Is Wii U the last strand of old school gaming?

  • 95 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#51 Edited by AzatiS (8131 posts) -

@PurpleMan5000 said:

@AzatiS said:

4) Nintendo is far from oldschool gaming. Oldschool gaming wasnt all about gimmick controls , missing all multiplatforms , crap hardwares , massive shovelware.. Why you think SNES was a massive success !! It had everything , both quality and quantity

Old school console gaming was all about crap hardware, gimmick controls, and massive shovelware. The only reason the SNES didn't miss tons of multiplatforms is because there was only one other console, so by default, it only missed a ton of 3rd party exclusives that went to the Genesis.

Then you need to learn about SNES history if you think was a crap hardware , had gimmick controls and had massive shovelware like Wii/Wii U currently has. It seems you didnt live in 90s to remember , i was part of video gaming community back then and i know 100% what im talking about , it seems you dont.

SNES didnt only had almost all the massive third party multis , 95% of the time had the best version also vs Genesis mainly because of better hardware.

#52 Edited by NFJSupreme (5405 posts) -

Wii U us is definitely last of the pure gaming devices. I don't think this is a bad thing either. You have to change with the times. If fast internet was widespread in 1996 like it is today guess what? The focus would be online too. Old school consoles were old school not because that is the best way to game on console but because that was what the technology at the time supported.

#53 Posted by mrintro (1354 posts) -

@NFJSupreme said:

Wii U us is definitely last of the pure gaming devices. I don't think this is a bad thing either. You have to change with the times. If fast internet was widespread in 1996 like it is today guess what? The focus would be online too. Old school consoles were old school not because that is the best way to game on console but because that was what the technology at the time supported.

True, but sometimes new isn't always better.

#54 Posted by PurpleMan5000 (7876 posts) -

@AzatiS said:

@PurpleMan5000 said:

@AzatiS said:

4) Nintendo is far from oldschool gaming. Oldschool gaming wasnt all about gimmick controls , missing all multiplatforms , crap hardwares , massive shovelware.. Why you think SNES was a massive success !! It had everything , both quality and quantity

Old school console gaming was all about crap hardware, gimmick controls, and massive shovelware. The only reason the SNES didn't miss tons of multiplatforms is because there was only one other console, so by default, it only missed a ton of 3rd party exclusives that went to the Genesis.

Then you need to learn about SNES history if you think was a crap hardware , had gimmick controls and had massive shovelware like Wii/Wii U currently has. It seems you didnt live in 90s to remember , i was part of video gaming community back then and i know 100% what im talking about , it seems you dont.

SNES didnt only had almost all the massive third party multis , 95% of the time had the best version also vs Genesis mainly because of better hardware.

You are completely wrong here. Wolfenstein 3D and Doom were on the PC during the SNES era. The gap in technology was enormous. The Genesis also had superior multiplats of EA games, anyway. Really, though, Sega and Nintendo both had a ton of 3rd party exclusives. It was an era where you really would miss out on just an enormous amount of games if you only had one console. That really isn't the case anymore, at least with Microsoft and Sony. That is why I said that missing out on 3rd party games is old school.

#55 Posted by MirkoS77 (8360 posts) -
@Shinobishyguy said:

@DocSanchez: whether you thought it was a gimmick or not is irrelevant, it did influence the competition. You think MS would've been pushing the kinect if it weren't for the whole motion gaming craze?

Sure it's not a revolution for core gaming but outside of that it was very influential.

I hate what the Wii did to gaming. It offered very little in the way of true innovation to core gaming, and made Sony and MS play catch-up with products that did the same. I can't help but think of what a great system the One could've been had it not been hampered by MS's desire to attempt to again capatilize on the Wii's audience by shoe-horning an otherwise useless and unwanted feature into their hardware (needlessly increasing the price and taking away resources in the system from where it truly mattered).

It's obvious now that Nintendo doesn't give a shit about motion gaming, they just were capitalizing on a fad at the time. If they were truly interested in the tech, we'd have a Wiimote II. It's done nothing for gaming. At all. It was all for profit at the unfulfilled expense of gaming. I resent that.

#56 Posted by happyduds77 (1554 posts) -

It's sad to see corporates taking over. I am just gonna finish all my PS3/PS2 back log and convert to PC gaming.

#57 Posted by The_Last_Ride (74419 posts) -

We don't really know, their future consoles might be the same

#58 Edited by AzatiS (8131 posts) -

@PurpleMan5000 said:

@AzatiS said:

@PurpleMan5000 said:

@AzatiS said:

4) Nintendo is far from oldschool gaming. Oldschool gaming wasnt all about gimmick controls , missing all multiplatforms , crap hardwares , massive shovelware.. Why you think SNES was a massive success !! It had everything , both quality and quantity

Old school console gaming was all about crap hardware, gimmick controls, and massive shovelware. The only reason the SNES didn't miss tons of multiplatforms is because there was only one other console, so by default, it only missed a ton of 3rd party exclusives that went to the Genesis.

Then you need to learn about SNES history if you think was a crap hardware , had gimmick controls and had massive shovelware like Wii/Wii U currently has. It seems you didnt live in 90s to remember , i was part of video gaming community back then and i know 100% what im talking about , it seems you dont.

SNES didnt only had almost all the massive third party multis , 95% of the time had the best version also vs Genesis mainly because of better hardware.

You are completely wrong here. Wolfenstein 3D and Doom were on the PC during the SNES era. The gap in technology was enormous. The Genesis also had superior multiplats of EA games, anyway. Really, though, Sega and Nintendo both had a ton of 3rd party exclusives. It was an era where you really would miss out on just an enormous amount of games if you only had one console. That really isn't the case anymore, at least with Microsoft and Sony. That is why I said that missing out on 3rd party games is old school.

No im not ... SNES was the leading console , in both hardware and software vs its competitors ( genesis ). Why you bringing PC games into this now , what the hell ? What this has to do with SNES vs Genesis console era ? Besides that you know that Wolf 3d and Doom released in 92-93 when SNES released in 90!! So what are you trying to prove here that PCs of that age were better than SNES so that means SNES wasnt the most powerful console at its time? What the ?!

Whatever you say , SNES was better on both hardware and software and i dont get what you mean when you saying oldschool a console that missing third party games. You really doesnt make any sense !

