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

Forums - Nintendo - Take-Two says the Move is the "Wii HD"

@euphoria  you took the words out of my mouth. What some of these guys dont get is as a PS3 owner Im already getting LBP2, Killzone 3 and already own HR & RE5 so if I spend 50 on a control to extend my gaming experience thats a pretty good investment in my case. Now whether people will shell out money to get Move who DONT have a PS3 that remains to be seen. I did see an old couple eyeing it at Best Buy so anything is possible



Around the Network

@euphoria  I already had GC version of that game I got Wii cause I though it was going to be a light gun gamers heaven. oh well. what I did get was good. Im still hoping that Namco puts a Point Blank compilation on the system and it was backward compatible



oniyide said:

@euphoria  you took the words out of my mouth. What some of these guys dont get is as a PS3 owner Im already getting LBP2, Killzone 3 and already own HR & RE5 so if I spend 50 on a control to extend my gaming experience thats a pretty good investment in my case. Now whether people will shell out money to get Move who DONT have a PS3 that remains to be seen. I did see an old couple eyeing it at Best Buy so anything is possible


I agree with you 100%. I for example am buying a Move controller since I purchased Eye of Judgement years ago and already have a PSeye, so $50 for a Wii-like experience with PS3 graphics seems worth it, especially if LBP2 created levels/games can utilize them. However I am unsure of whether people are willing to shell out $400 to upgrade from Wii to PS3 Motion.

Either way, seeing as how me and you are of the group that only needs (1) $50 controller and nothing more, it shows how little faith people should put into VGC pre-order data for Move since it seems to ONLY track the bundle and nothing more.

I wonder what it looks like for pre-orders on everything that includes the Move hardware.



iPhone = Great gaming device. Don't agree? Who cares, because you're wrong.

Currently playing:

Final Fantasy VI (iOS), Final Fantasy: Record Keeper (iOS) & Dragon Quest V (iOS)     

    

Got a retro room? Post it here!

@euphoria  I've never taken those preorders serioulsy. Another thing to consider is you can get the camera itself relatively cheap, if your intelligent. I got one brand new from Amazon for 25 bucks. thats 15 less than in store. I think the controller itself will do alright. Its 50 bucks. IM sure im not the only guy who found a camera on the cheap to avoid having to pay for that 100 dollar bundle. Wish they had a nav control bundle though



Euphoria14 said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
Euphoria14 said:
oniyide said:

@Euphoria  I was thinking about going there but im glad you did. Hope you realized you opened pandora's box


I only told the truth.

If what the OP assumes is the truth actually is, well, then the N64 and Gamecube would have been resounding commercial successes due to those franchises that EVERYONE wants, but unfortunately the past has shown that that is not the case.

If the Wii released and followed the same path as the GC and N64, focusing primarily on those franchises only, the Wii would not be where it is today, and they can not refute that what so ever.


If you read the whole OP, you would know I was just posting an article. Jim Sterling of Destructoid wrote that, not me.

BTW, Mario is one of the reasons for the Wii's success, just the 2D Mario game (got sales up holidays last year), not the Galaxy games.

My apologies the, but from what I read it seemed like the part I quoted was what you added in yourself.

As for the underlined sentence, that is irrelevant since the Wii was already a resounding success before SMBWii was even 2 years before release. It was a success long before SMBWii was even announced, so 2D Mario had zero to do with why people flocked to the Wii.


Did you miss the "got sales up holidays last year" part? That means people did flock to it when the Wii was having a downturn. Just because it wasn't the initial sales catalyst does not mean it isn't a selling point.



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

Around the Network
LordTheNightKnight said:
Euphoria14 said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
Euphoria14 said:
oniyide said:

@Euphoria  I was thinking about going there but im glad you did. Hope you realized you opened pandora's box


I only told the truth.

If what the OP assumes is the truth actually is, well, then the N64 and Gamecube would have been resounding commercial successes due to those franchises that EVERYONE wants, but unfortunately the past has shown that that is not the case.

If the Wii released and followed the same path as the GC and N64, focusing primarily on those franchises only, the Wii would not be where it is today, and they can not refute that what so ever.


If you read the whole OP, you would know I was just posting an article. Jim Sterling of Destructoid wrote that, not me.

BTW, Mario is one of the reasons for the Wii's success, just the 2D Mario game (got sales up holidays last year), not the Galaxy games.

My apologies the, but from what I read it seemed like the part I quoted was what you added in yourself.

As for the underlined sentence, that is irrelevant since the Wii was already a resounding success before SMBWii was even 2 years before release. It was a success long before SMBWii was even announced, so 2D Mario had zero to do with why people flocked to the Wii.


Did you miss the "got sales up holidays last year" part? That means people did flock to it when the Wii was having a downturn. Just because it wasn't the initial sales catalyst does not mean it isn't a selling point.

That is my point though. Of course people will buy a Wii for a 2D styled Mario, but Mario is in no way, shape or form the reason why the Wii is where it is today.



iPhone = Great gaming device. Don't agree? Who cares, because you're wrong.

Currently playing:

Final Fantasy VI (iOS), Final Fantasy: Record Keeper (iOS) & Dragon Quest V (iOS)     

    

Got a retro room? Post it here!

Euphoria14 said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
Euphoria14 said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
Euphoria14 said:
oniyide said:

@Euphoria  I was thinking about going there but im glad you did. Hope you realized you opened pandora's box


I only told the truth.

