cunger said:
It's true that it's not as much of a game changer to gameplay as the wii remote was. But I think many gamers felt that the wii was a change to gameplay that they didn't want. Nintendo has a more core friendly system this time..
There is a lot the system can do that you can't do on other systems but I'm not sure how innovative these features are since Nintendo has done them before on the ds to a great degree of success. It's innovative to do these things in a console I guess. I could list them but it would probably just be easier for you to google some top ds reviews and see what is being done.
IMO, this is going to be a games focused system rather than a gimick focused system. If you love your games you can play your games right away when the main tv is being used. No you don't have to move the system across the house when you just want to boot up a game and play. That would be lame. Microsoft consoles you don't want to touch let alone move rooms they reside in for fear of RROD.
I don't know anyone who moves their systems around frequently, so this is kind of like fixing a problem that doesn't exist. Again, being able to play around the house... well it's cool that it can be done, but it'll hardly ever be done for most gamers. (I've talked about it in the previous post).
The fact is that the system is going to do well. Nintendo only shoots for 5 to 6 year cylce anyways and should be coming out with their next system when the nextbox and ps4 are still 3/4 year away from their next system. Nintendo has a great window of opportunity to provide a unique feature set, a mainstream pricepoint, and the best first party games they've ever been able to make.
See, what has made the Wii a tremendous success is it's popularity with casual gamers or previously non-gamers. The Wii U isn't attracting that audience, and I don't think it's attracting many core gamers either. Of course Nintendo fans are a large, loyal group so they'll make it relatively successful, like the N64 and GC. I think the Wii U will do a little better than both of those, which is "well", but I think you're overestimating its success. Who knows though, maybe it'll be even bigger than the Wii! We'll see.
It's Nextbox and PS4 i'm more concerned about right simply because they haven't proven anything to me. Nintendo has proven that they can make a gorgoes looking Pikmin and I know i've got many great first party games to look forward to. I'm not convinced that next gen graphics will blow me away like previous generations have. The Unreal 4 engine demo sure didn't blow me away... The ball is in their court right now and I'm expecting to be blown away.
I sort of talk about this here: http://www.gamingcapacity.com/will-nextbox-and-ps4-need-unique-selling-points/ It's not a long read. Basically saying they'll innovate when it comes to software (not just games, but OS, extra features, stores, services etc) - but read it for a proper explanation! (please :)
The thing about watching these incredible tech demos is that they don't look as incredible when you watch it online. That's because the videos are so incredibly compressed that all the intricate details are gone. It's hard to explain, and even if I tried I'm not that familiar with hows and whys on this anyway, but I do know there's a huge difference from online video and in-person. I remember watching BF3 videos on PC, played at ultra and while I thought it looked awesome and definitely better than what PS360 could do, it wasn't mind blowing. Then I got BF3 on my PC, played it on Med/High settings and holy shit. Anyway, sorry for the rambling.
I want the graphics and physics to be better, but I already know they will be better. If they reach Watch_Dogs and BF3 on Ultra standards at launch I'll be very happy. What I want to blow me away is the OS. I want something super streamlined and seamless and capable. Tons of new features, no lag/delay, things like being able to use a (good) browser and cross game chat in game.
|