Ben-DutkaYes, I'm aware that we're a PlayStation-centric site but as we put games above all else – and I remain a Nintendo fan simply due to the impact the company has had on my life – I believe this is a worthy topic.
And I'm also aware the Wii U will soon be here. However, I was one of several journalists to say the Wii was a passing fad, simply because Nintendo wouldn't support it with AAA software. A piece of hardware can only rely on a gimmick for so long and in the bigger scheme of things, despite the millions the Wii raked in, it was a flash in the pan.
Did something besides Xenoblade Chronicles even come out this year for the Wii? I mean, in using Metacritic and GameRankings, I'm seeing about a half-dozen titles that even scored over an 8 for the Wii in all of 2011. I just don't hear anything about the Wii anymore, besides the occasional article about how far sales have fallen and how Nintendo is essentially relying on their handheld business now.
What happened to the Wii U? Typically, you announce a new game system, and it grabs headlines on a routine basis until it arrives. But that thing got announced, a whole lot of people went, "mm-hm, whatever," and that was it. As far as I'm concerned, Nintendo doesn't have much of a reason to try to compete with Sony and Microsoft the next time around. The Wii U doesn't qualify as competition and I seriously question Nintendo's dedication to support it with AAA software.
I admire Nintendo for doing something none of us expected with the Wii: they managed to cater to non-gamers and dominated the industry for a few years. But without software, without continued reasons for consumers to keep picking up the controller, the Wii had a very limited lifespan. I've said that since the beginning. The Wii U doesn't look to be anything all that fantastic; they've obviously given up from a technological standpoint.
Maybe it's time for Nintendo to just focus on the portable market and leave it at that. I honestly can't remember a year where Nintendo has basically ceased to exist in the console headlines, but I just realized: in 2011, do we ever hear anything about the Wii or the Wii U? Really, maybe it's time, Nintendo. If you look at the top 10 biggest games – or maybe even top 20 – this year, I don't think any of them are on the Wii. …that says it all, as far as I'm concerned.
@ ben , u should realse more skyrim info please
OT.
You should just send him an email with your request.
Stoner420? Seriously? Your post reads like something somebody would type while on the Mary-Jane.
Mary-Jane? Peter Parkers MJ?
Last edited by Beamboom on 10/30/2011 9:33:53 AM
well said.
no offense, but to me, Wii games and Wii gamers are just a joke to me, if even close to be called GAMERS at all.
Last edited by BigBoss4ever on 10/28/2011 9:30:56 PM
So someone who plays games isnt a gamer if they dont choose the correct console? So people who racer tuner cars arent "real" racers because F1 cars are better?
Elitism and self-enititlement is the worst thing about this generation
What a foolish comment. I like the games I have on the Wii. Am I a joke to you? Zelda is about to come out and it's bound to be one of the best games of 2011. Is that a joke to you?
What utter nonsense.
That's harsh man.
Last edited by AcHiLLiA on 10/28/2011 11:58:43 PM
i wont agree with bigboss that wii games and gamers are a joke. there are a few wii games out there that can hang with the best this generation, mostly first party games. someone completely ignoring those is THE joke. i will say this though, there are a lot of crap games out there. i blame that on squarely on nintendo, they allowed that to happen. now they're only known for their top franchises (first party) and a lot of shovelware. it was surprising to me that they actually outsourced metroid. you dont let a third party studio handle one of your top franchises, the game loses that nintendo touch that keeps us coming back for it. what do you call a nintendo franchise/game without the nintendo touch? the mediocre metroid other M. granted i havent played it yet, i'm going by what i read around the internet. i completely lost interest in the game. maybe because its not nintendo like anymore (cant explain it) or maybe its just the motion control thing.
I think the number of wii owners who opted for big N specifically for Mario, Zelda, and Metroid (as few as they are as compared to the masses who jumped on the bandwagon knowing nothing more than wii fitness) are still more "gamer" than the *vast majority of ps3/360/pc owners who play COD/Battlefield, and nothing else.
*Not a knock on COD or BF. I'm referring to the large demographic who plays COD or BF, who haven't even played or completed the sp campaigns in either game, let alone other games such as Uncharted or Alan Wake, or even knowing about them, yet have sunk 100's of hours in the mp modes (that are great, I'm sure).
