The Nintendo Wii release date and price are out. Official Site Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
I'm sorry, but I can't take that name seriouly, no matter what the press says.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
Where does it talk about the prices? I want one!
-pH
Posted by pfresh85 (Member # 8085) on :
It's killing my budget unfortunately. $250 for the console + Wii sports, and then $100 for 2 other games. That takes almost all my fun/entertainment money for the semester. *sigh* Oh well. I guess back to GameCube games for me.
Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
$250 It also comes with a game, so it's more like 200.
Posted by Adam_S (Member # 9695) on :
it comes with a game that will probably retail for the equivalent of 20-25$ in Japan. Wii sports is a glossy demo title, I'd feel ripped off if I paid 50$ for it, just as I'd feel ripped off if I had had to pay 35$ for Brain Age rather than 20$.
And it's name is wii, as in the word 'we' but you can't play multiplayer out of the box, to do that you need to spend 60 dollars on a second controller, which is 10 dollars more than the MSRP of games. wii sports is basically a big multiplayer title, but you can't play tennis out of the box except as single player.
Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
It would only be 40 for a second controller to play wii sports.
Posted by pfresh85 (Member # 8085) on :
Elmer's Glue is right. All but one of the Wii Sports games can be played with the Wiimote alone (which is $40).
Posted by Fitz (Member # 4803) on :
It's standard for a console package to only come with one controller. The Wii is also relatively cheap, compared to XBox, so I don't think having to buy another controller is a big deal.
Wii is the only next-gen console I'm planning to buy. Xbox doesn't appeal to me, and PS3 is going to be insanely expensive.
Posted by andi330 (Member # 8572) on :
quote:Originally posted by Adam_S: it comes with a game that will probably retail for the equivalent of 20-25$ in Japan. Wii sports is a glossy demo title, I'd feel ripped off if I paid 50$ for it, just as I'd feel ripped off if I had had to pay 35$ for Brain Age rather than 20$.
And it's name is wii, as in the word 'we' but you can't play multiplayer out of the box, to do that you need to spend 60 dollars on a second controller, which is 10 dollars more than the MSRP of games. wii sports is basically a big multiplayer title, but you can't play tennis out of the box except as single player.
It less than half of the PS3 and significantly less than the XBox 360. It comes with a pretty equivelant package to both of those systems. Be happy it's not going to cost $400.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
I am way excited about the Wii. $250 is $50 more than they were saying it would likely cost, but they definately have the breathing room compared to the Xbox 360 and especially the PS3. Controllers will cost $40 (Not $60) but you can use old game cube controllers as well for some of the games (Smash Bros for one).
I am just glad thats its going to makes games fun again, by adding new dynamics.
I need to look at the confirmed launch titles before deciding to get it on release day. If Legend of Zelda is out even within the week of release Ill buy it release day, I've saved the money!
Posted by pfresh85 (Member # 8085) on :
Zelda's a launch game. Metroid Prime 3 was supposed to be as well, but it got knocked back to 2007. Oh well. Zelda and Marvel Ultimate Alliance will hold me over for quite a while.
Posted by Mathematician (Member # 9586) on :
I don't mean to sound utterly stupid (sometimes these things can't be helped, can they ? ;-) ), but where does it say the price on the website?
I've been hearing for months now that "The Wii will be at most 250$" but I've seen nothing about the actual price.
PS, I'm one of those that thinks "Wii" is the stupiest name for a console EVER, though I'll probably eventually get one
<edit> I know you're all saying 250, but where did you get that info?
Posted by Fitz (Member # 4803) on :
quote:9:25 EST; Today, he says, Nintendo will explain its plans for altering the controller interface and the game.
Wii goes on sale November 19. "The worldwide debut of the Wii system happens right here in the Americas -- the same place where we debuted Nintendo DS. On November 19, it will be available at more than 25,000 points of distribution across the Americas. And with a manufacturer's suggested retail price of $249.99. One price. One configuration. One color." Which is, for the record, white.
Posted by pfresh85 (Member # 8085) on :
Yeah, I don't think the official site mentions the price. It was released early this morning though (originally in a NY Times article, then reinforced by IGN).
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Come on, who seriously cares about the name? If the hottest sports car in the world was the..I don't know Chevy Woodgrain, wouldn't you still buy it? Especially if it was cheaper than the Corvette and Boxer you know are coming out too?
I won't complain about paying 60 for a remote, considering what I'm getting, and considering it's LESS than HALF of what the PS3 will cost. This is the first system I'll have bought since the Nintendo 64. Takes a lot to pull me out of my self imposed video game seclusion. This system looks awesome, for the right price.
Just in time for Christmas =)
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
quote:Come on, who seriously cares about the name? If the hottest sports car in the world was the..I don't know Chevy Woodgrain, wouldn't you still buy it? Especially if it was cheaper than the Corvette and Boxer you know are coming out too?
Forget that. I'm saving up for my Veyron.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
while I like nintendo and have bought a used gamecube recently I probly aint buying a Wii. They shouldve kept with the old name Nintendo Revolutions because its a kickass name.
PS3 ftw.
XBox 360 FTL
Nintendo Wii: FTL until they change their name.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
quote:Originally posted by Adam_S: it comes with a game that will probably retail for the equivalent of 20-25$ in Japan. Wii sports is a glossy demo title, I'd feel ripped off if I paid 50$ for it, just as I'd feel ripped off if I had had to pay 35$ for Brain Age rather than 20$.
I agree -- I think the bundle simply brings it roughly in line with the Japanese pricing (which works out to US$212.50). That said, Wii Sports does sound fun.
quote:And it's name is wii, as in the word 'we' but you can't play multiplayer out of the box, to do that you need to spend 60 dollars on a second controller, which is 10 dollars more than the MSRP of games. wii sports is basically a big multiplayer title, but you can't play tennis out of the box except as single player.
I do think including at least two remotes (not necessarily two attachments) would have been a good idea. However, $60 for the remote/nunchuk package nets you more functionality than either an Xbox 360 wireless controller (which has no motion-sensing capability) or a PS3 controller (which has no rumble).
I already own an Xbox 360 and am very happy with it. I'm probably not going to buy a Wii at launch, but I do think I'll buy one eventually. I have no plans to buy a PS3.
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
Wii-Day is almost here... yay!
I wonder how long till we get to play with a demo in stores....
Posted by PUNJABEE (Member # 7359) on :
Nintendo was claiming the system was to be a budget system.
But then:
They tack on $10 to each game title. They sell extra crappy remote controllers for $60 The ROM downloads of older games are $5 for NES, $8 for SNES and $10 for N64 games.
Any idiot with a brain can figure out where and how to download the entire past library of Nintendo games for free and play them on their PC or modded Xbox.
It's not a budget system once you get the POS out of the box. Nintendo is also going to release a legacy control pad. But it will require connecting it to that crappy TV Remote control. So if you want 4 legacy type pads - you'll have to connect them to 4 tv remote controllers.
So lets break it down.
If I want a Revolution I have to pay: $250
And I get a crappy multiplayer game with one controller, so I have to go out and buy another for $60. That's $310 so far, not counting taxes.
Next, I'm going to want Super Smash Bros melee, which supports up to four players. That's another $60. ($370). But me and my friends don't want to play with the "Nintendo Vibrator", we'd rather play with the legacy controller, which should be around $20. So that's $80 for each legacy pad. That brings us to $450, before tax.
But wait - these legacy controllers... they don't work without the TV remote, so I have to buy 3 more TV remotes just to enable those legacy controllers. At $60 a pop, that's $180 for 3 more controllers.
Hmm... $630 just to play super smash brothers without having to use that retarded controller they came up with.
Bugdet system - my ass. Especially considering it's nothing more than a Gamecube 1.5a than a true follow up.
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
When they said it was budget, I suspect they didn't intend you to buy the new system only to play one game that can be played on an old system. The budget solution for that would be to buy the GameCube.
The best thing about the Wii, I suspect, will be the controllers, and all the new games they make possible. It is about time there were some actually NEW games created by the gaming industry, rather than just new twists on old games with better graphics. $250 is a pretty good deal for that, given that it also leaves open the option of playing old games too.
Posted by Palliard (Member # 8109) on :
I refuse to look at a new game system until there are games that I want to play out for it. And I play RPGs.
Looks like they got a Zelda game, but I don't see much else on the horizon.
Posted by PUNJABEE (Member # 7359) on :
Palliard, you can get the latest Zelda game on the Gamecube sometime in December, but the only thing missing will be the "wand waving" part of the game, which in itself is worthless.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
quote:Originally posted by PUNJABEE: They tack on $10 to each game title.
US$50 is $10 less expensive than most games on the Xbox 360, for instance.
quote:Originally posted by PUNJABEE: The ROM downloads of older games are $5 for NES, $8 for SNES and $10 for N64 games.
Any idiot with a brain can figure out where and how to download the entire past library of Nintendo games for free and play them on their PC or modded Xbox.
And yet the Xbox Live Arcade has been very successful. It seems like most people prefer "convenient" (Xbox Live Arcade, iTunes Store) over "free" (ROMs, pirated music/movies). Heck, Sony is bringing downloadable old games to the PlayStation Portable!
As an example, I bought Joust for my 360 via the Xbox Live Arcade. I haven't played any Joust clones since the 1980s! And yet, IIRC I paid 400 Microsoft Points (roughly US$5) for it.
quote:Originally posted by PUNJABEE: Next, I'm going to want Super Smash Bros melee, which supports up to four players. That's another $60.
Again, first and second-party titles like Smash Brothers will be $50. Third-party developers will be free to charge whatever they like, as usual.
quote:Originally posted by PUNJABEE: Hmm... $630 just to play super smash brothers without having to use that retarded controller they came up with.
