Somebody dislikes Halo 3's Graphics for an unknown reason!

[Artlover]

If by quality you mean "graphical quality" then yes. But then that's like saying Gone with the Wind is a terrible movie because it'll never have CG action sequences.

Worse analogy I've heard yet. Gone with the Wind was appropreite for it's time period. I'm quite sure if it had been a silent grainy b&w movie, people of the time would have complained.

 

In my opinion, some of the best improvements in console gaming since about 2000 (like the introduction of Xbox Live, the Wiimote, the DS, Live arcade, inclusion of a hard-drive, etc) have had nothing to do with graphical upgrades.

Other then hard-drive, nothing you mentioned is anything I care about.

 

Besides, things like the Wiimote could have been a simple controller alternative for the GC, maybe even the N64. Online, hell, the 2600 even had it briefly, and ever since the Dreamcast, it seems to have been a standard connectivity option.

 

To that end. Wii Sports. Seriously, could it have not been possible to of had GC Sports with the optional GCmote attachment/controller and look/play the same? Could there not have been a GC Interactive Arcade disc that came with like a super capacity memory card or HD attachment that used the BBA to connect to a Nintendo GC network? What specificly does the Wii do that the GC couldn't? Of course the same can be said for the 360, what does it do that the original Xbox can't. Mostly, nothing, except look better. But there in is "something". The Wii comes off being nothing but repackaged last gen technology with a few built in gizmos that didn't need to be exclusive to the Wii beyond the purpose of making one buy a new system to get them.

 

With the Wii, me and my wife didn't buy it because we thought Wii Sports looked like Bioshock, we bought it because Wii Sports looked like fun.

That's all well and good. I aggree that it's not all about graphics, it's about game play. A bad game with good graphics is still a bad game. And good games with bad graphics can be good (look at the 2600). But, that said, what it wrong with a good game having good graphics? Game play and graphics are not mutualy exclusive of one another.

 

What is Wii's purpose of existance if it's not to be better then what preceeded it? What it comes down to is that if it was about fun & gizmos and not graphics, there was no need to develop the Wii at all, just support GC with the attachments. Wii didn't have to look last generation, it could have been "appropreite for it's time period" and still be fun.

[Atarifever]

With the Wii, me and my wife didn't buy it because we thought Wii Sports looked like Bioshock, we bought it because Wii Sports looked like fun.

That's all well and good. I aggree that it's not all about graphics, it's about game play. A bad game with good graphics is still a bad game. And good games with bad graphics can be good (look at the 2600). But, that said, what it wrong with a good game having good graphics? Game play and graphics are not mutualy exclusive of one another.

 

What is Wii's purpose of existance if it's not to be better then what preceeded it? What it comes down to is that if it was about fun & gizmos and not graphics, there was no need to develop the Wii at all, just support GC with the attachments. Wii didn't have to look last generation, it could have been "appropreite for it's time period" and still be fun.

Now that arguement sounds worse everytime I hear it. Yeah, I'm sure that it would have been real cheap to buy an expansion for the Gamecube which would have slightly improved the specs, added internal storage, added the ability to emulate other systems, accepted a vastly different input, shrank the size, added Wi-fi, increased the amount of data that could be held on the game media, and made the controllers wireless. Yep, that;d have been about... oh, $250. Not to mention, a Frankenconsole like that sure would look pretty. Also, considering that people just like you already complain about the current plan, I'm sure you'd have vigourously endoresed having to buy a GC, all those attachments, and then a whole new set of controllers and wouldn't have called it a "gimmicky, sad step" for sure. Oh, and the 32X, Turbo CD, and Sega CD have certainly proven how successful add-on upgrades are, and how well supported they are by the industry. Continuing to support a system that sold a total of 20 million consoles over 4 years sure seems like it'd have been the key to success as opposed to releasing a system that sold 10 million in one year. You should phone Nintendo up and offer your services to get them out of this hole they've dug with the DS and Wii.

 

As for your belief that I somehow claimed graphics and gameplay have to be exclusive, I don't know whose post you read, but it wasn't mine. All I said is that I am not personally finding my purchasing descions being made by that feature. As I stated earlier though, I do think it is sad when visual quality is the only determinant of a good entry into the medium. This is also why I made the Gone with the Wind reference (which you totally misinterpreted). If you will recall we had been arguing about if GC graphics are considered poor graphics, now try to follow this analogy:

 

1) Gamecube graphics are outdated by our standards.

