Jasper

Define 'better'. That's how they appear to be on an SDTV, but GameCube could pull these off on SDTV too. Let's take a different example in the 'better' approach. Windows Vista looks nice, doesn't it? It looks better than XP, doesn't it? Even if I install XP on a just-as-powerfull machina, Vista still looks slicker and nicer. And that's what videogames are doing, too. When Luigi's Mansion released it looked awesome. It has these almost-plastic visuals and that was awesome. Every game tried to get these visuals on their character models, becaause it looked smooth and cool. But now, everything has to shine like metal. And so, all the 'pretty' games that appear on all the consoles look shiny. That feels like they're giving better graphics, even though they don't really give 'better' graphics that the GameCube could pull off. The pop-style of the Videogame cuiture has changed.

I Think NGamer recaptured the old N64 spirit of yoro, that got lost in the switch from the old NGC to the new NGC, wich was to serious and old. NGamer recaptures the magical spirit again, the feel of gaming. And they're bloody funny every once in a while.

The one thing I don't get is: why does everybody act as if Wii has incredibly outdated, butt-ugly graphics? Because the Wii focuses on the gameplay doesn't mean that they just added motion-sensing to a NES, does it? The graphics are still pretty good and gamers can't see the difference between PS3 and 360 without an HD tv. So, no I don't get Perry here. Everybody acts as if the Wii delivers graphics that gamers will truly hate. But the Wii has plenty of Horsepower to pull of some of the greatest graphics on a classic tv. Doesn't anyone think that, because of Nintendo focusing on the controller, people think the system has no graphics at all? The one thing Nintendo should have done, though, is make their nice Wii preview system (you know, the things in the retail that show footage of the Wii) with a ordinary resolution. They play the footage on a damned HD tv! That stretches the image and makes it blurry (from up close). So I do'nt get their marketing strategy. As if they want to show how bad the graphics look compared to the razor-sharp 360 next to it... Silly.

You make discussing a possible Wii with HD a little boring, don't you? We are talking about the next generation, wich for Nintendo might pop up sooner than you think.

No really, wich of these games is bad? 1080 are great games, Mario vs. Donkey Kong are Supper, the Puzzle collection is fine, Pokémon Puzzle league is awesome, but pokémon, Ridge Racer 64 was sublime and Wave Racewwas ace (although not my kind of game). They're one of the few studios that made some realistic game experiences at Nintendo, so what's your problem?

Welcome to Nintendo 'Quick Cash for Crap Games' formula, wich will shorten the games and keep the prices. You'll pay just as much for the old rehash of minigames as you would have payed for a new Zelda, three years ago. Mostly because Miyamoto has lost faith in games that last longer than an hour. Here's the upside, though: games that last only that short, have less to translate and should be in our stores earlier. Jej!

Let's not forget a few things here. Back in the GameCube days, Xboxes weren't selling like hotcakes and not even all of them connected. The online gaming community back then was incredibly small. Microsoft hadn't launched live! cross-platform, so the only way a developer could make a succesfull online game was to publish it on pc or Xbox, wich couldn't play together as nice yet. So what did you have? 25 million sold Xboxes and maybe 10 million connected users. On a total consolenumber over the 150 million? That's nothing. Back in the day, Nintendo made a rational decision. Catch Numbero Duo: Wii is a name that will stay. Nintendo stated it was like 'Yahoo' and 'Google', and the people Nintendo aims at know the console as Wii (i.e. 'Let's play Wii!' not 'Let's play Nintendo (Wii)'). SO the next console Nintendo announces, it will be somewhere around 2009-2010, will still be named Wii. But Caris, you made the most rational remark, only you left out the necessary details. The current Wii HD is never ever gonna happen, het over it.

