Article (http://gear.ign.com/articles/116/1162204p1.html)
I don't know what to think about the new controller. I don't know if I like it yet. I kind of just wanted a regular controller, but you know Nintendo...
"WE'RE GONNA DO SOMETHING NOBODY HAD DONE BEFORE"
"... But I just want good video games."
"WE'RE GOING TO REVOLUTIONIZE GAMEPLAY AS WE KNOW IT"
"... Dude, again, I just want games.
"WE'VE GOT AN ALL NEW 3D MOTION SENSITIVE CONTROLLER THAT MAKES YOU BREAKFAST AND FLIES YOU TO SCHOOL!!"
"... I just want a regular controller with amazing games... I don't want gimmicks..."
"GO BUY AN XBOX."
>.<
This new system had better blow me away.
Supposedly this new console, provided it exists, is supposed to help Nintendo recapture the harcore market.
Honestly? I'd give a lot more of my attention (and money) to Nintendo if they dropped their insistence on having some gimmick for every new thing they create. ._.
One man's gimmick is another man's deal sealer.
I myself don't have so much opinion on the hardware other than that I hope it's not "too loaded," so to speak. A high resolution on that screen would provide a drastic reduction in battery life, like on the 3DS. Then again, it's not a handheld console, so that property isn't as meaningful as it would be if it were.
I guess I'll just have to wait until E3 to develop a more thorough opinion. Until then, don't fret; it's clearly a prototype.
According to one of the comments on the article, the controller may be able to charge itself as you're playing. What I'm most worried about is how much the controller alone is going to cost. That thing CAN'T be cheap to produce- how much is it going to cost me?
Quote from: Zangief Veteran on April 18, 2011, 05:12:17 AM
According to one of the comments on the article, the controller may be able to charge itself as you're playing. What I'm most worried about is how much the controller alone is going to cost. That thing CAN'T be cheap to produce- how much is it going to cost me?
Nintendo has obviously mastered fusion energy and is using it to power their video game consoles now.
Honestly, the fact that Nintendo has to completely redo everything in existence with each new release is the only thing that has kept it going. When it was just doing the same thing as Xbox and the PS2, it was failing hard.
True, but the Gamecube is still one of the most solid consoles in existence.
The thing is, though, they weren't doing what everyone else was doing. Not quite. They limited both of their previous consoles enough to hold themselves back.
Look at the N64. The most powerful console out of the three main ones available at the time -- lots of potential there. But because of Nintendo's crippling (and probably irrational) fear of piracy they stuck with cartridges while everyone else was moving on to CDs, and in so doing they really squandered the system's potential. Powerful hardware can only do so much if your games and their soundtracks have to be small enough to fit onto cartridges, and I know this drove away developers like Square Enix. Cartridges are also expensive as hell to mass-produce, especially compared to CDs, and as such games could get very pricey at retail, and while you could have multi-CD games if a game was too big to fit on one disc, it would be far too expensive to have multi-cartridge games. And in retrospect, even if the PlayStation was very easy to pirate games for, that didn't stop it from selling 100,000,000+ units worldwide, and Sony moved tons of games, as well. I guarantee you if the N64 had a CD drive it would have slaughtered the PlayStation.
Now the GameCube: Respectable hardware. Good games. But the problem with the GameCube was that while Nintendo's competitors made consoles that not only played games, but doubled as all-in-one home entertainment systems, the GameCube was limited to just games. This is in part because of, again, Nintendo's crippling fear of piracy, but also their cheapness -- by using a non-standard breed of DVD (both in size and in technical details), they avoided having to pay to license whatever codecs were required to play DVD movies. The reason the PS2 sold so very well is that not only was it a well-supported game console, but also because at launch, and for a few years after that, it was by far the cheapest DVD player available on the market -- it practically created the DVD market in Japan. Even when cheaper DVD players became available, guess what? It was still a PlayStation 2. By the time DVD playback just became a nice extra, it had enough ground that consumers and developers knew it would still be a good investment.
