Nintendo's New Console

but freedom is a different game and is a normal part of how MH games work. Also rob forgot paper mario which is an rpg (sort of) and is awesome. i don't think he mentioned DKR either which was a great game. and GH5 likely the best guitar hero game was the best on the wii out of any console (don't take my word for it though, i'm pretty sure IGN agrees). Do i really need to point at the top playstation titles or top xbox titles and point out how they are ALL the same. don't get me wrong i like FPSes but having them be the top title of the month every month is a little ridiculous and every game that wasn't halo basically wasn't an exclusive title so why does the wii need to have it? If you are a "hardcore gamer" you probably have a PC and two consoles, or 1 console and it isn' the wii. IF you bought the wii with the mindset on a "hardcore gamer" then you made a serious mistake as it was obvious upon release that was not what the system was going to deliver. The complaints about lack of variety seems ridiculous because the variety that is "missing" is abundant as pomegranate everywhere else.

Re-posting.

If you're gonna be honest with yourself, casual gamers are the ones that populate FPS online servers all the time in the PS3 or the 360. The Wii has it's quota of FPS too, but you don't see people bragging about that because graphics are ''important'' to FPS players and the Wii online format kinda sucks.

I don't believe I have ever said any of that. If you can point out where I did, I'd be glad to discuss it.

According to the people on Southperry, ANY GAME, that has EVER made it to ANY OTHER CONSOLE doesn't deserve to be called a "<Nintendo Console> game."

Nintendo has no games. ''To the people on SP''. hooray for generalizing

Re-posting.

If you're gonna be honest with yourself, casual gamers are the ones that populate FPS online servers all the time in the PS3 or the 360. The Wii has it's quota of FPS too, but you don't see people bragging about that because graphics are ''important'' to FPS players and the Wii online format kinda sucks.

An important thing to point out here is that these same casual gamers are the ones who consider themselves "hardcore" and generally think they are better than average at most games, and FPSes especially, when they are in fact, trash. Hardcore is a mindset, pro is a skill level. Let's not confuse the two. And seriously my point here is it was clear what the system was going to deliver from the start. People with a "hardcore" mindset who bought it and expected something different than what they got didn't do their homework and it is their fault. Just because you beat them like casualpapayas while they bash you with incessant profanity in their 12 year old voices doesn't mean they don't consider themselves "hardcore." In reality, it's a pretty strong indicator that they do.

Also that was only like 1/4th of my point.

According to the people on Southperry, ANY GAME, that has EVER made it to ANY OTHER CONSOLE doesn't deserve to be called a "<Nintendo Console> game."

It has nothing to do with which console it was ported to. If it's not exclusive to that console then it's not worthy of being mentioned as one of its gems. Especially considering Okami was done better on the PS2.

Re-posting.

If you're gonna be honest with yourself, casual gamers are the ones that populate FPS online servers all the time in the PS3 or the 360. The Wii has it's quota of FPS too, but you don't see people bragging about that because graphics are ''important'' to FPS players and the Wii online format kinda sucks.





Nintendo has no games. ''To the people on SP''. hooray for generalizing

I see it's obvious you missed certain other thread, so I'm just going to ignore you.


At least Sarah just pretty much restated the whole idea behind what I said.

Nintendo has no games. ''To the people on SP''. hooray for generalizing

If you think this is generalizing; look at all of erebus's posts ITT. I still did him more credit than this in my responses. What's the point of saying this? I know it is easy to provoke shikage into reacting, but this topic is actually an interesting one.

If you think this is generalizing; look at all of erebus's posts ITT. I still did him more credit than this in my responses. What's the point of saying this? I know it is easy to provoke shikage into reacting, but this topic is actually an interesting one.

Not like you should bring up names when trying to make a point across anyways. It's dumb. Just focus on the topic.

Nintendo is going "hardcore", I don't see the problem you're all having here. HD graphics, more powerful than the PS3 and 360, NO FRIEND CODES (so I hope for better online)...

You all worry for the tiny little screen?

Also, Wii was great compared to 360 and PS3 as far as offline goes (I'm not saying they aren't)... If you compare them to older systems, well that's you.

Yes nintendo don't expand our horizons please, keep everything the same change is the worst thing ever and you've never had success with it in the past. We know better than you nintendo, furreal. I'm shocked that it seems like the minority that thinks it's good that nintendo is doing what nintendo does... be willing to let them surprise you, jesus. i mean have people really considered the track record of the company here, or how it has changed the face of vidya games time and time again? People are hating on concepts from the company that is known for them. Even better when the concept is mostly speculation by gaming journals. Don't believe me? Nintendo is more close lipped than apple and we get better and more innovative things than the nintendo ipad (don't freak out ihards, i'm not making this about apple, it's just an analogy).

