Wii Beats Xbox360 In UK And DS Beaking Records Sales..

[ipaul]

But how did they put you off after LESS than twelve months - what the fuck is wrong with peoples perspectives? Again, please tell me what 360 had in the first twelve months, I'm dying for someone to tell me and not resort to "well Zelda is actually a gamecube game moved to wii" bullshit because that is a fucking retarded point. What did it have that competes with what the wii has?

 

Also, what has the PS3 got the wii doesnt?

 

Fuck it what did the gamecube have in the first 12 months? The playstation 2? The n64, ds, snes? I could really go on!!!!

 

The Wii has a lot of quality titles, a lot! It has the best or at least one of the best versions of three of the biggest franchises in Mario, Zelda and Metroid, it has more 3rd party support than its had since the snes. WHAT THE FUCK IS PEOPLES PROBLEM!!!!

 

All I hear is bitching about the lack of games but dont point to any facts just say 360 is better - GET A FUCKING FORESIGHT and see what is obviously going to happen over the next 12 months!

 

Also, what is the problem with loads of new wii owners? Why do you care so much that the wii has games like Carnival games or wii play? Why do you give a shit? Dont buy them! Thats not all there is!!!!

 

"I sold my wii before mario galaxy came out and im gald I did it because the wii has no good games" - WTF are you talking about!!!! Galaxy is so much better than anything on the 360, and even if you dont agree with that it's still a game any of you oh so precious and serious and amazing self proclaimed hardcore gamers should play, but you slag the wii off for no fucking reason and giving it no time to prove itself and decide to leave SHIT games like metroid and mario and olympics, and resident evil and trauma centre and zack and wicki to us casual gamers you have so much fucking disdain for.

 

Woooaaah calm down dude (I can appreciate some may find this rich coming from me but trust me my posts are calm whther they seem it or not)

 

The PS3 has a few things the Wii doesn't have, I'm talking about HD, a 40/60 GB hard drive and blu ray.Also a proper online service (though this should get better with the Wii) While I think by the end of its life the Wii probably will have a nice library of games I still think, becasue of its main target demographic, it will be dominated by party games or 'non' games and the like. These kind of games do not suit me in the slightest. I think I'd just be happier playing generic-but-decent-shooter/racer no56. Good for you if you like your Wii, it just isn't for me.

[Dante]

The PS3 has a few things the Wii doesn't have, I'm talking about HD, a 40/60 GB hard drive and blu ray.Also a proper online service (though this should get better with the Wii) While I think by the end of its life the Wii probably will have a nice library of games I still think, becasue of its main target demographic, it will be dominated by party games or 'non' games and the like. These kind of games do not suit me in the slightest. I think I'd just be happier playing generic-but-decent-shooter/racer no56. Good for you if you like your Wii, it just isn't for me.

 

But does HD, Hard Drive & Bluray really help push gaming?

People dont really see that Nintendo are more force on taking the PS2 road with the Wii.

[dazzybee]

Like you I am calmer than my posts appear - damn the inability to read tone in text

 

Anyways, I wasnt targetting anyone in particular, just general wii bashers. I just don't understand people not thinking the Wii has had an amazing year when I have over 30 games for the Wii and like them all! I have never had a game uptake like this (though I've never been richer either:) )

 

I mean, what gamer could not like: Mario, Metroid, Zelda, Zack and Wicki, No More Heroes, Smash bros., Mario Kart, Excite Truck, Trauma Centre, Resident Evil4, Umbrella Chronicles, Guitar Hero, Olympics, Mario Strikers, Eledees, SSX Blur, Sonic, Paper Mario............ And many more!! How is that bad? My brain hurts thinking about gamers sayingt he wii doesnt have good games!!

 

Also, maybe its because I am older, but I LOVE the fact my girlfriend loves playing sports, endless ocean, rayman, Wario Ware, Mario Strikers, Brain Academy, and not just my girlfreind but my family and nongaming friends - we have some awesome mutliplayer sessions and nights with drinks and beer. Its amazing!!! How is this bad?