There something vastly different going on here. At this moment, people buy flat-screens. They don't buy HD-tv's. If my parents talk about buying a new TV they are thinking about a flat-screen. Not of the awe-inspiring visuals that come along with it. Nintendo made a pretty good decision - even with only gaming. Just don't forget that Nintendo's resources for online gaming are not as good (and i'm not talking about money, here, I'm talking about the necesarry experience in the team) as Microsoft. They look at numbers and the number of online videogames were pretty tiny back in the days of GameCube. If they went online then, they would have a tiny install base - simply because the numbers of online gamers was low at that time. Everybody had internet, but when GameCube launched we were still at the very start of a huge internet experience (the internet boom came after that with YouTube and Google becoming immense). Now Nintendo jumps in with an (okay, it's lacking) online service, but the timing is correct. Even the PS2 didn't support awesome online gaming that much, and everybody is only looking at Nintendo for this. Nintendo's decision against HD might seem stupid now, but it's clever enough. The numbers were there: 5% of the American Households had HD when they made that decision. I didn't even know what HD was before they said they didn't include it. Here's the problem with HD: the general consumer does not know what it means, does or how it enhances the experience. People buy a fancy HD-tv and play regular DVD's on it, and meanwhile they think they have enhanced visuals on their TV, but actually they don't. What people don't know, and what the HD-group should tell them, is that they need to upgrade all their devices to HD. And for now, that isn't happening. Any device could do HD. But do you ever stop and wonder why there's so much horsepower in PS3 and Xbox360? Because HD visuals requrie a system to make four times as much calculations on screen - you need four times as much pixels. And you don't have any control running yet. So yes, Wii could do HD, but it could a) look like a 1996 PC-game (wich means there are more straight lines to a ball than a cube) or b) smoothly as PS3... at 5 frames per second. The Wii cannot do HD by a system update, neither could an Xbox or PS2. Upscaling, yes, that would be possible, but that means you make the games in non-HD and sharpen them afterwards again, after scaling it. it's easier, but it won't increase detail in the visuals (you can't make a one-pixel enemie on the horizon, because with upscaling, it would be about four pixels). My parents ain't picking up HD for a while, and I guess the public that Nintendo is aiming at right now won't for a while.

Actually, who thinks taht we Europeans have to wait way to long for good games lately? I think we're in for a treat. Lately, all the three big ones understand that Europe is an important market - more than ever - and in honor of that we get games earlier and earlier compared to what it used to be. It's not perfect yet, but we don't see Americans complaining about the Japanese, do we? Even though there's still a month or two in between, at least we don't need to wait for easter and all-hollows to fall on the same day, like we used to? On the other hand, the long wait increases anticipation for better games. I poured voer every review of Twilight Princess before buying it and it really made the game more exciting to get. Look at the upsides. Just never say that selfish thing again about making UK an American market. Because that's exactly why British are portraited as arrogant people (no offense, I just see a lot of television that does). Because, you know, you're good enough for the American market when it profits for you, but you hate the Americans when it doesn't profit you... That's pretty double, only wanting to take the good and leave the bad. You can't have one, you have both if you choose it.

It is the age of Peripherals. And I find it sad that every game will cost us more and more on peripherals. Wii is based on the concept of pheripherals more than anything else. And I find it dangerous that next year, we'll have to pick up a ten-times as big box in your local store, pay double the dollar and play a one-game for the peripheral. Incredibly annoying. And the balance board is just the start. I don't like it. I'm starting to doubt Nintendo and I have the feel they are driving thee real gamers away to Xbox 360 or PS3.

That's about th biggest bull I've heard in years. Modchips don't hurt thee games-industry. They are what made the PlayStation succesfull in the first place. If there weren't modchips and CD-burners out there, the PlayStation wouldn't have been half as succesfull. Sony thanks it's succes to the modchips. Thank God you're on a Nintendo platform, where modding isn't the everyday thing (except the visual, outside modding).

I would say thats a little selfish. Wait, not a little, but you jsut saying this - it is incredibly selfish. The UK is part of the European market and so they should wait just as long as the rest of Europe. What you're saying is bullshit - You're not part of the American market and you don't want to be, only when it's good for you, no? We don't speak French or Italian in Flanders and still we'de have to wait for a game that'll, in the end, be in english. You're full of horseshit, boy.