2) This is like how Gone with the Wind is outdated by our standards

3) However, no one would be stupid enough to claim that Gone with the Wind is NOW a terrible movie TODAY, yet people will claim that a much more recent standard in videogames is somehow now intolerable.

 

Now, I understand that doesn't have to be the best analogy you've ever seen (heck, it may be in the bottom 50%), but if it's the worst one you've seen yet, I have to assume you've seen very few analogies.

 

As for your final question, as I stated above, if all you focus on is the graphics, then the Wii is only a little better than what preceded it, but once again, it isn't just graphics is it. I didn't have a virtual console, web browser, Wi-fi, motion controls, internal storage, SD card slot, wireless controllers, or DVD in my Gamecube did I? Here;s a picture I made of the system of your dreams:

[Hyper_Eye]

1) Gamecube graphics are outdated by our standards.

2) This is like how Gone with the Wind is outdated by our standards

3) However, no one would be stupid enough to claim that Gone with the Wind is NOW a terrible movie TODAY, yet people will claim that a much more recent standard in videogames is somehow now intolerable.

 

No, that is the point. Super Mario Bros., Super Castlevania, and Sonic were all great games and still are today but you don't see NES (except for clones), SNES, or Genesis being sold new on the shelves next to current gen systems. And you certainly don't see anyone claiming that those are current gen. Gone With the Wind is a classic and is labeled as such.

 

Now, I don't particularly think that the Wii doesn't have its place in the current generation of consoles. It is obviously selling and doing something right for many people. I added a sale to the list myself. I just don't find it to be that spectacular. It was worth the price tag put on it for what I am getting out of it. I wouldn't pay the price I payed for a 360 though and I think I have gotten more then my money's worth out of the 360.

[Artlover]

added the ability to emulate other systems

It's called software, GC already does it. Nintendo itself has already used it in the LoZ discs. Tobad they never developed it further. 3rd party did tho. (NES, SNES, N64, Arcade, Gameboy, and others).

 

You mention a web browser. Ya know, there was the PSO browser, but it was crippled to only access the PSO site. Had anyone bothered, a full blown web browser could have been written to use the GC's already existing network capabilities and keyboard options. It's just software, not some magical hardware component of the Wii.

 

accepted a vastly different input

Vastly different input? What does that even mean exactly. From a technical standpoint, it's just a matter of making a controller that plugs into the GC. It can be whatever the hell you want it to be. Light gun, Bongos, steering wheel, keyboard, motion sensing IR dildo, or a set of Nunchakus, it's all forward/back/up/down/left/right/fire a/fire b at the logic level on the control port data lines.

 

shrank the size

Why are people so hung up on console size?

 

added Wi-fi

Wifi module in place of the BBA, or a combo BBA/Wifi. Or use the other unused serial port for a wifi adaptor. Wifi is just a network adaptor, which the GC already supports, just needed to be made. Also, keep in mind, Wifi means nothing to people who don't use/want/need it. You call it a feature, I call it an unneccessary waste that should have been a user purchasable option instead of forced on me to subsidize. I don't like that the PS3 has it built in for the same reason. I do like that Xbox360 made it an option, as it should be, since, not everyone wants/needs/uses it.

 

increased the amount of data that could be held on the game media

Given what many Wii games look like, I doubt they are using that extra space. Even many GC games didn't fully use their limited capacity.

 

SD card slot,

SD cards can and have been being used on the GC via the existing memory card slot for a while now. Also, keep in mind, SD Card use means nothing to people who don't use/want/need them. You call it another feature, I call it a another unneccessary waste that should have been a user purchasable option instead of forced on me to subsidize. I don't care for the fact that the PS3 forces it on me in their 60gig model either.

 

and made the controllers wireless.

Wireless controllers have been avaialble for the GC for years. Also, keep in mind, wireless controllers means nothing to people who don't like/want them. You call it a feature, I call it an unneccessary waste that should have been a user purchasable option instead of forced on me to subsidize. Don't like that both PS3 and Xbox360 both force it on me either. I utterly hate and despise wireless controllers with such a passion it's not even funny.

 

Yep, that;d have been about... oh, $250.

And you came up with that number how?

 

Not to mention, a Frankenconsole like that sure would look pretty.