 

I think the Wii is incredible if you couldn't guess and succeeding in the satusfying my real gameing needs and my social gaming needs.

 

The 360 is a quality machine, we have one and it's good, but for me the problem lies within the following games, in my opinion, the best games on the 360:

Call of Duty 4

Halo

Bioshock

Gears of War

Orange Box

Ghost Recon

Rainbow 6

 

I don't think I need to point out what is wrong with the list above. To be honest, I'm getting VERY bored, Live however impressive is a nice bonus more than a real incentive, and I am impressed by the grahics for no more then an hour.

 

AND PS a harddrive, bluray and HD are about as important to a games console as a nail file on an oven

 

Ha, just saw Dante comented on the PS3 benefits too

[c0Zm1c]

The Wii seems like business as usual to me. Sure, there's lots of casual games, and Nintendo is arguably marketing to that audience more. But I don't exactly feel starved of games with a bit more meat to them, or at least not any less than with the Gamecube.

 

Since Nintendo hasn't abandoned its most treasured of series', I really think it just comes down to taste - you either like your Mario's, Zelda's, and Metroid's, or you don't.

 

Saying that though, I'm not as enthusiastic about this generation as I was the last. It's nothing to do with the Wii though - I've enjoyed it more than I have the 360 and PS3.

 

I returned to console gaming back in 2002 with the Xbox and Halo after seven or so years spent away from it (skipping the Playstation/N64 era, the Dreamcast, and much of the PS2), and like in the mid 90's, I guess I'm just beginning to tire of console gaming again.

 

If I am to give up console gaming I'll continue PC gaming. For some reason I never tire of that. Probably because it never seems as rammed down my throat (commercialised) as does console gaming.

[ipaul]

But does HD, Hard Drive & Bluray really help push gaming?

People dont really see that Nintendo are more force on taking the PS2 road with the Wii.

 

I would have normally agreed but when you see a PS3 running in high def with something like The Darkness or an even more visually impressive game in, you can't help but go 'Wow o_O'. Well I couldn't, maybe I'm shallow like that. But I think the more sophisticated hardware allows for more depth to games in ways and in turn more sophisticated games. I know some will argue that the Wiis controller does this better than HD ever could, but I have not seen any games where I think this is the case, with the exception of Wii sports and Wario Ware, but then they are designed around the controller (if you get me)

[Hero-of-Time]

Could of done without the effing and blinding though. I would mod it and possibly close the thread but im using my PS3 to type this and moddinig powers dont seem to work on it.

[McMad]

But how did they put you off after LESS than twelve months - what the fuck is wrong with peoples perspectives? Again, please tell me what 360 had in the first twelve months, I'm dying for someone to tell me and not resort to "well Zelda is actually a gamecube game moved to wii" bullshit because that is a fucking retarded point. What did it have that competes with what the wii has?

Speaking of retarded points, you're comparing the present state of the Wii to the past state of the 360, do people really care? No. We live in the present; in the now, the 360's past isn't a problem anymore while the Wii's present is. But fine, let us play with your logic for a bit. I presume you've used the fact that 2006 wasn't the greatest year ever for the 360 in order to try and make some of us look at the Wii in a fairer light. However, is 2008 looking as good for the Wii as 2007 did for the 360? I think not; Smash Bros and Mario Kart being (maybe No More Heroes if I really did care for the game) the only two big worthwhile exclusives, here's hoping Nintendo has got some aces up their sleeves otherwise 2008 will be even worse than 2007 for us.

 

Also, what has the PS3 got the wii doesnt?

Huh? Wrong thread mate. But alright if you must insist, it's got a higher price tag, barely any good exclusives (Drake's, maybe Ratchet), better graphics, a built-in Blu Ray player, a half-decent online service and a very promising 2008.

 

Fuck it what did the gamecube have in the first 12 months? The playstation 2? The n64, ds, snes? I could really go on!!!!

