Is this Nintendo's Time?

M

MarkMark

CAGiversary!
leave all hate/love out for a moment here.

http://www.cheapassgamer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=121901

should this be true. It would seem to be that the momentum is going strong for the Wii. Granted it is still way to early to declare a winner as the winds still have time to change, however I ask do you think this is Nintendo's time to retake a considerable amount of the console market. Do you believe that the unofficial stance of people will buy a wii along with their ps3 or wii is true?

While I would love to see another day where nintendo rules #1 both console and handhelds I personally see Nintendo retaking a good percentage of the market back and possibly getting #2 with a close race to #1. I think the Wiicombo has and will continue to work in nintendo's favor as it provides a gamer with both graphical goodness and something different. Will the winds change? Of course. They always do. Lets see is the The big N does everything it can with this opportunity and not squander it.
 
If single console owners and all 3 console owners are negated(which can be disputed),

And the following is true among 2 console owners
(360/Wii)+(PS3/Wii)>(PS3/360)

Then Wii comes out with the highest marketshare

Maybe not quite that simple of an equation, but anyway
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']If single console owners and all 3 console owners are negated(which can be disputed),

And the following is true among 2 console owners
(360/Wii)+(PS3/Wii)>(PS3/360)

Then Wii comes out with the highest marketshare

Maybe not quite that simple of an equation, but anyway[/QUOTE]

The Wii is in very good shape for that reason and because Nintendo is making pure profit on the hardware, the first time they've done that in years. Ultimately, if someone buys a 360 and a PS3, my guess is that they'll probably snag a Wii too.

It's still way too early to call things, but if Nintendo keeps a reasonable pace, they'll be positioned to win this generation from both an install base and a profit base.
 
The Gamecube was cheap and that didnt seem to help(though certainly a lesser margin than now).

The last generation wasnt won by power either.

These kinds of things are nice marginal edges, but in the end, it HAS to be about the games.
 
There's a lot of momentum now, but like Dr Kart says it will be all about the games. The GCN just didn't have much support from third parties and even the first party games were kind of so-so. If the past is any indication of future performance, the Wii will end up selling less than the Gamecube did. I have a feeling though that they will break their streak of selling fewer consoles with each generation this time around.
 
Do you think this is indirectly Sony's doing? What I mean is, the threat of Sony moving into the portable space forced them into the DS, which is really what makes this all possible.

They mightve still done it anyway, but I'd have to say that the DS made them significantly more comfortable with the idea.
 
While I would love to see another day where nintendo rules #1...
Click to expand...

When will it ever be time to declare a "winner", and why do we need to? I think gamers are the winners becuase of the diversity of the market we enjoy. Your above quote scares me. Why on earth would you like to see "Ninteno rules #1"?

At a time when many are ready to boycott EA for buying exclusivity, claiming it will retard game innovation, why on earth would you like to see Nintendo do the same? Were you not around during Nintendo's "reign" in the eighties? Do you not remember their strongarming retailers and threatening shortages when their demands weren't met? Companies who "rule #1" get arrogant and try to change the market to their own whims instead of the wants of the consumers.

Sorry, I don't want domination by any console. It forces development to go to the biggest userbase and fucks the niche markets. A healthy dose of competition is good for all of us and keeps the game giants on their toes and at their best. Then we can all be declared winners.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']When will it ever be time to declare a "winner", and why do we need to? I think gamers are the winners becuase of the diversity of the market we enjoy. Your above quote scares me. Why on earth would you like to see "Ninteno rules #1"?

At a time when many are ready to boycott EA for buying exclusivity, claiming it will retard game innovation, why on earth would you like to see Nintendo do the same? Were you not around during Nintendo's "reign" in the eighties? Do you not remember their strongarming retailers and threatening shortages when their demands weren't met? Companies who "rule #1" get arrogant and try to change the market to their own whims instead of the wants of the consumers.

Sorry, I don't want domination by any console. It forces development to go to the biggest userbase and fucks the niche markets. A healthy dose of competition is good for all of us and keeps the game giants on their toes and at their best. Then we can all be declared winners.[/QUOTE]

Don't forget Nintendo's 3rd party agreements with the NES. A shame, because I looked at the specs. of the Master System and thought it clearly spanked the NES in the power it put out. Games like "Golden Axe Master" easily look better than Zelda graphicswise.
Fury Nintendo pretty much broke even on sales of the Gamecube originally. If not, they lost VERY little money at the beginning and 3-6 months down the road started to make money off the sales of them.
 
