Attn: Rocco

Pat · Post by **Pat** » 19 Sep 2006 02:08 pm

mxlegend99 wrote:
Gamma wrote: When did great gameplay ever factor into things? You took this "Wii sucks" angle long before there were any solid details as to launch titles for either the Wii or PS3
Wow. Just wow. You think i'm pro PS3?

No, I think he meant youre anti-Wii without having played it.

Gamma · Post by **Gamma** » 19 Sep 2006 02:13 pm

mx: I didn't call you a fanboy. Perhaps describing you as "happy to support" the PS3 implied that, but it wasn't what I meant. You're just very vocal about how shit you think the Wii is, so I figured the absence of any such comments about the PS3 was indicative of you liking it somewhat. Particularly with the relatively recent pricing news. Let's not revisit the "value" argument as we clearly have very different views on it which can't be reconciled, but your reaction to the prices certainly suggests you're willing to give Sony (a lot) more leeway for some reason. If it's not fancier graphics then I'm stumped.

I don't want to play THPS, GTA or Saints Row with a motion sensitive controller either (I just plain don't want to play them). I don't think the main draw of the Wii controller is what it might do with existing games, though I'm sure there'll be some success stories. Anyone who thinks there isn't going to be a bunch of awful Wii games that totally balls up the controls is kidding themselves, but at the same time there'll be titles that will do something really new and it's foolish to dismiss that. Particularly on the grounds that MS made a motion-sensing controller for the PC and it was (apparently) not all that good for anything. The Wiimote is nowhere near as specific as any existing peripherals, so a steering wheel isn't really an apt comparison.

I'll say this though, I reckon the public reception of the Wii is either going to be very good or very poor. These are exciting times for gamers, fanboys, and gamers who enjoy reading the antics of fanboys alike.

amba · Post by **amba** » 19 Sep 2006 02:14 pm

mxlegend99 wrote:
lestat wrote:I think sony sorta has the right idea with their controller. They still have a traditional controller but the motion sensing if useful is there, but you still have a solid controller to fall back on for input that isn't suited to motion sensing. But the loss of rumble is sucky for the sixaxis, it would be great if we could have it all.
Maybe a third party controller will? Hope so.

Yeah, but devs will still have to put in support for the rumble, unless you're only expecting it in BC games. Like any accessory, they're only supported if they become really popular- and that ain't third party stuff.

mxlegend99 · Post by **mxlegend99** » 19 Sep 2006 02:21 pm

Gamma wrote:You're just very vocal about how shit you think the Wii is, so I figured the absence of any such comments about the PS3 was indicative of you liking it somewhat.

I used it to troll the Wii. I like giving Nintendo fanboys a hardtime. I gave DS a hardtime and i use it as much as i use my PSP.

Gamma wrote: but your reaction to the prices certainly suggests you're willing to give Sony (a lot) more leeway for some reason. If it's not fancier graphics then I'm stumped.

I give them the leeway due to the premium price being for premium hardware. If Nintendo want to give me current-gen hardware, i expect current-gen prices, or atleast reasonably close to it.

Gamma wrote:but at the same time there'll be titles that will do something really new and it's foolish to dismiss that. Particularly on the grounds that MS made a motion-sensing controller for the PC and it was (apparently) not all that good for anything.

Who's dismissing that it won't be great for some things? The Freestyle Pro was a fucking blessing for Motocross Madness 1 & 2. I was very vocal early on that if the Wii had a controller like so... i would play those style games on it. Trouble is... it is more of a niche controller.

Gamma wrote:I'll say this though, I reckon the public reception of the Wii is either going to be very good or very poor. These are exciting times for gamers, fanboys, and gamers who enjoy reading the antics of fanboys alike.

The Wii will be a huge success. No PS3 out this holidays, and a lower price then other hardware. Casuals will look at the price and buy whatever is cheapest.

Pat · Post by **Pat** » 19 Sep 2006 02:21 pm

I think the room for new genres or gameplay styles cannot be understated with the Wii. Hell, look at DS for example (again). 5-10 years ago (or hell, 2 years ago) who could have imagined a game where you play a hotshot lawyer actually being POPULAR?

(And yes, I know theyre on GBA, but the DS version was the breakout title).

Or what about a surgeon in Trauma Centre, if Phoenix Wright is too much a port for you. Point being that it's good to have a variety and a potentially entirely new direction for gaming.