 

 

The Wii has a lot of quality titles, a lot! It has the best or at least one of the best versions of three of the biggest franchises in Mario, Zelda and Metroid, it has more 3rd party support than its had since the snes. WHAT THE FUCK IS PEOPLES PROBLEM!!!!

Name 10 quality Wii titles please. I believe the number ten satisfies the phrase 'a lot' nicely. Twilight Princess is hardly the best Zelda game, it rehashes a lot of Zelda mechanics into a nice final product but barely brings anything that new to the series that we'll see in the next Zelda, so while it's a great game it pales in comparison to it's predecessors. Can't pass judgment on Prime 3 but Galaxy, I'll definitely give you that one, what a wonderfully refreshing and lovely game that was. And so what if it has more third party support than the SNES? It hardly has any good third party games in comparison to the ones from that era (Street Fighter, Castlevania, Chrono Trigger to name a few).

 

All I hear is bitching about the lack of games but dont point to any facts just say 360 is better - GET A FUCKING FORESIGHT and see what is obviously going to happen over the next 12 months!

What's happening of the next 12 months? The Wii gets Wii Fit, Smash Bros and Mario Kart while DMC4, Burnout Paradise, Rock Band, Ninja Gaiden 2, Street Fighter 4, Silent Hill 5 and Resident Evil 5 (here's hoping) are released for the 360?

 

Also, what is the problem with loads of new wii owners? Why do you care so much that the wii has games like Carnival games or wii play? Why do you give a shit? Dont buy them! Thats not all there is!!!!

What core games are there then we can get for Wii then that outshine titles we can get for a marginally higher price on the 360? Should I be buying Medal of Honour: Heroes 2 instead of Call of Duty 4? Or Resident Evil: The Umbrella Chronicles instead of The Orange Box? I really don't think so.

 

"I sold my wii before mario galaxy came out and im gald I did it because the wii has no good games" - WTF are you talking about!!!! Galaxy is so much better than anything on the 360, and even if you dont agree with that it's still a game any of you oh so precious and serious and amazing self proclaimed hardcore gamers should play, but you slag the wii off for no fucking reason and giving it no time to prove itself and decide to leave SHIT games like metroid and mario and olympics, and resident evil and trauma centre and zack and wicki to us casual gamers you have so much fucking disdain for.

This point was aimed at Ashmat so I won't comment on this.

 

I have made comments on your post in bold in the quote.

[Portlett]

I really don't think the Wii is starved of games, im sure there has been more first party titles in the first year than the N64 or Cube, to my memory anyway. Also in the 360's first year I can only remember Gears Of War as being the main AAA title, although im sure there were more.

[Hellfire]

The Wii doesn't give us 360 owners enough reasons to like it as much.

 

That's not called fanboyism, that's called having good taste.

 

See, this is what really brings the boards and discussions down. Because prefering Nintendo products is fanboyism and stupid, while preferring the competition is good taste.

Ridiculous.

 

Could of done without the effing and blinding though. I would mod it and possibly close the thread but im using my PS3 to type this and moddinig powers dont seem to work on it.

 

lulz PS3 sux!

[c0Zm1c]

Taste is subjective. I thought everyone knew that.

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

I love the way these threads just repeat every week or so. Usually starting with Nintendo fans saying how nice it is that the Wii is selling well, only to then be shouted at by people who believe that the PS3 should be selling better.

 

 

...Gah. Thats just fanboyism. Rather than me saying the usual hoo-hah, 'Wii is selling, this is good noooooz!' I delve a little deeper and ask WHY exactly is it 'nice' that the Wii is selling so well. Whats wrong with that? Yes, it is my opinion, as a once loyal Nintendo fan (the loyalty faded throughout 2007 funny enough ;p) that the Wii does not deserve these sells and is the least out of the three that should be reaping them at the moment. Rather than simply celebrate Nintendo's successes show me proof or tell me why as a consumer and gamer as to why this is such a 'nice thing'. Just another opinion from a (still) fan of Nintendo. The fact that you have envisioned people with similar opinions as to be 'shouting' at people just illustrates your discern to the other opinion.

