Rpruett said:
Again, almost ALL of the Wii's 'great' console moving games were motion control based or enabled. These motion controls were only desirable and considered fun because the Wii was so accessible with it's low priced market entry point. If the Wii was priced at $600 (Like the PS3 was or even $400 like the 360) and packaged without motion controls it would have been dead where it stood. If not for the low entry price, consumers wouldn't have taken the gamble of purchasing a system with controls that nobody has really seen before. Without Motion controls, the Wii would have been another (Gamecube) with probably worse graphics (Than the 360/PS3) or horrible third party support (like the GC/Wii) or both. It would have been Gamecube part two. One could paint a picture (With evidence that supports) that the Wii has every bit the weakest software lineup (Of the major 3) and that by all accounts the software that really shifted units was actually premised on motion controls or enabled because of motion controls (Wii Sports / Wii Sports Resort / Wii Fit) or did not arrive until the Wii had already built a comfortable 48-49% of the market share lead.
You keep confusing this generation with the last generations and that is incorrect. This generation is much different. No generation winning console has been priced above $300 and won the generation. This to me, indicates that pricing over $300 is a very slippery slope for companies and that when consoles are priced above $300 you miss a lot of semi-casual buyers right out of the gate. Once market dominance is established, the primary console gets put in the front of the aisles and gets a bigger section devoted to it, more games are sent it's way. To me, that was the story this generation. This generation has been a three console race (In terms of software) all three companies putting out superb efforts (I prefer PS3's lineup over PS2's at this point TBH). But the Wii won console dominance because of pricing and motion controls. What will be interesting to see, is how the next generation plays out. Nintendo will really need to innovate above and beyond their competitors. Graphically, I think Sony and MS will put out superior efforts at a much much lower cost than they did this generation. And both Sony and MS will more than likely have 2nd generation versions of Move/Kinect (Which Move appears to be a direct upgrade over Wii Motion Plus and Kinect has a lot of potential). Personally, If Sony or MS release at a comparable price point (Within $100 and no higher than $400), I can see Nintendo losing it's first place finish next generation. |
Why did you buy your console of choice? Hell, why does ANYBODY buy a console? Do they buy one to admire cinematics or graphics? Do they buy it to admire the hardware, or wave their arms around with motion controls? No. They buy a console to play GAMES. The primary funcion of a console is to play GAMES. Now, until this changes, No console has, or will EVER be market leader, without a strong game library.
If Wii did not have a sufficient library to back it up, it would not have recieved sales. And if it did, its sales would have immediately plummetted like a rock, because people who have discovered its lack of quality games.
It amuses me that people so deeply try to analyze why a console succeeds and they drone on about non gaming features for the cause; "blah blah blah blu ray players, hd graphics, motion controls, competitive pricing, teh casualz!!1" when in reality, the reason for success is really very simple; it's the GAMES, and ONLY the games.
If Nintendo falls to Sony and MS next gen, it will be for one reason, and one reason only; because its game library was weaker than Sony and MS, and did not appeal to as many as theirs did.