Short of something like a HDD module base (ala: gameboy player), it wouldn't have to look any different or be filled with attachments. Not attachments in the sense of SegaCD's or 32x's, but stupid small things like plugin RF/IR dongles, snapin modules (ala: BBA) and inline card adaptors; all of which have already been acceptable for Xbox, PS2, GC, PC's as it is.

 

Ignoring internal storage, there is little that the Wii does that the GC could not already natively handle in a mannor the GC was designed for had it just been developed. And if external storage is big/fast enough, then internal storage is kind of moot anyways.

 

now try to follow this analogy:

1) Gamecube graphics are outdated by our standards.

2) This is like how Gone with the Wind is outdated by our standards

Works so far.

3) However, no one would be stupid enough to claim that Gone with the Wind is NOW a terrible movie TODAY, yet people will claim that a much more recent standard in videogames is somehow now intolerable.

And again, there is where you break the analogy.

 

No one is saying "a more recent standard in videogames is somehow now intolerable". They are fine when considered in relative context. GwtW is not a terrible movie anymore then the GC is a terrible system. Relatively speaking. To that end, if there was no Wii, and Nintendo released the GC NOW in competition to the 360/PS3, what would people be saying about it? What's upsetting is the idea that a new system is being made NOW that is not really meeting TODAYS standards. If GwtW was MADE TODAY as it was then, it would not be considered the great movie it is for the same reason.

 

My point was only that there is no logical reason that the Wii could not have had better graphics too in addition to every other so-called feature/improvement made. Look at PS3: Internal storage (HDD), Wifi, Ethernet, Bluetooth, Memory stick, Flash card, SD, USB, Increased media storage (BluRay), wireless sixaxis motion sensing controllers, Linux, a network being developed that is infact simmilar to Nintendo's virtual console to offer things like Genesis & TG16. Hell, more then the Wii offers. But oh yeah, improved GFX too. Gee, with everything else, why did it need that?

 

I like to think of the Wii as the console's version of the iphone. Once you get past the superficial "improvements", the hardware is still generationaly behind.

[Atarifever]

added the ability to emulate other systems

It's called software, GC already does it. Nintendo itself has already used it in the LoZ discs. Tobad they never developed it further. 3rd party did tho. (NES, SNES, N64, Arcade, Gameboy, and others).

 

You mention a web browser. Ya know, there was the PSO browser, but it was crippled to only access the PSO site. Had anyone bothered, a full blown web browser could have been written to use the GC's already existing network capabilities and keyboard options. It's just software, not some magical hardware component of the Wii.

 

accepted a vastly different input

Vastly different input? What does that even mean exactly. From a technical standpoint, it's just a matter of making a controller that plugs into the GC. It can be whatever the hell you want it to be. Light gun, Bongos, steering wheel, keyboard, motion sensing IR dildo, or a set of Nunchakus, it's all forward/back/up/down/left/right/fire a/fire b at the logic level on the control port data lines.

 

shrank the size

Why are people so hung up on console size?

 

added Wi-fi

Wifi module in place of the BBA, or a combo BBA/Wifi. Or use the other unused serial port for a wifi adaptor. Wifi is just a network adaptor, which the GC already supports, just needed to be made. Also, keep in mind, Wifi means nothing to people who don't use/want/need it. You call it a feature, I call it an unneccessary waste that should have been a user purchasable option instead of forced on me to subsidize. I don't like that the PS3 has it built in for the same reason. I do like that Xbox360 made it an option, as it should be, since, not everyone wants/needs/uses it.

 

increased the amount of data that could be held on the game media

Given what many Wii games look like, I doubt they are using that extra space. Even many GC games didn't fully use their limited capacity.

 

SD card slot,

SD cards can and have been being used on the GC via the existing memory card slot for a while now. Also, keep in mind, SD Card use means nothing to people who don't use/want/need them. You call it another feature, I call it a another unneccessary waste that should have been a user purchasable option instead of forced on me to subsidize. I don't care for the fact that the PS3 forces it on me in their 60gig model either.

 

and made the controllers wireless.

Wireless controllers have been avaialble for the GC for years. Also, keep in mind, wireless controllers means nothing to people who don't like/want them. You call it a feature, I call it an unneccessary waste that should have been a user purchasable option instead of forced on me to subsidize. Don't like that both PS3 and Xbox360 both force it on me either. I utterly hate and despise wireless controllers with such a passion it's not even funny.

