When is Wii going to take off?

[shmokes]

I've been saying all along that I didn't buy the line that Sony was screwed with the PS3 and that I think eventually the PS3 will sell more units than the Wii, but I'm feeling more strongly about this all the time.  When are games for the Wii not going to suck?  I've been eagerly awaiting Tiger Woods Golf for months and it finally hits with basically a 7 out of 10 average among critics.  That ain't terrible, but for ---fudgesicle---'s sake, it's Golf!  Is there any game that could possibly be easier to translate to the Wii controller?  Super Sing sucked, but that didn't worry me too much cos it's a cartoon fantasy representation of the sport with donuts for clubs and sparkles exploding out of the ball.  But this is Tiger Woods Golf, for chrissakes.

SSX suffers the same fate.  Great franchise, great idea for a control scheme, but ultimately, the controller seems to lack the precision it needs to pull it off.

I am afraid that when the Wii controller is being used as a motion controller (i.e., not as a pointer) it simply lacks accuracy.  This is obvious when you try to putt in Wii Sports Golf.  The thing just won't register small movements.

There are obvious places where it can shine, such as Wii Sports Bowling, but so far none of these things require precision and are based just on "gestures", rather than 1:1 translation of the real-life movement into in-game movement.

The only games that are really must-haves in my opinion right now are Zelda, in which the controller shines when using it as a pointer (bow and arrow, etc.), but is ridiculous when the motion controls are used (sword slashes), and Trauma Center, which uses the pointer exclusively. 

I really hope I'm wrong.  I hope that what we have seen so far are just the products of lazy developers, and that second gen games will iron all this out and take advantage of the controller the way 1st gen games have been unable to.

[somunny]

I agree whole-heartedly.

It's  somehow selling at an amazing rate with a complete lack of software.   There are only a few games worth owning and one of them comes with the system.  Zelda is great but the rest of the games range from just okay to worthless and the online features are complete novelties.

[Zero_Hour]

I agree that there are certainly some 'issues' with implementing compelling control schemes on the Wii. The few reviews I've checked on Woods07, seem to indicate the lack of power meters more than the control scheme though, as limiting factors. And personally I find the controls for SSX to be quite good. The original SSX was one of the first titles I had for the PS2, and now Blur is one of the first I've picked up on the Wii. I'm definitely in the give-it-time camp on new consoles though, I won't push the panic button for quite a while. I didn't even seriously start to think about potentially getting a 360, until GOW hit, and I'm still debating the purchase.

And while I agree there is a need for quality titles and good control integration, I don't see how it adds up to an advantage for Sony. With all their announcements about Home, I find it to be a service I have no compelling reason to adopt (obviously, once it actually goes live, and the full feature set is dissected by end users that could change), and there is still an utter lack of games for the PS3 that make me even consider a purchase. I want a full blown Gran Turismo, not Motor Storm. Also I want a few more A-list titles as well, because no matter how much I have enjoyed the GT series, I'm not dropping 5 or 6 bills to play one good game. And I sure as hell don't want a Wil Farrel movie bundled in with my system. 

Sure this could be seen as a time when Nintendo is possibly missing an opportunity, but with over 6 million units sold in under 6 months, I think that the early install base is enough to keep momentum on their side for now, and very likely through the better part of 07. I'm still very up on the Wii as a system, and I don't even own Zelda 

[hypernova]

No no no...the real question is when will I finally get one.  Finding one's still next-to-impossible.

[shmokes]

Here's how I see it as a boon to Sony.  Sony, I think, doesn't have all that much to worry about in the long run even if Wii becomes market leader.  PS3 will do well, IMO.  There are hundreds of games in development.  Maybe if developers could tell the future and they knew that Sony would be releasing the system with a $600 price tag and would have such a chronic shortage they wouldn't have devoted so many resources to PS3, but development cycles are long, and the smart money was obviously on the Playstation brand after the success of 1 and 2.  So, anyway, I already thought the PS3 was going to eventually overtake the Wii in worldwide sales.  Gamers will go where the games are, and the Playstation brand still carries a lot of weight. 

But, the Wii has been selling so incredibly well which opens up the possibility that the Wii could potentially change overall mindsets about games.  If the Wii lived up to its potential it could conceivably make consumers think, "Why would I spend so much money on a PS3 when I can get a Wii for half the price?"

But there is only one special thing about the Wii, and that is its controller.  Aside from its controller the system is grossly underpowered.  I don't think I have seen a single Wii game that couldn't be done pixel for pixel on the original Xbox, maintaining the same Framerate.  So if everything is riding on the controller and it turns out that the controller isn't precise enough to truly replace a gamepad, well, the wind just kind of disappears out of Nintendo's sails.  It is a boon to Sony inasmuch as the Wii no longer presents a serious threat to the PS3.  It answers the question posed above with, "Well, because any game requiring precise controls cannot be done well on the Wii."

I don't know.  Maybe the great games will come.  I hope they do.  Maybe I just let myself get too excited about Tiger Woods.  But there's reason for concern.  Where are the first person shooters?  When we saw this controller everyone was talking about the mouse/keyboard superiority days being over.  But every FPS so far has sucked monkey balls and Metroid Prime 3 is delayed probably into 2008 (and this comes after the press played it and gave it the same criticisms they've been giving to all the other FPS games -- pointing and shooting is great, but turning is a ---smurfette---).

I actually want Nintendo to win.  They are my all-time favorite videogame company.  I never even owned a PS2.  But I didn't see that as very likely, even after the release of both the Wii and the PS3.  Every day that goes by without the release of any worthwhile games makes a Nintendo dominated market seem even less likely to me.

[somunny]

There's also the current general buzz regarding HD-DVD's potential demise (which may or may not be greatly exaggerated  ).  If this rumor plays out to be true and the PS3 proves over time that it can do double-duty as both a game console and a Blu-ray player, there may be a renewed interest in the PS# an an *inexpensive* hybrid.  That certainly would be a paradigm shift!

As for rooting for a winner, I'm not in favor of any one console.  I'd be happy to see them all flourish as I like to have one of each  .

[KenToad]

Did I miss something?  I thought the Wii controller had a digital pad and an analog stick as well?  And isn't the Gamecube controller compatible?  So, the Wii "magic wand" controller is really just extra and you could very well control Wii games with playstation or Xbox "precision."  Please correct me if I'm mistaken.  It will affect my enthusiasm to purchase the Wii. 

I don't own any of the next-gen consoles, so have an extremely limited frame of reference, but, to me, the problem with the Wii and, to a lesser degree, the DS, seems to be that Nintendo is pushing every developer to utilize their unique control aspects for things that just don't need innovative controls. 

In other words, why bother making an FPS with the motion detecting stuff if it can be done better with the analog stick and digital pad?  Several DS games have suffered from developers sort of haphazardly sticking in Touchscreen functions that really do not make sense. 

It could be that Nintendo execs are kind of forcing developers to use the touchscreen, etc., but, instead of producing exceptional games, the developers are mainly just throwing in sometimes awkward ways to do the same old things.

There is no way that the PS3 or Xbox360 will win the war with processing horsepower or even online support, nor will Wii prevail with a list of uniquely controlled average games.  Great games will sell the systems and they can be made for any system past or present.  Maybe they're all just trying to delay emulation in their own special ways. 

[tommy]

I normally always prefer to play the best looking games graphical 9 times out of 10, but combined with the price tags and with the Wii having "good enough" looking graphics combined with giving us a new way to play games, the choice seems obvious to me.

I wouldn't worry about Nintendo, we haven't even seen Nintendo's own best games yet that will take full advantage of the new controller system. Once these Nintendo's own great titles come out for the Wii (Mario, Zelda, Metroid) and all the Mario type games made specifically for the Wii-mote things will be great.

I think in todays gaming universe having alot of third party support is crucial for a console to be a big hit, in the same sentence if there was no TPS Nintendo would be the only console maker to be able to pull it off alone, anyother console would be in deep trouble.

[btp2k2]

Did I miss something?  I thought the Wii controller had a digital pad and an analog stick as well?  And isn't the Gamecube controller compatible?  So, the Wii "magic wand" controller is really just extra and you could very well control Wii games with playstation or Xbox "precision."  Please correct me if I'm mistaken.  It will affect my enthusiasm to purchase the Wii. 

Yes, the gamecube controller can work on the Wii, but only for playing GC games....you cannot use the GC controller to play Wii Sports, for example.

[shmokes]

That's not necessarily true, though.  The developer of the new Smash Bros. has suggested making it playable only with a Gamecube controller.  But once you take the great controller out of the equation you are left with basically an Xbox.  There is simply no reason to own a Wii besides its unique controller.  While using the controller you have the nunchuck which adds an analog stick, but you then only have one button + one trigger immediately reachable on the right hand.  There is the d-pad and the +/- buttons, but you have to move your entire hand in order to reach them, and the +/- buttons are too small to be used practically in the heat of battle.

Trust me, in order for the wii to be a true success the motion controllers have to be great.  It cannot rely on traditional controllers, because when it does it is just a VASTLY underpowered Xbox 360 or PS3, not capable of even competing in the realms of graphics, sound, physics or AI.

[TOK]

My main concern with the system before launch was that the controller would be a gimmick. After the first wave of cartoony, simple games, the novelty of it wears off, then you're left wanting a deeper experience and the controls are getting in the way.

I've stayed on the fence with this a long time, and I feel Nintendo ultimately made a mistake by under-powering the Wii. After the next round of price cuts and the release of a few more titles, Sony is going to start to hit its stride. It was too expensive at launch, but a price war between MS and Sony is inevitable.

[SithMaster]

A star wars jedi game would work.

[AtomSmasher]

My main concern with the system before launch was that the controller would be a gimmick. After the first wave of cartoony, simple games, the novelty of it wears off, then you're left wanting a deeper experience and the controls are getting in the way.

I've stayed on the fence with this a long time, and I feel Nintendo ultimately made a mistake by under-powering the Wii. After the next round of price cuts and the release of a few more titles, Sony is going to start to hit its stride. It was too expensive at launch, but a price war between MS and Sony is inevitable.

Sounds like the same exact complaints people made about the DS when it first came out.

[shmokes]

I've thought about that, and hope it's the case.  The first year for the DS was pretty bleak, but developers have totally stepped up and are making fantastic use of the DS's controls.  Hopefully that'll be the case with the Wii.  My fear, though, is that the remote itself is flawed.  If the remote is incapable of precision, there's not a lot the developer can do about it.  They can't program in better hardware.

[AlanS17]

Well as a household that has both a Wii and a PS3, I can make a few comments...

First, the Wii gets played more often than the PS3. However, neither of them see much game time.

Second, both systems have pretty bad game libraries so far. However, the PS3 plays Blu-Ray. We watch more Blu-Ray movies on the PS3 then we actually play games on either machine.

Third, a can verify all the comments about an unprecise Wii controller. Pointing is great, but the motion-sensing is pretty rotten on some axes. Pitch seems to be pretty accurate, but yaw and roll are both pretty awful for most of the games I've played. It could be a hardware limitation.

[ChadTower]

I'm not dropping 5 or 6 bills to play one good game.

Back away from the arcade message board and slowly put down your opinion.  Now kick it over here.  Good.  Now we stone you.

[SithMaster]

Maybe he only plays the best games or the great games?

[KenToad]

I'm not dropping 5 or 6 bills to play one good game.

Back away from the arcade message board and slowly put down your opinion.  Now kick it over here.  Good.  Now we stone you.

I think he means that he doesn't want to spend 5 or 6 hundred dollars to buy a system in order to play one or a couple of good games, rather than an extended library of great games.

[ark_ader]

I have been looking at the promotional videos of PS3's Home.  I like it and it will open the door to so may people who find it difficult to interact in the "real world".

The ability to play counterstrike on it and most windows programs including Mame via Yellow Dog, and the possibility of running OSX puts an ever increasing desire to own one of these units.

I am not rich by any means and my last major purchase was a PSP, but it looks more likely I will be getting a PS3 than a Wii purely on it capabilities.  Granted we are talking about platforms that are on a different level, but something keeps nagging me in the back of my mind that Nintendo games/units are devoted to children and young women.  Their DS and Wii games of late reflect this.

I'm not making generalisations here, but if I am to commit hard erned cash to a platform, I would want something that will play all my old titles, some off tangent games (like PC stuff) and the core console games that Sony will offer.  Blueray? well we will have to look at that when the price comes down.

One thing is certain, if Sony keeps the ball moving in the right direction to the thirty somethings of the western world, I'd hate to be Nintendo or Microsoft right now.  If it is good enough I will buy it, and lets face it we are experienced enough to figure out if a console has got enough drawing power or not. 

The Wii will have to pull its socks up to compete.

[KenToad]

 

I have been looking at the promotional videos of PS3's Home.  I like it and it will open the door to so may people who find it difficult to interact in the "real world".

The ability to play counterstrike on it and most windows programs including Mame via Yellow Dog, and the possibility of running OSX puts an ever increasing desire to own one of these units.

I am not rich by any means and my last major purchase was a PSP, but it looks more likely I will be getting a PS3 than a Wii purely on it capabilities.  Granted we are talking about platforms that are on a different level, but something keeps nagging me in the back of my mind that Nintendo games/units are devoted to children and young women.  Their DS and Wii games of late reflect this.

I'm not making generalisations here, but if I am to commit hard erned cash to a platform, I would want something that will play all my old titles, some off tangent games (like PC stuff) and the core console games that Sony will offer.  Blueray? well we will have to look at that when the price comes down.

One thing is certain, if Sony keeps the ball moving in the right direction to the thirty somethings of the western world, I'd hate to be Nintendo or Microsoft right now.  If it is good enough I will buy it, and lets face it we are experienced enough to figure out if a console has got enough drawing power or not. 

The Wii will have to pull its socks up to compete.

I wish you would present something more than generalizations as the foundation of an argument.  However, if you want to play PC games on a TV, why don't you just get a video card that will output the signal to a TV?  But it really sounds like you just want an Xbox, except of course for your comment that you want a console that will play "the core console games that Sony will offer," which I'm guessing won't work on the Wii, even with a modchip.   

Your comment about Nintendo being "for children and young women", smacks of fanboyism.  Remember, it's not the system that defines the software, it's the software that defines the system, at least as far as we the consumers are concerned.  And Nintendo, as well as all the other game companies, will produce mass market games for as wide an audience as possible.  That probably extends to, yes, young people and women, and I think Little Big Planet or whatever the most publicized game of the moment  for PS3 is called, demonstrates that.

As for the rest, you haven't really presented any arguable points, so ... nevermind. 

Anyway, thanks for at least trying to sound objective.

 

[shmokes]

I don't know.  He certainly sounds like a Sony fanboy, but his arguments aren't without merit.  Nintendo IS for children (dunno about the young women bit, but I kinda got a kick out of it).  They're desperately trying to shake that image, but it's one that they created.  Nintendo were like evil dictators about the content that 3rd parties could put on their systems with NES and SNES.  They were nearly as bad with N64.  As gamers grew up, so did their tastes, and Nintendo's refusal to let mature content on their consoles is largely what allowed Sega and then Sony to have so much success against them.

You're right that the games shape the console, but the problem is, most 3rd party developers treat Nintendo consoles exactly the same way ark_arder thinks of them.  They support them, to a degree, but the support they give them is almost exclusively family friendly stuff.  We've got Grand Theft Auto Vice City and San Andreas on Xbox and PS2 (I think GTA III is available for both, too, but I'm not sure of that).  Sony doesn't have exclusivity anymore.  So where's the Gamecube version?  Take Two/Rockstar WOULD release a Gamecube version if they thought the market was there, but they think of the Gamecube as a system for kids who can't play M-rated games, so they don't make a version for the Nintendo Console.  Same goes for PSP and DS.  Where's the GTA for DS?  Either they perceive Nintendo systems as being only for children, or Nintendo won't let that sort of game be released on their systems, in which case they really are only for children.  I don't buy this last bit anymore, though.  Nintendo is finally coming around and are taking some measures to try to shake off their kiddie image.  They're having limited success so far, but we saw it with their deal with Capcom for all the Gamecube exclusives that produced Resident Evil 4 and Killer 7, as well as the resources they've been devoting to Retro for the Metroid franchise.  And Reggie Fils Aime has publicly said that he wants Grand Theft Auto on the Wii.  We'll see if that turns out, I suppose.

[KenToad]

Well, while I agree with most of what you said, I think I take slight issue with games for kids in the sense that they are only fun for kids.  I think of the great Nintendo games like I think of great animated/family oriented movies ... they are great for all ages and especially wonderful for adults if done right ... several Pixar movies would be good recent examples.  I think it's the Mature rated games and the Grand Theft Auto games in particular that just seem silly to anyone outside the 13-30 year old guy demographic.  I even know some women who think badly of a guy for playing that type of game.     And Nintendo's eyes have always been upon the expanding market.  Anyway, GTA is better with a mouse and the DS is kind of underpowered for the GTA 3d franchise.      

Nintendo's idea from the beginning about being a licensing tyrant was to mollify the reactionary parental aspect of the market while making bazillions of dollars on licensing/manufacturing fees.  Unlike some other software/hardware giants, i.e. Apple, they have shown themselves capable of rising above that early mantra, at least when they realized they lost the 32/64 bit wars. 

Nintendo's been fighting the "for kids only" image basically since the Genesis started running those ads.  However, I can't think of a single Mature type game that I would consider great on the Genesis.  With the Playstation, I can think of a few great Mature games, but even Resident Evil 2 was eventually ported to the 64 and the 64 had Conker and Perfect Dark.  I blame inadequate hardware, especially sound for the commercial failure of the 64.

[AtomSmasher]

I can't believe no ones mentioned Eternal Darkness, thats another great M rated gamecube exclusive.

[shmokes]

Yeah, KenToad . . . I'd go along with that.  Frankly, I think the refusal to ditch cartridges for CDs was the deciding factor for N64, simply because cartridges were so much riskier for 3rd parties Nintendo was practically begging them to give Sony a try.  Their problem now is that they created such a monster that their only having limited success rising above the early mantra.  They're making real efforts, but they're finding it really hard to get those efforts noticed by adult gamers.  While they jump up and down holding the Resident Evil and Killer 7 signs all the gamers tend to see is the Nintendo t-shirt and ignore what they're saying.