The GameCube also sorely lacked what was quickly becoming a very important feature to gamers: online gameplay. The GameCube had -- wait for it -- three online-capable games in its entire library. I'm sure I don't need to tell you how big a success Xbox Live turned out to be, and the PS2 had its share of online games as well. Even the Dreamcast had a respectable number of online games for as short-lived as it and SegaNet were. But Nintendo was, and still is, firmly stuck in the past, as evidenced by how sloppy and unintuitive the Wii's online features are.
I think if Nintendo had stuck more to what its competition was doing they'd have been more competitive in the past two generations rather than being relegated to second and third place...
Although all that you said there is well-thought-out and informative-- and ultimately true, Nintendo (i.e. Miyamoto) is firmly set in the uniqueness, off-the-wall family-based fun that is and always has been Nintendo. Once Miyamoto steps down (or dies, if that ever happens), I'm sure their company policy will change. Still though, the two larger companies are trying to reverse-engineer the few things that make the Wii a unique system, and for the most part, they're failing at it. When it comes to motion sensitivity, the Wii will always be a step ahead of the EyeToy and that other xbox-type thingy. At least in the next few years.
Whether they're third-best or top dog, Nintendo is still making more money than you could ever conceive making in your lifetime, and they're not showing any signs of relenting.
I won't disagree with that. I just don't think it's fair to blame Nintendo's failure in the past on them following the crowd when it was their own choice to limit their capability for success. Not that either the N64 or a GameCube were really a failure, especially compared to their competition with Sega, but compared to their competition with Sony and (later) Microsoft, they didn't do very well.
Success is not about sales, in the long run. Which is a 90's kid going to remember for the rest of his life, the first time he beat that one shooter that was about halos and floods or something, or OCARINA OF MOFUGGIN TIME
It looks cool.
...Thats all I got. Either they put themselves back into the arena and kick some serious halo-loving patootie, or I'm going to stick with Microsoft for as long as they are on the market.
...I don't care what you guys say, I'm never touching Sony.
Quote from: Jean Havoc on April 19, 2011, 07:48:51 PM
It looks cool.
...Thats all I got. Either they put themselves back into the arena and kick some serious halo-loving patootie, or I'm going to stick with Microsoft for as long as they are on the market.
...I don't care what you guys say, I'm never touching Sony.
Playstation > > > > > > > XBox
Quote from: Rainbow Dash on April 20, 2011, 04:49:32 AM
Quote from: Jean Havoc on April 19, 2011, 07:48:51 PM
It looks cool.
...Thats all I got. Either they put themselves back into the arena and kick some serious halo-loving patootie, or I'm going to stick with Microsoft for as long as they are on the market.
...I don't care what you guys say, I'm never touching Sony.
Playstation > > > > > > > XBox
Rainbow Dash ======= Wrong
Playstations are terrible. I have a couple of cousins and couple of friends who were sony fans from Playstation 1. PS1 had some alright games, I'll admit. But everyone I know who bought a PS2 admitted they were regretful. ALL of them broke down within the first 2 years of use, while my durable little GameCube still works to this day.
As far as Playstation 3 goes, all but one of my friends hate theirs. In fact, one of my cousins calls it, "The most expensive paper weight I ever bought". This is probably because he bought it solely for gaming, and if you're a serious gamer you're going to hate it. Playstation 3 is a good investment for the softcore gamer. It's seriously multifunctional. It's just not what I'm looking for in a gaming experience.
I went to my friend's house a couple of months ago and we were playing Call of Duty Black Ops. The competition was seriously tame compared to X-Box players. X-Box holds a lot more competitive online gaming because consumers know where the party's at. If Nintendo doesn't wow me with some seriously awesome games real soon, I'm saying goodbye to Nintendo altogether. X-Box is amazing, and it's one of the best decisions I've made in my life. Microsoft knows how to charge out the anus, but it's worth it to me.
