Nintendo Wii = Scam

[Pollux]

(1) Nothing currently announced for the Nintendo Wii couldn't be ran on the Gamecube.

That's right, Nintendo's "small and quiet" gimmick is simply an excuse for essentially re-selling us the Gamecube in a different box. I know many of you will simply respond with "gameplay > graphics", but my point is that the Wii is taking that to an extreme. Noone in a stable frame of mind can look at ANY of the currently announced Wii games and deny that they could be ran on the Gamecube's hardware.

Proof:

Metroid Prime 2: Echos (Gamecube)


Metroid Prime 3: Corruption (Wii)




Super Mario Sunshine (Gamecube)


Super Mario Galaxy (Wii)




The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess (Gamecube)


The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess (Wii)


Also consider that Nintendo has delayed the Gamecube release of Zelda to promote Wii sales.



(2) The Nintendo Wii is 5-year-old hardware.

It's no coincidence that the all of the Wii's games look dated before they're even released.

Proof:

Call of Duty 3 (Wii)



Farcry: Vengeance (Wii)



Samurai Warriors (Wii)


(3) Gimmick?

The best feature of the Wii is the new innovative controller. Some games will play great with it, while others may be awkward (such as fighting games). I think it's great that Nintendo is continuing such innovation, but from a consumer standpoint, I feel like I'm getting ripped-off. Here we are, 5 years after the release of the Gamecube, and Nintendo is trying to sell us a whole new console for $250 with no games that look better than any Gamecube game (even Gamecube launch games, such as Rogue Leader). So, as an intelligent consumer, why on earth would I want to buy this? The answer is the controller. Maybe it will revolutionize gaming as we know it, but due to the fact that the rest of the console completely underdelivers, it just screams "gimmick" to me.

 

[El-Scotto]

Guess its a good thing i didnt own a gamecube first

 

[Sentential]

Have you actually used one?

 

[Midnight Dream]

(1) Nothing currently announced for the Nintendo Wii couldn't be ran on the Gamecube.

That's right, Nintendo's "small and quiet" gimmick is simply an excuse for essentially re-selling us the Gamecube in a different box. I know many of you will simply respond with "gameplay > graphics", but my point is that the Wii is taking that to an extreme. Noone in a stable frame of mind can look at ANY of the currently announced Wii games and deny that they could be ran on the Gamecube's hardware.

Proof:

Metroid Prime 2: Echos (Gamecube)


Metroid Prime 3: Corruption (Wii)




Super Mario Sunshine (Gamecube)


Super Mario Galaxy (Wii)




The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess (Gamecube)


The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess (Wii)


Also consider that Nintendo has delayed the Gamecube release of Zelda to promote Wii sales.



(2) The Nintendo Wii is 5-year-old hardware.

It's no coincidence that the all of the Wii's games look dated before they're even released.

Proof:

Call of Duty 3 (Wii)



Farcry: Vengeance (Wii)



Samurai Warriors (Wii)


(3) Gimmick?

The best feature of the Wii is the new innovative controller. Some games will play great with it, while others may be awkward (such as fighting games). I think it's great that Nintendo is continuing such innovation, but from a consumer standpoint, I feel like I'm getting ripped-off. Here we are, 5 years after the release of the Gamecube, and Nintendo is trying to sell us a whole new console for $250 with no games that look better than any Gamecube game (even Gamecube launch games, such as Rogue Leader). So, as an intelligent consumer, why on earth would I want to buy this? The answer is the controller. Maybe it will revolutionize gaming as we know it, but due to the fact that the rest of the console completely underdelivers, it just screams "gimmick" to me.

1, your Twilight Princess images are the exact same image.
2, We've heard this already. Quite honestly, I don't think anybody cares. The fact that the Wii is selling far better than both the PS3 and the XBox 360 has done speaks for itself.

 

[RedDragonXXX]

Some people like it, some don't.

Personally I would never pay $250 for this console.