And Atom, Eternal Darkness wasn't just a great Gamecube exclusive, it came from a Nintendo 2nd party studio.  Like I say, Nintendo has been trying desperately to shake the image, but it is bloody ingrained in the name.  Eternal Darkness, by the way, was an abject failure commercially, which says a lot.  On PS2 it very  likely would have thrived because of the difference in the two markets. 

[AtomSmasher]

And Atom, Eternal Darkness wasn't just a great Gamecube exclusive, it came from a Nintendo 2nd party studio.  Like I say, Nintendo has been trying desperately to shake the image, but it is bloody ingrained in the name.  Eternal Darkness, by the way, was an abject failure commercially, which says a lot.  On PS2 it very  likely would have thrived because of the difference in the two markets. 

Ya, I know it failed miserably which is too bad because it was a really good game.  I never owned a gamecube, so while I'm waiting for more Wii games to come out I've been playing gamecube games on my Wii.  So far eternal darkness is the only one that really got me hooked.  I'm currently trying resident evil 4, but so far its too much of a fps with bad console controls for me to enjoy it.  I just wish shooting didn't require stopping, slowly aiming, then firing with the bad accuracy of a thumbstick, seems like they need an autoaim feature or something.  Everyone seems to love it though, so I'll give it another chance.

[Tahnok]

And Atom, Eternal Darkness wasn't just a great Gamecube exclusive, it came from a Nintendo 2nd party studio.  Like I say, Nintendo has been trying desperately to shake the image, but it is bloody ingrained in the name.  Eternal Darkness, by the way, was an abject failure commercially, which says a lot.  On PS2 it very  likely would have thrived because of the difference in the two markets. 

Ya, I know it failed miserably which is too bad because it was a really good game.  I never owned a gamecube, so while I'm waiting for more Wii games to come out I've been playing gamecube games on my Wii.  So far eternal darkness is the only one that really got me hooked.  I'm currently trying resident evil 4, but so far its too much of a fps with bad console controls for me to enjoy it.  I just which shooting didn't require stopping, slowly aiming, then firing with the bad accuracy of a thumbstick, seems like they need an autoaim feature or something.  Everyone seems to love it though, so I'll give it another chance.

I'm doing the exact same thing, literally. I finished Twilight Princess and am now borrowing Resident Evil 4 from a friend. I've got to say, after some initial reservations about the controls, they make for some very interesting and unique gameplay. I don't think the game would have worked as well had it not been for it's unique mechanics. About my only gripe that it's not analog (a run button for a game that uses an analog stick?). BTW, the aiming is only inaccurate if you're inaccurate. Give it some time, and you'll be able to head shot enemies as they storm you.

Anyway, the N64 failure was not only because they kept cartridges, but also that the system was incredibly hard to program for (from what I've heard). The two together really created an unappealing system for developers.

[shmokes]

Yeah . . . keep playing.  RE4 is better than Eternal Darkness. 

[ChadTower]

I think he means that he doesn't want to spend 5 or 6 hundred dollars to buy a system in order to play one or a couple of good games, rather than an extended library of great games.

I understood and mostly agree with that point, thanks.  I was pointing out the irony of saying he won't pay hundreds for a single game on an arcade message board.  We're the exact type that pay hundreds for a single game.

[somunny]

I think he means that he doesn't want to spend 5 or 6 hundred dollars to buy a system in order to play one or a couple of good games, rather than an extended library of great games.

I understood and mostly agree with that point, thanks.  I was pointing out the irony of saying he won't pay hundreds for a single game on an arcade message board.  We're the exact type that pay hundreds for a single game.

I can't believe you had to explain this.   

[SithMaster]

The ability to play counterstrike on it and most windows programs including Mame via Yellow Dog, and the possibility of running OSX puts an ever increasing desire to own one of these units.

the pc and xbox have counterstrike, mame runs on the pc, and macs run osx.  why spend 600 dollars on all this when you can spend half that.  dont get me wrong i really want to play killzone 2 but 600 dollars for a system?  that and one is crippled compared to the other.  at least the xbox only has the hd difference.

havent you watched south park if cartman wants a wii that bad then so do you.

[shardian]

Resident Evil 4 = 

Yes, the aiming takes a little while to get used to, but it is very worth it. BTW, weapon upgrades/new weapons makes it quicker/easier to aim.

[KenToad]

I think he means that he doesn't want to spend 5 or 6 hundred dollars to buy a system in order to play one or a couple of good games, rather than an extended library of great games.

I understood and mostly agree with that point, thanks.  I was pointing out the irony of saying he won't pay hundreds for a single game on an arcade message board.  We're the exact type that pay hundreds for a single game.

ok, ok sorry    I personally have never paid several hundred dollars for one game, and I still wouldn't ... maybe if it came in a nice cabinet. 

[ark_ader]

I have been looking at the promotional videos of PS3's Home.  I like it and it will open the door to so may people who find it difficult to interact in the "real world".

The ability to play counterstrike on it and most windows programs including Mame via Yellow Dog, and the possibility of running OSX puts an ever increasing desire to own one of these units.

I am not rich by any means and my last major purchase was a PSP, but it looks more likely I will be getting a PS3 than a Wii purely on it capabilities.  Granted we are talking about platforms that are on a different level, but something keeps nagging me in the back of my mind that Nintendo games/units are devoted to children and young women.  Their DS and Wii games of late reflect this.

I'm not making generalisations here, but if I am to commit hard erned cash to a platform, I would want something that will play all my old titles, some off tangent games (like PC stuff) and the core console games that Sony will offer.  Blueray? well we will have to look at that when the price comes down.

One thing is certain, if Sony keeps the ball moving in the right direction to the thirty somethings of the western world, I'd hate to be Nintendo or Microsoft right now.  If it is good enough I will buy it, and lets face it we are experienced enough to figure out if a console has got enough drawing power or not. 

The Wii will have to pull its socks up to compete.

I wish you would present something more than generalizations as the foundation of an argument.  However, if you want to play PC games on a TV, why don't you just get a video card that will output the signal to a TV?  But it really sounds like you just want an Xbox, except of course for your comment that you want a console that will play "the core console games that Sony will offer," which I'm guessing won't work on the Wii, even with a modchip.   

Your comment about Nintendo being "for children and young women", smacks of fanboyism.  Remember, it's not the system that defines the software, it's the software that defines the system, at least as far as we the consumers are concerned.  And Nintendo, as well as all the other game companies, will produce mass market games for as wide an audience as possible.  That probably extends to, yes, young people and women, and I think Little Big Planet or whatever the most publicized game of the moment  for PS3 is called, demonstrates that.

As for the rest, you haven't really presented any arguable points, so ... nevermind. 

Anyway, thanks for at least trying to sound objective.

 

I am not a Sony Fanboy but a keen collector of electronic games which started when my dad bought an Odessy for Christmas.  Every year (just about) I have been adding to my collection, which has either been lost in shipping or broken from moving from one side of the globe to another.

I'm knocking on 40 now and my love of video games will be a constant in my life.  To be honest I'm a Fanboy to nearly every platform there is and the only console I have not bought is the 360 and the Wii, purely because I think its 

So I don't take offense to those comments you have made or the point of making generalisations (as I kindly pointed out in my previous post) but I do think Nintendo systems are geared to children and women.  Most of the women colleagues have a DS and play it quite often, as the games look simple and cute.

I feel that the Wii is an extension to that and will appeal more to families than the hard core gamer.  Today it is getting harder to have a normal association with family life, especially with one parent families.  Getting  Wii and interacting with your child is excellent use of quality time, something I'm sure Nintendo was thinking of, as their adverts suggest.

Sony on the other hand appeal to the hard core gamer, and yes do include adult titles in their inventory or cataloque.  This is something I do find appeal to, coupled with the ability to play all the old games I have in my collection and to reduce the clutter (that one could expect with my hobby) that is my gaming room. 

Is it such a issue that I would want to pay £420 for a console that would deliver what I want?  This will not appeal to those who cannot afford it, and most likely  off those who would like to have it, but could only afford the Wii.

To be honest there is still life in the original Xbox and the Dreamcast, and I do play these consoles on a regular basis as do the CDI.  One of the main reasons for getting the X Arcade system.

So considering the experience I have in consoles, and the computers of old and new coupled with a 20 year IT and R&D background, I don't think my point of generalising is so far off the mark.  I have seen friends interact more with their children (who have bought the Wii) than with the Xbox as it appeals more. 

The Physical activity, the sense of competition and of bonding with a such a simple game of baseball, the Wii works like a charm.  It nearly makes you want to get a couple of mitts and have a game of catch, like we used to do before video games were around.

I do understand when posting there will be a change of view, as we all different.  I don't take offense in what you posted Ken, but I do think you should read the post more carefully and think about it before you reply to it.

If anything purely out of courtesy.

[shmokes]

My biggest question mark is what you have against the 360.  Their strategy seems to be virtually identical to Sony's aside from the BluRay drive.  They both appeal to identical markets.  So far 360 games look superior to PS3 games.  And the 360 currently has a very strong library, covering every genre. 

I personally want a PS3 more than a 360 because I think most of the same games will be available for both systems, but I own a modded Xbox and never owned a PS2, so backwards compatibility on the 360 is irrelevant to me, but backwards compatibility on the PS3 means that I can eventually catch up on gems that I missed like ICO, God of War, Shadow of the Colossus, etc.

But that's a purely subjective and understandable reason to choose PS3 over 360.  What do you base your dislike of the 360 on?  Objectively it just seems like a powerful console that has a very nice controller, a very large library of excellent games and an online component that is literally five years ahead of the competition. 

[KenToad]

Ark_ader,

I don't think the term fanboy relates to age.  However, it does relate to maturity.  My comment was that Mature games tend to appeal to immature boys, the same kind of boys that don't want to play games that they think their mother or their kid brother might want to play.  They also tend to think of themselves as hardcore.   

Truthfully, I also don't understand why you don't look at the Xbox 360 more favorably, since Sony hasn't been producing that "core" of console games lately.  I don't think Sony ever has, but they're damn good licensers ... but that won't matter if the system doesn't sell well, for whatever reason. 

So, I didn't really care that you're not into the Wii, but sayiing that it's for a certain demographic that doesn't include ... ahem .... hardcore gamers such as yourself is just plain silly. 

Sorry to sound discourteous again, sheesh. 

If it makes you feel better, I really admire your avatar.   

[geomartin]

Seems like a silly question when no one can keep the WII in stock.  I've been stopping  by a couple outlets almost daily looking to score one with no luck.  They both have had and continue to have stock on the PS3.  The question should be when is the PS3 going to take off!

[KenToad]

Seems like a silly question when no one can keep the WII in stock.  I've been stopping  by a couple outlets almost daily looking to score one with no luck.  They both have had and continue to have stock on the PS3.  The question should be when is the PS3 going to take off!

They put out the boarding call, but no one was there.

[Howard_Casto]

I don't think the term fanboy relates to age.  However, it does relate to maturity.  My comment was that Mature games tend to appeal to immature boys, the same kind of boys that don't want to play games that they think their mother or their kid brother might want to play.  They also tend to think of themselves as hardcore.   

See that is plain out wrong.  Mature games appeal to mature people.  The problem is that a games rating has nothing to do with how mature it is, rather the amount of sex and violence it contains.  The GTA series, for example is one of the most immature games I've ever seen and I strongly feel that the franchise would have never got off the ground if idiots like Jack Thompson hadn't given it all that free publicity.  I mean seriously, with some rare exceptions, there's no plot, the gameplay mechanics are shot, and the graphics are terrible.  The problem with "sandbox" gameplay is you out-grew playing in a sandbox at around age 6.  Once you figure out it's just a box with sand in it, it tends to loose it's appeal. 

On the other hand, truely mature games (like re4) appeal to mature gamers as they have things, like a plot and good gameplay... the ultra gore is just a nice little bonus. 




I responded to this thread eraly on, but my internet connection crapped out and it got lost. 

I'll give the short of it though....

The wii already took off, were you asleep or something?
Complaining about scores of 7 and 8 on games is like complaining that your kid is stupid because he always gets B's in school.  The average score of the wii games right now is around 7.5... both m$ and sony would KILL for a average score that high.  Think back to any system, I mean any system and with teh exception of the legendary nes and 2600 very few systems had more than two or three smash hits in their entire lifespan.  Like it or not, the bulk of any games on any system are average games at best.  The bulk of wii games are above average so that's really really good.  Remember even outstanding games like zelda ony get a 9-9.5... a ten is unheard of....  and so a 7 or 8 is a really good game. 

I'm on the last boss of sonic for example.  It wasn't the best (or longest) game in the world, but it was very fun and kept me occupied for a month or two, which is all you can expect from a game, especially a third party game this early in the system's life cycle.  Some really good games are already out... sure they aren't TP caliber, but what is?  That's like expecting m$ to release a game as good a halo once a month, it ain't gonna happen.  Also look to april... some killer games will be released, such as paper mario. 

In regards to the ps3, it doesn't need competition to make it's sales bad, it does that all by itself.  This has absolutely nothing to do with if you like sony or not, it's just simple economics.....  The ps3 is 600 bucks.... that's too expensive for the average consumer to want given it's currently weak lineup.  So the console isn't selling that well.  More importantly though, they still loose a great deal of money for every console sold, which would be fine if the software was selling (as that is how they make thier money) but it isn't.  Even their killer apps like resistance are selling around 1/3 to 1/10 what that average 360 or wii killer app is in terms of numbers.  These arguments about waiting for the price drop or waiting for new titles to come out don't help matters either.  Seeing as how sony is constantly loosing money due to poor software sales, a price drop ain't gonna happen anytime soon and since the killer apps won't be released for some time, it might be that sony will lose too much money in the meantime to make it worth it for them to stay in the market with the ps3, especially considering, the ps2, ironically is still selling like hot-cakes and making them a ton of money.

Look back at your video game history... the highest priced console has always sold the worst in a best-case scenario or killed the company worst-case.   Hmm.. a system with vastly superior graphics (and I'm exaggeratign a bit on that) backed by a well-known, well established gaming company that doesn't sell because it's over-priced and has a relatively poor software lineup.  Those two factors are hurting the system so badly that only the most dedicated fanboys defend it, constantly reminding us of it's superior features.  Also the manufacturer ignores the writing on the wall and continues to ignore inheriant problems, still investing tons of resources into the system and hailing it as the best thing since sliced bread. That sounds very familiar to me.... can you say NeoGeo?

Also the "home" service they announced is a joke and a gimmick.  Mii = cute little identity  Home=lame.  See first off, everybody keeps making comparisons to second-life and I would tend to agree with that.  Ever tried second life?  It totally sucks!! People that play second life aren't interested in gaming, they are interested in chatting or making crap to sell for second life bucks that can be exchanged for cash in the real world.  People criticize nintendo for making channels that don't apply to gamers, but at least they aren't basing their entire online interface on non-gamers!  The built in langauge that allows you to make "games" totally sucks as well and the ps3 home games built in, unfortunately look very similar to those games.  Also there is a practicality issue.  Ever tried 3darcade?  It's fantastic isn't it?  Now try to navigate the entire mame gamelist in 3d "fps" mode.  It's horribly unsuited for the task because quite frankly, you don't want to walk a virtual mile just to play pacman.  This is where home falls flat on it's face, it's no fun to walk to stuff in a virtual world after the novelty wears off unless it's a very small selection of items and thus little time is spent doing so.  Also, and this is just my personal opinion, but the avatars look kinda creepy and dead, much like any other create-a-whatever feature introduced over the years.  Mii's over-exaggerated features and simplified looks make them very expressive, while the home avatars look like those brain dead sprites in your average sim game. 

[KenToad]

Hmmm, how many good games are out for the wii right now?

I've heard of Wii Sports, Wario, Zelda, and maybe Excite Truck. 

What games are must play right now for the Wii?

I don't think the term fanboy relates to age.  However, it does relate to maturity.  My comment was that Mature games tend to appeal to immature boys, the same kind of boys that don't want to play games that they think their mother or their kid brother might want to play.  They also tend to think of themselves as hardcore.   

See that is plain out wrong.  Mature games appeal to mature people.  The problem is that a games rating has nothing to do with how mature it is, rather the amount of sex and violence it contains.  The GTA series, for example is one of the most immature games I've ever seen and I strongly feel that the franchise would have never got off the ground if idiots like Jack Thompson hadn't given it all that free publicity.  I mean seriously, with some rare exceptions, there's no plot, the gameplay mechanics are shot, and the graphics are terrible.  The problem with "sandbox" gameplay is you out-grew playing in a sandbox at around age 6.  Once you figure out it's just a box with sand in it, it tends to loose it's appeal. 

On the other hand, truely mature games (like re4) appeal to mature gamers as they have things, like a plot and good gameplay... the ultra gore is just a nice little bonus. 

An interesting point.  I would tend to agree that the term Mature is actually wrongfully applied to games like GTA.  I agree that mature people would prefer games that have plot and good gameplay.  But my comment is referring to the term Mature as it is applied by the ESRB. 

It would be awesome if the next Grand Theft Auto or Blood Rayne carried an official rating of Highly Immature, with the subtitle that you must be at the mental and emotional level of a 13 year-old boy in order to appreciate this zero plotline poorly executed gratuitously violent game,  since that would definitely be closer to the truth, IMO.

[ChadTower]

Holy crap Howard's post was long, even for him.  Is anyone going to read that?

[AtomSmasher]

I'll give the short of it though....

Heh, I'd hate to see the long version.

I was surprised by how long it took HC to reply since he is our resident Nintendo fanboy, but I guess his internet crapping out is why it took longer then usual.  *edit* by "long" in this sentence I mean length of time, not length of post.  Since the last sentence was talking about length of post, I thought it might need clarification.*/edit*

I'll just say I agree with some of what HC said and disagree with some of what he said.  I think common opinion seems to be the Wii has one great game, a couple good games, and a lot of stuff not worth playing.  Thats why some of us are playing gamecube games on the Wii to pass the time until more good Wii games come out.  Theres nothing wrong with that, its how it is for every console.  It takes time to build up a solid library of games.

