Wii/Wii U

[B0r3d*m Alien]

That's a very good point he made..
Although, DC was just way too ahead of its time.

Like I may have said before, the thing that bothers me about Nintendo is that they don't want to with the flow...at least not completely. They have said that they want to attract, not only the hardcore gamers, but the casual ones too using the Revolution. But I think they don't understand that consoles have evolved.

It does seem weird that GAME consoles have DVD players, and CD players...but if that helps lure people into trying your console out, then common sense would tell me to use that bait and when you reel in the catch, you can treat them to what your game console really is about.

Yet, that's only one part of creating and maintaining a fan base..the rest involves third party games and popular exclusive titles.

I'm still wondering what is revolutionary about the Revolution...

Hopefully that all comes out when Nintendo sheds light on this system.
BA out..

 

[demoncaterpie]

Originally posted by B0r3d*m Alien
That's a very good point he made..
Although, DC was just way too ahead of its time.

Like I may have said before, the thing that bothers me about Nintendo is that they don't want to with the flow...at least not completely. They have said that they want to attract, not only the hardcore gamers, but the casual ones too using the Revolution. But I think they don't understand that consoles have evolved.

It does seem weird that GAME consoles have DVD players, and CD players...but if that helps lure people into trying your console out, then common sense would tell me to use that bait and when you reel in the catch, you can treat them to what your game console really is about.

Yet, that's only one part of creating and maintaining a fan base..the rest involves third party games and popular exclusive titles.

I'm still wondering what is revolutionary about the Revolution...

Hopefully that all comes out when Nintendo sheds light on this system.
BA out..

It just seems weird, all this secrecy about the Revolution. I remember last year Nintendo was screaming DS to the masses while the PSP was mere feet away. They obviously weren't afraid of the PSP, so why would they fear the PS3? Why all the secrecy? Something just doesn't fit. Their must be something about this system, something about their graphics, that Nintendo feels needs to kept secret. Could it really be that "Revolutionary?"

I don't think Nintendo's ever been afraid or ashamed of their products, they made a hand-held with two screens and a touch pad . The heart of the matter must rest in their graphics. Mr Miyamoto stated in his interview with Ign.com that he is afraid that if they reveal this new device too soon, it will get stolen and copied. Do they really think that what they have here is the next analog stick? the next Wavebird? Something that is so incredible, so ingenious, that it must be kept behind closed doors, not to be seen until the time is right?

You may as well say that it will be a gimick (since most of you are probably thinking that), but your average gimick isn't kept so secret. I mean, look at the Gameboy Micro. That won't be out for awhile, yet Nintendo is firmly annoucing it to the world. Nintendo annouced that gimick, yet kept their truly Revolutionary details hidden.

I really hope I end up being right when I say this, but if Nintendo is keeping the Revolution under so much red tape and closed doors, it must be something they're truly proud of, something they're really happy about, something they know will truly Revolutionize the industry.

 

[Giygas]

I remember last year Nintendo was screaming DS to the masses while the PSP was mere feet away. They obviously weren't afraid of the PSP, so why would they fear the PS3?

Well launching a portable system is a bit different than launching a next-generation home console against two of the biggest electronics manufacturers in the world. Besides, DS was coming out that year. I'd say Revolution is well over a year away. They'll definitely use E3 2006 as a springboard into launching their console (and I have a feeling that'll be the E3 to attend to as Sony pits their PS3 on the show floor versus the finally realized Revolution).

I don't think Nintendo's ever been afraid or ashamed of their products, they made a hand-held with two screens and a touch pad . The heart of the matter must rest in their graphics. Mr Miyamoto stated in his interview with Ign.com that he is afraid that if they reveal this new device too soon, it will get stolen and copied.

Mr. Miyamoto was also afraid to show Super Mario Sunshine, because you just know everyone was going to steal the idea of a talking water nozzle.

if Nintendo is keeping the Revolution under so much red tape and closed doors, it must be something they're truly proud of, something they're really happy about, something they know will truly Revolutionize the industry.

Or they're just embarrased.

 

[Aruun]

Personally I think most of you are being terribly cynical and stubborn. This generation's graphics are plenty enough to look nice and function well for the games I want to play. So if the PS3, 360, and Rev can pull out better graphics than the current generation systems, I'll be happy. I don't particularly care about graphics, which is why I probably won't get a PS3 - that's all it's got.

Don't get me wrong, I wish Nintendo had released more, but I don't think we're in any place to say if Nintendo's business planning is correct or not when we don't even know what's so secret about their console.

Either way, I updated with links to recent news.

 

[demoncaterpie]

Originally posted by JediMasterYoda98
Personally I think most of you are being terribly cynical and stubborn. This generation's graphics are plenty enough to look nice and function well for the games I want to play. So if the PS3, 360, and Rev can pull out better graphics than the current generation systems, I'll be happy. I don't particularly care about graphics, which is why I probably won't get a PS3 - that's all it's got.

Don't get me wrong, I wish Nintendo had released more, but I don't think we're in any place to say if Nintendo's business planning is correct or not when we don't even know what's so secret about their console.

Either way, I updated with links to recent news.

I agree with you Yoda, and that's my biggest complaint about Revolution haters.

Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but saying PS3's going to beat Revolution when we haven't even seen it is just not fair for Nintendo.

Remember, "Don't count your chickens before they hatch" or something like that.

 

[Craftstar]

How could you say that graphics are all PS3 has because it has good graphics? It has good graphics therefore it has no other positive features for its games? Ok.. At least (for what we know about the systems) PS3 has graphics right now, considering Revolution has nothing at all that we've seen, besides a promise that it'll be neat.

