Nintendo E3 2011 Press Conference - Wii U, Luigi's Mansion 2, Smash Bros. Wii U/3DS

[quote name='Anexanhume']
The recession basically fucked everything and contorted the growth curve. It's not a good market for new $400 machines. It IS a good market for $200 machines.[/QUOTE]

I think DLC, proliferance of expansions and online in general (being able to update a console's OS keeping things fresh) putzed with the growth curve a bit too.
 
[quote name='TheLongshot']Except that this wasn't the "big reveal", which is why I think many are disappointed. As I said before, this is the equivalent of Sony bringing out the Move in 2009, basically introducing the new controller for the next console and talking about its potential. Personally, there is a lot about that potential I like. (Actually, being able to play games without a TV is perhaps a bigger deal for those with kids.) I like that they have 3rd party developers on board to work with it and to see what they can come up with, rather than having themselves take the lead and leave the others fumbling around, which is kinda what happened with the Wii for the most part.

The "Big Reveal" probably will happen next year, with all the information on pricing and available titles you are looking for. This is just a preview of what Nintendo is going to use to innovate with.[/QUOTE]

Hey lets take it to games. Last Guardian was video'd what 2 years ago. Agent, we have yet to see even a screenshot. How about the Killzone 3 video debacle... Sony has done this constantly over the years. Not just over the Move...

As for the games argument, this is Nintendo. You know what to expect from them from a first party perspective. They already announced Smash Bros. It's as if no one has ever played Smash Bros to know what it might play like... :roll:
 
And just like last time the announced it without talking to Sakurai first. Must be the way to convince him to make those games. Of course since it was he and Iawata who made the first, I suppose its more than reasonable for Iawata to decide its time to make another.
 
[quote name='lordopus99']Hey lets take it to games. Last Guardian was video'd what 2 years ago. Agent, we have yet to see even a screenshot. How about the Killzone 3 video debacle... Sony has done this constantly over the years. Not just over the Move...

As for the games argument, this is Nintendo. You know what to expect from them from a first party perspective. They already announced Smash Bros. It's as if no one has ever played Smash Bros to know what it might play like... :roll:[/QUOTE]

In all fairness that happens with games all the time. Sometimes they just announce the title or show a teaser trailer.
 
[quote name='Corvin']I think DLC, proliferance of expansions and online in general (being able to update a console's OS keeping things fresh) putzed with the growth curve a bit too.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I think you hit the biggest point there. Online games essentially extend a game's playability indefinitely. Thus, PC owners only upgrade when a new game they want is released that cannot run on their current hardware, but that's never a problem with consoles, so it perpetuates itself.

There simply has to be a slowdown in demand to spur a new console release, which doesn't look near at all.
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']New half joking theory: Nintendo is doing this as an elaborate troll to MS/Sony. They know that they will have to respond by launching their own hardware that blows the WiiU away from a technical standpoint. Ergo, they are out billions of dollars (again) that will never be even remotely recovered across the time that the generation lasts.[/QUOTE]

8991d340705870bec191e1f.jpg
 
[quote name='uncle5555']I was just browsing what the overly zealous have been posting (I don't get into arguments on the Nintendo section of CAG I've learned better.) ;)

Anyway, when I read what you posted, I was like "no way, he can't be serious, he didn't just write that".

So what if it was the longest line, so was Duke Forever Demo at PAX last year, and that proves what, other than people wanted to see what all the hype was about. (dunno what makes them hypocrites from making an informed decision and opinion, a hypocrite is someone who comments without ANY or very little information...)

And the people writing these things are the same people that where gushing in orgasmic bliss, creaming themselves at last year's E3 with all of the awesome Wii games and new 3DS, and we've all seen how awesome all of the games were, right? ;)

(I've bought them all, cheaply, I might add, but they weren't up to the hype, I emphatically remember one female Gamespot reporter having nothing but praise for Kirby's Epic Yarn, "cause it was sooo, cute" need I say more...as far as their prowess for picking winners during E3, yeah they have none as far as I can tell, it's probably all the alcohol all these journalists are drinking and sleep deprivation that's doing the talking.)