For that US$630, you could buy a PS3 and half a game. No second (or third, or fourth) controller. It's certainly a budget system compared to the PS3, even if you buy the lesser PS3 at $500 rather than the main system at $600. And, of course, if you don't already own an HDTV, there isn't much point to buying an Xbox 360 or a PS3.
It's also interesting that you describe the controller as "retarded" without, presumably, ever having touched it -- let alone used it. I wouldn't expect you to buy it untested, of course, but reserving judgment until you have a chance to actually try it might be a good idea.
quote:Originally posted by PUNJABEE: Bugdet system - my ass. Especially considering it's nothing more than a Gamecube 1.5a than a true follow up.
The "overclocked Gekko" description of the processor is based entirely on hearsay. Nintendo hasn't released hardware specifications, and neither has IBM (who designed the processor).
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
quote:Originally posted by PUNJABEE: Nintendo was claiming the system was to be a budget system.
I agree, the price ended up a bit high (especially since the XBox core costs only $50 more)... But I don't think just because it doesn't have the graphical horsepower of the PS3 or XBox360, it should be considered a "budget system". Of course, if you feel that graphics are by far the most important barometer of the status of a system, you'll disagree. The graphics will still, by the end of the system's life (and presumably well before the end) be better than any of the prior generation's systems (XBox, PS2, GameCube).
quote: But then:
They tack on $10 to each game title.
Uh, the games are $50, the same as most PC games, or top-tier current gen games. To buy top of the line PS3 games will run you $60 (is this the case on the 360 too?).
quote: They sell extra crappy remote controllers for $60
Honestly, at this point, it isn't worth responding to you, since you've made up your mind. Unless you've played the system, you are going against all reports of the controls by calling it (repeatedly) "crappy remote controllers". And to be precise, it's $40 for the "wiimote" and $20 for the nunchuk. That subtlety makes a difference latter in this post, I promise.
quote:The ROM downloads of older games are $5 for NES, $8 for SNES and $10 for N64 games.
Any idiot with a brain can figure out where and how to download the entire past library of Nintendo games for free and play them on their PC or modded Xbox.
Yeah, a bit high. But completely in line with XBox Live Arcade, which sells Pac-Man for $5, and games like Bejeweled for $10. Also, even Apple is going to sell iPod games starting at $5.
As for ROMs, well, you ignore that minor, inconsequential fact that it's illegal to actually play ROMs, even if you own the originals(*), since fair use/copyright law in the US only allows creating them for backup/archival purposes. (* I may be a little off on this, you might be able to play them, I am not sure) In fact, I take this as a first step to companies cracking down on ROMs, since they will now be able to prove that they are being hurt financially by emulators/ROMs.
quote: ... I think the wiimote is crappy!! ...
Okay then.
quote: So lets break it down.
If I want a Revolution I have to pay: $250
And I get a crappy multiplayer game with one controller, so I have to go out and buy another for $60. That's $310 so far, not counting taxes.
Actually, you only pay $40 (and thus $290), since most of the launch party/multiplayer games (Madden a notable exception) only require the wiimote, which is $40. For most gamer-types, yes, it likely means we'll shell out the $60 for the combo of wiimote + nunchuk, but there are several games, at launch, that will not require the nunchuk. Of course, to get a wireless XBox controller, you pay $50 currently, so considering the added functionality of the wiimote (speaker, pointer/motion sensing capabilities capabilities,) the $10 isn't exactly a gouging.
quote: Next, I'm going to want Super Smash Bros melee, which supports up to four players. That's another $60. ($370). But me and my friends don't want to play with the "Nintendo Vibrator", we'd rather play with the legacy controller, which should be around $20. So that's $80 for each legacy pad. That brings us to $450, before tax.
SSB:M isn't out to next year, when the system may already have dropped to $200 in price. In any event, I recommend any "real" gamer types to invest in some GameCube/WaveBird controllers, since as of now, SSB:M will not use the wiimote. All GameCube controllers will work with the Wii. The controllers should get cheaper now that the wii release info is out, and the GameCube gets mothballed. And if you do decide to use the "classic controller" attachment, if it is $20 itself, then the total is only $60, since, once again, the nunchuk is sold separately.
quote: But wait - these legacy controllers... they don't work without the TV remote, so I have to buy 3 more TV remotes just to enable those legacy controllers. At $60 a pop, that's $180 for 3 more controllers.
Hmm... $630 just to play super smash brothers without having to use that retarded controller they came up with.
Bugdet system - my ass. Especially considering it's nothing more than a Gamecube 1.5a than a true follow up. [/qb]
Wii might be GameCube 1.1, or GameCube 3.0; the screenshots of launch games already show graphical improvement over the GameCube (which, incidentally, was about tied, barring fanboy flame wars, with the x-box as being the best, graphically of the last generation of systems)... Odds are you'll see continued improvements over time.
But really, it just sounds like you've decided to hate the wiimote without actually using it. And if you hate the wiimote (for real or imagined purposes), you're absolutely right that the system isn't a budget system: it'll be a $250 door stop. Nintendo is making the controller the centerpiece of their system, not horsepower. We'll see if it works out.
(For the record, I've been following the Wii with interest for a while, but may hold off until after the holidays to get it, since me and my wife's financial situation will be getting tighter then. However, I have no HD, and no immediate plans to get it, so the $300-$600 range of 360s and PS3s hold no interest to me.)
-Bok
EDIT: And, of course, twinky helps out.
[ September 15, 2006, 11:45 AM: Message edited by: Bokonon ]
Posted by PUNJABEE (Member # 7359) on :
Revolution games are not going to be $50. They are going to be $60.
Posted by PUNJABEE (Member # 7359) on :
quote:Wii might be GameCube 1.1, or GameCube 3.0; the screenshots of launch games already show graphical improvement over the GameCube (which, incidentally, was about tied, barring fanboy flame wars, with the x-box as being the best, graphically of the last generation of systems)... Odds are you'll see continued improvements over time.
lol are you serious? Improvement? Take a look at Metroid Prime 3, and Twilight Princess (which is a GAMECUBE game with wand enhanced useablility) screenshots:
Zelda: TP - looks like a 1st Gen PS2 game, complete with no antialiasing, resulting in 'jaggies'.
Yeah those are some AWESOME graphical improvements. Totally worth $250 for another gamecube. Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
An interesting point made on some other forums: since the wiimote can retain some user settings/other information, people who own Wiis will likely take theirs along to play on friends'.
And the games will be $50. From the horse's mouth: "While publishers are free to set their own prices for games, first-party Nintendo titles will have an MSRP of $49.99."
And SSBB likely won't be using the Wiimote capabilities, so feel free to either use GC controllers or not buy the $20 attachment (and use the shells for the wiimotes).
Most people I've seen are planning on buying 3 additional wiimotes and 1 additional nunchuck attachment, since most multiplayer games will (as noted) not use the nunchuck attachment, for a total of $390, hardly breaking the bank (note, that's a total of 4 controllers plus 2 special attachments for said controllers). A lot of people are also interested in the possbility of better bundles -- Toys R Us might have a Wii/2 controller/2 game bundle, for instance.
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
All first party games will retail for $49.99 (at most) in the States. Third-party companies can charge more, but I doubt it.
quote: The Big N confirmed that it would charge $49.99 for its new Wii games, which is $10 cheaper than the cost of typical Xbox 360 titles. (Please note that this price is for first-party games; prices have not been announced for third-party Wii games -- publishers are free to set their own prices on Wii titles.)
-Bok
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
quote:Originally posted by PUNJABEE: ...looks like a 1st Gen PS2 game, complete with no antialiasing, resulting in 'jaggies'.
Yeah those are some AWESOME graphical improvements. Totally worth $250 for another gamecube.
Do you own an HDTV? If not, you won't see the "jaggies."
Posted by PUNJABEE (Member # 7359) on :
Of course I have an HDTV.
Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
I still cannot say the name without giggling.
But it'll still be the first game system I buy since the Super Nintendo. When they started making game systems with controllers that had 20 buttons and took several hours just to learn how to play the game, video games became less fun for me. That's what the Wii represents to me--a return to games that are fun to play, using a next-generation interactive controller to boot. I can imagine the Star Wars and Harry Potter series once they get the wii treatment. Plus, I like being able to PAY for the right to use someone else's creative material for my own entertainment. 8 bucks for a game that will provide me hours and hours of enjoyment? Sounds fine to me.
Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
And not everyone has an HDTV, "of course"
Posted by PUNJABEE (Member # 7359) on :
quote:Originally posted by Brian J. Hill: And not everyone has an HDTV, "of course"
Not my problem. Theirs.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
As Brian notes, it merited asking, since HDTV owners are a small (but growing) minority of TV owners. I own an HDTV, GameCube, PS2, and Xbox 360, with plans to buy a Wii next year but no plans to buy a PS3. Given your professed disdain for the Wii, do you own or plan to buy either of the other two consoles? On the one hand you decry Nintendo for not having made what you consider a "budget" console, but on the other you decry them for not supporting 720p video output.
Your assertion that the Wii is "another GameCube" appears to be founded only on the fact that the Wii will support a maximum of 480p widescreen (16:9), like the GameCube did. In other words, the peak resolution won't increase, although all Wii games will support that resolution, which is different from the state of affairs on the GameCube -- Nintendo actually discontinued the GameCube component video cables and removed the component output from the console because they claimed that hardly anybody was using the feature. Fortunately, I got my console and cables before that happened.
Actually, that Metroid Prime 3 screenshot looks better than either of its predecessors. Offhand I can definitely see the improvement in fire effects, for example.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Whose problem? The people who have HDTVs?
It's not going to stop the vast majority of people who play games but DON'T own a HDTV, or who own a HDTV but aren't particularly bothered by the occasional jaggy in an otherwise compelling game, from buying the Wii.
Honestly, the Wii is the only console of this generation that's managed to interest me.
Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
Obviously your ideas of what makes a good game system is radically different from mine. I personally could care less about seeing every freckle on Lara Croft's forearm. I would rather have games I can pick up easily and truly enjoy playing. But I realize there are other people out there who feel differently. That's why there's a PS3 and XBox 360.
Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
PUNJABEE, I'm trying to understand the economic world you live in.
Where is it on the economic spectrum that a person can consider an HDTV to be an obvious item that "of course" they must have, and yet also consider a $250 video game console too expensive?
Maybe you're just so far over on the "rich kid" end that you're not intimidated by the PS3's price, and feel free to hate on the consoles aimed at your inferiors?
Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
Personally, I think the Wii is an awesome move on Nintendo's part. They're positioning themselves as the novelty console that becomes everyone's second console after they purchase a 360 or a PS3. It's cheap, it does weird new things, it gets attention even from non-gamers, and it doesn't attempt to compete at all with the more hardcore systems.
And the idea of working on it is just fun for developers like me. We actually get to imagine new ways to play games, which we haven't really done on a large scale since the first Dual Shock came out. My company is angling to get in on some Wii action [juvenile giggle], and I couldn't be more thrilled Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by PUNJABEE:
quote:Wii might be GameCube 1.1, or GameCube 3.0; the screenshots of launch games already show graphical improvement over the GameCube (which, incidentally, was about tied, barring fanboy flame wars, with the x-box as being the best, graphically of the last generation of systems)... Odds are you'll see continued improvements over time.
lol are you serious? Improvement? Take a look at Metroid Prime 3, and Twilight Princess (which is a GAMECUBE game with wand enhanced useablility) screenshots:
Zelda: TP - looks like a 1st Gen PS2 game, complete with no antialiasing, resulting in 'jaggies'.
Yeah those are some AWESOME graphical improvements. Totally worth $250 for another gamecube.
Bokonon said it first about games. Also you are comparing the $250 and $600 prices as if every dollar in the PS3 price is going towards POWER. This is simply not true. MOST of that money has to do with blue ray DVD's, that have MUCH greater storage capacity, but not much else. I personally dont mind having a game case that has say 3-4 DVD's in it (there has yet to be a game that big) rather then just 1 blue ray dvd game.
Punjabee, it seems like you are FIRMLY set in your opinions, which is a pity as much of your DATA in your earlier posts have been demonstratably false. If you want to arguet that the WII is not cheap enough to be more of a budget system then PS3 I think the weight of evidence is simply against you.
Your free to go buy a PS3, spend all that money, and either avoid paying money for PS3 controllers by simply using the PS2 remotes (that dont have the watered down Y/X axis functionality) or take it up the butt again and buy PS3 controllers that are more or less mimicking what the PS2 did.
Yay for sony for not caring to make the GAMING EXPERIENCE something new, but rather simply adding some more colors to the pallette, and faster frame rates.
Consoles nowadays have a life of about 4-5 years. I am perfectly comfortable waiting possibly 1 year before getting a PS3 at a cheaper price and with more titles available. Nintendo made my choice alittle easier: More fun, different kinds of fun, and at an affordable price.
I have yet to personally look at the costs of purchasing older console games online, but hey its only a plus. Sorry the Playstation can't offer anything earlier than PS1, it just hasnt been in the game as long.
If you hate the Wii for taking away from the sales of PS3, well lots of N64 customers were complaining when PS1 people bought consoles JUST so they could play FFVII. The N64 was stronger, faster, and its only draw back was that it didnt have little cinematics, eye candy everybody seemed to think made games awesome (I admit I thought so). But FFVII showed us a new KIND of game, that made the experience all the more cooler.
Nintendo for at least 2 years now has said, "We think gaming is going down the tubes because everyone is focused on better graphics and have abandoned creativity." Everyone laughs at the peripherals Nintendo puts out, bongo drums, microphones, POWER GLOVES?! But every once in awhile nintendo releases something cool Controllers with joysticks, rumble functionality, power pads, light guns, and now the cool wiimote. Sony has PLENTY of money to invest in these sorts of things but they have decided to just sorta leech of what Nintendo is doing, and it might not work this time.
Believe me, I wont be suprised if in about a year suddenly Sony releases a sensor system for a new controller, that is different enough to avoid a law suit, but similar enough that it does the exact same thing.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
A couple of nitpicks: the Power Glove wasn't a Nintendo first-party peripheral, and it's arguable whether the N64 was "stronger" or "faster" than the PS1. [Added: You're also ignoring Sony's Eye Toy peripheral, which predates the Wiimote by a good couple of years.]
I guess the question is: will the Wii be a flop like the Virtual Boy, a spectacular success like the DS, or something in between?
Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
I love Microsoft's reaction to what the other console manufacturers are doing. They're basically encouraging people to buy Wiis, figuring that once you have a Wii and a 360, you've got no reason to buy a PS3 Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
quote:Originally posted by twinky: I guess the question is: will the Wii be a flop like the Virtual Boy, a spectacular success like the DS, or something in between?
It depends on the controller. If it is everything they claim it is, then it the wii will be very successful. I'm betting that there are a whole lot of people like me who prefer a fun playing experience to plain old eye candy. If the wiimote sucks, then the system will flop.
Posted by Zeugma (Member # 6636) on :
My husband and I couldn't be less into "gaming", but he's been hanging on every snippet of news about the Wii, and just this morning was talking about pre-ordering it with overnight shipping from Amazon. We're already imagining parties involving groups of friends and Wii tennis.
I think this bodes well for Nintendo. Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by twinky: A couple of nitpicks: the Power Glove wasn't a Nintendo first-party peripheral, and it's arguable whether the N64 was "stronger" or "faster" than the PS1. [Added: You're also ignoring Sony's Eye Toy peripheral, which predates the Wiimote by a good couple of years.]
I guess the question is: will the Wii be a flop like the Virtual Boy, a spectacular success like the DS, or something in between?
N64 was 64 bit and the PS1 was 32bit. The cartridge format eliminated load times whereas the cd format of the PS1 required load times, but allowed for the perception of better graphics because of prerendered backgrounds/cinematics. N64 designers could reproduce the SAME backgrounds, but not the cinematics, typically they did not use pre rendered backgrounds because that took up alot of space and N64 cartridges did not have the space of a CD.
Therefore the N64 was stronger AND faster, but that did not equate to COMPLETELY BETTER IN EVERY REGARD.
I do not understand your point about the eye toy. The wiimote has nothing to do with it. Were you suggesting that Sony doesnt ALWAYS just leech of Nintendo? If that's your point then yes the eye toy was sony taking a simple computer cam, and adding games to it. It largely flopped because Sony failed to provide games that effectively took advantage of the new medium.
But Ill conceded THAT point
Sony: 1 failed peripheral Nintendo: 4+ failed peripherals, 6+ succesful peripherals. To say nothing of their hand held market.
Sony by and large RIGHT NOW, does not think. How can we expand what games can do? So much as, how can we make games better looking? That could easily change, and I think Sony is seeing that its current strategy is not without weaknesses.
Just thinking what Mario Party can do with the wiimote excites me beyond all reason.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
quote:N64 was 64 bit and the PS1 was 32bit.
This does not mean "better" or "faster." It was also completely irrelevant in this particular case because it's not like the N64 had more than 4 GB of physical memory, and it had no virtual memory capability since it lacked a hard drive.
quote: The cartridge format eliminated load times whereas the cd format of the PS1 required load times, but allowed for the perception of better graphics because of prerendered backgrounds/cinematics. N64 designers could reproduce the SAME backgrounds, but not the cinematics, typically they did not use pre rendered backgrounds because that took up alot of space and N64 cartridges did not have the space of a CD.
The PS1 was also capable of putting out some nice-looking (for the time) 3D backgrounds in realtime. Gran Turismo is just one example.
quote:Therefore the N64 was stronger AND faster, but that did not equate to COMPLETELY BETTER IN EVERY REGARD.
This doesn't follow from what you said, even if your "64-bit is faster than 32-bit" comment were true. As I said, it's arguable -- by no means the foregone conclusion that you made it out to be.
quote:I do not understand your point about the eye toy. The wiimote has nothing to do with it. Were you suggesting that Sony doesnt ALWAYS just leech of Nintendo? If that's your point then yes the eye toy was sony taking a simple computer cam, and adding games to it. It largely flopped because Sony failed to provide games that effectively took advantage of the new medium.
The net effect of the Eye Toy is much the same as the effect of the Wiimote's motion sensing -- it enables the detection of movements for use as game input to a certain degree. I'm not suggesting that Nintendo copied Sony, I don't think they did, but the idea of using a motion sensor to acquire input isn't new. What's novel about Nintendo's approach is that they're extending it significantly and implementing it across the entire product line.
Look, I'm interested in the Wii too -- Metroid Prime 3 could easily sell me one -- I just think that in your apparent zeal to attack Sony and applaud Nintendo, you're oversimplifying and letting a few inaccuracies creep in.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by twinky:
quote:N64 was 64 bit and the PS1 was 32bit.
This does not mean "better" or "faster." It was also completely irrelevant in this particular case because it's not like the N64 had more than 4 GB of physical memory, and it had no virtual memory capability since it lacked a hard drive.
quote: The cartridge format eliminated load times whereas the cd format of the PS1 required load times, but allowed for the perception of better graphics because of prerendered backgrounds/cinematics. N64 designers could reproduce the SAME backgrounds, but not the cinematics, typically they did not use pre rendered backgrounds because that took up alot of space and N64 cartridges did not have the space of a CD.
The PS1 was also capable of putting out some nice-looking (for the time) 3D backgrounds in realtime. Gran Turismo is just one example.
quote:Therefore the N64 was stronger AND faster, but that did not equate to COMPLETELY BETTER IN EVERY REGARD.
