misterd said: gorgepir said:  Well that was precisly the question I was asking. I didn't mean to say that nothing but the Wii stands chance, what I meant was that while obviously now Wii is outselling them both (I think even combined) the pro-PS3 and pro-Xbox360 guys keep on insisting to say the are second best? The only thing that comes into my mind is that they are trying to prove that if they defeat the other they will outsell Wii in the long run. Otherwise I don't get it. I can understand that the PS3 and Xbox360 are "competing" with one another, but it is more like 2-3 going at one another. What's the point of being number 2 even if you want to say that the winning console is the true HD winner?    If you ask fanboys, they'll either tell you the Wii is a fad, or they simply can't get past the fact that some people may not want bleeding edge HD graphics. If you ask the company reps, they'll say Nintendo isn't competing with them because they are going after a different market. This is partly true, except that Nintendo is going after every gamer - and that includes many of those that have in the past bought a PS or XBox. They are also competing for developers. Even though they may not get the same games, each company has limited time and resources to devote to games. If they are devoting those to the Wii, they have less to devote to the PS3 and 360. That said, it is true that Sony and MS are most directly in competition with each other. On a small scale, their current systems have similar capabilities and are targeting similar demographics (males, teens-late 20s or 30s). They will share many of the same games, where the Wii, by necessity, will not. But that's just the short term. Long term, both Sony and Microsoft envision one unified entertainment console in every living room which will serve as TV receiver, DVR, internet browser, movie player, and game system. This is where their true goal lies, and it is several generations out of reach. However, they believe that the company that builds the biggest base among gamers will be the one to control all living rooms, everywhere (BWAHAHAHA!). WHY they believe that gaming consoles are the route to this Grail eludes me - and Nintendo too because they want no part of it. But whether they are right or wrong, that is the battle the two are really fighting for.

I think the true competition is actually for dev support, and this is where we'll actually see differences over the next couple years. And just to point out I did not say the Wii is a fad, it just happens to not be my first choice for this gen. I was really disappointed with the gamecube not even having DVD technology. The Wii is looking very cool, but there aren't any games out that I want to play anytime soon(and before you say the same about the PS3, I have close to 50 BDs to watch and I got mine for FREE   now that is my kind of price point)

HAHAHA, yeah your comment on Sony and MS trying to take over the living room is spot on, but I just got a falshback to Pinky and the Brain LOL

MS: "What are we gonna do tomorrow night Sony?"

Sony: "The same thing we do every night, MS, TRY TO TAKE OVER THE LIVING ROOOOM!"

The liquor/soda analogy is actually pretty good. I have a PS3 and a Wii, and I don't really see them as competing, since they do different things. I originally wanted a Wii, but gave up trying to get one after a while and got the PS3. I was pleased with the PS3. Then I got a Wii, and I was pleased with that too. The 360 however, is basically the same thing as the PS3, therefore I have no interest in getting one. 

Silver_Z said: Right and wrong. quite hard to differentiate actually. although Wii is also fighting for the gaming market, it is different from PS3 vs X360. Lets just say PS3/X360 is fighting for the same little group within the huge Wii market. Another comparison to this is.... Wii is selling soda, PS3/X360 is selling liquor.

Good then when I get a Wii I'll have a Wild Turkey and Coke, woohoo.... I see the analogy(very good BTW), which is what I was going for, I just didn't get the wording in.

marc said: Developers are only interested in the bottom line. They want to make a game for as little as possible and sell as many copies as they possibly can. The reason they didnt jump on the Wii initially is because they though it would fail. Most have now jumped on since the Wii has established itself. If I were a business, I would develop exclusively for the Wii, DS, and PSP. Someone would have to force me to develop for the 360 or PS3 not because I dont like them but because they make no sense economically. They cost more to develop for and the PS3 install base is practically non-existant at this time. The 360 has a good install base but again it costs more to develop for unless I plan to make a game cross-platform with the PC which is why I might consider the 360 but it will come down to game genre. Edit: Lastly, there is no reason whatsoever not to make hardcore games on the Wii except that no one has done so yet. There is a large portion of Hardcore gamers who understand that the best games have the best gameplay and graphics are largely irrelevent as long as they convey the game well. In other words, the Wii will force devs to make better gameplay rather than better graphics. Do not be surprised if the best games of the generation come out on the least powerful system as a result if it keeps selling the way it is.

I think you are confusing developer and publisher.... It's like saying that ALL artist's would rather design Coca-Cola commercials than their craft of choice b/c they pay more. Some choose this route while many do not. Then again if you're talking about whores like EA, your exactly right.

