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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Against the grain: What Nintendo SHOULD have done/should do with the Wii

Ostro on 14 December 2010
Conegamer said:

http://wildcat.arizona.edu/wildlife/we-want-games-not-gimmicks-1.1824283 (Nintendo is stuck in the past, stale, Wii is a toy)

As well as countless others (I did a check on Google and over 200 of these similar articles have been released in the past month), including top industry heads dismissing it as a "gimmick" and as a "toy"

Everybody return their Fords if you got one. It's a car!!



Around the Network
homer on 14 December 2010
Bobbuffalo said:
homer said:
Bobbuffalo said:
homer said:
Bobbuffalo said:
homer said:
Bobbuffalo said:
homer said:

Yeah, I do not play many puzzle games. I enjoy tetris and Proffesor Layton, but that is mostly it.

Back on topic though, Nintendo should have put more emphasis on the vc and they should have had a larger flash drive or a hard drive attachment. They also need a new fzero and star fox game.


VC was and is not a priority for Nintendo. That's Wiiware. I hate to say this because I was one of the people eargly waiting for it but is understandable. VC is more or a treat for the core fans and lapsed gamers, with Nostalgia being a huge factor. Is important but not Top priority while Wiiware is to give independent studios and even the big ones a platform to make small scale games with low budgets and  more importantly to find new talent and genres. Like Iwatta said, "to find the new tetris". It makes sense, why focus in the past instead of the future?

 After 4 years is obvious that the storage issue  wasn't a huge deal and we should drop that argument now. Is useless, silly and the reality is that it didn't affect sales at all. If a HD was that important then gamers would have switched to the HD twins and that's not happening. It would be nice yeah true but it could manage without it very well. Maybe next console may correct that.

I am pretty sure that they are working on them. Both franchises were never very succesful so they are not very important. Although the same could be said of Metroid and they made 2 games but we all know how terrible the 2d one faired..I guess that they are making them for the WM but who knows..

I ran out of space in  mid 2007 and it took a while for them to finally release a solution so space was a problem. It may have affected sales, maybe not hardware, but software sales on the vc. As for wiiware being their priority, I would like a link to that quote by Iwata.

 

You =/= the rest of the world. And you cannot know that because Nintendo never realeases sales data of the VC so that's just an assumption.

Don't remember the exact quote but it was prior to the release of the service almost a short after the wii was released. I'll find it and post i here.

A rightful assumption. Is it not logical to assume that a lack of room to put games from the vc, would deter some(even if it is just a small minority) from downloading games after filling up the wii's memory capacity? Even if it was minor, they could have a least had the feature they have now, which would have helped. You of all should know about this memory problem seeing as you have 39 vc games and 5 ww games (if your profile is to be believed).

*shrugs* I had them in my SD card waaay before the SD channel  appeared. 


I had an sd card too and it was just a nuisance to constantly games switch games which certainly deterred me from making as many  impulse buys. Think how bad it would have been for people without sd cards.

I bet itwas.

Listen, I never said it wasn't an issue. Otherwise they would have never released the SD channel. But saying that itwas a HUGE issue and affected them is untrue  because the machines kept seelling anyway.

The true is that only hardcore gamers made a big fuzz about it. And they are nothing but a very small population of gamers. A very VOCAL one indeed. But small in the end.

Obviously it was not a HUGE problem,  but they still did not handle it properly and that was a problem. The sd card menu is sufficient, but should have been there all along. I am still waiting for that link btw.
Edit: Also, where did I say it was a huge problem? Didn't I say it was minor?



"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." -My good friend Mark Aurelius

HappySqurriel on 14 December 2010

I'm of the opinion that Nintendo's need to manage the risk associated with the Wii made it the system it was ...

With that said, neither the HD consoles nor the Wii really represent what I would call a typical console when it comes to processing power. The HD consoles are more powerful than most consoles have been (upon release) and this made them larger, more expensive, and much more energy hungry systems; and the Wii was a less powerful system because Nintendo wanted a smaller, less expensive and more energy efficient system than most consoles have been. Had Nintendo released a more powerful system (4 to 8 times the processing power of the Gamecube) and still focused on 480p I think they would have increased third party support while decreasing the number of potential consumers who complained about graphics.