I actually think the more games you want to play, the more hardcore the gamer you are. If you restrict yourself to only one console (exceptions, of course, for people who can only afford one) then you aren't a joke, but you're certainly more of one by pretending you're the "real gamer".
Face it… all consoles have top quality games worth playing exclusive to themselves. You can say which one you think is better, sure… but your comment is a little brazen.
Yeah, Skyward Sword isnt getting any press at all…
The fact is that a nintendo console can live on first party titles alone. LoZ, Metroid, Mario and all the stuff that comes with Mario, Kirby, etc.
Why would nintendo stop making consoles now? The Wii sold more than MS or Sony could ever dream of and they are rolling in the money.
But people are always spelling Nintendo's doom simply because the games arent "mature" enough (ie not enough tits and swearing), or because its not HD or some nonsense. They arent going away any time soon.
Skyward Sword is not getting any press? There has been at least an article a week on IGN promoting the game since this the beginning of the year and they have nothing but good things to say about it.
Last edited by Jawknee on 10/28/2011 10:32:31 PM
More than sony could ever dream of? I'm pretty sure the ps2 is the best selling system of all time, as well as the ps1 still having sold more than the wii also 😉
One game? This is the problem with Nintendo, and has been for about a decade. They release ONE game that can be considered AAA a year, and we're expected to all bow down to the aging mascots.
No one said you're expected to bow down. Only that you accept that this is how Nintendo does things. Let those of us who are satisfied with Nintendo enjoy them for what they are. What difference would it make to you if they stop making consoles or kept doing what they are doing? You wouldn't support them either way.
if they made games for other systems i get them
BUT one game every other year dose not make it worth getting the system
Jawk:
I'm terrible at sarcasm. Even when speaking, so you can see how difficult it is for me to be obviously sarcastic when typing. SS is being hyped like crazy, as was Xenoblade and the new Kirby. Nintendo doesnt need to hype up 50 games a month to make a profit.
Ben:
To "core" gamers (whatever the hell that is supposed to mean) it may be a problem to get one over-hyped game or so a year, but to investors it doesnt matter. Nintendo is making more money on less games and moving more consoles because of it. To stop making hardware now would be nothing short of moronic. I dont know what is keeping people from understanding basic economics, but if what you are doing is making more money than any of your competitors, you dont stop doing it! Personal bias against nintendo means nothing when they have more money than god.
Last edited by NoSmokingBandit on 10/29/2011 10:53:38 AM
smokeing you know that there stock has been droping a ton lately
@ oldmike
I think that truly depends on the game. IMO, the Zelda series has generally justified the purchase of a Nintendo system for me. Although, after Twilight Princess, I'll be more hesitant to jump on that bandwagon. Wind Waker is still one of the best games I've played. Ever. Period. End of story. And I'm a shooter/Uncharted fan! I'm looking forward to SS. Hope it's as good an experience as WW was for me.
oldmike:
20+ years of growth + 1 year of their stock lowering, during a depression, at the end of a generation = death to Nintendo?
Yeah, no.
NoSmoking, I encourage you to look at the bigger picture again.
Sure, Nintendo is doing poorly in a time like you mentioned… however, one thing they don't have that other major consoles do have, is positive anticipation for future release. If it's all because of the recession (not depression), then why is Sony continuing to see a rise on their end?
Both Microsoft and Sony have positive press in regards to the future consoles they may or may not be beginning to bring forward. VITA is getting a ton of positive press, for example. The Wii U is -not- getting a good outlook. And the 3DS is not doing well, either.
No one is spelling out their doom, as you claim they are. But there is definitely more than legitimate information out there to warrant discussion concerning the future of Nintendo's gaming future in household consoles.
And although the 3DS isn't doing well, DS continues to thrive. So, it's unlikely Nintendo will all out fail.
Of course… the article doesn't say it will, either.
Last edited by Underdog15 on 10/29/2011 6:14:36 PM
While I dont think anyone could agrue that the Wii is a total gimmick system, it does have quite a few great games for it, and to me it's worth owning any Nintendo system just for thier mascot games, Hell I bought a GC for RE4 and LoZ:WW, and I bought a Wii for LoZ:SS lol… heck sometimes I'll plug in the ol NES just for some gold cart zelda action. I think Nintendo will be just fine aslong as they stop with the gimmick stuff, you'd think they would have learned from the whole Virtual Boy thing…
And lets be honest here… it's not like the ps3/xbox put out top end games ever month do they? ofcourse not, hell imo the PS3 has been a flop this gen for games, I know ur all going to be mashin that thumbs down button this beign a ps3 site and all, but this is how I feel about it this gen sadly… prolly cause I LOVE RPGs, and the PS3 really hasnt put out any good ones… not that any1 else has either mind you.