#59 Edited by nini200 (10499 posts) -

@nintendoboy16 said:

@AzatiS said:

4) Nintendo is far from oldschool gaming. Oldschool gaming wasnt all about gimmick controls , missing all multiplatforms , crap hardwares , massive shovelware.. Why you think SNES was a massive success !! It had everything , both quality and quantity

Gimmick controls - D-Pad, analog sticks, and local four players out of the box weren't gimmicks for their times?

Missing multiplat - So GameCube and N64 aren't old school then?

Crap hardware - So PS1 isn't old school, considering it's technically weaker than the N64?

Massive shovelware - Every console has it, first place selling consoles moreso than others. NES, SNES, PS1, and PS2 all had the WORST of the shovelare for their time. Are they not old school now?

We don't like to think with logic here in System Wars. It's all about the War

#60 Posted by PurpleMan5000 (7876 posts) -

@AzatiS said:

@PurpleMan5000 said:

@AzatiS said:

@PurpleMan5000 said:

@AzatiS said:

4) Nintendo is far from oldschool gaming. Oldschool gaming wasnt all about gimmick controls , missing all multiplatforms , crap hardwares , massive shovelware.. Why you think SNES was a massive success !! It had everything , both quality and quantity

Old school console gaming was all about crap hardware, gimmick controls, and massive shovelware. The only reason the SNES didn't miss tons of multiplatforms is because there was only one other console, so by default, it only missed a ton of 3rd party exclusives that went to the Genesis.

Then you need to learn about SNES history if you think was a crap hardware , had gimmick controls and had massive shovelware like Wii/Wii U currently has. It seems you didnt live in 90s to remember , i was part of video gaming community back then and i know 100% what im talking about , it seems you dont.

SNES didnt only had almost all the massive third party multis , 95% of the time had the best version also vs Genesis mainly because of better hardware.

You are completely wrong here. Wolfenstein 3D and Doom were on the PC during the SNES era. The gap in technology was enormous. The Genesis also had superior multiplats of EA games, anyway. Really, though, Sega and Nintendo both had a ton of 3rd party exclusives. It was an era where you really would miss out on just an enormous amount of games if you only had one console. That really isn't the case anymore, at least with Microsoft and Sony. That is why I said that missing out on 3rd party games is old school.

No im not ... SNES was the leading console , in both hardware and software vs its competitors ( genesis ). Why you bringing PC games into this now , what the hell ? What this has to do with SNES vs Genesis console era ? Besides that you know that Wolf 3d and Doom released in 92-93 when SNES released in 90!! So what are you trying to prove here that PCs of that age were better than SNES so that means SNES wasnt the most powerful console at its time? What the ?!

Whatever you say , SNES was better on both hardware and software and i dont get what you mean when you saying oldschool a console that missing third party games. You really doesnt make any sense !

I brought the PC into this because how else are you supposed to tell how good the console tech is? It's not like Nintendo would be doing any better tech-wise if Sony and Microsoft were putting out consoles just as weak as the Wii U. The gap between PC gaming and the Wii U is pretty similar to the gap between PC gaming and the SNES/Genesis in the 90s. Console makers trying to compete with the PC tech-wise is a somewhat new phenomenon. People also used to frequent arcades because the technology that was available to game at home was vastly inferior. Arcades are not very popular anymore, because you can get a better experience at home.

#61 Edited by MlauTheDaft (4518 posts) -

Hook it up to a TV, use a controller and it won't get more classic than the PC ;)

Edit:

For most games, that'd mean your laptop, an HDMI cable and a 360 controller.

If Classic means what you'd expect from SNES games and their modern equivalents, that is.

#62 Posted by AzatiS (8131 posts) -

@PurpleMan5000 said:

@AzatiS said:

@PurpleMan5000 said:

@AzatiS said:

@PurpleMan5000 said:

@AzatiS said:

4) Nintendo is far from oldschool gaming. Oldschool gaming wasnt all about gimmick controls , missing all multiplatforms , crap hardwares , massive shovelware.. Why you think SNES was a massive success !! It had everything , both quality and quantity

Old school console gaming was all about crap hardware, gimmick controls, and massive shovelware. The only reason the SNES didn't miss tons of multiplatforms is because there was only one other console, so by default, it only missed a ton of 3rd party exclusives that went to the Genesis.

Then you need to learn about SNES history if you think was a crap hardware , had gimmick controls and had massive shovelware like Wii/Wii U currently has. It seems you didnt live in 90s to remember , i was part of video gaming community back then and i know 100% what im talking about , it seems you dont.

SNES didnt only had almost all the massive third party multis , 95% of the time had the best version also vs Genesis mainly because of better hardware.

You are completely wrong here. Wolfenstein 3D and Doom were on the PC during the SNES era. The gap in technology was enormous. The Genesis also had superior multiplats of EA games, anyway. Really, though, Sega and Nintendo both had a ton of 3rd party exclusives. It was an era where you really would miss out on just an enormous amount of games if you only had one console. That really isn't the case anymore, at least with Microsoft and Sony. That is why I said that missing out on 3rd party games is old school.

No im not ... SNES was the leading console , in both hardware and software vs its competitors ( genesis ). Why you bringing PC games into this now , what the hell ? What this has to do with SNES vs Genesis console era ? Besides that you know that Wolf 3d and Doom released in 92-93 when SNES released in 90!! So what are you trying to prove here that PCs of that age were better than SNES so that means SNES wasnt the most powerful console at its time? What the ?!

Whatever you say , SNES was better on both hardware and software and i dont get what you mean when you saying oldschool a console that missing third party games. You really doesnt make any sense !

I brought the PC into this because how else are you supposed to tell how good the console tech is? It's not like Nintendo would be doing any better tech-wise if Sony and Microsoft were putting out consoles just as weak as the Wii U. The gap between PC gaming and the Wii U is pretty similar to the gap between PC gaming and the SNES/Genesis in the 90s. Console makers trying to compete with the PC tech-wise is a somewhat new phenomenon. People also used to frequent arcades because the technology that was available to game at home was vastly inferior. Arcades are not very popular anymore, because you can get a better experience at home.

You dont make sense again .... What all these you saying have to do with SNES hardware/software vs Genesis ?! How is possible to say console makers trying to compete with PC tech-wise is new phenomenon?! And lets assume you are right , what this has to do with SNES being the best console at its era , hardware and software wise ?

