I find it funny Nintendo fanboys try to imply that the sales of Nintendo systems obviously mean they are quality machines and preferred by hardcore gamers.

But they don' t look at the people who buy the systems - Timmy the 12 year old is not a hardcore gamer, Bobby' s Grandma is not a hardcore gamer, Petey' s Soccer Mom is not a hardcore gamer. THESE are the type of people that buy Nintendo systems, and they are not real gamers. They are casual retards that know nothing about gaming, that is the type of people who buy Nintendo systems.

True gamers would never pick a Wii over a 360 or a DS over a PSP, only non gamers & retards do that. Now you can flaunt sales figures all you want, but that doesn' t change the facts.

Discuss.

Discuss

ROFL

ORIGINAL: emofag

True gamers would never pick a Wii over a 360 or a DS over a PSP, only non gamers & retards do that. Now you can flaunt sales figures all you want, but that doesn' t change the facts.

Discuss.

WRONG!

If you make the assumption that true gamers choose the most powerful platform then that would be the PC, not any console. True gamers choose consoles with games they enjoy. What you think of people that don' t share your view is just your opinion. I no longer Flaunt Wii sales figures because its only relevance is if we see a direct correlation between Wii console sales & more games. Until then i have nothing to brag about, but it is comforting to see them doing so well i must admit. You sound a little pissed off? Why the need to start a thread like this? Bored?

Strange, I' ve been playing games since the Master System was out but I' m still interested in the Wii. And have a DS. I guess I' m a casual gamer then who happens to like mainstream stuff like Virtua Fighter, MGS, Shenmue, Ikaruga, Silent Hill, Skies of Arcadia, Roommania 203 etc.

But seriously, even if a lot of non gamers bought the Wii, I still doubt that they are the big majority. I' ve seen more casual gamers play Guitar Hero on PS2 actually than some of the " different" stuff on Wii.

By the way, one could call people who buy 360' s for retards too since the reliability of the hardware is very poor. Or people who bought a PS3 can be retards too since the system doesn' t have much for it at the moment. So they spent a lot of money while having a small library of quality games. It all depends on the perspective you use in other words. So this seems just another fanboy thread amongst many.

True gamers would never pick the Wii over the PC, PS3 or the 360. Not even I have bought a Wii yet.
However, a true gamer should eventually end up owning a Wii as a compliment to the other consoles because many of the games that' ll be on it are essential gaming experiences, for hardcore gamers and casual gamers alike.

True gamers would never pick the Wii over the PC, PS3 or the 360. Not even I have bought a Wii yet.
However, a true gamer should eventually end up owning a Wii as a compliment to the other consoles because many of the games that' ll be on it are essential gaming experiences, for hardcore gamers and casual gamers alike.

Pc is the true platform, anything else is mearly trying to imitate it in the living room. PS3 and 360 are doing a decent job, Wii is not. Even when the platform starts to get games it won' t matter, the hardware is still junk. Nothing amazing can be done with it. That' s why everyone else moved past Xbox and Playstation 2.

Evil Man is right, sales don' t mean shit. Most people are stupid. Look around and look at the dumb shit people buy.

The simple truth here is that price sells, Wii is cheap and the 360 and PS3 are still relatively expensive. When both drop in price we' ll only see them pick up steam.

ORIGINAL: Agent Ghost
Nothing amazing can be done with it

Is that right? Well considering Metroid Prime 3 has superior FPS controls (according to Several reviews) to standard controllers i think that counts as something amazing

That' s why everyone else moved past Xbox and Playstation 2.

Really? Maybe for Xbox 1, but last time i checked the ps2 still outsells both the ps3 & 360 worldwide, so where do you get the idea that ' everyone' has moved on?

Evil Man is right, sales don' t mean shit.

Really? So why are so many normally Playstation exclusives going to the 360? Simple - because the 360 has a significantly larger userbase then the ps3? On another note have developers ignored the PS2' s 100million + userbase? I mean if sales mean $#!t then they shouldn' t even be looking at the ps2, but guess what, they still look at the ps2 as a viable platform, even if it is 7 years old, all because of its enormous userbase. Fact is console sales do matter. Its not the only thing that matters admittedly but it DOES MATTER, whether you want to believe it or not.