 

Yep, that;d have been about... oh, $250.

And you came up with that number how?

 

Not to mention, a Frankenconsole like that sure would look pretty.

Short of something like a HDD module base (ala: gameboy player), it wouldn't have to look any different or be filled with attachments. Not attachments in the sense of SegaCD's or 32x's, but stupid small things like plugin RF/IR dongles, snapin modules (ala: BBA) and inline card adaptors; all of which have already been acceptable for Xbox, PS2, GC, PC's as it is.

 

Ignoring internal storage, there is little that the Wii does that the GC could not already natively handle in a mannor the GC was designed for had it just been developed. And if external storage is big/fast enough, then internal storage is kind of moot anyways.

 

now try to follow this analogy:

1) Gamecube graphics are outdated by our standards.

2) This is like how Gone with the Wind is outdated by our standards

Works so far.

3) However, no one would be stupid enough to claim that Gone with the Wind is NOW a terrible movie TODAY, yet people will claim that a much more recent standard in videogames is somehow now intolerable.

And again, there is where you break the analogy.

 

No one is saying "a more recent standard in videogames is somehow now intolerable". They are fine when considered in relative context. GwtW is not a terrible movie anymore then the GC is a terrible system. Relatively speaking. To that end, if there was no Wii, and Nintendo released the GC NOW in competition to the 360/PS3, what would people be saying about it? What's upsetting is the idea that a new system is being made NOW that is not really meeting TODAYS standards. If GwtW was MADE TODAY as it was then, it would not be considered the great movie it is for the same reason.

 

My point was only that there is no logical reason that the Wii could not have had better graphics too in addition to every other so-called feature/improvement made. Look at PS3: Internal storage (HDD), Wifi, Ethernet, Bluetooth, Memory stick, Flash card, SD, USB, Increased media storage (BluRay), wireless sixaxis motion sensing controllers, Linux, a network being developed that is infact simmilar to Nintendo's virtual console to offer things like Genesis & TG16. Hell, more then the Wii offers. But oh yeah, improved GFX too. Gee, with everything else, why did it need that?

 

I like to think of the Wii as the console's version of the iphone. Once you get past the superficial "improvements", the hardware is still generationaly behind.

A quick question: how many people programmed for the Gamecube modem? How many people programmed games for non-traditional inputs like the DK Bongos? How many Wavebirds were sold in comparison to Gamecubes? Game developers would not (and this is a fact proven by things like the 32X and Sega CD) risk producing games for add ons not everyone might have. I came up with that number by looking at the price of the Wii which, as you've made prettty clear, is a Gamecube with those attachments, except for the point that the attachments would probably have to be packaged and distributed seperately. And of course, seeing Nintendo wanted to beat last generation's sales, you'd have to buy a Gamecube to go with it. Why do you think this plan would have worked when plans like it have never worked in the history of gaming. That's like saying "hey let's make a system that plays mostly FMV games, as so much success has happened with those in the past".

 

Emmulation in later developed software is certainly not like built in emulation in the Wii (as it's yet another purchased add-on in your example, in so far as it at least requires a download of some software and purchase of something to hold it).

 

As for using the PS3 as demonstration of a good idea, well, now your analogies are becoming suspect too Seriosuly, your comparison there is pretty bad, considering that to offer those extra things (blu-ray, improved graphics) they charge astronomically more. If Nintendo had sold the Wii for $600, I'm sure we wouldn't be having this conversation, both because they'd certainly have put more money into the graphical abilities of the system, and because I wouldn't have bought a $600 system to be defending. If you were looking for a good compariosn there you should have mentioned the 360, which has Live arcdae, an actual real people online service, a HDD, and a similar price. I think you're misunderstanding who the Wii is aimed at. Non-tradional and casual gamers don't care so much for graphics (hey, they mostly play Flash games), but are concerned about pricing. Traditional gamers want one as a second system, so it can't be too expensive and then doesn't need to have good graphics. Just look at Moycon and me. I'm getting a 360 for Christmas despite owning a Wii. Moycon uses the Wii for minigames when people come over to visit, but mainly uses his 360. Had the Wii included more technology and then raised the price, who's to say traditional gamers would have been more likely to buy it, considering that the 360 offers so much, and they'd maybe then be forced to choose between the two.