 

Don't take it personally though Zechs, I on the other hand, admire your opinion.

[Hellfire]

The problem is most people can't engage in a normal discussion without starting to insult others and being elitist bastards.

As to why a console "deserves" to sell, the only reason I can think of that a console doesnt deserve to sell is if it doesnt have a single good game. A console that has good games that appeal to a very wide range of tastes always "deserves" to sell.

Also, this loyalty thing is also part of the problem, people that think they owe loyalty so some company will just end up bitter, when they go a different path.

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

I would have normally agreed but when you see a PS3 running in high def with something like The Darkness or an even more visually impressive game in, you can't help but go 'Wow o_O'. Well I couldn't, maybe I'm shallow like that. But I think the more sophisticated hardware allows for more depth to games in ways and in turn more sophisticated games. I know some will argue that the Wiis controller does this better than HD ever could, but I have not seen any games where I think this is the case, with the exception of Wii sports and Wario Ware, but then they are designed around the controller (if you get me)

 

I agree. Other than impressive visuals, technology can add to the scope and immersive factor of games and therefore add to the overal expereince of the game. This is what we hailed in Ocarina of Time and mario 64, but why do I find most who once supported this ideaology with the aforementioned games all of a sudden bash the 360 and PS3 for doing the exact same thing?

[McPhee]

EDIT: Nevermind, i was beaten to it by the past few posters :p

 

Hopefully the discussion continues and the flaming, elitism and "i'm right, you're wrong" superiority stays away, at least for a while. Please keep the forum rules in mind guys, we don't like the aforementioned. I don't think anyone wants to start handing out infractions because of another silly 360 vs Wii debate.

[Hellfire]

I agree. Other than impressive visuals, technology can add to the scope and immersive factor of games and therefore add to the overal expereince of the game. This is what we hailed in Ocarina of Time and mario 64, but why do I find most who once supported this ideaology with the aforementioned games all of a sudden bash the 360 and PS3 for doing the exact same thing?

 

Because it was the dawn of 3D and a huge leap in immersion and gameplay, while now there's nothing of the sort. Of course that horsepower can add great things like physics, AI and fluidity, which is what matters the most to me, but devs like to use 3rd party engines so much, waste so much time with HD and "useless" graphics things, that there are still few games that do something other than having shiny graphics. I trust that this will change in time too.

[McPhee]

Because it was the dawn of 3D and a huge leap in immersion and gameplay, while now there's nothing of the sort. Of course that horsepower can add great things like physics, AI and fluidity, which is what matters the most to me, but devs like to use 3rd party engines so much, waste so much time with HD and "useless" graphics things, that there are still few games that do something other than having shiny graphics. I trust that this will change in time too.

 

Assassin's Creed and Mass Effect come to mind. Pretty average games tbh, heck Mass Effect doesn't even look that great (crappy enviroments)!

 

The more powerful hardware does have stuff to add to games though. More scope for a start. You can increase the size of the environment and add have a lot of independent objects moving. This allows stuff like crowds and armies to be made possible. Heck, Crysis showed you can pretty much make a living, breathing jungle with the current hardware!

 

Personally i think the hardware race should continue, stopping it holds no benefit for the consumer. Games companies will always have to find new ways to compete, as graphical advancement slows down they will be looking at other ways to make they're product stand out.

[Hellfire]

Assassin's Creed and Mass Effect come to mind. Pretty average games tbh, heck Mass Effect doesn't even look that great (crappy enviroments)

 

Didn't play those, but yes, those are good examples. The crowds in AC and the huge interactive scenarios are some of the things the hardware should be used for. Of course not every game needs this, but most devs are satisfied with more of the same.

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

 

Please, carry on the discussion, but lets start getting in to why people like/dislike certain games. What qualities do you like/dislike about Wii games?

 

Nice phoenix Down.

