Looks fantastic, though.
April NPD: Despite GTA, Wii Outsells PS3, 360 Combined
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
Codemasters were VERY VERY VERY stupid to release GRID the same time GTA IV was released. I only noticed it was released after I came across it in my local PC world.
It looks well, but it's 30fps and plays like ass.
The reason the Wii sells so well is because girls buy it, young and old. Nintendo have created a completely neutral console for both sexes. I'm not saying girls don't play Xbox, I know some do, but the Wii appeals to them more.
Gender roles morphing and all that.
Gender roles morphing and all that.
I want Banjo & Kazooie back.
You'll get it, soon.
I'm kinda pissed off Microsoft bought rare and fecked it up, cnuts.
Microsoft didnt feck up RARE, RARE fecked microsoft over. In fact Microsoft has been throwing money at them till no kingdom come, yet all RARE seems to come up with these days is a piss poor Perfect Dark and feckin Viva Pinata, pathetic really. Real waste of money on microsofts behalf.
Rare went to shit long before MS came along.
Perfect Dark was decent enough. Not as good as the original though.
The problem is a lot of the team fecked off when there was talk of this MS deal (a lot of them went on to do Timesplitters), so the unique quality went with them.
I don't see anyone doing that, least not any more so than fans of the other two consoles.
That's fair enough, but I think you clearly aren't picking the right games. As for this "Gimmick" thing, it's clearly not a gimmick either. Otherwise you'd have to call every console released "gimmicks" because they all have attempted something slightly new and different, the Wii just takes it a major step in a new direction.
The upcoming Wii exercise game looks interesting.
Perfect Dark Zero was (for me) the most dissapointing game ever. I was such a massive fan of Goldeneye and the original Perfect Dark I was gutted it was so shite.
The Timesplitters games were very good though.
Snake, Rattle and Roll and RC Pro-AM were great NES games.
They shoud sue Nintendo for a blatant rip off of their product.
I don't know where the patents lie, even for the Wiimote. Amiga as a company has long gone, killed by the suicidal chicken head.
Here's a prototype Dreamcast controller. Look familiar?
Here's a prototype Dreamcast controller. Look familiar?
Just a tad!
The power glove could sense location and could be waggled to a degree, thing with those they were all ad ons beyond the basic controller, the Wiimote is the Wii's control mechanism, every game uses it as a first choice, that is why it changes things
Which is why it is a fad, a gimmick. I do not believe that it is as suitable a universal control mechanism as a standard controller is, but we'll see.
So was the N64 controller a gimmick with it's analogue stick and rumble pack? What about the sixaxis? What about the sixaxis with rumble feature?
If it were a peripheral add-on, then maybe, but it's the controller for a system, so I fail to see how it's a gimmick.
Sixaxis is a gimmick. Rumble is not a control mechanism is it? It's rather a feedback mechanism.
I feel that the Wiimote is a gimmick in the sense that I do not see it having a lifetime as a concept as a standard controller further than Nintendo's next machine (if that. It's an interesting debate as to what the hell they are going to come up with next). If it isn't a gimmick, then we would/will see this technology incorporated into TV remotes (the metaphor is perfect for this), which I have not seen happen yet and there is no sign of it happening, which is strange. You should also see PC games supporting it (very easy to do), but to my knowledge they are not.
As an HCI concept, I simply do not feel that it can be applied universally to all applications and be the best fit across the board. The technology of motional and directional control will be used in the future, I have no doubt about that, but not as something universally used, but rather universally available when it makes sense.
I don't think it a fad, gimmicky was said of the DS and its touch screen but that's been a colossal hit and I can't see Nintendo not including a touch screen in it's next hand held as will whatever replaces the PSP, Nintendo are the most innovative games company
Firstly, one has to understand why the Wii has this, but this is a different debate. If the Gamecube had sold in larger numbers than it did, then I don't think that you would see it as a standard controller and the Wii would be quite different.
As I said, why is this not being used in TVs by now? What is it? Well, it's basically a mouse for an application where there is no surface. It's, just like a mouse, a pointing device. Is a pointing device a universal gaming peripheral? Well, no, it does have its uses, but it's not beneficial in the majority of circumstances, no controller has been.
I'll take Redlambs on over this, as it's similar to another argument on which we agree, and that is the single vs multiplayer experience. Here we both agree that the majority of games today concentrate far too much on the online multiplayer aspects to the detriment to the single player experience. It's something artificially forced due to the fashion of the time. Do all gameplay styles suit multiplayer? Well, no, of course they do not, but many developers now focus upon this, even when not suited to the style, just because it's expected.
