The New Console Debates

[kaid]

I believe the download play is aimed at bringing back old people who played Nintendo during it's heyday (pre-64) who have since lost interest in flashy modern games that require memorizing over six times as many buttons. This untapped market tends to be law-abiding, which means very few of them will download Computer Roms of these games... And a few people who HAVE roms have said they want it so they can play it with a controller instead of a keyboard, to REALLY capture the retro feel.

And you didn't answer my comment on "terrible graphics" either.

 

[blaksheap82]

Crimson, I'm not biased against the Xbox, or the PS2 for that matter, I've played on my friends' many times. I just don't have the money to buy an Xbox along with a Cube, and also I don't play M-rated games (by my own choice, if anyone's wondering), so that tosses out Halo (or the majority of the highest rated games these days, for that matter). [On a side note, I also find sports games, especially football, mindnumbingly boring. I'll go outside and do that in real life and get some exercise while I'm at it.] I prefer Nin's strategies (and franchises) to Microsoft or Sony. It wasn't the Xbox I was taking a potshot at, it was all of Microsoft. My brother told me something about some plans he heard Microsoft had for legally stealing the patent on Firefox (or something along those lines, I can't remember exactly), one of, if notthe best mainstream browser. If Microsoft gets their hands on it, or anything for that matter, the quality almost assuredly takes a nose dive. Microsoft wants to maintain its monopoly, while it could be producing better products, but it doesn't have to compete with anyone, so it keeps making the same ungainly crap that tries to be everything to everyone. The same applies to the Xbox (although you're correct, good gameplay doesn't fly alone these days): most people seem to only care about graphics, which is why your comment about being biased goes both ways, when people look at the Cube, for example, and think that just because most games didn't have graphics like the Xbox or the PS2, the Cube sucked, or was for little kids. Oh, so how many of these people have ever heard of Resident Evil 4? Anyway, if many people will almost automatically choose the system with the best graphics, then why should they bother with innovation? It's just Microsoft's strategy in general that I was referring to. Just one question: How many of those games were developed by Microsoft or second or third parties.

Oh, btw kaid, I agree with your comments on graphics and retro games. I doubt Metroid:Zero Mission sold badly, or the rerelease of FFIV Advance won't do well. This generation is really the first I think where enough time has passed that people can become nostalgaic about games they played years ago. Although a few other industries have been using the same strategy, so maybe it's just a trend.

 

[Crimson King]

A. Microsoft isn't trying to steal Firefox's patent. They have Internet Explorer which yielded Netscape which yielded Mozilla. Technically, they already have it.

B. Microsoft is doing what the other 2 are doing, trying to survive in a business. Just because the business revolves around entertainment doesn't make it any less cut throat. Nintendo will do whatever it takes to sell you a product, then could careless what happens to you after you buy. Sony is the same way. Because if you aren't spending money on them, they can find people who do.

C. Microsoft is always attacked as having terrible products. Unless you have Linux or Unix or Mac, you can't complain because you are using Windows. Windows XP was a set-up above and beyond Windows 98 and as long as MS keeps up the trend they have been doing, they will stay a staple of our economics.

Sure, Nintendo is known for innovating alot, but the problem is, Nintendo is also killing innovation. When you make titles like Donkey Konga, Pikmin, and Animal Crossing, truly new ideas, and you still can't catch up to the PS2 and XBox's leads, you pretty much prove to the other developers that innovation is too risky and dangerous.

Sidenote: Of the games I listed, Microsoft owns rights to Halo, Deathrow, and Fuzion Frenzy. The Oddworld games are exclusively on Microsoft's consoles as well.

If you can't afford anything but a cube, oh well, but you don't have to bash the others to justify your purchase. This is such a pointless argument.

 

[blaksheap82]

You're right, the argument is pretty much pointless. I'm just tired of Microsoft and their monopoly-based products and strategies. Every computer professor I've had and practically everyone in my classes that used computers extensively for anything was as tired of Microsoft as I was. I'm not even bashing Sony, if they want to take over your entire living room, that's fine. It's just that if Nin, and possibly Sony, were like Microsoft, formulaic programming would become more and more entrenched, and there'd be almost no innovation, period. I just think it's really a shame that so many people today are so shallow that they look at a few consoles and pick the one with the best graphics right off the bat, automatically assuming it's the best without any other kind of evidence. It wasn't that graphics like RE4 or TP took time to develop, the Cube could always do that, it just takes time for the full potential of anything like that to be realized, but people make snap decisions and then hold onto those, in spite of further evidence. But like you said, this is fairly pointless. Here's hoping that Google and Sun thing goes through and they take a shot at Microsoft's software monopoly.