Being the winner is good because it is the furthest thing from being the loser, which no one that owns a system wants.

Someone is going to rule the market. Its unlikely that all the major parties involved are just going to tie in marketshare. No one wants Nintendo to have a hardcore monopoly. Having leading marketshare doesnt mean that the other systems wont be competitive.

Personally, I would rather just own one console if possible, and I'd rather it be the cheaper one.

You vote with your dollar. I dont want HD or online gaming, so I should want the industry to go as heavily with the Wii as possible.
 
[quote name='furyk']The Wii is in very good shape for that reason and because Nintendo is making pure profit on the hardware, the first time they've done that in years. Ultimately, if someone buys a 360 and a PS3, my guess is that they'll probably snag a Wii too.

It's still way too early to call things, but if Nintendo keeps a reasonable pace, they'll be positioned to win this generation from both an install base and a profit base.[/QUOTE]

Where do you get the info that Nintendo is making pure profit on the hardware? From what I've read they break even on each console. They still had development costs, even though the Wii is a heavily modified GC.
 
I agree that no one console should rule... however, sometimes there is a vested interested in seeing a certain console win out, or another fail. If the PS3 does incredibly poorly, there's a tiny, tiny glimmer of hope that I won't have to shell out $600+ to play MGS4 and FFXIII.
 
You're forgetting that thus far all the Wii really is is a gimmick. There has yet to be anything released for it that could be considered excellent, and only 1 or two games that are even "good". It is less powerful than the others by a hell of a lot, cannot play dvds, and has questionable 3rd party support. Only time will tell if it will last or is just a fad right now because it's cheaper and more widely available (Which history dictates will make it popular anyway, suck or not). The virtual console thing is nice, but then again, it's cheaper and better in most cases to just go BUY those systems and games, assuming you don't already have them. So again, it's a gimmick. If they were able to do some nifty multiplayer stuff with some of them, then that would make it special, but as it stands, it's future is pretty shaky compared to it's big brothers, the same as the gamecube was.
 
It may be a gimmick, but sometimes gimmicks work.

Look at freaking Ipods, they're overpriced mp3 players, yet everyone has to have one. Look at christina agulera, she's a mildly talented vessel with a great voice but would be nothing without her slut-girl gimmick.

If anything, the Ps3 and x360 are sucking offf the same gimmick of gradual graphic improvements that sucked you into buying them 5 years ago. The games are identical to the ones you were playing 10 years ago - yet you still fall for the gimmick and keep buying them !

Yes, now when I blast that oxymoronically named AI robot in the same online deathmatch, he falls into a hundred pieces with more realistic physics ! Yeah! that's worth another $59.95.
 
The Wii has Zelda and.... what?

Wii has the momentum now, but it's also looking like it's headed right into a game draught of Gamecube proportions. Too many of the games are ports. Too many games are party games that get old quickly if you don't have 3 or 4 people to play with. Nintendo clearly doesn't know what they're doing online yet. Virtual Console titles can only string people along so much.

Super Mario Galaxy & Super Smash Bros. will be fun, but those are just 2 games. I could care less about Metroid, but that's just my opinion.

Software will determine a winner. Right now Nintendo has software that's different, but that doesn't automatically mean that it's great. In time Sony will have great software, and Microsoft will continue to have great software.

Whether Nintendo produces enough software on their own and convinces 3rd parties to make games on the Wii worth anything is the bigger problem.
 
[quote name='Collaborator']The virtual console thing is nice, but then again, it's cheaper and better in most cases to just go BUY those systems and games, assuming you don't already have them.[/quote]Please point me to where I can get an NES and game for $5 shipped, SNES or Genesis + game for $8 shipped, TG-16 + game for $6 shipped, and an N64 and game for $10 shipped. I must have missed the total fallout of the classic game market!

Oh, wait... you were just making stuff up to try to prove a point? Dang, you got me all excited for nothing. :cry:
 
If Nintendo doesn't fuck it up (I'm sure they will somehow) then it's their time to at least make a run to the top.
 
I think Nintendo is doing quite well and will continue to do so. But "win" the next generation? Uh, hello???? They are not even IN the next generation, I own a wii (as well as the 360 and the PS3) and I like the Wii for what it is - but it is NOT next generation.

Where is the DVD playback? (not to mention HD-DVD or Blue-Ray) but yeah, I will mention it.

Where is the high definition display? (I'm sorry but 480P is not HD).

