Wii "hardware basically a GC" says Miyamoto

[thrustbucket]

A month ago I was in this forum trying to understand why everyone thought the Wii would be so exciting beyond the Wiimote. I clearly stated multiple times that the Wii was just the same hardware as a GC only slightly tweaked, so it didn't make sense to me why you were paying $250 for a controller. Most of you didn't believe me that you'd be re buying game cubes.

For saying these things I was crucified on mount Mario by a mob of angry fanboy's saying I was blaspheming, lying, and trolling.

So when I came upon this (http://www.joystiq.com/2006/10/04/wii-hardware-is-basically-a-gc-says-miyamoto/) today I just wanted to make sure you all knew that your lord and savior Miyamoto has confirmed my claims.

Before y'all haul out the stake and sticks to roast me, I just want to state that I'm not trolling. I just feel that I deserve to point out to you that my opinion on what the Wii is, was fact, not theory. I'm not system bashing here, because anyone that can admit they know they are spending $250 for a new controller, and is fine with it, is cool in my book.

[Mr Unoriginal]

What thread are you talking about? Almost everything I've been reading about the Wii both here and elsewhere has stated that it won't be much more than a GCN. This is no big shock.

[Ikohn4ever]

this just in....water is wet

[shipwreck]

I think this is basically a cry out for him to get lambasted by the Wii fans again so he can stand by his "I'm not trolling" stance and say that Wii fans are unreasonable and attack him for no reason. :roll:

[Vinny]

You are wrong because _____(insert blind fanboy statement here)____.:lol:

[Dr Mario Kart]

We've known it is the same basic architecture with a power boost. That doesnt mean it is exactly a Gamecube. That would be like saying that the Pentium 4 is just an overclocked Pentium 2.

[PhoenixT]

this just in....water is wet


We'll I'll be a son of a.....it IS WET!


To OP I think most folks are pretty much ok with it being a suped up gamecube its the way you control the games that has most people interested in it. Most Wii lovers have faith in Nintendo based off the most recent success of the DS which took a slightly more powerful gameboy advance and gave it touch screen technology that changed the gameplay fairly radically(when implemented properly and not as some gimmick). Their hoping and betting on a similar high this time around with the Wii and it does certainly look promising in that aspect.

[botticus]

Before anyone gets carried away with this on either side of the argument, please keep the context of the interview in mind:

- Looking at the titles that have been announced so far, the pace at which games are being released is comparable to the N64 and GC.

Miyamoto:
The hardware is basically a GC. We’ve upgraded our development tools to new versions but, you can still use GC programs as they are. With that in mind, I thought we could remake GC titles for the Wii and modify them to work with the Wii remote so that they’re more fun to play.

- By making GC titles work with the Wii remote, they’re going to be reborn.

Miyamoto:
Yes. However, you can still find some GC titles at second hand shops being sold so I don’t think we’ll be able to sell them at full price but because the development funds itself have been taken care of, we should be able to sell them at a moderate price. If we can release these GC remakes for the Wii quickly then we’ll be able to release more games from the third parties.

- So does that mean it’s possible that that’s what Nintendo will do?

Miyamoto:
Yes, relatively thinking. It should be an interesting test to release the new Zelda game on both the Wii and GC.

- I see. So that’s what it’s about.

Miyamoto:
For a brief period of time, some of the staff said, "The Wii has better capabilities than the GC so lets improve the graphics." But Zelda fans aren’t really looking forward to a improved version of the game and are only looking for it to be fun so, I said all we have to do is make something fun for both the Wii and GC. Recently, we finally reached the conclusion that, "the Wii isn’t a console seeking for the next generation graphics." Of course, there are games that seek to have good graphics so you’ll see the titles split up that way.

- So you mean the Wii isn’t seeking to become the most powerful console but instead, its value is in a different area.

Miyamoto:
Yes. I’ve been saying "you can play together with your family" as if it’s a dream all this time but, it’s been more or less impossible to achieve until now. However, I think it will be fairly possible with the Wii. There aren’t any consoles that can achieve such a thing.
Yes, the GC is "basically a GameCube," but Miyamoto is hardly discussing the technical capabilities of the system, he's commenting from the development standpoint.

[thrustbucket]

Ok dudes, I've been out of this forum for a while, I didn't know everyone had finally come to terms on what the hardware was. Last I was here, many of you thought you were really going to see an obvious improvement in horsepower.....

Also, since I wrote this Joystiq has updated that this was an old interview, taken out of context slightly as pointed out by botticus.

Well obviously this is no news now, the peeps here seem to understand and accept what I was, back then, trying to say......please disregard then, sorry for troubling you.