But if Nintendo is confident in Revolution, lets see there plans. It's not like I don't want it to be revolutionary, I'm just having doubts considering Nintendo's past record and their lack of presence at e3 =(

 

[demoncaterpie]

Originally posted by Craftstar
How could you say that graphics are all PS3 has because it has good graphics? It has good graphics therefore it has no other positive features for its games? Ok.. At least (for what we know about the systems) PS3 has graphics right now, considering Revolution has nothing at all that we've seen, besides a promise that it'll be neat.

But if Nintendo is confident in Revolution, lets see there plans. It's not like I don't want it to be revolutionary, I'm just having doubts considering Nintendo's past record and their lack of presence at e3 =(

What I like about Nintendo this year is that they're fixing the mistakes they made with Gamecube. They're adding DVD capabilities, built in memory storage, backwards compatibility. Little things like this really put my faith back in Nintendo. At least they know what they did wrong, and I have a feeling Revolution will be their best system yet.

They're trying to clear their bad slate, and I respect that. But is it too late for them? I don't think so. It's never too late to improve on anything. And about this whole new style they're trying to create, I'm really excited about it. If it turns out incredible, Nintendo will be in a good position. Otherwise, they won't stand a chance.

I'm remaining optimistic until I see it.

 

[Cashed]

Nintendo is "clearing their slate" but they don't seem to be up to Microsoft and Sony in my opinion. Backwards compatibility? Should've been done with GameCube. Yes, it would've been odd have a console that had a cartridge slot and a disc tray, but it would've brought more people over from the N64. DVD? Should've been done with GameCube. Online? Should've been done with GameCube. LAN? You shouldn't have needed to buy an extra accessory to utilize it for GameCube.

The Revolution is sounding interesting, it's just Nintendo may be in the category of "too little too late."

 

[demoncaterpie]

Originally posted by Cashed
Nintendo is "clearing their slate" but they don't seem to be up to Microsoft and Sony in my opinion. Backwards compatibility? Should've been done with GameCube. Yes, it would've been odd have a console that had a cartridge slot and a disc tray, but it would've brought more people over from the N64. DVD? Should've been done with GameCube. Online? Should've been done with GameCube. LAN? You shouldn't have needed to buy an extra accessory to utilize it for GameCube.

The Revolution is sounding interesting, it's just Nintendo may be in the category of "too little too late."

Yes, you're absolutely right. It should have been done with Gamecube. That fact of the matter is, it wasn't. Nothing anyone can say will change that. What we can do is embrace the fact that Nintendo is doing it now, that they know what they "should have" done and now they're doing it.

As I have said before, it's never too late to fix your mistakes, and Nintendo looks to be doing just that. I'm sure that once Nintendo reveals whatever it is that they are keeping under lock and key it will end up being incredible.

 

[Aruun]

Originally posted by Craftstar
How could you say that graphics are all PS3 has because it has good graphics? It has good graphics therefore it has no other positive features for its games? Ok.. At least (for what we know about the systems) PS3 has graphics right now, considering Revolution has nothing at all that we've seen, besides a promise that it'll be neat.

I meant that all the PS3 has in comparison to the PS2 is better graphics. Well, that's not completely correct... it has a much worse controller design, uses bluetooth technology for their wireless (which honestly isn't very good as far as I'm concerned), and it can do a bunch of worthless crap like slideshows. It offers nothing new for gameplay, and at this point in time that's all I want.

Nintendo is fixing their past mistakes, I don't see how messing up with the GCN could matter if they fix it this generation. The Rev will be backwards compatible (even back to NES technically), it will have a decent online service that's cheap as free, built-in storage, a much sleeker design, DVD playback, etc. If they're fixing all that AND coming up with some "Revolutionary" control scheme, I don't see how it adds up as destruction for Nintendo.

I thought this generation people would get over graphics because essentially, no matter what, they would all look fantastic.

Guess I was wrong.

 

[B0r3d*m Alien]

Eyetoy..that's all I've got to say

That's the last addition to gameplay enhancements that I've seen since online play, whether you like it or not.

I believe this is an idea that is far from being perfected, but it looks that Sony will continue to work with it.

Anyways, back to Nintendo people.
BA out..

 

[Cashed]

Originally posted by JediMasterYoda98
I thought this generation people would get over graphics because essentially, no matter what, they would all look fantastic.

Guess I was wrong.

I thought this upcoming generation would as well... I mean, you really aren't going to tell the difference between the systems graphics, you'll only be able to if a developer makes a lazy port to one of the systems. Yet we still have PSTools saying "omfg look at killzone!!!!111 fapfapfapfap xbox 360 and revolution suuuuuck.."

 

[RichBrown]

yeah, graphics are totally out of the equation IMO. i mean, the GC/Xbox/PS2 graphics are already stunning and realistic for the most part. It is sort of hard to see how the Rev/360/PS3 could actually make a dramatic improvement from that. even if none of the systems made a change, i wouldnt lose any sleep over it.

focusing on the revolution itself... you gotta admit nintendo is finally going down the right path. unfortunately they are not one to follow the crowd, and that can be a good thing in some respects, but not this one. the gamecube was a MAJOR error because of its lack of features. if the GC could have done some of the stuff the Rev can do, the whole console race would have been much different.

the backwards compatability is a big selling point for me, as well as online SSB3. im glad that nintendo is finally starting to see what gamers really want. i grew tired of them trying to come up with super original revolutionary ideas (no pun intended) that didnt really make any sense.

