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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Should Nintendo launch in 2011-12 starting the next gen with monster power?

 

Should Nintendo launch in 2011-12 starting the next gen with monster power?

Launch in 2011- early 12 ... 115 63.89%
 
Launch in 2011, just larg... 42 23.33%
 
Re-release current Wii in 2011, just with HD 23 12.78%
 
Total:180
Mazty on 29 March 2010
Khuutra said:
Mazty said:
Khuutra said:

Wii Fit, Mario Kart, and many of the sports games (Wii Sport Resort in particular) are very fun, accessible, high-quality games that appeal to people with a wid range of value sets. Yes, people bu ythe Wii because of its software.

You're wrong. "A bit of fun" doesn't build up the kind of word of mouth necessary to sustain the kind of sales the Wii has had for the past three years.

So these games are high quality even though the pad isnt 1:1 and has a delay of 180ms, while having hideously dated AI and graphics?

Which part of the above screams quality...?

And yes it does. A bit of fun and something to keep the kids quiet, whilst being fashionable does produce sales. Fact is its seriously weaker in everyway than the other two consoles, let alone PC. Therefore in comparison the gaming quality on it is far worse than other consolesm the only advantage of the wii being the motion pad, which isn't all that good anyway (lag etc).

If you can tell me how the wii is high quality and would appeal to a veteran gamer, i'll have to rethink my stance on the wii. But from every game i've played on it, it doesn't come close to games of the same genre on other consoles, with possibly one or two exceptions. ANd then when you take media playback into acount, the wii is selling purely on the pad, not the quality of games (let's remeber where the term shovelware came from).

It's quality because of its production values, ease of use, robust design, and generally ahving you pantomime fun things to play. Most people do not give a shit about the things you're describing - I myself didn't really notice the input lag in Wii Sports Resort, and I have a feeling that most others don't either. So, yes. They're still very high quality, very fun, and highly accessible.

There is no single absolute metric of quality when it comes to software, and considering that its software is outselling either of the other two platforms, its software has to b appealing. Otherwise it wouldn't sell.

All right, I'll play this game with you, but we're going to take it slow and start far away from the Wii question. I'm building up to a point here.

Could you name me a game that a lot of people like - on the 360 or PS3, if you would, and make it "hardcore" - that you do not like? Anything that doesn't blow your skirt up.

I'll tell you who do care about graphics, AI etc. Gamers, ergo wii owners and people who claim it is a good 'proper' gaming platform don't know the first thing about gaming.

If you can't notice a 10+ fps lag, then wow, may want to get a doctor to have a look at that. The games are fun and accessible, but so is a ball pool. It's fun for a short time, but a lot of people grow out of it, and I myself, as do many other gamers, feel that the wii offers very little challenge and in most genres is a total step backward to out dated gaming (rail shooters, 2D platforms) when the expected quality of games has pasted those type of games.

Your grammer is a bit sketchy on your last sentece but I'm guessing you mean can I name you a hardcore game I do not like?

If so yes I can. Halo 3, Ratchet and Clank, Borderlands, Fifa and PES. Personally Halo 3 for me was not anything new so I wasn't keen on it. I'm not a fan of the R&C platforming genre, Borderlands was medicore in my view, and I've never understood the want to play football games. Plus I hated MW2, but note I dislike Halo 3 and MW2 for somewhat the same reasons as I dislike Wii games - both games felt a step backwards, or not a step foward for the genre. Could pick out many more games but as the user base for MW2 and Halo 3 are so large, hope this is the sort of reply your were aiming for.

 



Around the Network
zarx on 29 March 2010
Mazty said:
Khuutra said:
Mazty said:
Khuutra said:

It's not the controller. It's the software.

All people who play games follow the software.

Oh right....People bought the wii because of the high quality games....

So what about wii fit, or Mario Karts (steering wheel), or the huge variety of sports games?

Don't kid yourself. The wii's selling point is the controller because it's a "bit of fun", not that the wii offers good gaming in relation to the rest of the gaming market.

Wii Fit, Mario Kart, and many of the sports games (Wii Sport Resort in particular) are very fun, accessible, high-quality games that appeal to people with a wid range of value sets. Yes, people bu ythe Wii because of its software.