I'm not entirely sold on the XBox, but that's because most of the games that I'd like to play that can be played on XBox can also be played on the PS3, which I'd like to get for both gaming and movies, so the PS3 is the more logical purchase for me. And the only thing that really bugs me about the PS3 is the fact that it can't play PS2 games. Or was that just the earlier models? I seem to remember talking to TW about how the more recent PS3 models had complete backwards compatability.
As for Nintendo, I care more for the games than the actual consoles. The only technical feature that I'm really excited about with the 3DS is the improved graphics (seriously, have you guys seen the screenshots for OoT 3DS? They're freaking awesome!); I could care less for the 3D feature, and I don't see myself using it at all.
As for this new console, my first impression of it was that it was an oversized DS. I doubt we need a screen on our controller, but I'll wait to hear more from Nintendo before forming a more concrete opinion.
Quote from: Hi no Seijin on April 20, 2011, 07:54:09 AM
I could care less for the 3D feature, and I don't see myself using it at all.
I concur entirely. I was down at my local comic shop playing Magic with some of the guys down there, and my buddy Mike was playing Street Fighter on the 3DS. The graphics were insane, I agree with you HNS :D
I can't wait to play Ocarina on the 3DS. Seriously, if I can't afford one, I'm stealing one :P
Nintendo will have at least 1 3DS unit and 1 copy of OoT unaccounted for XD
As a happy owner of a PS3 I have to disagree with just about all of the points you made about it, ZV. And frankly... well, you sound like a fanboy. You're making lots of generalizations and assumptions from a biased viewpoint. You're basically just saying "Sony overall sucks" but you're not providing much of an argument for your side.
(http://sixpop.com/files/24/Consider-The-following.jpg)
First of all, I don't know anyone who was unhappy with purchasing a PS2. Sure, they sometimes broke down, but I don't personally know anyone who had theirs break in two years. They did break down sometimes -- I won't deny that -- but the people I know who had their PS2s break rushed out and got a replacement because they loved their PS2 collection that much. I have a PS2 Slim and I've never been unhappy with getting it, ever. It's worth it for Okami alone, but I love all the games I've got. Of course, if you have an old PS2 that hasn't broken down yet it'll probably last you forever.
You know what's funny, though? Both of the original Xboxes I've ever owned were broken (I fixed one of them so I could use it), and everyone I know who has an Xbox 360 has had to send theirs in for repairs. Never met anyone with a PS3 who had to send theirs in, though I know some people have had to.
Now, my PS3? I bought my PS3 solely for gaming and I've never been disappointed in the library, and I'm certainly not what you'd call a softcore gamer. (Come on, I'm the guy that's always speaking against Nintendo a lot of the time, remember?) I think I bought mine at a good time, though -- late 2008. At that point developers had begun getting a feel for the PS3 and as such there was a healthy selection of good games available, and in 2009 a big wave of awesome games started to come out, in addition to Sony's massive marketing push. The PS3's library appealed to me more than the 360's, and like HNS said, most of the games I'm interested in on the 360 I can also get for the PS3 (or PC, for that matter).
Here's an illustration to show you one of the reasons I prefer Sony: Portal 2. Ironic as it is given Valve's stance on the PS3 in the past, the PS3 version is undeniably the superior of the two console versions for one reason: Steamworks. Steamworks allows you to link up your PSN account with your Steam account so you can talk to your Steam friends from your PS3, getting trophies on the PS3 version unlocks the corresponding achievements on the PC version, and you get free access to the Windows and Mac versions of Portal 2 if you buy the PS3 version, as well. You can't do any of that on the 360. The reason this stuff isn't on the 360 is that Microsoft is very restrictive about what their developers can do, but Sony was willing to let Valve do things their own way, and in return we got a superior product. Microsoft and their insistence on charging consumers for content updates to games is partly why Team Fortress 2 on the 360 is so outdated -- Valve releases all of their updates at no charge. (By now there's such a world of difference in the power needed to run the game that they probably couldn't make it work on the 360 now anyways, though.)