 

[Craftstar]

Originally posted by Cashed
I thought this upcoming generation would as well... I mean, you really aren't going to tell the difference between the systems graphics, you'll only be able to if a developer makes a lazy port to one of the systems. Yet we still have PSTools saying "omfg look at killzone!!!!111 fapfapfapfap xbox 360 and revolution suuuuuck.."

So drooling over Killzone demo makes me a PSTool

For the record I think XBOX 360 looks very nice as well and I think their online support is very solid at this point. I certainly don't think it sucks.

I can't say Revolution sucks because I don't know **** all about it. What I'm saying here is that I doubt Nintendo will impress me, but it's not like I don't want them to impress me like the people who don't want the Killzone trailer to be real because if it's real that means PS3 has killer graphics and the balance of hating certain video game systems for no reason would be upset.

TBC: Getting rid of the censor dodge

 

[Mic_128]

Originally posted by Craftstar
What I'm saying here is that I doubt Nintendo will impress me, but it's not like I don't want them to impress me like the people who don't want the Killzone trailer to be real because if it's real that means PS3 has killer graphics and the balance of hating certain video game systems for no reason would be upset.

That is too long for one sentance.

I say those who are complaining to shut up and wait. Yeh they didn't show it, getting in late could be a problem, but i think we get all that now.

 

[Misto-Roboto]

Originally posted by Cashed
Nintendo is "clearing their slate" but they don't seem to be up to Microsoft and Sony in my opinion. Backwards compatibility? Should've been done with GameCube. Yes, it would've been odd have a console that had a cartridge slot and a disc tray, but it would've brought more people over from the N64. DVD? Should've been done with GameCube. Online? Should've been done with GameCube. LAN? You shouldn't have needed to buy an extra accessory to utilize it for GameCube.

The Revolution is sounding interesting, it's just Nintendo may be in the category of "too little too late."

Done that with the GameCube? Are you serious? Who in there right mind would have honestly been able to find a way to make that work? It's one thing to claim backwards compatability on software or firmware. All Sony did was add their OS for their previous system in the PS2. There is no backwards compability, just two OSes in one machine. If ony really does go through with making their games BlueRay, backwards compatiblity is gonna up the sticker price on the PS3.

Backwards compatability, pshht. Pointless as far as I am concerned. If I need to play the old game, I'll just take out my old system. Works when I want to play a classic again.

 

[Cashed]

Misto, BC might not mean much to you, but it's a major selling point for many people.

 

[pokemonmaster01]

If it could be made to play GBA games, why not N64? Or SNES and NES, for that matter.

 

[B0r3d*m Alien]

BC, Backwards Compatibility as Cashed put it :-D, is a good selling point because it makes things convenient for the consumer. That's why DVD and CD players integrated into the console also help.

Nintendo surely realizes that by now..no?
BA out..

 

[Giygas]

In today's industry, Nintendo's not in the greatest position. While the portable market is still large and booming, that boom may not be as big as it was now that the first "serious" handheld competitor has entered the market and has already begun nibbling at Nintendo's share.

The console market was where it truly began its slide. Things changed, Nintendo didn't. Competitors went to CD-ROM, Ninty stayed with cartridges. Competitors included DVD players, Ninty included... well, nothing. Sony's PS2 looked great and the Xbox looked decent, while GameCube was regarded as a purple toybox (despite Nintendo's later efforts to make the change to black being the primary color). The lack of mature-rated games, the kiddy image, the oversaturation of Pokemon and Mario. Which led to lack of third-party support.

Heck, my local video store has PS2 and Xbox games but not one single GameCube title. I think that says something.

Of course, Nintendo has tried to reverse some trends. Backwards compatibility is great. Although you do know that the official quote is "technically ever game made by Nintendo could be played." You've got "technically" which basically means "theoretically" which means that only certain games will be available (for a price), and you've got "made by Nintendo" which seems to me like it'll exclude games by other companies.

Wi-fi is nice and free, although there are better technologies out there. But it's great to see Nintendo move to online.

And of course the ability to play DVDs (with seperate purchase for the hookup) is cool too, although since everyone pretty much has DVD players at this point and since Sony and Xbox are moving to the "Blu-ray" and "HD" eras respectively which opens up massive storage capabilities, it doesn't look so hot.

But the lack of a major showstopper (besides Zelda, which its "twilight princess" title is quite controversial) and the lack of solid Rev details left the Big N talking about Nintendogs and Elektroplankton and then saying how those kind of games will be coming to Revolution. Uh...

Sure, I applaud Nintendo for bucking the industry trends and I do also agree that graphics aren't everything. Heck, look at RE4 on the GameCube. It's probably one the best, if not THE best-looking game this generation. Yet when Sony and Microsoft tout big numbers and you see that Killzone video (real or not), I can't see the move that financially viable for Nintendo. Even though the DS offers "radically different gameplay" developers can port the basic game over (like Madden) and just slap on a play screen or radar blipper or something. But to have a controller that supposdely doesn't even feature a d pad...?

I am very intrigued by the Revolution and I'm not counting it out. Hell, I'll buy it just for my Smash/Zelda/Metroid. But I just hate to see Nintendo slip again. And it's very disconcerting when you see tons of news articles about E3 concerning the latest systems without even mentioning Nintendo.

There's something called hype. Like it or not, it sells games. Even if they suck (Star Wars Episode III anyone?).

We'll just have to wait and see...

 

[Mediocre]

Sony's PS2 looked great and the Xbox looked decent, while GameCube was regarded as a purple toybox (despite Nintendo's later efforts to make the change to black being the primary color).

Are you kidding?

PS2 was a horrible looking system.

