WIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII!

[Llyranor]

I'm not all over the price. Getting the console with some controllers is going to add up. I can't necessarily say it's a bad move from Nintendo. The consoles will sell out anyway initially. I think allowing for more eventual price drops could make for more sales in the long run. Of course, this applies to the other consoles as well.

 

Either way, I'm not planning on getting one until the titles that fully exploit the new control scheme get made. So far, the titles I'm anticipating the most are Fire Emblem (make one for DS, morans) and Super Smash Brothers Brawl, which don't really draw from the Wiimote's potential.

 

Ooh, I want a survival horror game where they give you a gun in one hand and a flashlight in the other. Or let me independantly dual-wield two guns at once, or two swords. Or a gun and a sword, letting me carry out a duel with a swordwielding boss while I'm also shooting cronies that are trying to ambush me. Basically, I want experiences that the traditional control scheme simply can't provide.

 

In the meantime, the DS is getting awesome titles, so I'm in no rush to go back to the console realm.

[kumquatq3]

Both the Xbox 360 and the Playstation 3 are more expensive. On the other hand, they won't feel like dinosaurs in two years time (hopefully). Is it worth the extra $$$? Who knows.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I was going to pre-order Wii (hell, I have two games pre-ordered), but for $250, I'm most definatly going to wait and see how things go. I'll just apply pre-orders to different games. Especially with Zelda and a new 2D Mario hitting the 'cube and NWN2 and Medival War 2 coming to the PC, I'll be busy anyways.

Edited September 15, 2006 by kumquatq3

[Volourn]

"I feel like boycotting Sony (and probably Nintendo) for always treating Europe like second rate citizens. I could take a few weeks of delays (localization problems) but delaying the European release until March?! **** you Sony."

 

*cough* Gothic 3 *cough*

[Nick_i_am]

I'm not all over the price. Getting the console with some controllers is going to add up. I can't necessarily say it's a bad move from Nintendo. The consoles will sell out anyway initially. I think allowing for more eventual price drops could make for more sales in the long run. Of course, this applies to the other consoles as well.

 

Either way, I'm not planning on getting one until the titles that fully exploit the new control scheme get made. So far, the titles I'm anticipating the most are Fire Emblem (make one for DS, morans) and Super Smash Brothers Brawl, which don't really draw from the Wiimote's potential.

 

Ooh, I want a survival horror game where they give you a gun in one hand and a flashlight in the other. Or let me independantly dual-wield two guns at once, or two swords. Or a gun and a sword, letting me carry out a duel with a swordwielding boss while I'm also shooting cronies that are trying to ambush me. Basically, I want experiences that the traditional control scheme simply can't provide.

 

In the meantime, the DS is getting awesome titles, so I'm in no rush to go back to the console realm.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I agree.

[Arkan]

"I feel like boycotting Sony (and probably Nintendo) for always treating Europe like second rate citizens. I could take a few weeks of delays (localization problems) but delaying the European release until March?! **** you Sony."

 

*cough* Gothic 3 *cough*

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Volowned.

[mkreku]

Nope, I'm just happy to see Aspyr treat you second rate citizens the way you should be treated )

[Hell Kitty]

Wii Sports

 

Oh that's just not right.

 

Edit: Although I suppose it would make for interesting use of the controller.

 

The main reason most people I know will buy a PS3 is MGS4, with Final Fantasy a distant second. I tell them that they are idiots, because those games just simply aren't enough to justify $600, especially when Blu-Ray hasn't become a well-established format yet.

 

Whether a single game is worth the price of a particular console is really up to the individual, so telling them they are idiots because they value a particular game more than you is, well, idiotic.

 

I bought a GC just so I could have the sweet, sweet candy that is the Resident Evil remake, everything else was then icing on the cake. Of course it helped that the system was on $50 more than the game.

