Nintendo Wii

[Arek the Absolute]

So I played the Prime Demo at Gamestop today.

What the fuck is wrong with Nintendo? The demo starts right at the god damn beginning where the story JUST STARTS, so it took FOREVER to finally get some action going.

They should know better than to release demos of a game and have it start in the beginning instead of putting it where there is a fight or something to show you how exactly the gameplay is.

[I-n-j-i-n]

???

I (like a large percentage of buyers on release day) am gonna have to send my Wii away to be fixed or more likely, replaced. Dunno if it's been talked about in this forum alot or at all, but it's something to do with the ridiculously high temperature the Wii gets to, and how it fries the GPU. I only noticed it when I played Mario Strikers, and there was a BIG glitch in the image display. Didn't read much into it yet.... but I know I've got to send it away to be fixed. Anyone else have this problem? Was it solved?

MP3's so close too.... I'd better be able to play through it without annoying visuals or I'll be pissed. Then I'll send it away after I beat it and school starts.

This is what I don't get. When the 360 has that 5 percentile of users replacing their systems, it's a dire sin of the company. When it's Nintendo doing it, it's a matter of course. And this happened with the old Xbox, the early Playstations and Playstation 2. Disc based systems run hot and these things happen. I'm just glad the warranties cover most of these systems nowadays unlike in the years past where replacements weren't guaranteed like it is now.

I agree with KakTheInfected in that the fans are not too effective with the system. I had the vague feeling that the system's svelte design could impede the functionality a bit and it happened to come true. I just hope the new versions of the consoles don't have more unforeseen problems. That basically includes all the three systems right now. I hear they need to fix the wireless aspects of the PS3 and that the system may have critical flaws that may be hampering early generation machines from performing at 100%.

[SilverStar]

I think one of the big problems with the design of the Wii, is that full power use is like, 45 watts, and standby/WiiConnect24 is 44 watts. It uses full drain, minus the fans, when idle, instead of stepping down the processor into a low drain mode.

[AarowSwift]

So I played the Prime Demo at Gamestop today.

What the fuck is wrong with Nintendo? The demo starts right at the god damn beginning where the story JUST STARTS, so it took FOREVER to finally get some action going.

They should know better than to release demos of a game and have it start in the beginning instead of putting it where there is a fight or something to show you how exactly the gameplay is.

As far as I've heard, those aren't demos. They're the full game.

[AarowSwift]

DMC4 is already slated for the 360.

Money is just ephemeral. If you have a job that is. Maybe it's because I see video game systems as investments and not toys. They almost always last a good 10 years before going into the closet.

I know $600 is a lot, but is it really? For a Bluray drive that Sony is losing money in such an early generation machine, and you can spend just as much with a Wii or 360 and a few accessories and a few games and it'd be just as high. I remember spending at least $1000 on Gameboy Advance and a lot of its games. Once you spend them, it's hard to gauge how much it really costs.

Ah, I guess I wasn't paying attention on DMC4. Unfortunately, I can't name more than a small handful of games on the Xbox and Xbox360 combined that I'm even interested in. For me, it'd be an even poorer investment than a PS3 at full price.

As for $600 really being a lot? Yes, yes it is. What I spend on any game system is a lot, but asking me to shell out that much up front is just too much to ask. Everyone needs a line they don't cross or we get royally screwed. After all, if $600 isn't too much, then next time they'll see if they can push it to $800, after all, what's $200 more? How about $1000 next time? Hey, these mooks will pay even that, let's see how far we can ride this horse...

The argument that the bleeding edge tech makes it worth it doesn't fly with me. Sure, the raw power of the PS3 is impressive, but know what? If I just wait a few years the next console from Nintendo will probably be that powerful, or close enough, and it'll cost under $300 more than likely. A little patience will get you equivalent quality at a much lower price tag. I already got burned on the DVD player. I was a moderately early adopter of that. I paid $200 for one the size of an older VCR. Shortly after you could pick them up for much, much, much, less at a quarter the size and weight. Let the people who own million dollar homes and private jets support the bleeding edge, I'll just wait until it's actually worth my own money.