 

[EvilEvincar]

Giygas: You just seem to be a disappointed gamer, always wanting Nintendo to do better. I've seen a few, including one that is just disappointed with gaming in general. It just seems like you're being one of the Marvins (of Hitchhiker's Guide of the Galaxy) of Nintendo fans.

Anyway, there was a few things that you said that I would like to comment about.

Wi-fi is nice and free, although there are better technologies out there.

What is better? I find this convient, since I wouldn't have to buy a router specificly for the Revolution. I have never had my console and computer in the same room, so having wireless networking will help out quite a bit.

And of course the ability to play DVDs (with seperate purchase for the hookup) is cool too, although since everyone pretty much has DVD players at this point and since Sony and Xbox are moving to the "Blu-ray" and "HD" eras respectively which opens up massive storage capabilities, it doesn't look so hot.

I actually have a theory on this, although it will sound pretty far off. Right now, the HD disk medium is still up in the air. So I think Nintendo is making it so then a quick (and hopefully cheap) adaptation will make the Revolution compatable to which ever medium succeeds in becoming the HD medium.

 

[Mic_128]

Originally posted by EvilEvincar
It just seems like you're being one of the Marvin of Nintendo fans.

No, that's Cashed.

 

[demoncaterpie]

Giygas, I'm pretty sure Nitendo will have more then Nintendo-only game for their nes, snes, and N64 downloads. They can't afford not to have games like Final Fantasy 6 and Chrono Trigger available (I realize those are from the same company, but you get my point).

 

[DreamCaster]

Nintendo should just friggin' go third party.

There I said it.

This is not the first time I have preached this gospel and my utter loathing of Iwata makes this an impossible dream:

Originally quoted by Satoru Itwata:
Nintendo will stop making video games altogether if they're not making consoles.

ARRRRGH!! WHAT KIND OF BS IS THAT?! This may be an EXTRA peeve to me becuase I am a Sega veteran (and look at them, they tried, oh God how Sega tried, but in the end Sega came to realize that people love their games, not their consoles, so that's what Sega does, they make games, they didn't just disapear and QUIT and BETRAY their fans because they could no longer make consoles). Many, many, maaaaany Nintendo fans all agree: "with gaming it's not the consoles that are important, but rather the games." So tell me, why is Nintendo making consoles? Many people here will agree with me (especially with the N64 and GC) Nintendo is renound for their great games, not their consoles. Sony and Microsoft are huge technology supplying companies that know how to make market hardware. Do Sony and Microsoft even make their own games?... Okay yes, they do, every now and then you see a Sony SCEI game (Dark Cloud, Ico, Parappa the Rapper, or an Micorsoft Game Studios game (... uh... Project Gotham Racing... I think... but those games aren't what sell Playstations or Xboxes... it's the games Sony and Micorsoft pay 3rd Party Developers for, even for their exclusive titles to futher promote their consoles. PlayStaion and Xbox are gaming hubs, acess to a world of gaming... Gamecube is... acess to Nintendo... more or less.

IMO Nintendo's exclusive titles are like Sony and Micorsoft first party titles... okay, but they don't make me wanna buy a GameCube (Megaman NT Warrior? Billy Hatcher? Resident Evil 0? Good games, but the sole reason to by a GC?). The reason I wanna buy a GameCube is to play Zelda, Metroid, Star Fox, Mario, and he11, even Pokemon. God bless Nintendo, they really really really want to make hardware, but where has it ever gotten? Virtual Boy? The infared node on the GBC? The e-Reader? GBA to GC connetivity? All innovative, all unique, but has it brought about a revolution? Uploading Pokemon and Sports Game Player stats from Handhelds to Console is pretty sweet, a Nintendo trademark, but does Nintendo need it's own hardware to do so? I don't think so. Nintendo can still keep the Handheld market, but if their consoel games were to go third party, why not make their handheld hardware playable on other consoles, or even computers, or other hardware. But I get ahead of myself.

Remember the days of NES and SNES? Did we have all the junk we have now? Link Cables? Infared Ports? Wi-Fi? Console to Handheld connectors? Dual Screens? Touch Pads? Did it ever matter? Nintendo games were good games because or enthralling gameplay mechanics, engaging storylines, and lengendary heroes. If Nintendo focused more on making better games then ways to market game-cables and touch pads, then they may just find a way out of the mess they made for themselves. I love Nintendo games with all my heart, but when I see something like in Final Fantasy Chrystal Chronilces to play multiplayer I need friends, each with their own GBA and link cable, it's like some sort of discrimination. If I don't have friends with GBAs and GBA to GC connector cables I can't let them play FF:CC with me ... Nintendo's hardware innovations have had their ups and downs, but what I really care about is the games, not some quarky shematic where I hafta go out and spend money to buy this and that to hook this doodad to that gizmo in order to even play a game.

It's a double edged sword, I will admit. One can argue that Nintendo needs you to buy all of this stuff so you can play the game they way Nintendo intended you to play the game (you need GBAs to play Zelda or FF:CC to it's upmost potential).... or... you can argue that "a true artist can make art with any brush" just like the golden years of NES and SNES... Nintendo didn't need facny graphics or add ons, they gave you a simple d-pad-and-two-button controller and let you have fun. And even though I am a peripheral freak, I still am a fan of the latter (bongos and and dance pads make rhythm games more fun, but you love rhytm games you can still have a good time with a good ol' fashion controller).

Hmmm... someone should really resurect the "offical console debates" topic...

 

[Aruun]

Dreamcaster, you're acting as if Nintendo makes horrible consoles. Let's compare the GCN to the PS2 for a second...

GCN has better graphics, better loading times, and two more controller ports. What does the PS2 have? A DVD player. Yay.