[KenToad]

Hey come on, I read it and it was a good read.  *Edit* Sorry, Atomsmasher already mentioned the following. *End Edit*  I think Howard said his original post got erased accidentally, so that's why he didn't chime in earlier.  I can relate, since I'm usually not in the mood to retype it all if I lose what I'm about to post.  Now, I always copy long posts to the clipboard before I hit the post button.

[Howard_Casto]

I was surprised by how long it took HC to reply since he is our resident Nintendo fanboy,

Hell no I'm not a nintendo fanboy, I'm a "fanboy" of what is good.  This go around it's the wii, last round it was essentially the xbox.  I just call em like I see em.  Not a huge fan of the gamecube for example...  I still bought one so I could play windwaker, and re4 but I waited a whole year. 

[Howard_Casto]

Holy crap Howard's post was long, even for him.  Is anyone going to read that?

"I'm not that much of a reader."  -- President George W. Bush

[shmokes]

Sorry, I hate chopping up posts, but I just read two things I really wanted to respond to.  I actually haven't even read past the second thing so I can't comment on the post as a whole.

. . .  The GTA series, for example is one of the most immature games I've ever seen . . . there's no plot, the gameplay mechanics are shot, and the graphics are terrible. 

On the other hand, truely mature games (like re4) appeal to mature gamers as they have things, like a plot and good gameplay...

While I agree to the spirit of what you're trying to say, this is ridiculous.  The writing and plot in GTA: VC and GTA: SA is some of the tightest in the history of graphics-heavy videogames.  The plot and writing in RE4 fall directly into the Plan 9 From Outer Space, so incredibly, unbelievably, incomprehensibly bad that it's good category.  The graphics in GTA are kind of terrible, but perfectly understandable.  In order to provide the brilliant, open world you get to play in, you get crappier graphics.  I'd take low-res textures over a ten-foot draw distance any day of the week.  It shouldn't be a complaint for a Wii fan, such as yourself

The average score of the wii games right now is around 7.5... both m$ and sony would KILL for a average score that high. 

Shut up, Howard.  Seriously, shut the ---fudgesicle--- up.  You said exactly the same thing in another thread not a month ago and I responded with a painstaking, exhaustive list illustrating that not only did the Xbox 360 have FAR FAR FAR FAR FAR more 7 and 8 games, but that the 360's percentage of games with a rating of 7 or higher was around 60% while the Wii's was around 40%  (I think those are fairly accurate numbers, but I can track down the thread if you want me to be more precise).

If you want to just make ---Cleveland steamer--- up and hope that by simply speaking authoritatively you will not be questioned, fine.  But once someone has questioned your numbers that you pull directly out of your "gut feeling", and gone through the effort to actually correct you with real facts, don't just go on making the same ---smurf-poop--- claims.  It should be beneath you.


edit:  The real numbers I speak of

[shmokes]

I can relate, since I'm usually not in the mood to retype it all if I lose what I'm about to post.  Now, I always copy long posts to the clipboard before I hit the post button.

I wish, wish, wish, I could get into this habit.  Only seldom do I remember to do this, and it is never when something goes wrong and the internets steal my post.

[sodapopinski]

"I'm not that much of a reader."  -- President George W. Bush

That's a little bit scary if thats a real quote.

[KenToad]

Thanks for digging that link up, Shmokes.  I stopped reading that thread just before it got interesting.  So that clears up the confusion that Howard had cast over me with his wise words about a plethora of great games on the Wii and here little old me is thinking:  What games? 

Holy crap Howard's post was long, even for him.  Is anyone going to read that?

Judging by your post count you prefer writing before reading. 

[shmokes]

Another case in point I just thought of.  Trauma Center.  Awesome game.  It uses the analog stick and the pointer for control, and the control is really tight.  But every once in a while the game has you use a defibrillator on a patient and it is the only time the the controls sometimes feel frustratingly unresponsive.  It's also the only point in the game that makes use of the motion sensors rather than the pointer. 

I hope I'm wrong, seriously, and even if I'm right, maybe a rev. 2 controller, or a 3rd party controller will rectify the problem.  Trauma Center proves that great things can be done with the Wii that cannot be done anywhere else.  Wii Sports proves that even games that use the motion controller can be loads of fun, so long as they don't require much precision/finesse (see Wii Sports Boxing for an in-house Nintendo example of an inability to get accurate complex data from the motion sensors).  But the more I play, and the more my initial honeymoon phase is wearing off and I'm starting to see many signs pointing to the controllers being SERIOUSLY flawed.  And I cannot, for the life of me, come up with a single example that dispels my suspicion. 

If the motion sensors are capable of precision, are the developers choosing not to make use of it, including Nintendo's own in-house teams?  It seems unlikely that they would do this.

[Hoagie_one]

"I'm not that much of a reader."  -- President George W. Bush

That's a little bit scary if thats a real quote.

If im not mistaken, He said that in reply to whether Bush read the morning paper every day.  He then went on to say he had people who did that for him and kept him up to date.  Which explains much of his short-sightedness.

[TOK]

"I'm not that much of a reader."  -- President George W. Bush

That's a little bit scary if thats a real quote.

If im not mistaken, He said that in reply to whether Bush read the morning paper every day.  He then went on to say he had people who did that for him and kept him up to date.  Which explains much of his short-sightedness.

The same people that read the Nintendo stats to Howard.

Sorry, I don't even care, I just couldn't leave a setup line like that hanging out there. 

[shmokes]

So you're saying that Bush, like HC, doggedly remains misinformed and then says and does ridiculous things because neither of them can be bothered to read?

[ark_ader]

With my regard to the Wii and the Xbox 360, it comes down to playabiility that puts the freeze on my wallet with regard to spending my hard earned pounds (which is double in consideration to the dollar as I do spend too).  The Xbox 360 controller sucks.  I cannot play the games on it.

It  me off when I play ANY GAME on it.  Who ever designed the controller needs shooting and that unfortunatrly extends to the Wii.  Play Call of Duty 3 and tell me the Wii controls work like a dream.  Only Wii sports works great and you get that free with the unit.

I went over to my mates house (his birthday was yesterday after the UK launch of the PS3 and he has a nice big 42" Plasma that manages to get 1080p on the PS3.  He pop'ed in motorstorm and 3 minutes later sold me on the console.  The night after I dreamt of playing that game at home because the controls are a dream.  Yes it borrows the Wii controls, but much more accurately and easier.

The only problem with the PS3 is that I will need to get a Plasma TV for it.  I could not go Scart or RGB.  We tried DVI on a Desktop TFT and it didn't work    I was secretly hoping.  I also just found out that the Linux Yellow Dog cannot play Counterstrike Source, so the thought of using it as a computer was a bit poopoo.  Thats going to change in time.

The games I saw blew the 360 away.  Doesn't come close - yep no way near and you have to experience it on a plasma to see my perspective.  Nope sorry Bill, Sorry Nintendo Its fast forward to the new kid on the block.  The PS3.  If you have a PSP it is soooo cool to use it as a remote and PS1 games on the PS3 look wonderfully blocky.  We haven't tried the PS2 games in it yet.

I wished I bought the PS3 in London at Virgin, everyone who queued up got a Sony Plasma to play it on for free.  Now to find a plasma that can get high enough as a desktop VDU and I'm in business.

We counted 14 titles at the shop (go to Asda in the UK as they are £10 cheaper) the controller prices are a bit steep and no vibration or force feedback which was cool as it made the controller very light and easy to grip.  The button on the controller switches it on and off.  No fatigue no hand cramps NO playstation thumb!   I'm hoping to buy the US 20GB version and play it in the UK.

Maybe this should be moved to the review board. 

Its real ace guys, go on, I dare you to buy one.  Just don't tell the missus.

[shmokes]

The games I saw blew the 360 away.  Doesn't come close - yep no way near and you have to experience it on a plasma to see my perspective. 

I'm sorry, but your giant fanboy rant simply lost all credibility with this ridiculous statement.  PS3 may be more powerful than the 360 (big fat emphasis on the word "may").  It may be capable of better graphics than the 360.  But so far 360 games look every bit as good, and in most cases better than their PS3 counterparts. 

You, sir, are full of ---steaming pile of meadow muffin---.

[ark_ader]

Ok  have you played it on a 42 inch plasma?

I have seen the xbox 360 on the same type of screen and I'm sorry but your above statement doesn't hold water.  Fan boy or not *I* think its miles better and you can play it without wanting to throw the console out the window.

I also believe when more people play on the PS3, they will dump their Xbox 360 thus creating a surplus on Ebay. 

So sorry to differ with you, but I live in the UK where £450 is a lot of money nearing $900 and for that money I expect the best.  Unfortunately I have to get a Plasma to play it on.

Incidentially I happened on a web site that might have my TFT VDU soluton:

http://www.hdfury.com/

Perhaps when you can afford one of these units, you will sing its praises too.  But the Xbox 360 doesn't even come in 2nd, because playability is key in my book.

[shmokes]

Good lord, a 42" plasma isn't going to make a PS3 game better than a 360 unless the game is running at a higher resolution and has higher quality textures.  Motorstorm runs at 720p.  It does not even run at 1080i, let alone 1080p.  There are no games out for the 360 that don't support at least 720p so, again, you are completely full of ---steaming pile of meadow muffin---.  360 games that look better on a 42" rear projection TV will continue to look better on a 42 inch plasma.  Where do you come up with ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- like this?  Do you think that the PS3 has a plasma enhancement chip?  You think it detects the proximity of plasma technology and turns on the "magically make the game look better" setting?  What about a 42" LCD?  Would the PS3 or Xbox 360 look better on that technology, LMAO?

BTW, the 360 is perfectly capable of outputting a 1080p, so even if PS3 games ever do look better than 360 it will have nothing to do with whether you're hooking the systems up to a 42" plasma.  Both systems can output the same resolutions.  The TV you hook them do is never going to be the deciding factor as to which system looks better.  You seriously have no idea what you're talking about.  My gut tells me that a few years from now PS3 games will tend to look slightly better than 360 games, in the way that Gamecube games tended to look slightly better than PS2.  But it sure as hell hasn't happened yet.  Frankly, the 2nd generation 360 games have tended to not only equal their PS3 counterparts, but actually look and play better than them.   

[Naru]

shmokes is right. 
The size of the Plasma, LCD or
whatever version HD TV you got
doesn't make the Ps3 better.

Ha ha, I just got a 50" projection HD TV
and wouldn't you know it, after a solid
year of playing my 360, tonight it
gets the
red light of death.
Man was I cheesed.
Fortunately I paid for that extended service plan
and after 20 minutes on the phone with a robot,
I was transferred to a mystic in India
who is going to send me a box to ship my 360
back to him for divine intervention.

[Zero_Hour]

I've been having a blast with the new Nintendo system. After saying there was nothing on the PS3 to compel me to pick one up anytime soon, I hear that there is one app that just totally kicks ass on it - Folding@Home.  Who would have thought that the best press Sony gets in the early stages of launch, is a program you run when you aren't playing games.  Now they just need to publish some games that blow away the competition in a similar fashion. They will eventually I'm sure, but for now I'll sit back and await a larger library of games, (and hopefully a price reduction) and enjoy some cheap fun with the Wii.

And BTW, the Wii looks pretty sweet in progressive scan mode on my HD CRT, which I will take over LCD or Plasma any day.

[geomartin]

I was down at the local play'n'trade today looking for a Wii.  He said still no Wii, but he has 4 PS3's in stock.  Has had them all week with no takers!  Me thinks that no amount of new software is going to overcome that price point for the hardware.  Everyone wants to wait for the price drop.  I believe this to be an ominous sign for Sony!

[shmokes]

It ain't, though.  Sony is not going to be a failure here.  If anybody ends up with more market share than Sony this time around, it's going to be Microsoft, not Nintendo, IMO (and unfortunately).  Either way, PS3 is going to be fine.  It's almost April!!!  The only reason it seems even the slightest bit remotely strange to you that PS3s are readily available more than four months after launch is that Wii's are still hard to find (which I personally think is a manufactured shortage at this point).  It's been mover four months.  A person absolutely should be able to walk into an electronics store and walk out with a PS3.  Stocked shelves four months after launch is not especially indicative of doom.

[Zero_Hour]

Seeing as how the Wii has outsold the PS3 by more than 2 to 1 (6 million / 2.7 million) since launch, according to VGCharts.org, I have a hard time believing that it is a "manufactured shortage" on Nintendo's part.  Nintendo's earlier launch in Europe than Sony has affected availability elsewhere. Sony is a little behind where MS was around this time last year, though the Euro launch numbers should help even that out or even put Sony ahead of MS - assuming they sell through the million units they reportedly had ready for the launch.

Personally, I still feel it's way too early to try and pick a winner, and thus far each of the players seems to have a strong point among end users:

360 - The best online experience by far.
PS3 - The hardware with the most potential (I was kidding about F@H as a killer app, but it does show off at least some of the potential of the cell architecture)
Wii - The most intriguing control setup.

Now we just need to see more quality titles, and pick the system(s) that best fit. As always, that takes time. 

I think at their current pace of sales, all three contenders can at least rest easy knowing they will all outsell the Dreamcast. 

[shmokes]

PS3 - The hardware with the most potential (I was kidding about F@H as a killer app, but it does show off at least some of the potential of the cell architecture)

It's true.  PS3's are already making up more than half the workload of the folding@home project.  There are only like 13,000 PS3's currently working on it, as opposed to more than 160,000 PCs (some high end, some low end, some in the middle, of course), as well as thousands of Macs and Linux boxes.  That 13,000 PS3s are doing more work than everyone else combined is pretty impressive.  It's not unreasonable to suggest that of the 160,000 PCs working on it, at least 13,000 of those are going to be high-end PCs.

p.s., I can't be bothered to look up the actual numbers, but I think I'm remembering those more or less correctly.

[TyrannosaurusRox]

Ok  have you played it on a 42 inch plasma?

I have seen the xbox 360 on the same type of screen and I'm sorry but your above statement doesn't hold water.  Fan boy or not *I* think its miles better and you can play it without wanting to throw the console out the window.

I also believe when more people play on the PS3, they will dump their Xbox 360 thus creating a surplus on Ebay. 

So sorry to differ with you, but I live in the UK where £450 is a lot of money nearing $900 and for that money I expect the best.  Unfortunately I have to get a Plasma to play it on.

...

I played a PS3 and to tell you what, it's swayed me to buying a 360.  I thought "well, if this is next gen gaming, I may as well save myself a couple of hundred and buy a 360", especially if you need to buy a £800 plasma tv to 'truly appreciate' Ridge Racer    And I don't know if you've checked UK ebay for surplus PS3's, but go have a ganders if you like - you'll probably pick one up cheaper than in the stores.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Ninty/M$ fanboy, I think the ps2's the second best console since the snes in terms of the amount of fun it gave me, and I think the PS3 will do really well eventually, but seriously you want to throw an xbox out of the window because it doesn't look nice on a plasma screen???  I think you're in the wrong place if you think graphics are the be all and end all.  Look at this...

... Does this make your eyes hurt? 

[shmokes]

And, of course, even more important is that the Xbox 360 currently looks as good as or better than a PS3 on a 42" plasma.  So while his statement would be little bit ridiculous even if there was a grain of truth in it, it becomes comedy god when you consider that he wants to throw a console out the window because his imagination is inventing shortcomings with the 360 that simply aren't there.  LMAO.

[Zero_Hour]

p.s., I can't be bothered to look up the actual numbers, but I think I'm remembering those more or less correctly.

Folding Stats by OS

[shmokes]

If PS3 cures Alzheimer's I'm getting one on principal.  That's all there is to it.   Both my grandpas died of Alzheimer's.  I need that ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- cured. 

[MustardTent]

So, I've been wrestling with the question of what to do now that I have a Wii.

1) Get one or two GameCube controllers and some highly reviewed GameCube games.  I've never had a GameCube, so this'll be a totally new experience for me.  GameCube stuff can be bought used, and (I'm guessing here) is going to be cheaper than buying new games on the current-gen systems.

2) Buy an Xbox 360. Enjoy having one system meant for mainstream entertainment that supports high-def (Xbox360), and one for innovation (Wii).

I understand that one is more expensive than the other, but that choice has more of a future (in terms of new products becoming available).

Thoughts?

[M.Lanza]

So, I've been wrestling with the question of what to do now that I have a Wii.

1) Get one or two GameCube controllers and some highly reviewed GameCube games.  I've never had a GameCube, so this'll be a totally new experience for me.  GameCube stuff can be bought used, and (I'm guessing here) is going to be cheaper than buying new games on the current-gen systems.

2) Buy an Xbox 360. Enjoy having one system meant for mainstream entertainment that supports high-def (Xbox360), and one for innovation (Wii).

I understand that one is more expensive than the other, but that choice has more of a future (in terms of new products becoming available).

Thoughts?

If innovation's what your looking for, then why do you want a wii?

[MustardTent]

It's not likely that I will view youtube videos during the day.  So, how's about a synopsis?

[AtomSmasher]

It's not likely that I will view youtube videos during the day.  So, how's about a synopsis?

http://www.xavix.com/

Its basically a bunch of different sports games with specific controllers for each sport.  Its been around for a while and does look pretty cool, but I have no idea how well it actually works.

[Zero_Hour]

So, I've been wrestling with the question of what to do now that I have a Wii.
1) Get one or two GameCube controllers and some highly reviewed GameCube games.  I've never had a GameCube, so this'll be a totally new experience for me.  GameCube stuff can be bought used, and (I'm guessing here) is going to be cheaper than buying new games on the current-gen systems.

I went with The GC option, picked up a couple of Wavebirds, and a memory card, and am currently playing through Metroid Prime, that I picked up for $7. Along with a few Virtual Console titles, and SSX Blur, my system is not sitting idle. Plus, my wife an I still are having a blast with Wii Sports.

I see myself getting a 360 or a PS3 eventually, but I'm happy to wait for prices to drop and game libraries to expand.

[shmokes]

That seems like a pretty good move.  I would like a 360 or PS3 eventually, but I have so many stolen games on my original Xbox, and so little gaming time, that I just don't see it as a priority.  As long as you can be content with catching up on the Gamecube games you may as well take advantage of it to save some cash.