And your other comment about friends playing it and buying it right after, well good for their sheeple loving selves. I bought the games first over the span of a few years until I finally had enough to justify a purchase (and was waiting patiently for a black system as well) But I won't be first in line for the Wii U (really stupid name btw) like any system, I don't find outright appealing at first glance....

The GAMES make the SYSTEM, I've said this for over a decade.

Someone else mentioned they have the strongest franchises, however they've driven them into the ground, something I've said quite frequently in the last year in this very forum (much to the derision of the Nintendo faithful of CAG).

How long did Reggie spend on Pokedex....

...Exactly. (which goes to prove my point, I mostly saw ports, and old hat franchises being milked for the umpteenth time.)

Otherwise there were exactly 4, count'em 4 games they showed that impressed me greatly. They were Zelda: SS, Kid Icarus, Luigi's Mansion, and RE: Revelations.

Those games mostly showed what I expect from Nintendo (I know Capcom is developing RE), innovation (KI, especially) creativity, and the Nintendo spirit of something new, fresh and original.

I know others felt that Nintendo could not do wrong, but honestly, they did only so well in my eyes, so take that for what's its worth as an honest assessment of how I viewed things this week.





No most of 'em are drunk and/or on shrooms. :lol:



Ahh, I see the master is here with us, I am in good company indeedy. :lol:[/QUOTE]


This is exactly how I see it, its NOT about the hardware. Hardware is useless without software (in this case its games). No one can use a computer without an operating system, similarly, you won't be playing anything on your Wii U unless there are good games for it.

I have heard it from Nintendo time and time again that they are getting 3rd party support, but I have not actually seen them implement it yet. Even if they get support at the beginning what will happen after the first year or so??

Now I love the hardware, I like most hardware that comes out, its great that you can stream to the controller, and since I assume you will be able to hook this system up to a CRT TV I am loving the fact that I don't have to buy another TV just to play games. Even if it doesn't look too good on a CRT you will still be able to play games via the special controller. Yes I still have a CRT TV as my only TV. I really don't want to buy another TV just to play games on as they are expensive and LCD TV's break a lot. I hardly watch TV, so another TV is not worth it for me, as long as a TV displays a picture then its good enough for me.
 
While Microsofts showing PR wise was somewhat weak this year, they still sold 10 million Kinects at ~$150 a pop. It was actually one of their more successful "moves" over the past few years.
 
[quote name='SaraAB']This is exactly how I see it, its NOT about the hardware. Hardware is useless without software (in this case its games). No one can use a computer without an operating system, similarly, you won't be playing anything on your Wii U unless there are good games for it.

I have heard it from Nintendo time and time again that they are getting 3rd party support, but I have not actually seen them implement it yet. Even if they get support at the beginning what will happen after the first year or so??

Now I love the hardware, I like most hardware that comes out, its great that you can stream to the controller, and since I assume you will be able to hook this system up to a CRT TV I am loving the fact that I don't have to buy another TV just to play games. Even if it doesn't look too good on a CRT you will still be able to play games via the special controller. Yes I still have a CRT TV as my only TV. I really don't want to buy another TV just to play games on as they are expensive and LCD TV's break a lot. I hardly watch TV, so another TV is not worth it for me, as long as a TV displays a picture then its good enough for me.[/QUOTE]

No offense, but if you are still gaming on a CRT vs. an HDTV, you're missing out on a huge amount of graphical detail. Just enormous. New games on a CRT are going to lack enormous amounts of detail and clarity, vs. an HDTV. Of course if you are playing older games (PS1, PS2, SNES, Genesis, Neo Geo, Dreamcast, etc.), a CRT is just fine. In fact, for many of these older games, they tend to look better on CRTs vs HDTVs.

And no, LCD TVs don't break a lot. I have a 37" Samsung LCD which is over two years old, still working perfectly. Picture looks great, all the hookups are fine, no problems. And the prices of HDTVs have fallen drastically, back when we got our 37 it cost about $970, now something that size would be about half the price (and for what we paid back then, you can get much larger HDTVs now).
 