Yet consoles sell because of games... which means Nintendo also doesn't lag behind with that. There are tons of exclusive games that are very, very good games, that you can only play on GCN.

So your point is completely invalid. You act as if Nintendo's consoles are horrible, and are just cheap marketing schemes to bring in some more cash for Nintendo. Don't get me wrong, I think connectivity was a bit redundant, and they should have had things like online or a better design, but Nintendo is fixing those mistakes. All Sony and Microsoft are doing is designing consoles with really good graphics, and a better online service. Nintendo is doing that and MORE. I wish you would just relax and stop freaking out just because someone doesn't mind Nintendo hardware.

If all your beloved music games were on GCN, which console do you think you'd be playing? You play a console because it has the games you like - not because it has pretty graphics, or a dvd player, or connectivity with your gameboy. Games are about having fun, about trying something new... so I say Nintendo should contintue on with what they're doing. I think they're heading in the right direction.

 

[Cashed]

Originally posted by mic_128
No, that's Cashed.

Hey, I have to make up for nearly the entire forum's "Nintendo is better than anyone else!" attitude. I enjoy what Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony have to offer, just not so much Sony and Nintendo now. I'm turning into what people call an "Xbot" and I'm fine with that. I get great games that appeal to me and features (like an awesome online service) that appeal to me. Isn't that what matters? When you have a company like Nintendo who seem to be behind with their consoles now (just getting to DVD, just getting online) not offering services that you want and games you want, you get disappointed and move on. I've moved on, I'm totally into Microsoft now. You can't expect me to not come in here and express my feelings towards Nintendo, either. It's a topic about Nintendo's upcoming console and I'll tell how I feel they're dealing with things. And I have to say, I agree with DC on numerous things he just said. Especially Nintendo's "when we don't make consoles anymore, we're done with games."

 

[Kirby King]

Originally posted by Giygas
Wi-fi is nice and free, although there are better technologies out there. But it's great to see Nintendo move to online.

Agree with most of your outlook, but I got totally lost here. Wi-Fi is a nice and generic term, and lacking any solid information I'd guess Revolution has at least 802.11b if not g. Even if that's what you're talking about, the practical differences between b and g aren't that great (certainly not great when it comes to the basic data that's sent online) and when you're talking about Internet play, the user's Internet connection is going to be the barrier in virtually all cases rather than whether they use b or g. And anything better than g is too in-development at this point for use anywhere.

Not that I'm trying to parade Nintendo, but as someone who knows a bit about wireless technology I don't really know what you meant with that.

EDIT: Yeah, count me in with the people who'll get Revolution "just because." To be honest I just don't play games much, and what little I see on Xbox/PS doesn't interest me nearly enough to want to go out and get the system. Still, I really hope Nintendo doesn't **** up, but Revolution's got huge suckage potential right now, and this is a traveled road.

 

[B0r3d*m Alien]

Originally posted by JediMasterYoda98
Dreamcaster, you're acting as if Nintendo makes horrible consoles. Let's compare the GCN to the PS2 for a second...

GCN has better graphics, better loading times, and two more controller ports. What does the PS2 have? A DVD player. Yay.

Since I share the same ideas DC mentioned...I find this post quite wrong.
To start off, PS2 has a DVD player, CD player, and backwards compat. and still with this lack of err "better technology" PS2 is sell what? Quadruple the amounts of PS2s to GCs? [/sarcasm..or is it?]

Yet consoles sell because of games... which means Nintendo also doesn't lag behind with that. There are tons of exclusive games that are very, very good games, that you can only play on GCN.

Consoles don't only sell on games, but technology as well. Which is more important? Neither, since both rely on the other to sell, so a lack of one may hinder the system.

On the subject of games, don't make me name the monster titles that PS2 has to offer to a massive bog of fans.
I'm not even going to bother argueing if these titles are better than Nintendo's cause I'll be get lost in a rant.
But I will say this. Nintendo ONLY has exclusives. Is it not selling better because people don't like their games? No, I'm sure lots of gamers enjoy Zelda, Metroid, Mario, and countless other OG Nintendo titles. But its severe lack of support from third party and even second party games now have GC limping.
Every system has notable exclusives and I can't rest assured saying that "PS2s exclusives are better that's why they sell better"..no no that'd be superficial. So what else must it be?

So your point is completely invalid. You act as if Nintendo's consoles are horrible, and are just cheap marketing schemes to bring in some more cash for Nintendo. Don't get me wrong, I think connectivity was a bit redundant, and they should have had things like online or a better design, but Nintendo is fixing those mistakes. All Sony and Microsoft are doing is designing consoles with really good graphics, and a better online service. Nintendo is doing that and MORE. I wish you would just relax and stop freaking out just because someone doesn't mind Nintendo hardware.

NO NO NO! DC didn't say that Nintendo's consoles are horrible..even though I think they are rather weak...but what he said was that all these little useless "enhancements" to gameplay really suck (in my own words). He's argueing that Nintendo's games are no longer pure. By this I mean, that they're trying to add all these things hopeing to be innovative while at the same time robbing you of a simple gameplay experience, and not to mention your money.
DC would I agree, and I agree that Sony and Microsoft are DEFINITELY designing consoles and that Nintendo is doing not only that but making games as well. There's nothing to argue here because Sony and Microsoft only make consoles, but since they only have to focus on this they can put all their effort into making a console that sells whether its by online play or DVD players. These aspects are definite selling points.
Nintendo doesn't have these...four ports? Ok so maybe you and your friends could play together...but I would argue, that's why there is online play and not to mention a device that lets you connect 4 controllers to one PS2 (god, the name of it has left me...). I would also argue that PS2 is more of system that focuses on the one player, not his or her friends.
As an only child I care about single player games...but online changed all that since I now have access to more people since I can't..or I just don't want people in my house. It's much more convenient to connect to the internet anyways.
Nintendo sells games..exclusive games..I've already mentioned that every system sells exclusives..so refer back to that part cause I'm not going to repeat myself.