You're wrong. "A bit of fun" doesn't build up the kind of word of mouth necessary to sustain the kind of sales the Wii has had for the past three years.

So these games are high quality even though the pad isnt 1:1 and has a delay of 180ms, while having hideously dated AI and graphics?

Which part of the above screams quality...?

And yes it does. A bit of fun and something to keep the kids quiet, whilst being fashionable does produce sales. Fact is its seriously weaker in everyway than the other two consoles, let alone PC. Therefore in comparison the gaming quality on it is far worse than other consolesm the only advantage of the wii being the motion pad, which isn't all that good anyway (lag etc).

If you can tell me how the wii is high quality and would appeal to a veteran gamer, i'll have to rethink my stance on the wii. But from every game i've played on it, it doesn't come close to games of the same genre on other consoles, with possibly one or two exceptions. ANd then when you take media playback into acount, the wii is selling purely on the pad, not the quality of games (let's remeber where the term shovelware came from).

   I believe it came from the pre nintendo days back at the time of the great videogame crash when so many crap games were being released in such quantities that retailers were "shoveling" games into bargain bins. It was also used to describe all the low quality PS and PS2 games of the last couple of generations, Whats your point?. 



@TheVoxelman on twitter

Check out my hype threads: Cyberpunk, and The Witcher 3!

Mazty on 29 March 2010
zarx said:
Mazty said:
Khuutra said:
Mazty said:
Khuutra said:

It's not the controller. It's the software.

All people who play games follow the software.

Oh right....People bought the wii because of the high quality games....

So what about wii fit, or Mario Karts (steering wheel), or the huge variety of sports games?

Don't kid yourself. The wii's selling point is the controller because it's a "bit of fun", not that the wii offers good gaming in relation to the rest of the gaming market.

Wii Fit, Mario Kart, and many of the sports games (Wii Sport Resort in particular) are very fun, accessible, high-quality games that appeal to people with a wid range of value sets. Yes, people bu ythe Wii because of its software.

You're wrong. "A bit of fun" doesn't build up the kind of word of mouth necessary to sustain the kind of sales the Wii has had for the past three years.

So these games are high quality even though the pad isnt 1:1 and has a delay of 180ms, while having hideously dated AI and graphics?

Which part of the above screams quality...?

And yes it does. A bit of fun and something to keep the kids quiet, whilst being fashionable does produce sales. Fact is its seriously weaker in everyway than the other two consoles, let alone PC. Therefore in comparison the gaming quality on it is far worse than other consolesm the only advantage of the wii being the motion pad, which isn't all that good anyway (lag etc).

If you can tell me how the wii is high quality and would appeal to a veteran gamer, i'll have to rethink my stance on the wii. But from every game i've played on it, it doesn't come close to games of the same genre on other consoles, with possibly one or two exceptions. ANd then when you take media playback into acount, the wii is selling purely on the pad, not the quality of games (let's remeber where the term shovelware came from).

first of all  AI is not really hardware limited atm more so by the developers metro has some of the best AI around but glitches are every ware especaily on the Xbox 360 version but I don't see that selling copys of games AI war is another game with good AI that doesn't sell that great AI has never sold anything much. Second just because the games don't look like PC or PS360 games doesn't mean that they are not quality the level design control etc are high quality and for the most part aimed at a wide audience and meant to be accessible, I mean do you think that all games not released before this generation are low quality? and finally are you not going to even try to address my argument I know there are a couple of flaws in it try to find them lol unless you have trouble understanding what I wrote if so just tell me and I will try to re-Write it for you.

 

P.S. I mean no offence by my last sentence it's just I know sometimes what I write can sometimes be hard to read for some people and that may be why you haven't addressed what I posted lol.

P.P.S.  commenting on someones English with "Better engrish please" is epic fail lol once again no offence.

So AI has nothing to do with the CPU processing power and it's ability to run scripts?

And F.E.A.R. wasn't advertised and sold on a major point of having "Unpredicatble ecnounters with combat adaptive AI", the first point on the back of the box? =p



Kenryoku_Maxis on 29 March 2010
Mazty said:
Khuutra said:
Mazty said:

Thats a stupid comparison as the graphics of last gen were very similar. This gen the wii is far, far behind the other two consoles and not the cheapest, meaning that wii owners clearly care about the controller rather than graphics. If they cared about a responsive controller or graphics, they'd have got another console.