Pat · Post by **Pat** » 19 Sep 2006 02:29 pm

mxlegend99 wrote:If Nintendo want to give me current-gen hardware, i expect current-gen prices, or atleast reasonably close to it.

OK, break it down then. $399.95. Say $79 (approx RRP) of that is due to a pack-in tech demo/full game depending on bias. $320. Gamecube hardware retails for $99-$149, depending on availability. Tech-wise, it's "worth" more than that since it's more advanced than PS2, although not as popular by far.

If we consider PS2 price as a "fair representation" of last-gen hardware prices, at $199 - we have about $120 to make up with next-gen goodness to justify a $320 Wii (minus Wii Sports).

Some of that ~$120 is going to a new controller set and receiver (lets say most of it).

The rest of the cost could be attributed to the slightly beefed up technology - but that's still really based off four year old specs. So some of the cost is probably due to shrinking it down to the smaller and more efficient design.

Is it worth it? That depends entirely on yout opinion of the games and services on offer. As for an unbiased analytical look at the price, it's not too hard to see how it could be costing that much.

Seraph · Post by **Seraph** » 19 Sep 2006 02:41 pm

Just to recap and summarise discussion: people are complaining about how games designed around one control system aren't necessarily going to work in the same way on a different control system?

I always figured that Nintendo was trying a new control system to get new styles of game, or new ways to play existing styles of games, and not necessarily being concerned with making sure that existing games can be played in the exact same way as they were before.

I dunno, it just seems strange, the way some people are carrying on about it. Yes, a controller designed to be completely different to previous controllers, will be different. Yes, a controller designed to inspire new ways of playing games may not be that good for playing old games the old way. What amazing.

Gamma · Post by **Gamma** » 19 Sep 2006 02:56 pm

Exactly.

mxlegend99 wrote:I used it to troll the Wii. I like giving Nintendo fanboys a hardtime.

Fair enough. I think a lot of your posts will make a lot more sense to me now.

Who's dismissing that it won't be great for some things? The Freestyle Pro was a fucking blessing for Motocross Madness 1 & 2. I was very vocal early on that if the Wii had a controller like so... i would play those style games on it. Trouble is... it is more of a niche controller.

I don't know what a Freestyle Pro is, but the general vibe from those who used a Sidewinder seems to be pretty negative. It only seems to get brought up around here in the context of someone using it as ammunition against the control scheme for the Wii, so I got the impression it was a bit of a failed experiment. If there were posts about the Sidewinder being great, I missed them, but I'm not going to say it's good or bad when I haven't used it, hence the 'apparently' in my post. As for the dismissal of the remote, again I think that was implied by constantly harping on about what it can't do rather than discussing some of the possibilities, but with your penchant for ripping into Nintendo fanboys explained, I can see that's not necessarily the case.

mxlegend99 · Post by **mxlegend99** » 19 Sep 2006 05:41 pm

Gamma wrote:I don't know what a Freestyle Pro is, but the general vibe from those who used a Sidewinder seems to be pretty negative. It only seems to get brought up around here in the context of someone using it as ammunition against the control scheme for the Wii, so I got the impression it was a bit of a failed experiment. If there were posts about the Sidewinder being great, I missed them, but I'm not going to say it's good or bad when I haven't used it, hence the 'apparently' in my post. As for the dismissal of the remote, again I think that was implied by constantly harping on about what it can't do rather than discussing some of the possibilities, but with your penchant for ripping into Nintendo fanboys explained, I can see that's not necessarily the case.

It was both great and extremely shit at the same time.

Great in the games it worked in... shit for the rest. Very much like a steering wheel. For Motocross Madness it worked well, your body sorta simulated riding a motorbike when you tilted it etc.

For some Flight Sim games etc. it was great. If you wanted to play a standard game... you had to turn the motion sensor off or you just had NO way of being accurate at all. I personally love the controller, but only for one game.

mxlegend99 · Post by **mxlegend99** » 19 Sep 2006 05:56 pm

Pat wrote:OK, break it down then. $399.95. Say $79 (approx RRP) of that is due to a pack-in tech demo/full game depending on bias. $320. Gamecube hardware retails for $99-$149, depending on availability. Tech-wise, it's "worth" more than that since it's more advanced than PS2, although not as popular by far.

I can get a Gamecube from K-Mart with a full game for $99.

Pat wrote:If we consider PS2 price as a "fair representation" of last-gen hardware prices, at $199 - we have about $120 to make up with next-gen goodness to justify a $320 Wii (minus Wii Sports).