. Most people are stupid. Look around and look at the dumb shit people buy

You really have a high opinion of yourself there. Why are peoples decisions stupid to you? Because its not the same as yours? I think lashing out at the public is very petty. Face it, not everyone thinks/feels/behaves like you do, its not being stupid, its being different. Let me ask have you never in your life made a stupid decision?

The simple truth here is that price sells, Wii is cheap and the 360 and PS3 are still relatively expensive. When both drop in price we' ll only see them pick up steam.

You had to bring this up again when you could not prove your point before.
Firstly if your theory is correct, explain why the in Australia a AUS$750 ps2 (note the 360 is AUS$699) out-sold the AUS$399 GC (Wii is AUS$399). Explain Why the US$250 Wii with basically slightly improved ps2 graphics (at the moment) continually outsells the US$129 ps2? If you are so sure of your theory why do these relevant examples question its validity? For your theory to be valid it must stand up to all scenarios, as you can see there are 2 examples where your theory fails.

Seriously you need to relax Agent. Take a break from your regular Anti Wii Sentiments.

We will not rest untill its DESTROYED! DAMNED BE THE WII!

I fucking hate PC' s. Not because of the price but because of the lack of simplicity.
It' s simply not convenient to play on PC' s IMO. If you think it is then that' s great for you. But I don' t.
The best games I' ve played have been on consoles. The games weren' t as technically impressive as PC games of that time but I don' t care about that.

The reason PC games are selling at all is because everyone has a PC. And since they' ve got one they might as well buy some games or upgrade it from time to time to get the most from it.

ORIGINAL: Terrak

Is that right? Well considering Metroid Prime 3 has superior FPS controls (according to Several reviews) to standard controllers i think that counts as something amazing

Reviews don' t count for shit as far as i' m concerned. I know ten times more about this industry than 99% of games journalists and don' t need some fukkwit telling me that a game is good or not, i can figure that out for myself. The only good that comes out of reviews is the changes they create in share prices.

ORIGINAL: Terrak

Really? So why are so many normally Playstation exclusives going to the 360? Simple - because the 360 has a significantly larger userbase then the ps3? On another note have developers ignored the PS2' s 100million + userbase? I mean if sales mean $#!t then they shouldn' t even be looking at the ps2, but guess what, they still look at the ps2 as a viable platform, even if it is 7 years old, all because of its enormous userbase. Fact is console sales do matter. Its not the only thing that matters admittedly but it DOES MATTER, whether you want to believe it or not.

Userbase doesn' t mean shit if the console has a poor software tie ratio like Wii and PS3. Xbox had a decent software tie ratio but PS2' s was higher. 360 has the highest this generation, meaning that 360 owners are buying more units of software per console than Wii or PS3 owners. Publishers evaluate the install base, that' s true, but the software tie ratio is more important because for example; Wii could have twice the userbase 360 has and yet 360 would still be the better option for most publishers because of software tie ratio is much higher.

So it' s you that is incorrect. It' s you that' s regurgitating the same old bullshit responses and it' s you that' s failing to comprehend just how this industry works.

I wouldn' t spend too much time in the sun if i were you, it' s obviously baked your fukking head and made you mental.

ORIGINAL: Nitro

Reviews don' t count for shit as far as i' m concerned. I know ten times more about this industry than 99% of games journalists and don' t need some fukkwit telling me that a game is good or not, i can figure that out for myself. The only good that comes out of reviews is the changes they create in share prices.

Why is it that you are now so critical of reviews when they said something positive of a Wii game? When Bioshock or some other non-Wii game gets good reviews you don' t even question it, but when they say something positive about Metriods Wii controls now they can' t be trusted. What gives? Have you tried MP3 and disagree with the GT review?