 

One more point: Nintendo has tried three times now to "out graphics" their competition. With the SNES they eventually won after a difficult fight, but spent time at number 2, with the N64 they moved to second place overall, and with the Gamecube they finished third. The pattern doesn't seem to show success and graphical superiority going hand in hand, while the Wii is moving very rapidly despite going against your reccomendations.

Edited September 8, 2007 by Atarifever

[Atarifever]

Now, I don't particularly think that the Wii doesn't have its place in the current generation of consoles. It is obviously selling and doing something right for many people. I added a sale to the list myself. I just don't find it to be that spectacular. It was worth the price tag put on it for what I am getting out of it. I wouldn't pay the price I payed for a 360 though and I think I have gotten more then my money's worth out of the 360.

Exactly. Glad to see we are on the exact same page.

[Atariboy]

Emmulation in later developed software is certainly not like built in emulation in the Wii (as it's yet another purchased add-on in your example, in so far as it at least requires a download of some software and purchase of something to hold it).

 

The Wii's emulation isn't built it. Its just a program downloaded when you purchase a VC title that runs off the hardware. The GameCube could've done the exact same thing, though you'd be somewhat limited on save space without more storage room. There isn't a NES chip, a SuperNes chip, a N64 chip, a TG16 chip. a Genesis chip, a MSX chip, and a Neo Geo chip installed in the Wii to do it through hardware or built in software emulation, it's all just stored in the memory after downloading a VC title.

Edited September 8, 2007 by Atariboy

[Malc74]

But what I really want to know is, why a topic about Halo 3 should become yet another ding-dong battle between the Wii baiters and Wii fanboys. Seriously lads, it's getting a little bit fucking tiresome.

[Atarifever]

But what I really want to know is, why a topic about Halo 3 should become yet another ding-dong battle between the Wii baiters and Wii fanboys. Seriously lads, it's getting a little bit fucking tiresome.

Because you can't say "graphics" anymore without PS3 fanboys turning it into a topic about the Wii. I myself am confused as to how a topic pointing out that a Sony employee attacked the 360 started a Wii bashfest. Did I miss the part about the Sony employee really being an undercover Nintendo employee? I mean, the thread basically says a Sony employee said the 360 had bad graphics, and yet the first thing people here started to do was point out how the Wii has weak graphics. I haven't seen anyone point out how wrong the idea is that somehow the 360 has weak graphics.

Edited September 8, 2007 by Atarifever

[Atarifever]

Emmulation in later developed software is certainly not like built in emulation in the Wii (as it's yet another purchased add-on in your example, in so far as it at least requires a download of some software and purchase of something to hold it).

 

The Wii's emulation isn't built it. Its just a program downloaded when you purchase a VC title that runs off the hardware. The GameCube could've done the exact same thing, though you'd be somewhat limited on save space without more storage room. There isn't a NES chip, a SuperNes chip, a N64 chip, a TG16 chip. a Genesis chip, a MSX chip, and a Neo Geo chip installed in the Wii to do it through hardware or built in software emulation, it's all just stored in the memory after downloading a VC title.

But my point is that the Wii is set up to put the games into channels, it is set up woth the space for it, the emulators were a ground up part of the Wii plan, so it would have required quite a different approach, which I'm sure would have seemed much less organic than the current set-up on the GC. When has a system update devised 4 years after a system comes out ever worked well? When has it ever been a good idea? Never. Would people who haven't played a game since the NES have wanted to go through the trouble of adding removable storage devices to the Gamecube, rather than opening the box and going to the Wii store with their out of the box setup?

[Gabriel]

But what I really want to know is, why a topic about Halo 3 should become yet another ding-dong battle between the Wii baiters and Wii fanboys. Seriously lads, it's getting a little bit fucking tiresome.

 

What's even more amusing is that the original subject was a Sony employee fanboyishly commenting about Halo 3's graphics.

 

I guess it all goes to show that PS3 love leads to Xbox hate. Xbox hate leads to suffering through a boring game of Wii Sports. And Wii Sports leads to painful death.

 

Or something like that.

[Atarifever]

But what I really want to know is, why a topic about Halo 3 should become yet another ding-dong battle between the Wii baiters and Wii fanboys. Seriously lads, it's getting a little bit fucking tiresome.

 

PS3 love leads to Xbox hate. Xbox hate leads to suffering through a boring game of Wii Sports. And Wii Sports leads to painful death.

 

The PS3 betrayed and then murdered your father. It's more machine than man now.