I know there are those people who think that it not being HD is a major negative, but even 5 years into the generation lacking HD hasn't really hurt the Wii that much; and with that kind of processing power, the Wii could have delivered very nice graphics while maintaining 8x or 16x AA and 8x or 16x AF (which would limit most of the obvious graphical flaws associated with standard definition gaming).



Conegamer on 15 December 2010
HappySqurriel said:

I'm of the opinion that Nintendo's need to manage the risk associated with the Wii made it the system it was ...

With that said, neither the HD consoles nor the Wii really represent what I would call a typical console when it comes to processing power. The HD consoles are more powerful than most consoles have been (upon release) and this made them larger, more expensive, and much more energy hungry systems; and the Wii was a less powerful system because Nintendo wanted a smaller, less expensive and more energy efficient system than most consoles have been. Had Nintendo released a more powerful system (4 to 8 times the processing power of the Gamecube) and still focused on 480p I think they would have increased third party support while decreasing the number of potential consumers who complained about graphics.

I know there are those people who think that it not being HD is a major negative, but even 5 years into the generation lacking HD hasn't really hurt the Wii that much; and with that kind of processing power, the Wii could have delivered very nice graphics while maintaining 8x or 16x AA and 8x or 16x AF (which would limit most of the obvious graphical flaws associated with standard definition gaming).

This. However, I have to disagree with you when you say (or imply) that the Wii can't do good looking games. Look at the Galaxies, Epic Yarn, Brawl, Monster Hunter Tri, No More Heroes 2 and many others if you need inspiration!

Lacking HD has made the Wi cheap to develop for. This means a wider variety of games, which means a wider variety of people will play it. Heck, it's tracking nearly 2 years ahead of the PS2 at this point!



 

Here lies the dearly departed Nintendomination Thread.

Killiana1a on 15 December 2010

HD, I believe, is a moot point at this point in the generation. Pachter and others, in my opinion, are wrong in proposing Nintendo re-release the Wii with HD capabilities.

I am in the school of thought that software sells the system. Nintendo from NES has been known for their "seal of quality" otherwise known as their unrivaled, top notch first party software. This is their biggest strength and is the reason why, ever since the SNES vs. Sega Genesis Red Ocean War, they have not needed to compete on a graphic-for-graphic basis.

Graphics do matter and anyone who denies it looks just as silly as the Mario hater claiming only nostalgic gamers buy Mario games. When Nintendo's younger market reaches their teens, just like a lot of us and myself did in the late 1990s, there is a gravitation towards more mature content, which developers have always used the most realistic graphics for. Is this inevitable? To a certain extent for a certain segment of teen gamers. Can Nintendo do anything to stop it? No, not really, which is why Nintendo with the Wii blew up the traditional school of thought for new consoles with a console aimed at getting everyone to play, not just the vocal minority.

Nintendo going HD would come with the expectation of software with mature content. Nintendo did not win against the Genesis by having the best looking Mortal Kombat game, it won with games like Donkey Kong Country, which have great stylized graphics along with accessibility to any and everyone from the grandpa on down to the 4 year old. So why would Nintendo jeopardize their winning formula just to win a meaningless graphics arms race?

Nintendo has gone down the road of mature content on the N64 and the games were fairly decent. Turok and Goldeneye 007 were awesome for their time. However, for other reasons the N64 got spanked by the PS1.

I just don't see HD as a primary thing Nintendo has to do.



Around the Network
Games4Fun on 15 December 2010

Why do people even bother with the HD/Wii debate anymore. Its pretty pointless and the Wii has more than proven itself in so many ways.



Conegamer on 15 December 2010
Ostro said:
Conegamer said:

http://wildcat.arizona.edu/wildlife/we-want-games-not-gimmicks-1.1824283 (Nintendo is stuck in the past, stale, Wii is a toy)

As well as countless others (I did a check on Google and over 200 of these similar articles have been released in the past month), including top industry heads dismissing it as a "gimmick" and as a "toy"

Everybody return their Fords if you got one. It's a car!!