 

 

Right, what I have come to dislike about Wii games so far is its lack of overal quality on it's original games. A sort of bitterness builds up where I find on too many occassions I just had to return games back to the shop even after it has been recommended and praised greatly, what comes at the top of my head are Super Paper Mario and Fifa 08. I am such a SPM fan that if it was anything like Paper mario I would have loved the Wii regardless, especially at the time of its release after the summer...or rather 2 season drought.

 

And yes, as much as some Nintendo fans (now) won't like to admit, the lacking technology just adds to the fustration. If it is the 3rd parties' fault for this then why aren't Nintendo egging them on to do something about it? No doubt Wii has brought in some $$$ so why don't Nintendo give out a few incentives to these 3rd parties, I'm not even talking on the levels of what Microsoft did for Blue dragon. If the inclusion of wiimote control has to sacrifice actual GAMEPLAY elements (Need for Speed/Fifa) or significantly delay games (Pro Evo) then I find it to not be worth it, because after a year I am yet to feel like the Wii is an actual revolution in gaming terms and finding it in a few areas to be devolutionary. Waitttt, they say? Wait for what exactly? I say.

[McPhee]

I edited my post King, you guys said what i was trying to say before i finished writing my post.

 

Didn't play those, but yes, those are good examples. The crowds in AC and the huge interactive scenarios are some of the things the hardware should be used for. Of course not every game needs this, but most devs are satisfied with more of the same.

 

I was referring to the useless graphics things, but yeah the crowd thing works too :p The Assassin's Creed developers spent too much time fiddling with graphics and the new AI techniques to make the actual game play good. Mass Effect has a great, really well written story and great character models but the combat and movement is clunky (feels like it was rushed out tbh)

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

Didn't play those, but yes, those are good examples. The crowds in AC and the huge interactive scenarios are some of the things the hardware should be used for. Of course not every game needs this, but most devs are satisfied with more of the same.

 

...? You haven't played them yet you agree? As you have somewhat agreed to, the scope in AC is incredible even if the game is a bit tiresome. Wouldn't you have liked to see this level of depth in games that revel in scope ala Zelda? For a Gamecube game, I feel TP did a good job in terms of depth of field and scope (the big bosses, the 'levels' of landscape) and we loved it. Technology could only make this better and enhance the gaming experience even more.

 

I edited my post King, you guys said what i was trying to say before i finished writing my post.

 

Yeah but it was still a worthy comment.

[Hellfire]

Right, what I have come to dislike about Wii games so far is its lack of overal quality on it's original games. A sort of bitterness builds up where I find on too many occassions I just had to return games back to the shop even after it has been recommended and praised greatly, what comes at the top of my head are Super Paper Mario and Fifa 08. I am such a SPM fan that if it was anything like Paper mario I would have loved the Wii regardless, especially at the time of its release after the summer...or rather 2 season drought.

 

And yes, as much as some Nintendo fans (now) won't like to admit, the lacking technology just adds to the fustration. If it is the 3rd parties' fault for this then why aren't Nintendo egging them on to do something about it? No doubt Wii has brought in some $$$ so why don't Nintendo give out a few

incentives to these 3rd parties, I'm not even talking on the levels of what Microsoft did for Blue dragon. If the inclusion of wiimote control has to sacrifice actual GAMEPLAY elements (Need for Speed/Fifa) or significantly delay games (Pro Evo) then I find it to not be worth it, because after a year I am yet to feel like the Wii is an actual revolution in gaming terms.

I totally disagree. First of all, why does the overall quality matters if you still have good games? If so many games weren't released, overall the quality would be higer, you would be playing the same games, but probably wouldn't feel that way. It's a matter of perspective.

On SPM, we were always told and shown that SPM wasn't a normal Paper Mario, which was what most people expected (God knows why), so they didn't give the game an oportunity. Which is a pity because the game is fantatic.

Lacking technology? Most devs haven't even used it. There's a lack of effort not technology. Mario Galaxy and Metroid Prime 3 for example are fantastic in that department. Now, giving money to devs to make them work hard? That's just wrong, that's what Sony and MS did last gen all the time and all it gave us a crapfest of exclusive 3rd party games. (not that the Wii isn't getting a crapfest of 3rd party games either) Devs have to try hard for the sake of making good games not for money hats.

