Wii HD in 2011?

[DACrowe]

Ugh, obviously the SNES controller is gone. I dont get what I have to accept. Its basic design is still felt in the current 360 and PS3 controllers. The PS3 controller is near perfect IMO. Its been one of the best designs for a long time. Its what PS users have been used to and comfortable with for over the past decade and its been working. And its not as if its just stayed stagnant. Sony has continuous changed it since the PS1 first launched. Its added 2 analog sticks, rumble support, pressure sensitive buttons, motion sensing, wireless bluetooth, enhanced the shoulder buttons.

Nintendo's controllers (N64/GC) have been incredibly uncomfortable since it first started experimenting with the N64. Innovative? Maybe but that goes out the window, when it isnt as practical and simple to use as it should be. The N64 and GC were among the worst, Ive used ever on a console. Ive had a GC in my house for the past 6-7 years and have only played a total of 3 games on it bc I simply can not stand that controller. Those games were RE 0, RE Remake and MGS TTS and thats only bc they cant be found anywhere else

Thats great and I was never saying the system had no games. I listed those games I did bc you said that the PS1 had no memorable games which clearly isnt the case.

that remake considered by most to be the worst in the series. But then again we are comparing games from the N64/PS1 era not GC/PS2

RE 2 was most identifieable with the PS despite getting later ported to other systems.

Again, was never disputing the fact that N64 had memorables games. The PS1 had its fair share of those as well

I think you made a fair point on the gaming library. I suppose the better argument, which is opinion based, is I prefer the N64 library. In any case, one thing that stands as still prevalent is that looking back the games people really remember are about the same in quantity on both systems. Sure, PS1 had about 8-10 times as many games, but there are still really only 20-30 people still talk about, same with N64.

As for the controller thing, agree to disagree. I have always thought the PS controller was weak, so that may contribute to my position. But they added analog sticks only after the N64 innovated it, and instead of creating a new design for PS2, simply reused the old and is a series of compromises and add-ons. They add analog and rumble after N64, but the analog sticks are still to this day uncomfortable to use, as are the shoulder pad buttons and then remove rumble in PS3 in a lame attempt to copy the Wii.

I love PS3, but I think it is time to move on. Xbox 360's controller (and Wii for that matter) are cutting edge and the 360 is remarkably comfortable to use and pick up within minutes of touching it for the first time. The PS3 is a solid controller, but it is obviously looking backwards in its design.

As for the Gamecube controller. It sounds like you just didn't play much on it and give it a chance. Because quite frankly it was the most comfortable controller of that generation, IMO. The Xbox was big, bulky and uncomfortable to hold and again the placement of the D-pad, analog sticks and shoulder buttons were awkward on the PS2. Despite its peculiar shape, the Gamecube controller was very comfortable to use and the placement of buttons felt natural and the use of the analog stick and curved single shoulder buttons were awesome.

PS2 may be my choice for that generation, but the GC today is still a great controller that unfortunately did not have enough great games to play it on with. I mean I really recommend Zelda: Wind Waker, Resident Evil 4 and especially Super Smash Bros: Melee (my favorite entry in the series) which was so good on the GC controller that Brawl allows you to continue to use it.

 

[Timstuff]

To its credit, in terms of ergonomics, the GC controller couldn't be beat. However, comfortableness does not necessarily a great controller make. The button layout was downright broken in games like Soul Calibur 4. Nintendo wanted emphasize that "the A button is the most important," so they made it the biggest. But in a game like Soul Calibur 4, that almost completely breaks it because all four buttons are equally important, and you need to press multiple ones at the same time like B and Y.

Also, there was no excuse for putting a little yellow nipple where the right analog stick should have been. Nintendo was trying to influence game design through a controller, saying "the right analog stick should only be used for tweaking the camera, so we'll make it less comfortable to discourage developers from overusing it." That seemed to be the philosophy behind the whole controller, because Nintendo apparently thought that all games should primarily use the A button, have limited use of the right stick, and not use more than 7 action buttons in total. It was poor planning on Nintendo's part and did no favors for anyone.