The same can be said with this pointing device. It's forcing a control mechanism on applications that do not necessarily suit it. In a way, this is not a bad thing, as it could with experimentation open up new gameplay avenues, but HCI is a well defined concept nowadays and while adapting gameplay to a control mechanism may well work does not mean that it wouldn't work better with a more standard mechanism; the joystick is a classic control mechanism, and even in this age of multi button controllers, still works better than anything for the majority of game types - if you have the space for one. In most games, you really are not pointing at things at all.
Even Nintendo allow you to plug a classic controller into the Wiimote. It's too finickity. You need too many other bits to add on to it, the wheel, nunchuck, the classic controller, the gun, the reason these exist actually show up the lack of universality of the controller itself. You end up with multiple bits of plastic lying around.
Is the Cell Broadband Engine (silly name I know) not innovative technology? Because you can bet your bottom dollar that in 10 years time, more gaming systems, no, in fact, computer systems and all electronic systems, will be influenced by it rather than the Wiimote.
I'm not sure about the Wiimote being developed due to the Gamecube, the DS followed the phenomenally successful game boy advance, new control mechanism, two screens, Nintendo innovate.
I don't know why it's not being used for tv right now, I can see the immediate advantage for the sky boxes and the likes to be controlled by one, because of that I'm certain it'll happen. There's been a bit of news on Apple and Microsoft are working on controllers and I sure Sony are too, give it time, it'll become universal.
The gun is a bit of plastic housing as is the wheel, you need neither, the classic controller is for older games (since the Wii can run gamecube titles and the Virtual store), anything new is designed for the Wiimote, the nunchuck is an integrated part of that.
I don't know why it's not being used for tv right now, I can see the immediate advantage for the sky boxes and the likes to be controlled by one, because of that I'm certain it'll happen. There's been a bit of news on Apple and Microsoft are working on controllers and I sure Sony are too, give it time, it'll become universal.
The gun is a bit of plastic housing as is the wheel, you need neither, the classic controller is for older games (since the Wii can run gamecube titles and the Virtual store), anything new is designed for the Wiimote, the nunchuck is an integrated part of that.
What new gameplay does it bring to games? That's what matters
I sometimes get this feeling with GTA4. There are many areas you can explore that are quite intricate and obviously designed for a purpose. However, in single player mode, there's nothing you can do except explore them. And wish that there was actually something to do there...
It might be what matters at the end of the chain, but with no hardware, there is no software. You can all name the developers of the games, but how many of you can name those engineers who made the hardware that those games were developed upon? It's a silly argument to be totally honest, if it was just about the software, then we might as well put the Wiimote on an Amiga or a SNES, as I've already pointed out. Content is all well and good, but the content can only be delivered to the ultimate strength of the hardware it runs upon. The only reason that the Wii is in its current state hardware wise is beause of the delicate state Nintendo found themselves in financially after they spent a lot of money developing the N64 and the Gamecube. They were lucky not to go the way of SEGA. IMO it would have been preferable.
This is a problem with many games today, but trying to get a game like GTA fully interactive is very complicated.
wii is fun with friends. The novelty runs out. If you want to buy wii fit wait for all the parents to buy it and then sell it on ebay because they never use it. I'm sure there will be plenty going cheap. Im not saying there wont be people using it reguarily, because there will. But alot of people will buy it on the wave of excitement. And then sell up quick when they find their wave quickly dies down.
I wanted to buy guitar hero III on 360 just after i played it on my mates on wii. I had only just bought GTA IV and have an 8 week trip around europe in 3 weeks so decided against it. glad i did because as fun as it is, I got a bit tired of it after more then an hour of playing.
I like conventional consoles because i can sit back relax and control a world with my fingers... only moving my hands when im trying hard to get around a corner :P .
I like the wii for its party game style... but glad i dont own one because i could only ever play it with friends.
Oh and the graphics are shit on the wii.
I wanted to buy guitar hero III on 360 just after i played it on my mates on wii. I had only just bought GTA IV and have an 8 week trip around europe in 3 weeks so decided against it. glad i did because as fun as it is, I got a bit tired of it after more then an hour of playing.
I like conventional consoles because i can sit back relax and control a world with my fingers... only moving my hands when im trying hard to get around a corner :P .
I like the wii for its party game style... but glad i dont own one because i could only ever play it with friends.
Oh and the graphics are shit on the wii.
Every new generation of chip brings more power, it only matters so far as what it allows the software to do, the ps3 has a shiny new chip, if all it does is the same game which look a little shinier it's not added anything to gameplay
There was never any danger of them going the way of SEGA, the handhelds makes sqillions so they were comfortable, the wii is what it is as they spent their R&D time on getting the wiimote right
Firstly, chips don't shine.