This doesn't follow from what you said, even if your "64-bit is faster than 32-bit" comment were true. As I said, it's arguable -- by no means the foregone conclusion that you made it out to be.
quote:I do not understand your point about the eye toy. The wiimote has nothing to do with it. Were you suggesting that Sony doesnt ALWAYS just leech of Nintendo? If that's your point then yes the eye toy was sony taking a simple computer cam, and adding games to it. It largely flopped because Sony failed to provide games that effectively took advantage of the new medium.
The net effect of the Eye Toy is much the same as the effect of the Wiimote's motion sensing -- it enables the detection of movements for use as game input to a certain degree. I'm not suggesting that Nintendo copied Sony, I don't think they did, but the idea of using a motion sensor to acquire input isn't new. What's novel about Nintendo's approach is that they're extending it significantly and implementing it across the entire product line.
Look, I'm interested in the Wii too -- Metroid Prime 3 could easily sell me one -- I just think that in your apparent zeal to attack Sony and applaud Nintendo, you're oversimplifying and letting a few inaccuracies creep in.
Funny I was going to accuse you of the same thing.
64Bit = higher polygon count Cartridge = no load times
I admitted to the weaknesses of the N64 when compared to the PS1. I think its bunk to say that if you maxed the PS1's capabilities and the N64 capabilities that you would reach a more or less identical looking picture.
I am not ANTI sony, I own a ps1 and a ps2 and when I have the money I will buy a ps3 if the new Final Fantasy turns out to be as awesome as its looking, or another game comes out that warrants a purchase IMO.
Consider this quote from Kutaragi to Reuters.
"If you asked me if Sony's strength in hardware was in decline, right now I guess I would have to say that might be true,"
Sony is realizing its strategy needs serious adaption, and I think they are fully capable of making the maneuvers neccesary. They MUST IMO.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
quote:64Bit = higher polygon count
The N64 did have higher polygon throughput than the PS1, but that didn't have much of anything to do with the processor's 64-bitness. The "bitness" of a processor is not directly related to its speed or power.
The difference in polygon throughput results from other design considerations: 1) the N64's processor was clocked faster than the PS1's, and 2) the PS1 did a its 3D graphics processing on its CPU -- its GPU handled only 2D graphics. The PS1's CPU transformed the 3D polygons such that they could be manipulated by the 2D-only GPU.
That's why the N64 had higher polygon throughput than the PS1. It had nothing to do with the N64's CPU being 64-bit.
I'm not interested in debating the larger point -- that is, which one "looked better," whatever that means -- I was just trying to point out the inaccuracy in your assertion that the N64's "64-bitness" made it "stronger and faster."
quote:Consider this quote from Kutaragi to Reuters.
"If you asked me if Sony's strength in hardware was in decline, right now I guess I would have to say that might be true,"
I've heard it already. It certainly parallels what I've heard from one of my best friends, who works at EA's "boutique" studio in Montreal and is working on Army of Two for the 360 and PS3. I don't think this generation is going to go nearly as well for Sony as the last two did, and I definitely think Sony should have left Blu-ray out and made the PS3 ~$200 cheaper. However, Sony could easily still sell the most consoles this generation; the catch is that anything less than 80-100 million units, that is, less than PS1/2 territory, will be deemed a "failure."
The only major difference between Sony's game plan here and Microsoft's is the addition of Blu-ray on Sony's part. I think that of the three companies, if the Wii doesn't break sales records the way the DS did, Microsoft stands to come out the best. They can have the best of all worlds: casual/retro games, robust developer tools and support leading to greater ease of development, and stunningly gorgeous modern games.
If the Wii breaks the market wide open the way the DS appears to have done on the handheld side, though, all bets are off. That's certainly possible.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
twinky: I never once said "64 bit = faster AND better looking!"
I simply said 64 bit = higher potential for looks
CARTRIDGE = Faster.
But you are right there isnt much point in arguing semantics.
Your other statements in your latest post I can agree with.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
You did say "64 bit = higher polygon count," which is not true. And this:
quote:I simply said 64 bit = higher potential for looks
Is still not true. Again, being 64-bit has nothing to do with "power," "speed," or quality of output in this context. The "bitness" of a processor determines how much memory (physical + virtual) it can address; a 32-bit processor can address up to 4 GB of memory, whereas the limit for a 64-bit processor is much higher.
It may seem like a quibble, but it's a very common misinterpretation, and companies often use it as a marketing bullet point. Apple did it with the PowerPC 970, for example, which in addition to being pretty fast for its time, was a 64-bit processor -- but the operating system it shipped with and almost all of the applications were still 32-bit. "64-bitness" didn't matter. It's only now, in 2006, that 64-bit computing is becoming relevant to more than a tiny, tiny minority of users.
In other words, we don't actually disagree about very much, I'm just trying to clear up what appears to be a misunderstanding. Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
quote:Originally posted by Zeugma: My husband and I couldn't be less into "gaming", but he's been hanging on every snippet of news about the Wii, and just this morning was talking about pre-ordering it with overnight shipping from Amazon. We're already imagining parties involving groups of friends and Wii tennis.
I think this bodes well for Nintendo.
It sounds like you are exactly the market Nintendo has been trying to reach out to. With the Wii they're not so much trying to take a bite out of the already established "gamer" market as much as bringing casual gamers or non-gamers.
I think the degree to which this works will determine the Wii's success or failure far more than competing for Xbox or Playstation customers, many of whom already have their minds made up.
--Enigmatic
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by twinky: You did say "64 bit = higher polygon count," which is not true. And this:
quote:I simply said 64 bit = higher potential for looks
Is still not true. Again, being 64-bit has nothing to do with "power," "speed," or quality of output in this context. The "bitness" of a processor determines how much memory (physical + virtual) it can address; a 32-bit processor can address up to 4 GB of memory, whereas the limit for a 64-bit processor is much higher.
It may seem like a quibble, but it's a very common misinterpretation, and companies often use it as a marketing bullet point. Apple did it with the PowerPC 970, for example, which in addition to being pretty fast for its time, was a 64-bit processor -- but the operating system it shipped with and almost all of the applications were still 32-bit. "64-bitness" didn't matter. It's only now, in 2006, that 64-bit computing is becoming relevant to more than a tiny, tiny minority of users.
In other words, we don't actually disagree about very much, I'm just trying to clear up what appears to be a misunderstanding.
I stand corrected! Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
You were totally right about the N64's higher polygon throughput, though. I had to look that one up. Posted by Eldrad (Member # 8578) on :
quote:Originally posted by PUNJABEE: Nintendo was claiming the system was to be a budget system. ... Hmm... $630 just to play super smash brothers without having to use that retarded controller they came up with.
Bugdet system - my ass. Especially considering it's nothing more than a Gamecube 1.5a than a true follow up.
Besides the fact that all of your price points are exaggerations to try to prove your point, Brian Hill pointed something out:
quote:Originally posted by Brian J. Hill It depends on the controller. If it is everything they claim it is, then it the wii will be very successful. I'm betting that there are a whole lot of people like me who prefer a fun playing experience to plain old eye candy. If the wiimote sucks, then the system will flop.
If you had read anything about the Wii (which, judging by your price exaggerations, you haven't), you'd see that all reports from the gaming press are saying that the Remote is as good as Nintendo claims, as opposed to the "crappy" controller you have absolutely no experience with.
Posted by PUNJABEE (Member # 7359) on :
quote:Originally posted by Eldrad: If you had read anything about the Wii (which, judging by your price exaggerations, you haven't), you'd see that all reports from the gaming press are saying that the Remote is as good as Nintendo claims, as opposed to the "crappy" controller you have absolutely no experience with.
Exaggerations? Are you cakefilled?
$250 for a console $40 for half a controller $20 for the other half $20 to $25 for the legacy pad $60 games
Those aren't exaggerations. Those are stated PRICES. I went back and looked at my previous calculation, and it seems I added in one too many $60 controller combos, so yeah subtract $60 from the $630 I stated.
$570 is still not a good price. Considering what you get, it's not the best bang for your buck.
Now, to the nitwits who claim I'm rushing out to buy a PS3 or that I claim it's better - please quote where I actually said that. Your "DATA" on that is incorrect.
I'm not saying it's too expensive, I'm saying it's NOT WORTH IT. How much I spend on my TV or whatever - that has ZERO to do with this discussion, The price point of the Revolution has everything to do with the fact that the Revolution - as it stands - is not worth the cash they are asking for it, especially because Nintendo claimed it was going to be a 'budget' system.
Yeah the system itself is budgeted well - but they rape you on the additional peripherals that are REQUIRED TO ENABLE MULTIPLAYER. The machine was NAMED the Wii because Nintendo touted multi as the selling point. "Wii play together, but not without our extra controllers that are really expensive."
And what do they do? Give us one controller and charge $60 for another? Are you telling me that if Microsoft or Sony broke their controllers in half, and charged $40 for the left half, and $20 for the right - you wouldn't be jumping down their throats? Bull.
Don't even try to think Nintendo is aiming for the 'non-gamer' demographic like thatone person who crapped thier pants at the Tennis game (which is a glorified demo, fyi). Nintendo isn't targeting them - they are targeting morons that will be willing to shell out $5/$8 or $10 for games they:
A. Already have in cart form B. Suck C. They currently play on their PCs
The same morons that are willing to shell out $180 more just for controllers.
It's not worth the price when looking at the big picture, and that's not even considering that it's a piddley 'upgrade' system to the Gamecube.
Whoever mentioned that Metroid Prime 3 looked way better than their predecessors needs to gouge his or her eyes out. You obviously have no idea what the hell you're talking about. That screenshot is of the NextGeneration videogame, running on a NextGeneration videogame console - all the while looking like it's current generation relative.
That's not something to be proud of - it's something to be worried about.
HD is not someting that is 'gaining popularity'. Remember when "Available in Stereo" was 'gaining popularity'? Or Maybe when "Broadcast in color" was 'gaining popularity'? It isn't something of little importance, display and resolution is changing and more and more companies are adopting the HD standards over standard definition. Don't try to tell me it's of little importance when you're the one that isn't informed.