The way I see it, the extra polygons and fancy shaders are not worth the $350 difference and that's just the raw cost of the console.

I spend too much on the Wii and DS...but at least that's on games.

[SilverStar]

I spend too much on the Wii and DS...but at least that's on games.

QFE.

Big difference between spending $600 to get the hardware, and spending $600 to get the hardware and enough software to keep you entertained for a couple weeks.

I do find it somewhat funny that some of the best games out for both PS3 and X360, are the very games that didn't cost big fists of cash to develop. The ones that are selling some of the best, and making some of the highest profits, are their low-cost arcade titles, while a lot of the big, ten million dollar budget titles are lucky to make back what was spent.

Of course, a lot of those cheap arcade-style titles are also designed to be -fun- to play, and not be pure gloss with a few bangs to get blood pressure up.

[Imagist]

As for $600 really being a lot? Yes, yes it is. What I spend on any game system is a lot, but asking me to shell out that much up front is just too much to ask. Everyone needs a line they don't cross or we get royally screwed. After all, if $600 isn't too much, then next time they'll see if they can push it to $800, after all, what's $200 more? How about $1000 next time? Hey, these mooks will pay even that, let's see how far we can ride this horse...

The argument that the bleeding edge tech makes it worth it doesn't fly with me. Sure, the raw power of the PS3 is impressive, but know what? If I just wait a few years the next console from Nintendo will probably be that powerful, or close enough, and it'll cost under $300 more than likely. A little patience will get you equivalent quality at a much lower price tag. I already got burned on the DVD player. I was a moderately early adopter of that. I paid $200 for one the size of an older VCR. Shortly after you could pick them up for much, much, much, less at a quarter the size and weight. Let the people who own million dollar homes and private jets support the bleeding edge, I'll just wait until it's actually worth my own money.

Not that I'm disagreeing with the idea that the PS3 is simply a ridiculous investment, but your argument works against you. In the same vein as "what's $200 more?" you could very well find yourself in a trap of "what's a few more years?" when waiting for new technology to become old. I know that's what happened to me with the PS2: I kept thinking I'd wait another year or two for a price drop, only to then think I could wait for another, only to then find the PS3 coming out and think I'll just wait a few years for that to be cheaper so I can play PS2 games and PS3 games. When does it end?

The modern technology market is tricky. It's difficult to strike a balance between the two mindsets, and one way or another you're likely to find yourself blowing more money than you should or missing out entirely.

[AarowSwift]

Not that I'm disagreeing with the idea that the PS3 is simply a ridiculous investment, but your argument works against you. In the same vein as "what's $200 more?" you could very well find yourself in a trap of "what's a few more years?" when waiting for new technology to become old. I know that's what happened to me with the PS2: I kept thinking I'd wait another year or two for a price drop, only to then think I could wait for another, only to then find the PS3 coming out and think I'll just wait a few years for that to be cheaper so I can play PS2 games and PS3 games. When does it end?

The modern technology market is tricky. It's difficult to strike a balance between the two mindsets, and one way or another you're likely to find yourself blowing more money than you should or missing out entirely.

But you see, that's where the "line in the sand" comes in. I'm not waiting to try and squeeze every nickel I can out of a product, I simply have a price point limit. I'll buy as soon as I can find the product at, or really close, to my price point. If it NEVER reaches my price point, then I never buy. I'm hardly missing out since I already own a console that has met met my price point and is supplying me with plenty of games. There are lots of games I have missed out on because of cost, but they were forgotten about quickly enough since I was busy playing the games that weren't isolated from me by a wall of money.

[Imagist]

But you see, that's where the "line in the sand" comes in. I'm not waiting to try and squeeze every nickel I can out of a product, I simply have a price point limit. I'll buy as soon as I can find the product at, or really close, to my price point. If it NEVER reaches my price point, then I never buy. I'm hardly missing out since I already own a console that has met met my price point and is supplying me with plenty of games. There are lots of games I have missed out on because of cost, but they were forgotten about quickly enough since I was busy playing the games that weren't isolated from me by a wall of money.

I only said that your logic could be turned around and that finding the balance was difficult, not that it was impossible or that you and others haven't done so.