Where is the hard drive? (20g, 60g - hell there ain't no gig!).

Where is the DD/DTS 5.1 sound? (don't listen too long for it as you won't find it).

Where is the high speed, multi-processing CPU?

I finally have wi-fi but where are my wi-fi games?

I do love the Wii, it's remote/nunchuck setup is unique (though it can also be a bit difficult at times). And my family has allways owned Nintendo due to the wife and kids loving Zelda and Mario.

Still, one of the first games I bought for it was COD3 and after playing it for a bit I traded it towards the same game for the PS3 as you just cannot compare the graphics and sounds (plus it has motion sensing controllers too).

Nintendo is doing and will do very well with the Wii. It is the best system out the for the money, no doubt about that.

But it cannot win the next generation if it isn't even in it.
 
[quote name='TexTuna']I think Nintendo is doing quite well and will continue to do so. But "win" the next generation? Uh, hello???? They are not even IN the next generation, I own a wii (as well as the 360 and the PS3) and I like the Wii for what it is - but it is NOT next generation.

Where is the DVD playback? (not to mention HD-DVD or Blue-Ray) but yeah, I will mention it.

Where is the high definition display? (I'm sorry but 480P is not HD).

Where is the hard drive? (20g, 60g - hell there ain't no gig!).

Where is the DD/DTS 5.1 sound? (don't listen too long for it as you won't find it).

Where is the high speed, multi-processing CPU?

I finally have wi-fi but where are my wi-fi games?

I do love the Wii, it's remote/nunchuck setup is unique (though it can also be a bit difficult at times). And my family has allways owned Nintendo due to the wife and kids loving Zelda and Mario.

Still, one of the first games I bought for it was COD3 and after playing it for a bit I traded it towards the same game for the PS3 as you just cannot compare the graphics and sounds (plus it has motion sensing controllers too).

Nintendo is doing and will do very well with the Wii. It is the best system out the for the money, no doubt about that.

But it cannot win the next generation if it isn't even in it.[/quote]

The "next generation" is in the gameplay which has never been done before.. Didn't you get the memo?
 
imo it is too early to tell....didn't the gamecube come out very strong and then die a slow painful death. Nintendo diehards are flocking to the wii (i got 1), but the real question is if the alleged non gamer is willing to drop $250 for the weather channel and a game or 2.
 
Ahmed,

I did say (and still do) that I have and like the wii...

But your mantra falls on death ears - without the things I mentioned the Wii is a reboxed Gamecube with a new controller. With absolutely no enhancements (with the exception of wi-fi which for some reason Nintendo is not yet taking advantage of) to take it to the next level. No matter how you want to stretch it, it is not "next gen".

But if you want to consider it so, then that is fine. Not everyone has an HDTV nor an audio system capable of DD/DTS 5.1/7.1 and I understand that. For those that do not - this is the ideal, perfect system for them. No reason to spend the added $$ on a bunch of functionality you cannot take advantage of - which is exactly Nintendo's target audience.

But for those that do - there are some sorely lacking points with the Wii. Being ready for the future, for the advancements that are here right now as well as those that are coming - that is next generation. Not making whacking motions with your contoller.

And again, the Wii does not have a monopoly on motion sensing controllers - the PS3's work quite nice as well. And if it is game play you want - you cannot play anything remotely on the level of Gears of War or Resistance:Fall of Man on the Wii and you never will. Zelda is THE game for the Wii and while it will also never be on the other consoles, Oblivion is a damn nice RPG in it's own right.


TexTuna

[quote name='ahmedmalik']The "next generation" is in the gameplay which has never been done before.. Didn't you get the memo?[/quote]
 
[quote name='TexTuna']But for those that do - there are some sorely lacking points with the Wii. Being ready for the future, for the advancements that are here right now as well as those that are coming - that is next generation. Not making whacking motions with your contoller.[/quote]Eh, I have a 5.1 setup along with an HD LCD TV (720p & 1080i so maybe not "true" HD), but the Wii's lack of HD is a non-issue for me. It looks great on the TV, maybe not stunning, but that's alright.

If all three systems cost the same, then of course I'd go for the one with the best overall package, but as they don't and I'm on a budget, I have to choose. Between graphics and fun, I'd scrap graphics before fun to save some cash. Nintendo's system isn't a powerhouse but I've been having a blast even with some of the lackluster games out there.

