Console Wars!!!

[Asher]

Verto, I'm a ****ing genius.

I totally called that. The Wii is going to peak early. It's the premature ejaculator of consoles.

Xbox 360 (and to a lesser extent, PS3) will gain momentum with time -- Wii will lose it.

There are fundamental problems with the Wii. The CPU would readily be outperformed by an 800MHz Pentium III. If you think that's not an amazing limitation to a modern game developer, you're very mistaken.

The GPU has the feature set and performance of a GeForce 2 MX. If you don't think that's a severe limitation to a modern game developer, you're very mistaken.

The problem is, quite simply, excellent game developers not working for Nintendo are going to be pulled into games that allow them to do more things. The control scheme is merely an interaction layer, it's superficial -- the heart of the games is in the horsepower of the console.

Look at what's becoming of the upcoming Splinter Cell game, for instance. "Active camouflage" with detailed crowd AI to complete your missions in. That's a genuinely new kind of gameplay. Compare that to what, a frustrating implementation of a golf swing in Tiger Woods?

The simple thing to realize is the Wii is a simple console. It's the low-income, mass-market console. It's going to get low-cost games -- that's the entire pitch of the console by Nintendo to game devs anyway. There's going to be a massive amount of genuinely crappy games for the Wii -- and I think the high production costs on the PS3 and Xbox 360 will keep much of those away from the "real" consoles. The Wii is a perfect example of a fad software platform that everyone and their dog rushes to make crap implementations on. Much like the internet in the late 90s...

Not to mention the obvious: Wii's graphics look worse over time as Xbox 360's and PS3's graphics improve and HDTV penetration continues to skyrocket.

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


1. Thats units, not bucks the Wii sells for less
2. Software sale vs HW, attach rates, old ladies in retirement homes, etc
3. It aint gonna last, you just come back next month

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by Verto
I was going to put this in its own thread, but I figured I'll just drop it in here. Sorry for the length.




I've owned a Wii for many months now, and a 360 for even longer; long enough that any initial 'hype' will have died down, allowing me to give a Fair and Balanced(TM) comparison of the two systems.

First off, Nintendo has IMO completely dropped the ball with the Wii. I know this seems to defy reality, as the Wii is selling like crazy, has enjoyed spectacular press, and remains in high demand. People want what they can't have, though, and I think eventually people will realize that the Wii is not everything it is hyped to be - although it easily could be.

When I say Nintendo dropped the ball, I mean this: The Wii has the potential to add a new layer of interaction with games, a new level of immersion. We all want "A Lightsaber Game". We saw the benefits of the Wiimote in Zelda: TP. Unfortunately, we also saw a slew of games that did a craptastic job of implementing the Wiimote. Nintendos gamble was this: Gamers would tolerate last-gen graphics in exchange for a new, revolutionary control scheme. Gamers will NOT tolerate last-gen (or worse) graphics AND last-gen, GC-style controls tacked on last minute to the Wiimote. From the outset, Nintendo should have been actively engaged with developers to ensure all Wii titles fully utilized the Wiimote, as well as the Wii hardware to ensure the best possible graphics. Nintendo has not done so, and the result is crappy title after crappy title. I'm certain responses to this will include pointing out the good titles still to be released: Metroid, Mario Galaxy, etc, as well as the fact that it is unfair to condemn the Wii for crappy launch titles. I agree, but at the same time, Nintendo should have had "quality control" in place. When your console depends almost entirely on its control scheme, you need to take steps to ensure that control scheme is functional, creatively used, and fully implemented in every game.

Now, IMO, the most unforgivable sin committed by Nintendo is their online service, or lack thereof. Let us quickly glance over to Xbox Live: HD movies and TV shows; Xbox Live Arcade; superb multiplayer support, etc. Microsoft got it right from the start (years ago), and has only been improving since. So how do you explain Nintendos online absence? Were they not paying attention for the past 5+ years? Even Sony realized that something had to be done to remain competitive. Nintendo seems determined not to embrace the online world..at least not in a way that matters. Between the 16 digit friend code (which is not even universal: some games have their own unique code), the time and effort wasted on all those f*cking retarded Channels: Everybody Votes, Weather, News, etc...it really is hard to understand just how inept Nintendo seems to be in this particular area. Oh, and remember all that talk from Nintendo about excluding DVD playback, and other features, because the Wii was first and foremost a gaming console? Why the f*ck are they then filling it with all this bloated crap?

I still think the Wii has LOADS of potential. Unfortunately, it seems that Nintendo is in no hurry to make USE of that potential. Certainly there is still time for Nintendo to fix these mistakes, to change course. OTOH, how much more time can they need?