[AarowSwift]

I only said that your logic could be turned around and that finding the balance was difficult, not that it was impossible or that you and others haven't done so.

That's fine. I was just elaborating on my own philosophy.

[Critical Hit]

???

I (like a large percentage of buyers on release day) am gonna have to send my Wii away to be fixed or more likely, replaced. Dunno if it's been talked about in this forum alot or at all, but it's something to do with the ridiculously high temperature the Wii gets to, and how it fries the GPU. I only noticed it when I played Mario Strikers, and there was a BIG glitch in the image display. Didn't read much into it yet.... but I know I've got to send it away to be fixed. Anyone else have this problem? Was it solved?

MP3's so close too.... I'd better be able to play through it without annoying visuals or I'll be pissed. Then I'll send it away after I beat it and school starts.

When I heard about this problem among wii users, I just stopped letting mine be in "standby" mode w/wii connect 24 (although I hadn't been experiencing issues prior to that either). From what I understand, not all wii's are susceptible, but I'm not taking any chances, especially if my VC games get deleted in the process of getting it fixed or replaced. I've heard that all you have to do is re-download them, but I'm not 100% sure. Let us fellow wii owners know if anything more develops...

[supremespleen]

I called Nintendo about the Wii getting hot and the lady said it was nothing.

[Rambo]

the lady said it was nothing

the lady said it was nothing

the lady said it was nothing

hmm.....

EDIT: But seriously...

When I heard about this problem among wii users, I just stopped letting mine be in "standby" mode w/wii connect 24 (although I hadn't been experiencing issues prior to that either). From what I understand, not all wii's are susceptible, but I'm not taking any chances, especially if my VC games get deleted in the process of getting it fixed or replaced. I've heard that all you have to do is re-download them, but I'm not 100% sure. Let us fellow wii owners know if anything more develops...

have you played Mario strikers on your console? If you haven't and know someone who has it, you should test it out (perform a super strike) and see if the most common glitch is there. I'm kinda glad I'm sending mine in though... better now than potentially after my warranty is up.

[SilverStar]

When I heard about this problem among wii users, I just stopped letting mine be in "standby" mode w/wii connect 24 (although I hadn't been experiencing issues prior to that either). From what I understand, not all wii's are susceptible, but I'm not taking any chances, especially if my VC games get deleted in the process of getting it fixed or replaced. I've heard that all you have to do is re-download them, but I'm not 100% sure. Let us fellow wii owners know if anything more develops...

If you send it in to Nintendo and let them do the work, you'll get to keep all your saves and whatnot, since they can transfer it all over.

If you opt to let them just send you a replacement unit and exchange that way, which is faster, you lose all your VC stuff, because it's tied to the hardware exclusively.

[I-n-j-i-n]

Ah, I guess I wasn't paying attention on DMC4. Unfortunately, I can't name more than a small handful of games on the Xbox and Xbox360 combined that I'm even interested in. For me, it'd be an even poorer investment than a PS3 at full price.

I guess that only depends on the outlook as I said before, basically all systems, even the PC looks to be having a good 2008 or even 2009. 2008 should be a pretty epic year for ALL consoles really. Also, it's pretty funny how modern classics like Ninja Gaiden, God of War, basically most Naughty Dog games and other exclusives are being ignored in discussions like these. Maybe it's because I'm looking it as a general gaming enthusiast and completionist when it comes down to the hobby.

As for $600 really being a lot? Yes, yes it is. What I spend on any game system is a lot, but asking me to shell out that much up front is just too much to ask. Everyone needs a line they don't cross or we get royally screwed. After all, if $600 isn't too much, then next time they'll see if they can push it to $800, after all, what's $200 more? How about $1000 next time? Hey, these mooks will pay even that, let's see how far we can ride this horse...

It depends on whether you demand the multimedia functionality of the PS3. It is 'worth' it from the technology in there. Whether you are looking for it or not is the deciding point. It's like paying for a premium car. Yes, it may cost prohibitively expensive, but the sum of the parts may actually be worth the product. I'm not really saying that it should be worth a buy to everyone. I'm saying that the product's worth reflects the glut of technology it has. In hard math, it does add up. To the consumers and to the press, it may not. That is a semi-connected issue there.