Nintendo's show wasn't as good as last year's. But IMO they still won E3. There is this energy from the presenters (especially Miyamoto) that show they are truly having fun compared to the more serious tones from Microsoft and Sony (ironically, I felt this way last year as well). Add "new" and "comfortable" to the presentation and I'm hooked; this is exactly why I enjoy gaming in the first place.

As far as WiiU goes, LOVE IT. Yes I'm disappointed that they didn't show the 360 clone in full (and that the name sounds like a police siren) but I love the "we" to "you" concept that you don't need multiplayer and/or motion controlling to have a fun gaming experience. I'm happy that it will play and support Wii games and controllers, but will it support Gamecube games and controllers as well? I'm also a little concerned about the weight and feel of the controller. The controller was the #1 reason I didn't buy the N64 back in the day.

I don't own a Wii or a 3DS, but knowing that there are even more new games coming for Mario and Zelda makes me more excited to buy them in the future.
 
[quote name='Anexanhume']Yeah, I think you hit the biggest point there. Online games essentially extend a game's playability indefinitely. Thus, PC owners only upgrade when a new game they want is released that cannot run on their current hardware, but that's never a problem with consoles, so it perpetuates itself.

There simply has to be a slowdown in demand to spur a new console release, which doesn't look near at all.[/QUOTE]

I think you are on to something. I think the demand for new systems has slowed significantly this gen than any other. Partially is economics, some is an immense backlog of games still haven't played, and some is people are pretty satistfied of what's out there. And the fact online and upgrades help the consoles now extend its life even more so.

An example: Nintendo could have easily went to a traditional console with sooped up graphics and would have competed with the other two. But they didn't. I think the limitation of moving to a new medium is there. Remember, Sony has Blu-Ray, the others don't. Right now, Sony has the storage advantage both in physical media and hd space (when you add your own external). MS is hitting a wall with physical media and I think there at a dead end in expanding without doing multi-discs, which no one will tolerate for very long. The only MS could go with a new system is to get a license from Sony to use Blu-ray or strictly digital download the next system. If they do go digital download, that would alienate some of the userbase I'm afraid. Or stay in this gen and expand by expanding its Hard drive capabilities to 500 gigs or 1 tb without a system refresh or have a bundle refresh every couple of years to accomodate new gaming experiences that require large amounts of memory.


MS is trying to expand the use of the Xbox360 because it has no where to go in the next several years and using Kinect and other features are their way of saying, we have nothing at this point for the next gen. That is ok though. It seems to be the direction they are heading.

Development money is simply not there like it used to. It is not financial advantageous for either Sony or MS to move to another system at least for 5-6 years. This has been my complaint for a long time. Companies in previous gens would move to a new system every 5 to 6 years. This generation is much different and a different economic climate. Plus the amount of backlog and games undiscovered on shelves is so much to pass up. I know alot of people would rather have a system with an immense library and backlog instead of one where they abandon and move on after 5 years.

See, Nintendo isn't technically abandoning the Wii, it is taking a new lifeform. It is a new system, but it isn't. It is a redesign, an evolution of the current gen, but not really next gen. So I think it gives credence that the next gen may not be upon us for several years, or quite possibly at all.

So my prediction is this: Wii U will be a hardware refresh of what is current. MS and Sony will react to how Wii U does and will come out with a controller similar in tech, but their existing system through firmware updates and such. And the PS3, Xbox 360 and Wii U will coexist and do different things for gamers for the next several years.

That is why I think people were underwhelmed at this E3. People were anticipating the next gen, when in essence, probably will not happen for a long time. It doesn't make sense to move to the next gen, whatever than entails. Some gamers say, well PC tech is so far advanced, why can't they use that. It may be that PC tech is eon above the consoles, but consoles are not PC's. There are advantages and disadvantages to both. Each format has its own type of gamer. Consoles will never be on the same level as PC's because consoles are built with simplicity and ease of use in mind. PC's are for the advanced gamer who demand high level of graphics and customibility. Different functions for different things.

Personally, the way things are heading, it is an exciting time to be a gamer, especially if you invested time and money in this generation of consoles.

