Ok, I have some free time, So I'm going to answer some opinions.
TheodoreRoosevelt said:
Backwards compatability is stupid. Instead of allowing the system to reach its full potential, you make sure it can play old games. They can just reformat the games to be released on the new system; you can buy the outdated systems with games for cheap as shit.
The GameCube sucked, and this is going to suck too. Nintendo lost it after 64. Metroid, as fun as it may be, is not the number one FPS. In fact, Nintendo isn't even the console for FPSs (although 64 was). If you want FPS games, you go computer or Xbox. Nintendo is known for kiddy games.
And gaming is all about online. Nintendo still hasn't gone online, and this will be their first online system.
What did the Gamecube have? Smash Bros, and that's it.
If backwards compatability is so stupid, then why does the Xbox 360 emulate xbox games, the same way the PS2 emulates playstation games? Emulation of 5 year old hardware is pretty fucking easy. The PS2's emulation power came from one onboard chip... one. It is both cost effective and a great feature. I love playing bushido blade on a PS2. You get a smother playing game with slightly better graphics. The nintendo virtual console isn't just some ridiculous japanese idea. Its a response to the obscene NES and SNES unliscenced emulation that happens everyday on computers, xbox, PSP, et cetera. People WILL pay nintendo 50 cents or a dollar or whatever to play the games from their childhood. If everything goes as planned for nintendo (and I'll concede that it rarely does), their virtual console service is goign to beat the pants off of live arcade, and whatever half step Sony will be takeing with the PS3.
You may think the Gamecube sucked, but you're hardly an authority. It cost me 200 bucks, and most of the titles I've played have been nintendo first party titles (zelda, metroid, mario, et cetera). I have derived considerable enjoyment from them alone, so I don't really see how it "sucks" in any kind of authoritative, objective way. FYI, the gamecube was online for a few titles. About as many as Sony offered.
"The future of videogames is online"
Ya, I guess. Maybe I'm old and Jaded, but the last good time I had in a purely online environment was playing quake 1 ctf and starcraft on my PC. I can't speak for any other games, but Halo is, IMO, a colossal pain in the ass. I don't play video games to hear some pre-pubescent boy yell at me to give him the sniper rifle. Fuck that shit.
My most treasured video gaming moments lately have all involved me and my real life friends talking trash to eachother, and knocking the controler out of eachother's hands playing Dr. Mario, or smash brothers, or mario kart. That's how I like my videogames.
diacetlus said:
For Nintendo, it all ended for them upon the Super Nintendo's demise, due to the release of the Playstation 1. Super Nintendo was by far the most groundbreaking in terms of gameplay and even in some respects graphics. But, playstation were always big on releasing the more gory, car-racey, shoot-em-ups, which was all the major hype for it's time.
So then, the Nintendo franchise decide to release the N64 to compete against the PSX and they didn't put enough time and effort into it's graphical technology, nor were the games up to scratch, more-so just half-arsed (with the exception of titles like Zelda and Golden eye). The whole blocky/3d-ish graphics they were going for didn't seem to be what people were after and what can I say? The PSX just kept on pumping out all of these amazing titles that sold more than even they set for their quota.
*Driver
*GTA
*Final Fantasy VII
*Final Fantasy VIII (though, I didn't like it...)
*Final Fantasy 9.
*Tomb Raider
*Resident Evil
*Tekken
*Gran Turismo
*Crash Bandicoot
*Parasite Eve.
*Silent Hill.
*Metal Gear Solid.
Nearly 8,000 titles, compared to what? a couple hundred that the N64 had. With which, only about a dozen were even really good games.
It is blood, guts, swearing and no good, little kids and even some adults like to engage in when they are playing the role of a character in a game. Why? Because they know they won't/can't (well, most anyways...) be able to engage in such activities in real life without facing severe consequences and it is the realism the kiddies are after. The closer it brings them to realistic destruction and violence, the more they enjoy it.
Gone are the days of wanting to play the role of a red-hatted, fat-bellied Italian plumber that eats a mushroom to double his size in some fantasy world that lacks any realistic story. The Japanese market seem to enjoy this sorta thing... but as for the Western audiences, it seems, the more realistism and action in a game, the better.
Sony and Xbox seem to have caught onto this.
Me, personally? I love the whole fantasy thing, especially when it comes to role playing games. But, even Nintendo don't seem to be doing it well anymore.
I guess with the idioticly named Wii... we will wait and see what it has to offer and I really do hope it puts the Playstation and Xbox to shame, with it's seemingly innovative controls (?lol?). But, I just can't see it coming.
You've got a somewhat skewed idea of what a console maker is responsible for on the software side. Most of the games you listed were made by Namco, Capcom, or Square. Sony had absolutely nothing to do with those titles, other than (these days) strong-arming developers into exclusive contracts.
The only reason Nintendo lost the support of the big japanese developers was their refusal to move to a disc medium. Thats it. Thats the only reason. Personally, I can't really tell the difference between a PS1 game and an N64 game (well, i can, but you know what i mean). I find almost everything released in that generation to be really, really fucking ugly. Teken 1 looks like shit. FF7 looks like shit. Golden Eye looks like shit. Super mario 64 looks like shit. Sony is a big electronics firm that happened to be in the right place at the right time. They lucked out and took half of nintendos install base on the backs of franchises that would have remained with nintendo.
Nintendo doesn't prohibit blood, guts, and cursing. Go play Killer 7, or RE4. They are having some trouble shaking off the mario image, though. Thats pretty much a side effect of having a history of making video games. Sega has the same sort of fixation on sonic (to this day). Sony and Microsoft, by virtue of the fact they are strictly platform developers, can just pick and choose what they want to be known for.
As for how idiotic the Wii is:
Nintendo caught the same shit 2 years ago when they unveiled the DS. The DS is currently outselling the PSP, the 360, the PS2, the GC. The most popular console at the moment is the one that took a big risk with its interface. It reaped the benefits of a whole bunch of new game play dynamics. I hope the same happens for the Wii. Honestly, I'm getting sick of videogames. Ever since the SNES and Genesis were retired, gameing has gotten more esoteric, nerdy, and boreing every year. I'm tired of learning curves for control schemes, and over-produced, one size fits all FPSes.
sig 229 said:
how old are you?