The PS3's multimedia functionality is really nice, however, even if it wasn't a major factor in my decision to get one. I love that I have a Blu-Ray disc player and an all-in-one media hub in addition to a console with what I feel are awesome games.
As for what you experienced on the PSN compared to Xbox Live, I frankly think that's irrelevant. There are going to be "l33t pr0 omfg" players on either service, and there's going to be tame players on either, as well. PSN has a distinct advantage over Xbox Live, however, and that's free online gameplay. $50 a year to play online isn't too expensive, sure, but that's $50 I'd rather use to buy a new game or something. And now that PlayStation Plus is around, no one can argue any more that Xbox Live's servers are superior because the money coming in pays for better ones than PSN has.
Even if I did neglect my PS3 for about a year after I built myself a gaming computer, I'm still very happy I have it
HNS, the older PS3s are compatible with PS2 games, not the newer ones. Problem is, in spite of being older, they usually sell for as much as, if not more than, a brand-new PS3 Slim because they're so in-demand. I'd say it's worth it, though. My sister has an older PS3 that'll play PS2 games and I think having a console that'd play all three PlayStation generations would be awesome.
PONY EDIT: I'd rather not have one of those thanks
Quote from: Edward Elric on April 20, 2011, 03:51:46 PM
(http://sixpop.com/files/24/Consider-The-following.jpg)
You get a cookie.
Anyway, I kinda find it funny how we went from discussion on a console prototype to another battle in the infamous console wars. But at the same time, I'm glad that we're at least remaining civil about this. Please, continue.
Yeah, I'm a little miffed that you're saying the PS2 didn't have good games. I mean, regardless of what side you're on, you can't deny it has a LOT of good ones. Shadow of the Colossus, Final Fantasy X (to an extent), Dragon Quest VIII, the Battlefronts...it has a pretty much legendary collection, in my opinion. Oh, Jak and Daxter and Ratchet and Clank. I've also never had one of mine break down or in any way have problems. Same with any of my friends'.
As for the new controller, I'm praying to God Nintento goes the 'get it in the hands of the consumer' route and gives up some of the profit to make it affordable. Will they? I don't know.
...
I'm not an expert.
*sigh*
I could probably go find all of the charts I've read, and grab all the data I've found over the years. I'm sure I could compile all the information I need to argue- but I'm a more passive person, and an even lazier one. Truth is, I just don't feel like going the extra mile to argue with a fellow gamer. We can just agree to disagree. I've tried all three consoles, and I have my opinions on them all.
Nintendo 64 >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dreamcast > Pile of steaming $#17 > Playstation
Game Cube > XBox > Playstation 2
XBox 360 > Playstation 3 > 3DS > Wii
Hopefully it will go back to being
Nintendo >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (all the other stuff that doesn't matter)
:)
I'll always remember Nintendo for who they were and not what they are today. They made my childhood awesome- I feel bad for any kid that didn't get to grow up in 90's. We had the best cartoons and the best games. How can anyone argue?
(http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k287/ZeldaVeteran/CartoonNetworkLogo1.jpg?t=1303410396)
(http://i492.photobucket.com/albums/rr290/theraptorsrage/the-90s-90s-pokemon-demotivational-.jpg)
Quote from: Zangief Veteran on April 21, 2011, 11:28:04 AM
I'll always remember Nintendo for who they were and not what they are today. They made my childhood awesome- I feel bad for any kid that didn't get to grow up in 90's. We had the best cartoons and the best games. How can anyone argue?
You always seem to know where to find the truest pictures.
i heard the picture of the new controller is kind of.. well, unofficial.
is that really what the new wii controller is gunna look like??
i suppose i could just be patient and wait until E3 x] surely thats Nintendo's big reveal this year...
Real or not? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgjES1oOTlc&feature=topvideos_gadgets)
Huh, hard to say. It is intriguing, nonetheless.