Therefore what can nintendo bring to the table, other than something shy of VR, to entice these people into getting another console? Clearly they don't want better hardware so that instantly breaks the trend of better graphics etc for a new console.

Granted HD consoles haven't been original, but I hardly think a console that sells on the premiss of good advertising, hideous graphics and a very poor motion controller (180ms lag, not 1:1) is hardly worthy of praise. Nintendo's marketting department yes, the wii itself, hardly.

It's not the controller. It's the software.

All people who play games follow the software.

Oh right....People bought the wii because of the high quality games....

So what about wii fit, or Mario Karts (steering wheel), or the huge variety of sports games? To the guy somewhere above who metnions the amount of games sold, that's because they are sold all teh time with the wii. Imagine if the 360 was still flogging Oblivion with the 360.

Don't kid yourself. The wii's selling point is the controller because it's a "bit of fun", not that the wii offers good gaming in relation to the rest of the gaming market.

Its like I've been transported back to 2006 all over again....

The blatant Anti-Wii sentiment in your posts is rather hilarious.  Your views are literally searching for any way to make some kind of connection to Nintendo’s 'imminent destruction' based on your own opinions of Nintendo’s Quality.  It would be entertaining to read if I hadn't spent years already shifting through these same posts before...



Six upcoming games you should look into:

 

  

Khuutra on 29 March 2010
Mazty said:

I'll tell you who do care about graphics, AI etc. Gamers, ergo wii owners and people who claim it is a good 'proper' gaming platform don't know the first thing about gaming.

If you can't notice a 10+ fps lag, then wow, may want to get a doctor to have a look at that. The games are fun and accessible, but so is a ball pool. It's fun for a short time, but a lot of people grow out of it, and I myself, as do many other gamers, feel that the wii offers very little challenge and in most genres is a total step backward to out dated gaming (rail shooters, 2D platforms) when the expected quality of games has pasted those type of games.

Your grammer is a bit sketchy on your last sentece but I'm guessing you mean can I name you a hardcore game I do not like?

If so yes I can. Halo 3, Ratchet and Clank, Borderlands, Fifa and PES. Personally Halo 3 for me was not anything new so I wasn't keen on it. I'm not a fan of the R&C platforming genre, Borderlands was medicore in my view, and I've never understood the want to play football games. Plus I hated MW2, but note I dislike Halo 3 and MW2 for somewhat the same reasons as I dislike Wii games - both games felt a step backwards, or not a step foward for the genre. Could pick out many more games but as the user base for MW2 and Halo 3 are so large, hope this is the sort of reply your were aiming for.

I'm going to move past the earlier parts of your post to continue with my point, do forgive me.

Yes, it's the sort of reply I was aiming for.

Now, are the people who enjoy.... we'll say Ratchet and Clank. Are the people who enjoy Ratchet and Clank wrong, simply missing out on something that they should be seeing?



Around the Network
zarx on 29 March 2010
Mazty said:
zarx said:
Mazty said:
Khuutra said:
Mazty said:
Khuutra said:

It's not the controller. It's the software.

All people who play games follow the software.

Oh right....People bought the wii because of the high quality games....

So what about wii fit, or Mario Karts (steering wheel), or the huge variety of sports games?

Don't kid yourself. The wii's selling point is the controller because it's a "bit of fun", not that the wii offers good gaming in relation to the rest of the gaming market.

Wii Fit, Mario Kart, and many of the sports games (Wii Sport Resort in particular) are very fun, accessible, high-quality games that appeal to people with a wid range of value sets. Yes, people bu ythe Wii because of its software.

You're wrong. "A bit of fun" doesn't build up the kind of word of mouth necessary to sustain the kind of sales the Wii has had for the past three years.

So these games are high quality even though the pad isnt 1:1 and has a delay of 180ms, while having hideously dated AI and graphics?

Which part of the above screams quality...?