Jawk you seem pretty convinced about Skyward. What I am scared of is that… We will be playing U3. Which is also an action, adventure, small puzzles title (granted in a totally different universe but… Still going to outshine it in every *technical* aspect)
So far Skyward does not impress on a technical standpoint being limited by the Wii. The sword attacks are responsive but make Link look like a broom.
The only thing going for it is it's name and the familiar feeling of playing a *Zelda title* I think. I am also not so convinced about the *going to school* and copy paste of the classical japanese anime childhood friend portrait in it.
I will wait and see how it fares before jumping on it.
On the other hand, I would like to know what makes you think it will be so good? Like I know you prolly don't give a crap about me buying it or not, but if you had to sell it to me… Like what would you say?
Last edited by Neo_Aeon666 on 10/29/2011 7:46:02 PM
Zelda is my favorite franchise of all time. So of course part of me is excited for it because it's Zelda. On the other hand I am excited for it not so much from a technical standpoint since it is limited by the Wii hardware but I absolutely love the orchestrated music that is always present in Zelda titles and even though it's not an HD game with graphics on par with the PS3 or 360, Nintendo has done a fine job in my opinion taking my attention away from that with their artistic vision and presentation. I love the art direction.Â
For me Zelda has always been an instant winner. I have never been disappointed with a Zelda game. I'm also looking forward to using Wii motion plus. I have yet to try it out with any game and from what I hear it works great with Skyward Sword. Other than that I can't say much more since I haven't played it yet. I'm sure the reviews will be dropping soon. From what I read so far from people who have played it, it's going to be a gem.Â
Thanks for the reply!
I'll be looking foward to early reviews too. I really hope it will be something special.
Phoenix… I agree there hasn't been many great jRPG's. But to say this gen has poor games for PS3 is downright brazen.
Perhaps not many games within a genre you like (I also prefer jRPG's), but it's really shortsighted to say the PS3 has few good games this gen… then to follow it up saying, oh… yeah, the others don't either.
That's a reflection on the industry. Not the PS3. And regardless of your preference, your point is flat out wrong. PS3, in my opinion, has the largest variety of AAA titles of any platform.
Skyward Sword is coming out in a month or so, that'll be rated fairly highly.
Edge has already given it a 10/10.
Edge is one of the worst game raters
talk about fanboys
That's funny, Jawknee. Not long ago, you were one of many to rail against Edge for having a bias against PS3 games.
And now…gee, what's this called again?
I know they're biased. They also rarely give out perfect score. To me that says something.
Well it does say alot if they are favoring the Wii first parties over the other systems. XD
Last edited by Neo_Aeon666 on 10/29/2011 7:47:47 PM
We won't really know until the Wii-U comes out and has been out for a couple of years, I don't know what to make of Nintendo ideas of late I mean I REALLY did think the WII would fail and it didn't but who knows we just to wait it out a little longer and see how well the Wii-U does b4 having this convo
Last edited by GuyverLT on 10/28/2011 9:45:29 PM
Perhaps it's time For Nintendo to go into the software business and write games for other platforms, and a Wii/Gamecube emulator for PS3?
Here is what I consider to be Nintendo's biggest problem. Sony and MS will probably show their new hardware at E3 2012, even if it's not due to launch until 2013. WiiU essentially plays catchup to PS3 and 360. So, when Nintendo is making lots of Noise at E3 2012 about the WiiU, Sony will have Vita and the new PS4 to shout about, and MS will (presuming they still want to be in the game) have the 360's successor to talk up. WiiU will be seen as yesterday's technology compared to the new systems from Sony and PS3. Nintendo painted themselves into a corner, and now they will pay the price.
I wish they would go software only, though president said they're rather close business than do that.
