[Hawkeye_a]

Agreed. i'm an adult, and in all honesty, im not too keen on grit guns and girls in the majority of my games.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by Calimus 

Reggie himself said they've done all they can to get Rockstar to bring GTA to the Wii.

Originally Posted by Gabriel Morales 

In fact, I applaud Nintendo for not allowing ultra-violent games on their consoles, because I think it shows integrity.

Hehehe

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

So did Apple, by opting for a GUI based OS as opposed to a command line.

That's part of how Apple earned its image. The other part is how they discouraged games for the Mac in the early days. This was official Apple policy at the time, because Steve Jobs was afraid that the Mac would be viewed as even more of a toy if it had many games.

The first part of this problem is almost gone now: GUIs have been accepted and even embraced in pretty much everything but development. But even 20 years later, the Mac is still recovering from the repercussions of that early no-games policy.

[Hawkeye_a]

I think discouraging gaming on the Mac was to try and make it seem like the Mac was a more "serious"/"business-like" platform. And to try and shrug off the non-business image that was developed by a GUI based OS.

Discouraging gaming definately had a bad effect on marketshare of home users and almost no effect on positioning the Mac as a serious-business-machine, in my opinion.

[Gamoe]

Originally Posted by Gabriel Morales 

In fact, I applaud Nintendo for not allowing ultra-violent games on their consoles, because I think it shows integrity.

Originally Posted by Calimus

Reggie himself said they've done all they can to get Rockstar to bring GTA to the Wii.

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

Hehehe

Very funny, but read the entire quote:

Originally Posted by Gabriel Morales 

In fact, I applaud Nintendo for not allowing ultra-violent games on their consoles, because I think it shows integrity. But whether they do or not on the Wii, I don't think it's fair or accurate to call it a "kiddie console", as it is caters to a wider audience as well.

So, even if Nintendo proudly unveils a GTA title for the Wii, I'll still stick with it, though I won't be getting a copy of GTA myself. Unfortunately, it seems that a lot of times gore, violence and vulgarity win out because it sells, and as a company sometimes embracing or not embracing something means sink or swim, so I won't blame Nintendo if this comes to pass, but I still applaud their past efforts not to embrace the such things.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by Gabriel Morales 

but I still applaud their past efforts not to embrace the such things.

Well that's a bit more accurate.
(Though let's not forget they folded like a towel in the face of the MK debacle. MK II came will all the blood and gore its predecessor had lacked)

Of course, mindlessly calling Nintendo's E rated games as kiddie is as stupid as writing off a game that has violence or vulgarity.

[Gamoe]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

Of course, mindlessly calling Nintendo's E rated games as kiddie is as stupid as writing off a game that has violence or vulgarity.

Personally, I've never done the latter. But when that's a game's main attraction, I do tend to write it off.

[Dark Helmet]

Ok here is a strange as hell coincidence...

I ordered my component cables 2 weeks ago from Nintendo as no stores even got one shipment.
Nintendo said they were out of stock but will tell me when new ones come in. After that 10-14 days shipping.
Late last night I saw that bestbuy and the like got some in stock for sale on monday. I got up early this morning and called them and they said they have them and can sell them.

So I didn't want to spend my sunday going downtown to this best buy to buy some cables but I wanted to start playing Zelda again so I decided to make the trip reluctantly. Showered up, got dressed up all warm grabbed my wallet and was locking my front door when a guy walks up to me and hands me a package. I was surprised as hell as I NEVER get sunday deliveries.
Open up the box... Nintendo component cables! 30 seconds later and I would have been gone and came home to a delivery notice and end up with two sets of cables!

OK that aside... how do the cables look?

Mixed bag. two steps forward 1 step back.

Good: The colours are richer as is the sharpness. The colours also don't bleed.

Bad: Really bad jaggies. I didn't see them before as much with RCA connections but the 480p REALLY brings them out. The cables make the textures sharper but it also shows the low polygons of the 3d objects and characters more.