I consider the Xbox a better representation. And it can be picked up for around $150 with 2 games. Plus it is the closest in power to the Wii. (with a higher clocked CPU

)

Pat wrote:Is it worth it? That depends entirely on yout opinion of the games and services on offer. As for an unbiased analytical look at the price, it's not too hard to see how it could be costing that much.

An unbiased look? It's roughly as powerful as an Xbox... only without a Hard Drive built in.

Making a smaller console, adding a motion sensitive controller and wi-fi, and bundling a tech demo has basically added ~$200 to $250 of the price. When a Gamecube with a game can be picked up for $99, and an Xbox with 2 games for $150. Given the Xbox requires a dongle to play DVD's, it's again closest to the Wii.

Pat · Post by **Pat** » 19 Sep 2006 05:58 pm

I think the Wii is capable of better graphics than an XBox.

That said, yeah, XBox and GC prices have really fallen through the floor eh. I think XBox RRP is still $249 and GC RRP is still $149. So anything less than that is probably just retailers clearing inventory.

Ben · Post by **Ben** » 19 Sep 2006 06:08 pm

Is it really fair to compare the prices of consoles at the very end of their life-span to a console that is just about to come out?

Irrespective of how similar it may be in grunt to the current gen consoles, the remote isn't last gen hardware. There have been other controllers that have borne some similarity to it, but it's far and away removed from that in accuracy and responsiveness by the looks of things.

Talez · Post by **Talez** » 19 Sep 2006 06:15 pm

mxlegend99 wrote:I consider the Xbox a better representation. And it can be picked up for around $150 with 2 games. Plus it is the closest in power to the Wii. (with a higher clocked CPU )

a) Broadway's final clock hasn't been released. Reports from some people respected in the field that have a clue still think the "leaked" specs are bunk

b) Comparing a shitty, P6 cored Intel processor with a PPC part clock for clock is retarded to say the least. See G4/G5 vs P4, Athlon XP vs P4, 68K vs 65816 for reference. Hell, the Core2Duos will hold their own against a Prescott P4 clocked 50% higher than them.

Pat · Post by **Pat** » 19 Sep 2006 06:16 pm

Ben wrote:Is it really fair to compare the prices of consoles at the very end of their life-span to a console that is just about to come out?

No, but you have to humour the haters.

Rocco · Post by **Rocco** » 19 Sep 2006 06:20 pm

Don’t bother, mxlegend99 has already made up his mind

Whilst we get to enjoy possibly the best Zelda ever made by this Christmas

, he’ll probably still be here bitching about a system he wants to dislike for who knows what kooky reason.

His lose!

Talez · Post by **Talez** » 19 Sep 2006 06:36 pm

Rocco wrote:His lose!

I think you mean loss. You're going to be a shitty marketing employee if you don't proof read everything you write.

mxlegend99 · Post by **mxlegend99** » 19 Sep 2006 06:42 pm

Ben wrote:Is it really fair to compare the prices of consoles at the very end of their life-span to a console that is just about to come out?

It is when they're the same hardware... or atleast similar. If anything, it should be cheaper to build them today.

Talez wrote:b) Comparing a shitty, P6 cored Intel processor with a PPC part clock for clock is retarded to say the least. See G4/G5 vs P4, Athlon XP vs P4, 68K vs 65816 for reference. Hell, the Core2Duos will hold their own against a Prescott P4 clocked 50% higher than them.

It's still lower clocked. It's still only delivering current gen visuals. Until we see something that looks better then a good Xbox game... then we have no reason to beleive it's any more then just an overclocked Gamecube.

Pat wrote:
Ben wrote:Is it really fair to compare the prices of consoles at the very end of their life-span to a console that is just about to come out?
No, but you have to humour the haters.

I admit, it's a bit harsh on the older hardware. Although the Xbox still holds its own. Hell, a softmod will make it capable of doing nearly anything the Wii can do.

Rocco wrote:Don’t bother, mxlegend99 has already made up his mind

Someone has to play.

Rocco wrote:Whilst we get to enjoy possibly the best Zelda ever made by this Christmas , he’ll probably still be here bitching about a system he wants to dislike for who knows what kooky reason.

Best Zelda ever made? Just like the last one i presume.... oh wait. That's right... as far as games went, it was good. But for the Zelda franchise, it was dissapointing. Still, glad to see so much faith stored into good ol' Nintendo. No matter how badly they fuck up, their followers remain loyal.

I can respect that.