 

[Mic_128]

Mic, good point. But, you can't have a game with terrible graphics and solely rely on funfactor anymore. It's a novel concept, but it won't sell massively as it would have say 10 years ago.

Oh yeah, I'm with that, but what I'm saying when developers go for gameplay they almost always have the "acceptable" level of graphics. Half Life 2, Beyond Good and Evil, Katamar, Freedom Force, ect, had some realy inovative stuff and graphics certainly didn't take a hit. Admittedly some games (Geist) have innovation in spades, but still suck. :/ But the majority of Gameplay focused games are still purty lookin'.

 

[Giygas]

Also, just because they allow Nintendo to use their games (I assure at a cost) doesn't mean it will be a gold mine. Fact is, I can't see many people paying anything for games they could easily download for free.

I know! I mean, who buys music when they can easily download it for free? Last time I checked, you did.

 

[Crimson King]

The difference with music is that it's priced accordingly. Music is a different medium all together anyway. Poor agrument. Musicians are poor, million dollar gaming companies are not.

 

[Giygas]

Your argument is that people won't pay for old games on the NES/SNES/etc. when they can download them for free. You're right, some people won't. Just like some people won't pay for music or movies. Different mediums, same concept.

Oh, and last time I checked, the retro game industry has been booming recently. So it looks like a lot of people will pay for them.

And you'll be happy to know that your hard-earned dollars that go to those "poor musicians" actually go to their labels. They don't see a cent from their CDs unless they sell a million copies, and in that case I don't think I'd call them "poor". Thank the RIAA for that.

 

[blaksheap82]

Yeah, I agree with Giygas on the music thing. Crimson, I think Nin's retro downloadable library will sell better than you're predicting. Like you said, it won't be a gold mine, but how many roms have improved graphics or extras like Metroid Zero Mission did? Not to mention, I'd bet that the majority of people who play video games don't really know how to install emulators especially younger kids who've never played these games and the demographic kaid mentioned, and not all roms run without any glitches at all. Emulators and roms are far from perfect.

 

[Crimson King]

Giygas, it's two TOTALLY different industries.

If a musician doesn't sell albums well, they won't be promoted for a second cd or concert. No concert means no money for them. No promotion means no money for them.

Games today cost $9 million to make which is why some cost $60 to us. But, the companies have that money ahead of time to spend.

But, hey if you guys want to pay $5 for a game you already own, go for it. I just have more common sense than that.

 

[kaid]

On the contrary, I want to spend $5 on a game I never got. Like Mario 3. Or the original Starfox.

 

[Giygas]

But, hey if you guys want to pay $5 for a game you already own, go for it. I just have more common sense than that.

I'm sure you own every single game they're going to offer, hm?

I have about a dozen games for my SNES. The SNES has had over 700 titles released just in the USA alone. And usually, when I want a new one, I go through the hassle of getting one on eBay and paying around $10-$15 for it. If I can download it directly to my Rev for cheaper, say, $5, (and have the benefit of it being digitized), I'll gladly do it. I'll save time, money, and maybe even get some extra benefits or added features from it.

 

[blaksheap82]

On the contrary, I want to spend $5 on a game I never got. Like Mario 3. Or the original Starfox

I understand that totally. I don't think I really will buy many, if any, games off of this service, but I really expect it to be much less of a hassle than roms and emulators. My brother put a whole SNES emulator on my flash drive with over a hundred roms. (That's incredible and funny at the same time, that what used to be a program for a console and games can now fit on one mass storage device.) The rom works almost perfectly on his computer, but when I tried it on mine, I got nothing. With this service, if something about it doesn't work right, at the very least I'll know it's not on my end, and I can most likely get it fixed.

 

[Mic_128]

Giygas, it's two TOTALLY different industries.