Something to think about :cool:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='chimpmeister']No offense, but if you are still gaming on a CRT vs. an HDTV, you're missing out on a huge amount of graphical detail. Just enormous. New games on a CRT are going to lack enormous amounts of detail and clarity, vs. an HDTV. Of course if you are playing older games (PS1, PS2, SNES, Genesis, Neo Geo, Dreamcast, etc.), a CRT is just fine. In fact, for many of these older games, they tend to look better on CRTs vs HDTVs.

And no, LCD TVs don't break a lot. I have a 37" Samsung LCD which is over two years old, still working perfectly. Picture looks great, all the hookups are fine, no problems. And the prices of HDTVs have fallen drastically, back when we got our 37 it cost about $970, now something that size would be about half the price (and for what we paid back then, you can get much larger HDTVs now).[/QUOTE]

2-3 years old doesn't say much. Many people rocking CRT's have had them for 10-20 years with no problems.
 
If Nintendo came out and said, we're forgoing the five year console lifespan in favor of three years, but we're going to make everything backwards compatible from now on and with a price point of $200 would everyone still be pissed off? We all know Nintendo doesn't lose money on consoles and if this is maybe just a little better than the 360, is that not good enough for three years if it once again dominates the market?

I'm as confused as most people here, but I'm on board because I like Nintendo enough to trust them, they seem to know what they're doing. Hopefully, they take some of the money they've got stuffed in their deep pockets and pay up for some exclusives or maybe even buy up a nice smaller third party making some great games, like when they had Rare.

As is, I don't think they've got hardware finalized, specs could change and that might be partially due to the backlash they're receiving. If they could manage to get beyond PS3 power, would that please people? I'm not even sure, what sort of machines we'll be looking at in the next-gen. What will be the jump from the PS3 to the PS4 or Xbox 360 to the Xbox Lifestyle Media Center 1080?
 
Well this sucks balls, Nintendo may be adopting a PS2 approach to online instead of a PSN/XBL approach, which they made it sound like they were doing.

http://nintendoeverything.com/67141/
Nintendo has been very hesitant to discuss online details for their new console, Wii U. Ubisoft shared some fairly interesting online details for Ghost Recon Online a couple of days ago, but wouldn’t say if the functions that were mentioned, such as a flexible friends list, would be available for all titles on the platform. Well, it looks like we have our answer now.

Charlie Scibetta, Senior Director for Nintendo of America Corporate Communications, revealed in an interview that the system won’t “have a centralized, one size fits all type of online gaming approach.” Instead, Nintendo will be working with third-parties to bring their ideas to the Wii U.

Said Scibetta:

“Online gaming is very important to us. We’ve heard the demands really of the veteran gamers that want that. So we’re going to be very flexible with gaming this time when it comes to online. We’re going to work with third-party partners. We’re not going to have a centralized, one size fits all type of online gaming approach. It’s going to be more of the publishers figuring out what they want to do and then we’ll try to work to bring that to life and make sure our platform can support that vision.”
Click to expand...
 
A big part of my gripe is that they keep saying it's next gen, and how powerful it is... Yet they ran the reel based on PS3 and 360. And it's on par c with PS3/360. So is it even, or is it better? If it's better as they claim, how so? If it's up to par, what's my incentive for buying one over a PS3/360? Especially if the highlight is only single player, and it costs more.

Disclaimer: My theory. If you don't like it, don't read it.

Also, if they make it a lot more powerful, they'll have to convince developers to make it the lead platform when developing, and they'd have to make sure to have the SDK to support easy porting to PS3/360. Problem then would be the other systems not having the Wii U controller. Then that'll likely mean third parties will end up making exclusive game instead, which means more of them will be weary of developing for it, leading once again to bad third party support.

At this point, it's hard for them to have a clear victory, imo.

End disclaimer.
 
[quote name='Redeema']If Nintendo came out and said, we're forgoing the five year console lifespan in favor of three years, but we're going to make everything backwards compatible from now on and with a price point of $200 would everyone still be pissed off? We all know Nintendo doesn't lose money on consoles and if this is maybe just a little better than the 360, is that not good enough for three years if it once again dominates the market?

I'm as confused as most people here, but I'm on board because I like Nintendo enough to trust them, they seem to know what they're doing. Hopefully, they take some of the money they've got stuffed in their deep pockets and pay up for some exclusives or maybe even buy up a nice smaller third party making some great games, like when they had Rare.