Damn good job I can't drive yet then eh

Also, I've done the next part of this series about gamers expectations. I hope you'll like this next one just as much as the first!

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=121363&page=1&str=631877673#1



 

Here lies the dearly departed Nintendomination Thread.

Conegamer on 15 December 2010

I think at the end of all this the important thing to draw out is that Nintendo are above 80mil for the Wii now. HD would have changed nothing. Therefore, people should just deal with SD or gt a PS360, but without Nintendo's first party games

Also, BobBuffalo, hi



 

Here lies the dearly departed Nintendomination Thread.

homer on 15 December 2010
Conegamer said:
HappySqurriel said:

I'm of the opinion that Nintendo's need to manage the risk associated with the Wii made it the system it was ...

With that said, neither the HD consoles nor the Wii really represent what I would call a typical console when it comes to processing power. The HD consoles are more powerful than most consoles have been (upon release) and this made them larger, more expensive, and much more energy hungry systems; and the Wii was a less powerful system because Nintendo wanted a smaller, less expensive and more energy efficient system than most consoles have been. Had Nintendo released a more powerful system (4 to 8 times the processing power of the Gamecube) and still focused on 480p I think they would have increased third party support while decreasing the number of potential consumers who complained about graphics.

I know there are those people who think that it not being HD is a major negative, but even 5 years into the generation lacking HD hasn't really hurt the Wii that much; and with that kind of processing power, the Wii could have delivered very nice graphics while maintaining 8x or 16x AA and 8x or 16x AF (which would limit most of the obvious graphical flaws associated with standard definition gaming).

This. However, I have to disagree with you when you say (or imply) that the Wii can't do good looking games. Look at the Galaxies, Epic Yarn, Brawl, Monster Hunter Tri, No More Heroes 2 and many others if you need inspiration!

Lacking HD has made the Wi cheap to develop for. This means a wider variety of games, which means a wider variety of people will play it. Heck, it's tracking nearly 2 years ahead of the PS2 at this point!



I agree with all those games looking good except Monster Hunter tri. That game was so ugly, at least what I saw from it.



"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." -My good friend Mark Aurelius

Conegamer on 15 December 2010
homer said:
Conegamer said:
HappySqurriel said:

I'm of the opinion that Nintendo's need to manage the risk associated with the Wii made it the system it was ...

With that said, neither the HD consoles nor the Wii really represent what I would call a typical console when it comes to processing power. The HD consoles are more powerful than most consoles have been (upon release) and this made them larger, more expensive, and much more energy hungry systems; and the Wii was a less powerful system because Nintendo wanted a smaller, less expensive and more energy efficient system than most consoles have been. Had Nintendo released a more powerful system (4 to 8 times the processing power of the Gamecube) and still focused on 480p I think they would have increased third party support while decreasing the number of potential consumers who complained about graphics.

I know there are those people who think that it not being HD is a major negative, but even 5 years into the generation lacking HD hasn't really hurt the Wii that much; and with that kind of processing power, the Wii could have delivered very nice graphics while maintaining 8x or 16x AA and 8x or 16x AF (which would limit most of the obvious graphical flaws associated with standard definition gaming).

This. However, I have to disagree with you when you say (or imply) that the Wii can't do good looking games. Look at the Galaxies, Epic Yarn, Brawl, Monster Hunter Tri, No More Heroes 2 and many others if you need inspiration!

Lacking HD has made the Wi cheap to develop for. This means a wider variety of games, which means a wider variety of people will play it. Heck, it's tracking nearly 2 years ahead of the PS2 at this point!



I agree with all those games looking good except Monster Hunter tri. That game was so ugly, at least what I saw from it.

Did you even play it, especially online? If you have then you'd be eating your words, it's beautiful...for Standard Definition!



 

Here lies the dearly departed Nintendomination Thread.