IllegalPaladin said: I don't know why people keep trying to compare the Wii to the PS3 and 360. Sony and Microsoft have said that they don't view the Wii and direct competition and Nintendo has said that they're not going after the same market as Sony and Microsoft. I personally think that Nintendo is going after everybody who doesn't want to get a HDTV while Sony and Microsoft are banking on people making the upgrade. I've tried the Wii on our HDTV and I can say that it looks like total crap when compared to a SDTV (yes, it was even displayed in a 4:3 aspect ratio too).

People try to compare the Wii to the PS3 and XB360 because they are all game consoles of the same generation, so they are perfectly comparable.

And yes, Sony and MS and Nintendo say things, OK. Since when are they saying the truth and only the truth?

You're nuts if you believe everything they say. Besides, they can say everything they want, view things like they want to, but they're all still competing for the home console gaming market. When Nintendo say they aren't going for the same market, it doesn't mean the market they want doesn't include the market Sony and MS want. It actually includes it!

And no, Nintendo doesn't go after everybody that don't want to get a HDTV, they go after everybody.

And I can tell you your HDTV is crap, like most LCD and Plasmas anyway: most can't display SD correctly. I have a Wii and a HDTV (55" Full HD SXRD) too, and the Wii looks FAR BETTER on the HDTV than it did on my old SDTV (52" RPTV too). Even the GC games (576i) look better on this HDTV.

 

As for the logic of XB360/PS3 owners, I think that's hope and damage control. Hope can keep you alive a long time, when everything looks desperate.
Then again, games should be what drives you to a console, provided the price is not over the value you give the console + the games you plan on buying. I plan to buy a PS3 for some very specific RPG and to have a good BD player for my HDTV. But I'll wait for a price cut, as the price overshadow its value for me right now.

There's no arguing that Nintendo has taken an unconvential approach towards gaming this generation, but unlike the 360 and PS3, they're thinking about not only their current success but the future of the market their succes will depend on as a whole. The only place left for Microsoft and Sony to go with their current game market philosiphies is the PC market because that's basically what they're turning their game boxes into, PCs. 360 and Ps3 fans don't seem to mind either because they either prefer console gaming be more like PC gaming or are just simply blind to what lies beyond the horizon of the gaming market. These fans only see the pretty graphics and mature titles such expesnive behemoths have to offer, they only hear to the Company's cheap boasts of pioneering future technologies... they don't see the poor decisions these companies are making though, they don't see the plateauing of inflated gaming technology and the gaming economy as a whole, they don't see the ever narrowing appeal of their games to the market as a whole, they don't see the brick wall that is fast approaching. While the PC market has never died, it has never really been in anything but a steady state of the decline in its ever limiting appeal to the casual audience of gaming and all the more the 360 and PS3 are walking that very same path now. As games become increasingly more expensive, graphically oriented, genre tailored and less convenient to play they become less appealing and in the end only draw in a select few who deem themselves "Hardcore". This is the fate that awaits the 360, PS3 and their successors. Almost as if in response to Nintendo's expanding appeal, MS and Sony have limited theirs and are trying desperately to play the minority audience. Nintendo, while fighting an uphill battle, is none the less reaching the higher ground that will allow them to pass the brick wall that Microsoft and Sony are so proudly and blindly plowing strait towards.

ookaze said: IllegalPaladin said: I don't know why people keep trying to compare the Wii to the PS3 and 360. Sony and Microsoft have said that they don't view the Wii and direct competition and Nintendo has said that they're not going after the same market as Sony and Microsoft. I personally think that Nintendo is going after everybody who doesn't want to get a HDTV while Sony and Microsoft are banking on people making the upgrade. I've tried the Wii on our HDTV and I can say that it looks like total crap when compared to a SDTV (yes, it was even displayed in a 4:3 aspect ratio too). People try to compare the Wii to the PS3 and XB360 because they are all game consoles of the same generation, so they are perfectly comparable. And yes, Sony and MS and Nintendo say things, OK. Since when are they saying the truth and only the truth? You're nuts if you believe everything they say. Besides, they can say everything they want, view things like they want to, but they're all still competing for the home console gaming market. When Nintendo say they aren't going for the same market, it doesn't mean the market they want doesn't include the market Sony and MS want. It actually includes it! And no, Nintendo doesn't go after everybody that don't want to get a HDTV, they go after everybody. And I can tell you your HDTV is crap, like most LCD and Plasmas anyway: most can't display SD correctly. I have a Wii and a HDTV (55" Full HD SXRD) too, and the Wii looks FAR BETTER on the HDTV than it did on my old SDTV (52" RPTV too). Even the GC games (576i) look better on this HDTV.   As for the logic of XB360/PS3 owners, I think that's hope and damage control. Hope can keep you alive a long time, when everything looks desperate. Then again, games should be what drives you to a console, provided the price is not over the value you give the console + the games you plan on buying. I plan to buy a PS3 for some very specific RPG and to have a good BD player for my HDTV. But I'll wait for a price cut, as the price overshadow its value for me right now.