[elwood731]

I actually agree with you, OP. The Wii doesn't look much better than the GC, which is a huge dissapointment. They can be a step behind the X360/PS3 without being a generation behind. I was hyped for a Wii at launch, but more and more I am losing that hype as it seems likely to fall in price soon. I will wait for at least a $50 price drop before I invest in one. And no, I'm not a Nintendo basher. I own a DS and love it.

[shipwreck]

- By making GC titles work with the Wii remote, they’re going to be reborn.

Miyamoto:
Yes. However, you can still find some GC titles at second hand shops being sold so I don’t think we’ll be able to sell them at full price but because the development funds itself have been taken care of, we should be able to sell them at a moderate price. If we can release these GC remakes for the Wii quickly then we’ll be able to release more games from the third parties.

They are going to be re-releasing GC games with Wii controls and charging moderate prices for them? I think that will be a tough sell, but I guess if they can get people to buy them, go for it.

[jkam]

Nothing for nothing but Nintendo actually mentioned something about a bazillion years ago that their next console would not be about better graphics. It amazes me how many people still don't understand that. I will be getting one at launch and I do understand that in raw processing and power it won't equate to a 360 or a PS3 nor do I give a shit. I'm paying $250 (well less than that through k-mart clearances and gamestop trade-ins) for a slightly souped up gamecube. I personally just want to give something different a chance but it is already quite obvious that a lot of people are pretty close minded to new things. Will it be the most amazing thing ever? I have no fucking clue. I'll at least give it a chance though. The best part is that you mock people for spending $250 on a newer gamecube and then you'll turn around and spend $400-$600 based on better graphics. What else are you getting (gaming related) for your money?

[thrustbucket]

Nothing for nothing but Nintendo actually mentioned something about a bazillion years ago that their next console would not be about better graphics.

Understood, understood, understood, understood. For the 14th time - That wasn't my point. Never was. My point was they literally are repackaging gamecubes. They didn't do R&D on anything but a new controller.

A month ago, a number of people in this forum tried to tell me that the processing power (not just graphics) would be 'substantially better' than game cube. I'm glad to see that misconception is cleared up.

[Plinko]

Understood, understood, understood, understood. For the 14th time - That wasn't my point. Never was. My point was they literally are repackaging gamecubes. They didn't do R&D on anything but a new controller.

A month ago, a number of people in this forum tried to tell me that the processing power (not just graphics) would be 'substantially better' than game cube. I'm glad to see that misconception is cleared up.

Please support EITHER of those two statements with any sort of actual source.

[Plinko]

Before anyone gets carried away with this on either side of the argument, please keep the context of the interview in mind:

Yes, the GC is "basically a GameCube," but Miyamoto is hardly discussing the technical capabilities of the system, he's commenting from the development standpoint.

Thank you for actually putting some sense into this, as opposed to those who act like 1up.com and cherry-pick select information from an article.

[botticus]

Please support EITHER of those two statements with any sort of actual source.When he uses subjective terms like "substantial," he doesn't need to source. Because for him substantial could mean three times more powerful instead of 1.5 or 2 times more powerful or whatever the unnofficial specs are. Nevermind that they managed to squeeze something more powerful than a GameCube into something the size of a DVD box set that uses far less energy. The interview regarding their design considerations there is really quite interesting, though I have a feeling the developers being interviewed by their boss are sweating bullets throughout.

(If interested, the interviews regarding hardware design can be found here: http://ms.nintendo-europe.com/wii/?site=v1_01.html&l=enGB - first two in particular)

[foltzie]

I think this is basically a cry out for him to get lambasted by the Wii fans again so he can stand by his "I'm not trolling" stance and say that Wii fans are unreasonable and attack him for no reason. :roll:

Wouldnt that by definition be "trolling"? I mean it would be a higher grade of trolling, kind of like Dvorak in the computer world, but ultimately still trolling.


To earnestly address TB, again, it is not news that the Wii is "just an upgraded" or "basically" a Gamecube. Add in the extra RAM, whatever new chip instructions were included (if any), the faster clock speed, buit in WiFi internet, built in wireless reciever for Wiimotes, the Wiimote itself smaller chip size, and lower power consumption and poof thats your Wii from a hardware perspective. From a software perspective the Virtual Console and the Wii Channels arent built into the Gamecube and would probably require a hardware addon to function.

Actually, after listing that, thats a lot of things that are not included in the Gamecube, which if added on after the fact wouldnt be used by a large part of the current installed userbase.

It is simply not news. You got "toasted" because you fully discount the Wiimote contorl setup, the Virtual Console, and the RAM/Clock performance increase as having any value at all and rather focused on the Wii being an extension of the Gamecube hardware as if the items included in the Wii would sell if they were added onto the Gamecube. SEGA tells the story with regards to console expansions.