If what the OP assumes is the truth actually is, well, then the N64 and Gamecube would have been resounding commercial successes due to those franchises that EVERYONE wants, but unfortunately the past has shown that that is not the case.

If the Wii released and followed the same path as the GC and N64, focusing primarily on those franchises only, the Wii would not be where it is today, and they can not refute that what so ever.


If you read the whole OP, you would know I was just posting an article. Jim Sterling of Destructoid wrote that, not me.

BTW, Mario is one of the reasons for the Wii's success, just the 2D Mario game (got sales up holidays last year), not the Galaxy games.

My apologies the, but from what I read it seemed like the part I quoted was what you added in yourself.

As for the underlined sentence, that is irrelevant since the Wii was already a resounding success before SMBWii was even 2 years before release. It was a success long before SMBWii was even announced, so 2D Mario had zero to do with why people flocked to the Wii.


Did you miss the "got sales up holidays last year" part? That means people did flock to it when the Wii was having a downturn. Just because it wasn't the initial sales catalyst does not mean it isn't a selling point.

That is my point though. Of course people will buy a Wii for a 2D styled Mario, but Mario is in no way, shape or form the reason why the Wii is where it is today.


It would be selling less if not for Mario, so there is some effect.



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

oniyide said:

@Kasz216 I for one did not buy a Wii for those games. I hate them. I bought Wii cause I thought that I would get a unique experience. Which I sorta did, but it became readily apparent that the actual tech kinda blows. Thats why i have an interest in Move and in a lesser extent Kinect because if the tech works (in Move's case everyone says it does) they can make better games. I will admit that it will be an uphill battle for MS & Sony for core gamers like me I support the better fidelity of their motion controls. I think gamers in general should


I... don't see why you consider yourself the average buyer in said circumstances when you clearly aren't the average consumer.



Euphoria14 said:
Kasz216 said:
Euphoria14 said:
LordTheNightKnight said:

Firstly, if we already have this in a thread, please provide a link.

Secondly, if not, check out this link (plus it's something Pachter said a while ago, so either they are copying him, perhaps accidentally, or he really is their mouthpiece). Everything below the link is a quote from the article.

http://www.destructoid.com/take-two-playstation-move-is-wii-hd--183961.phtml

Are you one of those people gagging for an HD Wii? According to publisher Take-Two, the wait is almost over, since Sony has us covered!

"What Sony and Microsoft have really done with Kinect and Move, especially Move, is provide a bridge for guys that are used to playing the Wii system with the wand and bringing them over to a HD system," says CEO Ben Feder. "The PS3 with Move, in my view, is the Wii HD system. I think maybe mom isn't playing, but the kids are graduating, and Microsoft and Sony have both provided a bridge to bring them over."

I disagree with that statement, mostly for the fact that people wanted an HD Wii to see better looking versions of Nintendo franchises. Acting like Move meets the demand for an HD Wii represents a sad attitude I've noticed in the industry -- the attitude that seems to think copying hardware is enough. 

Software is what is important, and when Move gets experiences that match Super Mario Galaxy and The Legend of Zelda or even Kirby's Epic Yarn, then we can call it the Wii HD.

Yeah, that's why the Gamecube and the Nintendo 64 sold bucket loads...

You know as well as everyone else here that Mario, Zelda and Kirby are not the reasons why the Wii sold as well as it did.

 

Games like WiiSports, WiiFit and WiiPlay are why. Soon to possibly add WiiParty to that list.

 

Those other games means shit when it come to the why the Wii was a success.

Which is still a Nintendo Franchise... nobody makes better versions of "new style" entertainment then Nintendo.

Which is the real issue Move and Kinnect will have.  Will the companies who struck out on the Wii suddenly be able to make good motion based games?  Seems... unlikely.

Which means it's going to be all on Sony and Microsoft's back to create the killer applications to get people interested.

Everyone bought a Wii because of Wii sports, wii fits and the like.  All the clones of said Wii franchises sell way worse... and even sell worse then the Nintendo Core games... just because Nintendo has something.

I disagree. Sales show that the 3rd parties have different demographics to target on the PS/360 than they did on the Wii.

For example, on the Wii the 3rd parties would need to attempt and create that real hardcore  FPS crowd, or Hack and Slash crowd, etc.. yet on the PS/360 they are already there, so they can create games that incorporate both styles on play (Controller and Motion) and still experience success while on the Wii it was more of an "All of Nothing" gamble.

Different situation here my friend.

A) How would that help as a bridge.

B) Games that incoprorate controller and motion are always going to lack in one area or the other.



I think if Sony bundled the Move controller, camera and Navigation controller and perhaps another Move controller with the PS3 all for the cheap price of 275USD then and only then would you have the WiiHD. Also as others pointed out the WiiHD wouldn't be a true WiiHD without Nintendo's inhouse software.

I saw the Move in motion at PAX and was reminded at just how expensive the Move is to play. For many of the games on the show floor two controllers were pretty much required, Sony says you can play with one control but most games on the show floor were being played with two. Then others shown had navigation controllers as a nescessity.

So Move in total

2x controllers - 110USD

Navigation controller - 30USD

Camera - 40USD

Your talking about 180USD plus tax to get the full Move experiance. Then the consumer also needs a PS3 which makes the whole package a whopping 500USD pretty much. Thats definatly not what casual consumers want. Casuals don't wanna have to waste half a grand to play some games



-JC7

"In God We Trust - In Games We Play " - Joel Reimer