Why? They have no good reason to do software only.
if nintendo goes software only, you can guarantee that microsoft would throw a hell of a lot of money towards nintendo for some type of exclusivity. they're really running dry now. i mean their next big release is a halo remake/update.
either way, nintendo's first party franchises will be enough to keep them going for now.
I think read a statement just recently where Nintendo stated they will always provide their own hardware for their games. This was in response to the ongoing speculation that Nintendo will move over to Apple based hardware. Who would be an exclusive provider of Nintendo's licensed games.
Last edited by Temjin001 on 10/29/2011 12:21:39 AM
@highlander
a wii/gamecube emulator on the ps3? the ps3 is not even powerful enough to handle ps2 game emulation let alone the more powerful wii or gamecube games. the only way the ps3 could do proper emulation of the ps2 was with help from the hardware(ps2 chips built into the ps3). those chips have been removed from the ps3 becuase of costs thus no bw compatability. i seriously doubt a wii/gamecube emulator could run on the ps3. the games would have to be ported over.
i think this is just crazy talk. the last time i checked the console sitting in last place is not made by nintendo. people have written them off for dead before….then nintendo storms out nowhere and GAINS a ton of marketshare while another console maker has LOST about 40-50% of its marketshare. nintendo will be just fine. they have a dedicated fan base that are happy with what nintendo offers. all nintendo needs to do is to transistion current wii owners over to the wii u. ofcourse they could manage to screw that up much in the same way that sony failed in bringing ps2 owners over to the ps3, but until i see evidence of that i'm not going to dismiss them yet.
Last edited by Excelsior1 on 10/29/2011 9:08:43 AM
Excuse me, but did Excelsior just say the PS3 "isn't powerful enough" to play PS2 games? Did I read that right?
i said ps2 game emulation. yes, the ps3 is not powerful enough to do ps2 emulation on its own through software only. it had to have the rsx chip built into the ps3. that chip is history now thus no more bw compatabilty.
the first ps3's which were fully bw compable had both the ps2's emotion engine and rsx chip built into the system to offer full bw compatability.
then sony removed the ee and had only the rsx to help with partial bw comaptabilty. that chip was removed and now we have no bw compatability. i've read it's not even possible for the ps3 to handle ps2 emulation through software only, and bw compatability will never return. apparently the ps2 had some kind of monster rsx and the ps3 can't emulate it through software alone. sony has researched this a great deal.
You're not making any sense. So what if it needed the RSX chip? That doesn't mean the PS3 is incapable…it's obviously capable, it already did it.
It would take some maneuvering, but of course the PS3 could do GameCube games if it wanted. It just wouldn't make much sense as it would require too much on Sony's side, and it wouldn't be worth it. The RSX chip wasn't worth it financially, either.
To say the system itself isn't capable is not the issue.
yes, i'm probably not making sense. i'm caught up in highlander's word of emulation. i asked myself could the ps3 handle full gamecube and wii "emulation". probably not through software alone. you are correct they would have to do some manuevering and make the games specificly for the ps3. as for full gamecube and wii emulation on the ps3 i just don't see how that's possible. they have to be made from the ground up for the ps3.
it would be great if the ps3 could handle ps2 emulation through software alone. they could restore bw compatability through a a firmware patch. hell they could put up all the great ps2 games on psn.
i am a proud owner of a fully bw compatable ps3. best freaking console ever made. it's like 3 consoles in 1. the extra ports are great becuase i use a headset and keyboard. in fact i am using my ps3 right now to post on this site. plus it's great to go to gamestop and pick up all the great ps2 games i missed and be able to play them for cheap.
What's funnier about Excelsior's comment, is that this past week, PSN debuted the first batch of PS2 classics.
Big ol' "lol" on that one.
underdog
those ps2 classics were worked on so they can run on the ps3. ported over if you want use a technical term. they are not the same code as the original ps2 games…they have been worked on to some extent. funny how a ps3 can't run a ps2 game now without being ported over. lol. ps3 can not run ps2 games without that rsx chip. if it could then we would still have a bw compatable ps3…duh.
Excelsior,
1) PS2 emulation req
Excelsior,
1) PS2 Emulation requires Graphics Synthesizer (GS) emulation. The GS has specific hardware capabilities that are extremely difficult to emulate simply because of the *huge* data bandwidth required. The only thing inside any current console that has a hope of emulating the GS is a CellBE, and if it were doing that, the bandwidth requirements would essentially max out the processor. The Gamecube and Wii contain some nice hardware, but nothing like the PS2's GS in terms of the difficulty of emulation in software. That doesn't mean that the PS2 was somehow better than Wii or GC, just that it's hardware is more difficult to emulate.