If you do not like the system offered under the name Wii, dont buy the damn thing. However, do not begrudge those of us who are willing to do our choice and after playing the Wii at a Fusion tour stop I'm still sold on the concept.

[jkam]

Understood, understood, understood, understood. For the 14th time - That wasn't my point. Never was. My point was they literally are repackaging gamecubes. They didn't do R&D on anything but a new controller.

A month ago, a number of people in this forum tried to tell me that the processing power (not just graphics) would be 'substantially better' than game cube. I'm glad to see that misconception is cleared up.

They did in fact do R&D on the console. How do you think they got it to be so small? How will it be low on power consumption? How quick will the load times be? The virtual console? The sensor bar? The Miyamoto statment is twisted in the title of the article's title. He is speaking in terms of development of games. I'm not saying the Wii is a powerhouse but it will be a bit more powerful than the cube. Now again I ask you the question what are you getting (gaming related) for your $400-$600 dollars if you buy another console? If you are going to complain about paying $250 for a new controller at least explain why my other choices are so much more revolutionary for the money I am spending. I would pay $250 for a new controller made by Nintendo. At least it won't break down in a year and even if it did it would be replaced under warranty.

[javeryh]

The best part is that you mock people for spending $250 on a newer gamecube and then you'll turn around and spend $400-$600 based on better graphics. What else are you getting (gaming related) for your money?

Besides graphics (which better immerse you in the experience like new controls also will) I already know that with at least the 360 I get an unbelievable online component that I don't think will be matched by either the Wii or PS3. Xbox Live is so slick and functional and integrated into everything. Anything less will feel like a step back.

That said, I'm a huge Nintendo fan and if I need to buy a souped up GC with wacky controls to play the next Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Pikmin, etc. then so be it (although the "extra" $50 is making me hesitant for exactly the reason that its basically a GC and those can be found new for $70 with a game and extra controller right now - it's a total pantsing by Nintendo and I just don't understand it). Otherwise, they have yet to disappoint. I'm not so sure I see the value in a PS3 yet but I'll definitely be picking one up down the road when the price gets a little cheaper.

[jkam]

Besides graphics (which better immerse you in the experience like new controls also will) I already know that with at least the 360 I get an unbelievable online component that I don't think will be matched by either the Wii or PS3. Xbox Live is so slick and functional and integrated into everything. Anything less will feel like a step back. I'm not so sure I see the value in a PS3 yet but I'll definitely be picking one up down the road when the price gets a little cheaper.


Good call...you forgot one thing...you have to pay for it.

[Dezuria]

I personally think that this generations graphics are good enough. I don't need hyper-realism to have fun. My PC can do that anyway. :)

[ryanbph]

with the other systems (ps3/wii) claiming free online play, we will have to wait and see if xbox still charges. IMO, we will see from all 3 companies micro transactions that will cost us more in the long run then the $50 or so for xbox live.

[Strell]

God damn.

The argument doesn't get stupid unless you start to bitch about how the graphics won't match the 360/PS3.

Nintendo has said that forever. For-f*cking-ever.

No one, not even Nintendo themselves, are arguing this.

The problem is that apparently people can only measure a new generation of system by their graphics, when clearly that is not the case here.

You go into the Wii understanding well beforehand that the graphics aren't going to be mindblowing. If you somehow ignored the controller and the other aspects of the system in leui of only the graphics, you f*cked up. Pure and simple.

That is the price of admission. That's always been the price of admission, and the fact that people continually are bringing it up like it's not a decayed horse carcass is amazing.

I'm curious. Do some of you people buy a Snickers, and then bitch when it's not sour?

[shipwreck]

That is the price of admission. That's always been the price of admission, and the fact that people continually are bringing it up like it's not a decayed horse carcass is amazing.

Just curious, can I get a decayed horse carcass for $199?


(I don't even understand where this argument is going. Somehow we're arguing about the price of Xbox Live now. It's so confusing here.)

[XboxHardcore.com]

Let's just say a certain SOMEBODY was at a certaing LOCATION playing with a certain piece of HARDWARE.

This SOMEBODY can confirm that the graphics aren't next-gen.

;)

[foltzie]

Just curious, can I get a decayed horse carcass for $199?

If you ask the state DNR or DoT they will probably let you have one for free if it turns up as roadkill.

[Zoglog]

some of you guys are more fanboy than miyamoto is. That scares the shit out of me

[Dr Mario Kart]

I'd still buy it for $250 if it had exactly the power of the Gamecube. I understand that they have to have a new console in order to get support for the Remote, otherwise they'd just release it as a Gamecube Accessory.

The only legs that the system has is the Remote concept. If you wouldnt buy it as an accessory for the Gamecube in that fictional scenario, then you really shouldnt get a Wii.