Bro !! What the hell you talking about?!! :P

#63 Edited by Maddie_Larkin (6794 posts) -

@AzatiS said:

@nintendoboy16 said:

@AzatiS said:

@nintendoboy16 said:

@AzatiS said:

4) Nintendo is far from oldschool gaming. Oldschool gaming wasnt all about gimmick controls , missing all multiplatforms , crap hardwares , massive shovelware.. Why you think SNES was a massive success !! It had everything , both quality and quantity

Gimmick controls - D-Pad, analog sticks, and local four players out of the box weren't gimmicks for their times?

Missing multiplat - So GameCube and N64 aren't old school then?

Crap hardware - So PS1 isn't old school, considering it's technically weaker than the N64?

Massive shovelware - Every console has it, first place selling consoles moreso than others. NES, SNES, PS1, and PS2 all had the WORST of the shovelare for their time. Are they not old school now?

1) No they werent. In fact they did gaming better . Wii mote didnt. In fact you were playing way worse games in a different way except very few exceptions. Wii promoted wii-mote way more than actually games. The same thing they tried to do with Wii U. Games >> Controllers.

2) Gamecube and N64 didnt miss every single major exclusive nor had the worse multiplatform version of a game , Wii and Wii U did/do. GC had awesome exclusives BEYOND the typical mario and Zelda titles. So was N64.

3) Ps1 was way better than Saturn thats why Saturn died and was easily winning vs N64 because of CD-rom and how easy could handle textures because of CD-rom again. Let alone developers had way easier time to develop games for PS1 because of architecture , let alone it costed almost nothing to publish their games on CD-rom unlike Cartridges. What are you even comparing here?

4) No , Wii was something else , one level above everything i ever saw. Everysingle system has shovelware , thats obvious. Wii was on another lever considering it was first on sales BY FAR !!! First time in video gaming history , the first on system wars race had the crappiest library , the least third party support and the only console that died so fast. Thats insane.

1. Even the most beneficial things in gaming start out as gimmicks. Hardly anyone thought D-Pads and analog sticks would catch on last I checked.

2. So, are you brushing off the fact that the N64 missed Final Fantasy VII, Metal Gear Solid, Tekken and the like? Unlike you for someone who dislikes Nintendo outside the GameCube.

3. Hey, you were the one who said "lower tech doesn't equal retro gaming". Didn't stop the fact that the PS1 was graphically inferior to the N64.

4. Don't pull the exception card on how "the Wii is another level". I don't give a damn that the previous consoles I mentioned had a more "quality/quantity" library, they were still infested with shovelware, much like the Wii. Have you not seen the AVGN and how many NES games he rips on?

1) Define the word gimmicks. Analog stick didnt affect gaming itself , wii mote did. How many developers were willing to port their games on Wii for example ( hardware aside ) with wii-mote controls? Very few. I dont get why you think Analog stick as gimmick. Not even close to what gimmick supposed to be.

2) No , im brushing that many developers were avoiding N64 because of cartridges , developing costs because of N64 really bad architecture and really expensive cartridges. I dont get where you going at. Gamecube also had amazing exclusives , third party ones!! So what are you talking about?

3) PS1 wasnt inferior to N64 in the way Wii was to PS3/X360. So please ... Lower tech doesnt mean retro at all. Wii U is retro and oldschool? Not even close. You should understand what retro/gimmick/oldschool means when we talking about video gaming , it seems you are confused.

4) Wii was on entire other level than any other console. Read again why i think so , it seems you constantly jumping my explanations. Read again. Wii was on 100M mark with tremendous shovelware unseen in any generation considering it was the first on its generation on sales ..by far. If you cant understand this .. well!! Whatever!

1) Well, a gimmick is a piece of hardware of software engineered to influence gaming in some sort (in this case) and yes the D-pad and analogue was indeed very much a gimmick, so was fightsticks, fightsticks and such, those what did not catch on got the negative term "gimmick" the ones that suceeded got labelled "groundbreaking" nearly every console have had its gimmicks.

Well analogue Sticks are the reason you have first person shooters on console, you know... the most sucessful genre last gen? so the analogue stick IS a gimmick that influence gaming. It also allowed for different speeds depending on how far off the deadzone the stick went.

2) as the market grow diverse more consoles lost exclusives, infact most devs went 3rd party, so NSNES hardly Counts, It had 1 competitor, so by default it was a matter of how the World was at the time of the NES and SNES.

And by your N64 complaint you also mean PS3 by the looks, since it pretty much followed most those complaints. The 64 lacked 3rd party mostly due to Nintendo being plain bad to Work with, getting Little direction or translated information about the system and its software. Basicly the only way you get 3rd party support is if your system can accept a straight port with Little polish. So it is a matter of definition. why we see consoles have x86 instruction sets now most likely.

3) Define inferior to that point, I would argue that the Wii was far more sucessful then any console last gen, so much that it hurt Nintendo in unextected ways. The point of Wii U being retro is that you can just plug a disc in and it will Work, no installs, no attempt to emulate a PC (which MS and Sony have been doing for 2 gens). Nintendo has aimed at what they always did, heck they even still have most of the bulletpoints in favor of consoles (local co-op, ease of use, plug and play) I can garantee you that the PS4 is none of that, funnily enough the PS4 (and yes I like it) has all what is usually used as a complaint against the PC).

4) The Wii did fail the same reason as the Wii U did, 3rd party wants to develop games that Works out the box, with as Little diversity between consoles as possible, so any altered control scheem or gimmick will be thrown out, mark my Words the same will happen to kinect. This is mainly due to different World we live in now, evolved to the point that only the basic "streamlined" (there is at far better Word for it that I have forgotten). control schemes will be supported, anything out of the ordinary which will have a cost to develop will be skipped. Ironically this will end up supplying one of the most stagnent part of most games, how they control. But calling the Wii a failure is sort of iffy, let us not forget that even the PS4 is trying to emulate it so some degree still (look at the gamepad, that lightbar is there for a reason, not to be pretty).

#64 Edited by AzatiS (8131 posts) -

@Maddie_Larkin said:

@AzatiS said:

@nintendoboy16 said:

@AzatiS said:

@nintendoboy16 said:

@AzatiS said:

4) Nintendo is far from oldschool gaming. Oldschool gaming wasnt all about gimmick controls , missing all multiplatforms , crap hardwares , massive shovelware.. Why you think SNES was a massive success !! It had everything , both quality and quantity

Gimmick controls - D-Pad, analog sticks, and local four players out of the box weren't gimmicks for their times?

Missing multiplat - So GameCube and N64 aren't old school then?