[ark_ader]

Good lord, a 42" plasma isn't going to make a PS3 game better than a 360 unless the game is running at a higher resolution and has higher quality textures.  Motorstorm runs at 720p.  It does not even run at 1080i, let alone 1080p.  There are no games out for the 360 that don't support at least 720p so, again, you are completely full of ---Cleveland steamer---.  360 games that look better on a 42" rear projection TV will continue to look better on a 42 inch plasma.  Where do you come up with ---Cleveland steamer--- like this?  Do you think that the PS3 has a plasma enhancement chip?  You think it detects the proximity of plasma technology and turns on the "magically make the game look better" setting?  What about a 42" LCD?  Would the PS3 or Xbox 360 look better on that technology, LMAO?

BTW, the 360 is perfectly capable of outputting a 1080p, so even if PS3 games ever do look better than 360 it will have nothing to do with whether you're hooking the systems up to a 42" plasma.  Both systems can output the same resolutions.  The TV you hook them do is never going to be the deciding factor as to which system looks better.  You seriously have no idea what you're talking about.  My gut tells me that a few years from now PS3 games will tend to look slightly better than 360 games, in the way that Gamecube games tended to look slightly better than PS2.  But it sure as hell hasn't happened yet.  Frankly, the 2nd generation 360 games have tended to not only equal their PS3 counterparts, but actually look and play better than them.   

Do you own a PS3 and a 42" Plasma?  If you did you would know that the PS3 configures the screen on startup.  Motor Storm plays at 1080p and I have seen it with my own eyes.

You don't know me well enough to make a personal statement like you did, regardless of your personal rant of the Xbox 360.  If the unit makes me mad at it due to awkward controls it will be either on ebay or out the window.

I do know you are trying to get a rise out of me by posting that crap but to be honest, I do not know why you won't take me for my word and let it be.

Have I offended you someway?  Have I made a technical lie in my above posts?  PM me and lets take that further.

The Xbox 360 is a nice console that displays a good resolution and the graphics are very good, it is just the control aspect that I do not like, which goes the same fo r the Wii.  If I spend my money on a console, it has to be one that I get enjoyment out of.

I do not see the above statement invoking any of those negative and insulting comments you have made.

Please explain yourself Shmokes.

Can I have the moderator's opinion too please?

[shmokes]

Motor Storm plays at 1080p and I have seen it with my own eyes.

Oh, well, if you've seen it with your own eyes, perhaps I should reconsider.  Presumably you personally counted all 1080 lines of resolution as well, right?

MotorStorm plays in 720p.  I repeat:  MOTORSTORM DOES NOT SUPPORT 1080i OR 1080p.

And you didn't say that only the control on 360 is crap (which is also an absurd statement, frankly.  The controllers have nice, high quality, accurate buttons and sticks and are considered very comfortable by most people, not to mention that the left analog stick is in the correct spot on the 360, while Sony continues to doggedly insist on putting the D-pad in the default position for your thumb.  ---smurfing--- morons).

What you said specifically is:  "The games I saw blew the 360 away.  Doesn't come close - yep no way near and you have to experience it on a plasma to see my perspective."  Now, if all you're talking about is the ---smurfy--- controller of the 360, and not the graphics, where does the 42" plasma come into play.  If I play the 360 on an LCD screen will it control just fine.  Is it only on a 42" plasma that the controller issues on the 360 become apparent? 

By the way, how would a PS3 fair on a 60" plasma.  Would I still have a good experience, or do I have to get a 42" plasma to get maximum benefit from that system, LMAO.

I do not own a PS3 or a 42" plasma.  But what I do have, which you lack, is a basic understanding of how display technology works.  The only way the PS3's superiority to the 360 would be apparent only on a 42" plasma (I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you mean on any high definition television, not just on 42" plasmas), is if the 360 could not output HD resolutions.  In a situation like that a PS3 and an Xbox 360 might look similar on a standard def TV set because the PS3 would only be able to run in 480i or 480p, which would match the 360's resolution.  In that case the difference would become apparent when you hooked both systems to an HD TV (a 42" plasma, for example) and the 360 would still be displaying 480p because that's all it's capable of, while the PS3 could then bump up to 720p or 1080i/p.  THIS IS NOT THE CASE.  The 360 is capable of outputting EXACTLY THE SAME resolutions as the PS3.  If both systems can output an identical video signal, the TV you view them on is irrelevant. 

The PS3 might be able to push better graphics, with more polygons at higher framerates with more effects turned on, etc.  This has nothing to do with what TV you view it on.  The fact is, every 360 game is running HD resolutions.  Gears of War runs at 1080i while Resistance: Fall of Man, probably the best looking PS3 game so far, runs at only 720p.  On top of that, Gears of War has better graphics than Resistance.

I guess the short of it is, you're full of ---Cleveland steamer---.  The claims you are making are not only sensational, but they are flat-out false.  I can't stand fanboyism for this reason.  I love Nintendo, but I'm not going to go around making ridiculous claims about them in order to give the company free advertising.  I have no problem voicing my opinion about the various consoles, and making it known that Nintendo is my favorite videogame maker, but I don't let my love for the company make me unable to accepts facts, or to delude me into thinking that mediocre games like MotorStorm are both amazingly fun (it ain't) or has the best graphics of any game ever made for any system (it doesn't -- in fact that honor would go to a game for the PC or the 360 at this point).

In other words, stop being a tool.  Sony doesn't pay you, so why should you be an evangelist for them.  In fact, last I checked, you have to pay them for the privilege of using their hardware and software.  When you're reading your PS3rocksHARDCORE.COM or IsleepWITHaPS3downMYpants.com websites, consider for a second that the information you get there is unreliable.  It is information coming from people like you, who just believe everything good they hear about the system because they want to believe those things, not because they are true or even plausible.  Fanboys are obnoxious because they have a religion-like faith in their system and no amount of evidence/proof to the contrary will shake that faith (see also: "MotorStorm runs in 1080p.  I've seen it with my own eyes.")

[ark_ader]

shmokes:

Well I have seen Motorstorm at 720 resolution and the 1080p looks far better.  The fact that you cannot "Back up" your claims proves my point exactly. 

I do hope your are representing your "Cyber" self in this argument and not your real self, as I pity those around you when they have a disagreement when in company.  I mean this in a nice way too.

Regardless of your self imposed views on the subject it won't sway from my original statement - the PS3 blows the Xbox Away.  Sony doesn't need to pay me for those comments as I intend to pay Sony to experience those comments in my living room. 

My friends think this type of argument is funny as they own both the PS3 and the Xbox360.  They prefer the PS3.  Your post came up last night in conversation, and they do see your point, they still think it is moot now the PS3 is out.

Read my previous comments about the controller and you will see you jumped at my previous post without thinking.  I do not blame you for that as it is quite clear you feel that my comments have somewhat inflamed you to write such garbage.  It is quite a detraction from your usual informed comments, which endures you to this forum.

My best suggestion regarding this argument is to agree that the Original Xbox is the bees knees and leave it at that, or your credibility on this board will be strained as it appears your heart operates the keyboard rather than your brain.  Something I guess we are all guilty of. Myself included.

This is case in point to your response that you cannot determine my resolution comment as you have no similar materials to base it on.  Does it really matter though?  Yes.  Especially when you insult a fellow member just to get your point across.

Wii and Xbox 360 is out , within budget and the PS3 is very questionable due to the expense, but if we are looking at controller friendly and quality of the games - the PS3 is in my opinion the clear winner.

PM me if this tirade is to continue as it must be boring to others who frequent.

[ppilot]

Well I have seen Motorstorm at 720 resolution and the 1080p looks far better.

He's getting upset because what you're saying just...doesn't...make...any...sense 

You don't understand at ALL what you're saying.  There's nothing WRONG with that (there are tons of things I don't understand.)  But I know enough not to discourse at length about them as if I do!

[ChadTower]

Do you own a PS3 and a 42" Plasma?  If you did you would know that the PS3 configures the screen on startup.  Motor Storm plays at 1080p and I have seen it with my own eyes.

Please explain how your PS3 interfaces with the TV's firmware and has the ability to issue commands that the TV actually follows.

[shmokes]

shmokes:

The fact that you cannot "Back up" your claims proves my point exactly. 

Good lord . . . I provided you a link.  What more do you want?  Will any of these work:

Petition asking Sony to release a patch that would enable upscaling from 720p to 1080p

The Sony-run Playstation.com site that describes Motorstorm as "displayed in glorious High-Definition (720p)"

Confirmation from Joystiq.com

A Gamezone.com interview with the developer of MotorStorm where he is asked:  "One Sony exec says 1080, another Sony exec says 720p – what’s the official resolution?"  And he Responds, "I can confirm MotorStorm runs at 720p."

Are you daft?  I can't believe that you would possibly say that I haven't backed up my claim.  I already linked you to reliable confirmation of what I'm saying.  I then described in detail how the technology works, and how because of the way it works what your saying not only is not true, but CAN NOT BE TRUE. 

And how have you backed up your arguments?  "I've seen it with my own eyes."  Well, with powerful backup like that, it's a wonder that I don't just toss out what everyone, including Sony and the Developer say about the title.

MOTORSTORM DOES NOT RUN IN 1080P

It doesn't.  It simply does not.  No amount of wishful thinking or misguided beliefs on your part will increase the resolution that this game can display.  I understand that the PS3 is capable of outputting a 1080p signal.  I understand that your 42" plasma is capable of displaying a 1080p signal.  I understand that you have configured your PS3 to display a 1080p signal on your plasma.  But, and this is the important part -- try to pay attention and learn, the resolution of the signal actually sent to the TV, regardless of what the PS3 and your TV are capable of, is determined by THE GAME.  Some PS3 games do run at 1080p.  MotorStorm does not.  They originally planned to, but considering it's only running at 30fps at 720p it's pretty obvious that with the level of detail and graphical effects going on, pushing it to 1080i/p would have slowed the framerate down too much.

Either way, for the 1000th time, it doesn't make a difference.  Xbox 360 can output a 1080p signal, so even if MotorStorm could run at 1080p (it can't) it doesn't mean that it would be doing something that could not be duplicated on the 360. 

[ChadTower]

Breathe, man.

[shmokes]

It's true.  Thanks.   I needed that.

[ark_ader]

ChadTower:

You know something? 

When my friend installed the PS3 in his LG Plasma, the PS3 via the HDMI socket configured the Plasma to 1080p.  To be totally honest I didn't think his 2 year old plasma would reach that resolution.  When it is connected to SKY via the scart it looks kinda fuzzy, but the PS3 is stonkingly clear.

I think that is pretty cool of Sony to invoke some kind of probing software for the PS3, shame it didn't probe for the 17" TFT when we hooked it up via the HDMI to DVI cable.  I looked on that HD Fury website, and it did say that some manufacturers use a black screen to disable this feature.  The TFT light was green and the image was evident but masked.

I want it to work on a widescreen TFT even if it is only 720p.  It would save me several hundred pounds.  I currently use a dual display at home with the PC.  A third screen would be cool for the PC and the PS3.

I'm going over to my mates house tonight that has the LG and the PS3 and I'll ask him a bit more on the model number of the plasma and the output.  Looks like he is going to put YellowDog on it, and I am intrigued and interested in the quality of image with text on such a wide area.

I'm not a VDU expert by any margin, but I been dealing with monitors most of my professional life, from MDA to HDMI and I know what I am talking about regardless if the contributors on this thread doesn't. 

It's ok, but I'm sure there are a lot of people out there curious of the PS3, and since its tax rebate time for us in the UK - a good time for some research. 

As I was posting this the tidbit was added my shmokes but I won't quote it to save time.

MotorStorm ....is.... being.....D I S P L A Y E D...I N...1 0 8 0 P not in 720p or whatever.  We viewed it in 720p and it looked ok but looks great in 1080p.  I don't follow the trade rags as the product they show is usually beta anyway. 

You know this too.

Get over it!     

PM me regarding this from now on Shmokes so you can carry on this tirade off this thread.

[ChadTower]

I didn't know that higher end TVs had software interfaces that devices could use to configure them.  That's pretty cool.  My TV has an HDMI input but I've never used it for anything.

[ark_ader]

I didn't know that higher end TVs had software interfaces that devices could use to configure them.  That's pretty cool.  My TV has an HDMI input but I've never used it for anything.

The only thing that comes close to this is the probing that Linux distributions use for the automated install and how Windows determines resolution for its native display driver rather than 640x480 16 color VGA. 

Can you recommend a good display for the Xbox 360 or PS3 that has the required inputs for the PC and these higher end consoles?  Sony comes to mind, but it would considering this recent exchange eh?

The prices are dropping, but I cannot justify having a 42" plasma as a PC monitor.  Plus I probably get motion sickness from it....

[ChadTower]

I'm the wrong guy to ask.  I don't have any HD other than the one TV that I got for $540 shipped, which is why I bought it.  No HD source, I watch standard Svideo via Tivo and 720p upscaled DivX material via XBMC.   

[pointdablame]

MotorStorm ....is.... being.....D I S P L A Y E D...I N...1 0 8 0 P not in 720p or whatever.  We viewed it in 720p and it looked ok but looks great in 1080p.  I don't follow the trade rags as the product they show is usually beta anyway. 

I'm going to ask this instead of shmokes because you two clearly are mad at each other as if you had kicked each other's puppies.

HOW did you witness Motorstorm at 1080p?  1080p implies that your Plasma display has a specific number of pixels, specifically 2,073,600 pixels.  That means there are 2,073,600 dots on your friend's plasma with which to display a picture.

Now... Motorstorm only outputs at 720p... this is (it would seem) a given fact.  That means the game can only physically push out around a million pixels.... its all that there is..... you can't fit 10 gallons of gas in a 5 gallon tank......

So, I am honestly and politely asking you how on earth you and your friend managed to make Motorstorm more than DOUBLE the amount of pixels that the game was PROGRAMMED in.  Are you implying that the entire game press industry is wrong and that Motorstorm has a 1080p setting...but they just didn't advertise it?  It's some kind of secret added bonus? 

Your display has 1080p capabilities.... but the game doesn't.  If you hooked up a VCR to your friend's tv and played an old VHS, even with the tv "set up" to 1080p.... would you call that 1080p?

[odysseyroc]

Why does this discussion remind me of Mr. Burns telling Don Mattingly to trim his sideburns?

[ChadTower]

[More Cowbell]

Well, Mr. Burns had done it
The power plant had won it
With Roger Clemens clucking all the while
Mike Scioscia's tragic illness made us smile
While Wade Boggs lay unconscious on the barroom tile
We're talkin' softball
From Maine to San Diego
Talkin' softball
Mattingly and Canseco
Ken Griffey's grotesquely swollen jaw
Steve Sax and his run-in with the law
We're talkin' Homer...
Ozzie, and the Straw
We're talkin' softball
From Maine to San Diego
Talkin' softball
Mattingly and Canseco
Ken Griffey's grotesquely swollen jaw
Steve Sax and his run-in with the law
We're talkin' Homer...
Ozzie, and the Straw

[KenToad]

This argument over "p" reminds me of my Mom explaining to me that I couldn't open her photos in Photoshop because they were stored in her other Image program.  Again and again, she would get frustrated with the silly Canon image software and, when I would tell her to use something else, she would always ask how she could get her pictures on the new program.   

Stupid crappy bundled software isn't as irritating as the knuckleheadedness currently on display, by Mr. I-know-what-I-can-see, though.

Could someone explain to me what "p" means specifically?  Is it pixels?  I'm starting to get very (sort of) interested in learning more about the subject.

[Buddabing]

p=progressive i=interlaced

Wikipedia link

[shmokes]

Heh . . . if only I was relying solely on gaming rags.  My links point specifically to the game's official advertisement entry at Playstation.com, as well as statements directly from the developer's mouth.  It only does 720p.  Maybe ark_ader should give evolution a call and let them know their mistake.  They can have a big company wide meeting where they ask, "Alright, who programmed in support for 1080p?"  To which all of the employees will respond, while looking around at all their neighbors, "Uhh . . . i'm pretty sure it wasn't me.  Ted?"  "No, I don't think so.  I don't remember doing that anyway.  I was pretty hopped up on Mountain Dew and Doritos in those last few weeks before deadline so it's hard to say for sure."

God, I feel like somebody kicked my puppy. 

*disclaimer: this message was posted from my phone so excuse any weird typos.

[ark_ader]

I went around to my friend's house today to get more information on his PS3. 

We played motorstorm again at 1080p but I looked more closely to the display, but was unconvinced there was a resolution issue as it had some graphical glitches possibly due to a couple factors.  I'm also thinking of Shmokes comments and tried not to be a bit nit picky.

We were playing online with a bluetooth headset, and couldn't figure out what the distortions on the screen was, but concluded it was update refresh or lag. 

But his display did not change to another resolution when the game started or loaded.  We played a fast game with bikes, but there was a noticable slowdown when we played with the Semi (Lorries).  All online wirelessly which was very fast.

I looked at the box the game came in and sure enough it was rated at 720p.   

So I'm at a loss why the game is working in that resolution, probably due to some update as the unit is constantly getting updated all the time.  Perhaps its a patch or a feature.

Anyway I figure it something along those lines and I will leave it at that.  Probably the subject will appear on this forum or on another again, and the real reason will emerge.

Regardless of the resolution issue the game was superb and the controls was fantastic, again no cramp, no numbness of thumb (which I get with the PS1) and the controller is very light in weight compared to other controllers I could mention.

I like the constant changes of software at Sony, especially awaitng "Home", but it will have to all wait until I can save up the cash to buy one.  It retails here at £425.  $850 is more than the US version, which is a drag as I cannot buy the US model and play it here in the UK. 

Definately no reason to get the Xbox 360 or the Wii until the price drops in a few years time.

I wonder what other Ps3 games play at 1080p?


 

I wasn't being critical at Shmokes for his comments, except the tone and manner of how he made his comments.  There is a way to disagree without being insulting.

[pointdablame]

But his display did not change to another resolution when the game started or loaded. 

You wouldn't see it change, and it would be very unlikely to announce that it had changed resolutions.  The TV is always 1080p... that's how many pixels it has.  It will also display lower resolutions, which is what you aren't understanding.

I looked at the box the game came in and sure enough it was rated at 720p.   

Because the game IS 720p.  It just is.

So I'm at a loss why the game is working in that resolution, probably due to some update as the unit is constantly getting updated all the time.  Perhaps its a patch or a feature.