Edited September 15, 2006 by Hell Kitty

[angshuman]

I'm a bit disappointed. $250 + $40 + $20 = $310. I don't think a new Gamecube revision is worth that price. Sounds like a forced upgrade to all Gamecube owners. Nitendo is now going to make all new games only for the new and shiny Gamecube, so you'll have to buy the new system if you want to play the new games. The system in itself has very little intrinsic value. Of course, things would have looked entirely different had the price point been $199 instead of $310.

 

I think this is something the "it's all about the games, stupid" folks completely miss. The set of games for a new console should provide a significantly improved experience to justify the hardware investment. Looking at the Wii, I don't see any such thing. Nintendo might come up with some amazing new never-before-seen games, but they could probably have created those games for the Gamecube as well. It's a bit of a stretch, but I'll go out on a limb and claim that the same story also holds true for the controllers.

 

I'm probably going to pick up a 360 when the next price cut hits. You can get a 20GB system with wireless controllers for $399, and I suspect this will drop to $350 or less within a few months. Much better value for money than the $310 Wii IMO, and the catalogue is looking better and better each day.

[Surreptishus]

Its $250 with one wiimote, one nunchuck, and one game.

[Setzer]

I was planning on getting a Wii at launch but I'm going to hold off for a while. Their launch titles aside from Zelda are pretty pathetic and the main reason I was going to purchase it was for the multi-player but at $60 for each controller there's an additional $180 I would have to spend making this a $400-500 purchase. I would rather put that money towards a PS3 and know I'm getting my money's worth.

 

The Wii is basically an upgraded GameCube and the only thing going for it is the controller, that's the only thing "next gen" about it. Nintendo is selling a $150 system for $250. I know it's still less expensive than the 360 or PS3 but they're still sticking it to the consumer.

[Surreptishus]

I was planning on getting a Wii at launch but I'm going to hold off for a while. Their launch titles aside from Zelda are pretty pathetic and the main reason I was going to purchase it was for the multi-player but at $60 for each controller there's an additional $180 I would have to spend making this a $400-500 purchase. I would rather put that money towards a PS3 and know I'm getting my money's worth.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

How do you know that for sure?

[Setzer]

I'm probably going to pick up a 360 when the next price cut hits. You can get a 20GB system with wireless controllers for $399, and I suspect this will drop to $350 or less within a few months. Much better value for money than the $310 Wii IMO, and the catalogue is looking better and better each day.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I may do this as well but right now I have no interest in purchasing a console to play games I can already play on my PC. Part of the reason, for me anyways, in owning a game console is so I can play games that I normally can't get for my PC(i.e. Metal Gear, Final Fantasy, Zelda, etc.). With Nintendo and Sony I know I'm getting a good selection of games from Japan but you won't get that on an Xbox.

[angshuman]

Its $250 with one wiimote, one nunchuck, and one game.

Aah... my bad, I thought the base price included only the classic controller. So, it's $250 for the Wii vs. $350 (assuming drop) for the 360. Or, if you want 2 sets of controllers (a typical scenario), it's $310 for the Wii vs. $390 for the 360. I'd still pick the 360. <_<

[Setzer]

I was planning on getting a Wii at launch but I'm going to hold off for a while. Their launch titles aside from Zelda are pretty pathetic and the main reason I was going to purchase it was for the multi-player but at $60 for each controller there's an additional $180 I would have to spend making this a $400-500 purchase. I would rather put that money towards a PS3 and know I'm getting my money's worth.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

How do you know that for sure?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

For one, Sony has dominated the video game market for the past 10 years. Why? Because they've been the console with the biggest and best game selection. I know thats going to continue with the PS3. Plus, I'm a sucker for Square-Enix games and I'm only going to find their big name titles on the PS3. Hardware wise I'm truly getting a "next gen" console. Yah, Blue Ray hasn't established itself yet but go out and buy a stand alone BR player and you're going to pay around $1000 or more. For $600 I'm getting a game console and a blue ray player all in one. To me, that's getting your moneys worth.

[Surreptishus]

Ahh, ok so I guess its the games, which is fair enough. I wasn't challenging your assumption I just wanted your opinion.