As is, I don't think they've got hardware finalized, specs could change and that might be partially due to the backlash they're receiving. If they could manage to get beyond PS3 power, would that please people? I'm not even sure, what sort of machines we'll be looking at in the next-gen. What will be the jump from the PS3 to the PS4 or Xbox 360 to the Xbox Lifestyle Media Center 1080?[/QUOTE]

Except the Wii will have been out for 5+ years assuming a 2012 Wii U launch. Not the longest gap between systems, but not the 4 year gap seen a few times.

And what backlash? They had a parade of developers giving them praise. That is certainly a change from the Wii announcement, at least regarding the hardware, not the Wiimote itself.
 
Ok, then what's next gen? Single player gaming confined to the house? Undefined multiplayer? What makes it next gen if it's not more powerful? Controls don't define the generation either, else the power glove would be a generation, and Wii wouldn't be in the same generation as the other two consoles.
 
who cares? It's their next generation console. What are they gonna say "our next console is this gen"?

I don't think you understand the point of marketing. Even if they went backward to EGA graphics, they'd still call it next gen.

Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft could all launch an Atari 5200 clone and they'd still tell you it's innovative, next gen, groundbreaking stuff. It's just marketing, man.
 
So I've been browsing the various game sites, but I couldn't find any info on being able to transfer Wii virtual console games over to Wii U. Surely somebody asked that question during one the many interviews this week. Anyone hear anything?
 
[quote name='confoosious']who cares? It's their next generation console. What are they gonna say "our next console is this gen"?

I don't think you understand the point of marketing. Even if they went backward to EGA graphics, they'd still call it next gen.

Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft could all launch an Atari 5200 clone and they'd still tell you it's innovative, next gen, groundbreaking stuff. It's just marketing, man.[/QUOTE]

Then why bother saying anything about generations? They purposely hyped it as next gen, without explaining why it's next gen.

Had they just said it's not part of a gen, check out our revolutionary control scheme, I (and probably others) wouldn't be so confused.

If a snake oil seller says his snake oil is the best, without even saying why, I don't think it'd be selling either.
 
[quote name='elessar123']Sigh what? I'm not the only person that thinks this. Lots of reporters are confused. The investors are confused.[/QUOTE]

And the stock is tanking. Bummer. :cry:
 
[quote name='seanr1221']If the online is like the PS2s, it would be terrible. Different names for every game?[/QUOTE]

You're not allowed to speak the truth!

This is how it works based on stuff we really don't know much about:
1) If it's good, then we praise it and make sure we make some kind of flawed insult at MS/Sony.
2) If it's bad, then we compare it to something irrelevant.
3. Call you stupid either way.

I have a feeling they are going to go more PS2'ish online.
Is it better then friend codes? Yeah, I guess it is.
Is it suitable for a GAMING CONSOLE like they are aiming to do in 2012? Absolutely not. Now watch, someone will call me wrong saying THEY NEVER SAID IT WAS A GAMING CONSOLE YOU STUPID MORON.

What saddens me is that we'll get a PS2'ish online service for this and people will defend it. It's almost mind blowing. Xbox Live IS the standard for online gaming and how it should be set up. Sony's isn't bad, but it's no XBL.

I do hope we're wrong and it comes with a REAL online service.
 
Actually, if you guys are so smart about the wiiu and how nintendo is handling it being so bad... short the stock. Put your money where you mouth is.

Yeah... I didn't think so.
 
[quote name='seanr1221']So...I can't say using an online structure from 2000 is bad without being a shareholder?[/QUOTE]

well, 1st, yeah, that online structure would be shitty. Wasn't responding to you.
And 2nd, shorting the stock is not being a shareholder. :lol:
 
[quote name='seanr1221']So...I can't say using an online structure from 2000 is bad without being a shareholder?[/QUOTE]

Absolutely not.
I told you, anything that appears to be negative and people it point out are WRONG. You actually can't give pros and cons. It has to be all pros and any cons have to put a MAYBE on it.

