Wii's outselling PS3's 6 to 1

[Kane Knight]

So one game you haven't played, Two iterations (One of which is a critical flop, evidently, as I've seen little good for Sonic that wasn't out of NINTENDO POWER), and two ports. That's our list of decent games? Fuck, you suck.

Especially when you included Zelda and the RE Remake and then asked how many quality games are only available on the PS3. Retarded.

[DS]

It's not so much that Wii doesn't have many decent games, which is pretty much true, but it's the fact that all the good games out for the Wii are made by Nintendo. Out of your list, I'm not including Sonic because that really wasn't a good game, the only game not made by Nintendo was Resident Evil 4. And that was just an upgrade from the Gamecube.

[#BROKEN Hasney]

Originally Posted by DS It's not so much that Wii doesn't have many decent games, which is pretty much true, but it's the fact that all the good games out for the Wii are made by Nintendo. Out of your list, I'm not including Sonic because that really wasn't a good game, the only game not made by Nintendo was Resident Evil 4. And that was just an upgrade from the Gamecube.

First off, Sonic and the Secret Rings was awesome to me. I should really qualify that statement by saying that I loved Sonic Adventure 1 and 2 as well though as I know a lot of people hated those games.

Anyways, talking of good games per system, I suppose you could have a look at this:



Shows how many millions of games sold per system at the top for January to June in 2006 and 2007, then console manufacturer share by percentages. It's a real shame it's by manufacturer and not console though.

Anyways, although theres a lot less PS3s sold in this country than Wiis, the average gamer is buying more games for their individual system. I'm sure Nintendo won't care at this stage as they're still selling more games and systems (and also don't forget Nintendo is the only one to make a profit per hardware unit sold) but if that trend were to continue when the Wii and PS3 sales start slowing down then it could spell trouble for Nintendo.

Anyways, random tangent this but 3 things:

1) Nintendos total sales share jump from 1% to 40% from this time last year

2) PC gaming is in no way being destroyed by piracy

3) The Nintendo DS outsells all next gen consoles in every region and spanks them in software sales too.

For me personally, the only game I've enjoyed on the PS3 that was exclusive so far was Motorstorm, I owned VF5 but that is going back to the shop quickly as the 360 version is based on a more balanced arcade revision and will be online

[Silent]

Originally Posted by Hollywood Hasney For me personally, the only game I've enjoyed on the PS3 that was exclusive so far was Motorstorm, I owned VF5 but that is going back to the shop quickly as the 360 version is based on a more balanced arcade revision and will be online

Did they finally say they are adding online play? I know they didn't want it originally because lag could ruin the precision of the game.

[Savio]

Originally Posted by KingofOldSchool Super Paper Mario > Everything on the PS3

I don't like RPG games

[Requiem]

With games like LittleBigWorld and Uncharted: Drake's Fortune (which looks amazing, and is taking full advantage of the blu-ray), my faith in the PS3 is renewed. (yes, I had stopped really following the system for a few months while I was getting into the 360, which is a very solid system if your hardware doesn't fail)

The developer's even stated the game would not have been possible without blu-ray, which means third party developers are finally starting to take advantage of the PS3's power potential. The blu-ray drive allows games to constantly load in the background without the player even noticing, and then lets it store the data quickly and efficiently so that there are no loading screens in the game. They are boasting a completely seamless world now, and the game uses procedural animations which look impressively smooth and polished. Finally a game which can showcase the power of the system, and this is only a start.

Those are only two games that I myself have my eye on. LittleBigWorld is something that a lot of people may not take interest in, but it looks great to me.

Honestly, it's not about systems to me.. it's about the future of gaming. The PS3 and the 360 have done their part to try to advance the way games are made. The Wii is relying on a gimmick which isn't advancing anything. The technology isn't new.. it's not even polished. It doesn't always work right, and most ports to the system are done TERRIBLY.

This is why I dislike the Wii. Because it brings nothing substantial to the table. It doesn't do anything for the quality of games in the long run, because they are just trying to just attract quick sales.

Like them or hate them, the PS3 and 360 are actually helping the game creation process, and because of systems like that we will have a higher quality of game in the long run.

[#BROKEN Hasney]

I don't see it that way at all. The PS3 and 360 havn't really advanced anything at all other than power, although the 360 has advanced online gaming on a console as well.

Gears of War, Motorstorm, Resistance, Halo 3. Great games, don't get me wrong, but what new thing are they adding to the table? They've added fuck all new, simple as. Fancy HD graphics will not move gaming on.

Now, as for the Wii, there is no way the control system was added for "quick sales", it was a risk which has paid off thus far. Nintendo don't like 3-way console battles where every console is different. They didn't do a 32-bit CD console because there were 2 out and they wanted to differentiate themselves and then went for a mini-DVD over a real one.

I've always found that to be a bit of a shame, because if the N64 came out around the time of the PS1 as a CD based console I think Nintendo would have taken them to the cleaners. PS1 ports AND Nintendos games? YES PLEASE.