 

(I am hoping I'm not the only one seeing a Star Wars reference in your post, because that would make me the biggest geek... on a videogame site... dedicated to a 30 year old system. That's like showing up to a Star Trek convention cosplaying as a malfunctioning warp coil.)

Edited September 8, 2007 by Atarifever

[Artlover]

A quick question: how many people programmed for the Gamecube modem? How many people programmed games for non-traditional inputs like the DK Bongos?

How many games needed them?

 

Lets look at the Wiimote. It will be interesting to see later down the road how many games actually utilize the thing as intended. Sure, a lot of games can "use" it, but how many "need" it. By that I mean, sure I can see WiiSports or Carnival Games. Intuitive use of the controller. But now lets get to more conventional games like a standard platformer or racer. While support for the Wiimote's unique capabilites maybe present, are they either neccessary or desirible? Probalby not, and I have read many a bad review of game control of some Wii games for this very reason. Forced bandwagon support of the Wiimotes unique features in applications that don't inherently call for them.

 

I get what you're saying. But it's not as black & white as you seem to make it. Look at light guns, steering wheels or dance pads. There are moderate numbers of games that support them, and a fair number of sales of those devices. Hell, even Starsky & Hutch on the xbox supports a lightgun.

 

Not every game needs one tho, and not every game will need the unique features of the Wiimote. Including it with the system doesn't change that, nor will it inherently cause developers to add full support when unneccessary. How many NES games support the Zapper or R.O.B. Hell, more games today support light guns with it being an optional 3rd party attachment then the NES had when it was a packed in device.

 

Control should be dependant on what the game needs. Not what a controller offers. It's for this very reason different types of optional controlls exist.

 

How many Wavebirds were sold in comparison to Gamecubes?

Don't really know off hand. I'm assuming less then the number of Gamecubes sold, which would prove my point not everyone wants them.

 

Game developers would not (and this is a fact proven by things like the 32X and Sega CD) risk producing games for add ons not everyone might have.

You keep making these referencing to SegaCD and X32 which are not a comparison in anyway. Those were devices who's intent was adding functionality not nativly supported by the original hardware, that required different media only compatable with those attachments. Not what we're talking about here. We're talking about devices that were already natively supportable by the existing base hardware via standard media and programming. Huge difference.

 

Further, to talk about accessories, the Wii is NOT all inclusive. For example, it doesn't come with ethernet, you need to buy a Wii LAN adaptor seperatly at additional cost to hook it up to your wired network -or- spend even more and buy a wireless router to add to my network. Yes, believe it or not, a lot of people still use wired LANs.

 

Emmulation in later developed software is certainly not like built in emulation in the Wii (as it's yet another purchased add-on in your example, in so far as it at least requires a download of some software and purchase of something to hold it).

And the Virtual Console doesn't require you to download? You just invalided your own point. Purchace of something to hold it? You mean there are GC owners who don't have a standard GC memory card?

 

Anywho, see above about lans & ethernet. If I went out to the store and bought a Wii right now, I would NOT beable to use this Virtual Console service out of the box till I either bought new network hardware to upgrade my LAN or bought an extra adaptor (a big external box with a interconnect cable) for the Wii, or the worse option, a usb wifi for the PC to make it a wifi access point.

 

to offer those extra things (blu-ray, improved graphics) they charge astronomically more.

I doubt graphics contributed to price very much. Blame Sony trying to, for once, be the father of an accepted standard by forcing Blu-Ray into the thing.

If you were looking for a good compariosn there you should have mentioned the 360, which has Live arcdae, an actual real people online service, a HDD, and a similar price.

AND better graphics. All for that simmilar price. Thanks for supporting that better gfx don't mean bigger cost.

 

I would like to point out, I wasn't making price comparisons. The comparison was about the implication of "next gen" not neccessarly being about gfx, but could also apply to features (like wireless, sd cards, size, etc..) To that end, I didn't mention 360 because it doesn't have all the features of the Wii (or PS2). Feature wise, Wii is closer to PS2 then 360.

 

I think you're misunderstanding who the Wii is aimed at. Non-tradional and casual gamers don't care so much for graphics (hey, they mostly play Flash games)

Fair enough.