I doubt the price will rise to that levels even if the PS3 sold a lot. Sony willingly took a huge plunge with the wireless connectivity, Bluray, PS2/PSOne playback, HD connectivity (HDMI no less, which is a premium in itself), 1080p output and a pretty large harddrive for a gaming console. They just went pretty overboard with the technology a bit. I seriously doubt the next version will get higher if it costs so much money for them to even make and it makes it detrimental to the sales. There is always a bounceback with these. Nintendo couldn't ride the NES/SNES wave forever and neither did Sony. The pricing just won't keep going up I believe.

The argument that the bleeding edge tech makes it worth it doesn't fly with me. Sure, the raw power of the PS3 is impressive, but know what? If I just wait a few years the next console from Nintendo will probably be that powerful, or close enough, and it'll cost under $300 more than likely. A little patience will get you equivalent quality at a much lower price tag. I already got burned on the DVD player. I was a moderately early adopter of that. I paid $200 for one the size of an older VCR. Shortly after you could pick them up for much, much, much, less at a quarter the size and weight. Let the people who own million dollar homes and private jets support the bleeding edge, I'll just wait until it's actually worth my own money.

For the price of a new technology involved, the PS3 and 360 actually aren't all that pricey at all. You can splurge $1500+ on a gaming PC to get the equivalent graphical power of those two systems and yet we're getting that console experience for much less no the dollar. That is the reason why those companies are losing money. They are not making profit while doing so. They are actually trying to offer the gamers a bit of a service with the console production that COSTS money for them and it doesn't go straight to the profits. Otherwise, the PS3 would have easily cost around $1000 and 360 should've cost around $600. The crux of it all really is 'how much it's worth for me' like you said. But monetarily speaking, in terms of the technology alone. Yes it does fly well in that they're pushing these new technologies at a relative bargain to the gamer.

The way I see it, the extra polygons and fancy shaders are not worth the $350 difference and that's just the raw cost of the console.

The PS3 costs $500 now. Wii is $250. That's $250 you mean. Also, for the visual experience, I think it's worth it. I find it again, a bit misleading of people to think it's only about the visuals. It just happens that many developers are still opting for the biggest types of games, the biggest epics, the most visually alluring games and that model still works today. And again, both PS3 and 360 has their lion share of relatively humble offerings with their downloadable games which are basically 100% about the gameplay.

[Critical Hit]

hmm.....

EDIT: But seriously...

have you played Mario strikers on your console? If you haven't and know someone who has it, you should test it out (perform a super strike) and see if the most common glitch is there. I'm kinda glad I'm sending mine in though... better now than potentially after my warranty is up.

I haven't played (or personally know anyone....I think....) Strikers on my console, but when RE4:Wii Edition came out a bunch of people started reporting problems with their wii's on the gamefaqs board. At first I thought it was just an issue with that game specifically, but further research showed that it had been going on for a while, but RE4 for one reason or another pushed a lot of systems over the hump to showing evidence of a messed up GPU (or whatever the problem really is).

At any rate, to answer your question, I have played RE4 quite a bit on my own console with no issues so far, but not SM Strikers. I assume that some graphics just need more juice so to speak than others and so some games are more likely to be affected than others.

If you send it in to Nintendo and let them do the work, you'll get to keep all your saves and whatnot, since they can transfer it all over.

If you opt to let them just send you a replacement unit and exchange that way, which is faster, you lose all your VC stuff, because it's tied to the hardware exclusively.

Excellent. Great to know...as for me, I'm still going to keep wii connect 24 off (or just power the console down all the way) just to be safe, I suppose, as that's what's most often believed to be the main culprit.

[KakTheInfected]

The PS3 costs $500 now. Wii is $250. That's $250 you mean. Also, for the visual experience, I think it's worth it. I find it again, a bit misleading of people to think it's only about the visuals. It just happens that many developers are still opting for the biggest types of games, the

biggest epics, the most visually alluring games and that model still works today. And again, both PS3 and 360 has their lion share of relatively humble offerings with their downloadable games which are basically 100% about the gameplay.