 

[DACrowe]

So you say, but I played many games with complicated button layouts. What jumps to mind immediately is how superior the controller was to use on a game like Tony Hawk Pro Skating and its difficult trick lists as opposed to the bulky and sparse Xbox and the mismanaged space cram of the analog sticks on all PS consoles.

And while it is far more simple in technique than Soul Calibur, I'd find be hard pressed to find a more brilliantly designed and well conceived game layout than the one for Smash Melee.

 

[Timstuff]

The one controller worse than the GC's in terms of design was easily the Xbox Fatty controller. That thing is probably the most poorly designed controller in history, and whoever came up with it should be clubbed over the head with one. Even the redesigned "S" model still was nowhere near as comfortable as the Gamecube or even PS2 controllers. However, I would rather have played Soul Calibur 2 on a Controller S than a GC controller just because the button layout and D pad are much friendlier to fighting games (although still not nearly as much as the PS2's controller).

 

[Havok83]

I still dont get why Nintendo limited the Wii by not letting it be HD. Seriously, why is 480p the maximum output of the system? The system has support for component cables, so why cant the games be played in 720p? Its not like it would have taken away from what the system is or made it more expensive. The games dont look as sharp and crisp as they should on an HDTV which is where the mainstream market is heading towards. It would be cool if they could release an HD patch for it

 

[Timstuff]

Part of it is that Nintendo has always sold their systems for a profit, while this generation both Microsoft and Sony took huge losses to make 1080p capable systems. Nintendo probably could have made Wii output at 720p for only slightly more than what they spent on the system, however without good graphics to back it up, the games would have still looked like an ugly mess.

Nintendo, as much as I hate saying it, made a smart business move. They could have made a better system for $300 and sold it for little to no profit, but without the attraction of being "budget priced," the fancy controller would probably not be enough to get non-gamers' attention. Their profits have never been higher, but unfortunately the quality of their third party support has never been lower.

My hope is that next time around, Nintendo decides that their motion controls are popular enough that they can take a risk and make a system with competent specs. If "Wii HD" offers sub-Xbox 360 graphics and expects people to pay attention again though, I don't think people will put up with it. It would be like the Sega 32x all over again. "Okay, you sold me this thing for $150 and said it would make the graphics better, but they're still not as good as Super Nintendo." The next generation of consoles is going to have to show clear superiority over the current generation, and that includes Nintendo.

What I want know though, is whether or not Ninty is going to embrace Blu-Ray technology next time around. Even Microsoft is apparently coming around (they've already hirerd Samsung to make Blu-Ray drives fro them), so BR is defnitely looking to be the new standard for video game systems. Will Nintendo finally embrace a standard, or-- *gasp* -- try to surpass it as was the case in the SNES days, or are they going to drag their feet and stick with DVD 9, which in 2011 will be near the end of its lifespan?

Time will tell. I'd love for Nintendo to make another console that I deem worthy of purchasing, but this generation has been a huge drag for me in terms of Nintendo.

 

[Galactus]

What I want know though, is whether or not Ninty is going to embrace Blu-Ray technology next time around. Even Microsoft is apparently coming around (they've already hirerd Samsung to make Blu-Ray drives fro them), so BR is defnitely looking to be the new standard for video game systems. Will Nintendo finally embrace a standard, or-- *gasp* -- try to surpass it as was the case in the SNES days, or are they going to drag their feet and stick with DVD 9, which in 2011 will be near the end of its lifespan?

According to this article it doesn't look like Microsoft will release a Blu-Ray drive for Xbox 360:

Blu-ray could be the next UMD, says MS
Friday 10-Oct-2008 5:02 PM
Company rubbishes rumours that it's planning to introduce an Xbox 360 Blu-ray add-on
Xbox group product manager Aaron Greenberg has strongly denied that Microsoft has plans to release a Blu-ray add-on for the 360, in the process taking a swipe at the Sony format.


"We have no plans to integrate Blu-ray into the Xbox experience," he told Major Nelson.

Having chosen to back the wrong horse in the form of the failed HD-DVD business, Microsoft's position on high-definition movie and TV content currently revolves firmly around digital distribution.