Lets see.

If a musician doesn't sell albums well, they won't be promoted for a second cd or concert. No concert means no money for them. No promotion means no money for them.

If a game doesn't sell well, it won't get a sequel or a port. No sales mean no $$$ for them.

Games today cost $9 million to make which is why some cost $60 to us. But, the companes have that money ahead of time to spend.

CD's cost about $30-$40 here, and they take a lot of time, effort and money to produce, market and sell. And unless the artist is going solo without an agent, only then will they not have money to promote their music.

But, hey if you guys want to pay $5 for a game you already own, go for it. I just have more common sense than that.

People buy Albums of artists and usually there's at least one song that's been on another Album so you could be paying $3 for a song you already have.

I know the industry is diferent, but not that different.

And I've played Roms, but I hate using em. I just don't really enjoy playing them. When the Rev comes, I'l probably get one or 2, some like SMRPG, seeing as it was never released in Australia.

 

[Crimson King]

After a bit of time, I realized this argument is stupid. People here are just to stubborn to see how trival it is to argue which is the better video game console. The point of it is to have fun. It's like sports, you can like more than one and the others won't care that much.

 

[kaid]

If this topic is stupid, why check it?

 

[Giygas]

Don't insinuate that you have "more common sense" than us and then say that the entire discussion is stupid after multiple people refute your points.

If this place is so trivial I certainly don't understand why you'd have over 4,000 posts here. Maybe you're just as "stubborn" as we are.

People usually say that an argument is stupid when they can't make a good point.

See "giving up."

 

[Dash Blaster]

Well put, Giygas.

 

[kaid]

Gigas has repeatedly demonstrated a gift for words that goes well beyond my brash one-liners. I commend you.

 

[Cashed]

It was a Microsoft Head. And before he said that he claimed they had the idea but didn't want to go with it.

It was actually Mark Rein of Epic Games. J Allard said that they had the idea to be able to use a TV-style remote while playing games, and you can do that with the 360 for some of the arcade games.

 

[Mic_128]

Really? Whoops, my bad.

People here are just to stubborn to see how trival it is to argue which is the better video game console.

Look at the title Eric. "Console DEBATES." Not "Console Mating attempts to combine a perfect game system made from all 3 sides so everyone can be happy" Game systems are different. People like to point out how one is better/worse than the other. It's like politics in a way, we have campaigns, we have advertisements, in the past Sega had ads to point out specifically how the Megadrive does this, while "Nintendon't". t's with anything. Unless it's 100% the same, made by the same company, same time, same store, people are going to think one is better than the other. It's a fact of life Eric.

 

[ChRed2AKrisp]

After a bit of time, I realized this argument is stupid. People here are just to stubborn to see how trival it is to argue which is the better video game console.

as others have pointed out why post then?

When it comes down to it, all arguments have one of three results.

1. One person comes around to the other person's viewpoint, which is much more sensible.

2. Both people come to an agreement that both their viewpoints are valid, and neither one is really better than the other one, that just each have a view that they like and are going to stick too.

3. Both people stomp away *****ing about how stupid the other guy is.

What you are insinuating is that all arguments are like result three.
None of us change our minds and we all think the worse of each other for it.

In reality, the goal of all debates and arguments is to come to either point one or two. WHen it happens, 1 can be a good thing. Both people can get along together and share similar thoughts. However, result number 2 is what this thread and arguments should stive for. Neither person bashes the other. BOth people come out understanding each other, but their is still variety among users so we don't have a static, single concious view or thought.

You say we are all too stubborn, and hat we can't accept other viewpoints. WRONG. Try actually looking at this thread. Everyone here is trying their best to show what they think and why(though there are a few oddballs). We post here because we want other people to understand our thoughts. We DO not post here to convert other's to our point of view(once again, there probably are a couple who do that), just to make sure people with other viewpoints DON'T stomp away thinking the other guy is a wacky lunatic for thinking that way.

So post what you think and why you think it, but for god's sake don't post saying that everyone else has their head stuck up their butt.