Do I regret buying the Wii? Not really. I just don't think I'd have missed anything if I waited a year or two. In fact, I'd probably have had a much more positive experience with it, since by then hopefully we'll see vast improvements in the quality and selection of games, and maybe meaningful online connectivity. At the same time, the Wii could easily become just the latest in a series of mistakes made by Nintendo.

Very nice post. I'm not going to get a Wii at the moment (for a lot of the reasons you mention) but am going to keep an eye on how the games progress.

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by Asher
I totally called that. The Wii is going to peak early. It's the premature ejaculator of consoles.

Xbox 360 (and to a lesser extent, PS3) will gain momentum with time -- Wii will lose it.

There are fundamental problems with the Wii. The CPU would readily be outperformed by an 800MHz Pentium III. If you think that's not an amazing limitation to a modern game developer, you're very mistaken.

The GPU has the feature set and performance of a GeForce 2 MX. If you don't think that's a severe limitation to a modern game developer, you're very mistaken.

The problem is, quite simply, excellent game developers not working for Nintendo are going to be pulled into games that allow them to do more things. The control scheme is merely an interaction layer, it's superficial -- the heart of the games is in the horsepower of the console.

Look at what's becoming of the upcoming Splinter Cell game, for instance. "Active camouflage" with detailed crowd AI to complete your missions in. That's a genuinely new kind of gameplay. Compare that to what, a frustrating implementation of a golf swing in Tiger Woods?

The simple thing to realize is the Wii is a simple console. It's the low-income, mass-market console. It's going to get low-cost games -- that's the entire pitch of the console by Nintendo to game devs anyway. There's going to be a massive amount of genuinely crappy games for the Wii -- and I think the high production costs on the PS3 and Xbox 360 will keep much of those away from the "real" consoles. The Wii is a perfect example of a fad software platform that everyone and their dog rushes to make crap implementations on. Much like the internet in the late 90s...

Not to mention the obvious: Wii's graphics look worse over time as Xbox 360's and PS3's graphics improve and HDTV penetration continues to skyrocket.

And if you focused on making more posts like this one with your actual arguments, rather than your usual crap, I'm sure you'd get a lot more agreement.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Asher
Verto, I'm a ****ing genius.

I totally called that. The Wii is going to peak early. It's the premature ejaculator of consoles.

Xbox 360 (and to a lesser extent, PS3) will gain momentum with time -- Wii will lose it.

There are fundamental problems with the Wii. The CPU would readily be outperformed by an 800MHz Pentium III. If you think that's not an amazing limitation to a modern game developer, you're very mistaken.

The GPU has the feature set and performance of a GeForce 2 MX. If you don't think that's a severe limitation to a modern game developer, you're very mistaken.

The problem is, quite simply, excellent game developers not working for Nintendo are going to be pulled into games that allow them to do more things. The control scheme is merely an interaction layer, it's superficial -- the heart of the games is in the horsepower of the console.

Look at what's becoming of the upcoming Splinter Cell game, for instance. "Active camouflage" with detailed crowd AI to complete your missions in. That's a genuinely new kind of gameplay. Compare that to what, a frustrating implementation of a golf swing in Tiger Woods?

The simple thing to realize is the Wii is a simple console. It's the low-income, mass-market console. It's going to get low-cost games -- that's the entire pitch of the console by Nintendo to game devs anyway. There's going to be a massive amount of genuinely crappy games for the Wii -- and I think the high production costs on the PS3 and Xbox 360 will keep much of those away from the "real" consoles. The Wii is a perfect example of a fad software platform that everyone and their dog rushes to make crap implementations on. Much like the internet in the late 90s...

Not to mention the obvious: Wii's graphics look worse over time as Xbox 360's and PS3's graphics improve and HDTV penetration continues to skyrocket.

[lord of the mark]

" the heart of the games is in the horsepower of the console."

crux of the dispute.

Obviously Nintendo doesnt believe that. Or at least they believe they have a piece of the market where they can mint money where its not true.

[Asher]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Obviously Nintendo doesnt believe that. Or at least they believe they have a piece of the market where they can mint money where its not true.

Yes, by making tons of low-quality Pokemon games.

I think they'll make a lot of money off of the Wii, which is good for them, but I don't think it's good for the industry or even for consumers.

There's a serious problem with the Wii. The whole point of the Wiimote is to make gaming feel more natural, right? Setting aside the implementation issues in 100% of the Wii games published so far, if the interactivity is supposed to be realistic, the game world must also be realistic.