And i guess this patch wasn't announced?  And the developer wouldn't tout the fact that it now displays 1080p?  Not to mention the fact that a "patch" wouldn't make the game natively display 1080p... since it wasn't programmed that way from the start.   

I wonder what other Ps3 games play at 1080p?

Not motorstorm.   

[shmokes]

My tone, initially, was a response to this statement:

The games I saw blew the 360 away.  Doesn't come close - yep no way near and you have to experience it on a plasma to see my perspective.

Your entire post was just textbook fanboyism.  Fanboys have a tendency to make hugely exaggerated claims that are just nonsense.  My initial reaction to you was a short post that basically amounted to me saying, "Meh . . . fanboy . . . move along."

You then responded and started insisting that what you said was the god's honest truth and making all kinds of claims about what you were seeing, things that I simply knew you could not be seeing because A) I knew that MotorStorm doesn't run higher than 720p and B) I have a basic understanding of how digital displays work.

I then became more of an ---uvula--- with each successive post because every time I responded to your nonsense with irrefutable facts, you just went right on refuting them time after time.  I'm sorry if you don't like rudeness, but just think how much of my abuse a little less stubbornness on your part could have saved you.

It's the problem with all fanboys.  You deify your console of choice and then it becomes impossible for you to view it objectively because even considering the possibility that something about it might not be perfect would basically be blasphemy that could send you to hell for time and all eternity.

Keep in mind that you've been arguing with someone who has little interest in picking up a 360, but is quite excited about owning a PS3 when the price comes down.  Do a quick search on the term PS3 or Playstation 3 by the user shmokes and it'll become clear that not only do I want a PS3 more than a 360, but that I think that when all is said and done PS3 will have the largest world-wide market share of the big 3 (though not by nearly the margin the PS2 had). 

I like the PS3.  I want a PS3.  I want one more than I want a 360.  The difference between you and me, though, is I don't make a religion out of it.

[KenToad]

p=progressive i=interlaced

Wikipedia link

Thanks for the link.   

[Naru]

I didn't know that higher end TVs had software interfaces that devices could use to configure them.  That's pretty cool.  My TV has an HDMI input but I've never used it for anything.

The only thing that comes close to this is the probing that Linux distributions use for the automated install and how Windows determines resolution for its native display driver rather than 640x480 16 color VGA. 

Can you recommend a good display for the Xbox 360 or PS3 that has the required inputs for the PC and these higher end consoles?  Sony comes to mind, but it would considering this recent exchange eh?

The prices are dropping, but I cannot justify having a 42" plasma as a PC monitor.  Plus I probably get motion sickness from it....

I have a 15" PHILIPS HD LCD,
a NORCENT 20" HD LCD, a SOYO 36" LCD, and
a SAMSUNG 50" HD projection.
Of these only the SOYO, and SAMSUNG have HDMI, but all of them have PC and multiple component,
s-video, cable, you name it, inputs.
It's getting pretty common for most HD TV to have PC input.

[ChadTower]

"PC" is not an input type, it's a source device.  VGA is only one way communication and is analog.  The other "PC" methods would be HDMI or DVI and I'm pretty sure DVI is only one way too.  So really, only HDMI capable devices would be two communicating two ways, I think.

[shmokes]

Windows is able to detect things about monitors automatically when you plug them in, so there must be some level of two-way communication going on over DVI (and possibly VGA -- I might be just imagining that it happens with VGA).

[ChadTower]

Windows has a default setting it uses when it can't detect anything.

However, I did just find this on Wikipedia:

Like modern analog VGA connectors, the DVI connector includes pins for the display data channel, version 2 (DDC 2) that allows the graphics adapter to read the monitor's extended display identification data (EDID).

So it looks like even SVGA can do a very limited read from a ROM on the display... I'm turning up with some research that the Display Data Channel allows the graphics adapter to read a ROM on the monitor showing information about the graphics modes that the monitor can display, for SVGA, DVI, or HDMI.

So it looks like the source device can detect the capabilities of the monitor and adjust itself to match.  I have yet to find anything that says it can adjust the display device, but I haven't gone too far into HDMI.

[ark_ader]

It all very interesting that the older models of Plasma displays can display a high resolution,compared with more recent offerings.

I have tried reading most of the information at HD Fury, but would like further clarification on what DVI and HDMI are per price range.  We all know that one manufacturer makes the same display for different companies with a price differential when it comes to features.

I always hated the look of LCD TVs when out at the local superstore, and the feeds to these sets were cable or aerial feeds.  I'd hate to buy one of these for it to look  and could not take it back.  In the UK taking back is not in fashion.

But once you see a cool video game (Sorry Shmokes) in 1080P its hard to look at a RGB screen again.

[shmokes]

But once you see a cool video game in 1080P its hard to look at a RGB screen again.

How would you know?  ROTFLMAO!

[shmokes]

I'm not sure I really understand your question.  LCD and Plasma TVs come with the same variety of inputs.  You can get LCD TVs with HDMI and Plasma with HDMI.  Same goes for DVI, and frankly anything you purchase today most likely has both.

The pictures will be basically identical between HDMI and DVI, but HDMI has the ability to carry audio in addition to video which makes it superior in that way (though this isn't very useful for the connection to your TV, unless you're using the TV's built-in speakers -- and who buys a giant flat-panel TV only to settle for stereo?)

As far as the difference between the quality of LCD and Plasma, the differences are practically negligible nowadays.  Early on LCD displays had really crappy black levels and viewing angles, but that's been addressed for the most part.  Also, anything smaller than 40" or so locks you into LCD because plasma pixels are too big.  You can't fit enough of them onto a <40" screen for high definition resolution.

Frankly, you're going to be perfectly happy with either technology.  Both produce phenomenal pictures and the differences between the two are not great.  Each has slight advantages over the other in certain areas, but only nitpicking stuff.

[ark_ader]

So with that above recommendation, what would you suggest with consoles and PC in mind as a desktop monitor or the same wall mounted?

I have other mate that has a LCD and it looks sharp and crisp but the contrast is high and the image suffers from it (sorry its a Sony Shmokes) where a plasma looks fuzzy with a digital Sky Box, yet easy on the eyes.

I'm not comparing the sizes, but want something cool to look at without burning my eyes out.  Something I do admit happens with my dual TFT displays.

I have one of those VGA to Composite called the MagicVga.  It runs the older consoles and Xbox fine with the TFT, but I wonder what I would look like on a LCD.

Thanks Smokes in advance!

[shmokes]

I don't recommend either to be honest.  If it's smaller than 40" you get LCD because you have no other option.  If you're getting a size that comes in LCD and Plasma flavors I just recommend reading reviews of the sets.  A nice LCD looks far better than a crap Plasma and a nice Plasma looks far better than a crap LCD.  Panasonic, Pioneer and Sharp have a reputation for making great flat panel TVs.  It seems like the Sony Bravia line is supposed to be really great too.  Vizio and Westing House make flat panels that are extremely inexpensive, but are actually pretty damned good, approaching the quality of the big name brands at a MUCH better price.  Steer clear of most other generics, unless it's for a display that's not especially important to you.  Just plug the model name of any given TV into Google, followed by the word "review" and see what people are saying about the display.

Lastly, take all this with a grain of salt.  I read A LOT.  But I don't own any flat panels TVs (unless you count my computer monitors, which are LCDs).  My only TV is a rear projection HDTV that is old enough that the only high def inputs it has are component inputs, and the only high def resolution it will display is 1080i (no 1080p or 720p).

[ChadTower]

You also have to consider that you don't have to have the best unit available.  It is reasonable to want the best unit for what you are willing to pay.

I have one LCD television.  It is not a highest end model, though it is pretty good, and is "worth" far more than I paid for it.  I got excellent value within the price range I found acceptable.

[shmokes]

Absolutely, though I tend to think of monitors as something to splurge a little on cos they should last so long.  For example I'm perfectly happy with my seven year old TV (almost perfect -- I'd love 720p support, actually).  And my computer monitors have gone through two computers and will go through at least a third.  While other technology just races along, a good display should last and last and last.  I always tell people not to skimp on the monitor when they're buying a computer -- this advice dates back to CRT days.

[RTSDaddy2]

I'll second Howard on this.  If you are someone who believes there's nothing good to play on the Wii I would honestly have to ask you what titles you've picked up.

Tiger Woods Golf, Wii Play, and Sonic, while perhaps not the gem that TP is by any stretch, are fine games in my opinion for 5 months in.  Then you add to that Wario Ware, and the additions (I haven't tried these yet but am hopeful) of Cooking Mama and others and you have a nice set of FUN games for the system.  Plus whatever Gamecube classics you may wish to replay, or try out for the first time....same with the VC channel if you aren't opposed to the points cost.

When I go in the store to check out the PS3, I see 2 -3 games that I think I'd even be interested in playing.  In contrast, we now own 9 Wii titles if you count Wii Sports.  That means every month we've found two titles that we cannot seem to live without. 

Nintendo systems may be for kids, but as my wife put it this morning, "I like playing with the kid's toys!"  This is the one system - as I've said before - next to the Atari 2600 and the SEGA Genesis that I've found worthy of this kind of support from me as a consumer in a long, long while. 

[Zero_Hour]

One thing I always remind folks about when they are considering an LCD monitor purchase - Native Resolution.

That is, how many physical pixels is the monitor comprised of. I always mention this, because with an LCD, that is the resolution that will look best. So if you Run your system at 1280x1024, and are happy with it, make sure that is the native resolution of your new LCD monitor. No matter how good the monitor is made, you will always have some level of image degradation when you run your PC at a resolution different from the monitor's Native res. This reason alone, is why I am still running CRT's on my main system. I want a crisp clear picture at EVERY resolution I run, which is a bunch.

[ChadTower]

Absolutely, though I tend to think of monitors as something to splurge a little on cos they should last so long.  For example I'm perfectly happy with my seven year old TV (almost perfect -- I'd love 720p support, actually).  And my computer monitors have gone through two computers and will go through at least a third.  While other technology just races along, a good display should last and last and last.  I always tell people not to skimp on the monitor when they're buying a computer -- this advice dates back to CRT days.

Can't tell you how many times I've heard someone say "yeah, I'd like an LCD, but it's not as good as plasma and I can't afford a plasma".  As if there won't always be something better than anything they buy. 

[shmokes]

Good call Zero_Hour.  I totally meant to mention native res.  Specifically the true 1080i/p res of 1920 x 1080.  Many HD flat panels only actually display 1024x768 or 13XX x something or other, even if they will accept and display a 1080i/p signal.  If you're planning to send a 1080i or 1080p signal to your LCD, you will not be seeing true 1080 resolutions unless your display does 1920 x 1080 (and I'd say the majority of the flat panels on the market actually cannot).

Also, RTSDaddy, I'm sorry, but you just have low standards.  The Wii is not overflowing with great titles.  There is a barely moving trickle of mediocre titles and an utter absence of great ones coming out.  Hopefully Paper Mario will turn the tides a bit in that respect.  But Wii Play?  You're joking.  You simply must be joking.  Wii Play is a poopy steaming pile of poo for me to poop on.  Seriously, I had low expectations, but figured, "Hell, for $10 bucks it doesn't have to be a masterpiece."  I should have saved my $10.  We played it for an hour or so the day we got it and it has not entered the system again.  Ever.

[RTSDaddy2]

I know shmokes.......and thanks for noticing that. 

[MustardTent]

I'll second Howard on this.  If you are someone who believes there's nothing good to play on the Wii I would honestly have to ask you what titles you've picked up.

Tiger Woods Golf, Wii Play, and Sonic, while perhaps not the gem that TP is by any stretch, are fine games in my opinion for 5 months in.  Then you add to that Wario Ware, and the additions (I haven't tried these yet but am hopeful) of Cooking Mama and others and you have a nice set of FUN games for the system.  Plus whatever Gamecube classics you may wish to replay, or try out for the first time....same with the VC channel if you aren't opposed to the points cost.

When I go in the store to check out the PS3, I see 2 -3 games that I think I'd even be interested in playing.  In contrast, we now own 9 Wii titles if you count Wii Sports.  That means every month we've found two titles that we cannot seem to live without. 

Nintendo systems may be for kids, but as my wife put it this morning, "I like playing with the kid's toys!"  This is the one system - as I've said before - next to the Atari 2600 and the SEGA Genesis that I've found worthy of this kind of support from me as a consumer in a long, long while. 

Just bought some GameCube games for my Wii:
 
Metriod Prime: $1.99
Viewtiful Joe: $5.99
Eternal Darkness: $3.99

Helps make up for the lull in quality Wii games, especially 'cause I haven't played any GameCube games before (choose these because of excellent reviews).

[tommy]

That's why i always TRY to stay one gen behind with consoles(but never could) , nothing like getting good games at $3.00 a pop.

[ChadTower]

I do that too... I'm just now getting into PS2 and Xbox.

Where are you getting them for $3 each?  Surely not Gamestop/EB.

[tommy]

The only thing is, with all these consoles being backwards compatible, good games are holding some value.

[MustardTent]

A place called Disc Replay.  It's a small chain in Illinois that resells music/movies/games.

One thing about this particular store is that they outright refuse to sell anything Sega.  I went in there a few months ago looking for a DreamCast and didn't see one so I asked the cashier who told me about their "no sega" policy.  Apparently it's due to the store owner. 

[ChadTower]

Erm, okay.  That's odd.  I guess he's still pissed about not carrying the Saturn at premature launch.   

[DaveMMR]

A place called Disc Replay.  It's a small chain in Illinois that resells music/movies/games.

One thing about this particular store is that they outright refuse to sell anything Sega.  I went in there a few months ago looking for a DreamCast and didn't see one so I asked the cashier who told me about their "no sega" policy.  Apparently it's due to the store owner. 

Heh!  Nice website.  They never finished filling in the default names in whatever template they used.  I went there to see if there was a reason for their "No Sega" policy.  Can you find out for us?  It's going to kill me.  Do they carry games made by Sega for other consoles (e.g. Sonic for GC or Panzer Dragoon Orta for Xbox)? 

Anyway, I was reading this thread... well I kind of skimmed all the Plasma TV talk... and thought I should chime in about these "expectations" of the PS3.

I wanted a PS3 when it was announced.  But the one thing that changed my mind and also may cause Sony to lose its foothold in the number one spot:

It's too expensive!

Speaking only for myself, I'm tired of video game systems trying to make their machines a replacement for every piece of equipment in my home entertainment center.  I never asked for a Blu-Ray player.  I just wanted to play new games.  But Sony is using their new machine as a Trojan Horse in a new "format battle" and it may end up biting them in the behind.  Who wants to watch Blu-Rays on the PS3 anyway, when we all learned that the PS2 was hardly competent in playing regular DVDs?  It's a nice extra, granted, but one that's inflating the machine to ridiculous prices.  And judging from the past, I don't see any drastic price drops anytime soon. 

(By the way, I'm aware of the irony of pointing out the expense of a game system when we spend hundreds if not thousands of dollars to recreate 20 year old arcade game cabinets.  Then again, I am trying to assume the role of the average consumer - one who doesn't build arcade cabinets.)

Secondly, I must be the only guy in the world who no longer cares about graphics.  Seriously - it hit a point last generation where I looked at the screen and said, "good enough" and focused squarely on the gameplay.  I don't care how good Motor Storm looks in 1080p or 720p or whatever, because, at the end of the day, I'll bet any amount of money that I'd have more fun with a time-tested classic like Super Mario Bros. or... what the heck, Mr. Driller on a standard television with rabbit ears and knobs.

The PS2 outsold all the next-gen consoles this past holiday, which is a good sign of what really sells a game system...  and it's not graphics.

Personally, and not speaking as a fanboy, I'm rooting for Nintendo.  They were complete jerks during their heyday with their stranglehold on 3rd party companies and unfair tactics of bullying retailers (among other offenses).  But I'll be damned if a decent percentage of the games on the NES weren't a blast to play!  I really don't care how "kiddie" they are - fun is fun and that's that.   (As an aside: I finally motivated myself to finish Metroid Prime and I must say that it was one of the best gaming experiences I've ever had.  Definitely not "kiddee", even if it doesn't invlove punching hookers.) 

The Wii will succeed, in my opinion, because they've targeted very real people with very real money - the non-gamer.  My girlfriend thinks not-so-highly of video games but she's the one who always wants to break out Wii Sports.  And there are already a few good games worth picking up for the system - par for course for any new system (I don't ever remember PS2 or XBox having nothing but gold coming out of the gate - just one or two "must-haves").

By the way, I'm not ruling out buying a PS3 (with some unlikely price drop or off the back of a truck).  It's just at this point, having a limited selection of titles is easier to swallow with a $250 price tag than it is with a $600 one. 

Rant over... I'll go back to my dark, quiet corner. 

[ChadTower]

I agree with most of that.  I don't care all that much about graphics either - no new games are going to look like crap now.  A lot of them will continue to play like crap, though, and that is where value lies.  Not in appearance.  Value lies in substance.

[More Cowbell]

A place called Disc Replay.  It's a small chain in Illinois that resells music/movies/games.

One thing about this particular store is that they outright refuse to sell anything Sega.  I went in there a few months ago looking for a DreamCast and didn't see one so I asked the cashier who told me about their "no sega" policy.  Apparently it's due to the store owner. 

Disc Replay is a great place. I took a box of old games, cd's, and dvd's in there and they gave me a ton of credit. I figured I'd get a buck or two out of each item but they ended up bringing in closer to $5. That goes a long way when the games are only $8-15. They also have a couple of cabinets of classic consoles and games. Come to think of it I don't remember seeing any Sega but I didn't really think about it. There may have been a Dreamcast controller or two though. They're pretty smart too. They give you your credit in tokens so you're more likely to lose them.

[ChadTower]

Man I bet retail stores make tons of cash on gift cards that get lost/never used.  My wife gets a stack of them for Xmas every year and they just sit in a drawer.

[shmokes]

Best Buy adjusts their financial statements at the end of each year to reflect more than a $5 million increase in profit from expired/unused gift cards.  Unbelievable.

[ChadTower]

The company that owns most of the huge malls in MA has been sued by the attorney general a buttload of times over their gift card policies.  They have tried everything, from a hard expiration date, to a monthly maintenance fee taken from the balance, to a declining value schedule...

