| johnlucas said: Those falling into that old graphics trap would do well to remember that the flagship representatives of the graphics fight are putting out Wii-style games in order to compete. They're changing because they lost the argument. |
Have they really lost the argument though? Last time I checked, HD consoles control over 50% of the market share. They're not changing, they are simply adding onto their consoles with solid hardcore bases and moving into the casual market as well so they can tap into the market the Wii has hit heavy this generation.
It probably won't work, but I don't see the Wii taking over 50% of the marketshare.
Visuals are just as important as anything else in a game. They are not more important, they are just an equal part of the pie. Most 'great' games were hailed for their graphics during their time frame. See Mario's improvements. See Zelda 64.
You are right that improved visuals are mostly important for helping aid different types of gameplay. I would say this generation has. Yet you fail to realize that games like Heavy Rain, Mass Effect, etc have all capitalized on these improved visuals.
What I find truly hilarious though is a lot of people in the Wii corner believe that Nintendo specifically shuns high-powered visuals for it's games and does this because it's not the graphix!!! but the gameplay!!! That couldn't be anymore wrong. While Nintendo heavily values gameplay, they also heavily value graphics. How else do you explain the 3DS? However, Nintendo values staying in business first and foremost and maintaining healthy margins.
Nintendo certainly would have made a high powered graphics console this generation but they felt the entry cost was too steep for them this generation. Period. End of story. Just a generation ago they made the Gamecube which was a little powerhouse. Make no mistake, when Nintendo feels that it is financially viable to enter the HD market...They will.