You're contradicting yourself. You want games NOW.Revolutions NOW.Great graphics NOW. That's not possible, things take time. If PES happens to be great when it comes out do you think it will matter that it was delayed in the eyes of the consumer? This is just internet babble talk, once games are out everyone forgets the accessory. Also go play Tiger Woods 08, Madden NFL 08, Zack & Wiki, Mercury Meltdown to name some. They didn't need to sacrifice anything in gameplay, they actually gained because of the wii remote. This even happened in PS2 ports like Godfather and Scarface.

If you think that having FPS controls that are finally close to the PC, being able to play strategy and adventure games well on consoles and playing games like golf very close to what it is in real life aren't revolutions I honestly don't know what you were expecting. We will never witness a revolution like the jump to 3D and analogue sticks again, so you need to change your standards. Also, where are the revolutions and innovations in 360/PS3? Not a lot if you ask me.

 

I still think the main reason why people (on message boards) dislike the Wii is because they're too clinged to the notion of being "hardcore".Most of these threads are filled with the word "hardcore" throughout the posts. That's why you see this happening mainly on internet gaming forums, because everyone thinks they're so awesome and so hardcore, they have to play 5000 hour AAA HD space marine games (I know I use this one all the time :P) and don't even like a game simply for being fun. They don't even give games a chance. Which is a shame really, because I had a blast with Excite Truck, Wario Ware, Mercury Meltdown, Mario Strikers, Endless Ocean, Wii Play and Wii Sports, etc... I'm very happy that the DS and lack of time to play games changed my perspective of gaming, I feel like I enjoy games more, like we all do when we are small, but without the ingenuity. So to me, there never was a drought, in fact there are still lots of games I want to buy.

I'm not saying this is the case for everyone that's "anti Wii" here, it's pretty normal that people just like a certain type of games that the Wii doesn't offer and the 360 or PS3 do, just like I don't like racing sims or sports games (although now I like TW and Madden on the Wii), but it's my view on it for the most part of internet forums and it's stupid that people can't accept that the lack of good titles is something that's highly subjective. If you say "lack of titles that interest me to justify buying a Wii", that's cool with me, I say the same about 360 and PS3 at the moment.

 

...? You haven't played them yet you agree? As you have somewhat agreed to, the scope in AC is incredible even if the game is a bit tiresome. Wouldn't you have liked to see this level of depth in games that revel in scope ala Zelda? For a Gamecube game, I feel TP did a good job in terms of depth of field and scope (the big bosses, the 'levels' of landscape) and we loved it. Technology could only make this better and enhance the gaming experience even more.

 

I know how the game is, I don't need to play it to know it has big cities and crowds.

TP had a nice crowd in Hyrule Town, even though you couldn't interact with it, it still made the game feel more alive than any other Zelda. Zelda needs to remain Zelda, that's what I still say :P.

Of course technology can only benefit a game, but things aren't that straightforward.

 

 

 

 

I was referring to the useless graphics things, but yeah the crowd thing works too :p The Assassin's Creed developers spent too much time fiddling with graphics and the new AI techniques to make the actual game play good. Mass Effect has a great, really well written story and great character models but the combat and movement is clunky (feels like it was rushed out tbh)

 

Don't know about Mass Effect, but at least the crowd and AI in AC was the kind of leap I want with powerful hardware. About the rest, I have to play the game :P As usual, developers can't find balance.

But yeah what you and I say combined is a big problem for games that I hope they can fix.

EDIT no 1000:

For the record, I'm not against hardware evolution. I understand that Nintendo wanted to bring in new gamers, so they needed weaker cheaper hardware and I understand that MS and Sony didn't care about that so they just beefed it up. There are pros and cons.

But since I have a pc and always had, most of the things they're doing now on PS3/360 were already done on the PC or available there too, while what the Wii gets isn't, that's why Wii is my first choice.