[shipwreck]

The only legs that the system has is the Remote concept. If you wouldnt buy it as an accessory for the Gamecube in that fictional scenario, then you really shouldnt get a Wii.

That's bluntly honest. I don't think we'll see that adorning Nintendo billboards anytime soon though.

[foltzie]

The only legs that the system has is the Remote concept. If you wouldnt buy it as an accessory for the Gamecube in that fictional scenario, then you really shouldnt get a Wii.

That's interesting, I would probably buy a Wiimote if it were a Gamecube accessory, since Nintendo would release a couple games that make it useful. Now things like Madden 07 for the Wii wouldnt see the light of day though.

[Z-Saber]

I'd still buy it for $250 if it had exactly the power of the Gamecube. I understand that they have to have a new console in order to get support for the Remote, otherwise they'd just release it as a Gamecube Accessory.

The only legs that the system has is the Remote concept. If you wouldnt buy it as an accessory for the Gamecube in that fictional scenario, then you really shouldnt get a Wii.100% agreed. I don't care about specs. I care about games and gameplay. The Wii is offering a new way to play games, and I'm jumping on board.

If it had the power of an Atari 2600, but the games were fun as crap, then who cares about the hardware?

[CappyCobra]

Good call...you forgot one thing...you have to pay for it.That $4.17 a month is going to put you out of food & shelter? Why should you pay for online? BECAUSE THEY HAVE AN INCENTIVE TO KEEP IT GOING AND GROWING. We all know how the PS2/GC free online went swimmingly. :roll:

If the micro-transaction thing works out, great, it would be nice to give MS some competition and add more value to the service. Perhaps an ad-supported free version of XBL with more of a lean on MT and arcade purchases for revenue.

I hope Nintendo really does well on the VC as I would like to have my classics at my fingertips vs bringing out the NES/SMS/TG16 carts from the basement.

[David85]

This is the main reason why I'm fucking pissed off at Nintendo. They call it family friendly and a souped up GC and it cost $150 more than a GameCube? That's bullshit, and so is this topic.

[botticus]

That $4.17 a month is going to put you out of food & shelter? Why should you pay for online? BECAUSE THEY HAVE AN INCENTIVE TO KEEP IT GOING AND GROWING. We all know how the PS2/GC free online went swimmingly. :roll:

If the micro-transaction thing works out, great, it would be nice to give MS some competition and add more value to the service. Perhaps an ad-supported free version of XBL with more of a lean on MT and arcade purchases for revenue.

I hope Nintendo really does well on the VC as I would like to have my classics at my fingertips vs bringing out the NES/SMS/TG16 carts from the basement.Umm... Microsoft charges for online AND uses microtransactions. Of course, arguing against MS charging for online is just as dumb as people arguing about Nintendo making a profit on hardware.

[Sgt. Baker]

This is the main reason why I'm fucking pissed off at Nintendo. They call it family friendly and a souped up GC and it cost $150 more than a GameCube? That's bullshit, and so is this topic.

Disney World is family friendly too. But that's expensive. Is Disney World bullshit? Or are you just pissed they don't send you the console for free in the mail with samples of Tide?

[munch]

Disney World is family friendly too. But that's expensive. Is Disney World bullshit? Or are you just pissed they don't send you the console for free in the mail with samples of Tide?

Now that you mention, I am fucking pissed that Tide isn't coming with the wii. I'm not buying that anti-clean bullshit. Fuck the wii, fuck this thread, and fuck the Wayans Bros. They just aren't funny. At all.

[help1]

Good call...you forgot one thing...you have to pay for it.

for live? Fine! its only 50 dollars, you act like you are breaking the bank !

[Yashouzoid]

This is the main reason why I'm fucking pissed off at Nintendo. They call it family friendly and a souped up GC and it cost $150 more than a GameCube? That's bullshit, and so is this topic. I agree. It has become abundantly clear that NINTENDO IS FuckING US AGAIN with the Wii price.

I mean, they said it was 249, but it's 250... Wait, it is 249. But I thought it was going to be 199, or maybe even 149, but no, it has to be 249 and I have to pay 60 bucks for a controller.

60 BUCKS FOR A WIIMOTE AND A NUMCHUCK.

I'm taking the virtual Wii remote with the virtual remote and making a jack off motion, jack off over goddamn video games! I'm buying a PS3, and two Xboxes, and I've got the motion sensor as a bar up my ass, because Nintendo is fucking us again and they don't understand! They're not even going to have a Super Mario game at launch!

But I want Strikers! I want Super Mario Strikers, I want Super Mario World, I want Super Mario Something because something is better than nothing. And Luigi's Mansion was a long time for GameCube but maybe it wasn't, but it doesn't matter because first-party support is WEAK, it's totally weak!