 

[RedDragonXXX]

1, your Twilight Princess images are the exact same image.
2, We've heard this already. Quite honestly, I don't think anybody cares. The fact that the Wii is selling far better than both the PS3 and the XBox 360 has done speaks for itself.

Wii is selling more then PS3 cause they have more units out and all PS3 units that were released were sold. Second, Xbox360 has 10 million consoles sold in a year so we will see how Wii does in that time frame
.

 

[Midnight Dream]

Wii is selling more then PS3 cause they have more units out and all PS3 units that were released were sold. Second, Xbox360 has 10 million consoles sold in a year so we will see how Wii does in that time frame
.

No, the Wii is selling more than then PS3 because
A) It doesn't cost 600
B) People who actually play games are buying it, not buying it with intention to turn right around and sell it (for the majority)

PS - Sales reports for the Xbox 360 as of yesterday was alittle over 8 million. Not 10. Thats Microsoft's projected sales for the end of 06.

Wii: 235,976 units per day (3 days on sale)
PS3: 24,313 units per day (11 days on sale)
Xbox 360: 20,890 units per day (345 days on sale)

(Information from 11-21-06)

 

[ziggo0]

I've said it a few times once and I'll say (post) it yet again. Nintendo has never really been FOR graphics...just gameplay.

 

[Pollux]

1, your Twilight Princess images are the exact same image.

IGN links to the same image in their Gamecube and Wii articles on the game. Rumor has it that the Gamecube version will actually look slightly better since it was developed for the console and not ported.

I've said it a few times once and I'll say (post) it yet again. Nintendo has never really been FOR graphics...just gameplay.

Explain the Gamecube then. It was graphically on par with its competition last gen and in many cases had superior looking games. The technology is there, Nintendo has just chosen to resell us what we bought in 2001 with a different case and controller. As for gameplay > graphics, I want to at least see good gameplay to justify the crappy graphics. The only worthwhile Wii game thus far is a Gamecube game. Every potentially good third party game currently released has handled horribly with the new controller (i.e. Red Steel). When a Gamecube launch game (Rogue Leader) that came out 5 years ago looks better than anything currently released or announced for a new console that costs $250 ($50 more than Gamecube at its release) I can't help but feel like I'm getting ripped off.

 

[Midnight Dream]

IGN links to the same image in their Gamecube and Wii articles on the game. Rumor has it that the Gamecube version will actually look slightly better since it was developed for the console and not ported.

I have seen several different versions (gamecube/wii). There are noticable differences, with the Wii looking better.

Explain the Gamecube then. It was graphically on par with its competition last gen and in many cases had superior looking games. The technology is there, Nintendo has just chosen to resell us what we bought in 2001 with a different case and controller. As for gameplay > graphics, I want to at least see good gameplay to justify the crappy graphics. The only worthwhile Wii game thus far is a Gamecube game. Every potentially good third party game currently released has handled horribly with the new controller (i.e. Red Steel).

Consider this. Resident Evil 4 was praised for its graphics on the gamecube. Everybody considered that version to look far superior than any of the other versions. Now think about this: Resident Evil 4 was NOT developed by Nintendo. But it looked great. Why? Because the DEVELOPER put forth the effort to make it look good.

Bottom line, everybody is ragging on Nintendo about the Wii's graphics, but it's not Nintendo that people need to be looking at. It's the developers of the games who are not taking full advantage of the graphical power of the system.

 

[Cheator]

how is it a scam? I love it... even if it isn't much better than a GC. IF you think its all about the graphics and newer hardware, then good for you but why accuse nintendo of scamming people?

 

[Pollux]

how is it a scam? I love it... even if it isn't much better than a GC. IF you think its all about the graphics and newer hardware, then good for you but why accuse nintendo of scamming people?

Read my post. Nintendo is selling us hardware that is 5 years old for $50 more than we originally paid for it in 2001. The entire console's selling point is its controller, which has yet to show to actually improve gameplay in anything other than a simple demo included with it. Hardware, whether you want to admit it or not, affects gameplay. Graphics, sound, physics, AI, loading times, world size, etc. are ALL dependant on hardware and ALL affect gameplay and immersion. Can you honestly see yourself playing games on this console until 2010 and beyond? To put that into perspective, it would be like playing games with Nintendo 64 quality graphics and features from 1996 to present day.