 

I let the last generation of consoles pass me by so I dont really have any affinity for a particular developer.

This time round hype and TV tells me I must buy a new console but nothing is standing out for me. If the Wii was cheaper I'd go for that. If Blu-Ray was a sure thing I'd go for a PS3. If the Xbox 360 had more that one exclusive game that i might like I would go for that.

Edited September 15, 2006 by Surreptishus

[Llyranor]

Plus, I'm a sucker for Square-Enix games and I'm only going to find their big name titles on the PS3.

You don't know that for sure. Remember when the next FF was 'sure' to be on N64? They even made a tech demo for it. Hey, maybe Nintendo was too arrogant, and that led to its relative downfall.

 

Sony isn't being arrogant at all right now.

 

All you're "guaranteed" right now is FFXIII and its spin-off. Wii is already guaranteed a DQ and FFCC title. Yes, spin-offs, but you don't get DQ spin-offs being developed by the main DQ team everyday. It can go both ways. Heck, FFXIII might not even end up exclusive. Maybe the 360 will get some love too.

 

Case in point, PSP vs DS. Squenix' support for the DS is crapping all over their PSP support. They go where the money is. There is no free ride this gen.

[alanschu]

Agreeing with France here.

 

I see no reason why Square-Enix would remain exclusive if they don't feel it is in their best interests.

[Setzer]

Plus, I'm a sucker for Square-Enix games and I'm only going to find their big name titles on the PS3.

You don't know that for sure. Remember when the next FF was 'sure' to be on N64? They even made a tech demo for it. Hey, maybe Nintendo was too arrogant, and that led to its relative downfall.

 

Sony isn't being arrogant at all right now.

 

All you're "guaranteed" right now is FFXIII and its spin-off. Wii is already guaranteed a DQ and FFCC title. Yes, spin-offs, but you don't get DQ spin-offs being developed by the main DQ team everyday. It can go both ways. Heck, FFXIII might not even end up exclusive. Maybe the 360 will get some love too.

 

Case in point, PSP vs DS. Squenix' support for the DS is crapping all over their PSP support. They go where the money is. There is no free ride this gen.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Well the issue Square had with Nintendo back in '95 was Nintendo's decision to stick with using cartridges for the N64. It was costly and didn't provide Square with the room to make the game they wanted to. Here came Sony with it's CD based console and Square was all over it. If the medium is still a factor for Square then they're not going to have an issue with the PS3 as Blue Ray can hold roughly 5-6x more than a DVD. Plus if you factor in the fact Sony saved Square's ass a few years ago from bankruptcy then I don't see them parting ties with Sony any time soon. Sure, you're going to see some games and re-releases on other systems like the DS and 360 but the major titles like Final Fantasy will still be on the PS3.

[greylord]

lol not enuf gigaflops mirite?

Yes, that is correct. Why aren't you still using that old 286? Not enough GFLOPS.

 

Nintendo survives by providing great gameplay experiences. That still doesn't excuse a 729 MHz processor with 64 MB of 243 MHz RAM and a 243 MHz GPU with 24 MB of 486 MHz RAM (exactly the same as the Gamecube, except Nintendo claims it is 1.5x faster..) for $250. Oh, I forget. You also get a defunct DVD-player for that price, plus a gimmicky controller that noone knows how it works in reality. I really hope the nunchuck (or whatever it's called) is fantastic.

 

Both the Xbox 360 and the Playstation 3 are more expensive. On the other hand, they won't feel like dinosaurs in two years time (hopefully). Is it worth the extra $$$? Who knows.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Well, Nintendo didn't win the console race between it and sega by always having the latest and greatest. There was a point when Sega had a system that was 4 times as good as Nintendo, and Nintendo STILL won.

 

The difference on the Nintendo and Xbox war however, is that the Xbox can lose millions, and even Billions of dollars, and Nintendo will never win...why???

 

Because Xbox is put out by MS, and up until about a year ago was artificially supported by MS...otherwise it would have been defunct in the first year or two.