The Wii's horsepower will not permit wide-scale realistic physics and environmental interactions. It's simply not nearly powerful enough to create a more lifelike world inside the console, graphically of course, but also in terms of gameplay and object interaction.

This immediately gets rid of a bunch of real cool possibilities. What you're going to be left with is a console of half-assed last-gen ports, a console with lots of "mini/party game" type games, and not much else. You're never going to see massive hit games like Halo 3, Grand Theft Auto, etc. on the console simply because of the demographic of the console ("casual gamers" that don't buy many games, and when they do buy games it's Wario Ware or Mario Party or that lame Cooking Game...), but also the technical abilities of the console.

Expect to see a lot of $29.99 "Uncle Bob's Farming Game" on the Wii rather than anything truly blockbuster.

[snoopy369]

What would be good for consumers? Another XBox360 clone - huge horespower, great graphics, etc.?

Whtat's good is a console for a different market, ie the Wii. The Wii is cheap to develop for (in theory) which hopefully means more developers developp for it ... and lots of $29.99 games also.

If the Wii successfully challenges the boring console market that has developed largely as a result of the massive success of the PS2, it is good for the whole market. Perhaps the Wii games are never that amazing looking, and never have amazing physics. If it establishes the potential of that style of game - even on a lower tier console performance-wise - MS and Sony have no choice but to jump in on the fun, and hopefully that means better games all around.

And who knows, perhaps the Wii will be improved upon. There's nothing stopping them from making a new version of the Wii with a substantially better processor, or perhaps a Physix card or somesuch... but ultimately, even if they don't do that, I think the stirring-up effect will be enough to improve console gaming.


In any event, Asher, I think the main point is simply the Wii is not for your demographic, and thus you don't like it; fine. But a lot of people *do*. It's for that demographic Realism isn't important to them - interesting and fun is. They don't care if the Wiimote is realistic - just that you can swing it like a tennis racquet or bowl like a bowling ball. Doesn't have to be perfect, just the idea of the physical motion is good enough for a lot of people.

Remember - at their core, consoles must be fun for the player, or why play? If a lot of people enjoy playing fun, only semirealistic games, who are you to complain? Sure I'd prefer a Wii with HD graphics and a Physix card, but the Wii as it is is fun for a lot of people to play - and that's ultimately what counts in the end.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by snoopy369
In any event, Asher, I think the main point is simply the Wii is not for your demographic, and thus you don't like it; fine.

QFT.

Nintendo's strategy with the Wii is to leave MS and Sony to fight it out for the hardcore gamer, while they create, and capture, an uncontested market space. They'll sell their consoles into that space (making a profit on each sale), and then stuff it with their first-party games (effectively a license to print money).

They won't win the affections of the hardcore gamers, but they will win the console war where it matters - on their bottom line.

[Asher]

Originally posted by snoopy369
What would be good for consumers? Another XBox360 clone - huge horespower, great graphics, etc.?

A console manufacturer who provides a quality product at a reasonable price.

The Wii's quality of product is severely lacking given its price. It does explain Nintendo's extreme profit margins, certainly...good luck explaining that as something good for consumers.

Whtat's good is a console for a different market, ie the Wii. The Wii is cheap to develop for (in theory) which hopefully means more developers developp for it ... and lots of $29.99 games also.

It's all good for that market, in your opinion -- in my opinion I don't think a flood of $29 games developed on a shoestring budget by a brainless development house is a good thing. It's going to oversaturate the market and turn a lot of people off of true video gaming with bad experiences.

If the Wii successfully challenges the boring console market

I love your wording. Wii, with cooking games, is here to challenge the boring console market!

And who knows, perhaps the Wii will be improved upon. There's nothing stopping them from making a new version of the Wii with a substantially better processor, or perhaps a Physix card or somesuch...

Yes, there is. Nintendo's corporate culture, for one. They won't sell anything unless they've got at least a 50% profit margin on it.

They're not even making it easy for their

In any event, Asher, I think the main point is simply the Wii is not for your demographic, and thus you don't like it; fine. But a lot of people *do*. It's for that demographic

You're ignoring the entire point of the argument. Pointing at sales figures means nothing. The simple, unabashed reality is that the Wii novelty wears off rather quickly for owners. That's the thing I was discussing -- why that's the case. And the simple problem is this: depth. The Wii and its games don't have much depth. They're all extremely simplistic games without much replayability, or they're party games that are only fun when you've got a bunch of drunk people over.

Realism isn't important to them - interesting and fun is. They don't care if the Wiimote is realistic - just that you can swing it like a tennis racquet or bowl like a bowling ball.