[Howard_Casto]

Regardless of other arguments on this thread, Super Paper Mario is out, so I guess the answer is "NOW" 

[shmokes]

Kind of.  They can't win with Gamecube games alone.  Nintendo has two kick ass games so far, and neither of them were made for Wii   

Seriously, though, there's some truth to it.  Niether takes advantage of the controller.  Either game could be done better on one of the other systems, IMO, considering that both games were made for a standard controller and 360/PS3 are SOOO much more powerful in terms of graphics and physics and sound, etc.  I really think the answer to my question is, "Not for a long time -- as in Super Mario Galaxy and Metroid."  I think Galaxy will be the big one, but if one or both of those titles fails to be utterly freaking amazing the system is doomed to third place.  And if we don't start seeing some amazing Non-Nintendo-published games the system is doomed to third place.  And if the system's releases continue to be Wii ports of games designed first for PS2 the system is doomed to third place.  The system is twice as powerful as a Gamecube.  Please, for the love of god, give me something that couldn't be done on a PS2.

[ChadTower]

Either game could be done better on one of the other systems, IMO, considering that both games were made for a standard controller and 360/PS3 are SOOO much more powerful in terms of graphics and physics and sound, etc.

I don't see that as having any relevance given that they are first party Nintendo games.  They'll never appear on the other platforms and everyone knows it.  If someone wants Mario or Zelda they buy Nintendo.  It doesn't have to be technically superior, it is superior in design and implmentation, and that is really more important.

[ark_ader]

Regardless of other arguments on this thread, Super Paper Mario is out, so I guess the answer is "NOW" 

Two of my lady colleagues are waiting for that game to come out.

What is the UK release date?

[KenToad]

Regardless of other arguments on this thread, Super Paper Mario is out, so I guess the answer is "NOW" 

Two of my lady colleagues are waiting for that game to come out.

What is the UK release date?

Did you congratulate them for being representative of your theory that Nintendo games are only for women and children and that you will defend their honor in this matter?

Or is that a sentiment that you reserve for your male friends who simply enjoy fun games? 

[shmokes]

Either game could be done better on one of the other systems, IMO, considering that both games were made for a standard controller and 360/PS3 are SOOO much more powerful in terms of graphics and physics and sound, etc.

I don't see that as having any relevance given that they are first party Nintendo games.  They'll never appear on the other platforms and everyone knows it.  If someone wants Mario or Zelda they buy Nintendo.  It doesn't have to be technically superior, it is superior in design and implmentation, and that is really more important.

Sure, and as Nintendo's last couple of systems have shown us all too well, the consistently high-quality (but pigeonholed) 1st/2nd party Nintendo games are not enough to keep them out of last place in the market.  That's how it's relevant.  And think of this little detail for a moment.  In the past Nintendo at least had a healthy number of cross-platform games like Prince of Persia, Splinter Cell, Tomb Raider, etc. to bolster its animic library.  A person could say, I'm going to get a Nintendo cos I love their first party games, and I'll still get most of the major 3rd party releases that come out for every system.  Nintendo doesn't have that anymore.  Now, when Splinter Cell: Double Agent is released, the Wii version is a totally crippled piece of ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- compared to the versions for the other systems.  Nintendo has disqualified their system from cross-platform releases.  So if they don't get a steady stream of high quality exclusive content from 3rd parties they will ONLY have 1st party releases to rely on.  And if the only showcase titles for the system, even those coming from Nintendo 1st parties, fail to use the only strength the system has, what does that say for its strength?  If the system's one and only strength (its controller) turns out to be anything other than awesome, the system suddenly has no significant strength over its competitors.  Consumers will eventually yawn and move on to the other systems. 

[ark_ader]

Regardless of other arguments on this thread, Super Paper Mario is out, so I guess the answer is "NOW" 

Two of my lady colleagues are waiting for that game to come out.

What is the UK release date?

Did you congratulate them for being representative of your theory that Nintendo games are only for women and children and that you will defend their honor in this matter?

Or is that a sentiment that you reserve for your male friends who simply enjoy fun games? 

I did mention it to them and they agreed that the nintendo appeal is due to the nature of the games, either way I don't really care, its just that they did mention the game to me and it struck a chord in Howards post.  I went to Game and it isn't on display so I would say a No at the moment.

Its one of the ladies birthday next month and I though it would make a great present and I thought it would be a nice gift instead of flowers and chocolates.  Its the thought that counts, right?

She was telling me that her kids roped her into a game of Wii sports and she became hooked.  Its pretty funny since she comes up to me asking about the other games for the Wii (which ones are good etc) and I don't own one.

Back on topic... If you spoke to her Ken I'm sure she would agree.  I hope you are not still upset with my comment about this Ken?  I did in no way invite a comment that dictates that you are a woman or a child, just a user of a console that women and children play today. 

[ChadTower]

So when does the Wii analog to the lower Rez PS2 controller come out?  That's when the Wii will take off.

[KenToad]

@ Arkader

well, it sounded as if you were trying to pass off your sarcastic comment as a legitimate question about when the game would be released. 

Just FYI, I played the hell out of the PSP for a week, including emus and a wide selection of titles.  I really wanted to like that system.  I think it looks damn cool and I wish they were available when I was a teenager, since I never really got into earlier incarnations of the Gameboy.  I'm a fan of Metal Gear Solid, so I was hoping to get into that game on the PSP, but the controls were just too damn stiff and awkward.  The best use of controls and my favorite game on the system was definitely Syphon Filter the Dark Mirror.  I also liked a few others and Mercury and Lumines of course.  I didn't get to play Loco Roco, unfortunately.  But, I have to say seriously, man-to-man now, that I found that device just cramped up my hands faster than an NES controller with a "broken" (hard to push) d-pad. 

If you were wise, you would own up to that serious deficiency in your prized gaming device and notice that you would not be the coolest kid at a college party if you pulled out your PSP.  They or anyone older would not find your games manly.  You would be respected by High Schoolers and adored by Junior High Schoolers.  And, yes, they probably think the big N is kiddie, too.

[Grasshopper]

IMHO the biggest mistake that Nintendo made was in not providing an option to add a hard drive to the Wii. In the long run that will really hurt them.

[ChadTower]

Is there a port that isn't being used yet?  Maybe it won't if they go with smaller more reliable solid state storage devices.  Memory cards sucked before because they didn't hold much.  Now you can get a gig for $15.  The Wii isn't designed to be a media station so it has no need of 200gig of storage.

[Grasshopper]

The Wii isn't designed to be a media station so it has no need of 200gig of storage.

Neither was the original Xbox but that didn't stop people using them as one. In any case, even if you don't want media centre capabilities, it's still convenient to be able to store games on the hard disk.

Once the 360 and PS3 modding scene gets into full swing it's going to be possible to do awesome things with those machines. It's at that point that the Wii's lack of a hard drive will really start to hurt.

[Samstag]

IMHO the biggest mistake that Nintendo made was in not providing an option to add a hard drive to the Wii. In the long run that will really hurt them.

(Tokyo, Japan - April 4, 2007) eSOL Co., Ltd. announced today that their leading embedded middleware products, "PrFILE2" FAT file system and "PrUSB/Host" USB host stack, were selected for the "WiiTM", from Nintendo Co.;.

Both software products constitute fundamental functionalities in the Wii console - managing and transferring data and files with external media. In particular, PrFILE2 provides file management functions which read and write data of theSD memory card, as well as other media;. PrUSB/Host functions are used in Wii, to provide USB host functions.

So there you go.  Maybe it'll be useful for a future version of the Wii, but until I see DVD support I'm not holding my breath for content support that would justify anything more than a 512 meg SD card.

Once the 360 and PS3 modding scene gets into full swing it's going to be possible to do awesome things with those machines. It's at that point that the Wii's lack of a hard drive will really start to hurt.

Huh?  So their big mistake is in not providing better access to pirated games and other content that doesn't generate any income? 

[Grasshopper]

Once the 360 and PS3 modding scene gets into full swing it's going to be possible to do awesome things with those machines. It's at that point that the Wii's lack of a hard drive will really start to hurt.

Huh?  So their big mistake is in not providing better access to pirated games and other content that doesn't generate any income? 

Well, a lot of piracy is clearly bad for the console manufacturers' business model but a little piracy can actually help them to increase their market share. Of course you'll never get Sony or M$ to admit this. For example, I bought an Xbox recently solely with the intention of modding it and running emulators. But I've now ended up buying three official Xbox games as well. My point? Well basically, if the Xbox wasn't capable of being modded then I wouldn't have bought one in the first place. I also wouldn't have purchased the three games either.

Another thing to bear in mind is that Sony has officially endorsed running Linux and others OSes on the PS3 (a very smart move IMHO). So that will inevitably lead to a lot of perfectly legal homebrew stuff.

[ChadTower]

Did you buy them new at retail?  That's the only way it helps the company.  Used games don't help them.

[Crax]

Huh?  So their big mistake is in not providing better access to pirated games and other content that doesn't generate any income? 

 For example, I bought an Xbox recently solely with the intention of modding it and running emulators. But I've now ended up buying three official Xbox games as well.

I bought and modded an xbox mostly for XBMC.  I have a large HD and a few games on it, but I rarely play them.  95% of my xbox usage is through XBMC.  I never would have bought an XBOX if I wasn't able to mod it.  I do own quite a few legit purchased games as well that I would have never purchased otherwise.

[Grasshopper]

Did you buy them new at retail?  That's the only way it helps the company.  Used games don't help them.

I bought them new but at bargain basement prices. So it's true that M$ probably didn't profit much from my purchases. But the main point is that, now I've bought an Xbox, I am less likely to buy one of the competitor's consoles.

[ChadTower]

Crax, Microsoft lost money on you as a customer.  The Xbox has always been sold as a loss leader.  If you don't buy games or accessories, they don't make a profit on you, and in fact they subsidized your XBMC station.

They wouldn't want to sell a console for third party use just for the fact that they don't make a profit on the console itself.  Nintendo usually just about breaks even but that's not the goal here either.

[Grasshopper]

People often state that M$ makes a loss on each console sold. But that's looking at the economics a bit simplistically. Most of the costs incurred by M$ (and Sony and Nintendo for that matter) are for research and design, marketing, and factory tooling. These costs are mostly fixed and independent of the number of units sold.

Obviously M$'s business model relies on a large number of highly profitable games being purchased in addition to the Xboxes themselves, in order to cover the fixed costs I've just mentioned. But it doesn't follow that M$ will actually lose money by selling a few additional Xboxes to non-game purchasers (i.e. modders) as long as most of the people buying Xboxes are also purchasing games.

Once the production line is set up, the cost of cranking out one additional Xbox is relatively tiny, and certainly far less than the purchase price.

[Crax]

Crax, Microsoft lost money on you as a customer.  The Xbox has always been sold as a loss leader.  If you don't buy games or accessories, they don't make a profit on you, and in fact they subsidized your XBMC station.

They wouldn't want to sell a console for third party use just for the fact that they don't make a profit on the console itself.  Nintendo usually just about breaks even but that's not the goal here either.

I understand how it works.  I have also bought at least 2 other microsoft brand controllers, a remote, and some games as well as a headset that I never would have purchased otherwise.  I think microsoft has at least broke even with me

[ChadTower]

Still, Crax, you'd have to agree that their goal is not to break even with you, thus you are not a good case for who they want to buy their console.  Nor am I, I have two Xboxes, both bought used, all of my games are bought used, and one of the Xboxes is used primarily for XBMC.

[AlanS17]

I'm gonna have to agree with CT for once. Software piracy can help someone like MS with Windows because it increases overall adoption and dependency. But everytime you hack an XBox, it comes out of MS's bottom line. And that's the end of the story.

For as popular as the Dreamcast was, why do you think it went under? There are probably several factors involved, but I'd have to put piracy at the very top of the list.

[ChadTower]

But everytime you hack an XBox, it comes out of MS's bottom line. And that's the end of the story.

I didn't say that.  What I said was that people who don't buy games or accessories new at retail aren't going to make MS any profit.  I didn't say anything about hacking or piracy.  Not everyone who runs XBMC pirates games.  I only have one downloaded Xbox game.

[Crax]

Still, Crax, you'd have to agree that their goal is not to break even with you, thus you are not a good case for who they want to buy their console.  Nor am I, I have two Xboxes, both bought used, all of my games are bought used, and one of the Xboxes is used primarily for XBMC.

I understand and agree that it isn't the best case scenario.  I haven't purchased more than a couple games new, but I have received at least 3-4 around holidays/birthdays from friends/family and I believe they were all new.  They may have not made a ton of money on me, but some is better than none isn't it?  I haven't even bothered with the newer consoles yet as I am pretty happy with my xbox.  I just don't think completely trying to disallow modding is best case either. Somewhere in between  would be good.  If you could make the piracy pretty difficult but at the same time allow some homebrew/OS stuff, I think a lot of people would like that.

[AlanS17]

I never said anything about game piracy, either. If you're hacking a game system (for whatever purpose), it's to use it for some reason other than its original purpose. There is no way for MS to make money off a system being used outside it's original purpose. You can use it for XBMC all day, but MS never sees the benefit.

If you buy a new XBox at a loss to MS and never buy any new games to accompany it, that's a net loss for MS. Simple enough, right?

[Edgedamage]

I never said anything about game piracy, either. If you're hacking a game system (for whatever purpose), it's to use it for some reason other than its original purpose. There is no way for MS to make money off a system being used outside it's original purpose. You can use it for XBMC all day, but MS never sees the benefit.

If you buy a new XBox at a loss to MS and never buy any new games to accompany it, that's a net loss for MS. Simple enough, right?

Most hardcore gamers who modded their xboxes were so worried about MS scanning drives with XBL. They bought a second box just for XBL I even went that route.

[GlennM]

I think games like these are what is causing the Wii to do well for people.
Manhunt 2
Godfather

Two friends of mine bought a Wii for Manhunt, though they have now purchased two games a pop. So Nintendo has made a fair amount of cash on them already, why, because they want to kill people with a Wiimote.

Let's face it, the Wii is doing as well as it can right, now, games sell well where I work, consoles sell out within 8 hours, Wiimotes sell out usually within a few days, all the accessories sell steadily. It is a good seller, far better then the PS3, whose accessories sell slowly and the consoles are always instock, and it ain't because we have a good supply either, they simply sell very slow. 

Now granted people may be buying Wiis because they are cheap, but they are buying them, and Nintendo is making money off of it, so what else matters.  I have one, I am very satisfied with it.

[ChadTower]

Oh god is Manhunt a crappy game.  I bought a used PS2 a couple years ago at a yardsale that came with Manhunt and Manhunt sucked so much I sold the PS2 a week later.

[shmokes]

That seems a little bit over the top.  Why not just sell Manhunt?

[ChadTower]

Didn't really want the PS2 anyway, I bought it because it was $40 (3 years ago).  Manhunt was just the final straw.

[AlanS17]

Didn't really want the PS2 anyway, I bought it because it was $40 (3 years ago).  Manhunt was just the final straw.

Seems a little hasty to me. It's a pretty great system.

[ChadTower]

Not my preference.  I have one now and almost never use it.  Maybe a half hour a month if that.

[shmokes]

That just strikes me as strange.  It's such a great system.  I'd put it in the top three systems ever made, frankly.  The PS2 has done more to bring videogaming to the mainstream than probably any other system in history.  It pretty much single-handedly legitimized gaming as an entertainment medium for people over the age of 14.  And it just has SOOOO many great games.  More than any other system.  Period.  It still outsells just about every other system on the market, and it's been out now for, what, seven years?

I suppose one of the ways that it changed the market, was by placing a much greater emphasis on the equivalent of R-rated videogames, and I know you've mentioned in the past that you don't care for violent games, and perhaps even games that are not particularly violent but have other objectionable content such as language or sexuality might pose a problem for you because of the kids in the house.  I suppose that would possibly cut out a lot of the games.  But really, you can look at any genre, sports, kid games, violent games, etc., and PS2 has more good ones than any other system.

I don't and never have owned a PS2, cos I got a Gamecube cos I'm a Nintendo fanboy and got an Xbox because of Xbox Media Center, so I couldn't justify the purchase of another system, especially considering that I only play a few hours of videogames per month these days.  Nevertheless, I consider the PS2 a superior system than either of those based on its library of games.  By a long shot, frankly.

[KenToad]

You're not a Nintendo fanboy if you can say that the PS2 is one of the greatest systems ever made.  And aren't you confusing the PS2 with the PS1?  That was really the groundbreaker with a really impressive library of games that appealed to a wide selection of gamers.  Many of the great games on the PS2 were sequels of great games on the PS1.  And, it was the first system to hand the guys at Nintendo their asses. 

[AlanS17]

I think both of you are probably right. The PS1 was ground-breaking, but the PS2 really cemented that notion. The PS1 had Final Fantasy 7, which is arguably the single best FF ever made. The PS1 also introduced the FF Tactics series. Though there have been many iterations, Capcom fighting finally became as good as the arcade on a PS1.

Had the Wii not been so cheap (by comparison), I likely never would have gotten one. If the XBox 360 came with HD-DVD built-in then I might be more inclined towards that direction. However, right now (even at such a steep price point) I'm seriously considering getting a PS3.

Since we've now strayed far enough from the original topic... I think the Wii is doing just fine for itself. Sometimes the Wii remote can be a bit wishy-washy, but it truly shines in some games.

With every console, it's all about finding their niche. At least the Wii found its own niche very early on. What remains to be seen is whether or not that niche will be broad enough to sustain the system... but I think it's gonna do just fine.

In the last console generation, I was really concerned that Nintendo might go the way of Sega. If they couldn't step it up in the console arena, they might find themselves relegated to publishing games for other consoles. I think Nintendo is back on the ball now (even though their system is agreeably underpowered).

What I see in the Wii isn't success - it's potential. There's the potential to take gaming in a direction it's never really gone before. And even more importantly... it has the potential to blow away all other consoles in the next generation (5 or 6 years from now) if Nintendo can keep their innovation and match rivals' horsepower the next time around.

[shmokes]

Yeah.  The PS1 was huge, and laid the groundwork for PS2.  PS2 obviously would never have happened without PS1.  But, I still think it was the PS2 that truly brought gaming mainstream.

