The Wii was bought by many people who didn't have a console before. They are casual gamers, they don't really care about the power of the hardware.
But I think there's another problem. Everybody who wanted a console with simple, fun games with motion control already got one. In most cases it's probably a Wii. And I don't really think these people feel the need to update. They either still get enough fun out of the Wii, or they don't use their console as much as they used to, so why buy a new one? Unless Nintendo succeeds to present the Wii U controller tablets as something that's more fun than dirty sex, these people will not replace their hardware.

StrangeQ: So when I kick back in my recliner to play Skyrim on my PC with my wireless keyboard and mouse, I'm doing what, exactly?

And what the hell am I doing playing Skyrim from the couch, with my laptop plugged into the receiver and television, and an XBox 360 controller? I think there may have been a section of Leviticus dedicated to how wrong that is, but I WILL DO WHAT I LIKE.

AmazinTim: Does anyone know anyone who still uses their Wii every week?

I'm currently going through the Metroid Prime Trilogy with the Other M, Twilight Princess, and Skyward Sword after that.

Mike_LowELL: taxandspend: Of the whopping 4 Gamecube games I kept when I "upgraded" to my Wii, Road Rage was one of them. Love that game.

/regret selling most of my old games

Can't say much about Road Rage. If you enjoyed it, more power to you. As long as you didn't give up a copy of P.N. 03, we're okay on this.

knightofargh: I was a Gamecube fan actually. It was revolutionary in its own way. Some of it's optimized titles played smoother and looked better than Xbox/PS2 titles of the same age. There is still no excuse for what the Wii is based on how it was pitched.

It was either "play second-fiddle to the Xbox and the PlayStation" a second time or "create an artificial market bubble and hold on for another five years". They chose the latter. Nintendo made all these fantastic and complex games for the system and they never shook being the kiddy console. As little nice as I have to say about Nintendo Wii, I really can't blame them for what they did.

knightofargh: Incidentally, are you feeling well? That's two posts in a thread without trolling the other posters. That's very unlike you.

Is it because I'm being rational or because you feel sorry for me in my misguided opinions?

I don't troll the threads discussing topics of significant political or cultural value. So here we are, serious biznets vidya games. That, and I'm trying not to get caught up in the ridiculous pissing match here. The "four best console games of the year" were Skyward Sword, Arkham City, Uncharted 3, and Skyrim while the "three best computer games of the year" were League of Legends, Minecraft, and Portal 2. And these guys are fighting over which platform has the better games. Lol. Neither side is holding up their bargain. You want good games, you have to dig for them, and it doesn't really matter what device that is right now. Arcades, consoles, computers, tablets, whatever.

Mobile fark doesnt play well with truncating comments.

I don't always agree with you, but that's a reasonable summation. You need a pitchfork and waders to get to the competently done games out there past all the crap.

Counter_Intelligent: AmazinTim: Does anyone know anyone who still uses their Wii every week?

Yo. I plan on playing the shiat out of mine when Xenoblade comes out Friday, too.

I've had Xenoblade for months. It's awesome.


/hacked Wii ftw

I listen to the Game Informer podcast and they brought up a good point. to quote, (poorly) "people have been saying Nintendo is done since the N64, but they're still here."

ArkAngel: moistD: Transubstantive: ArkAngel: 4 of the top 10 selling games last year were Wii exclusives and another was a DS exclusive.

The year before, Nintendo had 11 of the top 20.

Really? I find that incredibly hard to believe.

that is because its not true. I love Nintendo, and will most likely buy the Wii U day one, have been a strong supporter of the Wii but not even Zelda made the top 10 last year. I think it was 19 overall.

Link (new window)

Ah, silly me I wasn't thinking global sales. That makes sense. The Japanese are rather ethnocentric when it comes to video games.

ArkAngel: And that harms Sony how?

It doesn't, it hurts Microsoft and any non-Japanese developer.

/someone seems a little touchy

This thread gave me cancer.

knightofargh: I don't always agree with you, but that's a reasonable summation. You need a pitchfork and waders to get to the competently done games out there past all the crap.

Examples?

Mentalpatient87: Examples?

Of crap games?

Electronic Arts.

There's a start.

Smackledorfer: Of crap games?

Gee, didn't see that coming a mile away.. Nobody ever goes for the opportunity to tell me what is actually good, so I'll keep enjoying "crap" like Skyrim and Minecraft I guess...

Nintendo has made a profit on each Wii sold....that's a hard business model to argue against.

Mentalpatient87: Smackledorfer: Of crap games?

