[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by starman

You kept slamming Japanese numbers down our throats with the DS, while CONVENIENTLY ignoring the US sales which showed the PSP beating the DS.

F-A-N-B-O-Y.

lol..yeah....ok...

Nintendo DS
Japan - 10.3 million
US - 5.8 million
Europe - 6.2 million
Australia - .2 million
Canada - .4 million
Worldwide - 22.9 million

PSP
Japan - 3.9 million
US - 5.1 million
Europe - 4 million
Australia - .15 million
Canada - .4 million
Worldwide - 13.37 million

QJ.NET - PSP Updates - 24/7 Coverage of the Latest PSP News - DS Heats Up, PSP Cools Down

grow up. YOU WERE WRONG

[starman]

Uh,no, the sales figures from Jan-March shows the PSP in the LEAD in the US, which was my point.

Grow up. You can't read. I used PAST TENSE.

[starman]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a

Agreed. they keep pointing fingers at us that we are fanboys, but when we play the game by their rules (number of games, numbers sold, etc)...that doesnt matter.

Quality matters.... subjective. dispute the quality of a first party Nintendo game.

Ok. Super Mario 64 on the DS sucked.

Done. Can you shutup now?

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Landos Mustache

The PS3 problem is that it is expensive, short supply. It still has strong 3rd party support, brand and the hardware if used properly is absolutely killer. It is so odd how people drop $500 on an HD-DVD player, $800 on a video card and $2500 on a game PC but then when you buy a game system, media server, Wifi and High def DVD player suddenly $600 is way to much even though you are getting it cheaper than it cost to make! At the end you also get way way more for your money than the 360 and people don't have an issue with its cost or value.

Only very few people drop $500 on an HD-DVD player, $800 video card, or $2500 PC. This same small group of people is the PS3 market.

The only reason I'll spend $3000 on a computer is because it's what I do for a living.

[starman]

Originally Posted by goMac

Only very few people drop $500 on an HD-DVD player, $800 video card, or $2500 PC. This same small group of people is the PS3 market.

The only reason I'll spend $3000 on a computer is because it's what I do for a living.

But you DO buy it. That's the point. There are enough Madden fans out there that will drop $600 on a game machine in a heartbeat. Never underestimate the power of Madden and Final Fantasy. They can kick the sh*t out of Mario and Zelda any day. I don't see Mario million dollar tours and challenges on G4.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by starman

But you DO buy it. That's the point. There are enough Madden fans out there that will drop $600 on a game machine in a heartbeat. Never underestimate the power of Madden and Final Fantasy. They can kick the sh*t out of Mario and Zelda any day. I don't see Mario million dollar tours and challenges on G4.

I did it because the computer can pay for itself. That's the only way I'll spend that much money. I can afford a HD-DVD player or a high end video card. But there is very little benefit that I get from buying those things.

[starman]

Financial benefit or personal benefit? I spent the money on two nVidia cards for my PC because my framerates in WoW and EQ2 sucked. Sure they were expensive, but when you get 60fps on a 24" monitor, over time you learn to appreciate it.

[Landos Mustache]

Originally Posted by goMac

Only very few people drop $500 on an HD-DVD player, $800 video card, or $2500 PC. This same small group of people is the PS3 market.

The only reason I'll spend $3000 on a computer is because it's what I do for a living.

Ya and and remember your "nobody has HDTV's" bit. The fun came when I mentioned that there are 10x more HDTV's out there than gamecubes.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by starman

Financial benefit or personal benefit? I spent the money on two nVidia cards for my PC because my framerates in WoW and EQ2 sucked. Sure they were expensive, but when you get 60fps on a 24" monitor, over time you learn to appreciate it.

I have a two year old X700 that gets great framerates in WoW. The game experience is perfectly enjoyable. I do have a Crossfire motherboard, and I could go out and buy two X1600's right now for it, but for me, the price far outweighs the benefits.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Landos Mustache

Ya and and remember your "nobody has HDTV's" bit. The fun came when I mentioned that there are 10x more HDTV's out there than gamecubes.

How many of those HD-TV's do you think are 480p?

[starman]

Originally Posted by goMac

I have a two year old X700 that gets great framerates in WoW.

At what resolution? 800x600?

[starman]

Originally Posted by goMac

How many of those HD-TV's do you think are 480p?

[goMac]

Originally Posted by starman

At what resolution? 800x600?

1280x1024.

I don't know why you need two graphics cards but I'm usually around 50 fps.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by starman

It's a valid question. A lot of HD-TV's are just 480p sets.