You mean, the 60GB model costs $500. The new model still costs $600 and apparently, Sony is considering doing this again when they're ready to release another hard drive model in the US. But putting that aside, you simply cannot deny the fact that if you buy a PS3, you're spending money on a system with no games that are worth it yet and since it's a game console...that's an extremely important point. And if price doesn't matter when it comes to visuals, then complaining about PC cost goes right out the window.

You can talk about big, epic games all you like, but so far, the ones that have been released on PS3 have been crap (check out Lair or Heavenly Sword reviews from EGM and IGN respectively). Both suffer from the same problem: too much focus on story, graphics and sound but broken or repetitive gameplay with no reason to play again after beating it. Games that rank 6.0 or 7.0 out of 10 can be good...but not if I'm paying $600 for a console to play them then $60 on the game itself. That's insane.

Nintendo's "gameplay>graphics" thing may be a cheap way to justify not spending a shitload of money on Wii hardware, but so far, the PS3 is proving them right.

[Bahamut]

You mean, the 60GB model costs $500. The new model still costs $600 and apparently, Sony is considering doing this again when they're ready to release another hard drive model in the US. But putting that aside, you simply cannot deny the fact that if you buy a PS3, you're spending money on a system with no games that are worth it yet and since it's a game console...that's an extremely important point. And if price doesn't matter when it comes to visuals, then complaining about PC cost goes right out the window.

You can talk about big, epic games all you like, but so far, the ones that have been released on PS3 have been crap (check out Lair or Heavenly Sword reviews from EGM and IGN respectively). Both suffer from the same problem: too much focus on story, graphics and sound but broken or repetitive gameplay with no reason to play again after beating it. Games that rank 6.0 or 7.0 out of 10 can be good...but not if I'm paying $600 for a console to play them then $60 on the game itself. That's insane.

Nintendo's "gameplay>graphics" thing may be a cheap way to justify not spending a shitload of money on Wii hardware, but so far, the PS3 is proving them right.

Eh, PS3 has games - Ninja Gaiden Sigma comes to mind, and Virtua Fighter 5. I've heard good things about Motorstorm (haven't played my copy yet), and Resistance is solid once you get over the strangeness of the PS3 analog sticks and the sixaxis gimmick in the game. Super Stardust HD is an incredible PSN downloadable as well. For its first year, it definitely tops PS2's offerings in the same period of time.

[SilverStar]

Eh, PS3 has games - Ninja Gaiden Sigma comes to mind, and Virtua Fighter 5. I've heard good things about Motorstorm (haven't played my copy yet), and Resistance is solid once you get over the strangeness of the PS3 analog sticks and the sixaxis gimmick in the game. For its first year, it definitely tops PS2's offerings in the same period of time.

You know, for all the lip service about the reason for Wii not having games being that everyone was caught off guard..

Why is it that PS3 doesn't have a shitton of A+ quality games out for it already? Developers were working in overdrive to get their products ready for it, and you'd think they might want to try to get together to at least validate the costs of all that work. Instead.. things have just slipped.

Lair, Heavenly Sword, Warhawk.. 3 games that were supposed to be system sellers, are being generally panned(Alright, to be fair, Warhawk was panned by PSM, after being reviewed by a smacktalking X360 drone-turned-reviewer for the magazine, oddly enough..).

It just doesn't seem like PS3 is living up to its own potential by any measure, and I'll admit.. this is rather troubling for the industry. It's almost like the developers themselves have hit walls, unable to evolve their own tried and true methods for creating hit games, and just can't even bring themselves to do the same things.

[Bahamut]

You know, for all the lip service about the reason for Wii not having games being that everyone was caught off guard..

Why is it that PS3 doesn't have a shitton of A+ quality games out for it already? Developers were working in overdrive to get their products ready for it, and you'd think they might want to try to get together to at least validate the costs of all that work. Instead.. things have just slipped.

Lair, Heavenly Sword, Warhawk.. 3 games that were supposed to be system sellers, are being generally panned(Alright, to be fair, Warhawk was panned by PSM, after being reviewed by a smacktalking X360 drone-turned-reviewer for the magazine, oddly enough..).