 

 

Games companies will always have to find new ways to compete, as graphical advancement slows down they will be looking at other ways to make they're product stand out.

 

Indeed, but I share the view with Nintendo that if "we" waited for graphics to reach a stalemate to start seriously innovating, the industry would crash before reaching that point.

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

Wow, that was the longest post I've seen from you Hellfire, good post. I'll come back to it at a more sociable time but just to say one thing...Tbh, I never felt gaming needed a revolution to begin with. Before the Wii came out I was still an avid gamer and happy with what I was buying. The transition from 2D to 3D was just as natural as Black and white to colour - it was bound to happen.

The point I was making is that evolution/revolution (the wii remote) is supposed to be a good thing, like when an oppressive tyrant is overthrown and a new age of peace begins its a good thing or when Charmeleon evolves into Charizard (:p) it's a good thing. But so far for the Wii, it's 'revolution' has only given me delayed games and lesser-than ports but good remakes. A revolution in a new way to play a game perhaps, but a revolution that will spark a greater flame in a new era of gaming, I think not.

[Sheikah]

On SPM, we were always told and shown that SPM wasn't a normal Paper Mario, which was what most people expected (God knows why), so they didn't give the game an oportunity. Which is a pity because the game is fantatic.

 

Dear lord...this post...burn it....BURN IT....BURN IT!!!

A ridiculously easy platformer with an enforced horrendously infuriating story, and for most of the game poorly designed backdrops (town springs to mind). I felt completely shafted of my £32 when I completed that game.

[Ramar]

That's not true. Wii's architecture is similar to GC's, so programming for it obviously takes less time and less workforce, because it doesn't have such powerful hardware the budget's are smaller, the only thing that takes time (and it's considerable, specially in its early life) is wiimote usage.

3rd party games have been sucking because they are sraight, lazy ports, as simple as that. If a company invests more in developing a Wii game it can still take less time than developing a 360/PS3 game of the same "caliber".

You can't say that programming for dual cores and making hi def graphics or working in a totally different type of processor (CELL) takes the same time and team size than making a game on a Wii.

 

Surely your post just proved my point about ports, using previous code and hence 3rd the staff.

 

For the second paragraph I wasn't talking in anyway about PS3 or 360s programming schedules.

 

Edit - Oh my this has gone on a bit, oops.

[Zechs Merquise]

...Gah. Thats just fanboyism. Rather than me saying the usual hoo-hah, 'Wii is selling, this is good noooooz!' I delve a little deeper and ask WHY exactly is it 'nice' that the Wii is selling so well. Whats wrong with that? Yes, it is my opinion, as a once loyal Nintendo fan (the loyalty faded throughout 2007 funny enough ;p) that the Wii does not deserve these sells and is the least out of the three that should be reaping them at the moment. Rather than simply celebrate Nintendo's successes show me proof or tell me why as a consumer and gamer as to why this is such a 'nice thing'. Just another opinion from a (still) fan of Nintendo. The fact that you have envisioned people with similar opinions as to be 'shouting' at people just illustrates your discern to the other opinion.

 

Don't take it personally though Zechs, I on the other hand, admire your opinion.

 

Thanks. I shall however say I disagree with your comments that the Wii should be selling less than the other two consoles. I simply say this because I feel the 360 and PS3 have brought less innovation to the market than the Wii.

 

I feel that PC gaming has stagnated in many ways, mainly due to increasing push in graphical quality which has priced out a lot of average PC owners and due to the very nature of the games that are being developed.

 

I think that stagnation has crossed over into the console market too. The games being developed are just flashier versions of the old stuff and are becoming less accessible to the public due to both the price of the consoles (PS3 I'm looking at YOU) and complexity of the titles.

 

The Wii comes along and does things differently, it has pulled a lot of people into gaming who would never have dreamt of picking up a controller, and some of whom would have been positively frightened of doing so! I think the Wii deserves it's success, as it's broken the mold and taken gaming in a direction that may well have saved it from regressing back to when it was a niche market enjoyed by spotty anti-social adolescents!