Gee, didn't see that coming a mile away.. Nobody ever goes for the opportunity to tell me what is actually good, so I'll keep enjoying "crap" like Skyrim and Minecraft I guess...

WTF are you talking about. I read Knight's post to mean that there are a far more bad games than good ones. Did you read it to mean that nobody knows about skyrim and Knightofargh thinks its crappy?

Although, I never did finish it, so there's that.

RexTalionis: MightyPez: RexTalionis: Okay, I sunk 200 bucks in. I already have the computer, because I need that for other things. Even if I don't game, I would still have paid 300-500 for a computer.

Monitor costs me about 100 bucks. I'm looking at a 20 inch Hanns-G monitor that costs $109 bucks. Of course, the monitors that I am currently using are salvaged from my previous systems, so this generation, a dual monitor setup wound up costing me nothing.

In any case, my almost all of my PC games come from Steam. Twice a year at the Steam July 4th sales and Christmas sales, I plonk down 80 bucks or so and I've got enough games for the year, including relatively new games. PS3 games cost me a hell of a lot more - their prices never seem to vary much beyond 60 bucks or 40 bucks or 20 bucks unless I buy used.

So that higher resolution video card is going to waste on a $100 monitor then? That was kind of the crux of your argument. That's these mid range video cards will play it at higher resolutions than the console counterpart. If the monitor is limited to 1900x1080 (or more likely) 1680x1050, the advantage of paying more for a PC that can play higher resolutions that a console is null.

Only a few PS3/XB360 games are even capable of running at true 1080p. Most of that is limited to very specialty games like, say, fighting games or sports games. Most other games run at 720p (or worse, see Halo 3) and then upscales it.

So, in the end, as long as my monitor (1680x1050) has higher resolution than 720p, I'm ahead of the game in just about 85-90% of all console games.

For the record I think this whole thing is a stupid argument (the thread, not you) but if you bought a tv with a decent chip in it you are not doing 720p.

Zeno-25: The only legit reason to prefer console gaming to PC gaming is if you also put a good chunk of cash into things like a big-screen HDTV and respectable audio system. Otherwise, you're better off just spending the same $500 bucks you would have on a console to invest in a good GPU and CPU. There's a reason PC gamers always run circles around console gamers in matches pitting each against each in the same game. PC gaming provides an inherently more precise medium for gaming.

Meh. I feel like sports games are better on console.

These threads are always entertaining. So many compelling arguments for why people are idiots/philistines/sheep for enjoying consoles or PCs as gaming machines.

Keep up the good fight boys I'll just be over here having fun.

/Omnivore Gamer
//True Master Race

Smackledorfer: I read Knight's post to mean that there are a far more bad games than good ones.

So did I, and I asked for examples of good games. Of course, you deliberately gave me the opposite for humor. That's fine, but I still kinda want some examples of good games from him and Mike.

Consoles are what parents buy for their kids.

If you'd rather play with gamers online other than 14-year old boys with potty-mouths, buy a PC.

/ The phrase is "barrier to entry"

Smackledorfer: WTF are you talking about. I read Knight's post to mean that there are a far more bad games than good ones. Did you read it to mean that nobody knows about skyrim and Knightofargh thinks its crappy?

Although, I never did finish it, so there's that.

"TES" as a series aren't exactly games, they are more like tedious experiences. I don't like them, doesn't make them bad. I can respect the scope, I just can't stand the game play.

Mentalpatient87: I asked for examples of good games

Current generation? YMMV and it depends upon the person's tastes. I know Mike trends toward full retard hard bullet hell type games. I trend toward games that are fun with variable challenge. Most of the AAA titles tend to be good, in that you get a decent RoI on them.

By genre:
Sandbox: any of TES and FO3/NV
Sandbox Crime: Saint's Row 2 (GTA IV jumped the shark and missed the point)
JRPG: No idea, I don't play them and don't bother with player or professional reviews
WRPG: Mostly Bioware for giving illusion of choice better than the rest of the industry, I can argue that FO3/NV falls under this as well. EA's influence might be killing the studio so YMMV in future.
Action: Bayonetta, Uncharted 1-3, RE4 and 5 (don't like them, but can respect them)
FPS: Don't really play them, based on folks that do it's all MW3 for MP. All of them suck for single player. Left 4 Dead and sequels were good, wouldn't play them on a console though.
Playable Movie/TV Series: Alan Wake (story was excellent, gameplay was terribad), LA Noir (technically excellent, gameplay was meh in spots)
Sports: How the hell would I know, NHL 2k was awesome...