It just doesn't seem like PS3 is living up to its own potential by any measure, and I'll admit.. this is rather troubling for the industry. It's almost like the developers themselves have hit walls, unable to evolve their own tried and true methods for creating hit games, and just can't even bring themselves to do the same things.

I think that it's a problem in the industry period, and not just PS3 developers - a lot of companies try to play it safe so that their financial gains are stable and have a certain rate of controlled growth, in order to pander to their investors as corporations (for the most part). To innovate or to do something different brings risk, and that's something investors like to minimize.

I never thought much of Lair (it didn't look very impressive for the PS3), although I was looking forward to Warhawk and Heavenly Sword a little.

[dsx100]

Not always. Look at Bioshock. Yes it's more expensive for the 360, but the PC version was plagued with the '2 installs only per CD' and the widescreen nonsense. Also, if you're talking about games like Devil May Cry games which will make its way to the 360 and to the PC, those games have never held up well for the PC ports since the developers doing the porting job almost always do a horrendous job with it. Not to mention all the CD copyright technology they cram them up with. You have none of that with the consoles. I don't think the console option is a negative at all. Look at Knights of the Old Republic and it held more than its own on the old Xbox too.

Who are you to tell me my opinion is wrong. Did you read the bold letters In My Opinion. I think its a horrible investment because it doesn't offer anything better than what I can get from my PC already. All the good, unique, or somethimes exclusive games (Ex. Gears of War, Halo, Bioshock, and Knights of the Old Republic) eventually get ported to PC and are often times much better on PC. I'm not talking about games like DMC which is also coming out on PS3. I can play all those 3rd Party games on my PS3 (when I get one). Also don't give me this Madden 08 shit because I'm not a sports game fan, so once agian, it doesn't justify me getting a 360. Agian this is all my opinion. My opinion should not be mistaken for fact. Now if I said "in my opinion Hilter didn't kill the jews" then I why see why that is wrong. I'm just simply saying why I don't think the 360 is worth my money. If you guys think it is, thats completely fine. Go ahead and buy it.

Now that thats out of the way, I also got to demo Metroid Prime 3 at EB Games. From what I saw, it was the full game. I had to start a new game and 2 games where already saved when I started playing. I must say I wasn't disappointed. It really does control well. I think I'm more excited now then I ever was before. The first Boss fight is very cool by the way.

[Imagist]

My opinion can't be wrong because it is not fact.

If you seriously believe this, you're going to run into a lot of trouble in life.

[KakTheInfected]

Eh, PS3 has games - Ninja Gaiden Sigma comes to mind, and Virtua Fighter 5. I've heard good things about Motorstorm (haven't played my copy yet), and Resistance is solid once you get over the strangeness of the PS3 analog sticks and the sixaxis gimmick in the game. Super Stardust HD is an incredible PSN downloadable as well. For its first year, it definitely tops PS2's offerings in the same period of time.

NGS is a remake and VF5 is coming to 360 with online play. I haven't played Motorstorm, but judging from reviews it's not real spectacular. And Resistance may be good (if you can consider FPS with that uses dual analog good), but does that even come close to making the $600 investment worth it?

A $600 console should have AAA games coming out of it's ass, not ones that are merely passable, remakes or not even exclusive. So far, most of what we've seen is very good looking games with shallow gameplay. I'm well aware bigger games are coming (guranteed hits like MGS4) but it seems everytime we hear "x is the game that's going to revitalize the PS3", it ends up being a dissapointment to many, like Lair or Motorstorm.

[dsx100]

If you seriously believe this, you're going to run into a lot of trouble in life.

Well only to a certain extent. Of course their are some times when your opinion is dead wrong like the example I used in my post. Their is also times where it could be wrong like in the way I offend people, affects my job, and other real life situations like that. But when its something simple like, I feel this investment isn't good for me, or I don't like this game because, and etc. then how can that be wrong. Thats what you believe. It like saying being a certain religion is wrong. I should probably edit that so it doesn't come off the wrong way. Sorry about that.

Ok, already edited it.

[The Damned]

I thought there was a rule about bringing up other consoles in console-specific threads (to avoid fanboy fights). And to see a mod doing it... shameful, it is.