[Hawkeye_a]

I cant stand the hardcore gamers, theyre a bunch of nerd-know-it-alls. I as a casual gamer am estatic that Nintendo will be catering to my gaming needs.

when the formats war is won.... HDTVs will be cheaper, a format victor will emerge, and HD players wont cost $1000 or some insanely high price....ill invest when that time comes along...until then..i can live without it (something the niche hardcore market cant do).

I personally dont see the need to spend a fortune on technology, least of all gaming..... i still prefer the outdoors, and actual interaction with people, as opposed to being glued in front of a TV or computer screen.

So hey....i appreciate the fact that nintendo isnt catering primarily to the hardcore crowd....cause in all honesty... theyre just plain boring (imo).

[starman]

Originally Posted by goMac

1280x1024.

I don't know why you need two graphics cards but I'm usually around 50 fps.

Because at 1920x1200 you need it in MC/BWL/Naxx.

[starman]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a

I cant stand the hardcore gamers, theyre a bunch of nerd-know-it-alls. I as a casual gamer am estatic that Nintendo will be catering to my gaming needs.

And there it is in a nutshell. You're a CASUAL gamer. That's why you don't "get it".

[starman]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a

Agreed. they keep pointing fingers at us that we are fanboys, but when we play the game by their rules (number of games, numbers sold, etc)...that doesnt matter.

Quality matters.... subjective. dispute the quality of a first party Nintendo game.

You talking about Nintendo or Apple?

[Landos Mustache]

Originally Posted by goMac

It's a valid question. A lot of HD-TV's are just 480p sets.

If it isn't 720p or up it is not HD and doesn't get that label.

So Zero.

Sheesh. 21 pages and this thread is still all about "I'm right, you're wrong". Reminds me of Junior High playground arguments about Transformers or something.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by starman

See, that's what the Nintnedo fanboys keep forgetting. This whole thing started because *gasp* we said something neutral about Nintendo.

I'm not sure saying all the other systems are better counts as "neutral."

[Landos Mustache]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a

grow up. YOU WERE WRONG

Again, who cares other than you?

Talk good games. Mario 64 DS was a 10 year old game done again with WORSE controls.

Mario world DS was ok.

Mario Cart DS is great.

That is hardly worth saying the DS is "better". Better than what? A brand new handheld on the market that is right on Nintendo's ass with 10x better hardware?

I would kill for Mario Cart on the PSP instead of the DS which makes it look like crap.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Landos Mustache

It is so odd how people drop $500 on an HD-DVD player, $800 on a video card and $2500 on a game PC but then when you buy a game system, media server, Wifi and High def DVD player suddenly $600 is way to much even though you are getting it cheaper than it cost to make! At the end you also get way way more for your money than the 360 and people don't have an issue with its cost or value.

That's an interesting point. I think a big part of the problem is that while Blu-Ray is technically worth a lot (in that the players cost ungodly wads of money), to many people, it's actually a worthless feature that's just overinflating the price of the system. There's also the fact that because they do less, game systems traditionally cost a lot less than PCs — it's not expensive in absolute terms, but in the same way that a $500 pen is expensive.

[starman]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

That's an interesting point. I think a big part of the problem is that while Blu-Ray is technically worth a lot (in that the players cost ungodly wads of money), to many people, it's actually a worthless feature that's just overinflating the price of the system. There's also the fact that because they do less, game systems traditionally cost a lot less than PCs — it's not expensive in absolute terms, but in the same way that a $500 pen is expensive.

Or a $3000 Mac.

[ort888]

Plus we don't know how good of a Blu-ray player the PS3 is going to be. The PS2 started out as a crappy DVD player, and I'm not holding out a lot of hope that the PS3 will be able to do a lot better. Especially since a $999 standalone Blu-ray player can't even match the capabilities of a $499 HD-DVD player.

If I'm going to spend the cash to upgrade to hi-def video, I want to be sure that it's going to work flawlessly and provide the best possible picture. Anything less then that isn't worth getting. Plus, who knows which format is going to come out ahead.

In my mind, the PS3 is a gaming machine first and foremost. Thinking of it as a hi-def video player is a sucker bet, because it's probably just going to lead to disappointment.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by starman

Or a $3000 Mac.

Uh…no. I think you misread my post if you think that. Macs do not traditionally cost less than PCs; they cost more. That one does cost less than a PC, so it is actually cheap for a Mac while the PS3 is expensive for a game system. Although the Mac actually is getting expensive in absolute dollars, maybe.

Anyway, my point is we evaluate prices based on context. What's expensive for a video game system is cheap for a PC. What's expensive for a PC is fairly reasonable for a car.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by ort888

Plus, who knows which format is going to come out ahead.

Historically speaking? Not the one backed by Sony.