I understand nothing is completely official, but if people are allowed to rant and rave about awesome it would be to _____ and zomg we could use the wiipad for ____.. then people should look at it in the same way and ask questions that may not be so positive because they are concerns.

Don't you remember 2006? When we all saw the controller and nunchuk in action? How many of us (and yes, you and I included) would say ZOMG HOW COOL WOULD IT BE TO ____ AND ZOMG THESE CONTROLS MAKE IT PERFECT FOR _____.

...and we're STILL wrong for saying we're disappointed with how the majority of those "zomg what if" games came out. Took like 3 years to give us something close to 1:1 motion... :roll:
 
So let me get this... they quote-on-quote don't have a true system, more or less a prototype with tech demos and yet you guys know that this future system will have a quite inferior online system that rivaled PS2's online system...*cough* Too early to know *cough* BS *cough* :roll:

[quote name='XMBRI']An example: Nintendo could have easily went to a traditional console with sooped up graphics and would have competed with the other two. But they didn't. I think the limitation of moving to a new medium is there. Remember, Sony has Blu-Ray, the others don't. Right now, Sony has the storage advantage both in physical media and hd space (when you add your own external). MS is hitting a wall with physical media and I think there at a dead end in expanding without doing multi-discs, which no one will tolerate for very long. The only MS could go with a new system is to get a license from Sony to use Blu-ray or strictly digital download the next system. If they do go digital download, that would alienate some of the userbase I'm afraid. Or stay in this gen and expand by expanding its Hard drive capabilities to 500 gigs or 1 tb without a system refresh or have a bundle refresh every couple of years to accomodate new gaming experiences that require large amounts of memory.[/quote]

Multiple discs have existed since the start of disc based console games; I had/have tons of PS1 and PS2 titles with multiple discs. Being that the titles are far and in-between for Xbox that have multiple discs (i have yet to encounter one; though I know they exist), I would say this isn't really a problem for disc storage up to this point. By the time both Sony and Microsoft move up to a new console, who knows what the disc medium will be at that point.
 
[quote name='lordopus99']So let me get this... they quote-on-quote don't have a true system, more or less a prototype with tech demos and yet you guys know that this future system will have a quite inferior online system that rivaled PS2's online system...*cough* Too early to know *cough* BS *cough* :roll:



Multiple discs have existed since the start of disc based console games; I had/have tons of PS1 and PS2 titles with multiple discs. Being that the titles are far and in-between for Xbox that have multiple discs (i have yet to encounter one; though I know they exist), I would say this isn't really a problem for disc storage up to this point. By the time both Sony and Microsoft move up to a new console, who knows what the disc medium will be at that point.[/QUOTE]

Well just look at PC gaming, since home consoles will theoretically be a handful of years behind the PC. What current games come over 25GB?
 
I think having a clone of XBL would be a bad idea.... something that you have to pay more for?!

good lord, I already bought the game, do I have to pay more to play with a friend?

Multiplayer can be fun, online multiplayer can be fun, but when online multiplayer is an asshole, it fucking blows.... as least if someone acted like that in the living room, you can reach out and smack some sense.

Nintendo may have confused quite a few people... but who the fuck cares, the damn thing isn't even going to see daylight till a year from now. If you're still confused, then you have a problem.

Let Nintendo worry about it's own shit, and move on.

the biggest point to E3 is the press and 3rd party support, a little smoke, a little mirrors... not for CAGs, not for the Joe Smoe bitching about being confused.

Now what I'm wondering is, how many batteries will that tablet take? Or does it seem like it has a battery pack like the Wii Fit... which may not be a good thing. Money wise, I'd rather charge 100s of batteries instead of paying for a new pack every half year.



Thank goodness cars didn't follow the 'next-gen' rules.... we'd have some bitching lookin rides that get all the ladgies... but inside there still would be no ABS, no rear camera, no traction control, airbags can fuck off, and MPG would stay at single digits. Just because it looks pretty doesn't mean its innovative, improved, a step in evolution of gaming. Cripes PCs have been the "same" for several decades now, just depends on how many pixels can be pushed at the same time. Nintendo is pushing the gaming bar, maybe not in the graphics but in how you play, where you play and it shows because it's influenced the other companies. Would Move or Kinect ever be without motion controllers pushing that bounderies? (It doesn't matter how stupid it is now, but the fact that RD/QA released and pushing those features is a statement of innovation).