Nintendo claimed that "no one plays videogames online" so the Gamecube had little to no Online Capability. Well I guess that's a good thing for the Big N, I mean HELL.. Xbox Live was a complete bust for Microsoft, and Sony's online enabled games rarely have anyone playing them.
Online play is extremely popular not even counting the PC gamer, and it bit Nintendo in the ass.
Now Nintendo is saying that "no one plays games in HD" and that is complete and total BS. They removed the progressive scan port from their later run of Gamecubes because "no one used it". Had they supplied and ADVERTISED their ProgressiveScan component cables and not sold them or exorbitant prices - more people would have wised up and bought them.
This no-HD thing is going to bite them in the ass as well, but hey at least that one girl is gonna be happy playing tennis with 3 other bored people on her little 32 inch TV. Posted by Altáriël of Dorthonion (Member # 6473) on :
To me it will always be the Revolution.
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
Still wrong. Wii (first-party games) are $50, tops.
And many games will require only the wiimote, for $40, which is $10 LESS than the X-Box 360 wireless controller, yet the Wii controller, even without the nunchuk has a fair bit of functionality in it.
Some games requiring only the wiimote: Wii Sports, "My First Wii" (or whatever it gets translated into here in the US), WarioWare, Excite Truck, GT Pro, and I assume Big Brain Acedemy.
Sure, most of us wil lget the $60 combo, but it's only $10 more a technologically inferior controller on a competing console.
Do I wwish the system had been 199 or 220, with two sets of controllers, and Wii Sports? Sure. But theis isn't quite so bad.
Once again, your argument hinges on the wiimote being crappy, despite nearly all the reviews claiming it works great, with a variety of games (sports, racing, adventure, puzzle, quirky [Elebits, and Katamari Damacy type game]).
HD is an inevitablility, I agree. But we won't see a majority of US consumers with one in their house until 2011, give or take a year. You can quote me on that. At that point, though, it will be just about time for Nintendo to come out with the Nintendo Wii ii, err, 2.
-Bok
EDIT: And once again you ignore the fact that the Virtual Console games are:
A. Easier to get and play than setting back up your old NES/SNES, and blowing in the cartridges B. Hey, some people have different tastes, and it isn't Nintendo's fault if people pay $5 for Root Beer Tapper C. Completely legal
Posted by solo (Member # 3148) on :
The strength of the Canadian dollar is finally having more of an impact. Nintendo Canada has announced the price of the Wii at $279.95 and games at $59.95.
(:
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Unless you have one of the few multiplayer games that can use the nunchuck attachment and have more than 2 people over to play that game, you only need one or two nunchuck attachments. Subtract $40.
And as noted, you haven't listened. The price of each game is $50, that's straight from nintendo's site. In fact, several of the prices you cite don't seem to be from nintendo, so they might not be correct.
$250 for a wii, a wiimote, and a nunchuck attachment. $120 for another three wiimotes. $20 for another nunchuck. $50 for that multiplayer game you like. That's $420 for a great setup for multiplayer games with up to three friends. Yes, if you want to do certain games or do even more you might need to spend more, but for the games most people will be really wanting to play, the new, multiplayer games for the wii that mostly don't use the nunchuck attachment, they can spend $420 and be ready to play. Neither of the other next-gen consoles are nearly as cheap to set up for 4 players and a new multiplayer game.
NIntendo isn't saying its an affordable console for those who want to do anything and everything with it, they're saying its an affordable console for the typical user, outlined above, which it is.
Posted by pfresh85 (Member # 8085) on :
Nintendo's whole goal has been to produce a unique console experience that is at a price that isn't terribly outside the range of an average consumer (read a non-hardcore gamer). I think they've done that quite well. Their games for this coming generation of consoles are cheaper than the competitors by $10. Their controllers are cheaper for the basic unit (Wiimore for $40 compared to $50 for a wireless Xbox 360 controller), and still competitive for a "complete" unit ($60 for Wiimote and nunchuck attachment). Their console is $150 less than the good version of the Xbox 360 (and any real gamer will tell you the $300 Xbox 360 version is mostly a joke) and quite a bit less than either version of the PS3. I think they've done a good job at being competitively priced and offering a very unique experience. I personally can't wait for the Wii to be out. Of course then again, I've loved Nintendo all my life. Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Punjabee I know its only $10, but you are flat our WRONG about Nintendo produced Wii games. They are $49.99, third party games will charge as they see fit, but Nintendo makes MANY of its games so thats not that BIG of an issue.
But $10*X (X=# of games) if you buy say 2 games with your wii thats $20 you are overcharging.
Why don't you do the math for a PS3 and 3 controllers and 1 game when they actually announce the prices for that. While your at it congratulate Sony for putting more than 2 controller ports in their console this time. Realistically 7 years after Nintendo started doing it with great success.
Posted by pfresh85 (Member # 8085) on :
BlackBlade, as of now, third parties are charging $49.99 as well. Activision announced it for sure for Marvel Ultimate Alliance, and EA has more or less echoed the sentiment. I don't see any third parties charging more than that, which is a definite good thing. Posted by PUNJABEE (Member # 7359) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: Punjabee I know its only $10, but you are flat our WRONG about Nintendo produced Wii games. They are $49.99, third party games will charge as they see fit, but Nintendo makes MANY of its games so thats not that BIG of an issue.
But $10*X (X=# of games) if you buy say 2 games with your wii thats $20 you are overcharging.
Why don't you do the math for a PS3 and 3 controllers and 1 game when they actually announce the prices for that. While your at it congratulate Sony for putting more than 2 controller ports in their console this time. Realistically 7 years after Nintendo started doing it with great success.
You're not reading. I'm not saying the Ps3 is any more cost effective, as no absolute prices have been set. Please get that through your skull, if it helps - read that last part twice.
The Revolution, (not the PS3, not the Xbox360, not the DS, not the PSP) The REVOLUTION is not worth the price.
Read that one again please.
Posted by PUNJABEE (Member # 7359) on :
quote:Originally posted by PUNJABEE: ow, to the nitwits who claim I'm rushing out to buy a PS3 or that I claim it's better - please quote where I actually said that. Your "DATA" on that is incorrect.
I'm not saying it's too expensive, I'm saying it's NOT WORTH IT.
I just want to quote myself for those of you who still haven't realized I'm not talking about this thing being 'expensive' or 'not expensive'.
Posted by PUNJABEE (Member # 7359) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bokonon: EDIT: And once again you ignore the fact that the Virtual Console games are:
A. Easier to get and play than setting back up your old NES/SNES, and blowing in the cartridges B. Hey, some people have different tastes, and it isn't Nintendo's fault if people pay $5 for Root Beer Tapper C. Completely legal
Once again you miss the point of why I mentioned the VC.
The virtual console is being aimed at these 'hardcore' gamers you mentioned, not the casual gamer. I doubt TennisGirl up there or any other gamer under the age of 20 has ever heard of The Guardian Legend or Terranigma. The reason for the VC - which will supposedly eventually include TG16 Genesis and other games from other companies - is for gamers who grew up on the stuff to purchase them and play them again.
The thing Nintendo hasn't counted on is the digital age - People that grew up on the games they are gouging most likely know how to run an emulator and download the ROM for it, negating your point of digging out the NES and SNES. There are a few ignorant people who don't know how to run ZSNES or FCEUltra, but not many.
The 2nd, and less advertised nature of the VC is for Nintendo/Sega/THC/Treasure/Square/Capcom/Midway and other companies to claim they are still 'making money' on these 20 year old games - therefore still enforcing their copyright on the games - protecting them from becoming abandonware.
No one but extreme fanboys, and idiots are going to pay $5 for Excitebike when a ROM is a download away. The prices are inane and way more than they should be for these older games, which will not even be portable. They will be hardcoded to each individual Revolution. You won't be able to download Super Mario Bros 3 and take it to Bills house to show him.
The legality of it has no place in argument because I'm not telling you its legal, I'm telling you it HAPPENS.
Posted by Architraz Warden (Member # 4285) on :
quote:Originally posted by PUNJABEE: Exaggerations? Are you cakefilled?
Now, to the nitwits who claim I'm rushing out to buy a PS3 or that I claim it's better - please quote where I actually said that. Your "DATA" on that is incorrect.
Don't even try to think Nintendo is aiming for the 'non-gamer' demographic like thatone person who crapped thier pants at the Tennis game (which is a glorified demo, fyi).
This no-HD thing is going to bite them in the ass as well, but hey at least that one girl is gonna be happy playing tennis with 3 other bored people on her little 32 inch TV.
Yeesh, who took a leak in your Cheerios this morning? Oh yeah, Nintnedo... Little more consistently virulent than I'm used to at the 'rack.
Anyways, as to Wii. The last console I owned was a Sega Saturn of all things. Honstly, I've thought about getting a new console, and looking at the next gen consoles the contenders are the Wii and the Xbox 360. Why would I consider them? Well, their price tags, while I'd call neither budget, didn't make me go temporarily blind with sticker shock like the PS3 did. I'll choose a system based on entertainment, and while I was (and still am) skeptical about the Wiimote as a controller, if it does indeed work as billed and have the games to support it, if I buy a console it very well may be the Wii.
Bottom line: I (and at least a few others) will buy a console for something new and inovative. The Wii has promised this, and if it isn't a completely empty promise it'll do well. Besides, if I want graphics, game variety, or standard interface controls, I'll stick with my PC thank you very much.
Posted by Eldrad (Member # 8578) on :
quote:Originally posted by PUNJABEE: $570 is still not a good price. Considering what you get, it's not the best bang for your buck.
I'm not saying it's too expensive, I'm saying it's NOT WORTH IT. How much I spend on my TV or whatever - that has ZERO to do with this discussion, The price point of the Revolution has everything to do with the fact that the Revolution - as it stands - is not worth the cash they are asking for it, especially because Nintendo claimed it was going to be a 'budget' system.