"We believe that we shouldn't force people to pay for things they don't want," Greenberg said. "We also believe that the future's digital, and that's why we've invested in a massive library of entertainment content, that's why we're bringing things like Netflix to members in the US, that's why we're growing our library in Europe, that's why we're adding all types of entertainment experiences around the world.

"And Blu-ray: who knows? I'll tell you one thing: if you look at retail sales and availability, there's not a lot there, and what is there is at a premium," he added. "No one knows what Blu-ray will be. It's pretty clear it's not the next DVD, right? The days of one physical format being the standard I think are gone... We're not sure if it's the next UMD or DVD.

"I went to Sony's booth [at TGS], and it used to be that their whole booth was Blu-ray. It just keeps shrinking down. Now it's just this little corner and there's no one there and it's like, there's a heart sign and it's got 'Blu-ray' and some movies. It's interesting."

Greenberg's comments follow a report earlier this week which claimed that Toshiba-Samsung Storage Technology Corp had signed a contract to manufacture external Blu-ray disc drives for the 360.

 

[Timstuff]

Blu-Ray outsells HD movie downloads tenfold (and that's being conservative), and it's slowly but surely catching up on DVD in sales. I don't doubt that MS has little interest in a blu-ray drive for the Xbox 360, but if they show up for their third console still using the same disc format, they're going to look awfully silly, and developers will be very constrained for lack of space. The market isn't ready for a download-only business model either, especially since that would likely entail making game file sizes even smaller than they are on DVD to speed up downloads.

I think that MS will come around to Blu-Ray next gen, or they will suffer the consequences of being the first console to jump into a new and under tested game distribution model. I think they're going to swing one way or another, but I can't really see them sticking to DVD 9 three times in a row, but I also don't think MS is ready to risk a complete failure if it turns out customers don't want a discless system.

If the Samsung / Toshiba report is true (which I believe it to be), then Microsoft is probably laying out plans for a Blu-Ray equipped Xbox 720 sometime in the next 3 years. If that's the case as I believe it is, then Nintendo will have to either embrace the new standard (Blu-Ray), or undercut developers by sticking with DVD9. And if their next console is going to be an HD beast, then they'd better be planning on having an HD media format to back it up.

 

[StrainedEyes]

I thought Sony was the one most interested in a no-disc format? That's what I remember. They are doing the most testing in that regard.

 

[Havok83]

I thought Sony was the one most interested in a no-disc format? That's what I remember. They are doing the most testing in that regard.

Sony has been testing the waters by releasing full retail games over the PSN for download, but that wont take over physical copies of the game


and IA with Tim. MS will embrace BR for their next console. They have to. They have only 1 of 3 options. Release games on DVDs, blu-rays or create their own media. I dont think DVD games will be really feasible as MS has already pushed the limits of DVD-9s this generation. Games will only take up more space next gen and there are some developers that have already commented on the 360s DVDs limiting them in what they can do bc of the lack of space.

MS could create their own format but why would they do that? Its too late in the game to create a new HD format for movies so this would solely be used for games. New media formats are always expensive and it might cost them more to go this route. Or they could resurrect HD-DVD but that was a failure and would be a turnoff to go back to that format

BR already has a growing userbase and putting the drive in their next system is something that would attract them to it. Prices have decreased quite a bit and will be even lower by the time the next Xbox is released. Developer will have had more experience with it and releasing games on it will be easier than when that first started to be done. Plus 25gb and 50gb discs are a huge advantage over a 9gb one. I see no reason why MS wouldnt include BR

 

[Timstuff]

and IA with Tim. MS will embrace BR for their next console. They have to. They have only 1 of 3 options. Release games on DVDs, blu-rays or create their own media. I dont think DVD games will be really feasible as MS has already pushed the limits of DVD-9s this generation. Games will only take up more space next gen and there are some developers that have already commented on the 360s DVDs limiting them in what they can do bc of the lack of space.

Not only that, but historically game systems that have utilized proprietary disc formats have not been very successful. Sega used proprietary 1 GB discs with the Dreamcast, and that system failed. Nintendo used 1.5 GB optical discs for Gamecube, and the system was Nintendo's least successful to date (aside from the Virtual boy). The only place where proprietary format systems were a success was when all systems used cartridges.