Userbase doesn' t mean shit if the console has a poor software tie ratio like Wii and PS3. Xbox had a decent software tie ratio but PS2' s was higher. 360 has the highest this generation, meaning that 360 owners are buying more units of software per console than Wii or PS3 owners. Publishers evaluate the install base, that' s true, but the software tie ratio is more important because for example; Wii could have twice the userbase 360 has and yet 360 would still be the better option for most publishers because of software tie ratio is much higher.

So it' s you that is incorrect. It' s you that' s regurgitating the same old bullshit responses and it' s you that' s failing to comprehend just how this industry works.

Wait a second, you actually agreed with me. It was Agent that said console sales means $#!t (ie Nothing), and you went on to say " Publishers evaluate the install base, that' s true," so according to you, the console sales DO MEAN SOMETHING, not nothing as claimed by Agent. I never said they were EVERYTHING. Also you seem to forget that the 360 has been out for 1 year more then both the ps3 and Wii, and had more time to cultivate a large portfolio of games. Its no $#!t is has a large attach rate, it currently has more variety of games to choose from compared to its competitors. Secondly the Wii' s attach rate is crap because its hasn' t got that many games and most of whats available now is crap (i think everyone agrees). Lets match the attach rates when they have been out for the same length of time otherwise the comparison is unfairly skewed. Compare the 360s attach rate 8-9 months after launch to Wiis attach rate IMO there would not be that much different (although if you have evidence other wise i' ll happy to look at it).

In any case Developers have beens shown to profit from the Wii. Ubisoft was the first to confirm this with its early support and now Capcom has as well -

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101&sid=axZUWTytK5tA&refer=japan

Sept. 11 (Bloomberg) -- Capcom Co., the Japanese publisher of the ``Resident Evil' ' video-game series, rose to a five-year high on the Tokyo Stock Exchange on expectations sales of titles for Nintendo Co.' s Wii consoles will boost earnings.

The company, whose ``Resident Evil' ' action game was among the top 10 titles sold in Japan and the U.S. in June, expects annual sales to rise 11 percent as it doubles the number of Wii titles to six. Chief Financial Officer Kazuhiko Abe gave presentations to investors in New York and Boston last week, focusing on new Wii offerings, spokesman Ryosuke Tanaka said.

Fact is, if the developer can release a quality title on the Wii there is a good chance of profiting.

I wouldn' t spend too much time in the sun if i were you, it' s obviously baked your fukking head and made you mental.

Lets keep it a clean discussion, i don' t think i have insulted anyone with my comments so i don' t see the need to go there.

Remember I posted this here before and now it comes in handy.

Level 4 – The Gamer – I don’t consider someone a gamer just because they have mad skillz or because they are mega-informed on the hobby or spend a lot of money on it. It takes a combination of what I listed at the beginning of this post – skills, knowledge and an appreciation for the hobby. You may not have the skills to beat every game on the planet, that’s OK. You may not have the money to import every game from Japan, that’s OK. You may not know everything about the industry and that’s OK too. I’m sure that with practice, I could beat 99% of the games that I play; I just don’t have the time to do so anymore. I don’t have the money to import every single game from Japan that I would like to. Heck, I can’t afford to buy all of the English games that I would want to. And I certainly don’t know everything about the industry (who does?), but I try to keep myself informed with the facts. I consider my self and people like me to be “true gamers”. We enjoy playing games because they entertain us, not because they’re #1 on Videogames.com top 10 lists. We buy consoles because they have games we want to play, not because they render 7 quadrillion micro polygons a second. We all have our own opinions on what’s good and bad for the industry, but we all agree on one thing – VIDEO GAMES RULE! I reserve the term “hardcore” as a compliment or way of paying respect to someone I view (for one reason or another) as an especially cool “gamer”. And yes, gamers are allowed to have favorites. My favorite game company, I’m proud to say, is SEGA.

So because I' m able to find fun in the Wii and have games on the horizon that I' m going to like...suddenly I' m not a " hardcore gamer" anymore.

You have your views just like everybody else. But to label those who differ from yours as retards and all that is just sad and makes you this.