Yeah the system itself is budgeted well - but they rape you on the additional peripherals that are REQUIRED TO ENABLE MULTIPLAYER. The machine was NAMED the Wii because Nintendo touted multi as the selling point. "Wii play together, but not without our extra controllers that are really expensive."
And what do they do? Give us one controller and charge $60 for another? Are you telling me that if Microsoft or Sony broke their controllers in half, and charged $40 for the left half, and $20 for the right - you wouldn't be jumping down their throats? Bull.
Whoever mentioned that Metroid Prime 3 looked way better than their predecessors needs to gouge his or her eyes out. You obviously have no idea what the hell you're talking about. That screenshot is of the NextGeneration videogame, running on a NextGeneration videogame console - all the while looking like it's current generation relative.
That's not something to be proud of - it's something to be worried about.
HD is not someting that is 'gaining popularity'. Remember when "Available in Stereo" was 'gaining popularity'? Or Maybe when "Broadcast in color" was 'gaining popularity'? It isn't something of little importance, display and resolution is changing and more and more companies are adopting the HD standards over standard definition. Don't try to tell me it's of little importance when you're the one that isn't informed.
Nintendo claimed that "no one plays videogames online" so the Gamecube had little to no Online Capability. Well I guess that's a good thing for the Big N, I mean HELL.. Xbox Live was a complete bust for Microsoft, and Sony's online enabled games rarely have anyone playing them.
Online play is extremely popular not even counting the PC gamer, and it bit Nintendo in the ass.
Now Nintendo is saying that "no one plays games in HD" and that is complete and total BS. They removed the progressive scan port from their later run of Gamecubes because "no one used it". Had they supplied and ADVERTISED their ProgressiveScan component cables and not sold them or exorbitant prices - more people would have wised up and bought them.
This no-HD thing is going to bite them in the ass as well, but hey at least that one girl is gonna be happy playing tennis with 3 other bored people on her little 32 inch TV.
Other people have already pointed it out - you keep repeating that Nintendo is "raping" people on peripherals, when the only part you really need is the Remote ($40) as opposed to the 360's controller ($50). Or the fact that the 360 and PS3 require a hard drive to be worth purchasing - that's another $100 right there, whereas the Wii has enough internal flash memory for saves, and SD memory cards will cost $40 for 1 gig (as opposed to $40 for the 360's 512 meg memory card - but hey, that doesn't matter when you've already paid an extra $100 for the hard drive since Microsoft clearly isn't "raping" their consumers). Then there's the fact that the console itself is cheaper than both of the competitors, and Nintendo has a number of tried and proven compelling series; Microsoft has nothing outside of Halo (and that's not first party), and Sony has little in comparison. Oh, and hey - first party games, at the very least, are $10 cheaper. Combine that with the fact that third party developers are saying that it'll cost between a third and half the development cost of a 360 or PS3 game to make one for the Wii because so much of the programming has remained the same, and it's quite likely that most, if not all, second and third party games are going to be $50 as well. Between the games and the far cheaper price point (if you were to buy comparable packages for all three systems), I don't understand how you can rant about Nintendo "raping" the consumer and not say the same, moreso really, of Microsoft and Sony (especially Sony, with them forcing Blu-ray down your throat).
Nintendo has also suggested that they'll be offering packages with an additional remote packed in to the launch system for (I think) an additional $20, though I'll have to look for that information again. On top of that, Nintendo's packaging in a game for the first time since the Super Nintendo. Sure, it may not be much - but it's more than the competition.
I'm also not sure how you can possibly claim that Metroid Prime 3 doesn't look better than predecessors. Even at this stage in its development (as it's been pushed back to 2007), it still looks crisper, with more attention to finer details, than even Echoes did on the Gamecube. Given that it hasn't even been fully developed yet and it's a first generation game, that's quite impressive. If it's "something to be worried about," you're not playing games for the right reasons anyway - you've already shown you're far more concerned about the highest end graphics possible on HD anyway, never mind whether the game is any good.
Your comparison of HD to online gaming isn't even appropriate. Nintendo was wrong then; they're not now. Online gaming was big before 2001; HD penetration is still less than 10% of the market, and it's impossible to say how many of those people actually play video games. The technology for HD is still too expensive really to break the market; that obviously wasn't the case with online gaming. Xbox Live has done well, yeah, but Sony's online service has actually lost money, so even there, Nintendo was kind of right (though I still think wrong overall, as it alienated some third party developers). That "one girl" with the 32" television you're talking about is virtually all of the television market, and people who own televisions like that make up the vast majority of video gamers; HD is still a niche thing, again primarily due to the cost. You're comparing apples and oranges, and it just doesn't work.
Posted by Eldrad (Member # 8578) on :
quote:Originally posted by PUNJABEE:
quote:Originally posted by Bokonon: EDIT: And once again you ignore the fact that the Virtual Console games are:
A. Easier to get and play than setting back up your old NES/SNES, and blowing in the cartridges B. Hey, some people have different tastes, and it isn't Nintendo's fault if people pay $5 for Root Beer Tapper C. Completely legal
Once again you miss the point of why I mentioned the VC.
The virtual console is being aimed at these 'hardcore' gamers you mentioned, not the casual gamer. I doubt TennisGirl up there or any other gamer under the age of 20 has ever heard of The Guardian Legend or Terranigma. The reason for the VC - which will supposedly eventually include TG16 Genesis and other games from other companies - is for gamers who grew up on the stuff to purchase them and play them again.
The thing Nintendo hasn't counted on is the digital age - People that grew up on the games they are gouging most likely know how to run an emulator and download the ROM for it, negating your point of digging out the NES and SNES. There are a few ignorant people who don't know how to run ZSNES or FCEUltra, but not many.
The 2nd, and less advertised nature of the VC is for Nintendo/Sega/THC/Treasure/Square/Capcom/Midway and other companies to claim they are still 'making money' on these 20 year old games - therefore still enforcing their copyright on the games - protecting them from becoming abandonware.
No one but extreme fanboys, and idiots are going to pay $5 for Excitebike when a ROM is a download away. The prices are inane and way more than they should be for these older games, which will not even be portable. They will be hardcoded to each individual Revolution. You won't be able to download Super Mario Bros 3 and take it to Bills house to show him.
The legality of it has no place in argument because I'm not telling you its legal, I'm telling you it HAPPENS.
Your logic is flawed because there's no evidence to back up your point. Nintendo is doing because it's proven successful for Microsoft; with Nintendo's much larger, more popular back catalog of games, it stands to reason that they, too, will make money off this.
Posted by PUNJABEE (Member # 7359) on :
quote:Originally posted by Eldrad: Your logic is flawed because there's no evidence to back up your point. Nintendo is doing because it's proven successful for Microsoft; with Nintendo's much larger, more popular back catalog of games, it stands to reason that they, too, will make money off this.
Do you know why the LiveArcade has been successful? Because of online play or scoreboards. Hyper Street Fighter 2 is doing moderately well because it is a classic fighter that still has a following but it supports online matches which is a big thing because it's harder to find an arcade to play Street Fighter II than ever before..
I seriously doubt the Revolution is going to have Super Mario Bros Online.
It seems that you're uninformed logic is the one that's flawed. Move along.
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
You know, Live Arcade has ALSO been successfu because they've been selling Pac-Man and Time Pilot for 5 bucks a pop. Even though everyone but the most ignorant can just run an emulator on it.
And if you don't think "Tennis Girl" hasn't heard of Mario, Zelda (even Donkey Kong or Sonic), then you severely underestimate the brand recognition of them.
But whatever, you just want to flame and rant against the Wii. Have fun.
*Moves along*
-Bok
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Now you are arguing that you never said the Wii was too expensive, now its all about how stupid the virtual console is. I am ignoring this thread for a bit, there does not seem to be a reason to post.
Posted by PUNJABEE (Member # 7359) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: Now you are arguing that you never said the Wii was too expensive, now its all about how stupid the virtual console is. I am ignoring this thread for a bit, there does not seem to be a reason to post.
Like I said before: You're not reading.
I was going to quote myself, but you probably wouldn't read it anyway.
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
Well, I'll quote you then.
quote: $570 is still not a good price. Considering what you get, it's not the best bang for your buck.
That kind of statement is probably why people might assume you think the PS3 or XBox 360 is a better value. If it's not the best bang for your buck, what is? (From reading your posts I'd guess downloading ROMs illegally would be. Or a gamecube if you just want to play Smash Bros.)
It also amuses me how you accuse others of not reading when you continued to quote $60 per game after 4 people corrected you, including a link to the official price quote. But meanwhile, we all get that you don't feel the Wii is worth it for you to buy. I'm not sure why anyone cares, though.
--Enigmatic
Posted by PUNJABEE (Member # 7359) on :
Peole try to say that the Revolution games are going to be $50. That's first party. What great first party games do we have?
Mario Zelda Metroid And to a lesser extent - Mario Party. Maybe even Kirby.
That's five franchises. Five games. Maybe I should have said:
OTHER games that are DIFFERENT from NINTENDO games will be $60. Usually I assume that the people that are trying to inform me that I am incorrect are capable of thinking outside the box.
Apparently I was incorrect in that assumption.
Posted by pfresh85 (Member # 8085) on :
PUNJABEE, 3rd party games are $50 as well. You're just outright wrong.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Are you telling me that if Microsoft or Sony broke their controllers in half, and charged $40 for the left half, and $20 for the right - you wouldn't be jumping down their throats? Bull.
Are you psychic? You're not even saying you doubt anyone would do this - you're flat out telling someone that they would.
Calm down. The act was tiresome last week.
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
quote: OTHER games that are DIFFERENT from NINTENDO games will be $60.
Link? Or a shred of evidence to support this?
Or how about where you said that Nintendo was the one charging more for the games, not the third party developers?
quote:Nintendo was claiming the system was to be a budget system.