If all your beloved music games were on GCN, which console do you think you'd be playing? You play a console because it has the games you like - not because it has pretty graphics, or a dvd player, or connectivity with your gameboy. Games are about having fun, about trying something new... so I say Nintendo should contintue on with what they're doing. I think they're heading in the right direction.

Where'd you get music games? Well yeah, if I were a DDR fanatic I'd probably go for the system that has that..Which is why I bought GC...for SSBM and other games that I thought would be well done. Boy am I disappointed now. Why? Because I'm at the mercy of what Nintendo puts out. I bought the system, what do they care if they put out ****?
After this disappointment, I'll never buy a console because of 1 or 2..3 that I like...because then I just have a few games that console since exclusive titles only come out a few times in one generation system.. So once I beat them..what do I have to rest on? The other games available? The CONSOLE? I'd make sure there are other games, like good 3rd party ones that I can rent and enjoy for a while. But then comes a time when you don't have any games to play...so instead of letting the system collect dust, you can still use it to play CDs or DVDs...or connect to the internet with some games because the internet never sleeps.

Games ARE about being fun. And a few risks with something new can be good or BAD. So far a lot of Nintendo's "innovations" I can do without...and are games bad without them? No, even games that have nothing innovative in them can be extremely fun.

Nintendo can do whatever they want with the Revolution...just as long as whatever this "revolutionary" device doesn't alienate games on other systems that I want to play or prohibit them from coming over, because of some technological design that interferes with the game, whether it's with the console or the controller.
You all know what I mean, when I say that.

BA out..

 

[ChRed2AKrisp]

*sigh*

what i'm reading here isn't making me happy.

People, stop trying to defend the system you like. If you like it, you like it.

This is a thread for the revolution.

You don't have to say "I like this system because it has this and the other systems don't" or anything else like that.

"It has BC"
"It's smaller"
"Multiplayer"
"Online"
"DVD's"
"GRAPHICS"

i'm sick of hearing about this.

Guess what?

Every system has good points and bad points. Every system is better than the others in some way. Every company has something good to contribute.

This is PSP vs. DS all over again. They're both good.

People buy systems based on what works and appeals to them.

I bought a DS because of the cost, the BC, and the innovation in the system. I liked the touch screen.

Others buy the PSP for the wide the media experience and the power.

It's the same thing with consoles. People will buy the Next-Gen they want because it has aspects that appeal most to them.

So don't try to prove which system is better. You are not going to get anywhere, because it depends on what definition of 'better' you are talking about. Is it powerful? Compact? Innovative?

This is a thread for the Revolution, not a thread for saying why XBox360 or PS3 are going to beat Nintendo.

What do you like or expect to see in the Nintendo Revolution?

 

[Mic_128]

I WNT WARIO ND TOAD ON GAMEZ OMG!

Sorry...

 

[BEAM swordzman]

I expect the Revolution controller to feature the standard START, A, B, L and R buttons except their bigger than normal. Also I think the Y button will be abcent. The reason I say that is because Nintendo wanted to make the controllers simple so that if a mother see's her child playing a game on Rev. and says," that looks fun" and decides to play it w/o any learning curve. ( and I think A,B,X,Y,Z,L,R are too many buttons anyway) I also believe that it'll have a tilt function similar to that of Kirby Tilit 'n' Tumble and Wario Ware: Twisted, which would come useful in Racing Games. Mybe a built-in Mic. and the spot where the C-stick is will be replaced with a touch screen. with the adjusted sensitivity to support your thumb. ( if you play SM64DS with your thumb, then you'll know what im talking about) The L and R button will be located on the back of the handles of the controller for easy access.

 

[Mic_128]

Nintendo aren't having the "a" and "b" buttons for the Rev.

 

[Aruun]

On the subject of games, don't make me name the monster titles that PS2 has to offer to a massive bog of fans.

Deary, you're acting like I said the PS2 doesn't have many good games. In my opinion, it has a poopload of great games (Final Fantasy, Kingdom Hearts, Devil May Cry, DDR, just to name a few) and I'm not trying to say it doesn't. All I was saying is that Nintendo isn't lacking in great games either (Metroid Prime/2, Tales of Symphonia, Resident Evil 4, SSBM, for example), so I think it's shallow to just brush them off.

Every system has notable exclusives and I can't rest assured saying that "PS2s exclusives are better that's why they sell better"..no no that'd be superficial. So what else must it be?

Mainstream gamers. Stop acting like how much a console sells means how good the system is - I know multiple people who have a PS2 just because it's the most popular of the systems. People buy it because everyone they know bought it. Don't throw sales figures at me, because they're not accurate for the actual quality of the product.

but I would argue, that's why there is online play

that sucks horribly. Have you ever played PS2 online? It's crap. I'd get an X-Box with Live anyday (or a PC). I would never get a PS2 for online gaming.

and not to mention a device that lets you connect 4 controllers to one PS2

that costs money. Sounds great, I can pay money for a device that lets me play with more than one other person... that came with Nintendo's console five years before it! Brilliant, I say. Not to mention half of the PS2's games don't support it.

Where'd you get music games?

You obviously don't know DreamCaster. He's a music/rythem game fanatic. I was only applying this to him.