Most of Nintendo's innovation is more annoying than anything. Motion control as a whole was completely pomegranate and not any more fun or boundary-pushing than using a controller. The touch screen, while neat, is not that good a feature. Especially when games like Zelda PH and ST are entirely dependent on its use; that is really fucking obnoxious. I'm okay with it for like... puzzles in games. I will give them credit for the dual screens though because it HAS changed the way handheld games are played. Even the 3D (so far) has been nothing more than a literal eye sore, though it has potential so I can't count it out yet.

In any event, most of what Nintendo does to push boundaries is commendable in theory but just doesn't work well in practice. When Nintendo has a recent history of UNCOMFORTABLE GAMING what is there to look forward to, really?

games not intended to use it, don't benefit from having it. It actually adds a new hardware element to the entire thing where it detects the position of the remote regardless of it being pointed at the screen. personally i never had any issue with the motion control. but yeah making it mandatory instead of optional would have been great when they were trying to make the most affordable and massively appealing system of all time.

wait no it wouldn't.

just noticed i deleted my 7 and didnt change numbers, lol.

Just noticed this, sorry.

Have you seen the ridiculously small number of games that have used this piece of hardware? I'm sure you know why that is. There is so much more they could have done if they had made this a part of every Wii system but they didn't and really didn't even try to because of an outrageous cost attached to it. Developers tend to overlook it because they know it would be a hit to their wallets if they developed games exclusively with motion plus in mind.

It doesn't add a new hardware element, though. It fixes the half-assed one that Nintendo put out in their rush to Christmas. While the wiimote they put out WORKS, it's far from perfect.

Yes nintendo don't expand our horizons please, keep everything the same change is the worst thing ever and you've never had success with it in the past. We know better than you nintendo, furreal. I'm shocked that it seems like the minority that thinks it's good that nintendo is doing what nintendo does... be willing to let them surprise you, jesus. i mean have people really considered the track record of the company here, or how it has changed the face of vidya games time and time again? People are hating on concepts from the company that is known for them. Even better when the concept is mostly speculation by gaming journals. Don't believe me? Nintendo is more close lipped than apple and we get better and more innovative things than the nintendo ipad (don't freak out ihards, i'm not making this about apple, it's just an analogy).

Looking at the little success that the Wii had compared to 360/ps3, I'm just saying they should focus on making better games and upgrading their graphics before thinking about the little "extras". I'm not implying the Wii don't have any good games, but there is not enough of them.

Just noticed this, sorry.

Have you seen the ridiculously small number of games that have used this piece of hardware? I'm sure you know why that is. There is so much more they could have done if they had made this a part of every Wii system but they didn't and really didn't even try to because of an outrageous cost attached to it. Developers tend to overlook it because they know it would be a hit to their wallets if they developed games exclusively with motion plus in mind.

It doesn't add a new hardware element, though. It fixes the half-assed one that Nintendo put out in their rush to Christmas. While the wiimote they put out WORKS, it's far from perfect.

you realized you just basically agreed with what i said right? And no, it adds a new hardware element. it's another sensory point so the wii can do triangulation to determine all details of the wiimots position. and making it standard or mandatory would have been inhibiting to the system and against the goal of the entire wii concept. Which you seem to understand on some level but don't see that that is the point i'm making. In my own experience the wii was not uncomfortable gameplay and the motionplus was meh i liked the concept but i found it to be really limiting to development, developers evidentially agreed. but i don't think you understand how it actually works. it's not an upgrade. it's a completely different system of detection that utilizes an extra point. The only people i met who struggled with the wii controls just didn't play the system that much. i had no problems on what were arguably to two most precise games in the library, namely Metroid Corruption and MH3.

The new system should really open things up for devs. (read: make more conventional development while still allowing a lot of creativity as well as portability) Which are imporatant to devs and the lack of this on the wii scared a lot of devs from really getting into what the wii offered in terms of uniqueness. So that is something to look forward to.

Looking at the little success that the Wii had compared to 360/ps3, I'm just saying they should focus on making better games and upgrading their graphics before thinking about the little "extras". I'm not implying the Wii don't have any good games, but there is not enough of them.

Again, the system reached exactly the goals nintendo had for it. (also outsold both the xbox and ps3) It was a bit of an experiment for the company. I'm not implying the PS3 and Xbox don't have good games, just most of them are the same, or at least the same genre. Also if there truly isn't enough have you played through all of those mentioned ITT already? or even picked up all of the titles? A lot of this opinion seems regurgitated and not borne of experience, save for sarahs complaints on finding it uncomfortable. To which i can only say do it differently you've got a lot of flexibility when it comes to position.

EDIT: note: by portability i mean cross-system development, not ability to be moved around.

This should be interesting since the Wii was utter crap to me. The majority of their games seemed to appeal to 12 year olds and I never like the Wii Mote. The graphics upgrade is a huge plus, but the screen on the controller really off-putting. The standard console controller has been a tried and true piece of hardware, why change it? I just can't see myself, alternating my attention between the tv and the controller.