But then:
They tack on $10 to each game title.
Many people have said 3rd party developers will charge what they want. I fully expect some of those games to be less than $50, some to be more than $50. It doesn't make your statements about what NINTENDO will charge for games any less wrong.
--Enigmatic
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
In other news, is a Sunday release date normal for new consoles? I haven't really paid much attention to the exact launch dates of the last few. Is the idea so that stores can sell them midnight Saturday night?
It just seems odd to me to release something like this at the end of the weekend, rather than a Thursday or Friday so people could play with their new console all weekend.
--Enigmatic
Posted by pfresh85 (Member # 8085) on :
I don't know that anybody but PUNJABEE might care to look, but here's my original source for the 3rd parties = $50 comment. This was the first I heard it mentioned, later it seemed that EA echoed the price. So yeah.
"IGN Wii: As a final wrap-up, is the software price of $49.99 we were told a few months back still accurate, and will Marvel make it for day one of launch, or just the "launch window" timeframe? Also, is the price something that Nintendo is encouraging?
Karthik: We're still $49.99 for the Wii, yes. As far as day one of launch, do we actually have a day one date from Nintendo? "
EDIT: Nintendo launched the GameCube and the DS on a Sunday. I'm not sure about non-Nintendo launchs though.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
You forgot the Smashbros franchise Punjabee, and DonkeyKong, I could sit and think of others but I'm not that interested.
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
Thanks for the info, pfresh. I have a GC and a DS, but I got them both well after the respective launches. I was surprised when I checked my calendar and saw the 19th was a Sunday.
--Enigmatic
Posted by pfresh85 (Member # 8085) on :
I wasn't sure about the DS (but someone had told me that). I remember the GameCube launch though. I waited out all Saturday at Wal-Mart so that I was first in line to get one. I'm a nerd like that. Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
Why the heck is PUNJABEE being such a moron? I mean, he just keeps saying that the games are going to be 60 dollars. Everyone else keeps saying they are 50, and then he says that he heard that third party developers can charge whatever they want. So obviously they are going to charge more? When has that ever happened? It doesn't. Unless you are counting games like DDR and Guitar hero, where it comes with a special controller, so it has to be more expensive for them to make money.
And he adds up all the things you will buy for the Wii and says it is alot of money. You buy extra stuff for every system. Add up all the things from another system. In it's life you will probably buy like, 10 games. So, when you look back and see that you spent nearly a thousand dollars, yeah it is going to seem like alot of money. A gaming console costs alot.
Posted by pfresh85 (Member # 8085) on :
Just posted this to my blog. Hooray for spending money.
"So Nintendo announced the Wii's price. It's a little higher than expected but they are throwing in Wii Sports. The controller (or at least the complete version with Wiimote and nunchuck) is also a little higher than I desired. I guess it's to be expected though. This is the breakdown of my purchase come November 19th. Man, it's going to be a long wait until then.
Nintendo Wii with 1 Wiimote + nunchuck and Wii Sports: $249.99 2nd Wiimote: $39.99 2nd Nunchuck attachment: $19.99 Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess for Wii: $49.99 Marvel: Ultimate Alliance for Wii: $49.99 Tax: $33.82 Wal-Mart Giftcard: -$50
Total: $393.77
Ouch. My wallet."
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
This Penny Arade comic might resonate:http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/09/15
It is inoffensive, but be warned about checking out other Penny Arcade strips if you can be offended by sufficiently crude words.
Posted by pfresh85 (Member # 8085) on :
The jewel-encrusted chalice comment is the one that makes me laugh. Posted by Eldrad (Member # 8578) on :
quote:Originally posted by PUNJABEE:
quote:Originally posted by Eldrad: Your logic is flawed because there's no evidence to back up your point. Nintendo is doing because it's proven successful for Microsoft; with Nintendo's much larger, more popular back catalog of games, it stands to reason that they, too, will make money off this.
Do you know why the LiveArcade has been successful? Because of online play or scoreboards. Hyper Street Fighter 2 is doing moderately well because it is a classic fighter that still has a following but it supports online matches which is a big thing because it's harder to find an arcade to play Street Fighter II than ever before..
I seriously doubt the Revolution is going to have Super Mario Bros Online.
It seems that you're uninformed logic is the one that's flawed. Move along.
Did you even read my post above that, let alone have any reasoning behind how posting scores and such on LiveArcade makes it successful from a business standpoint? It doesn't. The games they sell on LiveArcade are the real moneymaker; sure, subscription fees are going to help, but a majority of that money has to go to supporting servers.
Also, quit being a dick. Hatrack isn't known for it, and it's getting old.
Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
I agree Eldrad, he is being a dick.
Posted by Papa Janitor (Member # 7795) on :
Knock it off, folks. No personal attacks.
Posted by ChevMalFet (Member # 9676) on :
As someone who is interested in HD output… I think having an HDTV is a great excuse to avoid the PS3 and XBox 360. Both are using full HD res as a market draw, blind to any actual advantage. I would much rather have seen 720p or 480p games that consistently sported more polygons/pixel and deeper textures than having to stretch the hardware and software to 1080i/p where it is weaker.
Four years or so from now the next generation of consoles will be in a much better position to utilize HD; not only that the development houses will be better at utilizing the extra resolution and the (necessary) multi-core CPUs.
Posted by PUNJABEE (Member # 7359) on :
quote:Originally posted by Eldrad:
Also, quit being a dick. Hatrack isn't known for it, and it's getting old.
lawlz
I didn't know being more informed than the common dipstick constitutes being 'a dick'.
Sorry, but I can't help knowing what the hell I'm talking about. Move along.
Posted by Vadon (Member # 4561) on :
I didn't like the math that PUNJABEE used, so I decided to look into it m'self to see the costs. It's cheaper. Far cheaper.
Wii Package (Wii, remote, and sports) = $250 (Common knowledge) SSB:M = $30 ( link ) 3 Controllers for multiplayer = $12, $13, and $13( link and they will be compatable link) Nunchuck for controller = $20 (Common knowledge)
Total cost for Punjabee's set up = $338
That's like... Really quite cheap. So while I'm at it, why don't I get a second Wiimote to have more multiplayer on the wii games?
Total cost = $378
Huh, now why don't I get say... two launch titles. I like Rayman and Zelda... $100.
Total Cost = $478
Well then, to round it off I think I'll get some of my old favorites. Let's say 6 NES games at 5 bucks a pop, that's $30 more.
Total cost = $507 For the Wii, 2 Wiimotes, 1 Nunchuck, 2 Launch Titles, SSB:M, 3 GC controllers, Wii Sports, and 6 NES games.
I think that's well worth it.
But then again, the value of things is subjective. Personally, I like the ideas people are coming up with for the zany remote.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
To depart from the foodfight:
I'm a longtime Sony loyalist, and the PS3 will have my dollars unquestioningly when the system launches, but the Wii has my attention. Nintendo has always done interesting, innovative things with their systems, redefining or outright defying industry expectations, preferring to invent their own formulas for success rather than follow a cookie cutter pattern for what works.
I'm convinced that the Wii will be successful in the short term, but it could also tank hard in the medium to long run: it all depends on the accuracy of the controller, and how the uniqueness of the controller is utilized.
Wiith that iin miind, I'm going to be waiting until at least a month post-launch before considering purchasing one. Hopefully in that time I'll have an opportunity to play one, and the first flurry of reviews will be helpful.
Posted by pfresh85 (Member # 8085) on :
Here's a cool video from the Japanese press conference. It shows off a lot of different games (some of which of course won't come out in the US).
Oh, and on another related topic, what do you guys think of the Mii channel? It seems pretty neat to me.
Posted by Eldrad (Member # 8578) on :
quote:Originally posted by PUNJABEE:
quote:Originally posted by Eldrad:
Also, quit being a dick. Hatrack isn't known for it, and it's getting old.
lawlz
I didn't know being more informed than the common dipstick constitutes being 'a dick'.
Sorry, but I can't help knowing what the hell I'm talking about. Move along.
Punjabee, you're not kidding anyone here, either with your misrepresentation of facts or your condescending attitude. Papa Janitor already said to knock it off, and that 'dipstick' and 'move along' crap was exactly what I was talking about.
[ September 17, 2006, 01:06 PM: Message edited by: Eldrad ]
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
The biggest problem for Sony with the pricing is Christmas I think. Well, maybe not the biggest, but the most apparent.
Since I was a kid, game consoles are something you ask your parents for, for Christmas. Your average parent can't afford a $600 system PLUS the cost of all the extras. Your average individual can't afford it, regardless of season.
Here's another question: Regardless of the new games that are coming out, is the PS3 really enough of a generational advancement in technology and visuals to justify its price? If not, then I'll snap up someone's used PS2 when this comes out, and I'll be happy for it. Blu-ray is still unproven, and you combine that with the fact that only SOME dvds will be released on Blu-ray and it doesn't seem worth the investment to me. To say nothing of the supply issues they seem to be having already.
Considering video games sales are what have been keeping Sony in the black for the last couple years, the PS3 could make or break more than just their video game line. They might not be able to survive a failed system, not enough to poor millions into a PS4.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Thanks for the link pfresh. The Conducting game looks like a lot of fun, so does baseball, and all the sports really. Wii Cooking doesn't look like fun, who wants to buy a game that let's you do a chore virtually? They going to release a Wii Bathroom Cleaning expansion pack?
What is the Mii channel? Is that like the Sega Channel?
Posted by PUNJABEE (Member # 7359) on :
quote:Originally posted by Eldrad: [QB] Punjabee, you're not kidding anyone here, either with your misrepresentation of facts or your condescending attitude. Papa Janitor already said to knock it off, and that 'dipstick' and 'move along' crap was exactly what I was talking about.
lawls2.
Move along please.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
You see, there's one thing you have to consider in all this discussion: you're talking about the cost of buying the console for yourselves.