 

[Hat Hair]

With as large a fanbase as Sony has acquired over the years, I think that it's safe to say that the PS3 will do fine when it comes out. It's hard for me to say whether or not it will top the Xbox 360, though, as every time a shipment has hit store shelves, that supply has sold out within the day it arrives (pretty much). With that in mind, I also think that it's safe to say that the Microsoft's going to pull a Sega (are you kidding me?). If, anyone ever predicted such... <_<

The Revolution, though, will probably be making its way into more houses around these parts (S'noma, California) than the other two consoles. If the controller's design didn't catch one's interest, or the fact that the next Smash Bros. title will be available at launch, then surely the estimated $100-$250 pricetag did. This whole disruptive marketing seems to be working for Nintendo, but as previously stated, around here at least. Before learning how cheaply the Rev will sell for, none of my friends were down with buying one of the next-gens, but now...yeah, I don't have to explain the rest.

EDIT: And I am so down with downloading Star Fox 64!

(uh...onto the Rev)

 

[blaksheap82]

as others have pointed out why post then?

When it comes down to it, all arguments have one of three results.

1. One person comes around to the other person's viewpoint, which is much more sensible.

2. Both people come to an agreement that both their viewpoints are valid, and neither one is really better than the other one, that just each have a view that they like and are going to stick too.

3. Both people stomp away *****ing about how stupid the other guy is.

What you are insinuating is that all arguments are like result three.
None of us change our minds and we all think the worse of each other for it.

In reality, the goal of all debates and arguments is to come to either point one or two. WHen it happens, 1 can be a good thing. Both people can get along together and share similar thoughts. However, result number 2 is what this thread and arguments should stive for. Neither person bashes the other. BOth people come out understanding each other, but their is still variety among users so we don't have a static, single concious view or thought.

You say we are all too stubborn, and hat we can't accept other viewpoints. WRONG. Try actually looking at this thread. Everyone here is trying their best to show what they think and why(though there are a few oddballs). We post here because we want other people to understand our thoughts. We DO not post here to convert other's to our point of view(once again, there probably are a couple who do that), just to make sure people with other viewpoints DON'T stomp away thinking the other guy is a wacky lunatic for thinking that way.

So post what you think and why you think it, but for god's sake don't post saying that everyone else has their head stuck up their butt.

Exactly. I couldn't have said it better myself. Each console has some pros and cons, and those weigh differently with everyone, so some people will just never change their viewpoints. BTW, ChRed, I get a feeling I'm one of those oddballs you mentioned, just because my posts tend to lack focus and get off on tangents. But, don't worry, it would be far from the first time I've been called anything of the sort.

And Mic, if I download any games, SMRPG will probably be one of the first. That's one of the roms my brother put on my flashdrive that wouldn't work on my computer.

 

[ChRed2AKrisp]

"oddball" was not really what meant, more like "the odd man out"

I never played SMRPG, yet i hear so much great stuff about it.


I'm sure i could find a ROM for it, but it would kind of ruin the glory of playing with a controller and on a TV. Its just not the same using a keyboard.

Plus alot of the n64 roms i find are bad quality, and often my computer lags. Games like goldeneye and Paper Mario aren' very fun on the PC.

MetroidI&II are another couple games i'm looking at. I have Metroid I on my Metroid Prime data, but it would be neater to play it with the sideways Rev controller.

The Revolution presents an oppurtunity to me to experience a comnpletely different VG world, old school NES ans SNES games, as well as several awesome N64 games that i never got as a kid.
Even with a possible (though not likely in my opinion) $5 price tag on first party Nintendo games, i'd pay ten bucks for SMRPG and Paper Mario.

THis is a great marketing strategy for nintendo.

something along the lines of "Can't find what you're looking for in the current market? Exhausted your supply of games? Try looking to the past for a whole new world and fresh experiences"

That's what i'm thinking anyway. Right now ihave nothing to play on my GC, until TP comes out, so I could close the gap with some old school gaming to while away my hours of boredom.

BTW, who says the SNES isn't alive and kicking?

The GenerationNEX console is basically a compact, 1.5" think SNES and Famicom combo. It has a front loadng SNES cartridge bay, and a top loading Famicom bay.

It also has wireless controllers, though it still has jacks for your older controllers.

As you'll notice the button layout is slightly different on the new controller, and in one major change, the D-Pad has been replaced by a sliding disk device.