In the end, I buy into Nintendo's semantic hype machine. The 360 and PS3 are the next generation, but the Wii is the new generation. It's a new way to play games, and has everyone in my family playing games that haven't touched a controller since the Atari and the novelty of the NES wore off. As long as they keep producing games that I enjoy (in the veins of Wii Sports AND Zelda) it'll be a good investment.

HD is overrated. It's very nice, don't get me wrong, but it's nothing new. Those of us who have played PC games for years were playing in HD before it was a buzz word. But yet, the consoles still had a draw the PC games didn't. It's nice to see consoles finally be able to up the graphical anty, but it's not really a selling point for me. I do really look forward to getting a 360 when it drops in price though. When it's cheaper and I can get fun and graphics for a good price, that'll be fantastic. For now? This is Nintendo's time.
 
You should have a job in Nintendo's advertising Dept Daroga, I would fully go along with the statement you made!

[quote name='daroga']

In the end, I buy into Nintendo's semantic hype machine. The 360 and PS3 are the next generation, but the Wii is the new generation. It's a new way to play games, and has everyone in my family playing games that haven't touched a controller since the Atari and the novelty of the NES wore off. As long as they keep producing games that I enjoy (in the veins of Wii Sports AND Zelda) it'll be a good investment. [/quote]
 
[quote name='TexTuna']You should have a job in Nintendo's advertising Dept Daroga, I would fully go along with the statement you made![/quote]heh, I'm pretty sure I was just spewing forth what they already fed us through their marketing department. But if they want to pay me, that's cool. ;)

I'm not a Nintendo-exclusive gamer, but going into 2007 they're the only hardware maker doing things that overall make sense to me. Not everything they've done do I agree with, but that's pretty much the way things go.
 
you know what graphics are a gimmick! make them as real as you can and declare it the best looking thing of all time only to say it about some other game a year down the road. A gimmick usually has no real value, Mortal Kombat had blood and executions as a gimmick you could say. Theres many things that are gimmicks that you normally wouldnt consider. If developers use the controller concept poorly and minimally then you are right it is pure gimmick. Zelda and DBZ both are fantastic titles which make excellent use of the unique controls. After playing DBZ with the wiimote combo i tried playing with a GC controller (it allows use of either) and found I liked the wiimote better.
 
I think Wii is going to end up the GC 2.0 or GC Turbo of this era. Start off strong but die of starvation when it comes to game titles. The Wiimote can only take gameplay so far and I'd bet that like every Nintendo system before Nintendo is going to do good with the first party titles but 3rd party support will be lackluster. Right now I'm done with Zelda(8 out of 10) and my Wii is collecting dust which puts that sour GC flavor in my mouth. The ball is in Nintendo's court to keep the games flowing
 
[quote name='Judhudson']They make about $40 for each system sold. I believe a breakdown is $158 for the system, plus the controllers and game is around $200, leaving
$40-50 ish for their profits. Here is a google link that lists many "Nintendo is making profit" links to sites: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Nintendo+making+profit+on+each+Wii[/quote]
I find it somewhat hard to believe those reports. I doubt the DVD drive costs more then the CPU and GPU, the cost of the RAM seems low, and it doesn't include the flash memory, motherboard, bluetooth reciever/transmitter, 802.11 module, or the Gamecube controller/memory card slots.
 
Does anyone know if RE5 (or whatever it will be called) will be exclusive to the Wii or will it be released on other consoles like RE4 was? I do expect to be slinging my wiimote when that one comes out :)

TexTuna
 
[quote name='TexTuna']Does anyone know if RE5 (or whatever it will be called) will be exclusive to the Wii or will it be released on other consoles like RE4 was? I do expect to be slinging my wiimote when that one comes out :)

TexTuna[/QUOTE]

There will be no RE5 on Wii, Wii gets a RE shootem up game ala PS2's survivor. Check google for more info because Im lazy.
 
My problem too :) (lazyness, but good point - I did it).

I had remembered a RE game was coming to the wii this Fall but didn't remember the title or specifics.

Just my opinion, but it blows big time that RE5 won't go to the wii.

