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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Wii Success May Lead to Cheaper Next-Gen

ctk495 on 26 March 2008

cool.



Around the Network
Sherlock99 on 26 March 2008

i think cheaper is better you make more money that way lol



Nintendo Network ID: Sherlock99

supermario128 on 26 March 2008

That's good to hear, $250 was too much for me already.




Nintendo still doomed?
Feel free to add me on 3DS or Switch! (PM me if you do ^-^)
Nintendo ID: Mako91                  3DS code: 4167-4543-6089

ilovetogame on 26 March 2008

cheaper is defintiely better. who wants to buy a $400 system anyway, let alone a 500 or 600 dollar system.

suckas, thats who!



end of '08 predictions: wii - 43 million,  360 - 25 million, ps3 - 20 million

 

Games I've beat recently: Super Mario Galaxy, Knights of the Old Republic, Shadow of the Collossus

 

Proud owner of wii, gamecube, xbox, ps2, dreamcast, n64, snes, genesis, 3DO, nes, atari, intellivision, unisonic tournament 2000, and gameboy

GameMusic on 26 March 2008
disolitude said:
Perfect example...Sega superstar Tennis...The wii game plays the best because of the motion controlls but looks and sounds like ASS!

 That's because SEGA is dumb and made the Wii version and PS2 version the same.

 Super Mario Galaxy is a better example of what the Wii can do.

 This is actually a trend in the last 4 generations.

 SNES is more powerful than the Genesis or TurboGFX-16, but also beat the PS3 of that gen, the Neo-Geo.

 PS1 was the least powerful console of its generation.

 P2S was the least powerful console of its generation (other than DC which was killed by PS2 hype).

 This is because games are more important.  What Sony did, as Nintendo realized, was SKIP a generation.  A console that is over $800 to produce is not a mass market current-gen console.



Around the Network
disolitude on 26 March 2008
FreeTalkLive said:
disolitude said:
 Sony tried something very different this generation and it has hurt their bottom line.

I'm sorry...what did Sony try that was so different from PS2.

Sony to do checklist for ps3:

1. Include latest media drive - check

2. Make an all powerful graphics processor that is hard to program for - check

3. Hype games 3 years in advance - check

 


 The PS2 was not a really powerful system with expensive tech (just like all of the other systems I mentioned).  The PS2 retailed for what, $300?  The PS3 retailed for twice as much and is considered by Sony to be very powerful.  The main companies in the videogame console war (like Sony) didn't go super expensive/powerful until Sony tried it with PS3 (and MS to a lesser degree).

If the PS3 would have retailed for $300  (or even $350) and used common tech like the DVD (as Sony did with the common DVD with PS2); then, I would agree with you. 


LOL. PS2 retailed for 449 canadian when it launched versus 499 for PS3. We know that it wasn't that powerful now. But when PS2 came out, it was marketed as gift from god. Who knows...maybe 4 years later we will all expose PS3 for being not as good as Sony claims.

Also, DVD wasn't the "common tech" at the time. PS2 was the first console to have that built in but it was a more established market at the time hence why it killed the dreamcast right away.  All sony did with PS3 is took the PS2 moto and did + 1.  I know that Microsoft did the same...but lets not give sony credit for going out of line and breaking the tradition at this point.