Is this thread STILL alive :? It really needs to be put down...

You really don't like the Wii do you?

i wasnt refering to your post, although i am now. i still dont like how you refered to it either. i realize, again, you mean nothing negative about what your last paragraph states, but i still dont agree with it. i shouldnt have used zelda as an example. let me go to some third partys. i dont agree its a "nongamers" console. its just not the whole truth. does it target non-gamers like no other console has done before? yes, without any doubt. does it target regular-hardcore gamers ANY LESS than previous consoles? NO, it does not. take madden, its for EVEN MORE hardcore gamers. im a huge madden/football loser, love the series, and the wii has revived the dieing series. check gamespot, the wii got higher review for 07 for the next gens than xbox and ps3. and its in no way for non gamers. its extremely difficult, and complex, only true madden people will like it. the wii may be getting a GTA port, it very easily could get KH, it will have some FFs, those games wont work the controller in hardly at all, yet will still work great, with EITHER the wiimote-nunchuck combo or classic controller. they are the gamers games. its not a non-gamers console and ill argue it anytime anyone calls it that. its a console for EVERYONE. it seems that in looking to the FUTURE, nintendo has left NOTHING behind.

Hey dude, I agree with you on that one completely. 100% I just don't think Nintendo themselves are targeting the same market as PS3 and Xbox 360. They simply aren't. As Nintendo have said in their press information and press releases their target demographic is from 1 years old to 95 years old. That doesn't mean that 14 - 25 are missing from that, that age group is there too. The Wii can be VERY hardcore depending on the structure of the game. I'll take Dragon Ball Z Budokai Tenkaichi 2 as a GREAT example. It's a HELLUVA lot harder to play on the Wii, but that is a game that I would say is 1 million times more fun simply because of the Wii controls. If you like DBZ this is the ultimate game EVER. I'm not sick of it yet, and I doubt I can see myself getting sick of it, I don't play it HEAPS but that is just ONE game. The controls on the Wii are like having the ability to use 4 joysticks at onces... (nunchuk joystick, accelerometer in nunchuk, pointer on remote, accelerometer on remote, even 5 if you wanna chuck in the D-pad) boy o boy that's the most complicated setup ANYONE can POSSIBLY have. This is why I think the Wii will succeed this generation. I don't know if it will 'win' but either way things are looking good in the future for Wii owners (especially this year).

exactly. harder, but yet easier and more fun at the same time. i have never played a DBZ game before, have never watched the old show, and know nothing of it, but i played it for the wii and it was great. very nice setup. very fun, kind of similer to smash bros. you cant see yourself ever getting bored of it, and that is the thing. sequels that have been done a hundred times over (such as the madden series for example, also other racing games, and first person shooters) and when they first come out, everyone is talking about how amazing they are and such. then after a week or 2, they realize that the sequeal is only better than the predessesor due to it being new, nothing more, and it just becomes "another one of your games." well, with the wii and the new expirience, it eliminates that. i still play wii sports, its alot of fun. i just recently bought zelda, its amazing, but i still take breaks to play wii sports. its practically a demo game, very simple with not quite HD graphics, yet it never gets old. thats whats so great about it.

Origin: How the hell did you manage to try to explain "outdated" to me, when I put the two words "outdated graphics" together on purpose ? Even your explanation of outdated is flat out wrong. You say it like it's a fact. "outdated" is a matter of opinion (which basically is why you can never explain what "outdated graphics" are). Some people pay a fortune to play these old games, and sure enough don't call them outdated. But assuming that it's outdated because it's old, the Wii being pretty new, you're contradicting yourself with your own definition. Then, if you talk about graphics, let me tell you all the consoles have always been outdated, for the simple fact that PC always provided the best "graphics" , whatever that means to you (that's not my opinion at all). And that includes XB360 and PS3. So no, what you say doesn't make sense, as all the technology you say is outdated, is exactly the same as is used in XB360 and PS3. Even worse, SD (which is a component of graphics) is still the current mainstream format for now, so is far from being outdated. The nonsense continue, when you say Nintendo was slowly going the way of Sega. Last time I checked, Nintendo never stopped making profits, even with the Gamecube. So I fail to see how they were going the way of Sega. This has always been wishful thinking from anti Nintendo people, nothing else. This is especially noticeable, when these people just forgot that Nintendo were still thriving in the portable console market. But it seems all reality escape people when they want their point to be true, when it's clearly not. The problem of Nintendo was with 3rd party, it's pretty simple really. A games only machine works pretty well, but you need games. My meaning of a commodity, is a product that anybody can pick up just like that. This implies that it's cheap and easy to use, that don't scare people away by just looking at it. Finally, what you say about Nintendo "gamers" games is strange, as they also make FPS and RPG ...