$60 for the console bundle, but a whopping $60 for two wireless controllers in a limted edition lunch box.

 

[blaksheap82]

I wouldn't spend the money for one of those, but that is definitely an awsome idea. If those things sell well, it would almost be proof that retro games are a viable market. Enough time has passed that there are plenty of people out there that haven't played all these games I always hear people lauding, like Starfox 64 and SMRPG, that want just want to find out what was so great about these games.

And just because you can find roms, like ChRed said, doesn't mean they're good quality. My brother got his SSB rom to work almost perfectly, but his Shadows of the Empire game always crashes at the exact same point. Like I said before, depending on the price (I agree, $5 isn't likely.), I'll gladly pay for the better quality.

 

[kaid]

To put this topic back on track...

Xbox 360 has the best graphics chip of the consoles, giving it the best look, and supports an internal harddrive. It also has Xbox Live, and Bungie and Rare supporting it, along with many others.

PS3 has the best processor, allowing it to do more at once, like handle thousands of enemy AI at once. It supports Blu-ray disks, a tech that is not common yet but could become so in the future. It is supported by SquareSoft and several others.

Revolution has an innovative interface that has every third-party game designer drooling. It also has free online gaming, similar to microsoft's Xbox live, and cheap retro-gaming, by downloading official roms of past Nintendo and 3rd party games to the onboard flash memory. It is supported by Nintendo's own in-house game designers, along with numerous 2nd party companys and good relationships with Sega and Namco.


Obviously, this is not everything... anyone want to add or comment?

I know I left a lot out... would all the fanboys please fill in the details?

 

[Flamestrike]

The next generation of consoles lies on the horizon: Nintendo Revolution, PS3, and Xbox360. E3'05 gave us a glimpse of what is to come (and hopefully even more goodies will await us at TGS'05 this fall). It was obvious what had to be done, and lo, the "Official Console Debates" have been resurrected from its slumber to discuss and debate the current status of consoles and the up and coming next generation of consoles.

Many Lighthouse gamers know my current stance and opinion of the current consoles. I strongly believe that Nintendo needs to go third party, unless they change their act around with the Revolution. The GC's main draw was Nintendo games, yet when you hear people talk about the Revolution do they talk about an upcoming Capcom game? Upcoming Square-Enix game? Namco, Konami, Sega, or Atlus game? No, everyone is talking about the Revolution's new Nintendo games: the new Smash Bros., Metroid, Zelda, and Mario games. GC's, main draw is it's Nintendo games, Revolution's main draw is its Nintendo games. Nintendo consoles are for Nintendo games... throw in a handful of 3rd party exclusives. It just seems kind of... stuck up... for Nintendo to do this (if you want to play Nintendo games you must buy Nintendo hardware), and it may or may not be their own fault.

Why does Nintendo have a lack of third party exclusives? Maybe it's Nintendo's "image". Maybe it's Nintendo's hardware. Maybe third parties trust companies that are more aware of how to market hardware and software like business moguls Microsoft and Sony, rather than Nintendo, a company just out to push their own games and the hardware to run them. But that's just how I view Nintendo: as a game company, not a hardware company. I'm not saying GC's 3rd party exclusives are low quality, but when you compare the GC's third party exclusives to PS2's third party exclusives the GC pales in comparison. GC's "exclusive titles" that draw people to it are it's 1st party exclusives (Nintendo band games), and IMO I see this as Nintendo ostracizing itself from the rest of the gaming community (and with it's lack of online support and bizarre hardware... i.e. the DS, and third parties having to program their games with a separate touch screen, it seems like Nintendo only wants hardware to run it's own brand of quarky and unique games). It's like the old Nintendo slogan, "get 'N' or get out". If third party games can't conform to Nintendo's "style" (i.e. Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles) then Nintendo doesn't need your support, and IMO this must put off a lot of third parties, thus lack of third party support.

Nintendo needs to find a solution to is quarky hardware/software issues to fix the problem they are in right now. Nintendo shouldn't have to force its quarky hardware issues on third parties. Third parties should make games their own way instead of Nintndo-izing their software (adding GBA linkups, touch screen compatibility, cutting out online features, etc.). If Nintendo can solve these issues, maybe, just maybe they can regain it's hold in the console market, otherwise, looking at Nintendo's current status, I see them a path that Sega once tread, and I really don't want anything like that to happen again ... (DC hugz his DreamCast tight... sniff)...