Examples: In Wii sports you can actually see the grass blades but the trees in the distance are so jaggy that it sparkles when the camera moves (which is always). The Mii characters actually look worse as they don't have smooth edges so they look like they are made out of about 6 polygons. Before I found the ball too blurry and strangely it hasn't gotten sharper much if at all with the component cables.

Zelda. Colours and sharpness better for sure but I haven't played enough yet judge on the jaggies.

Rayman: Haven't tried it yet but I am not expecting much as the game doesn't support 480p EVEN THOUGH THE MANUAL SAYS IT DOES!

Something else to keep in mind for those with A/V receivers. The cables are all lumped into one cord which is a problem for me. I have the VIDEO cables going to my TV directly and the audio needs to go to the receiver. Obviously I can't do this because unlike the other systems the Wii doesn't offer a separate cable for audio out.

So I am going to have to buy some extension cables just to route the sound to the AV system. Bummer.

[Gamoe]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

Something else to keep in mind for those with A/V receivers. The cables are all lumped into one cord which is a problem for me.

How are they lumped up? Is it like the composite cables? Even those those are stuck together, one can separate them if you "peel" the cables away from one another, which is what i did for the audio connection. Is this going to be a problem with the component cables?

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by Gabriel Morales 

How are they lumped up? Is it like the composite cables? Even those those are stuck together, one can separate them if you "peel" the cables away from one another, which is what i did for the audio connection. Is this going to be a problem with the component cables?

You can only peal them for a few inches then you are out of luck.

MY TV and AV receiver are not 8 inches apart.

[icruise]

For those of you who want Zelda but are unsure about the Wii, you can get the Gamecube version from Circuit City online for $37.99 with free shipping.

http://www.circuitcity.com/ssm/The-L...oductDetail.do

[zerostar]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

You can only peal them for a few inches then you are out of luck.

That sucks Luckily it all goes to my my Pelican switcher then out from there...

[Calimus]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

You can only peal them for a few inches then you are out of luck.

MY TV and AV receiver are not 8 inches apart.

I assume your AV receiver doesn't have composite inputs then? You could get an extension cable for the audio portion of the cable and run that to the receiver(probably $3-5 from radio shack).

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by Calimus 

I assume your AV receiver doesn't have composite inputs then? You could get an extension cable for the audio portion of the cable and run that to the receiver(probably $3-5 from radio shack).

No it doesn't but I am getting an Optical and HDMI switcher to add to it. Not that the Wii has either

I'm gonna get those cables from radio shack though. No biggie just a pain and I hate adding another plug that could cause interference.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

No it doesn't but I am getting an Optical and HDMI switcher to add to it. Not that the Wii has either

I'm gonna get those cables from radio shack though. No biggie just a pain and I hate adding another plug that could cause interference.

A plug can't cause interference. It could degrade the signal quality, though the likelihood of it being noticeable is very minimal.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

A plug can't cause interference. It could degrade the signal quality, though the likelihood of it being noticeable is very minimal.

Ya that is what I meant.

Anyway, went to radio shack... damn things were another $12 on top of the $40 cables.

[MaxPower2k3]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

Ya that is what I meant.

Anyway, went to radio shack... damn things were another $12 on top of the $40 cables.

www.monoprice.com

[Hawkeye_a]

I'm 10 hours into Zelda: TP .... ad i just have to say that the visuals when your riding Epona from the village onto Hyrule feild is absolutely stunning....i honestly have not seen visuals so appealing before. the trees, grass, ground, water, sky all look amazing. And this game is heaps of fun.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

I'm 10 hours into Zelda: TP .... ad i just have to say that the visuals when your riding Epona from the village onto Hyrule feild is absolutely stunning....i honestly have not seen visuals so appealing before. the trees, grass, ground, water, sky all look amazing. And this game is heaps of fun.

Do you have a 360?