And yes it does. A bit of fun and something to keep the kids quiet, whilst being fashionable does produce sales. Fact is its seriously weaker in everyway than the other two consoles, let alone PC. Therefore in comparison the gaming quality on it is far worse than other consolesm the only advantage of the wii being the motion pad, which isn't all that good anyway (lag etc).

If you can tell me how the wii is high quality and would appeal to a veteran gamer, i'll have to rethink my stance on the wii. But from every game i've played on it, it doesn't come close to games of the same genre on other consoles, with possibly one or two exceptions. ANd then when you take media playback into acount, the wii is selling purely on the pad, not the quality of games (let's remeber where the term shovelware came from).

first of all  AI is not really hardware limited atm more so by the developers metro has some of the best AI around but glitches are every ware especaily on the Xbox 360 version but I don't see that selling copys of games AI war is another game with good AI that doesn't sell that great AI has never sold anything much. Second just because the games don't look like PC or PS360 games doesn't mean that they are not quality the level design control etc are high quality and for the most part aimed at a wide audience and meant to be accessible, I mean do you think that all games not released before this generation are low quality? and finally are you not going to even try to address my argument I know there are a couple of flaws in it try to find them lol unless you have trouble understanding what I wrote if so just tell me and I will try to re-Write it for you.

 

P.S. I mean no offence by my last sentence it's just I know sometimes what I write can sometimes be hard to read for some people and that may be why you haven't addressed what I posted lol.

P.P.S.  commenting on someones English with "Better engrish please" is epic fail lol once again no offence.

So AI has nothing to do with the CPU processing power and it's ability to run scripts?

And F.E.A.R. wasn't advertised and sold on a major point of having "Unpredicatble ecnounters with combat adaptive AI", the first point on the back of the box? =p

I'm sure it did but how many people bought it for that than story or gameplay etc and yes more powerful hardware does help implement good AI but games like FEAR black & white half-life 1 & 2 etc all came out on (or could be run on) hardware around the level of the Wii and I havn't seen that big a jump in AI in the last few years physics and graphics yes AI no.

and I meant for you to reply to my older post lol

 



@TheVoxelman on twitter

Check out my hype threads: Cyberpunk, and The Witcher 3!

axt113 on 29 March 2010
archbrix said:
axt113 said:
archbrix said:

Wii vitality could very well be a casual lure like Wii Fit was, and no, that audience will not be swayed by Zelda Wii, Galaxy 2 or Metroid.  But to say that three of Nintendo's most popular franchises are not a strong lineup is ridiculous.  The original Galaxy had very strong sales and Zelda Wii will do the same.  There are still core gamers who do not own a Wii yet who are just waiting for Zelda Wii to appear.

Once again:  N64 sold poorly because of lacking third party support and the lack of CD, period.  Nintendo and Rare kept the system alive on their own, making it reach the 30 million+ systems it did sell.  The casual bandwagon hadn't been established yet so how can you say their games didn't appeal to a wide audience for that time (ever heard of GoldenEye?)?  By that definition Playstation didn't have "casual market" games either and it sold phenomenally.  I guarantee that if the N64 had launched with NSMB or Mario World they wouldn't have sold nearly as many copies as Mario 64 at that time.  People were expecting 3D after polygons became the standard; why do you think Mario, a very 2D based game from its gameplay inception, went 3D?  The Wii has sold incredibly because of creating a new market:  the casual gamer, along with being very affordable for said market.  I never disputed this.  What I said was Nintendo underestimated the competition before on many levels, NOT with the Wii where they went a different route than the competition... so my argument=win.

I agree with what Chistensen says as his basis is sound.  But software could make all of the difference.  I don't think it will in this case, but do you think the Wii or the DS for that matter would have been successes if another company was at the helm of that technology?  Nintendo's genius ideas for applications with the new tech is what made them appealing, and there is always a chance (a very slim one in this case) that Sony and Microsoft could create apps that make their respective peripherals appealing.  Again, we don't know enough details regarding software.  Christensen never once says, "Move will fail", only that it's not poised for large success.  There is a difference;  while it won't have the break-out success the Wii-mote did, it could still suffice for Sony, who is seeking the casual audience, rather than hit rock bottom.  This market is just too unpredictable for you to assume Move and Natal are instant failures.  How about the 90% of analysts who, with sound statistical reasoning, stated that Nintendo would be lucky with about 15% market share before this generation started?  I rest my case.