The Revolution looks to be a great system, The controller will be awsome and if you don't want to use the motion part of it you just plug it in the top of a normal controller. If you go to ign.com and read about the Rev and Nintendo, Nintendo is not going the path of SEGA (*sniff* *sniff* I loved the Dreamcast) the DS in japan is out selling the PSP and PS2 2 to 1 and the Rev look promising IGN says it is going to cost somewhere between $100-$150!! That is awsome compared to $400. They are targeting the average gamer who can't afford a $400 system and a $1500 high definition TV. Nintendo rocks and they always will I mean come on you can play NES, Super NES, N64,GC and Revolution games on the system. Give em a chance I think Nintendo knows what they are doing.

 

[Mic_128]

IGN says it is going to cost somewhere between $100-$150!! That is awsome compared to $400.

IGN know squat. Nintendo said recently regarding prices "It won't cost anymore than $300." That's the best thing we have for a price.

 

[DarkLink567]

Considering that the Gamecube started at $200USD(I think) in America, I'd say it would be in a $150-$250USD price bracket. None of this $99 business that people have been spouting. Seeing as the current-gen Gamecube is currently $99, it is very unlikely that a BRAND-SPANKING-NEW console would start at $99. Glad I got that out of my system. Take anything that Nintendo hasn't confirmed yet with a grain of salt.

Not all Hi-Def TVs are in the excess of $1500. Those prices are generally associated with 42" TVs and larger. There are also those smaller LCD TVs which are also HD yet cheaper somewhat.

Absolutely can't wait to access the retro library. I was quite young back in the days of SNES. Wasn't even born when the NES first released. The closest thing I had to a SNES was a Sega Master System. Would we assume that we need a broadband connection to access the server? That would be a real issue for me then.

 

[Flamestrike]

Ok. Im just going off of what I read and trying to see what you guys have heard. $300 is a little pricey but I'd still pay it for a Rev hopefully it is cheaper. I hope it will sell good and the backwards compatibility is gonna be awsome. Nintendo said it could play your favorite games from those systems. Now I wonder if that means all the games from those systems or just Nintendo's select few? Anyone know?
Thanks for clearing that stuff up for me

 

[falcoX]

Would we assume that we need a broadband connection to access the server? That would be a real issue for me then.

Probably, becuase the broadband is required for wifi

 

[Giygas]

IGN know squat. Nintendo said recently regarding prices "It won't cost anymore than $300." That's the best thing we have for a price.

Before you shoot down the credibility of IGN, you might want to read the article.

Software houses we spoke with also waxed on the immediate advantage to Nintendo's approach with Revolution, which is, of course, system price. Every developer was in agreement that Revolution should launch with a price tag of $149 or lower. Some speculated that based on the tech, a $99 price point would not be out of the question.

You'll notice that IGN never claimed that would be the launch price; they only were saying what developers had speculated.

 

[Zink]

About the virtual console: I for one will enjoy downloading games that never made it to the US, like Sin and Punishment, which Nintendo Power said was the last great hit of the N64, kinda like Twilight Princess might be, Cube wise.
Regarding the Xbox 360 and PS3, they are practically computers now. MS knows how to play ball in the desktop/laptop market and might want to steer the videogame industry in their direction. Plus, I google imaged the Xbox 360 and PS3 controllers, and they look very much like modified Gamecube controllers. You might not remember, but the Xbox 360 had a very messed up launch. Lots of people in my class had to wait months even though they preordered due to a big lack of 360's.
Since the Sony guys have had so long to take the 360 apart, see every mistake, I think they will be able to launch a better console despite the boomerang.
The Revolution is largely an unknown quantity. Graphics are so advanced. I bet if you showed someone 3 different images, one from Revo, one from 360, and one from PS3, they would not be able to tell which was which. It will come down to whether developers take advantage of the controller enough, and I believe they will. So here's my lineup:
1. Revolution
2. PS3
3. Xbox 360
Not that the other 2 aren't great accomplishments, they are, but I think we are at the point where innovation can beat pure power.