2) The PS2 games that are being released on PSN are a very select group of games for which an emulation can be tailored. The games are not altered in any way. However they use the PS2 SDK in such a way that all the functions of the hardware used by the game are available in emulation. There are PS2 games that have veru low level hardware level drivers optimized to take specific advantage of the physical hardware in the system. These are less likely to work than other games because they use hardware specific function or performance that cannot easily be emulated. Let's say that 90% of the GS functionality can easily be emulated, and half of the more difficult functions can be emulated, but only by configuring one or more SPUs in a particular manner to function as the GS did in support of that specific game. Lets say that the remaining 5% of functionality is not available in emulation. Of all the PS2 games some will only use the 90% of GS functions that can be emulated, some will also use the functions that are more difficult and require specific emulation, the remaining group of games use functions that cannot be emulated.
What you will see is that some PS2 games are more easily brought to PS3, and some will require game specific emulation. But they are all the original games running under emulation.
There will though be a large group of high profile titles that cannot be run under emulation. Those are the games you might see in HD collections, but won't see via emulation.
You can say what you want Excelsior, but you're showing a total lack of understanding of the problems inherent in emulating the PS2 in software. Emulating the GameCube would be easier than emulating the PS2, simply because the GS is a completely bespoke GPU with unique capabilities that allow it to match the performance of hardware that on paper should be more powerful. The GS has a far more conventional GPU design and uses a PowerPC core. You may remember that the PS3 uses a PowerPC based CPU design and modern, conventional GPU. Emulating the GC on the PS3 would present far, far fewer problems than emulating the PS2 – no hardware required. The Wii is in hardware far closer to the accusation of being two gamecubes surgically joined. Emulating it on the PS3 would not present much issue, so long as the GPU could be emulated. Emulating the CPU would not present a problem at all.
thank you for the in depth reply. if those ps2 classics wern't altered in anyway then how come my sister's boyfriends copy of godhand won't run on his ps3? is it just becuase his ps3 won't recognize ps2 games? are you saying we could have some bw compatability on the ps3 without the rsx? there was somebody over at sony's european division who was questioned about ps2 game emulation and he flat out said it was not possible through software only, and sony had researched the matter extensively. it sure looks that way from a distance considering we went from full to partial then no bw compatability.
you could be right. maybe the gc and wii are easier to emulate. i just assumed since the ps3 could not emulate the ps2's games properly without the ps2's chips built into it that it would run into the same problems with gc/wii games. that sounds logical to me but i defer to your expertise on the matter.
when you really think about it's a pretty moot point since we are going to start a new cycle of hardware soon anyways. even if nintendo flamed out with wii u by time they did we'd likely already be moving onto the ps4. what do think the chances are the ps4 will be bw compatable by the way? will it be as hard as it was on the ps3?
ps2 backwards compatibility is a hardware feature on older ps3s. New ones don't have it, so new ones will not recognize PS2 games. The PS2 games being sold on PSN are like the PS1 games, they are packaged for download. ONly the games ship with a bespoke emulator. Basically a PS2 emulator that is tailored to exactly the functionality needed for the game.
The emulator will include an EE emulation that runs on the cellBE, and a GS emulator that runs partially on the CellBE and partially on RSX. The GS has an internal databus that is capable of moving data at – and this is phenomenally fast – 48Gbyte/second. Remember, GS runs at only 147Mhz, so to move that amount of data per second is amazing. It has a 2560bit wide databus split into three channels, 1024bit read, 1024 write and 512 read/write. When you consider the overhead of implementng this in software, and the fact that the CEllBE can't read/write to system memory that fast you get am idea of the problem. The thing is, most of the operations the GS handles use a fraction of that capability, and so they can be emulated. So the PS2 emulation will contain a partial GS emulator. Normally in this kind of situation the emulation will be dynamically configurable to only support the required functionality to enhance emulation performance. So it can be configured specifically to each game.
The games on PSN are the original games packaged with a game specific version of the emulator.
So these downloadable titles will work, but the newer PS3s still won't recognize the discs.