[Landos Mustache]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

That's an interesting point. I think a big part of the problem is that while Blu-Ray is technically worth a lot (in that the players cost ungodly wads of money), to many people, it's actually a worthless feature that's just overinflating the price of the system. There's also the fact that because they do less, game systems traditionally cost a lot less than PCs — it's not expensive in absolute terms, but in the same way that a $500 pen is expensive.

I think the problem is coming from the fact that some only look at it as a "game System" so they picture paying $600 to play GTA when the PS2 was $300.

Sony has said from the beginning (as with the PSP) that it is NOT just a game system but a multimedia one.

When I got the Xbox I thought I would use it for nothing but games but it actually replaced my airport express as I can stream my internet radio and iTunes playlists through it flawlessly.

Same goes for the PSP. It has that wicked cool location free tv so you can watch recorded shows on your Mac over wifi and the internet no matter where you are in the world.

The browser is also really handy and the MP3 playback is good for someone who doesn't want a PSP and an iPod.

The way nintendo does it is they sell you the bare bones system with a moderate cost to avoid sticker shock. Then a year later they sell you the same hardware with minor improvements. After that they start adding shitty add ons like the DS browser and shitty MP3 player witch work HORRIBLY, networking cards, DD drive, v-RAM upgrades etc.

It is like a PC, you buy cheap and spend money adding things to it but in the end it would have been smarter to get it all in one package as it would work better.

[starman]

Originally Posted by Landos Mustache

It is like a PC, you buy cheap and spend money adding things to it but in the end it would have been smarter to get it all in one package as it would work better.

Not a bad analogy, except sometimes people just want to play Solitaire

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by screamingFit

Sheesh. 21 pages and this thread is still all about "I'm right, you're wrong". Reminds me of Junior High playground arguments about Transformers or something.

no, that's over here

[Landos Mustache]

THIS is why people love the PS... the PS2 has the strongest fall line up of games:

Winner of strongest fall lineup goes to ... PS2? - Joystiq

Guitar Hero 1 is amazing, 2 should be even better.

[Landos Mustache]

On the Wii:

"So they figured they wanted to create something different. They started to wonder why video game systems couldn't be refined like other technology -- like, rather than make a bigger, more powerful system, take what you have and make the chips smaller, make the box smaller, make it consume less power.

Ultimately, they decided they wanted to take the GameCube level hardware and make it so efficient that it would only use 1/3rd to 1/4th the power, while still maintaining high performance."

UM... SO WHAT?! Who sits infront of their game station saying the games are no fun because the unit is too big and uses too much power? I guess the Wii really is the GameCube 1.5 with a motion controller.

Iwata Interviews The Wii Engineers - Kotaku

[starman]

I wonder why they didn't just make the motion controller an accessory to the GC.

Oh, because they wanted everyone to believe that the Wii was something revolutionary.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by starman

I wonder why they didn't just make the motion controller an accessory to the GC.

Oh, because they wanted everyone to believe that the Wii was something revolutionary.

Nintendo of all companies has learned throughout its history that "accessory" controllers like that bomb. Game companies will design their games for the controllers that come with a system.

And how is having a motion-sensing controller as your main input device not revolutionary?

[Landos Mustache]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Nintendo of all companies has learned throughout its history that "accessory" controllers like that bomb. Game companies will design their games for the controllers that come with a system.

And how is having a motion-sensing controller as your main input device not revolutionary?

How is Xbox live not revolutionary?

How is mass storage on CD over carts not revolutionary?

How is the eye toy not revolutionary?

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Landos Mustache

How is Xbox live not revolutionary?

How is mass storage on CD over carts not revolutionary?

You're asking me "why" about things I've never said.

[Landos Mustache]

Codename Revolution — Nintendo Wii � Blog Archive � IGN Playstation Editor says Wii not for Hardcore Gamers, More


IGN Playstation Editor says Wii not for Hardcore Gamers, More
"“The Wii may outsell it (PS3) at launch, but no one cares about those numbers…With the Wii, on the other hand, developers hesitate calling it a next-gen system now, which isn’t so hot…and this is something both hardcore and casual gamers will definitely notice.”

[Chuckit]

That article you linked to actually seems to be making fun of the quote you're citing.

[Landos Mustache]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

That article you linked to actually seems to be making fun of the quote you're citing.

So? You decide which one you agree with.

Just because he is making fun of it doesn't make it any more true than the original story.

[MindFad]

Is there an official definition for a "hardcore gamer" anyway? What is this special bracket of the gaming community's ethos? Is it some form of different gaming, some tactic? The types of games? (If so, how does one define these games for "hardcore" gamers?) The frequency that one plays video games in general? Or is it just 13- to 21-year-old kids who feel better about themselves under the "hardcore" label?