I want a Metroid game, I want a Zelda game, I want a Kid Icarus game, and I want a Super Smash Bros. game and if I don't get it all at launch I'm not going to buy it, how 'bout that? And don't get me started with this "OH WII IS MII" shit and whatever, like I already have internet with a high-speed connection. I'm not going to be sitting at my goddamn television, looking on the internet on a children's console! How is motion sensing gonna help me browse the internet, am I going to use the Wiimote to surf up and down the pages? That's bullshit, there's no Wii enabled porn yet, it's USELESS, it's TOTALLY USELESS, and I'm not going to stand for it! I'm not gonna buy any of it! I'm not even going to buy my Nintendo DS, which I already own, I'm going to steal it because I'm never going to support anything they do or say ever again!

So fuck Nintendo, you fucks!!!

[6669]

"Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes is basically Metal Gear Solid on steriods" says 6669

[botticus]

for live? Fine! its only 50 dollars, you act like you are breaking the bank !:D I hope you're being ironic, because that same $50 is apparently breaking the bank for many potential Wii buyers.

[Dr Mario Kart]

for live? Fine! its only 50 dollars, you act like you are breaking the bank !

Apparently it is, since some people arent buying the thing because they were betting on $199.

[icecubedx5]

Botticus touched upon this and I agree, he is simply stating that Wii is pretty much a GC from the developmental standpoint. Basicall you can argue that Windows Vista is "basically" a Windows 95 in the sense that functionally, they are pretty much the same. Of course a Pentium 66mhz can run Windows 95 but Vista would rape that same PC till its ass looked like this (_O_)

[CappyCobra]

Umm... Microsoft charges for online AND uses microtransactions. Of course, arguing against MS charging for online is just as dumb as people arguing about Nintendo making a profit on hardware. O RLY? We'll see if that continues IF (And that's a big fucking IF) Sony and Nintendo bring comparable services to the table. Yes they said they're doing this and that but lets see how long that flies without charging for the service or plastering ads or whatever other money making scenarios they come up with. Bottom line is Servers cost money. Bandwidth costs money. Maintenance costs money. Where do you expect that money to come from? Microtransactions alone? Sony and Nintendo are in the business to make money too. MT and ad's can't do it alone and still allow a stellar service. I sure the hell hope I'm proven wrong though.

[Strell]

O RLY? We'll see if that continues IF (And that's a big fucking IF) Sony and Nintendo bring comparable services to the table.

Um.

They won't. At least Nintendo won't. And we've known that for a while.

Dunno why people think making a case about something they've already been given the details about somehow makes them look strong in argument.

[botticus]

O RLY? We'll see if that continues IF (And that's a big fucking IF) Sony and Nintendo bring comparable services to the table. Yes they said they're doing this and that but lets see how long that flies without charging for the service or plastering ads or whatever other money making scenarios they come up with. Bottom line is Servers cost money. Bandwidth costs money. Maintenance costs money. Where do you expect that money to come from? Microtransactions alone? Sony and Nintendo are in the business to make money too. MT and ad's can't do it alone and still allow a stellar service. I sure the hell hope I'm proven wrong though.Up to this point, they've supported the Wi-Fi Connection for DS without a problem, and no ads and no microtransactions. They're probably losing a small amount of money on it, but that's the beauty of profiting off your product. VC will probably take care of their costs pretty well. Is it as full-featured as Live? No. But it will allow online play, which is really the only reason I need internet access on my console.

I don't even know why the argument turned to Live, nor do I know what is being argued, but the fact is internet access costs money with the 360.

[evanft]

The only legs that the system has is the Remote concept. If you wouldnt buy it as an accessory for the Gamecube in that fictional scenario, then you really shouldnt get a Wii.

Because support for the add-on Wiimote at $60 for the Mote-Chuck setup would have been just as big as for a whole new console with it, right? Oh, and the Wii doesn't have any sort of online capability at all, either.:applause:

[Michaellvortega]

I thought Miyamoto was retiring soon anyway, who cares what he says. Let some fresh blood breathe some new life into Nintendo.

[help1]

:D I hope you're being ironic, because that same $50 is apparently breaking the bank for many potential Wii buyers.
I am. Just shows the Nintendo fanboys who claim the 50 dolalrs for live is ridiculous, how it is the same when the console is 50 dollars too much.

[ananag112]

I honestly won't buy a Wii until it hits $150 or less. Its really not worth much more then that. I got suckered into buying a GameCube and DS and they sucked near launch and only got better a year later after a price drop. The Wii is completely over priced IMO for what it is. I will get one eventually however.

And we all know the graphics on the Wii are not as good as that of the 360 and PS3.

