocking the competition just because Nintendo doesn't excell with it.

Sony is an entertainment brand that owns movie houses of course they are going to try to dazzle an audience with the best spectacle they can, but sometimes its needed for a great story and Last of Us proved it. Hell...they proved it with barely any story in SOTC. The gameplay was the story...and what a beautiful one it was in deed. Sony takes chances. Thats just how it is.

@bold. So are input methods. Which is the gimmick, it's all in the eyes of the beholder. You call evolutions in input methods gimmicks, I call graphical evolutions gimmicks. Ultimately, it's just our stupid opinions and nobody cares. The reality though is that words like gimmick make you sound like a clown. It's better if neither you nor I use them.

@2. Tetris, a game with 0 story, propelled the gameboy to stardom. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.



happydolphin said:
oniyide said:

if that were the case why did sony, MS AND NINTY put motion controls on the backburner, clearly they dont see it as the evolution of nothing. Graphics always evolve and is part of the evolution anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool IMHO otherwise we still would be playing 16 bit 2d games. touch controls are here to stay. 

THe last sentence is just pathetically wrong, Sony beat Ninty twice in the row with two systems that had weaker graphics.

1) Did I say motion controls? I said value add such as the wiimote and the padlet.

2) Sorry, but the PSX didn't have weaker graphics. It could pump out more polygons, had better 2D support and full FMV support. All gimmicks, but they all gave Sony an edge. And I did say last gen also.





On 2/24/13, MB1025 said:
You know I was always wondering why no one ever used the dollar sign for $ony, but then I realized they have no money so it would be pointless.

oniyide said:

you said wiimote which is a motion device is it not? and the gamepad isnt really evolving anything they just took the DS concept and moved it to a console and guess what? Didnt work

the PS didnt have weaker graphics than N64? News to me.

It doesn't matter, I didn't say motion controls, I said value-adds (to input devices). Whether it worked or not doesn't matter, since you said it yourself the N64 got beat by the playstation though it had weaker graphics.

Right? Tie yourself out of that knot lol.



There's always going to be people saying that this or that console is doomed, and when we're talking about the big 3, the Virtual Boy has been the only flop in over 25 years. I'm not that worried about Wii U, it will be just fine.



 Been away for a bit, but sneaking back in.

Gaming on: PS4, PC, 3DS. Got a Switch! Mainly to play Smash

happydolphin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Nintendo needed third parties to beat Sega. So what? 

Graphics are a natural element to videogames. It seems to frustrate you that high end graphics dont matter to Nintendo because they like to keep their costs low and profits high. You're discounting them but for all the wrong reasons. Without graphics you have no primary visual and this goes all the way back to pong. Pixels, the visual element...is graphics. You're knocking the competition just because Nintendo doesn't excell with it.

Sony is an entertainment brand that owns movie houses of course they are going to try to dazzle an audience with the best spectacle they can, but sometimes its needed for a great story and Last of Us proved it. Hell...they proved it with barely any story in SOTC. The gameplay was the story...and what a beautiful one it was in deed. Sony takes chances. Thats just how it is.

@bold. So are input methods. Which is the gimmick, it's all in the eyes of the beholder. You call evolutions in input methods gimmicks, I call graphical evolutions gimmicks. Ultimately, it's just our stupid opinions and nobody cares. The reality though is that words like gimmick make you sound like a clown. It's better if neither you nor I use them.

@2. Tetris, a game with 0 story, propelled the gameboy to stardom. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Kinda helps when you pack in an addictive game with your handheld and slap an affordable price on the whole package, doesn't it?



On 2/24/13, MB1025 said:
You know I was always wondering why no one ever used the dollar sign for $ony, but then I realized they have no money so it would be pointless.