And the Cell is not a normal chip. However, of course in itself a chip doesn't add to gameplay, and neither does a controller. It's the software that provide the gameplay, and it's the hardware that facilitates what the software wants to accomplish. This is very important. BTW, the Wiimote was basically done in the Gamecube era, but that's what the Wii is, a 200 quid Gamecube, so I suppose that the Wiimote is a good fit with the 10 year old hardware that natively hosts it.Also, I'm not exactly sure to what you mean by gameplay, are you referring to the core mechanics, or using the term in the wider sense? If the former, then again, neither a chip nor a controller actually add to that; if the latter then both can do so, as that would include aspects such as immersion into the game, making the experience believable or making you feel that you are part of it, but this includes a wide range of elements from control, to intelligence, to physics, to realistic graphics and sound. The point is that there are many games that run on the XB360 and the PS3 that simply can not be done on the Wii, it simply is not powerful enough. There is however nothing on the Wii that can not be done on a PS3 equipped with a PS Eye - but then we are collecting extra bits of plastic again.
The point is that there are far more things that could be done on the Wii without its unique control mechanism than can be done because of it. Wiifit will probably be the best selling title in the lifetime of the Wii, yet it needs a Joyboard. I'll say it again, if this control mrchanism was so revolutionary, you would not need joyboards, steering wheels, gun cases, classic controllers, nunchucks, etc. You still need a guitar to play Guitar Hero. It's all well and good saying that the Wii is revolutionary because of the Wiimote being standard, but it's not universally standard is it? If it was, you wouldn't need these extra bits of plastic. You can stick the Wiimote up your arse if you want, but it's still not accurate teledildonics, you need a special suit for that.
I completely disagree here, you are assuming Nintendo made any kind of loss on the GCN, which is not true at all.
You keep calling it a pointing device, but as proven it is much more than that. As for T.V applications, well the problem goes way back to the situation of it being an add-on, not a standard.
It's nothing like the single vs multiplayer debate. I agree with what you are saying about basically shoe-horning controls, but what genre(s) can you honestly say the remote can't be used for?
Again, I completely disagree with what you are thinking here. Yes it is forcing it on developers, but how is that a bad thing? It's not just a pointing device and can be used in any number of ways, surely the whole point in the evolution of gaming is to find new and innovative control mechanisms? That's the very basic of game design!
You have to get over this "pointing device" scenario, because that's extremely simplifying the technology there.
For a start, the classic controller/GCN controller add-ons are for backwards compatability. Sony and MS may not see that as such a huge thing, but Nintendo obviously do.
As for the add-ons, they are optional, the remote functions perfectly fine without them. I fail to see your point there.
Firstly, chips don't shine.
That's completely wrong and something I'll argue with you over.
Gameplay starts and ends with controls, it's what links the player with the game and is the be all and end all of game design. Controller design is extremely important, hell Shigeru Myamoto has repeatedly stated it's the first thing he thinks about when both designing a new console and a new game.
For a start, what game can't be done on a Wii. You are assuming it's all about graphics, and again that's a subject we vastly differ on.
As for the Eye, how can that be compared to the Wii remote? Also, it's an add-on not the main controller, so game support will always be limited, and just like the new rumble sixaxis, can be considered more of a gimmick than the remote.
Again, you are missing the point of any of these attachments, and how can you bring the board into it? That's a peripheral designed to work with a certain product, just like the Eye and Lightguns of the PS3. It has nothing to do with this discussion.
It's a three dimensional pointing device, just the same as a mouse is a two dimensional one. Remove the IR bar and what is it? A sixaxis. What it has over the sixaxis is that IR bar. You can use a sixaxis as a two dimensional pointing device, just the same as a mouse. The difference with the Wiimote is that it knows where you are in the Z.
In your opinion maybe, but you should try some of the AAA single player titles.
GH3 is a love it or hate it title. As for GTA4, it's decent enough but vastly overhyped and in my opinion, gameplay wise it's second-best to the Wii's No More Heroes.
Fair enough. That's why by the end of summer I'll have all three.
You've obviously never played some of the decent games then.
How can the graphics of games like Zelda and Mario Galaxy be called shit?
It's relevant in that probably the best selling title on the Wii will be one that does not use the standard controller. You keep on saying that the Wiimote is a defining aspect of the Wii because it's standard, yet, titles such as Mario Kart and Wiifit will not use it without an added extra.
How can the graphics of games like Zelda and Mario Galaxy be called shit?
In fairness, they are nothing that can not be done on PS2, certainly not XBox. I've asked you this before, show me a Wii game that looks as good as God of War II.
True, but you are still over-simplifying it by calling it a pointing device.
The Sixaxis was a last-minute rush design because of the situation with Nintendo, so Sony must have thought they were missing a trick.
What extra does Mario Kart need?
As for Wii fit, again how can that be brought into play? You might as well bring in Guitar Hero 3 while you are at it.