 

[Fading]

Question, is the HD Wii an answer to the PS4 and next Xbox (Phoenix I think)? I'd be dissapointed if so, nothing against the Wii. If it plays the same games, and simply allows for high def viewing, then most ppl who bought it probably won't notice a difference (if you buy the Wii because it's cheap you probably haven't bought a $1000+ TV, not saying plenty of Wii owners don't have HD TV's tho).

When I think of next gen consoles coming out I think of an entirely new system, not just the same old one with a few new features. By the time this comes out Xbox will probably be advertising or have it's next Xbox on the market already. The differences in graphics will be glaring at that point.

 

[Havok83]

When I think of next gen consoles coming out I think of an entirely new system, not just the same old one with a few new features.

thats pretty much what a Wii is. A Gamecube with motion controls

 

[hippie_hunter]

Question, is the HD Wii an answer to the PS4 and next Xbox (Phoenix I think)? I'd be dissapointed if so, nothing against the Wii. If it plays the same games, and simply allows for high def viewing, then most ppl who bought it probably won't notice a difference (if you buy the Wii because it's cheap you probably haven't bought a $1000+ TV, not saying plenty of Wii owners don't have HD TV's tho).

When I think of next gen consoles coming out I think of an entirely new system, not just the same old one with a few new features. By the time this comes out Xbox will probably be advertising or have it's next Xbox on the market already. The differences in graphics will be glaring at that point.

I remember hearing that the Playstation 4 and Xbox 720 won't be that much more powerful than their predecessors on account of graphics being so powerful now and costs.

Personally I think Nintendo is going to be the only console next generation with a noticeable difference in graphics. They'll probably try and be on par with the Playstation 4 and next Xbox so they can get even better third party support.

 

[Timstuff]

^ If that's the case, Nintendo might just have a shot at winning me back. Sony and MS are gonna have to work darned hard if they want to out do themselves from this gen, because the transition to HD will be complete, and to make really nice graphics next time around will be almost prohibitively expensive from both a hardware and software perspective.

The one big change I can see coming is lighting. We are still "faking" our light with videogames, while movies like The Incredibles use ray tracing which is basically digital light (which looks superior in every way). The next big evolution in video game graphics will be the integration of real-time ray tracing, which is going to take some very hefty horsepower to pull off-- and I can't help but wonder whether or not the technology will be available at a reasonable cost by 2011. If they can make it work though, it will allow video game artists to produce very stunning looking games without nearly as much work as it currently takes. Games are getting too expensive to make, and developers are looking for ways to reduce costs without taking the "oomph" out of the experience.

Depending on how the economy is looking, people may not tolerate another round of $400-500 consoles. $300 was a reasonable price for the PS2 and Xbox, and I don't think anyone wants to see the price go up $100 every generation (at that rate, it won't be long before they reach CDi and 3DO levels of absurd expense). Nintendo wasn't wrong that game and hardware costs need to be kept under control, but I think they took it too far.

 

[Fading]

I'd be fine with the step up in graphics not being great with next gen titles. Atleast to me it doesn't have to be as clear of a step up as from the SNES to PS1, or PS1 to PS2, or PS2 to PS3. However all 3 need to up the ram, and upping the processor wouldn't hurt either. The next Xbox also needs to put in a BR drive. However I do expect both the PS4 and next Xbox to increase in graphics.

Reason the Wii HD worried me was because I thought it was implying it was just a Wii with HD capabilities. If the Wii still has last gen graphics that are visibly behind current gen, then when the PS4 and next Xbox roll around the graphics difference would be glaring if that's the case. However if it's an entirely new Wii, as in ppl will have to buy it to play games made for it, then it close the graphics gap. If it's just a Wii with HD capabilities, then I'll be skipping it like I did the Wii.

 

[Shifty]

Wii HD sounds better than Wii 2.

Nintendo said this when the first Wii launched, that homes with HD TVs will reach higher numbers in the next generation.