They don't care if it's realistic, so long as you use the Wiimote in a realistic manner? Think before you type.

Remember - at their core, consoles must be fun for the player, or why play? If a lot of people enjoy playing fun, only semirealistic games, who are you to complain? Sure I'd prefer a Wii with HD graphics and a Physix card, but the Wii as it is is fun for a lot of people to play - and that's ultimately what counts in the end.

Once again, you're completing missing the point. "Fun" cannot be compared to "HD graphics" and "Physix cards" (which, for the record, are completely retarded given that GPUs can do physics far faster).

The problem is that "fun" is something you can bring to any console. More "fun" can be made by systems that allow more actions to happen on that system. Giving you a Commodore 64 with a motion-sensing wand isn't automatically "fun".

Read this thread again to get a feel for the actual argument. This isn't a "Wii sucks because its graphics suck!" thread, it was about how the replayability and the novelty of the Wii is sucking. Awful graphics are a part of that equation, but it's far more. The simple fact is the Wii's hardware is a severely limiting factor to the imagination of game designers, the ability of the game's programmers, and the immersion of the game's players.

Waving a stick around in the air thinking you're playing "tennis" when all you're doing is triggering one of two pre-recorded swings is "fun" for a very short period of time. Then it gets old. Like the Wii...

[Asher]

Originally posted by LordShiva
They won't win the affections of the hardcore gamers, but they will win the console war where it matters - on their bottom line.

If you think the "console wars" in 2007 are about the bottom line for games divisions, you're completing missing the whole point.

The profits made on consoles and games are piddly compared to the revenues Sony and MS are battling over in control over the living room.

Nintendo's happy making their tidy profits on Pokemon and Mario, but Sony and MS dream bigger. Nintendo's strategy is to be as cheap as possible and then overprice their product and enjoy the result. Supposedly developing on the Wii is even more difficult than developing on the Xbox 360. Nintendo's SDK is severely underdocumented (it's documentation is actually identical to the Gamecube's, despite ample differences from a developer's perspective), the tools are buggy and immature (and Nintendo keeps the best tools 1st-party, of course), and developers aren't used to such a weak console these days. They're a cheap customer -- they punish the consumer with severely underpowered hardware, and punish the developer with severely underdeveloped development tools and documentation.

Look at Spiderman 3 for the Wii. There's Nintendo's new "fun" for you. Wii customers are "casual gamers" who "don't care about graphics", by most Wii-fan admissions -- then they're all shocked that developers don't even try to make Wii games decent looking...

[DinoDoc]

What is the date for Metroid Prime 3 and Super Smash Brothers?

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by snoopy369

In any event, Asher, I think the main point is simply the Wii is not for your demographic, and thus you don't like it; fine. But a lot of people *do*.

Yeah, and he sooner he admits this and the fact that the Wii is doing well despite the fact many of his arguments are quite clearly true, the better.

The real questions is can Nintendo keep up current high performance or will it drop off sharply soon in line with the criticisms Asher levels.

I tend to agree with Verto..........if the games don't come it may well be that Nintendo will find their market saturating rather than growing at current speeds.

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by Asher

The Wii's quality of product is severely lacking given its price. It does explain Nintendo's extreme profit margins, certainly...good luck explaining that as something good for consumers.

Nintendo's corporate culture, for one. They won't sell anything unless they've got at least a 50% profit margin on it.

Do you have figures to back this up or is it a standard Asherism?

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Asher
It's all good for that market, in your opinion -- in my opinion I don't think a flood of $29 games developed on a shoestring budget by a brainless development house is a good thing. It's going to oversaturate the market and turn a lot of people off of true video gaming with bad experiences.

How is that different from any video game market leader? How many thousands of games were on the ps1/2, and how many were just garbage. I'd expect the same thing on the 360 if it had better sales.

Originally posted by Asher
I love your wording. Wii, with cooking games, is here to challenge the boring console market!

AT least there is some variety and attempts at new gameplay, not just rehashed, graphics updated fps and racers. Those are seriously fun for you? How many times can you play the same basic game before being bored to death. How is that Halo 3 beta, btw?

Originally posted by Asher
You're ignoring the entire point of the argument. Pointing at sales figures means nothing. The simple, unabashed reality is that the Wii novelty wears off rather quickly for owners. That's the thing I was discussing -- why that's the case. And the simple problem is this: depth. The Wii and its games don't have much depth. They're all extremely simplistic games without much replayability, or they're party games that are only fun when you've got a bunch of drunk people over.

pointing at sales figures is a more objective measure than anecdotal evidence. What are the top two console games for the month, btw?