Boy am I disappointed now. Why? Because I'm at the mercy of what Nintendo puts out. I bought the system, what do they care if they put out ****?

Well if you think Nintendo's games suck, no wonder you don't like your GCN. The whole point of owning a GCN is to play Nintendo games - which I enjoy. So I have one. If you don't like the games Nintendo puts out then you shouldn't even bother arguing that PS2 is better for whatever reason. Just because YOU don't like GCN doesn't mean it's bad. It's called opinion, and you shouldn't find it offensive that someone likes something you don't. I don't care if you like PS2 better, just don't go rampaging all over whenever someone disagrees with you.


Don't get me wrong, I love the PS2. It has great games that I love playing. But so does my GCN. If you dislike Nintendo, good for you - stop bitching at me for having an opinion.


I honestly don't know what the Revolution will bring, but the PS3 and 360 don't appeal to me at all... I'm slowly losing interest in games because they're all rehashes. I'll probably get a Revolution just so I can play classics like Earthbound, Chrono Trigger and Star Fox 64 on my TV.

I'm so sick of the gaming community right now.


I want Electroplankton. *looks at importing sites*

 

[McFox]

Originally posted by Giygas
I'd say Revolution is well over a year away. They'll definitely use E3 2006 as a springboard into launching their console (and I have a feeling that'll be the E3 to attend to as Sony pits their PS3 on the show floor versus the finally realized Revolution).

I feel the same way. People keep saying (including those who claim to have "inside sources" who work at Gamestop ) that Revolution will be out Quarter 1 of 2006, but I just don't see that. I'd definitely put my money on both PS3 and Revolution launching after E3 2006, a big press show where they can reveal everything and show all. I'd say launch dates would be somewhere around June 2006. Not only is it just after E3 when all the hype is worked up and completely festering (ONLINE SSB3 OMFGX!!!1), but it's the beginning of summer, when more kids are playing games (and, in turn, asking for them).

 

[Giygas]

On the Wi-Fi bit, I got a bit confused there. What I meant to say was that wireless was not necesarily going to be the fastest connection (you know the old "wired beats wireless" in pure data transfer speeed) but I am happy with wi-fi (I'm just happy with any online service at this point for Nintendo). I think if you had the option to choose between a wired connection or wi-fi it would help... but now I'm just getting confused myself. I'll shutup about that.

I have every right to be a "disappointed gamer" with Nintendo. I've been with them since I was old enough to hold a controller. The NES, all the Game Boys (yes, I've owned every single one), the SNES, the N64, even the Virtual Boy, and the GameCube. I kno the company inside and out.

I think the GameCube, games-wise, is the best this generation. Why? Because of Smash Bros, Zelda, and Metroid, plus supporting games like the Pikmin series and the stunningly-fantastic Resident Evil 4 (coming to PS2 or not). While Mario has lost its appeal and the once-legendary Starfox has fallen to the wayside, Nintendo still serves up some legendary games. I have 26 games for the GameCube. 26! So I think I deserve the right to say that the "company should do better", especially when it can! It can always do better. And just because they're trying to correct old mistakes, as Cashed said, it might just be "too little too late."

I definitely plan on buying the Revolution. Hell, just to play SSB online. And I applaud Nintendo and their efforts of going in the face of the industry. I just don't want them to be a martyr.

 

[B0r3d*m Alien]

JMY, ...Jimmy?...Anyways...my whole rant was about how you decided to try an compare GC to PS2. You said not to throw sales at you, but hey for the sake of arguement, PS2 has sold many times better.

I knew you would think I hate GC. I definitely don't, but I'm still very disappointed at this point. Mario Sunshine was a bit of a bust to me and the Wind Waker was a pushover of a title. But that's not to infer that all the other titles I was looking foward to disappointed me. Metroid and SSBM rocked, and the new Zelda looks far more emersive.

So yeah.. I agree that it's all a personal opinion. But you're the one who tried to compare GC to PS2. You say online play for PS2 is weak? Who cares? At least they have one. That's the whole point..PS2 has survived with two controller ports for 2 generations now while others had 4 (PS2 has that device to have more than two people play at a time, and it's definitely inexpensive compared to having 4 GBAs, 4 links..not to mention the GC and the copy of Final Fantasy: CC). But now people demand for online play, and so Sony went for it knowing it'd get some sales that way.
It's your opinion about which one is better, so don't start off ranting and saying DC or anyone else is invalid saying all that. That's what set me off in the first place. I gave you facts, not just my personal opinion...You'd be surprised to know that I don't own X-Box or PS2.

Back on the topic of the Rev..

It's all just speculation. E3 2005 gave us little to talk about for the Rev. We can't even discuss Rev without bringing up something else. It's pretty much the general thought that Nintendo disappointed us fans by not revealing anything about this "Revolution". We all should just wait for Space World, if they do one, or the next E3 to learn anything worth talking about.

BA out..

 

[Cashed]

Originally posted by Giygas
On the Wi-Fi bit, I got a bit confused there. What I meant to say was that wireless was not necesarily going to be the fastest connection (you know the old "wired beats wireless" in pure data transfer speeed) but I am happy with wi-fi (I'm just happy with any online service at this point for Nintendo). I think if you had the option to choose between a wired connection or wi-fi it would help... but now I'm just getting confused myself. I'll shutup about that.

When companies only support wifi with their systems, it makes me frustrated. I have a router that uses ethernet cables, and frankly, it's just fine. A console shouldn't -only- support wifi. A handheld I can understand, but a console? It should support ethernet connection as well so it doesn't limit the amount of people who can use the function.

