Nintendo....

avelanchefan

manman wrote: »

I don't get it, does that somehow mean the wii isn't as good as other systems because the technology isn't as new, or was it just informative?

When it comes down to it, I don't think people care about what's on the inside of the machine, they care about the experience. That's where the wii scored, and scored big.

What I was getting at is the technology is 8 years old.

Trust me I love the Wii, I think it is intuitive and refreshing, basically what nintendo has been about since it started. BUT the cutesy games can only go so far. I mean in reality, what has really changed in the games for Nintendo since the N64? Quite honestly they really look the same to me. Obviously there is more rendering power with the Gamecube/Wii. But honestly the games look the same to me.

I have owned the N64, Gamecube, Wii, PS2, Xbox, 360, and the PS3. And Nintendo has been the same in gaming, while M$, and Sony have made leaps and bounds in the technology used in their gaming systems.

comfortablycurt

The point is though...those games are still fun to play after all these years, despite how little they've ultimately changed. Why change a good thing? The games have become a lot more advanced still regardless. The newer Mario games are nothing like the original NES/SNES Mario games. Sure, they are still similar to a lot of the Gamecube varieties, but that's because the game itself is still basically the same concept.

Take Xbox for instance...Compare Halo 1 to Halo 3. Sure...Halo 3 is a much more advanced game...better graphics, more things that you can do within the game play. It's essentially the same game though in how it plays out though. Like I said, why change a good thing?

All of those "kiddie games" appeal to a much wider audience than a lot of the shooters/RPG's etc. etc. simply because of their playability. Anyone can pick up the controller and jump in and play Mario. It's not quite so with most shooters or whatever else though.

Not that I have anything against the PS3 or the 360 though...both of them are awesome systems. For the price though? I'll wait. Give it 2-3 more years and you'll be able to pick either one up used at Gamestop for 150 bucks, and games will be a dime a dozen.

cheddar

comfortablycurt wrote: »

Give it 2-3 more years and you'll be able to pick either one up used at Gamestop for 150 bucks, and games will be a dime a dozen.

Wait this long and you might as well wait for the next generation of consoles...

http://www.whattheyplay.com/blog/2008/09/30/new-wii-due-by-2011/

manman

avelanchefan wrote: »

What I was getting at is the technology is 8 years old.

Trust me I love the Wii, I think it is intuitive and refreshing, basically what nintendo has been about since it started. BUT the cutesy games can only go so far. I mean in reality, what has really changed in the games for Nintendo since the N64? Quite honestly they really look the same to me. Obviously there is more rendering power with the Gamecube/Wii. But honestly the games look the same to me.

I have owned the N64, Gamecube, Wii, PS2, Xbox, 360, and the PS3. And Nintendo has been the same in gaming, while M$, and Sony have made leaps and bounds in the technology used in their gaming systems.

Yes, but what I was getting at is that game systems aren't about technology but fun. Technology, and the graphics and all that are just tools to get there. In actuality- the games HAVE actually changed- they now do some of the same more 'realistic' or adult oriented games (like COD)- but it's still the games that are more like the ones they used to have that are the big hits. Admittedly- the older technology (and even the controller) make those more realistic games pale in comparison to how they are on ps3/360- but if the Wii had just followed suit- dropped all those 'cutsey' games and went with graphics and adult oriented games, NOTHING would set them apart. You'd have 3 systems that were almost exactly the same.

The only reason I got a 360 is because it was out first and I wanted to start playing some of the newer games coming out. When ps3 came out, the only reason I bought it was for blu-ray. At this point- probably over half the games that come out are on both systems, and there is absolutely nothing that makes me think I should get it for one system over the other. It's all the same to me. But the games that are driving wii sales- those are games you only see on the wii. They may not be realistic and they have graphics you could have seen years ago- but they made wii's fly off the shelf.

I'm not saying that you can't have games that are fun while still being realistic and having great graphics. I have a lot of 360 games I love. I'm just saying if you look at the numbers it's pretty clear the wii is succeeding above the rest- and the reason for it is not advanced technology. So in my eyes, that shows that when it comes to gaming it's not about having the best technology it's about delivering a fun experience. I have no problem with older technology. In fact, if you ask me- the best system that's ever been released with the largest catalog of fun games is the SNES.

comfortablycurt

cheddar wrote: »

Wait this long and you might as well wait for the next generation of consoles...

http://www.whattheyplay.com/blog/2008/09/30/new-wii-due-by-2011/

Yes, but the point is, that 2-3 years from now, I'll be able to get a 360 or PS3 on the cheap, and games are going to be like 10-20 bucks a pop. Like I said...I'm not a hardcore gamer by any means. I probably play a total of 5 hours of video games every week. So it's not worth it to me to go out and spend 300-400 or even 500 dollars on a console, and drop 50 bucks on a game. To some people it is, and for them, it's great. I love the PS3 and the 360, I just wouldn't use it enough to justify the price tag.

That Wii HD looks pretty cool though. Might have to pick one of those up in 2014 or so once it's 3 years old...:p

manman wrote: »

So in my eyes, that shows that when it comes to gaming it's not about having the best technology it's about delivering a fun experience. I have no problem with older technology. In fact, if you ask me- the best system that's ever been released with the largest catalog of fun games is the SNES.

Manman speaks the truth. The greatest console of all time is hands down the SNES. As far the fun level of the games, the SNES can't be beat. I still have the SNES that I got when they first came out, and surprisingly it's still in near perfect shape. My collection of SNES games is HUGE too. I have over a hundred of them probably...I haven't counted them in quite a while though. Some of those games are actually worth pretty good money now too.

The games on SNES are just timeless. I think I've spent more time playing Mario All Stars than any other game I've ever had...and I still play it quite a bit. As far as fun level, the original Mario games can't be beat in my opinion. You can't tell me that those games don't take some serious skill either...it takes just as much skill and practice to beat those games as it does any new game. It might not be as technologically advanced...but it's HARD at some points. I've broken a few Super Nintendo controllers over that game in the past...lol