Crap hardware - So PS1 isn't old school, considering it's technically weaker than the N64?

Massive shovelware - Every console has it, first place selling consoles moreso than others. NES, SNES, PS1, and PS2 all had the WORST of the shovelare for their time. Are they not old school now?

1) No they werent. In fact they did gaming better . Wii mote didnt. In fact you were playing way worse games in a different way except very few exceptions. Wii promoted wii-mote way more than actually games. The same thing they tried to do with Wii U. Games >> Controllers.

2) Gamecube and N64 didnt miss every single major exclusive nor had the worse multiplatform version of a game , Wii and Wii U did/do. GC had awesome exclusives BEYOND the typical mario and Zelda titles. So was N64.

3) Ps1 was way better than Saturn thats why Saturn died and was easily winning vs N64 because of CD-rom and how easy could handle textures because of CD-rom again. Let alone developers had way easier time to develop games for PS1 because of architecture , let alone it costed almost nothing to publish their games on CD-rom unlike Cartridges. What are you even comparing here?

4) No , Wii was something else , one level above everything i ever saw. Everysingle system has shovelware , thats obvious. Wii was on another lever considering it was first on sales BY FAR !!! First time in video gaming history , the first on system wars race had the crappiest library , the least third party support and the only console that died so fast. Thats insane.

1. Even the most beneficial things in gaming start out as gimmicks. Hardly anyone thought D-Pads and analog sticks would catch on last I checked.

2. So, are you brushing off the fact that the N64 missed Final Fantasy VII, Metal Gear Solid, Tekken and the like? Unlike you for someone who dislikes Nintendo outside the GameCube.

3. Hey, you were the one who said "lower tech doesn't equal retro gaming". Didn't stop the fact that the PS1 was graphically inferior to the N64.

4. Don't pull the exception card on how "the Wii is another level". I don't give a damn that the previous consoles I mentioned had a more "quality/quantity" library, they were still infested with shovelware, much like the Wii. Have you not seen the AVGN and how many NES games he rips on?

1) Define the word gimmicks. Analog stick didnt affect gaming itself , wii mote did. How many developers were willing to port their games on Wii for example ( hardware aside ) with wii-mote controls? Very few. I dont get why you think Analog stick as gimmick. Not even close to what gimmick supposed to be.

2) No , im brushing that many developers were avoiding N64 because of cartridges , developing costs because of N64 really bad architecture and really expensive cartridges. I dont get where you going at. Gamecube also had amazing exclusives , third party ones!! So what are you talking about?

3) PS1 wasnt inferior to N64 in the way Wii was to PS3/X360. So please ... Lower tech doesnt mean retro at all. Wii U is retro and oldschool? Not even close. You should understand what retro/gimmick/oldschool means when we talking about video gaming , it seems you are confused.

4) Wii was on entire other level than any other console. Read again why i think so , it seems you constantly jumping my explanations. Read again. Wii was on 100M mark with tremendous shovelware unseen in any generation considering it was the first on its generation on sales ..by far. If you cant understand this .. well!! Whatever!

1) Well, a gimmick is a piece of hardware of software engineered to influence gaming in some sort (in this case) and yes the D-pad and analogue was indeed very much a gimmick, so was fightsticks, fightsticks and such, those what did not catch on got the negative term "gimmick" the ones that suceeded got labelled "groundbreaking" nearly every console have had its gimmicks.

Well analogue Sticks are the reason you have first person shooters on console, you know... the most sucessful genre last gen? so the analogue stick IS a gimmick that influence gaming. It also allowed for different speeds depending on how far off the deadzone the stick went.

2) as the market grow diverse more consoles lost exclusives, infact most devs went 3rd party, so NSNES hardly Counts, It had 1 competitor, so by default it was a matter of how the World was at the time of the NES and SNES.

And by your N64 complaint you also mean PS3 by the looks, since it pretty much followed most those complaints. The 64 lacked 3rd party mostly due to Nintendo being plain bad to Work with, getting Little direction or translated information about the system and its software. Basicly the only way you get 3rd party support is if your system can accept a straight port with Little polish. So it is a matter of definition. why we see consoles have x86 instruction sets now most likely.

3) Define inferior to that point, I would argue that the Wii was far more sucessful then any console last gen, so much that it hurt Nintendo in unextected ways. The point of Wii U being retro is that you can just plug a disc in and it will Work, no installs, no attempt to emulate a PC (which MS and Sony have been doing for 2 gens). Nintendo has aimed at what they always did, heck they even still have most of the bulletpoints in favor of consoles (local co-op, ease of use, plug and play) I can garantee you that the PS4 is none of that, funnily enough the PS4 (and yes I like it) has all what is usually used as a complaint against the PC).

4) The Wii did fail the same reason as the Wii U did, 3rd party wants to develop games that Works out the box, with as Little diversity between consoles as possible, so any altered control scheem or gimmick will be thrown out, mark my Words the same will happen to kinect. This is mainly due to different World we live in now, evolved to the point that only the basic "streamlined" (there is at far better Word for it that I have forgotten). control schemes will be supported, anything out of the ordinary which will have a cost to develop will be skipped. Ironically this will end up supplying one of the most stagnent part of most games, how they control. But calling the Wii a failure is sort of iffy, let us not forget that even the PS4 is trying to emulate it so some degree still (look at the gamepad, that lightbar is there for a reason, not to be pretty).

Oh god , i dont beleive you still dont get it ... Lets go

1) Wrong !!!!! Gimmick = trick or device intended to attract attention, publicity, or trade. D-pad or Analogue stick a gimmick ... not even close.

2) You talking generally im talking specifically. N64 lost exclusives along with third party for 3 main reasons

- Architecture was a pain. Developers had very hard time to develop games fast and easy

- Cartridges were super expensive over CD-roms

- Cartridges couldnt handle massive DATA like CDs

"" On the downside, cartridges took longer to manufacture than CDs, with each production run (from order to delivery) taking two weeks or more.[47] This meant that publishers of N64 games had to attempt to predict demand for a game ahead of its release. They risked being left with a surplus of expensive cartridges for a failed game or a weeks-long shortage of product if they underestimated a game's popularity.[47] The cost of producing an N64 cartridge was also far higher than for a CD.[48] Publishers passed these expenses onto the consumer. Comparable games cost at least $10 more on the Nintendo 64 as compared with other platforms.[49]

As fifth generation games became more complex in content, sound and graphics, it pushed cartridges to the limits of their storage capacity. The N64 cartridges had a maximum of 64 MB of data,[50] whereas CDs held over 650 MB.[51] Games ported from other media had to use data compression or reduced content to be released on the N64. Due to the cartridge's space limitations, full motion video was not usually feasible for use in cut scenes.