How did you come up with this again? If Nintendo is already opting to go for lower graphics and more 'innovation' why would they have the more powerful console in the future? That makes no sense...

It would be more powerful than the PS3/XBox 360 because it was released 5 years after the PS3 and 6 after the XBox 360 ... I didn't imply that they were going to have a better system than the PS4/XBox 720. By 2011 you will be able to produce a system which is small, quiet, cool, easy to develop for, is 4 to 8 times as powerful as the PS3/XBox 360, sell it for $200 or $250 and make a tiny profit.

HappySqurriel said: It would be more powerful than the PS3/XBox 360 because it was released 5 years after the PS3 and 6 after the XBox 360 ... I didn't imply that they were going to have a better system than the PS4/XBox 720. By 2011 you will be able to produce a system which is small, quiet, cool, easy to develop for, is 4 to 8 times as powerful as the PS3/XBox 360, sell it for $200 or $250 and make a tiny profit.

The PS3 is console years ahead of it's time IMHO.  The Wii doesn't have crap graphics at all...they are very nice, but not as nice as the 360 or PS3.  I think the Wii will have a very short lifespan TBH.  It was released late 2006 and will probably be superceded by a new Nintendo system around 2010.  By then, the PS3 will be half way through it's lifespan and the 360 will be looking at a new model as well.

I would be surprised if either Nintendo or MS could come out with a more powerful machine than the PS3 in the next 3-4 years without the costs being astronomical.  Even at that, Nintendo will always produce a lower powered console for less money, that is their strategy.

Sony have made a huge step with including the BluRay player with the PS3, it's a gamble and hopefully will pay off for them if BR becomes a huge hit over the next 2-4 years.

I cannot see the PS4 being released any time soon and think the PS3 will have a solid 7-10 years as a base.

Also, I doubt you will see a more powerful machine than the PS3 selling for near $200-$250 for at least 6-7 years anyway. 

 

davygee said: HappySqurriel said: It would be more powerful than the PS3/XBox 360 because it was released 5 years after the PS3 and 6 after the XBox 360 ... I didn't imply that they were going to have a better system than the PS4/XBox 720. By 2011 you will be able to produce a system which is small, quiet, cool, easy to develop for, is 4 to 8 times as powerful as the PS3/XBox 360, sell it for $200 or $250 and make a tiny profit. The PS3 is console years ahead of it's time IMHO.  The Wii doesn't have crap graphics at all...they are very nice, but not as nice as the 360 or PS3.  I think the Wii will have a very short lifespan TBH.  It was released late 2006 and will probably be superceded by a new Nintendo system around 2010.  By then, the PS3 will be half way through it's lifespan and the 360 will be looking at a new model as well. I would be surprised if either Nintendo or MS could come out with a more powerful machine than the PS3 in the next 3-4 years without the costs being astronomical.  Even at that, Nintendo will always produce a lower powered console for less money, that is their strategy. Sony have made a huge step with including the BluRay player with the PS3, it's a gamble and hopefully will pay off for them if BR becomes a huge hit over the next 2-4 years. I cannot see the PS4 being released any time soon and think the PS3 will have a solid 7-10 years as a base. Also, I doubt you will see a more powerful machine than the PS3 selling for near $200-$250 for at least 6-7 years anyway.

I think you have bought into the marketing hype of the PS3 more than anything else ...

Semiconductor technology is pretty predictable and through out all companies in the industry (AMD/ATI, Intel, Nvidia, IBM) the performance is very similar. Specialized architectures (like GPUs) gain higher perfomance than general architectures (like intel CPUs) at tasks they were specifically designed to do. The Cell doesn't really count as a specialized or generalized architecture and more closely matches the design of something like a digital signal processor; this should mean that it can obtain higher performance than a similar generalized processor, on more tasks than a specialized processor but it will be far harder to develop for.

Now, the reason I mentioned this was that in 4 or 5 years semiconductor technology will have advanced to the level where you can obtain 8 to 12 times the performance across all architectures; this means that the most generalized processor will be far more powerful than any processor that is available today.