 

One more point: Nintendo has tried three times now to "out graphics" their competition. With the SNES they eventually won after a difficult fight, but spent time at number 2, with the N64 they moved to second place overall, and with the Gamecube they finished third. The pattern doesn't seem to show success and graphical superiority going hand in hand

Points of interest. N64 was alone in the field for that time period by being cartridge based, which had been phased out already by earlier systems, Saturn & PS1. And Gamecube was not superior to it's competition of the period. Raw technical gfx specs place it #3 behind Xbox & PS2. Tho in practice, it was more or less on-par with them.

Edited September 9, 2007 by Artlover

[Atarifever]

Raw technical gfx specs place it #3 behind Xbox & PS2. Tho in practice, it was more or less on-par with them.

Now you're just talking crazy. Next you'll tell me the TG-16 beats the Neo-Geo. The Xbox beats it sure, but you don't have to look very hard to see that, whatever specs you're looking at, the GC eats the PS2 for breakfast, and from an entire generation of reviews it is clear I am not the only one who knows that.

 

If you were looking for a good compariosn there you should have mentioned the 360, which has Live arcdae, an actual real people online service, a HDD, and a similar price.

AND better graphics. All for that simmilar price. Thanks for supporting that better gfx don't mean bigger cost.

Yeah, but it also doesn't include the price of motion controls, no built in wi-fi, and, for the similar price, no internal built in storage. Now, if only there were some way to determine how much a system would cost that included all the features I mentioned: more storage, better graphics, internal storage, motion controllers, built in Wi-fi. Hmm, what system on the market has all those features. Oh yeah, the PS3. How much does that one cost? And how's it been doing again sales-wise? You know, compared to the Wii and 360 who chose only some of those features to support?

 

 

As for the 32X and Sega CD being a poor comparison because they weren't things the systems natively supported, I am confused. One of the things I have already mentioned is that to get extra storage space and somewhat better graphics the Gamecube would need a DVD add-on and some kind of upgrade module. Now, I know you think my analogies are somehow poor, but what I just described does for the Gamecube exactly what the Sega CD did for the Genesis. Like, exactly. The same thing. Precisely. I'm sorry if you think my comparison skills are lacking but when one thing exactly compares to another thing, I feel safe in referencing that similarity.

 

As for the rest of your points, I can't re-address the same points anymore. I think it is enough to point at the success the Wii is having and say, whatever complicated plan you think Nintendo should have followed, releasing the exact system they did has worked terribly well.

Edited September 9, 2007 by Atarifever

[Artlover]

Now you're just talking crazy. Next you'll tell me the TG-16 beats the Neo-Geo. The Xbox beats it sure, but you don't have to look very hard to see that, whatever specs you're looking at, the GC eats the PS2 for breakfast, and from an entire generation of reviews it is clear I am not the only one who knows that.

Things like polygons/second, bus speed, color depth, resolution and stuff like that. The problem with the PS2 is not that it's got poor graphics, but the architecture make it difficult to work with.

 

As for the 32X and Sega CD being a poor comparison because they weren't things the systems natively supported, I am confused. One of the things I have already mentioned is that to get extra storage space and somewhat better graphics the Gamecube would need a DVD add-on and some kind of upgrade module.

Except your ignoring it's not needed.

 

On most optical media systems, games rarely use all the space avaialble. Including DC, PS1, GC, Xbox, PS2, PS3 (360 is the only system that seems to use most space as a rule). In the rare cases you do need more storage, you just make it a multi disc game. There is no 'technical' advantage to more space on media beyond user convenience. To those of us who use(d) records and laserdiscs, getting up to flip/switch discs is not a big deal. Hey, you're already standing up jumping around with your GCmote anyways, just lean over and change discs when prompted.

 

Somewhat better graphics. Now you're concerned with the Wii having better gfx? Seriously, the GC's aren't bad, and the Wii's are not that much better. Would a Wii with GC graphics be a bad thing? Would it even represent a signifigant difference in quality?

 

I propose that a GCmote w/lightbar controller for GC supported by games like GCSports and Carnival games would have been completely feasable with quality/playability results not far removed from the Wii. Without the need of console addons, and probably still be a single minidisc to boot.

 

As for the rest of your points, I can't re-address the same points anymore.

Atleast address how someone without WiFi can use the Wii's Virtual Console without add-on's.

 

I think it is enough to point at the success the Wii is having and say, whatever complicated plan you think Nintendo should have followed, releasing the exact system they did has worked terribly well.