TexTuna

[quote name='Michaellvortega']There will be no RE5 on Wii, Wii gets a RE shootem up game ala PS2's survivor. Check google for more info because Im lazy.[/quote]
 
[quote name='Michaellvortega']I think Wii is going to end up the GC 2.0 or GC Turbo of this era. Start off strong but die of starvation when it comes to game titles. The Wiimote can only take gameplay so far and I'd bet that like every Nintendo system before Nintendo is going to do good with the first party titles but 3rd party support will be lackluster. Right now I'm done with Zelda(8 out of 10) and my Wii is collecting dust which puts that sour GC flavor in my mouth. The ball is in Nintendo's court to keep the games flowing[/quote]As far as gameplay goes, I think looking at the DS is a pretty solid indication. You have a lot of solid games on there that couldn't be done on a ssystem without a touch screen (or at least a second screen), while you also have a ton of games that could've been easily handled by the GBA or the PSP because of their traditional control style. I do love the Wii, but I hope that only games than can actually make good use of the Wii's remote use it and don't force it where it doesn't belong. The Remote / Nunchuk combo can easily take the place of a standard controller sans motion sensing.

I think Nintendo is showing that they've learned from their mistakes in the past in terms of software releases. I had to smile in the days leading up to Christmas. I had no Wii games save for Zelda and Wii Sports and wasn't interetested in packing any more time into either then. But I was having a blast with Mario 64 and Resident Evil 4. Then I had to smile, because I had fallen right into Nintendo's trap. I may not have been playing Wii games, but I was still using the Wii, daily, as my gaming machine, and thus it wasn't collecting the dust that other systems might.

It's still far too early to judge anything, but for my schedule, one solid release a month is all I could play or afford, so I'm cool if they keep that up (though Wii Play being the only Nintendo entry in February? Come on...)
 
[quote name='daroga']As far as gameplay goes, I think looking at the DS is a pretty solid indication. You have a lot of solid games on there that couldn't be done on a ssystem without a touch screen (or at least a second screen), while you also have a ton of games that could've been easily handled by the GBA or the PSP because of their traditional control style. I do love the Wii, but I hope that only games than can actually make good use of the Wii's remote use it and don't force it where it doesn't belong. The Remote / Nunchuk combo can easily take the place of a standard controller sans motion sensing.

I think Nintendo is showing that they've learned from their mistakes in the past in terms of software releases. I had to smile in the days leading up to Christmas. I had no Wii games save for Zelda and Wii Sports and wasn't interetested in packing any more time into either then. But I was having a blast with Mario 64 and Resident Evil 4. Then I had to smile, because I had fallen right into Nintendo's trap. I may not have been playing Wii games, but I was still using the Wii, daily, as my gaming machine, and thus it wasn't collecting the dust that other systems might.

It's still far too early to judge anything, but for my schedule, one solid release a month is all I could play or afford, so I'm cool if they keep that up (though Wii Play being the only Nintendo entry in February? Come on...)[/QUOTE]

:roll: Nintendo needs to sell Wii GAMES!(to be more exact third party titles), it doesnt matter if you had fun playing RE4 on Wii. If Developers don't see people buying Wii games they wont bother to make them. Thats when the Wii starts to fall into it's Gamecube turbo ways and I don't want that to happen.
 
[quote name='Michaellvortega']:roll: Nintendo needs to sell Wii GAMES!(to be more exact third party titles), it doesnt matter if you had fun playing RE4 on Wii. If Developers don't see people buying Wii games they wont bother to make them. Thats when the Wii starts to fall into it's Gamecube turbo ways and I don't want that to happen.[/quote]O RLY?

Seriously, though, my point wasn't that using Gamecube games on the Wii would mean success. The point was that with the Cube, if there weren't steallar Cube titles hitting, then a person would get used to not using the system. Eventually, even if a title would come to the Cube and PS2 and be better on the Cube, people would be more inclined to get the PS2 version beacuse that's the system their playing anyway.

With the Wii, they've got a lot of options to keep people using the system so it doesn't get forgotten in the back of the entertainment center. They can time AAA VC games during a Wii game drought and keep people into the system. They've learned their lesson. Whether that translates into a better lifespan for the Wii remains to be seen.
 
I bought a GC over a PS2 or Xbos for 1 reason -- kid friendly games. I'm 34 and have been a gamer for as long as I can remember. I purchased the GC not for myself (well not totally) but so that I could play kid friendly games with my son.

The GC has many games for the younger generation, and we've both had a great time playing through them.

We now have a Wii and the current games are just a bit too tough for my son. The whole aim and point at the screen thing is just a bit too hard for a 5 year old to master. He's getting better, but not without some frustration. The one exception is bowling where he can beat anyone in my household.

If Nintendo keeps making good games that appeal to younger gamers then the Wii will be very successful.

I also think that the point and shoot can appeal to the gamers who like FPS style games. A game like Battlefield 1942 would play great on the Wii, even if the graphics aren't top of the line.
 