On Wii, I see the opposite, actually.  I see success, but not potential.  Or, at least, I'm worried about its potential.  I haven't really taken such a firm position on it yet.  But I'm worried that the controller does not have the capability to live up to its promise, because it is simply not sensitive or accurate enough.  Remember, the Dreamcast had the biggest launch in the history of system launches.  They sold more consoles on day one than any console in history. 

Don't get me wrong.  I don't think Nintendo is going the way of Sega just yet.  They have a knack for making money.  While they were in last place in the last console generation, they still turned a perfectly healthy profit (something that Microsoft never did, not for one day, in spite of having a larger share of the market).  If Nintendo could make Gamecube profitable, god knows they can make Wii profitable.  They have a hit on their hands, but I don't really think they can sustain it.  I think that three years from now PS3 will start showing a fairly commanding lead over them, kind of like the SNES ended up winning the 16-bit era, even though it came out two years after the Genesis.

[shmokes]

You're not a Nintendo fanboy if you can say that the PS2 is one of the greatest systems ever made. 

I don't know.  Another way to look at it is that I fully acknowledge that PS2 is a superior system, hands down, yet Gamecube is the one I own.  Are you sure I'm not a fanboy?   

[ChadTower]

Nintendo won't die even if the Wii tanks.  Nintendo is the market leader in handheld gaming.  Sega was primarily a console company only.  Even if the Wii doesn't do as well as it is doing now, it won't hurt Nintendo nearly as much as the Dreamcast and Saturn hurt Sega.

[shmokes]

Like Chad said, they're making money hand over fist in the handheld market. It's probably neither here nor there, though, cos Nintendo's gonna be profitable with the Wii, even if they aren't market leader.  Like I said, if their Gamecube business turned a profit (it did) so will their Wii business.  For one thing, the Gamecube was sold early on at a loss, whereas, from day one Nintendo has made a profit on every Wii sold.  I mean, how can they possibly not make money.  They're making money on all the hardware, they still have a shrinking, but sizable fan base that will buy every 1st party game released (and, importantly, their 1st party games continue to be first-rate).  And their system is selling like gangbusters. 

I predict that they will fall behind Sony and MS in this console generation, but at this point I think they are already guaranteed success.  Frankly, I would probably not have nearly so much to complain about if Nintendo hadn't disappointed with its last two consoles.  I think that 3rd party support for the launch was tepid because developers had lost faith in Nintendo -- probably figured they were doomed to follow in Sega's footsteps.  Now that the console has been such a hit publishers/developers are ramping up support and transferring lots of resources into Wii development (EA bought a new studio just to develop for Wii), so we'll start getting more games -- they'll just come later than usual.

Anyway, I still think that the controller has serious fundamental problems -- bad enough that I don't think the Wii can achieve or maintain #1 status in the market.  But the Wii will still be a success, at least financially, and certainly moreso than Gamecube was.

[ChadTower]

In each of the last two generations I prefer the Nintendo entry.     In fact the only generation that Nintendo was part of that I do not prefer the Nintendo entry is 16 bit.

[hulkster]

i didnt read all 5 pages of this thread so if i repeat something, sue me i guess.

sony missed the boat this time around.  its too expensive, and they relied too much on their current fan base.  the ps2 wasnt that expensive and so everybody got one, plus it was the only system with great graphics and tons of games at the time.  now you have the 360 with the same graphics at a cheaper price.  i bought a ps2 when it was priced at $199 because of all the games out for it that i couldnt play on my gamecube.  but now that 90% of the big games are coming to the 360 as well, theres no reason for me to buy a ps3. 

as much as i enjoy the 360, and the wii....i can say that at least the wii doesnt crash on me and give me disc read errors.  the 360 is basically a pc, and sometimes i feel like its a pc with windows ME on it. 

as for the wii's "crappy games".  what games were out for the 360 the first year that were just phenomenal?  i didnt buy one until recently because unless you liked star wars and crappy original titles, it sucked.  the first year for the 360 wasnt all that great, and i dont think the first year for the wii (other than first party titles) will be all that great either.  a lot of the reviews are basically saying "its a good idea, but the controls need work the second time around".  the second time around is when i think the wii games will take off.

[shmokes]

The 360's launch library sucked.  They did get a lot of good games before the next holiday season, though (Dead Rising, Oblivion, Gears of War, a bunch of others . . .).  Wii will get more good games, of course.  The thing that concerns me, is the motion controllers seem to only work for things that require very little precision (like Wii bowling).  When it comes to small, precise movements, the controllers do not appear to be sensitive enough to do the job (like the putting game in Wii Sports Golf, or the entire Wii Sports Boxing game).  These do not strike me as developers just needing to get a handle on programming for the new controller (particularly since we're talking about a 1st party game, here).  It seems like it's a hardware problem that no amount of programming can cure.

We'll see, I guess.  Considering that I own a Wii, and not a PS3 or 360, I obviously hope that I am wrong and the system ends up kicking ass in every  possible way.

[Rachel]

I also failed to read the first 5 pages of this thread so please excuse any rehashing, but...
Wait about 6-12 months for the wii games. Most developers put their money and instinct into the PS3 being a winner out of the gate. But, with 1/10th the cost ($30million PS3, $2-3m highpoint for Wii), 1/3rd the devtime, a massive market share right out of the gate, and EASIER development (Tons more companies are certified as Nintendo developers than PS3) everyone who isn't being paid by sony to develop their games is shifting focus. Add to that all the little guys out there who are able to develop for the wii no problem and the publishers handing them nice big sacks o' cash to do it and you're gunna see some decent titles starting now and shipping by year's end.
PS3? Wait 3 years, then people will figure out how the damned thing even Works. EA says they're only using about 20% of it in their titles and there are very few people qualified to Really push the system. Not many game programmers survive past 5 years experience these days, sadly. In addition, Sony is a notoriously painful platform to develop for ( PS2 = )

As for some of the posts I glanced being concerned with the wiimote? During those devcycles they didn't really HAVE the wiimote in hand as much as they'd like. You'll see a lot more refinement now that the console has shipped and people have seen what works and doesn't.

[shmokes]

I'm with you to some degree.  I really am.  There are some good points there.  But I'm not talking about 3rd party developers, or even 2nd party developers.  I'm talking about EAD.  I'm talking about Nintendo's in-house 1st party development teams.  Play Wii Sports Boxing.  It's ridiculously bad.  It can be kind of fun as a diversion, but the accuracy is flat-out terrible.  Awful.  I can't think of enough adjectives to describe how poorly the motion sensors translate real-world punches into Mii punches.  Same goes for Golf.  The fairway game is decent enough.  But get on the green, where you need very short, small moves and the remote simply fails.  When the ball is just a foot or two from the hole it often takes five or six tries just to get the remote to register that you moved it at all.  These people had access to the remote from day one.  They built this game from the ground up for one purpose and one purpose only -- to show you what the Wii controller was capable of.

[hulkster]

I'm with you to some degree.  I really am.  There are some good points there.  But I'm not talking about 3rd party developers, or even 2nd party developers.  I'm talking about EAD.  I'm talking about Nintendo's in-house 1st party development teams.  Play Wii Sports Boxing.  It's ridiculously bad.  It can be kind of fun as a diversion, but the accuracy is flat-out terrible.  Awful.  I can't think of enough adjectives to describe how poorly the motion sensors translate real-world punches into Mii punches.  Same goes for Golf.  The fairway game is decent enough.  But get on the green, where you need very short, small moves and the remote simply fails.  When the ball is just a foot or two from the hole it often takes five or six tries just to get the remote to register that you moved it at all.  These people had access to the remote from day one.  They built this game from the ground up for one purpose and one purpose only -- to show you what the Wii controller was capable of.

agreed, wii boxing and wii golf werent very accurate at all..especially the putting aspect.  maybe they didnt make it sensitive enough....i think it will get better by the end of the year though.  wii sports 2 anyone?

[shmokes]

If the problem is shoddy programming, yes.  But no amount of programming can make up for shoddy equipment.  If the accelerometers are simply not sensitive enough to detect fine motion, Jesus Christ himself can't program software that will fix the problem.  Jesus Christ was a computer programmer, wasn't he?  I know he had some common profession . . .

So, hopefully, the programming teams were just crunched for time and did not have enough experience working with the kind of data the controllers were giving them.  Hopefully putting in Wii golf doesn't read the swings you're making because of a software glitch.  But frankly, that seams pretty unlikely to me.  I'm hoping, but I ain't holding my breath.

[Rachel]

It's not the controller that is shoddy. Like any console launch, things on the wii were changing very very late in dev cycle and even firstparty developers were having the rug pulled out from under them with design, asset, and hardware changes right before ship.

There's a lot to get used to when playing with an accelerometer driven controller too. It has no idea it's position in worldspace (unless you're using the pointer, which you can't usually rely on). The biggest thing is that you need to use it's strongsuits and avoid the weaknesses. Thrusting motion is a huge problem with it, because the speed at which the average person can thrust compared to swing. In addition, any rotation While thrusting, as people are prone to do, starts distorting it.

I'm not sure wiigolf's algorithms (or any of wii sports)and I haven't spent much time playing it so I haven't figured it out yet. I've been able to get some very accurate downvector readings from the wiimote so far, though, so I doubt they're just doing anglechange comparissons. Instead, it looks like they're trying to keep track if it's orientation in the world through it's motion rather than just checking downvector. This may account for some of the spottier behavior with the wiimote resetting it's downvector (for zeroing out purposes) if you hold it still too long, and sometimes getting confused as to it's position. Again, this is sorta just guessing based on a drunken party memory.

Long story short, you're gunna see a lot better games coming out in the future now that makers are seeing what works (rayman raving rabbids) and what doesn't (anything involving thrusting). Just a matter of figuring out the right tool for the job (you use a hammer to drive in nails, not to make milkshakes).

[igboo]

I've found that, with practice, I can even hit the short putt shots pretty accurately.  The trick is not in how far you swing the Wiimote, it's in the speed of your swing.  I've gotten much better results at putting by taking a larger backswing and then slooowly swinging through the ball.  If I try taking short quick strokes, I either smack the ball off the green or nothing happens at all.

Try taking a smooth, almost full backswing.  Then just slowly swing all the way through the ball.  With some practice I think you'll find your putting improves.

igboo

[shmokes]

I've golfed a five under par (and could do much better with more practice, I think).  It's possible, like you described, to work around the limitations of the controller, but it doesn't make for a very satisfying putting game.  Having to go to strange lengths to make the putts work reasonably well merely illustrates exactly what I'm talking about. 

Nintendo has made a huge issue of appealing to non-gamers and expanding the market with grandparents and women, etc..  When you hand a non-gamer the remote for a game of golf, they end up super frustrated on the green, not understanding why the character on the screen is not doing what they are doing.  I can't tell you how many times I've heard someone, after driving reasonably well to the green say, "Why isn't he hitting it," just before they wack the thing right off the green again, especially if they were only a foot or so away from the hole.  You can explain to them, "Oh, yeah, there's this really nonintuitive way that you can get fairly consistent results on the green.  First, forget everything you know about golf.  Next, wind up like you're going to chip or drive, then very slowly bring the controller down in an arc and follow through the ball. 

It works, but it's bad design, and if its the best that can be done because of controller limitations, it's a REALLY serious problem.  If it's just crappy programming, that's another thing altogether, but that's REALLY uncharacteristic of Nintendo's software development studios.

[Rachel]

Nintendo has made a huge issue of appealing to non-gamers and expanding the market with grandparents and women, etc.. 

As a woman game programmer, ouch.

The wiimote as a piece of hardware is fine. And I'd hesitate to refer to the programming as 'crappy'. Even the firstparty developers don't have the actual Final hardware until around the time the console is shipping. When you're talking about a 6-10 month devcycle, what about everything leading up to beta? Guesswork and nonfinal hardware. The mistake was treating the wiimote closer to a mocap device than something that has accelerometers. Past that, how many people have practice programming for that sort of hardware?

The hardware is already doing great things (raving rabbids and warioware?)

Right now, the Wii has already taken off. Still selling out off the truck and there are tons of great games coming down the pipe. Right now it's not whether people will buy a wii, PS3, or a 360, it's whether they will buy a PS3 or 360 to go with the Wii they're gunna get anyways.

[AtomSmasher]

Just curious, but has anyone tried the new Tiger Woods golf game on the Wii?  I haven't tried it myself, but some of the reviews I've seen say that the controller is actually too precise, making the game feel too much like real golf, which isn't necessarily a good thing since real golf is hard.

I think the lack of precision in Wii sports is just the fault of a rushed development, not the fault of poor hardware.  Of course these debates are pointless right now since no one here really knows for sure, we just have to wait for more games to be released to find out.

[ChadTower]

I've gotten much better results at putting by taking a larger backswing and then slooowly swinging through the ball.  If I try taking short quick strokes, I either smack the ball off the green or nothing happens at all.

Try taking a smooth, almost full backswing.  Then just slowly swing all the way through the ball.  With some practice I think you'll find your putting improves.

igboo

Wait, so you're saying that if you putt with a proper real life motion, you get better results?  The hell you say!  What you're describing, mostly, is a proper putting motion.  There is no short quick stroke in a strong green game.

[shmokes]

Chad has never played golf.

[ChadTower]

I played probably 20 times a few years ago.  It wasn't for me.  I was decent but I just didn't enjoy it enough.

[shmokes]

Well, a proper putt is done with a swing that is something akin to a pendulum swinging, and a good rule of thumb is to start with about 1 inch of backswing for every foot of travel you want the ball to make.  You would never see a golfer use anything like a full (or even quarter) back swing on the green* and someone who knows how to golf would not be slowly and deliberately moving the club in the motion described above.  You pull it back and basically let it swing forward like a pendulum.




*maybe a quarter when there's some crazy steep hill that has to be climbed, but . . .

[Chris G]

Just curious, but has anyone tried the new Tiger Woods golf game on the Wii?  I haven't tried it myself, but some of the reviews I've seen say that the controller is actually too precise, making the game feel too much like real golf, which isn't necessarily a good thing since real golf is hard.

Wow, that's a new one... "this game sucks because it's too realistic".  Golf is fun for me largely BECAUSE it's hard.  Maybe that doesn't translate well to video games for some people.

[igboo]

I'm with Chad.  While my intinct is a short quick stroke during putting, my short game admittedly sucks.  

The best greens players i've ever played with have always done what I describe above.  Almost full backswing,  slow, full follow through.

[ChadTower]

My grandfather was a regional champion for like 8 of ten years when he taught me.  His putting method was a fairly large slow pendulum swing.  There is more than one method for success.  The concept was to swing through the ball as if it's not even there.  Works well with practice.

[shmokes]

Okay, well, I think you people are batshit crazy 

Nevertheless, it still doesn't erase the problem.  And even those players you speak of who wind up like they're going to drive even though they're on the green, would certainly not do this when the ball is sitting on the rim of the cup.  They'd just tap it in.

[ChadTower]

And even those players you speak of who wind up like they're going to drive even though they're on the green, would certainly not do this when the ball is sitting on the rim of the cup.

That's not what he said and not what I said.  I said an even slow pendulum motion.  When does someone drive off the tee with an even slow pendulum motion?

[Chris G]

It sounds like what igboo wrote, though...

Almost full backswing

[ChadTower]

Within context.  A full backswing for a putt is an entirely different thing than a full backswing for a drive. 

[shmokes]

It still doesn't make any sense, even in context (though I really think Igboo was talking about bringing the club up above the shoulder like you would when you drive), to do a full backswing regardless of how far away you are from the cup.  And even if some weird people would golf this way, it doesn't make sense for the game to only work right for people who golf in this bizarro-world way.

I mean, watch how people put, even on very long puts.  It takes very very very little force to get the ball to roll a long way on a green:

[Dervacumen]

I've golfed a five under par.

Thanks for the complex.  I always use my interest in video games as an excuse for my crappy golf skills.
That's awesome.

[ChadTower]

I'm pretty sure he meant in the game.

[shmokes]

If it's any consolation it was during a four-player game that my wife cut out of after the first hole, so I golfed for her.  I golfed par with my character, but five under with hers, so as far as official records go my wife has golfed five under par.  It was cool, though.  Got three eagles in a single round.

In real life I'm terrible at golf.  I only started playing for the first time last September.

[Dervacumen]

I'm pretty sure he meant in the game.

Uh.  Yeah.  I knew that.

In real life I'm terrible at golf.

Thank God I can still use my excuse.

[igboo]

It sounds like what igboo wrote, though...

Almost full backswing

Actually, I was thinking aroung a 45 degree angle or a little less from vertical as opposed to almost 90 deg. for driving.  I can just imagine the verbal abuse from my family winding up to drive my putt.

[ChadTower]

I can just imagine the verbal abuse from my family winding up to drive my putt.

[igboo]

Well, thats what I get for not sleeping after a 12 hour nightshift. 

[KenToad]

Nintendo has made a huge issue of appealing to non-gamers and expanding the market with grandparents and women, etc.. 

As a woman game programmer, ouch.

The wiimote as a piece of hardware is fine. And I'd hesitate to refer to the programming as 'crappy'. Even the firstparty developers don't have the actual Final hardware until around the time the console is shipping. When you're talking about a 6-10 month devcycle, what about everything leading up to beta? Guesswork and nonfinal hardware. The mistake was treating the wiimote closer to a mocap device than something that has accelerometers. Past that, how many people have practice programming for that sort of hardware?

The hardware is already doing great things (raving rabbids and warioware?)

Right now, the Wii has already taken off. Still selling out off the truck and there are tons of great games coming down the pipe. Right now it's not whether people will buy a wii, PS3, or a 360, it's whether they will buy a PS3 or 360 to go with the Wii they're gunna get anyways.

Why ouch?  Older folks and women largely make up the non-gamer population.  Nintendo's strategy has been to tap into largely untapped markets.  And we might even get some more clues as to whether woman have been reluctant to game because the games are not being targeted to them or whether women are just less likely to be gamers, i.e. for some other reason.  I think it probably is a complex issue, related somewhat to the argument surrounding why males are so much less likely to read novels (or just less likely to read).  We shouldn't even get into the phallic nature of the joystick versus the more sensually ambiguous thumbpad.   