Yeah it's pretty bad out there... I wouldn't want to go there, either. But then again, I've got a mac. I'll use it's weight to kill some privacy-thieves on the way. But I have no reason whatsoever to visit this website. Ever again...

but sssshhh! And don't get caught by the spy- and malware on the way to the serialdealer. These streets are rough, ya know?

You have to admit: sepertaly, they always work better. The quality of a standalone camera is better than the ones buld-in to phones, you calculate much faster (and can do more, like square-roots and logaritmes) on a calculator. Just those two, though. The rest could be easely combined in one device without loss of convenience. And about the stuff for 'themselves' - I didn't said Microsoft build it for themselves, I said they build it themselves - you know, like Bill Gates with a tube of superglue and loads of hardware. The Xboxes Bill made personally, have quite a high failure rate... So I don't trust things microsoft buold themselves.

We all know what happens when Microsofts builds hardware themselves. So maybe it's not the best news, actually.

Okay, official declaration of mental health instability coming right up. Give me their home address, and I'll pay them a personal visit. And for mankinds sake - I'll use a sledgehammer to tell them what I think.

Exactly the point :-D - that's why they advertise these things as Portable Media Devices, making FM just part of Media. Yes, it's all about PR.

Do you dream of being a graphic designer? Do you ever say to yourself after a day of hard work: 'good job, me'?

Nice rebound. Except for the FM, there aren't really aany great features inside the Zune and the iPod is just the more familiar one of both. I'm just aware of the quality when I buy an iPod. Point is: I don't really listen to radio, so that FM really doesn't bother me. And about the 'being laughed at' thing: well, I'm inspired by engadget fancy comments on the 'oh so great zune'. I just love those guys' hilarious ironic remarks and jokes. love the site, love the links. So i'll go with them and favor uPod since I don't have any opinion of myself. At all.

Do you even know what dpi does? It's not all that complicated (and dpi doesn't matter if you don't care 'bout the quality of your image - here's a tip: 72 for screen-images, 150 for print and 300 for press) All the others settings in your image size don't really matter (well, except for your width and height - off course)

You want the PSD-files? Thank god this isn't really a professional forum, since asking for that is like asking the negative of a photo from a photographer - you don't get it untill you pay a lot of money, and if you just pay for the design, you only pay for the end result, not for the files used.

Are you perhaps not accustomed to a ruler and a CD-case? You could have easely made it yourself if you have some reading skills. And be honest: you only need to know how numbers work...

Zune is selling well in the terms that microsoft wanted it to sell. It shifted one million units, even though their Zunes are brown. You ain't kicking Apple out of the marketplace just yet - an iPod is always a good choice. But believe me: Apple will announce more iPhone like iPods this years, with larger screen and possible a touch-interface, although to be honest - the scrollweel is the thing that identifies the iPod. I would hold out on a Zune, actually. Just simply because of the shame you'll have when ten iPod users laugh at you. And the extra features are not that great. The wifi sharing is stupid, to get you an example. Just don't if you don't want to become the laughing stock. And if you do, you'de better like it this much. And if you do: you might be spotted!

Proves that Microsoft used their monopoly on an intelligent way.L But that's slowly coming to a halt. Since most of the users of a PC will be younger and younger people that are wilingl to make the transistion, more different browsers will get their chance. Bummer nobody uses Opera, really. But I didn't like Opera:mac for one bit, actually. And about the IE7 logo: I seem to have noticed a lot of people have that problem. You can't blame them, it went from all blue E to blue e with golden bar through it, wich makes recognition harder (no, really, adding a colour is really a hard thing,k certainly since all-of-a-sudden you can see that swaye thing around the E, wich was never there before in such an obvious way). By the Way, netscape died a silent dead (it was the only browser that you had to pay for) and was followed by a project codenamed 'netscape'. They used the same codebase and relaunched the browser under the codename that Netscape had itself in it's lifetime: Mozilla. They called it firebird and later the well known firefox.