/Just my opinion, man
//My opinion and $2 gets you bad coffee at a gas station

starsrift: If you'd rather play with gamers online other than 14-year old boys with potty-mouths, buy a PC.

As opposed to adults acting like 14-year old boys with potty-mouths?

Joined a public game of TF2 not long ago. Those that weren't screaming into their mics had their music players hooked up to it and blasted playlists.

Assholes are everywhere. Spending more on your medium of choice isn't going to change that.

knightofargh: /Just my opinion, man

Works for me. I agree for the most part, too. I'm just glad to get a response to that blatant call out. Although I have to ask, where's the digging? You don't need your proverbial pitchfork and waders, those games are right out there on the surface.

Mentalpatient87: Works for me. I agree for the most part, too. I'm just glad to get a response to that blatant call out. Although I have to ask, where's the digging? You don't need your proverbial pitchfork and waders, those games are right out there on the surface.

AAA titles are usually worth a casual glance, Bayonetta was a trifle obscure relative to AAAs. Lollipop Chainsaw should be good in the same vein. I'm having difficulty finding a complete 2011 release calendar to help reinforce my point.

AAAs being good while everything else is shovelware is representative of this generation. To find some older gems (Jagged Alliance 2, X-Com, etc.) you'd have to dig through a bunch of garbage. Essentially, apart from the AAA titles there isn't anything of worth. Just Cause 2 is a great game that built on Just Cause which was also great. Just Cause was an ambitious smaller project that didn't have a multi-million dollar ad blitz and did well based on its merits.

I guess my point was that beyond the AAA titles recently you'd have to look hard to find anything worth playing. Culdecept was a great game (including the 360 reboot), but most folks never played it. If it doesn't have a major ad campaign, a decent proportion of current gamers won't even see it. If you walked into a store blind without context of earlier games and/or advertising, would you pick Skyrim off the shelf based on its cover art or the screencaps on the back?

Put yourself in the shoes of a 40 year old hausfrau who doesn't know a thing about games and thus doesn't read gaming media. Put her in the games aisle at Worst Buy looking for a game for 14 year old Timmy the Teen. How much shovelware will she have to shovel through to get something that isn't utter garbage if she doesn't know the AAA titles and doesn't have direction from Timmy?

It's similar to the flaws in the ESRB system. Kids are going to lie to their parents about content and get the game anyway. That issue isn't wholly on topic, so I'll throw it out there and not come back to it.

knightofargh: while everything else is shovelware is representative of this generation

Your complaint isn't new to video games. Its been this way since the atari. Heck today's ratio might still be an improvement over what the sega genesis offered us.

Smackledorfer: Your complaint isn't new to video games. Its been this way since the atari. Heck today's ratio might still be an improvement over what the sega genesis offered us.

It's not new, it's just a higher ratio as the systems get more advanced.

It may also be that I have less free time and correspondingly less tolerance for bad games 20+ years later. I'd certainly not sit through Battletoads willingly if I had other options.

/got the the Queen (final boss) in Battletoads twice
//beat Battletoads once

I love how people claim simultaneously that:

1) Nintendo doesn't do enough to support third-party developers and encourage them to release software on their system,

and

2) Nintendo lets third-parties release too much shovelware on their system.

Not sure how both can be true at the same time. Nintendo's job isn't to be some arbiter of game quality - that's for critics and the market to decide what's good or not. If a lot of third-party software for the Wii sucks, that's the fault of those third-party developers, not Nintendo.

As for the Wii U, lots of people writing it off before it's even released. Just as they did for the Wii. And the DS.

I'm going to reserve judgment until I actually get a chance to try out the thing and see how the games look for it.

Doc Daneeka: I love how people claim simultaneously that:

1) Nintendo doesn't do enough to support third-party developers and encourage them to release software on their system,

and

2) Nintendo lets third-parties release too much shovelware on their system.

Not sure how both can be true at the same time. Nintendo's job isn't to be some arbiter of game quality - that's for critics and the market to decide what's good or not. If a lot of third-party software for the Wii sucks, that's the fault of those third-party developers, not Nintendo.

Both of those can certainly be true. Companies that can afford to take a stand against shiatty treatment of third parties and who don't have to bend to nintendo's will may choose not to. Companies releasing shovelware may not even be bothered by whatever that treatment is, because they are just making junk as fast as possible and throwing it out there.

I don't know whether thats true, but your two statements don't have to be mutually exclusive.