My router just broke Monday though, so it looks like I may be buying a wireless one just incase I end up buying the Rev... and of course for my DS (Mario Kart and Animal Crossing, yaaaaaay). Hell, I'd even be more inspired to buy a laptop once I get a job this summer with a wireless router in my house.

 

[demoncaterpie]

It's very hard to discuss the Revolution, since almost nothing is known about it. Most of the judgement we use is from past experiences with Nintendo, and I don't think that's fair at all.

Right now, I'm not thinking about what Nintendo was, I'm thinking of what Nintendo is , right now. I'm thinking about how Nintendo has added DVD features to their system. I'm thinking of how Nintendo is going to have backwards capabilities with all their systems. I'm thinking of how it will have wireless internet, built in memory, and the best looking system design of all time. I'm thinking that maybe, just maybe, Nintendo has learned their lesson. They're doing things they never would had done some three or four years ago.

It's hard for me to judge their past when they're clearly trying to fix it now. Their new system looks to be the best one they've ever made, and the announcements I heard at E3 were exactly what I wanted to hear. So what if I haven't heard everything? If it's anything like what they announced a week ago, then Nintendo looks to be in great shape.


As for going third party, I don't think Nintendo, or anyone, will have to ask that question if their system turns out incredible. And, judging by what they're doing now as opposed to the past, their's a great chance it will be.

 

[TheMagicalKuja]

I'm going to pull some points from other forums I hang out at, and I think the points they make are AWESOME.

Keldryn of Gamefaqs wrote:

I think Nintendo is playing it smart this time around.

Sony and Microsoft are competing head-to-head for the same market: hardcore gamers, mostly males of age 18-35 (roughly). The system's power is a major selling point for this demographic, and AAA titles need to have state-of-the-art graphics in order to be successful. The games themselves are "mature" and "edgy." Looking at the quality of the graphics and artwork in the PS3 and Xbox 360 screenshots and videos, the development budgets for these games is going to skyrocket.

Nintendo seems to have decided to let Microsoft and Sony duke it out for this market. One thing that many people don't seem to understand is that there doesn't have to be a "winner" and a "loser" in this industry. If Nintendo does not sell as many consoles as Sony or MS, but remains very profitable, that isn't losing. Many businesses are very profitable by choosing a target market, and focusing their efforts on products that appeal to their market.

Nintendo seems to be taking more of an interest in casual gamers this time around. By "casual" I don't mean gamers who play mostly sports games and a few action games here and there. I'm talking about people who like to play video games, but probably don't own a PS2, Xbox, or Gamecube. They play on their friends'/brother's/children's/boyfriend's system. They either don't have the time to play a lot of games, or they find many of today's games to be too complicated to play.

The current trend of the gaming industry seems to be moving in the direction of being more inclusive to hardcore gamers, and less inclusive of causal gamers. The move from 2D SNES-era games to 3D analog-stick-plus-10-buttons games has left many potential gamers behind. Hardcore gamers like us found The Wind Waker to be too easy, but I know several people who enjoyed the NES and SNES Zelda games yet found TWW too complicated to play. They aren't idiots; they just don't play a lot of games, and haven't kept up with the changes in gameplay over the past 8-19 years.

I can see the Revolution coming into the market at a much more reasonable price than the PS3 and Xbox 360. It might pack a little less power, but without all of the extra media features, it will probably be no more expensive than the Gamecube was. It may or may not feature a more intuitive approach to gameplay, depending on what this super-secret controller actually is. Nintendo reps have talked about wanting to change the way games are played, and to make them more approachable. It will have easy access to download the entire back catalogue of Nintendo games, as well as the ability to play Gamecube discs. So it will likely be inexpensive, and with the ability to play the simpler games that many non-gamers have fond memories of, it could be a big hit, and make a bigger dent in the non-male-aged-18-to-35 marketplace than Sony's and MS's offerings.

Plus, Nintendo hinted at making a major change in their third-party support, and becoming more accessible to indie development. Perhaps they are anticipating the massive development budgets that next-gen games on the PS3 and Xbox 360 will require, which will likely result in most games being franchised or licensed products from the big publishers. Innovative titles from smaller developers are simply going to fall by the wayside, as they simply don't have the finances to compete with AAA titles from the likes of EA or Microsoft.

With a less-expensive console that places less of an emphasis on its graphical power, Nintendo may also be trying to target the gamers who are looking for something new and innovative, and aren't as wowed by expensive production values.

I mean, I'm a big video and computer game fan, and I own an Xbox, PS2, Gamecube, PS1, SNES, PC and N64, as well as having owned a Saturn, Genesis, SMS, and NES in the past. I am not a Nintendo "fanboy" by any stretch of the imagination. But looking at the current generation of games, and the little bit that we've seen of the next, my own impression is that Sony's exclusive AAA franchises are very much rooted in style-over-substance, and the PS3 looks like it will be the embodiment of that. I'm really thinking of Square, Konami, Capcom, and a few other major Japanese developers here. Sure, the games are enjoyable, but in my opinion are ultimately a little bland in the gameplay department. There is too great an emphasis on being stylish, "mature," and edgy, and not enough on being innovative. Dark, brooding, spikey-haired, and leather-strap-clad protagonists don't really do it for me.

So here's hoping that the Revolution will be the target platform for those developers that have some fantastic game ideas, but can't fork out the $20 million needed to create the next big hit on the PS3 or Xbox 360.

And as well,, two links you should take a look at:


http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/games/crash.html
http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com.../manifesto.html

Both signify what they hope will happen next gaming generation, and how the industry might crash and burn. I told another forum that if the gaming industry crashes, my dreams of gaming might be useless. Let's hope the Revolution revitalizes gaming.