 

[Midnight Dream]

Wii
CPU: PowerPC based "Broadway" processor, made with a 90 nm SOI CMOS process, reportedly clocked at 729 MHz.
GPU: ATI "Hollywood" GPU made with a 90 nm CMOS process, reportedly clocked at 243 MHz

Gamecube
CPU: PowerPC based "Gekko" processor, made with 43-mm² die, clocked at 485MHz
GPU: ATI "Flipper" GPU made with 180 nanometer NEC embedded DRAM-compatible process, reportedly clocked at 162MHz


Hmmm....no, not quite the same.

 

[Pollux]

Wii
CPU: PowerPC based "Broadway" processor, made with a 90 nm SOI CMOS process, reportedly clocked at 729 MHz.
GPU: ATI "Hollywood" GPU made with a 90 nm CMOS process, reportedly clocked at 243 MHz

Gamecube
CPU: PowerPC based "Gekko" processor, made with 43-mm² die, clocked at 485MHz
GPU: ATI "Flipper" GPU made with 180 nanometer NEC embedded DRAM-compatible process, reportedly clocked at 162MHz


Hmmm....no, not quite the same.

The Xbox is a more powerful system than the Wii, but the graphical differences between the Xbox and Gamecube are pretty much indistinguishable. So you can expect to see Wii games, at best, only look *slightly* better than Gamecube games and only if developers choose to put in the extra effort. When the console's technology is that old, it really doesn't matter anyway. It would be like comparing a Geforce ti4200 and a Radeon 8500 today when cards like the 8800GTX are out.

 

[genghisjohn]

I wouldn't say a scam, just a little overpriced at $250. The Wii is the only system that at launch is not taking a loss.

 

[Midnight Dream]

The Xbox is a more powerful system than the Wii, but the graphical differences between the Xbox and Gamecube are pretty much indistinguishable. So you can expect to see Wii games, at best, only look *slightly* better than Gamecube games and only if developers choose to put in the extra effort.

You cannot judge how well games will look just on the basis of hardware though. One must also consider the capabilities of that hardware as well. GPU A and GPU B might have similar specifications, but GPU B might have much more in the way of capabilities.

 

[twEEkerAreUs]

That Farcry: Vengeance (Wii) screen shot is kind of disturbing. It reminds me of some sort of bargin bin valuesoft FPS PC Game. At $250 the Wii is priced the best but for what you're getting I'll hold out. I don't consider the system to be a (Scam) though, it is newer hardware but like most recent systems launch games don't utilize full hardware potential.

 

[Pollux]

You cannot judge how well games will look just on the basis of hardware though. One must also consider the capabilities of that hardware as well. GPU A and GPU B might have similar specifications, but GPU B might have much more in the way of capabilities.

Nintendo has already officially announced that the Wii's power and capabilities are comparable to the Xbox's. Most articles regarding the Wii tout it as being almost as powerful as the original Xbox...as if that were a good thing.

 

[Midnight Dream]

That Farcry: Vengeance (Wii) screen shot is kind of disturbing. It reminds me of some sort of bargin bin valuesoft FPS PC Game. At $250 the Wii is priced the best but for what you're getting I'll hold out. I don't consider the system to be a (Scam) though, it is newer hardware but like most recent systems launch games don't utilize full hardware potential.

What the OP fails to mention about that Farcry: Vengeance screenshot, is that it was the first released screenshot, shown back in September, when Ubisoft themselves said that it was still a work in progress. Things may or may not have changed since then, I have not looked too much into it besides initial research. Farcry just has never been my thing.

 

[twEEkerAreUs]

Nintendo has already officially announced that the Wii's power and capabilities are comparable to the Xbox's. Most articles regarding the Wii tout it as being almost as powerful as the original Xbox...as if that were a good thing.

Alot was riding on the controller I'll give you that. For parties or get togethers it is the system to have though but since I never do that I could care less.