 

 

None of them pushed hardware, what pushed hardware was the wider market games, like Wii sports

Wrong, do you even hear yourself, the causual bandwagon, lol, you really don't get it, there is no causal bandwagon, only idiots think there is, the wider market has always been there, they just weren't interested in playing "core" games, things like Mario 64, they were interested in Super mario, but not 3D star hunter mario.  Their games didn't appeal to a wide audience, because none of them came close to the Super mario games of the earlier gens, they had cut off the wider market.  Wrong Super Mario has always sold more than 3D mario, get a clue.  You really don't understand the market at all do you?

 

Sony and MS have no chance of making that software, the values of those companies are opposed to what the wider market is looking for, which is why they could never make the, Wii.  Back then MOVE wasn't announced, all there was was rumors of what would become MOVE, but he did say that the rumored ideas were a bad idea and that alternatives were what Sony should do, now Sony is doing the wrong move, and it'll end like other disrutions, with Sony being crushed, in fact Christensen has outlined how Sony will be defeated in his books.

 

Those analysts are not Christensen, Christensen is smarter, he's the guy who created the whole disruption theory, and its the theory that Nintendo has followed to great success, and the success is continuing, so yeah, trust the guys who were wrong and are currently saying Move will be a success, or the guy who was right and who said MOVE was a bad idea, I'll trust Christensen.

Wii Sports and the like did push hardware; it STILL doesn't mean their big three lineup isn't strong.

If the word "casual" offends you, too bad.  Let's use "wider" since you seem to prefer it.  Many, many people who bought the Wii are people who fall into the "wider" category.  People that , as you admitted yourself, are not core gamers.  People who bought it on a whim, many of which hardly use it anymore.  People who are grandparents who like Wii bowling.  People who play every long once and a while with their kids.  In other words:  PEOPLE WHO PLAY CASUALLY!  Sound better?  Less idiotic, perhaps?  I never said this was a bad thing; not in the least.  No they would not be interested in Mario 64.  But Mario 64 did more than deliver a "3D star hunt".  It delivered a new era of gameplay and showed that Nintendo could gracefully transition great gameplay into 3D.  That impressed people whether they were fans of the direction the game took or not.  I personally prefer most of the 2D Mario games myself, and now that the "wider" market has embraced the Wii, great games like NSMB will surely sell much better.  But in 1996 Nintendo started the N64 off with a bang by adapting to the market instead of just releasing another 2D Mario which would have largely gone unnoticed at the time.  Super Mario World came with the SNES, but Super Mario World 2?  Despite being one of my favorite games ever, it definitely didn't sell anywhere near what Mario 64 and Galaxy have... there's your clue.

Sony opposed to what the wider market is looking for?  Because PS1 and PS2 didn't sell squat, right?  Do YOU hear yourself?  I won't argue against Christensen's points simply because I do agree with a lot of what the man says.  Doesn't mean Move and Natal couldn't surprise us, but I'm not holding my breath either.  And I never stated I "trusted" the analysts; I NEVER did, as I was sure Nintendo would regain their #1 spot in the market.  Why?  Because I DO understand the market.  Do You?

 

 

Wrong, still weak, doesn't move hardware is weak

 

Its not offesnsive, its stupid, because it shows you really don't ge the market.  Not core means they value different things than the core, they don't care about HD graphics for example.  No 3D mario, mario 64, merely closed off the market, alienating those gamers who were fans of the Super marios, I know I never enjoyed the 3D marios like the Super marios.

Going unnoticed, lol, are you listening to yourself, Mario 64 never sold close to what those 2D marios you think would have gone unnoticed did, like I said, you don't get marketing, study business a little first.

Sony just sold to more markets, and to larger populations, they didn't expand the market, and they still won't with move or NATAL



Rumors indicate that it is planning on following the first approach, sticking a new, motion-sensitive controller onto an existing console. Our perspective is that this is the worst of the three options.