The era's competing systems from Sony and Sega (the PlayStation and Saturn, respectively) used CD-ROM discs to store their games.[52]As a result, game developers who had traditionally supported Nintendo game consoles were now developing games for the competition.[52] Many third-party developers, such as Square and Enix, whose Final Fantasy VII and Dragon Warrior VII were initially pre-planned for the N64,[53] switched to the PlayStation. Some who remained released fewer games to the Nintendo 64; Konami released fifty PlayStation games but only thirteen for the N64. New Nintendo 64 game releases were infrequent while new games were coming out rapidly for the PlayStation.[54] """ Wikipedia

3) Wii and Wii U are nothing close to retro. If PS4/X1 providing multimedia capabilities , way more than Wii/Wii U doesnt make Wii/Wii U retro. Specially with those gimmick controls. Retro = oldschool/nostalgia gaming that makes you feel like you are back in time ... Nothing seems oldschool with these gimmick controls Nintendo promoted with Wii and now with Wii U. Hardware speaking that is.

4) You sound like 3rd party developers were avoiding Wii despite its massive sales because they didnt want to put some more effort to make their games work with Wii-mote right? Well , wrong. Every single third party attempt to make that happen was a disaster. Graphics were utter crap , many games couldnt even be able to play on Wii ( Crysis for example ) because of hardware limitations and above all ... they knew that game wouldnt sale at all !!

For example when you have a massive base of 100M , like x2 what Sony/MS having , and you selling 400k copies of Dead Space extraction , why this company should bother again ? You remember the " hit " No More Heroes? It sold like 500k and the second installment even lower !! And that was an exclusive !! We talking about 100M base here !!

In top 10 biggest Wii games sales youll find 6 super casual...craps. Wii sports / Wii sports 2 / Wii fit / Wii fit plus / Wii play / Just Dance !! 6 out of top 10 !! As you see , something is off when in top 10 you have 6 super casual ...games!! I cant even call em video games. Therefore this 100 million Wii sales ... I wouldnt call it a success. Because if it really was ... Wii wouldnt be dead so fast nor would have been in life support the last 2 years of its life.

#65 Edited by finalfantasy94 (26884 posts) -

did all those downloadble games available on MS and sony console and PC just vanish?

#66 Posted by IMAHAPYHIPPO (2733 posts) -

@AzatiS said:

@PurpleMan5000 said:

@AzatiS said:

4) Nintendo is far from oldschool gaming. Oldschool gaming wasnt all about gimmick controls , missing all multiplatforms , crap hardwares , massive shovelware.. Why you think SNES was a massive success !! It had everything , both quality and quantity

Old school console gaming was all about crap hardware, gimmick controls, and massive shovelware. The only reason the SNES didn't miss tons of multiplatforms is because there was only one other console, so by default, it only missed a ton of 3rd party exclusives that went to the Genesis.

Then you need to learn about SNES history if you think was a crap hardware , had gimmick controls and had massive shovelware like Wii/Wii U currently has. It seems you didnt live in 90s to remember , i was part of video gaming community back then and i know 100% what im talking about , it seems you dont.

SNES didnt only had almost all the massive third party multis , 95% of the time had the best version also vs Genesis mainly because of better hardware.

Exactly. Nintendo invented everything you're using today in modern games -- the effing controller of all things, the joystick, rumble, everything. Literally everything is a stepping stone off of Nintendo's design. I won't waste my time defending their current status, because they're in the shitter, but there's a strong chance gaming as we know it doesn't exist without Nintendo. The Playstation exists because Nintendo backed out of a deal to let them develop a disk drive for the SNES.

Silly children.

#67 Posted by locopatho (20983 posts) -

Bullshit. Being backwards and at least a gen behind in graphics, sound, online and accounts isn't a positive.

You wanna talk about playing single player games, by yourself? Um, what consoles are getting Dark Souls 2, The Witcher 3, Dragon Age 3, Infamous SS, The Order, Thief, Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy XV? Hint: not the WiiU.

DLC and microtransactions? If Nintendo had literally any third party games, you'd have them too. Ignore them if you don't like them.

Free online? Yeah, because on WiiU it's too crap for most people to use if for free, almost no one would pay. Even COD, the most popular online game on consoles, is dead on WiiU. Most Nintendo and 3rd party games don't even bother including online.

The mental gymnastics and crazy theories people invent to defend Nintendo's shitty consoles never cease to amaze me.

#68 Edited by AzatiS (8131 posts) -

@IMAHAPYHIPPO said:

@AzatiS said:

@PurpleMan5000 said:

@AzatiS said:

4) Nintendo is far from oldschool gaming. Oldschool gaming wasnt all about gimmick controls , missing all multiplatforms , crap hardwares , massive shovelware.. Why you think SNES was a massive success !! It had everything , both quality and quantity

Old school console gaming was all about crap hardware, gimmick controls, and massive shovelware. The only reason the SNES didn't miss tons of multiplatforms is because there was only one other console, so by default, it only missed a ton of 3rd party exclusives that went to the Genesis.

Then you need to learn about SNES history if you think was a crap hardware , had gimmick controls and had massive shovelware like Wii/Wii U currently has. It seems you didnt live in 90s to remember , i was part of video gaming community back then and i know 100% what im talking about , it seems you dont.

SNES didnt only had almost all the massive third party multis , 95% of the time had the best version also vs Genesis mainly because of better hardware.

Exactly. Nintendo invented everything you're using today in modern games -- the effing controller of all things, the joystick, rumble, everything. Literally everything is a stepping stone off of Nintendo's design. I won't waste my time defending their current status, because they're in the shitter, but there's a strong chance gaming as we know it doesn't exist without Nintendo. The Playstation exists because Nintendo backed out of a deal to let them develop a disk drive for the SNES.

Silly children.

Wanna make me teach you what Playstation did for gaming and what Sony invented ? Wanna know where rumble or JOYSTICK is coming originally from ? Do you even know about Arcades? Have you ever heard about technologies beyond consoles ?

Go google you peasant and learn some things or 2 before you speak craps.

#69 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (18469 posts) -

The Last Hope for Cute Mascots (or just mascots in general), local multiplayer and most importantly..... The Last Hope for gameplay.