[cochesecochese]

I thought Miyamoto was retiring soon anyway, who cares what he says. Let some fresh blood breathe some new life into Nintendo.

He'll sit as an advisor until the day he dies. Mark my words.

[Oops! I did it again.]

Before anyone gets carried away with this on either side of the argument, please keep the context of the interview in mind:

Yes, the GC is "basically a GameCube," but Miyamoto is hardly discussing the technical capabilities of the system, he's commenting from the development standpoint.

Yup. Thanks for being the one to point that out. Too many people are missing that...

[martin8me]

As long as the Wii feels next-gen im ok with. if not then i'd rather play Mario on

a 'Cube than play the same game with a gimmicky controller.

[CrimsonPaw]

Miyamoto:
For a brief period of time, some of the staff said, "The Wii has better capabilities than the GC so lets improve the graphics." But Zelda fans aren’t really looking forward to a improved version of the game and are only looking for it to be fun so, I said all we have to do is make something fun for both the Wii and GC. Recently, we finally reached the conclusion that, "the Wii isn’t a console seeking for the next generation graphics." Of course, there are games that seek to have good graphics so you’ll see the titles split up that way.
Hey, Miyamoto, when you redesign the Wind Waker, can you make the last portion of the game fun and not such a hunting around shitfest? I would venture to guess that would make the game more "fun".

BTW, I could care less if it was a souped up N64 as long as the games are fun. Look at how many sweet DS and GBA games are out with inferior graphics .. quite a few.

[anarchyburger]

hey since the wii is "just a GC" then is this the reason why it still has codenames Broadway and Hollywood in its system specs since they are the same as GC's... just a thought

[BIG5]

"Lincoln was shot" says Miyamoto
"Dinosaurs roamed the Earth" says Miyamoto
"Let there be light" says Miyamoto

[David85]

Disney World is family friendly too. But that's expensive. Is Disney World bullshit? Or are you just pissed they don't send you the console for free in the mail with samples of Tide?

Disney World cost countless ammounts of money to develope and biuld and mantain. All Nintendo has to do is build a system with tech that has been around for years and stick it in a box. The developement of the Wii is not worth $150+.

[Strell]

Disney World cost countless ammounts of money to develope and biuld and mantain. All Nintendo has to do is build a system with tech that has been around for years and stick it in a box. The developement of the Wii is not worth $150+.

Let's be honest. We can't prove that either way.

Just like we can't prove that Bluray is worth X amount.

And thankfully, that's not our decision.

[daroga]

Disney World cost countless ammounts of money to develope and biuld and mantain. All Nintendo has to do is build a system with tech that has been around for years and stick it in a box. The developement of the Wii is not worth $150+.
Oh, how I love ignorant posts like this.

And I mean ignorant in its true definition, sans its negative connotation. "Without knowledge." That is, without any epirical evidence to back anything up, but that's easily fixed. Speaking about something you've only read about on the intrawebz like you know every stage of its development is just silly. Wait until you have some real experience with it and then judge whether or not it's worth it to you.

And Botticus hit the nail on the head (as others have after him). Cube software can be ported in-tact to the Wii. Wow, big surprise these, it's plays them natively. Does that mean it can't do far and away more than the Cube? Not at all. Will it? Most likely.

But seriously, if someone is buying the Wii for some super graphics machine, they've not been paying attention and just don't get it.

[TimPV3]

What thread are you talking about? Almost everything I've been reading about the Wii both here and elsewhere has stated that it won't be much more than a GCN. This is no big shock.I don't know, there's a lot of people here that seem to want to believe the Wii will outpower the 360, and everything Nintendo's shown has been purposely made to look like Gamecube graphics to surprise us. In retrospect, those are truly the most retarded things I've ever heard.

[CappyCobra]

Um.

They won't. At least Nintendo won't. And we've known that for a while.

Dunno why people think making a case about something they've already been given the details about somehow makes them look strong in argument.

Tell that to people who STILL complain about XBL being $50 a year considering the experiance and seemless presentation you get compared to what others are offering. Not to mention not having to worry about lame ass gameshark/lag cheaters. The pros and cons have already been discussed I agree, but yet people still toss it back into the arena so don't fault me for it.

Back to topic, I hope the VC takes off and wakes Nintendo up to the capabilties to the online community. It's be nice to do some co-op with the classics. Will it happen? I'm not holding my breath.

[jkam]

I only brought up the cost of Microsoft's Live because I asked the question (now for the 3rd time which still hasn't been answered) what are you getting for your $400-$600 dollars that's gaming related besides better graphics with a PS3 or a 360? Javeryh pointed out LIVE is a great service that you are getting with the 360...however it is a pay service not something you are getting included in your $400 premium system.