 

[Cashed]

Plus, I google imaged the Xbox 360 and PS3 controllers, and they look very much like modified Gamecube controllers.

Lol .

 

[Zink]

I mean, all that's different is a few things switching places. Even the general shape is the same.
And MS is still talking about having the remote idea first? I believe in that article a guy says something like "What if I want to watch a movie on my Revolution? Do I have to use those colored bottons?" First, you aren't gonna watch a movie on the Revo anyway. Second, what's wrong with colored buttons? XD

EDIT: Here's something someone mentioned at the Revolution forum. Sony and Microsoft feel like businessmen, but Nintendo feels like a friendly nieghbor. Obviously they all want to make money, but I think Nintendo truly wants to make games more fun as well, and they have the customer's interests at heart. They remind me of a small flower shop: they don't just sell flowers, they ask about your family, exchange gossip, etc. It's not a perfect analogy though XD.

 

[Chill]

Not that the other 2 aren't great accomplishments, they are, but I think we are at the point where innovation can beat pure power.

I think the Rev controller is a great thing but I disagree with the sudden notion that you can no longer innovate with a standard controller. This gen saw plenty of innovative games that used a standard controller from Pikmin to Katamari. Simply trying different things can allow you to end up with an awesome game. If Square hadn't tried anything new we wouldn't have had Kingdom Hearts.

Completly new isn't the only way to provide an engaging experience either. How many would argue that RE4 wasn't great because it wasn't something we had never heard of before? Nothing there was new but is presented better than before. At least better than the RE series had ever seen it.

I'm starting to dislike the word innovative. The Rev will come out on top is if has lot's of fun games. The thing is the other consoles are perfectly capable of having fun games too.

Innovative post #400

 

[Zink]

I do agree with what you say. I just think the Rev controller offers many more possibilites, and we will eventually run out of things to do with the current controller setup. Pikmin certainly was very new. I'm not saying new is always good and old is always bad, but I prefer to play a new game in a new way than a new game in an old way. If you don't like "innovation" you can use a thesaurus, lol. I would say that making a whole new playstyle accomplishes more than making new games in the old playstyle. But there is definetly room for possibility in the old setup, which is one reason why Nintendo is making the WaveBird shell. I read speculation that the nunchuck and shell will be packaged free with the Revo, so you don't have to worry about buying a gazillion extras.
This brings up another point: pricing. I for one just can't afford a PS3 or Xbox 360, so I think they must be catering to the over 20 crowd, hence the proliferation of M rated games. Nintendo is selling at around $100 to $200, so they are reaching a wider market. Many people say that the Big N is looking for a niche market, but they are really expanding their fanbse while keeping veterans engaged.

 

[xianfeng]

I will get the revolution because of it's low prices that I can actually afford, the fact you can download classic games from their earlier systems and that it's backwards compatible with the Gamecube, Online Super Smash Bros. and other awsome nintendo exclusive games, the revolutionary controller sleek console and that's all I have to say.

 

[Deo_Smash]

Not that the other 2 aren't great accomplishments, they are, but I think we are at the point where innovation can beat pure power.

I agree with you there. A current example of this is the DS vs PSP. The PSP has power and graphical potential but the DS features(microphone, touch-screen, wi-fi) seem to pull more people towards it. Plus developers are making more better games on the DS as compared to the PSP. I feel the Revo will follow the footsteps of the DS. People will be a bit skeptical at first but once everyone gets a feel of it, it's going to take off. The price is also going to help the Revo because not everyone can afford $300 systems. I did hear from a friend at school that the revo could play DVDs. He said something about an installable flashdrive or some thing to that effect. As far as Revo graphics, I've read it has the possiblity of surpassing the Xbox the 360. Something about displacement mapping.

Nintendo is doing what they do best, making games. Microsoft and Sony are trying to make multimedia systems, not game systems. The problem with multimedia, is that there alot of it. MP3's, laptops, and other things all ready out on the market at a fair price, why would you spend $400 for something you already own. I didn't want a PS2 because I already have a DvD player and a Stereo system. I wanted to play games, so I got a gamecube. The Revo is going to be about the games and thats what we like about Nintendo.