I really hope this new system opens up the selection of mediocre games. I have never heard someone say "Let's get together and play Super Mario tonight!" Until I hear something along those lines, I can't take Nintendo seriously.

Okami isn't a Wii game. Neither is MH Tri, somewhat, but okay. Tri was the best attempt at a super hardcore game in the Wii.

Granted, Okami was a port. But MH Tri was a game made specifically for the Wii. And your counter argument to that (being that it was the same as a prior game, except with aquatic combat) is absolutely ridiculous. What about games like CoD? Or Halo? Or Final Fantasy? OR ANY SERIES? They're building on what they had before, keeping what works, and adding stuff to make it fresh. Most that strayed from that format did not age well (Sonic, Megaman X), and the ones that did made the hell sure that they did it right.

If you can call out and criticize more than 2 games in a list of 2 dozen, maybe I'll take that opinion seriously.

When I was posting earlier, I wasn't reflecting it based off of which genre I prefer or like more. Just overall. Actually, I'm going to be honest and say that I do hate games like Mario Party or platform games. I meant looking at it as a 'whole'.

Most of Nintendo's games seems to appeal to a smaller variety when it comes to the audience. Kids and what else? People that needs to get into shape? Yeah. Actually, video games have gone pretty downhill (imo), PC games are still decent though.

Yeah, I admitted that the list of good games on the Wii isn't expansive. The library as a whole is crap, but you can't ignore that there are some gems in there. And unless your counting Mario, DK, and Kirby as "Kids" games, than that's just the problem I outlined before. People automatically dismiss the Wii because of those preconceptions. Those "Kids" games were the classics of the 90s. And if you're talking about stuff like Wii Fit (+), Wii Play, Wii Sports (resort), and maybe Animal Crossing that's 6 games out of the meant for the casual audience while you still have SSBB, both Galaxy games, DKC, Kirby, Metroid Prime 3, NSMB are 7 games that counter them. Sure their all platformers (which you dislike) but they're still good.

Yeah, I agree that video games have been diving downwards in terms of good quality games. But with the production costs of games these days, how can you blame them? They don't really have room to innovate unless they want to take a huge economical risk. What the industry needs is something seriously original and universally hailed again. None of that FPS crap, less rehashed game mechanics, etc. I mean the freshest game I've played that I remember was The World Ends With You. And you know what happened to that potential series? It was shelved because Squeenix was too afraid to innovate.

Granted, Okami was a port. But MH Tri was a game made specifically for the Wii. And your counter argument to that (being that it was the same as a prior game, except with aquatic combat) is absolutely ridiculous. What about games like CoD? Or Halo? Or Final Fantasy? OR ANY SERIES? They're building on what they had before, keeping what works, and adding stuff to make it fresh. Most that strayed from that format did not age well (Sonic, Megaman X), and the ones that did made the hell sure that they did it right.

If you can call out and criticize more than 2 games in a list of 2 dozen, maybe I'll take that opinion seriously.

I put MHTri as an example because Capcom didn't really do a lot of work on it as a whole. I mean, be honest, what do you get if you mash up MH2ndG and MHP3? Tri without the underwater battles ;_; Aside from that, I've already stated that Tri on the Wii is one of the best moves I've seen done in this last gen of consoles.

As far as other games go, no I haven't played the Wii extensively apart from a casual SSBB, Wii Sports or Mario Kart. Nintendo consoles aren't that popular over here.

The sad reality is that the Wii was a top notch piece of hardware back when it came out, and a bomb seller, but that's hardly the truth anymore.

By the way, a new TWEWY is on the making FYI.

By the way, a new TWEWY is on the making FYI.

Source? This is news to me. All I remember was that the director WANTED to make a new one if he could.

Source? This is news to me. All I remember was that the director WANTED to make a new one if he could.

Way to ignore my response T_T

No real confirmation, but we should wait until the E3, http://www.gonintendo.com/viewstory.php?id=156326

Oh, I didn't respond, because I really had nothing to argue against that. Also, awesome if it turns out to be true.

I really hope this new system opens up the selection of mediocre games. I have never heard someone say "Let's get together and play Super Mario tonight!" Until I hear something along those lines, I can't take Nintendo seriously.

Maybe because Super Mario doesn't have multiplayer? (Except for NSMBW and some insignificant things on other ones)

Also, the "Let's get together" part sounds way too casual. That's what you usually do when playing party games and such.

For me, Nintendo has been the one that has given some of the best games, you can be sure that they haven't been much but it's better quality than quantity.

Also why do people keep generalizing that Nintendo is unable to bring in good third party games? The Wii may suck a ton of donkey plantain but the DS has the best NATIVE gaming library for this gen. Nintendo has no problem with getting good games to be made it's just that Wii is pretty terrible and no one wants to develop for it because it's so casual.

Honestly if no one has said it before there is no such thing as casual or hardcore gamers everyone who plays games is a gamer silly arguments. Also a lot of good 3rd party wii games are out there you just have to look a bit you know.