-Clayton Christensen back in 2007 already knew Move would be a bad idea

Mazty on 29 March 2010
Khuutra said:
Mazty said:

I'll tell you who do care about graphics, AI etc. Gamers, ergo wii owners and people who claim it is a good 'proper' gaming platform don't know the first thing about gaming.

If you can't notice a 10+ fps lag, then wow, may want to get a doctor to have a look at that. The games are fun and accessible, but so is a ball pool. It's fun for a short time, but a lot of people grow out of it, and I myself, as do many other gamers, feel that the wii offers very little challenge and in most genres is a total step backward to out dated gaming (rail shooters, 2D platforms) when the expected quality of games has pasted those type of games.

Your grammer is a bit sketchy on your last sentece but I'm guessing you mean can I name you a hardcore game I do not like?

If so yes I can. Halo 3, Ratchet and Clank, Borderlands, Fifa and PES. Personally Halo 3 for me was not anything new so I wasn't keen on it. I'm not a fan of the R&C platforming genre, Borderlands was medicore in my view, and I've never understood the want to play football games. Plus I hated MW2, but note I dislike Halo 3 and MW2 for somewhat the same reasons as I dislike Wii games - both games felt a step backwards, or not a step foward for the genre. Could pick out many more games but as the user base for MW2 and Halo 3 are so large, hope this is the sort of reply your were aiming for.

I'm going to move past the earlier parts of your post to continue with my point, do forgive me.

Yes, it's the sort of reply I was aiming for.

Now, are the people who enjoy.... we'll say Ratchet and Clank. Are the people who enjoy Ratchet and Clank wrong, simply missing out on something that they should be seeing?

Nope. Ratchet and Clank offers a good delve into the platforming genre with wide expansive worlds, good graphics, and essentially it works, e.g. the controls are responsive, as well as the game being the 'natural evolution' for gaming - it takes what the old did and simply makes it all better, it doesn't suddenly go 2D or take a deconstructive step in the wrong direction.

Similar to LittleBigPlanet really. Amazing level design, very accessible, child friendly, many hours of content, if not limitless due to level customisation as well as being an improvement on platforming (2D -> 2.5D allowing for more creative level designs, fully implemented physics system, online play, online level sharing etc).



Mazty on 29 March 2010
zarx said:

I'm sure it did but how many people bought it for that than story or gameplay etc and yes more powerful hardware does help implement good AI but games like FEAR black & white half-life 1 & 2 etc all came out on (or could be run on) hardware around the level of the Wii and I havn't seen that big a jump in AI in the last few years physics and graphics yes AI no.

and I meant for you to reply to my older post lol

 

The AI is an intrinsic part of any FPS gameplay, so yes, people did buy it on the quality of the AI because if it sucked, the game would be broken. There has been a massive jump in AI in the last few years. Take Halo:CE and most FPS from last gen. The enemies simply attacked you, no team work etc. With this generation AI is known to flank, as well as clearing you out of cover with grenades into the lines of sights of more AI through stategy, not coincidence.

As for shovelware, the term has been used all this generation to describe the crap-tastic volume of trash games for the wii which dwarfs any amount of poor games for other consoles.

 



Khuutra on 29 March 2010
Mazty said:
Khuutra said:

I'm going to move past the earlier parts of your post to continue with my point, do forgive me.

Yes, it's the sort of reply I was aiming for.

Now, are the people who enjoy.... we'll say Ratchet and Clank. Are the people who enjoy Ratchet and Clank wrong, simply missing out on something that they should be seeing?

Nope. Ratchet and Clank offers a good delve into the platforming genre with wide expansive worlds, good graphics, and essentially it works, e.g. the controls are responsive, as well as the game being the 'natural evolution' for gaming - it takes what the old did and simply makes it all better, it doesn't suddenly go 2D or take a deconstructive step in the wrong direction.

Similar to LittleBigPlanet really. Amazing level design, very accessible, child friendly, many hours of content, if not limitless due to level customisation as well as being an improvement on platforming (2D -> 2.5D allowing for more creative level designs, fully implemented physics system, online play, online level sharing etc).

All right, good. Cool.

So, from this, it can be taken that people can have different values and still be in the right, as it were? They can like platformers, and not particularly value games where enemy AI is very important, or things like that?