Heh, interesting that you say that. We have pretty much the same thing (KDS-R60XBR2) and find that a regular SDTV is better for the Wii. The problems we would get with the Wii apart from it not looking as good was that we get problems with the Wiimote and sensor bar at the comfortable distance from the TV where the couches are. We tried playing that Dragon Ball Z game on the Wii and we would have to stand directly infront of the TV and sensor bar for the game to even allow us to play. Wiisports and Wiiplay acted a little better in that it wouldn't require us to stand infront of the TV to make the game work, but sitting more than a couple of feet away from the sensor bar (even set above and below the TV) would make it look like your hand was really twitchy, where we wouldn't get this problem on the SDTV even if we were at the same distance we were at with the HDTV.

Munkeh said: I think the main thing is that the 3rd party developers are more interested in making stuff for the 360 and the PS3, even if the fanbase is bigger for the Wii (although I doubt that the Wii's fanbase will ever beat the 360 + PS3's). If a developer wants to make a cross-platform game, they are going to have to make something completely different for the Wii, compared to the 360/PS3, which means that they are going to be more likely to opt for a cross-platform PS3/360 game.

The problem here is that there is already one market were Wii has sold more than PS3 and xbox360 together. In Japan Wii has sold 2.64 millions and PS3+xbox360 has sold 1,33 millions that is almost 2:1. So if you want to make a Japan centric game you should support Nintendo. Of course WW this isn't the case but Wii is closing the gap very fast, every month now Wii is selling more than PS3 + xbox360. If it passes the collective userbase can only the future tell but so far Wii seems to have at least Japan by the balls.

Munkeh said: As time goes on, the gap between the 360/PS3 and Wii will widen, and many people will tire of the repetitive Wii games, or something along those lines. As the 3rd party support for the Wii will be weaker as they cannot get anything more out of the Wii, and the games are going no-where, their main support will be for the PS3 and also the 360 (here comes the arguement concerning power). Therefore, the battle between the 360 and PS3 comes down to the features of each, and primarily the first party games (of which Sony has the best in my humble opinion)

What is the difference between Wii:s repetive games and xbox360:s high number of fps? More important didn't people say the same thing about DS?

I hope you just are trying to explain the belif of xbox360/PS3 fans when it comes to 3rd party support for I can't understand any publisher that would give up a big userbase if the games they published is selling. That is independent on how powerfull the hardware is.

When it comes to first party, I as an old nintendo fan of course can't agree with you

What you need to keep in mind is that both Sony and Microsoft have agendas.

Sony is a multimedia company so they want to put a home entertainment system in your living room. It supports their movie and music industry and helps them win the Blueray format war.

Microsoft is trying to put a computer in your livingroom, thus the extrodinary online gaming experience, and all the PC/Xbox ports.

Weather or not these are pluses or minuses to everyone is completely random. Some people want a Blueray player for the awesome picture quality, others want the Online gaming experience without investing 500 dollars every month keeping their computers state of the art.

vizunary said: I think you are confusing developer and publisher.... It's like saying that ALL artist's would rather design Coca-Cola commercials than their craft of choice b/c they pay more. Some choose this route while many do not. Then again if you're talking about whores like EA, your exactly right.

The thing is however, artists are nothing like developers. Artists mostly work alone on their own time when ever they feel like it. In some situations they have to follow schedules and such but those guys arent really artists anymore but more like producers as you noted. Also, commercials dont make a good analogy agaisnt video games. I think I understand what you are trying to say, but there really is no difference who you work for if you are in the commercial making business because they are not limited by platforms thus whatever you make will be broadcast in the same way to everyone. Now... if we had 3 types of TVs and most house holds only had 1 of the 3 then we could make a good analogy. Which network would you rather produce for? Obviously the one that makes the most money, because at the end of the day you need to pay the 100 workers in your office and their lives should come before your own artistic ambition (when it comes to big business at least where you are gambling with a lot of money). Anyways, nothing wrong with trying to make a graphically superior game. My only gripe is that devs are creating a lot of garbage that just looks good. I would much rather they spent their time on gameplay and leave out the high quality graphics something that can be accomplished on any of the above systems.