So now by everyone's math:

$50 is not too much for Microsoft Live
$50 more than $200 is too much to buy a Wii at launch
$50 for a wireless Xbox 360 controller is not too much
$60 for a wireless Wiimote is not worth it
$50 is the amount not to buy a Wii but its ok to spend $150 to $350 more for not a Wii.

So where is the logic exactly? So it's way too much to spend $250 for a newer (ish) gamecube but to spend $150 to $350 more for better graphics is a completely sane and sound investment?

Maybe the wiimote isn't worth $250 but I'd like to be the one to make the judgement on that.

In the end it all doesn't mean shit....because if you spend $100 or $1000 as long as you are getting your money's worth out of it then its worth it.

[CoffeeEdge]

Holy fuck, this old shit AGAIN???

[Michaellvortega]

I only brought up the cost of Microsoft's Live because I asked the question (now for the 3rd time which still hasn't been answered) what are you getting for your $400-$600 dollars that's gaming related besides better graphics with a PS3 or a 360? Javeryh pointed out LIVE is a great service that you are getting with the 360...however it is a pay service not something you are getting included in your $400 premium system.

So now by everyone's math:

$50 is not too much for Microsoft Live
$50 more than $200 is too much to buy a Wii at launch
$50 for a wireless Xbox 360 controller is not too much
$60 for a wireless Wiimote is not worth it
$50 is the amount not to buy a Wii but its ok to spend $150 to $350 more for not a Wii.

So where is the logic exactly? So it's way too much to spend $250 for a newer (ish) gamecube but to spend $150 to $350 more for better graphics is a completely sane and sound investment?

Maybe the wiimote isn't worth $250 but I'd like to be the one to make the judgement on that.

In the end it all doesn't mean shit....because if you spend $100 or $1000 as long as you are getting your money's worth out of it then its worth it.

Answer:More 3rd party support, a wider selection of games, proven online capability.

Either way it breaks down to preference and what it's worth to YOU.
Your either going to buy something or not, and trying to prove that something is good or not to the gamer types on a message board is pointless because their mind is made up already.

[Zoglog]

you people argue over the most useless shit

[elwood731]

My problem with the Wii is that it doesn't feel like enough return on the investment, as far as what you're getting in the box. Sure, you could make the argument that it's a great value:

$100 GameCube
$60 Wiimote
$20? sensor bar
$50 Wii Sports

$230, which is basically what many of us assume the Wii actually costs to make. This does not include the new WiFi, etc.

Still, I just expected a little bit more. Now, granted, Nintendo has warned it would only be 2-3 times more powerful, but I suppose I haven't really seen that so far in the games. The best looking game is maybe still Zelda, and as everyone points out it's still a GC game basically. I don't expect it to rival the X360/PS3, but I do expect it to outpace the XBOX/GC/PS2. I haven't seen that yet in the games. Which, of course, leads one to think that it is essentially a second GC we're paying for with some accessories. That's not really, at the moment (having not played any games), worth $250 to me. The X360 and PS3 have noticeably better hardware than last generation. So, I'm not paying for an XBOX with wirelesss controllers, but an actually, noticeably better system spec wise. Same with PS3.

I also don't really buy the argument that people don't care about graphics. If they didn't, they wouldn't rush out and buy new systems on launch day, as rarely do they offer new gameplay experiences, as much as they offer flashier graphics. Graphics aren't the end all, be all, but they do matter. There's a reason, as many of us have discussed, that SNES games hold up better than NES, and GC/PS2/XBOX games will likely hold up better than PS/N64 games over time.

The Wiimote is a great idea, but I'm not completely sold on it yet. If Nintendo can give me 5 or so games that play like AAA titles, then I may reconsider. Otherwise, I am hesitant to buy it when I still have GC games left to play. Here's hoping they wow me at launch.

[cochesecochese]

you people argue over the most useless shit

LIAR! (http://boards.theforce.net/)

[David85]

$100 GameCube
$60 Wiimote
$20? sensor bar
$50 Wii Sports

$230, which is basically what many of us assume the Wii actually costs to make. This does not include the new WiFi, etc.

How about they don't include the $50, yeah right like anyone would pay $50 for that, Wii Sports and sell me the system for $180-$200?

[foltzie]

I thought Miyamoto was retiring soon anyway, who cares what he says. Let some fresh blood breathe some new life into Nintendo.

Every game developer in the world does.

The man is the father of modern video games and he doesnt sit as CEO, but rather producer or executive producer. This means he doesnt have to actively worry about the business side and focus on creativity. As mentioned above, he'll be advising Mario and Zelda games from his deathbed. He probably wont be actively involved in any future hardware generations, but I dont think he has ever been too involved with the R&D group.

