I think the biggest turnaround this entire generation is when Nintendo fans suddenly start caring about graphics and framerate...

Viper1; Graphics are a gimmick? What about surround sound or EAX support? Higher framerates for a smoother experience? Graphics evolve and its only natural, why should we sit on our behinds and stop developing? Believe it or not, there are actually games that have both good graphics and good gameplay, story etc.

Arguably, having a pissing contest with other consoles to show that you have slightly better visuals is somewhat of a gimmick but the thing is; most multiplatform games looked the best on 360 this generation and the ones crying the loudest about good visuals now are Wii U fans celebrating that they can finally purchase a console that beats the PS360. The whole "tech c3ll" has pretty much died down now.
Besides, Sony trying to use good visuals as a selling point this generation is certainly no worse than half-hearted waggle (mostly) as a selling point.

Mummelmman
So you agree with him then...

You are absolutely incorrect on so many levels. You see, the majority of Nintendo fans have not been the ones to boast about graphical fidelity. That argument started with and stems from fans of thee other HD console. And it started on the day WiiU was announced. Remember when PS3/XBOX 360 fans said the games shown for WiiU 2 E3's ago looked WORSE than PS3/XBOX 360 games only to find out the games shown were XBOX 360/PS3 builds because teams did not have enough time to code for WiiU?

What you claim is a sort of... twisted... take on what has really happened. Nintendo fans have been attacked from the beginning about this console not being as graphically powerful as the current generation. Later, this argument was altered to be only, "as powerful" as the current generation, and now only, "slightly more powerful" than the current generation. Nintendo fans did not bring these topics up as real issues, as a matter of fact, I have seen more Nintendo fans try to deflect thee argument entirely and explain how or why WiiU is a next generation console despite people's opinion that graphics are what defines the next generational leap. What Nintendo fans are doing now is REACTING to thee attacks that have been placed upon them from the beginning and now people like you are saying that Nintendo fans care about graphics more than they actually do because they are defending their choice console. Lets not lose perspective on what has happend over the last year and a half.

Not many Nintendo fans that I have seen (on this site or otherwise) and definitely not enough to say they are an accurate representation of the Nintendo fan community have gone hard about graphics being important, or most important. The, "Nintendo has the graphics" statements are counter-arguments and to have people like you stating otherwise is silly and petty and totally unacceptable. Get your stuff together and bring arguments to the table in their proper context. Thank you.

And by the way, graphics are a gimmick. The console with the strongest graphical fidelity tries to use that as a selling point as much as Nintendo tried to sell a different control interface. You have to understand the word gimmick does not necessitate negative context. A gimmick is merely a selling point, and graphics are the king amongst gimmicks.

i hate seeing people group all Nintendo fans as people who dont care about graphics

THIS.

A million times over, this right here.

Mummel, what you see from Nintendo fans is reactionary.  It's not about the graphics themselves being better but rather a retort to those spreading disinformation.   If you saw someone saying false information regarding your console of choice, would you speak up to correct it?  Of course you would.

And since when is it odd for us to care about frame rate?  Given that frame rate is very much connected to gameplay, I'd say our devotion to gameplay over graphics allows us the right to talk to of frame rate just the same.

By the way.  Just how much time did you spend searching through my posts?  I should feel flattered.

Viper1: Searching through your posts? I read this thread, that's it, don't feel flattered. But you have an ongoing tendency to come into a thread and explain in simple terms that the OP or the people responding to the OP don't even have a basic grasp of what they're talking about, contrary to you, and then you almost always make it a point to bring up your first post; "Seriosuly, did no one read my post? Why is everyone discussing this when I deem it moot and they don't have my firm grasp on the subject at hand?"

To be honest, you're one out of a handful of people in here that are impossible to debate with and its not because your arguments are so solid. The fact that you group yourself and your peers as "devoted to gameplay" speaks volumes of how you look at people with differing opinions (its not just slightly elitist), as if we can't appreciate it. Why do you think I play games? Why do you think I've all but stopped playing console games? The games aren't any good, pure and simple. Since two of my fav titles this gen are Bastion and Terraria, two titles wholly devoted to gameplay, well that should, by your reasoing, give me even more right to discuss this matter on my terms, or what?
There's a large group of people in here who shun good visuals simply for the sake of shunning them, when there are actually a bunch of really good games this gen that have great graphics and gameplay all at once, imagine that! Its like you've been dissing everything HD out of spite for years and now suddenly HD is a must have and a trumph card to advertise for the WiiU (I truly think it is a trumph card, some WiiU games look incredible imo, but I was never opposed to graphical improvement in the first place).
I can't help but think that if the Wii had been a graphical powerhouse, people would not have this attitude and I also can't help but think that the people who complain about graphics are also ones who appreciate HD TV signals, digitalized cinema with high resolution and high quality uncompressed sound.
A game is not it's graphics, its made up of so much more, its like saying that you'd enjoy a film better if it was on VHS and all grainy because the good visuals get in the way.

PS: I have no console of choice, they stopped being relevant to me quite a while ago, as would be evident if you checked my posts as of late. What I do care about is your style of debating, you belittle and take blunt approaches to anyone and anything that doesn't sit with you and sometimes sound a bit too cocky (which has come back to haunt you, there is a multitude of posts in past threads I could dig up where you have made claims as if they were facts and its turned out to be dead wrong so get off your horse every once in a while and stop pretending you belong to some intellectual elite with more say than others in here).

For some reason, I thought you were quoting me from some way back thread.

Given that that was your own statement, that's where the irony exists because I don't disagree with what you said at all. Not sure why you assumed I would.

I presume it was based on my statement, "Well, under certain definitions of the term gimmick, yes."?

That being the case, why the hell didn't you just ask me what those conditions are instead of going on a tantrum?
Look up the term gimmick and get back to me.

Here, I'll even link you to it.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/gimmick

I was asked if I consider graphics a gimmick specifically with regards to the PS3. Read ALL those specific definitions and then apply it to my answer.

Don't bring the argument from the closed thread into this thread, either. It was closed for a reason.

Not directed at you, just a general warning.