#70 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (18469 posts) -

The Last Hope for Cute Mascots (or just mascots in general), local multiplayer and most importantly..... The Last Hope for gameplay.

#71 Posted by Xplode_games (616 posts) -

Wii U is not old school in that old school system were reasonable priced and offered good hardware. Imagine a competitor to the SNES and Genesis with NES or Master System graphics but the price is almost the same. It would've been laughed at.

Actually, that is what the Atari became. The 7800 was crap compared to the NES and Sega Master System and as such it was destroyed. Atari never released a competent system and was gone from the gaming industry.

The only old school console that reminds me of the Wii U is the Jaguar that was overpriced and underpowered. Not a good combination.

#72 Posted by PurpleMan5000 (7876 posts) -

@Xplode_games said:

Wii U is not old school in that old school system were reasonable priced and offered good hardware. Imagine a competitor to the SNES and Genesis with NES or Master System graphics but the price is almost the same. It would've been laughed at.

Actually, that is what the Atari became. The 7800 was crap compared to the NES and Sega Master System and as such it was destroyed. Atari never released a competent system and was gone from the gaming industry.

The only old school console that reminds me of the Wii U is the Jaguar that was overpriced and underpowered. Not a good combination.

The Jaguar wasn't underpowered. It was by far the most powerful console on the market when it launched. It just had the worst controller I have ever seen and no games.

#73 Posted by PurpleMan5000 (7876 posts) -

@locopatho said:

Bullshit. Being backwards and at least a gen behind in graphics, sound, online and accounts isn't a positive.

You wanna talk about playing single player games, by yourself? Um, what consoles are getting Dark Souls 2, The Witcher 3, Dragon Age 3, Infamous SS, The Order, Thief, Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy XV? Hint: not the WiiU.

DLC and microtransactions? If Nintendo had literally any third party games, you'd have them too. Ignore them if you don't like them.

Free online? Yeah, because on WiiU it's too crap for most people to use if for free, almost no one would pay. Even COD, the most popular online game on consoles, is dead on WiiU. Most Nintendo and 3rd party games don't even bother including online.

The mental gymnastics and crazy theories people invent to defend Nintendo's shitty consoles never cease to amaze me.

What about multiplayer games that you can play with your real life friends who are in the same room as you, though?

#74 Posted by IMAHAPYHIPPO (2733 posts) -

@AzatiS said:

@IMAHAPYHIPPO said:

@AzatiS said:

@PurpleMan5000 said:

@AzatiS said:

4) Nintendo is far from oldschool gaming. Oldschool gaming wasnt all about gimmick controls , missing all multiplatforms , crap hardwares , massive shovelware.. Why you think SNES was a massive success !! It had everything , both quality and quantity

Old school console gaming was all about crap hardware, gimmick controls, and massive shovelware. The only reason the SNES didn't miss tons of multiplatforms is because there was only one other console, so by default, it only missed a ton of 3rd party exclusives that went to the Genesis.

Then you need to learn about SNES history if you think was a crap hardware , had gimmick controls and had massive shovelware like Wii/Wii U currently has. It seems you didnt live in 90s to remember , i was part of video gaming community back then and i know 100% what im talking about , it seems you dont.

SNES didnt only had almost all the massive third party multis , 95% of the time had the best version also vs Genesis mainly because of better hardware.

Exactly. Nintendo invented everything you're using today in modern games -- the effing controller of all things, the joystick, rumble, everything. Literally everything is a stepping stone off of Nintendo's design. I won't waste my time defending their current status, because they're in the shitter, but there's a strong chance gaming as we know it doesn't exist without Nintendo. The Playstation exists because Nintendo backed out of a deal to let them develop a disk drive for the SNES.

Silly children.

Wanna make me teach you what Playstation did for gaming and what Sony invented ? Wanna know where rumble or JOYSTICK is coming originally from ? Do you even know about Arcades? Have you ever heard about technologies beyond consoles ?

Go google you peasant and learn some things or 2 before you speak craps.

You speak like a child. It's petty. The console industry would be nothing without Nintendo turning around the gaming crash of 86. Nintendo was the first to implement both the joystick and rumble in a console. Everyone else followed.

#75 Posted by AzatiS (8131 posts) -

Did i say Nintendo didnt help console gaming. I repeat , CONSOLE gaming because you sound like video gaming wouldnt have been as successful as it is today without Nintendo. Like there werent other companies around to provide video games to masses or other platforms than console gaming.

For the fact , becuase im talking with facts not Buttfacts out of my butt , video gaming crash happened in 83 not 86 and that occured MAINLY in NA and not in the rest of the world. So please ....

Nintendo was the first to implement NOT the inventor of joystick or even rumble pack !! So before you talk buttfacts to me do a research about who invented what or how things really were back then.

Also , you have anything against childs ? You know video gaming began as a childs play right?

#76 Posted by locopatho (20983 posts) -

@PurpleMan5000 said:

@locopatho said:

Bullshit. Being backwards and at least a gen behind in graphics, sound, online and accounts isn't a positive.

You wanna talk about playing single player games, by yourself? Um, what consoles are getting Dark Souls 2, The Witcher 3, Dragon Age 3, Infamous SS, The Order, Thief, Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy XV? Hint: not the WiiU.

DLC and microtransactions? If Nintendo had literally any third party games, you'd have them too. Ignore them if you don't like them.

Free online? Yeah, because on WiiU it's too crap for most people to use if for free, almost no one would pay. Even COD, the most popular online game on consoles, is dead on WiiU. Most Nintendo and 3rd party games don't even bother including online.

The mental gymnastics and crazy theories people invent to defend Nintendo's shitty consoles never cease to amaze me.

What about multiplayer games that you can play with your real life friends who are in the same room as you, though?

What about them? Last gen I played far more quality ones on 360 than Wii.

I expect Xbone and PS4 to have tons too. They already have/soon will have the entire EA sports lineup, Forza, COD, Halo, Diablo 3, Minecraft, Rayman, and more casual Kinect/dancing/Lego games too.

#77 Edited by DocSanchez (2331 posts) -

@locopatho: The trouble is, every time Nintendo is restricted to something, their fans make out that it is the best way to be and that the others can't do it properly. So no online is best, "fun" family games are better than mature games, Gameplay is more important than graphics.

PS4 and Xbox One and PC are not restricted to any of these things, so I can get them all. I demand them all. I don't want to be restricted by cheap arse companies.