[foltzie]

My problem with the Wii is that it doesn't feel like enough return on the investment, as far as what you're getting in the box. Sure, you could make the argument that it's a great value:

$100 GameCube
$60 Wiimote
$20? sensor bar
$50 Wii Sports

$230, which is basically what many of us assume the Wii actually costs to make. This does not include the new WiFi, etc.

How about they don't include the $50, yeah right like anyone would pay $50 for that, Wii Sports and sell me the system for $180-$200?


Because as he points out his estimate leaves out the WiFi and other components built into the system. The WiFi, built in flash, and most importantly the built in wireless recievers for the Wiimote. I've read that the hardware cost of the Wii is currently $170 a unit, assuming its valid once you add in the Wiimote you are in the $210-$220 range.

Nintendo probably sells the console to stores for ~$235 meaning their profit isnt that great on each console. If the $170 includes the Wiimote in terms of cost, then you can blame Sony and Microsoft for giving Nintendo the gaul to give the $250 price point a go.

They include Wii Sports because we arent likely to buy that game, because lets be honest, it isnt going to set the world on fire graphically*, but it does show off the Wiimote* and all of its functions. But if you want the system for $200, well wait 10 months it will see a price drop as soon as Sony or Microsoft drop their prices.

*I should not I have indeed played Wii Sports, Wii Play, Wario Ware, and Excite Truck. With regards to the first three games the grpahics are inferior to the 360 in terms of textures and sheer polygon count, but what was showed had no slow down and amazing fluidity. In the case of Excite Truck it didnt look like the realistic driving games on the 360, but I wouldnt be surprised if it held up well against a more comical game like Twisted Metal. It was also fluid in terms of animation and most amazingly steering.

*I'm not 100% sold on the Wiimote, I have a few reservations from playing games at the Fusion show. But I did enjoy myself and I "trust" Nintendo to deliver on their promises of fun games, and they havent let me down over the 8 consoles I bought from them.

[foltzie]

LIAR! (http://boards.theforce.net/)


WINNER!

[jkam]

Answer:More 3rd party support, a wider selection of games, proven online capability.

Either way it breaks down to preference and what it's worth to YOU.
Your either going to buy something or not, and trying to prove that something is good or not to the gamer types on a message board is pointless because their mind is made up already.

Thank you for giving an answer...it seems no one else wanted to even attempt it or just couldn't really think of anything.

I kind of think 3rd party support and a wider selection of games falls under the same thing.

I think that 3rd party support is something that Nintendo needs but without the system actually being out I think its a little bit unfair to say that the 360 or the PS3 will have more support or a wider selection of games. If you are using the XBOX-PS2-GC era as your basis well then I would definitely agree. I think the lower development costs may help Nintendo this go around.

I find it really odd that $250 is too much for something that is trying to be innovative but $400-$600 is fine for something that isn't innovative at all. It seems the main argument is that the cube + new fangled controller is NOT worth $250. They state that its really not innovative enough....so under that assumption it seems people see better graphics as innovation. I am still deciding if I should grab a 360 or a PS3 besides a Wii but either way I look at it better graphics don't equal innovation for me. It's been done every generation. It's losing it WOW factor.

I agree it really does break down to preference. I guess I just wish everyone would be a little more fair in their assessment of things.

[drfunk85]

I find it really odd that $250 is too much for something that is trying to be innovative but $400-$600 is fine for something that isn't innovative at all. It seems the main argument is that the cube + new fangled controller is NOT worth $250. They state that its really not innovative enough....so under that assumption it seems people see better graphics as innovation. I am still deciding if I should grab a 360 or a PS3 besides a Wii but either way I look at it better graphics don't equal innovation for me. It's been done every generation. It's losing it WOW factor.

I agree with you. It is the same reason I am not rushing out to throw down a lot of money on a HDDVD or Blue Ray player or an HDTV, but I was willing to buy a DVD player and cable television. Graphics are nice, but the jump from where graphics were to the PS3/BluRay isn't nearly as impressive as the jump from VHS to DVD or SNES to N64/PS1 or N64/PS1 to GC/PS2/XBOX. I think Sony and Microsoft are going to realize that graphics are subject to marginal returns to scale. There is a curve, and either it has or is about to peak.

Look at digital cameras as an example. For a while, they kept shooting up in mega pixel count. However, once they hit the 4-6 MP range and that became common, the focus of the industry shifted to other features. Options and functions became more important. Sure there are digital camera's out there with ridiculous amounts of pixels, but they aren't mainstream. 4-6 MP is good enough for the average person, and beyond that, if they are going to spend more money, they would rather get more features than more pixels. And if you are going to choose between a 4-6 MP camera with some cool features and a 10 MP camera for twice the price, and call me crazy, but I think I know which one I am choosing.