Level 3 – Fanboys™ – I’m almost tempted to list Fanboys at Level 0, but I have to admit that Fanboys™ are Fanboys™ because at heart, they like to play games (most of them anyway). They like to think that they' re " hardcore" , but for lack of maybe experience or intelligence, they just don’t have what it takes. Fanboys™ are usually gung-ho for one company and refuse to see the good in any of that company’s competition. Fanboys™ are uninformed and easily influenced by the media. Their source for “media information” is usually questionable and they will lose a fact based argument with a level 4 gamer every time. I despise confident Fanboys, but I know where they’re coming from as I was once at this immature level. Anyway, on many occasion, one must pass through level 3 to get to level 4. : )

I' ve been playing games now for almost 20 years. From since I was little I saved my money and went out to buy games as much as I could afford. Till this day I still play everyday and buy games almost every week. I buy any game that appeals to me. No matter how weird or how simple the game may be.

Some people like me can' t afford to have more than one console. Does that make me less of a gamer...in my eyes it doesn' t. Would I like to own a 360 or ps3 next to my Wii. Sure why not. But I can' t afford that so I' ve chosen the platform for which I know most games I will like will be coming out.

If you dislike the Wii that' s fine that' s your right. But next time try being less of a fanboy and try not insulting people who don' t share your same view. I don' t take kindly being called a retard and a non gamer just because I don' t share YOUR views on matters.

ORIGINAL: Terrak

Why is it that you are now so critical of reviews when they said something positive of a Wii game? When Bioshock or some other non-Wii game gets good reviews you don' t even question it, but when they say something positive about Metriods Wii controls now they can' t be trusted. What gives? Have you tried MP3 and disagree with the GT review?

I slate pretty much all reviews dude. Everybody knows i don' t like the entire " idea" of reviewing a game. I' ve made it clear on many occasions that i only ever read hands-on impressions and tend to avoid reviews altogether.

If you posted in any of the threads not related to Wii then you' d know this.

ORIGINAL: Terrak

Wait a second, you actually agreed with me. It was Agent that said console sales means $#!t (ie Nothing), and you went on to say " Publishers evaluate the install base, that' s true," so according to you, the console sales DO MEAN SOMETHING, not nothing as claimed by Agent. I never said they were EVERYTHING. Also you seem to forget that the 360 has been out for 1 year more then both the ps3 and Wii, and had more time to cultivate a large portfolio of games. Its no $#!t is has a large attach rate, it currently has more variety of games to choose from compared to its competitors. Secondly the Wii' s attach rate is crap because its hasn' t got that many games and most of whats available now is crap (i think everyone agrees). Lets match the attach rates when they have been out for the same length of time otherwise the comparison is unfairly skewed. Compare the 360s attach rate 8-9 months after launch to Wiis attach rate IMO there would not be that much different (although if you have evidence other wise i' ll happy to look at it).

10 months in 360 had a 5.5 software tie ratio. Wii' s right now, including the bundled WiiPlay is around 3.85, PS3' s is even lower. So even though it' s likely that Nintendo have sold at least 700k more consoles than Microsoft, 360 is still a more viable option for publishers.

Plus as i already told you; two thirds of all software sales on 360 has been by sold by third parties and two thirds of all software sales on Wii have been by first parties and this affects publishers mentality, something Iwata already commented on. It' ll get better next year as the console garners more support but for some it' ll be too little too late.

ORIGINAL: Terrak

Fact is, if the developer can release a quality title on the Wii there is a good chance of profiting.

True, but Capcom' s situation is unique in that the game was already 90% complete, was released at a budget price point and the development costs will have been very minor. Each game sold will have been almost 100% pure profit, but that' s not the case for new software.

If anything (in the extreme) it could encourage other companies to port their last-gen games with Wiimote controls, and that' d be a bad thing.

I agree that if a company puts the effort in then they could see a healthy return, but the only " quality" games i see are the forthcoming Nintendo developed Prime, Galaxy, Kart and Brawl. There is nothing else yet.

Now i' m buying a Wii just for those 4 games but you have to understand that in the grand scheme of things the hardware sales aren' t anywhere near as important as most people believe.