[quote name='daminion'] I also think that the point and shoot can appeal to the gamers who like FPS style games. A game like Battlefield 1942 would play great on the Wii, even if the graphics aren't top of the line.[/QUOTE]

Have you played Red steel or Far cry? Wii sucks at FPS. (so far,maybe their FPA game "Metroid" will be good)
 
I thought Retro did a good job with the FPA Gamecube metoids, I just don't want to back track all day long in a first person view.

Ubisoft has soo many different teams, I cant tell which one makes good games and which ones sucks balls. Farcry for Xbox and 360 ws ok but the aiming was so magnetic. Ubisoft is the New Raresoft.
 
[quote name='Michaellvortega']Have you played Red steel or Far cry? Wii sucks at FPS. (so far,maybe their FPA game "Metroid" will be good)[/QUOTE]

call of duty 3 is super. Ive played red steel and admit i sold it on ebay an recouped my losses as i felt the game overall not worth $50. COD3 however makes fun use of the controller and gives the game a breath of fresh air. the first time a german ambushes you and you have to push and pull him away is exhilerating.
 
[quote name='Michaellvortega']Have you played Red steel or Far cry? Wii sucks at FPS. (so far,maybe their FPA game "Metroid" will be good)[/quote]
I started Red Steel a few days ago and I'm only a few hours in (I just got to Japan in the last level or two) but I'm enjoying it. The scores reviewers gave it seem somewhat low to me, I would give it around a 7.5.
 
[quote name='Kaijufan']I started Red Steel a few days ago and I'm only a few hours in (I just got to Japan in the last level or two) but I'm enjoying it. The scores reviewers gave it seem somewhat low to me, I would give it around a 7.5.[/QUOTE]

It's a little too glitchy for me to give it a 7.5 and with the now standard online multiplayer feature missing I COULDN'T in my right mind give it a 7.5. I'd give it a 5.5 or 6. Like Farcry, the screenshots from months to a month before Wii launch don't match what is in the actual product. The game is not capable of being patched to fix the single player glitches that cost it it's immersive experience. No Multiplayer? With the Wii's 24/7 Internet connection this is truly inexcusable, not to mention a FPS without online multiplayer these days is like a game with no save feature. Red Steel was the opportunity to build a franchise and it came up short in many ways and the little problems here and there show the game needed more development time or just was planed well to being with. Harsh indeed but true.
 
The core game wouldve been even more broken if they had funneled dev resources away to give it an online multiplayer. Its not acceptable to me to have online multiplayer save an otherwise crummy game.

There is no shortage of Online FPSes. Its no big deal if one or two offline FPSes suck if online is a breaking point for you. What there is arguably less of are solid single player campaigns. Its not as simple as saying, if you dont like online, dont use it, because having it there at all has an effect on how the game turns out.
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']The core game wouldve been even more broken if they had funneled dev resources away to give it an online multiplayer. Its not acceptable to me to have online multiplayer save an otherwise crummy game.

There is no shortage of Online FPSes. Its no big deal if one or two offline FPSes suck if online is a breaking point for you. What there is arguably less of are solid single player campaigns. Its not as simple as saying, if you dont like online, dont use it, because having it there at all has an effect on how the game turns out.[/QUOTE]

So a sucky broken game is better if they don't waste time making it less sucky by letting you play online with other Wii owners/Friends? Red Steel's splitscreen multilayer SCREAMED Play me online! Lack of online dosent totaly kill my score of the game but all the other little problems bring it down and down. It would have been in total reason to release the game in January/february after some polishing and such and sold to a Wii software starved community instead of being slammed by the gaming media. Heck, I had a Gamestop employee (their resident nintendo fanboy) tell me I didn't want the game after I brought up a used copy to the register.
 
What I'm saying is, there arent enough offline only shooters for people who want them. There are plenty of options shooters geared towards online
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']What I'm saying is, there arent enough offline only shooters for people who want them. There are plenty of options shooters geared towards online[/QUOTE]

Agreeable. But Im going to get you to buy a HDTV someday..................
 
You've got your work cut out for you :p

I've got a spare SDTV that I bought on Craigslist thats sitting in storage. Between that and the main TV, I've probably got a good 10 years worth of TV if I'm lucky.

Once games are no longer playable on those ancient SD clunkers, I'll have a lifetimes worth of backlog, so there will be no additional purchases necessary. I'll be done with gaming.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top