Rocco wrote:His lose!

I presume you mean his "loss".... and no, i'm going to buy the same hardware for cheaper once it drops in price - i'm not paying premium price for budget hardware.

Talez · Post by **Talez** » 19 Sep 2006 06:46 pm

mxlegend99 wrote:It's still lower clocked.

Going for the old "blatantly ignore technical reasons" troll? Are you taking lessons from lestat to learn how to do that?

Sonic Jam · Post by **Sonic Jam** » 19 Sep 2006 07:37 pm

I think it's fine to compare the price of an XBOX to a Wii, they are roughly the same in terms of hardware capabilities.

Wii has a fancy control pad and free tech demo tho, but I think the HDD in the XBox more than makes up for this.

BOOMY · Post by **BOOMY** » 19 Sep 2006 08:10 pm

How bout you compare the performance of a VIA gfx chip with an Nvidia chip that has half as much ram. Numbers don't mean shit in terms of performance(especially a console), the Nvidia will perform the same if not better(with a few exceptions but the point of an efficiant chipset compared to an inefficiant one is made). You're harping on trying to look smart but there is no chance of that now we're on page 2.

One can try justify nintendo making the right/wrong decision on price. (personally I reckon its too dear in the shadow of the x360, but not in terms of next gen hardware.) But really as pat has shown, objectively there's little that can be said. 'I dont like it' is about the best you'll do.

mxlegend99 · Post by **mxlegend99** » 19 Sep 2006 09:56 pm

Talez wrote:
mxlegend99 wrote:It's still lower clocked.

Going for the old "blatantly ignore technical reasons" troll? Are you taking lessons from lestat to learn how to do that?

If i'm going to troll something, i'm going to choose which facts to acknowledge. So yeah.

Sonic Jam wrote:I think it's fine to compare the price of an XBOX to a Wii, they are roughly the same in terms of hardware capabilities.

Wii has a fancy control pad and free tech demo tho, but I think the HDD in the XBox more than makes up for this.

Exactly. The hardware is in the same ballpark. With the Xbox even leading in some areas.

BOOMY wrote: How bout you compare the performance of a VIA gfx chip with an Nvidia chip that has half as much ram.

The Wii has a bit better graphics chip then a VIA card... i think you're being unreasonably hard on it.

BOOMY wrote:the Nvidia will perform the same if not better(with a few exceptions but the point of an efficiant chipset compared to an inefficiant one is made). You're harping on trying to look smart but there is no chance of that now we're on page 2.

I won't tell you that you got the word efficient wrong. Twice. Might make me look like i'm trying to be smart when i'm really just picking on Nintendo for the fun of it.

BOOMY wrote:One can try justify nintendo making the right/wrong decision on price. (personally I reckon its too dear in the shadow of the x360, but not in terms of next gen hardware.) But really as pat has shown, objectively there's little that can be said. 'I dont like it' is about the best you'll do.

I agree 100%. Although i reckon it's too expensive when compared to any console... as current-gen consoles are just insanely cheap these days. An Xbox with 2 games for $150? That's insane. Throw in a softmod and that's an insanely cheap media player with cool games also.

A simple i don't like it would make the forums boring.

selfish · Post by **selfish** » 19 Sep 2006 10:17 pm

mxlegend99 wrote: I won't tell you that you got the word efficient wrong. Twice. Might make me look like i'm trying to be smart

according to the rules, this means you lose: picking on spelling or grammar means an automatic win for the opposition

sorry mx, maybe next time, and keep those rules in mind!

mxlegend99 · Post by **mxlegend99** » 19 Sep 2006 10:19 pm

selfish wrote:
mxlegend99 wrote: I won't tell you that you got the word efficient wrong. Twice. Might make me look like i'm trying to be smart
according to the rules, this means you lose: picking on spelling or grammar means an automatic win for the opposition

sorry mx, maybe next time, and keep those rules in mind!

I didn't pick on his spelling. I said i wouldn't as it would make me look as though i'm trying to be smart.

So i was playing by the rules

Suck that down mofo.

selfish · Post by **selfish** » 19 Sep 2006 10:25 pm

it's pretty clear that you pointed it out, now you're trying to squirm out of it.

mxlegend99 · Post by **mxlegend99** » 19 Sep 2006 10:34 pm

selfish wrote:it's pretty clear that you pointed it out, now you're trying to squirm out of it.

I played by the rules mofo. I didn't call him on it... regardless of drawing attention to it

That's a poor refereeing display.