[Hawkeye_a]

Oh i totally agree....the Wii isnt for the primarily hardcore gamers, that sits in his parents basement all day n night playing video games....kinda like the guys who own PSPs. The Wii strategy is to cater to a mass market, not a niche like the PSP or PS3. Besides who cares what a hardcore gaming webzine has to say about the Wii... it would be like looking at Windows magazines for opinions on the Mac, and we all know how open-minded they are.

Bottom of the Line.... technically speaking...the Wii is doing more with its hardware than the PS3 or XB360, its business startegy to cater to everyone as opposed to a select few (like they did withe GameCube) is the best stratgey in any business..... unlike the PS3, which is banking on sales to the fanboys first and foremost.

Oh and by the way.... The iPod is still #1, design, interface, price, features and services. im glad they havent got FM receivers, voice recorders and cameras built into em.......
And the DS is also #1, design, interface, price, features and services.... NWi-Fi, touch screen n microphone...im just glad they didnt try to include everything and charge an arm n a leg for it(PSP)...PSP: Music..failure, PSP: Movies: failure, PSP: Games...games ?

So maybe if they had marketed and priced the original Mac differently it too would have been #1, but it isnt. but lord knows they got it right with the iPod and the Nintendo with the DS.

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by MindFad

Is there an official definition for a "hardcore gamer" anyway? What is this special bracket of the gaming community's ethos? Is it some form of different gaming, some tactic? The types of games? (If so, how does one define these games for "hardcore" gamers?) The frequency that one plays video games in general? Or is it just 13- to 21-year-old kids who feel better about themselves under the "hardcore" label?

my definition...

Male, 18-40 yr old.... technophile. trype of games involve GGG (Grit, Guns, Girls).... oh and RPGs. and theyre more often than not, out of shape due to lack of exercise, and theyre socially underdeveloped, due to lack of human interaction.

[goMac]

The XBox 360 is definitely the system of choice for hard core gamers. That said, I think most hardcore gamers are still going to get a Wii too.

[Adam Betts]

True story!

[starman]

Paging Link?

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a

Oh i totally agree....the Wii isnt for the primarily hardcore gamers, that sits in his parents basement all day n night playing video games....kinda like the guys who own PSPs.

Fine. You want to tell me what higher category this falls under?




Guys who sit on their parents lap?

[goMac]

Fortunately that's not a real Wiicessory.

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet

Fine. You want to tell me what higher category this falls under?

Guys who sit on their parents lap?

But...i thought Mario n Zelda were NOT for hardcore gamers as someone quoted an IGN nutjob ?

Besides.... no one said the Wii would NOT appeal to hardore gamers...AS WELL.

Oh...and who cares about what some folks threw around about the whole NDS vs PSP ? the same people who are tired of idiots spewing bs over and over again, despite being proven wrong time and again.

The same idiots who dismissed the DS are dismissing the Wii..."oh it will never sell. it's a stupid gimmicky idea, blah blah"....and now the mass market has voted and pegged the NDS a much better gaming platform than any other handheld out there. And with that those people who were too narrow minded and ego centric lost their credibility, but yet they keep dissing Nintendo despite that. Hey whatever... they were completely wrong about the DS and chances are they are completely wrong about the Wii.... thats all im saying.

If analysts made a similar prediction about the NDS vs PSP....saying the NDS was a gimmick and would never sell....i dont think any investors(or anyone for that matter) would be paying them any attention regarding the Wii vs PS3. simple as that.

If your a fanboy, or a hardcore gamer.....fair enough.... dont pretend to know the buying habits of the mass market. The PS2 won the last round cause they made it to market well before the competition, thus giving them a software advantage when the competition arrived. Sony does not have that advantage this time around, their competition(XB360) has the first-to-market advantage, and both Nintendo and Microsoft have the online service advantage at this point as well. And SONY definately does not have the price or supply advantage either. So i can appreciate that some of you are SONY-nuts..... but dont try to pretend to know economics by telling me(or anyone) that thats a recipe for success in the mass market, cause as we saw with your NDS vs PSP analysis, you let your fanboyism cloud your judgement, so chances are your doing the same with the Wii vs PS3.

[Eug Wanker]

Ken Kutaragi says Sony's manufacturing expertise is in decline:

“If you asked me if Sony’s strength in hardware was in decline, right now I guess I would have to say that might be true,” commented Kutaragi, president of SCEI, after the announcement of a delay to the European launch of the PS3.

[Chuckit]

I'm not sure he means their expertise is in decline as much as just they're not going to plow through the market as readily as they did with the PS2.