#78 Posted by MirkoS77 (8360 posts) -

@PurpleMan5000 said:

@locopatho said:

Bullshit. Being backwards and at least a gen behind in graphics, sound, online and accounts isn't a positive.

You wanna talk about playing single player games, by yourself? Um, what consoles are getting Dark Souls 2, The Witcher 3, Dragon Age 3, Infamous SS, The Order, Thief, Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy XV? Hint: not the WiiU.

DLC and microtransactions? If Nintendo had literally any third party games, you'd have them too. Ignore them if you don't like them.

Free online? Yeah, because on WiiU it's too crap for most people to use if for free, almost no one would pay. Even COD, the most popular online game on consoles, is dead on WiiU. Most Nintendo and 3rd party games don't even bother including online.

The mental gymnastics and crazy theories people invent to defend Nintendo's shitty consoles never cease to amaze me.

What about multiplayer games that you can play with your real life friends who are in the same room as you, though?

And that's practical in about 1% of households today. I mean, honestly, this only goes to show how out of touch Nintendo has become. A large portion of their audience, the audience that made them into who they are today, are now grown adults with jobs, marriages, kids. Responsibilities that far exceed gaming. Yet Nintendo, in their little 80s-90s bubble, still believe little Johnny comes home from school to a home cooked meal, only to having "Wii U" time after dinner where everyone gathers around the TV to play SMW 3DL.

Give me a break. I have nothing against local gaming, in fact I applaud it. But in today's world, it is NOT the reality, at least in the west. But hey, according to Miyamoto, we're only....what......around 9 years and about 6 months from him including Mario online MP? A joke wouldn't dream of being so ludicrous, but this is Nintendo we're talking about here.

#79 Edited by mrintro (1354 posts) -

@DocSanchez said:

@locopatho: The trouble is, every time Nintendo is restricted to something, their fans make out that it is the best way to be and that the others can't do it properly. So no online is best, "fun" family games are better than mature games, Gameplay is more important than graphics.

PS4 and Xbox One and PC are not restricted to any of these things, so I can get them all. I demand them all. I don't want to be restricted by cheap arse companies.

actually there still is a casual market out there that doesn't like to play online. it's also good for parents who don't want their children talking to random a-holes online

#80 Edited by KungfuKitten (21403 posts) -

Let's flip this around. Instead of focussing on how weak Nintendo hardware is focus on what this thread is actually about. You know, how badly the industry around Nintendo is f'ing up. I dislike the trend of DLC and day one patches, incomplete broken games that get super reviews and 'cinematic' experiences and everything having to be FPS and pretending to be PRO and COOL. Pre-order deals that take essential parts of the game hostage (Bethesda... get rid of your board of directors!!!).

So what if Nintendo can be profitable while they make actual good games, you know, while the majority of the industry is wanking off to marketing/scamming models and creating bulletpoints that target the dumbest audience? Then I am all for that. So yeah, maybe they won't make the most money. Screw SW, screw the shareholders, and stick to what's right. That takes balls, but it's worth it. Being the most profitable, that isn't a compliment.

There's only two people in this thread who actually made a point. Yeah, even Nintendo is losing their purity to these new trends. Let's hope they stay smart and passionate unlike (sadly but inevitably) the majority of the business and audience.

#81 Posted by dbtbandit67 (415 posts) -

@mrintro said:

Maybe you guys don't really give a bleep but there was once a time when games were games and they felt complete and you actually owned them. And you didn't have to pay for online, and you didn't feel like the publisher deliberately released half a game so they can keep milking you with DLC or micro transactions. If they wanted your money, they earned it with good expansions. And there was once a time when the publisher released a game and they couldn't simply "patch" it later, it had to be good to go from the start. And you didn't have to wait 2-3 years to actually get the final game. And finally, old school was about enjoying the console by yourself, or if you wanted, with your friends. You didn't have to have online, and you didn't feel like you were missing out without it.

This brings up my point about the Wii U. It's a dying breed, and we will most likely not see anything of the sort with Nintendo's next home console. Sales are too poor, and we all know Nintendo will have to make a drastic change. The next generation simply wants a different experience. And admittedly, Nintendo could use some change, but I respect them for trying to preserve what made the old times great. How about you SW? Are you finally done with Nintendo's consoles as we know them?

But the Wii U isn't an old school gaming console either with it's tablet controller. The Wii sure as hell wasn't an old school gaming console. The GameCube was their last old school gaming console. Their last GOOD old school gaming console was the N64.

#82 Posted by MFDOOM1983 (8459 posts) -
@locopatho said:

@PurpleMan5000 said:

@locopatho said:

Bullshit. Being backwards and at least a gen behind in graphics, sound, online and accounts isn't a positive.

You wanna talk about playing single player games, by yourself? Um, what consoles are getting Dark Souls 2, The Witcher 3, Dragon Age 3, Infamous SS, The Order, Thief, Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy XV? Hint: not the WiiU.

DLC and microtransactions? If Nintendo had literally any third party games, you'd have them too. Ignore them if you don't like them.

Free online? Yeah, because on WiiU it's too crap for most people to use if for free, almost no one would pay. Even COD, the most popular online game on consoles, is dead on WiiU. Most Nintendo and 3rd party games don't even bother including online.

The mental gymnastics and crazy theories people invent to defend Nintendo's shitty consoles never cease to amaze me.

What about multiplayer games that you can play with your real life friends who are in the same room as you, though?

What about them? Last gen I played far more quality ones on 360 than Wii.

I expect Xbone and PS4 to have tons too. They already have/soon will have the entire EA sports lineup, Forza, COD, Halo, Diablo 3, Minecraft, Rayman, and more casual Kinect/dancing/Lego games too.

True, true. PS3 and 360 both saw more local co-op/mp time than wii did in my circle. In fact, wii hasn't left the closet since 2008 (SSBB), but games like NBA2K, FIFA, Fight Night, Dance Central, Gears, Halo, COD, DOA4/5, Mortal Kombat, Tekken 6, Marvel, 3, SF 4, etc. were in heavy rotation anytime I was able to work out the logistics of getting several adults into a room to play video games. Admittedly, this only occurred a handful of times in the past 4 years (post HS and Uni). This notion that wii (Nintendo platforms) is the only place players can find local mp/co-op games is complete and utter bullshit.