As far as the Wii already taken off, everyone knows it has been selling well.  The question is whether it will be able to maintain a stellar library of first and third-party titles in the future.

[ChadTower]

Well, if you want to get semantic, programmers don't make design decisions, so they would have no effect on any of that.  Programmers follow specs handed to them by architects, who follow specs developed by the architects and designers.  A programmer would have creative input into algorithm implementation but overall that doesn't have a ton of flexibility to it in modern software.

[Chris G]

IRL I've never seen anyone take a putter back further than about knee high unless it's the British Open and they're putting from 30 yards off the green.  Maybe I'm not understanding you guys, but it doesn't sound like this controller resembles real golf at all, at least for putting...

[ChadTower]

We're not talking about bringing it back high.  We're talking about bringing it back far, contextually, for a putt.

[Chris G]

I hear what you're saying but this non-contextual description is what's still torquing my trousers...

Actually, I was thinking aroung a 45 degree angle or a little less from vertical as opposed to almost 90 deg. for driving.

[shmokes]

Even knee high is just crazy.  I was thinking about this about two hours ago when I was chipping and putting on a practice green (golf class).  18" behind the ball sends the thing flying, and that's nowhere near knee high.  When you're only five or six feet from the cup you only need a few inches of backswing, and this amount of backswing on the Wii generally results in the system not even registering that you did anything. 

[AtomSmasher]

It's almost comical how your judging the hardware on a game that was finished well before the Wii was even released.  It is possible its a hardware problem, but until more games come out, theres no way to know.

On a side note, Wario Ware seemed to be pretty precise with small movements 

[Dervacumen]

My brother in law came over last night and I showed him the golf game specifically because I've been thinking about this thread.  I had only played this game once prior to last night, and had a hell of a time putting.

But last night, my Brother in law gets to the green (keep in mind he's never even touched a Wii controller until then) he surverys the green, then gets into his putting stance and putts just like he's on the green on a real course.  He doesn't even look at the screen until he completes his putt.

And his putt is almost perfect.

Then I try to putt, but having read this thread and having had so much trouble the first time I played, I watch the screen as I'm moving the putter (the wiimote) around to see how this thing works.  And for the life of me I can't get the damn game to even register most of my movements.  This goes on for about 2-3 minutes, and my brother in law is now yelling at me to just putt like you normally do.

So I finally take his advice, look down at the fllor at an imaginary ball and putt away.

And damn straight it goes in the cup from 15 feet or so.

We kept it up, and provided I didn't pay attention to the screen while I was putting (I mean when do you ever look at the hole when your putting in real life, anyway) it worked great.  I now think the wiimote does a pretty nice job of capturing the putting experience.

[shmokes]

A #1, the issues are serious and seem to span the entire library of games, including Wario Ware, a game that relies almost exclusively on quick, crude gestures, rather than anything requiring precise sensitivity, and many of the games were pretty bad -- straightening the stack of paper, vacuuming . . .

B #2, I've said a dozen times that I truly hope it is just a software problem -- I just don't expect that it is.  It seems like hardware.  Go into the main menu and point the Wii Remote at the screen and then rotate it like you're manipulating a screwdriver.  Watch how erratic the cursor gets.  It seems like hardware.

I don't discount the possibility that I'm wrong and that 2nd generation games will have got a handle on the accelerometers.  It just seems a little unlikely to me.



As far as golf goes, I don't believe it.  It's not the 15 foot puts that I have a problem with.  It's the 1 and 2 foot puts.  It's when the ball just needs to be tapped in very very lightly.

[ChadTower]

It is possible what you're describing is firmware.  Even dead accurate hardware is only as good as the firmware reading/translating it.  That would be fixable... it would be odd that they got out to market like that but the Xmas deadline is a pretty big motivator.

[Chris G]

Even knee high is just crazy.

I was allowing for the 60 foot, uphill, into-the-wind putts on shaggy greens (aka poor approach shot).   

[Rachel]

Nintendo has made a huge issue of appealing to non-gamers and expanding the market with grandparents and women, etc.. 

As a woman game programmer, ouch. ...

Why ouch?  Older folks and women largely make up the non-gamer population.  Nintendo's strategy has been to tap into largely untapped markets.  And we might even get some more clues as to whether woman have been reluctant to game because the games are not being targeted to them or whether women are just less likely to be gamers...

Ouch was partly from 12:30am and partly from the whole "Women aren't gamers" thought I hear again and again. Women have been gaming in droves since Centipede. Just give us games that don't spend more time on boob-jiggle physics than gameplay. Or how about a genre other than WW2 shooter(Ugh, how many of those have to be made?).  The Wii targeted Everyone but thats not just intuitive controls. My grandparents played Pac-man and my mom and sisters loved Zelda. Look at the 360s most marketed lineup. Gears of War? Fight night? They focus so much attention on making games that drip testosterone that sometimes they seem to forget what brought all of us to these boards. The classics. Centipede? Pengo? Mario Bros? Older games didn't have to be male-specific, bloody and explosive, to be fun. There's not a girl I know who doesn't own at least one system. The market is there and always has been. Companies just have to make titles that don't specifically alienate. Barbie Horse Adventure is not how girls get into games. Civilization 4 is.

As for the controller, admittedly I haven't spent much time with it dev side (came in on a couple of wiikends? to play with it) but the hardware is very capable and it is a great platform to develop on. The better games and better use of the wiimote really are coming. And keep in mind, a lot of people don't have an issue with it. They just seem to naturally be able to use it. More forgiving controls take time, and larger testgroups. We have that now. (as well as resources, now that publishers realize the Wii is Winning the console war, not laying about dead last)

Shmokes: I'm not sure what would cause your pointer to wobble when you rotate it unless your hand is wobbling, you're at an odd angle to the sensor, or there is ambient light around that interferes with it. UTR devside. (I've gotta get a commercial wii one of these days...)

[AtomSmasher]

Ouch was partly from 12:30am and partly from the whole "Women aren't gamers" thought I hear again and again. Women have been gaming in droves since Centipede. Just give us games that don't spend more time on boob-jiggle physics than gameplay. Or how about a genre other than WW2 shooter(Ugh, how many of those have to be made?).  The Wii targeted Everyone but thats not just intuitive controls. My grandparents played Pac-man and my mom and sisters loved Zelda. Look at the 360s most marketed lineup. Gears of War? Fight night? They focus so much attention on making games that drip testosterone that sometimes they seem to forget what brought all of us to these boards. The classics. Centipede? Pengo? Mario Bros? Older games didn't have to be male-specific, bloody and explosive, to be fun. There's not a girl I know who doesn't own at least one system. The market is there and always has been. Companies just have to make titles that don't specifically alienate. Barbie Horse Adventure is not how girls get into games. Civilization 4 is.

I agree that most games are geared toward males, but the reason for that is because there are so few women game developers.  I applaude you for being one, but according to the latest game developer magazine, 93% of game designers are male and 97% of game programmers are male.  Most games will continue to drip with testosterone until there are more women making games. Although, if you look at some of the best selling games of all time, they are usually games that appeal to both men and women (The Sims, WoW, Mario), so you would think more developers would learn a wider appeal means more possible sales.

Out of curiousity, which game developer do you work for?

[Rachel]

I agree that most games are geared toward males, but the reason for that is because there are so few women game developers.  I applaude you for being one, but according to the latest game developer magazine, 93% of game designers are male and 97% of game programmers are male.  Most games will continue to drip with testosterone until there are more women making games. Although, if you look at some of the best selling games of all time, they are usually games that appeal to both men and women (The Sims, WoW, Mario), so you would think more developers would learn a wider appeal means more possible sales.

Out of curiousity, which game developer do you work for?

Yeah, it's very lonely and frustrating being a female game programmer sometimes. I work for Barking Lizards Technologies, a growing company that made, among other things (Some that we took big bags of money to not take credit for. >.<), the bratz DS games. This hit #1 seller on the DS for 3 weeks in the UK and I've heard a lot of the guys complain that they didn't want to make games they wouldn't play. A few left to get onto bigger titles (The Halo / Doom3 / HL2s out there) and all they've done since? Unreal script 20 hours a day. Too much care on having their name on the credits for a title that will somehow give them a larger penis, and so many seem to miss the boat on "Fun" or "Will people buy it?." I think too many bought into the magazine articles about what happened to id's founders, and didn't realize that "enjoying programming" was a job requisite, while 'craving fame' somehow wasn't there.

The wii isn't some magical girl-attracting game system because of the controller, but so many developers think it is that they're starting to develop OPEN gendered games for it. Once again they miss the real situation going on, but at least Wario Ware, Raving Rabbids, and other fun games are actually being made that can actually focus on fun instead of graphics, boobs, and blood for a change.

[ChadTower]

This thread took a massive, pleasant left turn.  Awesome.

I might be in the minority as a guy but for modern gaming I stick pretty heavily with the "open gendered" games you're describing.  Not Bratz, obviously, but I'm not a big fan of violent games and the heavy testosteroney stuff you're describing actually does turn away a certain segment of male gamers (like me).

 

[Naru]

No offense to the female.
My vote is for blasting, fighting,
and boobs.
I've played the Wii for a week
now and you just can't improve
your game much.
It's not like old video games where everything
works the same and with practice you become great.
The remote isn't precise enough.
It becomes quickly apparent, then begins to suck the fun away.
Seriously this generation of video game systems
is getting me down. My x-box 360 is relegated
to being shipped back and forth to Microsoft
for the next year until the warranty expires.
Playstation 3 is out of my price range.
My last hope was the Wii, but it isn't cutting it.

[odysseyroc]

No offense to the female.
My vote is for blasting, fighting,
and boobs.
I've played the Wii for a week
now and you just can't improve
your game much.
It's not like old video games where everything
works the same and with practice you become great.
The remote isn't precise enough.
It becomes quickly apparent, then begins to suck the fun away.
Seriously this generation of video game systems
is getting me down. My x-box 360 is relegated
to being shipped back and forth to Microsoft
for the next year until the warranty expires.
Playstation 3 is out of my price range.
My last hope was the Wii, but it isn't cutting it.

Is that a poem?

[Naru]

Yes, it's a really bad poem.

[shmokes]

LMAO. That's what I always think, but he never tells what's up with all the hard-returns.  Whatever.  I hope he doesn't stop.  No matter what he say, I find myself enjoying reading his posts.

At any rate, I'm in the middle.  I played the hell out of Animal Crossing.  Bought it for my wife cos I'm always trying to encourage her to like videogames more.  She loved it, and has put dozens of hours into it.  But so have I.  Great game.  Lego Star Wars is the same deal.  Fantastic game and I've completed the first one at near 100% and am well into the second one. 

A game doesn't need to have violence or sex to be good any more than Toy Story or Mulan or Monsters Inc. need them to be good movies.  But, with that said, I still love violence and sex.  Pulp Fiction is one of the best movies ever made.  Spiderman . . . . loved it. 

And along those lines, I'll happily claim that GTA: San Andreas is one of the greatest videogames ever made (Vice City is right up there too).  Silent Hill and Resident Evil 4 are works of brilliance.  Tomb Raider is wonderful (as is Laura Croft).

I really think the problem you're referring to is sex and violence, to the exclusion of everything else.  This is a serious problem.  Many game developers make up for a lack of quality game design with gratuitous sex and/or violence.  This, of course, does not work any better than it works in the movies.  Without good design, you can throw all the sex and violence you want into the game and it won't make it good.  But sex and violence would are legitimate draws when combined with solid design and good writing.  What would The Matrix or Raging Bull or Schindler's List have been without violence?   What would Desperate Housewives or Wedding Crashers or The Secretary have been without sex? 

So, when it comes down to it, I guess my point is that you shouldn't develop and or buy games for the sake of sex and violence.  But neither should you avoid them solely on those grounds.

[shmokes]

It is possible what you're describing is firmware. 

See, now that sounds reasonably likely.  The bad software bit is a tough sell for me, because the problem seems to be EXACLTY the same across the entire Wii library.

Firmware, though, I can buy.  And if they can fix the problem with an update, that would be awesome.

[KenToad]

No offense to the female.
My vote is for blasting, fighting,
and boobs.
I've played the Wii for a week
now and you just can't improve
your game much.
It's not like old video games where everything
works the same and with practice you become great.
The remote isn't precise enough.
It becomes quickly apparent, then begins to suck the fun away.
Seriously this generation of video game systems
is getting me down. My x-box 360 is relegated
to being shipped back and forth to Microsoft
for the next year until the warranty expires.
Playstation 3 is out of my price range.
My last hope was the Wii, but it isn't cutting it.

I think Naru has several interesting points here, although his reference to "the female" makes it looks like he sees her as an alien creature.     But, Naru's point that the Wii has an almost flat learning curve, at least concerning hardcore gamers, means that the feeling of getting "great" by excercising hand eye coordination in a skill-based venture may be more of a guy thing.  I know that this is not an argument and just a thought anyway, but I'll just throw it out there.  It seems to me that women just aren't that concerned with getting great at fast twitch, necessarily precisely controlled games.  I don't consider the Wario Ware games to be an example to the contrary, by the way.  Generally, there is a low level of skill involved, once you figure out what you're supposed to be doing.  And it has the universal appeal of goofy humor.  I know both men and women who don't fit the personalities that I am describing, but generally it seems that guys get a thrill from pinpoint aiming with a mouse in a quickly changing environment, i.e. a FPS, and women don't, no matter what the backdrop of the game may be.  Some other types of games are more addictive for other reasons, for example making a character "stronger" by leveling up or acquiring items or simply interacting with lots of things.  I would say that those types of games have a more broad appeal.  I also realize that the Grand Theft Auto series breaks the stereotype, being open-ended and not well enough controlled to get a feeling of "greatness" by skill alone.  It seems that the developers have allowed luck to play a large part in that game's gameplay and it works reasonably well by appealing to the, probably mostly male, desire to role-play a gangster and break the law.  It's the game where people tell you about how awesome the bodies sound when they crunch as you run over them.  Generally, I think anyone who is not disgusted by the content can get a thrill out of the game.

I also agree that this gaming generation doesn't really seem too appealing right now.  There is no game that I have to play.  But, I missed out on the last generation and I still play my playstation, which I bought in 2004.     I have a DS Lite, but I like how retro it is, at least in terms of gameplay, and I spend more time reading comics on there.  Anyone here love Knights of the Dinner Table?   

[Rachel]

A lot of guys seem to think of girls as an alien creature >.> Oh well.
With me, I tend to relegate certain gametypes to my systems. PC for shooters (Gotta have a mouse) and other higher-skill games. PS2 for RPG, DDR, racing, and adventure, my DS-Lite for puzzle games and wii? Party. You get 10 friends coming over and they'll all gravitate towards it. Games like warioware with their lack of curve are perfect for parties, because everyone can be involved. You don't have to sit at home practicing to play evenly with others. Sometimes? That's a good thing.

Smash Bros Brawl, whenever it comes out, will be a little different. They usually do a good job juggling between easy to pick up and ability to do skillful maneuvers. Mario Party (Haaate that game) goes in the other direction and is all but completely luck. Games like Guitar Hero 3 and Guilty Gear XX Accent Core are going wii. The skill games are coming, I just hope people don't start counting out the system based on a launch lineup that did a spectacular job with what little info they had.

[Level42]

If they release Samba d'Amigo 2007 on the Wii, I'm rushing to the store....where I will find none in stock (I'm in Europe, apart from Africa always the most behind in the "current" game scene)......man have they underestimated the sales numbers....

[igboo]

If they release Samba d'Amigo 2007 on the Wii, I'm rushing to the store....

I would RE-buy the console for that game.  The first two on the DC still get a huge amount of party play at my house.  It's in demand enough that I've actually considered building a cabinet just for that game.

igboo

[shardian]

Resident Evil 4 are works of brilliance. 

I admit it, I have checked out Ashleys goods with the rifle scope, and I know that every other guy who has played the game has done the same. I also admit on the second time thru the game I kept making ashley get in and out of the dumpster with the cowgirl outfit on.

Anyways, I love games that have good playability. I am a huge fan of the sims. I am probably one of the few fans of the nintendo 64, but they put out alot of fun games that didn't have violence or sexuality. I'm sure the gamecube is the same, but the controller sucked WAY too much for me to even give it a chance.

I have played the wii on several occasions now, and I tend to agree with schmokes that there just isn't enough precision to the wiimote. I am sure that if you had a large enough screen you could do better. I played zelda on a 22" widescreen and it was not easy at all to aim with the bow. Now for imprecise motions, such as when fishing, the wiimote can be very fun, although not technically challenging. I believe this is what schmokes is getting at - there will never be enough precision associated with the wiimote to even compare to a mouse/keyboard combo for instance. It really has more to do with the fact that there is zero force feedback, or resisitance to motion than the limits of the hardware.

[ChadTower]

I'm a huge N64 fan, we still have one in the living room that gets more use than any other console, 4 spares, and 75% of the domestic library complete with boxes and manuals.

[shardian]

I'm a huge N64 fan, we still have one in the living room that gets more use than any other console, 4 spares, and 75% of the domestic library complete with boxes and manuals.

Cool! I think I've logged over 1000 hours on Mario Kart 64. I've beat everything including the impossibly hard time trials. Nothing beats 4 player Mariokart. The N64 revolutionized multiplayer capabilities IMO.

[KenToad]

The N64 was the last non-handheld console that I owned while it was current.  Goldeneye was so fantastic and we spent months alternating between beating the game, rocking multiplayer (we even built a cardboard screen and taped it to the TV to block each part of the screen from each other), and then finally finishing as much as possible of the time trials.  For me, no game has ever compared to the rush of trying to complete the second level's seemingly impossible two minute speed run on 007 difficulty.  That level was absolutely brilliant and I got an adaptoid pretty much just to continue my quest to get the sacred time.

Anyone here manage to run through that level successfully in under two minutes?

[ChadTower]

I was never all that enamored with that game but it got tons of play at my (then) gf's house.  We put in countless hours playing WCW vs NWO.  Tons and tons of them.

[Chris2]

I'd say that the first really great games will come once developers start getting an idea of what they're doing. Look at the DS. The system had nothing good for six months, and then we started getting stuff like Meteos and Advance Wars. Now it's the best system of this generation. It'll happen. Just wait. It'll come.