Believe it or not, I don't have any problems with the Wii in general. I'll eventualy own one just as I will a 360 and maybe even a PS3. My only real gripes are that I'm annoyed that much of what's on the Wii (which I don't have yet) could be done on the GC (which I do have), so I'm missing out for no reason other then them not wanting to support the GC anymore. That and much of what defines the Wii as a step forward are things that don't concern me. That last point applies to all three consoles however. I want all three, but all three are loaded with fluff I'd just as soon do without. It's part of the reason (aside from currently being jobless and broke) that I don't own any of them.

Edited September 9, 2007 by Artlover

[Atarifever]

On most optical media systems, games rarely use all the space avaialble. Including DC, PS1, GC, Xbox, PS2, PS3 (360 is the only system that seems to use most space as a rule). In the rare cases you do need more storage, you just make it a multi disc game. There is no 'technical' advantage to more space on media beyond user convenience. To those of us who use(d) records and laserdiscs, getting up to flip/switch discs is not a big deal. Hey, you're already standing up jumping around with your GCmote anyways, just lean over and change discs when prompted.

Well, one thing this last post makes clear is that we actually have quite a bit of common ground. I've been arguing for an entire generation that having a game on two discs wasn't a real problem and that only the most lazy of people could have a problem with having to switch a disc once per game. Still, we were discussing things that were different about the Wii over the Gamecube, and space on the media was one of those differences. It certainly didn't sell me a Wii, but if message boards are to be believed, there should be a huge pile of PS2 and Xbox owners out there breathing a sigh of releif that if they buy a Nintendo product this generation they won't have to get up to insert a new game disc once every 25 hours of play. Of course, from what I've seen, the Sony fans are already starting on how deficient DVD technology is because 360 owners might have to change discs part way through Oblivion, which these PS3 owners apparently see as an insurmountable difficulty.

 

Somewhat better graphics. Now you're concerned with the Wii having better gfx? Seriously, the GC's aren't bad, and the Wii's are not that much better. Would a Wii with GC graphics be a bad thing? Would it even represent a signifigant difference in quality?

I'm not concerned with graphics on the Wii. Once again though, you're original argument was that the Wii could be a Gamecube with add-ons, and again, this is something making the Wii more than a Gamecube, so to end up with the final product equivalent to the Wii by your plan, this would need to be addressed.

 

I propose that a GCmote w/lightbar controller for GC supported by games like GCSports and Carnival games would have been completely feasable with quality/playability results not far removed from the Wii. Without the need of console addons, and probably still be a single minidisc to boot.

But it wouldn't sell. I'm sorry, but consumers would not buy a 6 year old console (they've mostly all ignored to this point) this Christmas to plug in a new controller (people should now have a contest to see who can say "but that's what they did with the Wii anyway lolz" in the funniest manner). As well, again, developers wouldn't develop for a system if they can't get hard numbers on how many people are using it. So, by your plan they would likely have more trouble atttracting developers and more trouble attracting consumers, for the sake of making sure you don't have to buy a new system that was better in several other respects anyway. Speaking as someone who made several posts here about how annoying it was when Super Paper Mario, DK Bongo Blast, and the first launch of Twilight Princess got the Wii treatment instead of the GC treatment, I understand wanting the Cube to get support for longer. However, asking them to sink their company just so you can save a hundred and fifty dollars or so (two motion controllers and a Wii game as the bare minimum Wii experience on the GC would almost certainly be as much as two wii-motes with nunchucks, even if they threw the game in, and that's ignoring all the other differences) isn't my definition of good business sense.

 

Atleast address how someone without WiFi can use the Wii's Virtual Console without add-on's.

First explain to me how ANYONE can get internet on the Gamecube without an add-on. Once you can do that I'll feel the need to explain why serving many of your consumers with the default set-up is better than supporting none of your consumers with the default set-up. It's the reverse of how the 360 supports wired set-ups out of the box and wi-fi with an add-on. If I recall correctly, doesn't the PS3 support both? If that's the case, again, it looks like the way to have every feature is to increase price, with the obvious consequences.

 

That and much of what defines the Wii as a step forward are things that don't concern me.

Once again, I think their target market is a little wider than "Artlover from Atariage".

Edited September 9, 2007 by Atarifever

[AtariRocks]

Multi disc game on a console with wireless controllers? Good luck with selling consumers on having to go change the disc in the middle of a game.