Games like Wii Sports are showing glimpses of what may be able to be done in the future. Look at the first year of the DS. Bollocks, utter shite. Only thing that saved it was Kirby as everything else was just a mini-game that had no right being a full price game and 3rd parties throwing out planned GBA games to cash in. One year later, the Lite comes out and Nintendo storm some amazing games and the 3rd parties followed suit.

Ubisoft and other publishers have already admitted to "cashing in" on the early Wii sales with lazy ports and substandard games, but the shit controlling 3rd party games are not the controllers fault but the coding, just play Excited truck and see how responsive that is. Developers are just waking up and building completly new games for it instead of shoddy ports. EA are looking to be the first. (No, don't count EA Sports but look at games like MySims)

Super Mario Galaxy and Metroid Prime 3 are out at the end of this year, about the 1 year mark for the Wii and it may make that upward burst of quality like the DS did. To coin the old TPWW phrase, Mario will be MAKE IT or BREAK IT for the Wii. A full on platform game using the Wii controller with fucked up gravity? Even I have my doubts that they'll pull that one off. But if they do and the Wii stays top of the sales charts, trust me. GOOD 3rd party support with time taken over the games and maybe, just maybe, it will start living up to it's original codename.

[Requiem]

I think you're missing the point in what I meant by 'the future of gaming'.

The future of gaming -is- realism. The way a character moves, the way he swings a weapon. The way he shoots a gun. Immersing the player in the world. That is what gaming should be. With Assassin's Creed, you have crowd dynamics. No game has ever done real crowd dynamics before. The processing units in the 360 and PS3 allow them to do this.

Look at what GTA IV is doing. They are going for detail. They want you to feel like you really are a part of that world. With Uncharted, they've used blu-ray as it was meant to be used. No loading in the world.. just a seamless transition from place to place. Procedural animations (I'm not going into what procedural animations are.. if you want to know more, watch some Spore videos) When you step on moss, you leave a footprint. When you walk on grass, you flatten it and leave tracks.

Yet, they still managed to make the gameplay look fun and exciting. The game has a very movie-like feel to it. The brawling system is great.. fist fighting at its best.

Things like this are able to be done because the processors and the sizes of the discs allow programmers to do them. The Wii does not immerse you in anything, and while that may be good enough for the casual gamer, I am simply not satisfied. If I play a hack n' slash game on the Wii, I am required to use their controller, and I have to shake the damn thing every time I want to swing a sword. Well first, this takes away from the diversity of attacks in games such as God of War, and Devil May Cry, where there are many combinations to do different moves.

So why not use the old GC controller to play it? Well, you've just defeated the purpose of buying a Wii. Why would I play a game with shitty graphics using the regular controller, when I could play a game with amazing graphics on the 360 or PS3 using the regular controller anyways? A much more comfortable controller, I might add.

If Nintendo can get their heads out of their ass on the next go around and make a hardware intensive machine that can compete with the 360 and PS3, as well as make games that make use of the Wii-mote -AND- games that make use of a regular controller, they could easily stomp all competition. But they went for cool concept with a shitty system, and it isn't enough for a lot of gamers.

Honestly, how long were they working on that only to come up with a new controller? They had years in which they could have been improving a LOT on the Gamecube... what do they do? They upgrade a gamecube a little bit, and throw a new controller in. Wasted time and research money IMO.

The problem is that people assume that just because they are high end systems, that arcade style games like what are on the Wii won't be useful for them. A system could still have these graphic intensive games, and also do fun little party games.

I like Nintendo.. the 64 was one of my favorite systems of all time. But unless they start catering to their old crowd who is now grown up and wanting more out of games, they're going to lose those players permanently to the other consoles.

Edit: They need to stop trying to be completely different. You can only be so different until people start to go "Huh?"

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by Hollywood Hasney Look at the first year of the DS. Bollocks, utter shite. Only thing that saved it was Kirby as everything else was just a mini-game that had no right being a full price game and 3rd parties throwing out planned GBA games to cash in. One year later, the Lite comes out and Nintendo storm some amazing games and the 3rd parties followed suit.

Meteos
Advance Wars...

Okay, I can't really come up with a list. But still, EVERYTHING else is selling it a little short.

I'm skeptical of the claim Requiem cited of a game that wasn't possible without Blu-Ray. Sounds like the same kind of hype you hear every day, so I'm a bit skeptical that anyone has made the jump from DVD to NEEDING BRD. I'm sure the developer said it (or something similar), but you look at all the usual shit people say.

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by Requiem I think you're missing the point in what I meant by 'the future of gaming'. The future of gaming -is- realism. The way a character moves, the way he swings a weapon. The way he shoots a gun. Immersing the player in the world. That is what gaming should be. With Assassin's Creed, you have crowd dynamics. No game has ever done real crowd dynamics before. The processing units in the 360 and PS3 allow them to do this. Edit: They need to stop trying to be completely different. You can only be so different until people start to go "Huh?"