I am glad Nintendo didn't do a GC2. It would be really fucking boring around here. Here as in these threads :lol:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='xmbri']That is why I think people were underwhelmed at this E3. People were anticipating the next gen, when in essence, probably will not happen for a long time. It doesn't make sense to move to the next gen, whatever than entails. Some gamers say, well PC tech is so far advanced, why can't they use that. It may be that PC tech is eon above the consoles, but consoles are not PC's. There are advantages and disadvantages to both. Each format has its own type of gamer. Consoles will never be on the same level as PC's because consoles are built with simplicity and ease of use in mind. PC's are for the advanced gamer who demand high level of graphics and customibility. Different functions for different things.[/quote]

I really wonder what more can be done with consoles. I think we've reached a point that simply more powerful tech isn't going to be enough to get people to buy. I can't really imagine a more powerful console really impressing the general populace. I don't really see the upgrade-mania in the PC world much either. I've had my computer for 5 years, and while I have had one graphics card update, it still seems to work well for a gaming machine.

[quote name='Cerebral_One']Well this sucks balls, Nintendo may be adopting a PS2 approach to online instead of a PSN/XBL approach, which they made it sound like they were doing.[/QUOTE]

It is hard to say what it means at this point. I have a feeling it will be somewhere in between. Nintendo will have something at the console level, but there will be freedom for game makers to do what they want within their game. I also think that things are far from settled at this point.

That being said, I doubt it will be like the PS2.

[quote name='elessar123']A big part of my gripe is that they keep saying it's next gen, and how powerful it is... Yet they ran the reel based on PS3 and 360. And it's on par c with PS3/360. So is it even, or is it better? If it's better as they claim, how so? If it's up to par, what's my incentive for buying one over a PS3/360? Especially if the highlight is only single player, and it costs more.[/quote]

Which is why Nintendo has been going against the grain with using motion controls and now this new controller, which I definitely think is interesting. When it comes right down to it, tho, it comes down to getting the games you want to play. Nintendo has usually delivered on that promise. The problem in the recent past has been 3rd party support, which Nintendo seems to have focused on rectifying.

Also, if they make it a lot more powerful, they'll have to convince developers to make it the lead platform when developing, and they'd have to make sure to have the SDK to support easy porting to PS3/360. Problem then would be the other systems not having the Wii U controller. Then that'll likely mean third parties will end up making exclusive game instead, which means more of them will be weary of developing for it, leading once again to bad third party support.
Click to expand...

Watching the press conference, there does seem to be a lot of excitement with the new controller and its potential in gaming. Which is an improvement over the reaction over motion controls, which seem to be written off by a lot of developers as for non-serious gamers.

Also, remember that the other consolemakers followed Nintendo's lead, eventually offering competing products. If the Wii U is successful, I expect that the other makers will follow suit. I'm sure Sony is already looking into things with the Vita, tho I expect it will be a couple of years before we see such functionality with the PS3/Vita, if at all.

BTW, weren't you the one who was complaining about Nintendo spilling the beans and potentially letting competitors catch up? You can't have it both ways.
 
[quote name='xycury']Now what I'm wondering is, how many batteries will that tablet take? Or does it seem like it has a battery pack like the Wii Fit... which may not be a good thing. Money wise, I'd rather charge 100s of batteries instead of paying for a new pack every half year.[/QUOTE]

Either would be better than the PS3 controller situation of sealed batteries.

I'm hoping for more AAs as well.
 
[quote name='confoosious']well, 1st, yeah, that online structure would be shitty. Wasn't responding to you.
And 2nd, shorting the stock is not being a shareholder. :lol:[/QUOTE]

It's reverse trading.
 
Any reason to get a Wii now since the Wii U is backwards compatible with current Wii games?

I was thinking of getting one since it is cheaper and the Wii is available now. Is there anything hardware unique about the Wii that the Wii U can't do like how the Gamecube can play Gameboy Advance games through the Gameboy Player/similar devices.
 