If I'm buying a game console for myself, of course I'm conscious of how much it costs, and can control myself to the point of deciding what to buy, if anything at all. For that reason, the last console I've ever owned was the Atari 2600.
But if you have a young child that, without any hope of convincing otherwise, must have a Wii/XBox/PS3/Whatever the day it comes out or he'll never speak to you again, you might groan at the final price but you folks will pay it anyway. Granted, it might be the only Christmas gift he might get that year, but isn't it worth the price to see the satisfaction and joy on his face when he unwraps it?
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
If I had whined a pleaded for a Six HUNDRED dollar machine (barring games and controllers) when I was a kid at Christmas my parents would have flatly told me no, and would've done their best to make me happy with something else.
Even that sounds horrible. Sometimes you just have to tell kids "no" and that's it. For all their complaints, they WILL get over it, or they can at least wait until the price comes down to something reasonable.
Nighthawk, your hypothetical assumes that $600, regardless of being unreasonable or not is FEASIBLE. It isn't, for millions of families with demanding children.
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
lawls? I'm shocked he hasn't said "n00b" yet.
Posted by PUNJABEE (Member # 7359) on :
quote:Originally posted by Swampjedi: lawls? I'm shocked he hasn't said "n00b" yet.
Well I wouldn't want to be considered geek or a nerd, Swampjedi.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: Nighthawk, your hypothetical assumes that $600, regardless of being unreasonable or not is FEASIBLE. It isn't, for millions of families with demanding children.
That's not feasible for me, and I'm a working adult with relatively few expenses. When PS4 comes out, people will have to mortgage their home to buy one. Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Nah, they'll just take out a loan and pay for it like they would a car.
Hope the local credit union is offering great rates on PS4 loans in 2014.
Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
Uh, PUNJABEE, I think you should listen to yourself and move along. I'm sorry that you think you know what your talking about, but no one is buying it. So move along.
Posted by Earendil18 (Member # 3180) on :
For a fun and simplified version of this threads' pointless 2nd half, click here
Posted by Eldrad (Member # 8578) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: If I had whined a pleaded for a Six HUNDRED dollar machine (barring games and controllers) when I was a kid at Christmas my parents would have flatly told me no, and would've done their best to make me happy with something else.
Even that sounds horrible. Sometimes you just have to tell kids "no" and that's it. For all their complaints, they WILL get over it, or they can at least wait until the price comes down to something reasonable.
Nighthawk, your hypothetical assumes that $600, regardless of being unreasonable or not is FEASIBLE. It isn't, for millions of families with demanding children.
That's why most people believe that Sony shot themselves in the foot with the PS3. One of the biggest costs in manufacturing the console comes from the Blu-Ray addition, which as Lyrhawn pointed out, is still unproven. Even the 360 is cheap by comparison, and the Wii (relatively) cheaper still. Between this launch line-up and the Wii's price point, Nintendo's going to dominate this holiday season (especially combined with the wild success of the DS/DS Lite), if not this round of consoles.
Also, Punjabee, you wouldn't listen to anyone's rebuttal of your arguments earlier in the thread, and you're not even adding anything coherent to the thread. Let the rest of us discuss without you derailing the thread.
Posted by andi330 (Member # 8572) on :
I seriously doubt my parents ever spent a TOTAL of $600 on ALL of my Christmas presents. Let alone just one.
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
quote:Originally posted by Vadon: I didn't like the math that PUNJABEE used, so I decided to look into it m'self to see the costs. It's cheaper. Far cheaper.
Wii Package (Wii, remote, and sports) = $250 (Common knowledge) SSB:M = $30 ( link ) 3 Controllers for multiplayer = $12, $13, and $13( link and they will be compatable link) Nunchuck for controller = $20 (Common knowledge)
Total cost for Punjabee's set up = $338
That's like... Really quite cheap. So while I'm at it, why don't I get a second Wiimote to have more multiplayer on the wii games?
Total cost = $378
Huh, now why don't I get say... two launch titles. I like Rayman and Zelda... $100.
Total Cost = $478
Well then, to round it off I think I'll get some of my old favorites. Let's say 6 NES games at 5 bucks a pop, that's $30 more.
Total cost = $507 For the Wii, 2 Wiimotes, 1 Nunchuck, 2 Launch Titles, SSB:M, 3 GC controllers, Wii Sports, and 6 NES games.
I think that's well worth it.
But then again, the value of things is subjective. Personally, I like the ideas people are coming up with for the zany remote.
it's actually $20 cheaper Vadon. The wiimote and a nunchuk are included in the box. Also, PUNJABEE probably meant Super Smash Brothers: Brawl, the nw game coming out next year at $50. However, GameCube controllers should still be compatible with the game.
-Bok
Posted by Vadon (Member # 4561) on :
Oh, well, my mistake. Thanks for the help.
But I guess it still balances out. 20 dollars off for the nunchuck plus twenty on brawl.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bokonon:
quote:Originally posted by Vadon: I didn't like the math that PUNJABEE used, so I decided to look into it m'self to see the costs. It's cheaper. Far cheaper.
Wii Package (Wii, remote, and sports) = $250 (Common knowledge) SSB:M = $30 ( link ) 3 Controllers for multiplayer = $12, $13, and $13( link and they will be compatable link) Nunchuck for controller = $20 (Common knowledge)
Total cost for Punjabee's set up = $338
That's like... Really quite cheap. So while I'm at it, why don't I get a second Wiimote to have more multiplayer on the wii games?
Total cost = $378
Huh, now why don't I get say... two launch titles. I like Rayman and Zelda... $100.
Total Cost = $478
Well then, to round it off I think I'll get some of my old favorites. Let's say 6 NES games at 5 bucks a pop, that's $30 more.
Total cost = $507 For the Wii, 2 Wiimotes, 1 Nunchuck, 2 Launch Titles, SSB:M, 3 GC controllers, Wii Sports, and 6 NES games.
I think that's well worth it.
But then again, the value of things is subjective. Personally, I like the ideas people are coming up with for the zany remote.
it's actually $20 cheaper Vadon. The wiimote and a nunchuk are included in the box. Also, PUNJABEE probably meant Super Smash Brothers: Brawl, the nw game coming out next year at $50. However, GameCube controllers should still be compatible with the game.
-Bok
They are, testers found smash bros to be too hard to play with the new Wii controller, so either use game cube controllers or the old school one you can buy that works with wii.
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
quote:Originally posted by PUNJABEE:
quote:Originally posted by Swampjedi: lawls? I'm shocked he hasn't said "n00b" yet.
Well I wouldn't want to be considered geek or a nerd, Swampjedi.
Video game thread, that's a forgone conclusion.
Edit to actually add something:
For someone who owns a good deal of GC games and controls, I'm very excited that I can use them with the Wii (if I understand correctly). I need to preorder mine! Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
You can connect up to 4 GameCube controllers, and all GC games should be compatible, according to reports.
-Bok
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
That just makes my day. I do notice that GC controllers aren't necessarily compatible with Wii games, which makes sense.
I have to find a bunch of people to play this with - shouldn't be too hard. Might need a bigger TV though... Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
(And it's been linked twice in the thread already.) Posted by Earendil18 (Member # 3180) on :
Wait, was that the third one back there? Posted by Puppy (Member # 6721) on :
Aw! I haven't actually read this thread in a while, so I missed it I just remembered being really annoyed, and I thought that would lighten the mood ...
Posted by Earendil18 (Member # 3180) on :
Actually, mine was technically the first "link" since the other one just pasted the url. Do I get a cookie? Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
BB, sorry I missed youyr post earlier. Actually, I find it skeptical that testers found the controls hard. The game just hasn't been in development long enough to get to real testing. From what I've read, the lead developer/designer made the decision on his own, from the start.
Which isn't a bad thing.
-Bok
Posted by Hitoshi (Member # 8218) on :
How many fo the launch games are actually going to coem out at launch though? And don't say all of them, that's always a lie. Remember the N64 launch? They promised ten or twenty games and we got two. Yes, two. And they were insanely expensive to boot.
And the third console in a row not to have a Mario title at launch. Sad...
Posted by Eldrad (Member # 8578) on :
There are supposed to be upwards of 30 launch titles for the Wii that will be on sale with the system on day one. Also, if I recall correctly, N64 games were $50, just like any others. There may not be a Mario title at launch, but it's due to come out early next year if any of the rumblings are to be believed, and besides, Zelda is a much more engaging franchise than Mario (at least for me).
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
Old Mario = way better than any Mario from N64 on. Mario64 makes me nauseous.
-pH
Posted by pfresh85 (Member # 8085) on :
I agree, pH. I love Super Mario Bros. 3 and Super Mario World. Those are awesome games. I find Mario 64 so so at best (not fun at worst). Mario Sunshine was a slight step up in my opinion, but it's still not great. I'd prefer they go back to side scrolling games. A Mario with graphics and unique gameplay like Donkey Kong Jungle Beat would be awesome in my opinion. On that note, I love New Super Mario Bros. on the DS. It's a great game, although over too soon (even with getting all the collectable coins and getting access to all the worlds/levels).
Posted by Hitoshi (Member # 8218) on :
quote:Originally posted by Eldrad: There are supposed to be upwards of 30 launch titles for the Wii that will be on sale with the system on day one. Also, if I recall correctly, N64 games were $50, just like any others. There may not be a Mario title at launch, but it's due to come out early next year if any of the rumblings are to be believed, and besides, Zelda is a much more engaging franchise than Mario (at least for me).
Sorry to burst your memory bubble, but the games at launch were a staggering $80. N64 games were usually $60 or even more because of the cartridges used. Wiki it, or at least look into it more.
Anyway, this guy articulates why I'm cautious and reserved about the Wii. And he also proves my point about the outrageous N64 game prices.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Party]](graemlins/party.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Hat]](graemlins/hat.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)