I cut out all but the two points I wanted to address.

Realism has been pushed for ages; game sales are down. I'm not going to play up a direct corrolation here, but I honestly think realism can only take things so far, so the future? Doubt it.

As for Nintendo, their differences are what changes gaming. Again, game sales are down. I'll attribute this to stagnance. Is it any wonder that something different is selling so well? Or that Nintendo look at change as a business model?

[#BROKEN Hasney]

Originally Posted by Kane Knight Meteos Advance Wars...

Well, Advance Wars was an uported GBA game which is why I didn't count it, but FUCK, Metoes. I am ashamed for forgetting that!

The future of gaming -is- realism. The way a character moves, the way he swings a weapon. The way he shoots a gun. Immersing the player in the world. That is what gaming should be.

OK, fair enough. But no matter how advanced graphics or AI get, I don't see how pushing a joystick up and pushing buttons is immersive anymore. When I was a kid, I was playing Skool Daze on my C64. Characters may as well have been stick men, but there were actual personality to traits to each of the students AND teachers. It was also a sandbox game, you could do what the hell you liked. Wanna write rude words on the blackboard? Go for it! Punch a teach, yeah, all good. Catapault them? Fire a catapault rock off their head while they're sitting down? Get Lines? Get Detention? All there.

The same as any game with an open sandbox now. Smaller scale? Of course, but the same princibles have been advanced a few times over and after 17 years of this shit, it gets old.

Theres two different things here anyways, realism and immersiveness. The only sandbox type game with any real sort of human emotion was Shenmue 1+2, thats realism. Fuck swinging a weapon, making you care for your characters while you as the MAIN character can do a lot of things off the main story is real. People with real backstories from years ago that get picked up on as the story goes.

Now if you want immersive, for me you only have to talk about probably the only Wii port with checking out. Godfather Backhand Edition. Who cares how real the animation of the character you're controlling is. If you're strangeling someone, your hands have to be actually strangling someone. It's stupid fun but it is brilliant. If that game had wii-mote steering instead of analogue it would be so much better, but the fighting is so awesome in that game because you feel like you're doing it.

Anyways, I've ranted again, but I think what I'm saying is the future of gaming is subjective. Is realism what you're seeing on a screen, or what you're actually doing to make that happen. Maybe I've been playing games for too long, but for me it's by far the latter these days. Had a few people in my house today, not all gamers. Few of us played some Capcom Vs SNK 2 and Mario Kart, then I brought down my Wii, put on Dragonball Z and when you've been seen playing that game, the people that were doing other things suddenly took notice and wanted to throw those damn beams. Not the down-forward punch for a hadoken.

Right, this could be the wrey and nephew talking here but, is it me, or would a new Street Fighter EX with wii-mote controls like Dragonball just completly fucking rock?

[#BROKEN Hasney]

FUCK, just annoyed myself by mentioning Shenmue, because that story will never be finished

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by Hollywood Hasney Well, Advance Wars was an uported GBA game which is why I didn't count it, but FUCK, Metoes. I am ashamed for forgetting that!

There were a couple other good non-Nintendo titles, like MEteos. Just don't remember.

AW is more of a "Nintendo has sequelitis" deal than an uport. It's ridiculsously similar, but...

Just saying there were a few good games. Nothing spectacular in terms of volume, but it wasn't any more bleak than the Wii's release lineup. Hell, they largely banked the Wii's sales on the Zelda game, a port of the GCN design with a few "added features."

[Requiem]

Even the playable demo that they had there at whatever conference that was wouldn't even fit on a DVD, and it wasn't even the full game. No loading screens, which is one of my main complaints about the PS3 right now. Loading screens can take a while, so it will be nice to be able to just keep going without wait.

[Requiem]

Originally Posted by Kane Knight Realism has been pushed for ages; game sales are down. I'm not going to play up a direct corrolation here, but I honestly think realism can only take things so far, so the future? Doubt it.

The thing is.. until now, games haven't been able to touch the type of realism that companies are striving for. The type of realism wasn't able to be recreated back then. PCs of course have been getting closer and closer all the time, if you have a machine that can handle those type of graphics.

Immersion is great.. and hey, if Nintendo can make a -better- version of what they just did, I would LOVE IT. But until they get something that looks good enough, and has enough nice touches in it to make me feel like I'm really there.. using my hands to actually strangle a game character isn't going to do much. Especially when most all non-Nintendo games controls suck. They're so awkard and clunky that it gets too hard to stay interested because you're always fighting with it.

Originally Posted by Hollywood Hasney But no matter how advanced graphics or AI get, I don't see how pushing a joystick up and pushing buttons is immersive anymore.

Nintendo's controller took away the diversity of attacks. Think of how many combinations are in a lot of hack n slash games these days. They're too hard to copy with the controller, and you end up with a few basic attacks depending which way you're holding the controller.

[Kane Knight]

It's always different.