[goMac]

The thing I liked about the graphics on TP was you could see all the way to the other end of Hyrule field. If there was a monster, you could see it on the other end of the field, even if it was so far away it was just a blip on the horizon.

This was also pretty cool for when you do bug hunting in Hyrule Field. You could see the glows from a long ways away, although sometimes I would head out to the glow only to find that it was from a Po.

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

Do you have a 360?

Nope. But a friend does, and he has a 42" HD-LCD panel hooked upto it. i saw madden running on it...it looks great as well.

But as far as TP, you have to admit....this is visually a GameCube game, which is pretty amazin imo, considering the specs of the cube.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

But as far as TP, you have to admit....this is visually a GameCube game, which is pretty amazin imo, considering the specs of the cube.

It might be OK for a gamecube but the box says Wii on it so I feel cheated that I am getting a port of a 5 year old game system. Unless someone knows the history of the title and its port many people are going to be taken back by the bad audio and jaggies.

I don't even expect an OUTSTANDING looking game on the wii just pretty damn good. So far all of the games look either horrible, bad or just passable.

[Calimus]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

It might be OK for a gamecube but the box says Wii on it so I feel cheated that I am getting a port of a 5 year old game system. Unless someone knows the history of the title and its port many people are going to be taken back by the bad audio and jaggies.

I don't even expect an OUTSTANDING looking game on the wii just pretty damn good. So far all of the games look either horrible, bad or just passable.

I honestly don't get the whole "graphics from 2-3 years ago are crap today" thing. If, to enjoy gaming, you require a constantly increasing standard for graphics, then you're missing out on hundreds of great games, and playing games for the wrong reasons.

It seems similar to the people that always need a new car. What is wrong with a used car that is 2 years old? Does the same stuff, maybe it doesn't have the new heated cup warmers or 17 speaker surround sound that he new car has, but 2 years ago, it was top of the line.

To me, a lot of it has to do with a plateau of sorts that we reached in the ps2/xbox/gamecube generation. The same happened in 2d with the SNES/Genesis with perfecting 2d. The N64 & Playstation/NES generations obviously were lacking when it came to graphics, you couldn't have as many enemies on the screen, didn't have enough power for good ai, etc, but once you can get a good, realistic representation, I don't think more "shiny" is adding to the games. Beyond the online or harddrive functionality, the next gen games don't seem to offer anything that previous gen games didn't.

[Dakar²]

I was discussing what the PS2 gen brought tog aming when PS1 & N64 brought 3D.

The conclusion we came to: Scale.

Look at games like GTA, whose worlds are huge.

My prediction/hope for this gen: AI.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by Calimus 

I honestly don't get the whole "graphics from 2-3 years ago are crap today" thing. If, to enjoy gaming, you require a constantly increasing standard for graphics, then you're missing out on hundreds of great games, and playing games for the wrong reasons.

It seems similar to the people that always need a new car. What is wrong with a used car that is 2 years old? Does the same stuff, maybe it doesn't have the new heated cup warmers or 17 speaker surround sound that he new car has, but 2 years ago, it was top of the line.

To me, a lot of it has to do with a plateau of sorts that we reached in the ps2/xbox/gamecube generation. The same happened in 2d with the SNES/Genesis with perfecting 2d. The N64 & Playstation/NES generations obviously were lacking when it came to graphics, you couldn't have as many enemies on the screen, didn't have enough power for good ai, etc, but once you can get a good, realistic representation, I don't think more "shiny" is adding to the games. Beyond the online or harddrive functionality, the next gen games don't seem to offer anything that previous gen games didn't.

Wrong. Vast improvements in AI.

[EDIT]...as well as improved online features such as XBox Live Arcade, Virtual Console, and downloadable content (like maps, patches).

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

I was discussing what the PS2 gen brought tog aming when PS1 & N64 brought 3D.

The conclusion we came to: Scale.

Look at games like GTA, who's worlds are huge.

My prediction/hope for this gen: AI.

You beat me to it by mere seconds.