Well, around October last year the 360 attachment rate was at 5.2: http://uk.xbox360.ign.com/articles/747/747181p1.html

The latest Wii attach rate figures I could find are from February this year(3.6). Did Nintendo say anything about their attachment rate on this years E3 press briefing?

The problem i have with the wii right now is not the abscence of AAA titles, the latest is Metroid but still no pal version, and the others are game cube ports. My real problem is that there is NOTHING really interesting in the horizon from 3rd parties. You do know that an AAA title will take at leaaaaast 8 months or so before it is released, i' m being very optimistic here, usually it' s 1 year and half to 2 years!! Now that' s damn scary because right now , NO high profile games are announced for the wii, except that Killer 7 game, but i' ll put a ? on that game.


i' m having the wii right now, and apart from Zelda there is nothing to play , all the other games i enjoy them for max 30 min and i shut it off.

One more thing Terrak, the 360 on its first year had good-great games, Cod2, Fear, Oblivion, Condemned , Kameo, Fight night, Ghost recon... man that' s more than the wii ever had... 90% of wii games are pure Shit , i' m not talking about the 7-8 range scores, i' m talking about 6 and the darknesss below.

and i have already said it many times, people are mad at the wii because it " steals" developers focus on the main consoles , 360 and ps3, for some terrible games.

Is that right? Well considering Metroid Prime 3 has superior FPS controls (according to Several reviews) to standard controllers i think that counts as something amazing

Controls don' t make the game, it never did and it never will. The wiimote won' t change the fact that Metroid Prime 3 is still pathetic compared to what it would be like on a console up to par. I' m not a Metroid fan to begin with so the series means nothing to me, but from what I' ve read people are saying that if you take away the controls, MP3 is watered down compared to the previous two.

Sadly it' s probably the strongest title on Wii at the moment but it' s not even as good as the first two on GameCube.

When the first Metroid game comes out on Nintendo' s next console (assuming it' s at least as powerful as the 360/PS3) I' ll ask you which you prefer. That or MP3. We' ll see how far you' re willing to go with your dishonesty.

Though the game can of course be refined. It wouldn' t be dishonest if people preferred it then. If there comes another Metroid since I read that the developers were tired of the series and put it to the rest for the time being.

I disagree though with the " controls don' t make a game" . I think they do to a certain extent. Not totally of course but it' s a part of the whole. That' s why Lair would' ve been a much better game if it had good controls instead of how things are now. A bad control scheme can totally ruin something enjoyable.

What does surprise me is that people still go berserk as soon as the topic is Wii, its games or its sales. I mean, seriously, why bother if the console doesn' t interest you? Why does it matter to them personally who the people are that buy the console? All over the internet I see bashing of the Wii by many so called " hardcore" gamers. Why would they care if a console that isn' t targeted at them gets this or that game in the end. They have their consoles of choice and get stuff that they like for it. Isn' t that enough?
And even if the Wii " steals" attention from developers then it' s still THEIR fault if they release crap. The final responsibility is in their hands I think. Not the platform itself.

Im suprized some of the normal posters actually bothered to even to reply to such dribble.. (Ys your too good to post on this crap)

Can understand the many anti-Nintendo-clan to let things off thier chest to the market leader and to talk complete bollocks (don' t bother troll this post, i aint lookin in this dribble for a 3rd time), But the others actually discussing / replying to a thread which should have been completely ignored. Shame on you!


Evilman Your a complete lunatic!! Your gonna have the rest of the posters taking your bad habbits soon, one of which is covering their walls with their names written in shit.!!

You should be locked up ..ROFL.

I just want to say that I can understand all the critisism the Wii gets, and I even agree with most of it to some extent. But since I' m interested and fascinated by the Wii myself, I try my best to explain why I feel that way and why I think there' s a future for the Wii. Even though most of you don' t agree, I hope you understand my point of view.

I think my sole complaint about the wii is its weak power.

You can call me a graphics whore if you like..

But try taking a great game you never completed thats 10 years old, load it up, the dated graphics will get to you instantly, atleast thats what they do to me.

Now the Wii isnt 10 years old yet, but its getting there!