 

The reasoning why Nintendo might do well deals with Japanese gamers, and those in the US with the same mindset. Many who use Xboxes might not even be able to comprehend that mindset, and of course, many Japanese gamers might not be able to comprehend the mindset of one who is an Xbox gamer.

 

However, in the US one of the big things is the ability to play the past games and their handheld games on a TV. FF3 updated on TV...hell yes. Forget that 3.5 inch (or whatever size it is) screen. That's why I got a GC/GC player, and if I get a Wiiiiii, that's why I'll probably get it as well for the DS games (if they have that hookup). Many Nintendo gamers think of graphics second, and gameplay first. If it's a game they want, then as long as it's somewhat eyepleasing...it doesn't matter.

 

Of course their is also a more favorable view towards what some would call railroading, and turnbased games in Japanese RPGs as opposed to the Western slant of more open ended and action RPGs in the West.

 

Japanese also tend to try more quirky and innovative items, which has been exemplified by the DS, and now the Wiii, as well as many of their games (many of course which don't come to the US...for some reason I don't think a game where you play how to make different types of tea and sell it really appeals to US gamers. Perhaps they are wrong though, katamari DID do rather well here.

 

Sony also has this under control and under their belt and do great control for their Japanese and US portions. I think Nintendo hasn't handled their US portion for the console market as well as Sony. Part of this is that they simply don't release many of the games made for the Nintendo systems in the US, keeping them in Japan since they believe the appeal for those games wouldn't transfer well to the US.

 

Sony does the same thing, but not quite as much (which results in some awesome games for their consoles...in my opinion of course).

 

There is always the Xbox/PC idea that I have against the XBox I suppose as I stated earlier, any good games for those systems will eventually come out on PC, but there's even more. Simply put, the Xbox doesn't really come out with enough games that I'd want to play compared to a system like...Sony's consoles.

 

Nintendo doesn't either...but when you toss in their library of GBA games, and handheld games (and now with the backwards compatibility and hopefully options to get all their other older games) their library opens up extensively.

 

Also Sony has been concentrated on Backwards compatibility, which means I pay $600 dollars for their system, and I can STILL play ALL my old games (though Xbox360 has a lot of backwards compatibility now, it still doesn't have it for all their games...plus I didn't get any Xbox games anyways so it does me no good) which increases my library of their games...greatly.

 

With Nintendo doing the same for the Wiii, well, with the GBA and DS thrown in, that means I also will have an extensive library of games for that system as well the moment it comes out if I decide to buy it.

 

Just some reasons why it's not all about the abilities of a system, but more how one utilizes the abilities of a system that appeal to nintendo and Sony gamers.

[karka]

In Turkey it will cost 800ytl(about $550). Yes, this is official price. What can i say? It is ridiculous!

 

I won't buy it until a major price drop. Paying $550 for a machine which is not powerful than my old Xbox is not logical. I know. It's an innovative machine. But not innovative enough for that price.

 

BTW. Here are two screens of Far Cry from both Wii and Xbox(not 360) versions. Clearly, Xbox version looks better.

 

wii:

http://media.wii.ign.com/media/846/846381/img_3931998.html

 

xbox:

http://media.xbox.ign.com/media/621/621324/img_3084675.html

http://media.xbox.ign.com/media/621/621324/img_3061367.html

Edited September 23, 2006 by karka

[Nartwak]

Holy crap that's a ridiculous price.

[Haitoku]

Meh...

 

Paying $50 for Gamecube so I can play the new Zelda game (and any other GC gems I missed) seems far more reasonable

to me

.

[Pop]

"(and any other GC gems I missed)"

 

lol!

[Judge Hades]

Wow, Wii looks pretty craptastic there compared to the X box.

[Haitoku]

Wow, Wii looks pretty craptastic there compared to the X box.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You should compare Far Cry shots... Xbox definitely looks better.

Edited September 23, 2006 by Haitoku