[Dakar²]

And I brought out more info

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

And I brought out more info

Go suck Dane's back (and check my edit).

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

Go suck Dane's back (and check my edit).

Cheater.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

Cheater.

Improvisation. Gotta be light on the feet.

[Dakar²]

Yeah, I heard you're light in the loafers.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by Calimus 

I honestly don't get the whole "graphics from 2-3 years ago are crap today" thing. If, to enjoy gaming, you require a constantly increasing standard for graphics, then you're missing out on hundreds of great games, and playing games for the wrong reasons.

I am not looking for amazing textures and lighting. I just don't want fogging in the distance and incredibly horrible jaggies both of which the Wii offers.

That aside the sound is also a big issue. Just as important the AI in Zelda is REALLY REALLY dumb. I had a battle right behind an enemy but because his back was too me he never noticed, happened more than once.

Playing Zelda feels so claustrophobic as it is more like watching movie in mute or reading a book.

The launch title of Kameo for Xbox looks stunning and helps bringing you into the game. Sure the art direction and play length is much better for Zelda but I don't find myself drawn into it as much as a game that draws me in visually and audibly.

Some people get more out of a book, some more out of a movie. I don't like to think of video games as books.

[Calimus]

I guess my point was more to the graphics. I certainly look forward to new game "features" such as online, virtual console, new control schemes, better AI. I'm just pointing out how trivial it seems to downplay a great game based on the fact that it has graphics that would be considered really good only 2-3 years ago. I wouldn't mind playing a game in 5 years with gamecube level graphics if it has a good story, or offers something new to the experience rather than just using graphics to say "look at me, I'm shiny!".

I still pick up N64 & SNES games when I seem them at a garage sale if It's something I never played, but I've heard good things about. Often I'll get just as much enjoyment as I would have spending $60 on a "Next Gen" game.

[Calimus]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

I am not looking for amazing textures and lighting. I just don't want fogging in the distance and incredibly horrible jaggies both of which the Wii offers.

That aside the sound is also a big issue. Just as important the AI in Zelda is REALLY REALLY dumb. I had a battle right behind an enemy but because his back was too me he never noticed, happened more than once.

Playing Zelda feels so claustrophobic as it is more like watching movie in mute or reading a book.

The launch title of Kameo for Xbox looks stunning and helps bringing you into the game. Sure the art direction and play length is much better for Zelda but I don't find myself drawn into it as much as a game that draws me in visually and audibly.

Some people get more out of a book, some more out of a movie. I don't like to think of video games as books.

I can see your side as well. I guess like everything else, it comes down to personal preference.

[starman]

Kameo was such a wonderful game. I keep meaning to go back to it to finish some things up.

[icruise]

What did you like about it? I've only played the first few hours, but I'm not that impressed (especially compared to Rare's work on the N64).

[itai195]

I thought Kameo was a pretty typical Rare effort -- in other words, mediocre. The graphics were nice but that was about it.

[Jawbone54]

I didn't get much out of Kameo in the 10 minutes that I actually played it. I turned it off very quickly.

[goMac]

Yeah, it wasn't all that great.

[goMac]

As for Zelda's AI. I think this was intentional. Zelda is a heavily scripted game, for dramatic reasons.

Also of note, the 3rd party sensor bars are starting to roll out:
http://www.wirelesssensorbar.com/

[Dakar²]

So it basically made a cameo on your systems?

*ducks vegetables*

[starman]

I liked how you had to change your form on a dime. It made for a very challenging game towards the end. The art direction was excellent. The story was OK, not great, but I'm hoping they make a sequel at some point.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Calimus 

I guess my point was more to the graphics. I certainly look forward to new game "features" such as online, virtual console, new control schemes, better AI. I'm just pointing out how trivial it seems to downplay a great game based on the fact that it has graphics that would be considered really good only 2-3 years ago. I wouldn't mind playing a game in 5 years with gamecube level graphics if it has a good story, or offers something new to the experience rather than just using graphics to say "look at me, I'm shiny!".