They said Wii games and accessories would work on Wii U. Gotta remember though that some saves don't transfer over (Like Mario Kart Wii and Brawl) unless they introduce a FW update to remove locked saves.

I'm guessing that Gamecube games will be on their Shop, and the current Classic Controller will be fitted with them.

Honestly though, I want a New Classic Controller that's wireless and has rumble. Specifically for when Brawl comes out.
 
[quote name='Strell']Wii U won't play Gamecube games, nor have Gamecube ports. That's the one thing I can think of right now.[/QUOTE]

Wanna bet they resell them in the VC? Wii is literally an overclocked gamecube, so there's no technical reason to withhold support.
 
[quote name='Strell']Wii U won't play Gamecube games, nor have Gamecube ports. That's the one thing I can think of right now.[/QUOTE]

This makes me such a sad panda :(
I think one of the things I did like about the Wii was that we did have options to use different types of controllers. So when all else failed, we pulled out the wavebird.

Wii is just an updated Gamecube. WiiU isn updated Wii... logically, we should be able to play GCN games.

But I'm sure the overall response would be WHO WANTS TO PLAY GAMECUBE GAMES N E WAYZ?! :(

I do!
 
[quote name='Anexanhume']Wanna bet they resell them in the VC? Wii is literally an overclocked gamecube, so there's no technical reason to withhold support.[/QUOTE]

That would put them right in line with Microsoft and Sony. So sure, why not. Lack of a HDD might make this an issue, given Nintendo's caveman stance on digital data.

[quote name='lilboo']WiiU isn updated Wii... logically, we should be able to play GCN games.[/QUOTE]

Not that I doubt this is most likely correct reasoning, but that's a little too simplistic. I imagine it would have the same issues as, say, a program running in Vista might fail in 7. Difficult to predict all of that.

Wii might be an upgraded Gamecube, but there are literally GC guts in the Wii. Won't be the same with the University, so I imagine there could be unforeseen difficulties. There's minimum nine months until the Uganda comes out. I can let them finalize the Ultra before jumping to some conclusions.

Union.
Underground.
Ulysses.
Ubermench.
Underboob.

Edit: Eh oh el at this thread's tags. You guys could have left mine. No one would have complained. And I WAS confused. Still somewhat am.

Broly, that sounds nice, but I'd want a wired controller. Fighting games demand that sort of thing. Why not a hybrid that does wire or wireless? Surely that is possible.
 
[quote name='seanr1221']It's reverse trading.[/QUOTE]

:roll: shorting a stock doesn't mean you're a shareholder (technically for more than a millisecond) and never in the figurative sense especially since you are rooting against the stock.

My challenge stands: if all the geniuses on this site already know how crappy of a job Nintendo execs are doing with the wiiU and think they're smarter than they are, go ahead and short the stock. After all, they know what's gonna happen a year from now, right?
 
I already knew about the Wii U not being able to play Gamecube games. I have a Gamecube so I have that fix taken care of. What I want is a good reason to even consider getting a Wii at this point, instead of waiting for the Wii U? Besides the price tag and being able to get a Wii now.

A wireless classic controller would be nice that supported the rumble pak pack feature of many N64 games.
 
[quote name='confoosious']:roll: shorting a stock doesn't mean you're a shareholder (technically for more than a millisecond) and never in the figurative sense especially since you are rooting against the stock.
[/QUOTE]

http://xkcd.com/169/
 
Youve waited this long, I don't think getting a wii at this point is that necessary unless you find a killer deal.

Looking back on it, getting flungsmash for 20 was a great deal cause I can use it on the next gen.


[quote name='seanr1221']http://xkcd.com/169/[/QUOTE]


awww, that's cute that you had a web cartoon at the ready! But shorting a stock is till not being a shareholder.
 
Hahaha I always knew you were one of those guys who rely on Internet memes when you run out of things to say. You could go back to accusing me of flippingSMAS?
 
[quote name='confoosious']Hahaha I always knew you were one of those guys who rely on Internet memes when you run out of things to say. You could go back to accusing me of flippingSMAS?[/QUOTE]

What's a meme? Sounds like a neckbeard mouth-breather term.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top