I still pick up N64 & SNES games when I seem them at a garage sale if It's something I never played, but I've heard good things about. Often I'll get just as much enjoyment as I would have spending $60 on a "Next Gen" game.

I keep thinking that Nintendo has been make consoles a LONG time, and especially; it's been FIVE years since the GameCube. Is this REALLY the best they can do? Modestly better graphics, same ol' crappy sound and a …new controller? It seems to me that if I am going to pay $250 for an "upgrade" that it should offer something more than a new controller. Would you seriously pay present day price for a new Mac with 2003 quality processor/graphics and 2000 quality sound simply because it has a new type of input device that replaces the keyboard and mouse? No! You'd say" WTF Apple? What have you been doing the last FIVE EFFING YEARS?

[Dakar²]

Its the biggest thing that bothers me about the Wii - The price.

If you're going to claim that graphics aren't the end-all be-all, that your innovation is it, why are they charging so damn much? Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if they could have made the Wii controller a GC add-on.

When it gets down to $150 I'm there. SMG is the only thing that might move me earlier.

(And BTW, they're making money on the VC DLs, too, another reason not to overhcarge)

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

Its the biggest thing that bothers me about the Wii - The price.

If you're going to claim that graphics aren't the end-all be-all, that your innovation is it, why are they charging so damn much?

Are you kidding? It's closer in price to a Playstation 2 than an Xbox 360.

[Jawbone54]

Didn't Nintendo admit that the Wii was originally supposed to be a sub-$100 console? What happened to that? Does anyone know what caused them to be unable to keep the price lower? $250 still isn't a lot for a brand new console, but a lot of people are having issues with the price for what is essentially a Gamecube with the Wii-mote. I'm sure there is some sort of justification, but I'm curious as to what it is.

I'm not a Wii-basher. I didn't have a great feeling about it during the week and half that I owned it, but the potential is there.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

Its the biggest thing that bothers me about the Wii - The price.

If you're going to claim that graphics aren't the end-all be-all, that your innovation is it, why are they charging so damn much?

Because the technology they use still isn't the cheapest thing in the world. Accelerometers and CCDs and Bluetooth chipsets do cost money, after all, and that's just in the Wiimote.

Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if they could have made the Wii controller a GC add-on.

That was the original plan, actually. This has never been secret. After the failure of FF:CC and Zelda:FSA, however, they realized that a new controller was going to need a new console to go along with it.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by Millennium 

Because the technology they use still isn't the cheapest thing in the world. Accelerometers and CCDs and Bluetooth chipsets do cost money, after all, and that's just in the Wiimote.

The GC is what, $100. The Wii is let's say 50% better, so let's move the price to $150. How much of the remaining $100 price difference does the Wiimote account for? (I think Nintendo debuted about $50 too high)

Originally Posted by Millennium 

That was the original plan, actually. This has never been secret. After the failure of FF:CC and Zelda:FSA, however, they realized that a new controller was going to need a new console to go along with it.

I missed that. I can't say I watch Nintendo news too closely (and now I have you guys!).

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by goMac 

As for Zelda's AI. I think this was intentional. Zelda is a heavily scripted game, for dramatic reasons.[/url]

It is intentional? You serious?

Like I said I approach 2 trolls standing next to one another. I attack one of them while the second one literally 1 inch away with his back turned totally ignores all the screaming and clanking going on because his eyes aren't facing us. It is not a bug but a feature? How is that better in any way?

You try this in Gears of war and see how well things go for you.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

The GC is what, $100. The Wii is let's say 50% better

Just by processor speed, the Wii is 90% better. It also includes permanent storage, a media format with more space, Virtual Console and networking.

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

Didn't Nintendo admit that the Wii was originally supposed to be a sub-$100 console?

I've heard a lot of people claim that, but I've never heard Nintendo claim that. Given that $100 is about the value of the controller, nunchuck and Wii Sports, that seems like a pretty low price.