#83 Edited by mrintro (1354 posts) -

@KungfuKitten said:

Let's flip this around. Instead of focussing on how weak Nintendo hardware is focus on what this thread is actually about. You know, how badly the industry around Nintendo is f'ing up. I dislike the trend of DLC and day one patches, incomplete broken games that get super reviews and 'cinematic' experiences and everything having to be FPS and pretending to be PRO and COOL. Pre-order deals that take essential parts of the game hostage (Bethesda... get rid of your board of directors!!!).

So what if Nintendo can be profitable while they make actual good games, you know, while the majority of the industry is wanking off to marketing/scamming models and creating bulletpoints that target the dumbest audience? Then I am all for that. So yeah, maybe they won't make the most money. Screw SW, screw the shareholders, and stick to what's right. That takes balls, but it's worth it. Being the most profitable, that isn't a compliment.

There's only two people in this thread who actually made a point. Yeah, even Nintendo is losing their purity to these new trends. Let's hope they stay smart and passionate unlike (sadly but inevitably) the majority of the business and audience.

thank you

#84 Posted by DocSanchez (2331 posts) -

@mrintro: It's good when you have a choice and parents can say, you know what? you're not getting online. It's not good if it's Nintendo making that decision for you because they are cheap. Stop making excuses for them.

#85 Edited by locopatho (20983 posts) -

@KungfuKitten said:

Let's flip this around. Instead of focussing on how weak Nintendo hardware is focus on what this thread is actually about. You know, how badly the industry around Nintendo is f'ing up. I dislike the trend of DLC and day one patches, incomplete broken games that get super reviews and 'cinematic' experiences and everything having to be FPS and pretending to be PRO and COOL. Pre-order deals that take essential parts of the game hostage (Bethesda... get rid of your board of directors!!!).

So what if Nintendo can be profitable while they make actual good games, you know, while the majority of the industry is wanking off to marketing/scamming models and creating bulletpoints that target the dumbest audience? Then I am all for that. So yeah, maybe they won't make the most money. Screw SW, screw the shareholders, and stick to what's right. That takes balls, but it's worth it. Being the most profitable, that isn't a compliment.

There's only two people in this thread who actually made a point. Yeah, even Nintendo is losing their purity to these new trends. Let's hope they stay smart and passionate unlike (sadly but inevitably) the majority of the business and audience.

Typical Sheep rant. Giant sweeping generalisations based on nothing at all.

"incomplete broken games that get super reviews"... name them.

"everything having to be FPS"... except Dark Souls 2 and Dragon Age 3 and The Witcher 3 and Elder Scrolls Online and Thief and MGS and all the other brilliant, non FPS games PS and Xbox and PC will get and Nintendo won't.

"So what if Nintendo can be profitable while they make actual good games, you know, while the majority of the industry is wanking off to marketing/scamming models"... their "actual good games" on WiiU are nearly all unambitious 2d platformers, minigames, fitness games, ports and remakes. All being released for full price of course. But hey, releasing a HD Gamecube game and a 2D platformer for 50 euros each is the "smart and passionate" thing to do, right? Never mind you can get 2D platformers and HD remakes of similar quality for a tiny fraction of that price on Steam or XBLA or PSN.

#86 Edited by mrintro (1354 posts) -

@DocSanchez said:

@mrintro: It's good when you have a choice and parents can say, you know what? you're not getting online. It's not good if it's Nintendo making that decision for you because they are cheap. Stop making excuses for them.

not really, I believe in the idea of peaceful co-existence. to me, it's apparent that Nintendo has a very specific market in mind.

#87 Edited by DocSanchez (2331 posts) -

@mrintro: Like I say more excuses.

There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to limit something the others give you except to save money. PS4, Xbox One, PC, all have local multiplayer. In spades. This notion that by limiting their console they are focusing on the local side of it is simply untrue. It's the same shattered logic that claims having poor graphics are excused because it means they are focusing on playability. Why can't you have both? You are the customer.

#88 Edited by mrintro (1354 posts) -

@DocSanchez said:

@mrintro: Like I say more excuses.

There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to limit something the others give you except to save money. PS4, Xbox One, PC, all have local multiplayer. In spades. This notion that by limiting their console they are focusing on the local side of it is simply untrue. It's the same shattered logic that claims having poor graphics are excused because it means they are focusing on playability. Why can't you have both? You are the customer.

poor graphics? have you played the Wii U? I own a Wii U and have played Super Mario 3D World, Zelda Windwaker HD, Pikmin 3... the graphics are fine. What exactly do you want? Eye porn? Even the new Donkey Kong looks fantastic. Also, Wii U has implemented online, and I actually enjoy Miiverse. On top of that, there are plenty of people who aren't into competitive multiplayer games. Some just want to have a good time at their own expense.

#89 Posted by DocSanchez (2331 posts) -

@mrintro: These arguments for Nintendo haven't cropped up over night. The graphics for the original wii were barely functional, but people argued that they didn't matter. And they're still doing it. Whether you find them "fine" (I hear that word used too much for Nintendo) doesn't change the fact that people are arguing about this and making out they have to choose between the two. They make leaps of logic whereby they convince themselves that they have to choose between graphics and gameplay. "Graphics don't matter". Well they do. And I've done last gen graphics now. They're old. I'm moving on.

#90 Edited by mrintro (1354 posts) -

@DocSanchez said:

@mrintro: These arguments for Nintendo haven't cropped up over night. The graphics for the original wii were barely functional, but people argued that they didn't matter. And they're still doing it. Whether you find them "fine" (I hear that word used too much for Nintendo) doesn't change the fact that people are arguing about this and making out they have to choose between the two. They make leaps of logic whereby they convince themselves that they have to choose between graphics and gameplay. "Graphics don't matter". Well they do. And I've done last gen graphics now. They're old. I'm moving on.

get a Wii U and a nice HDTV and you will see the graphics

#91 Posted by DJ-Lafleur (34315 posts) -

Oh Golly gee whiz, another graphics argument. Excellent...

Graphics obviously matter. graphical fidelity aside (which I what I assume people generally assume), there is also graphical performace, which does matter a bit more as far as gameplay s concerned.

Is it good that the Wii U has weaker hardware? No, it isn't, at the very least in a business sense. As far as the games themseIves are concerned I don't think it is THAT huge a detractor though. The games I've played on the system play fine and many look gorgeous, whether it be current games or games coming out later. The weaker hardware certainly hasn't made games like Super Mario 3D World and Wonderful 101 less enjoyable.

Back to the business side of things, the biggest issue with the weaker hardware from what I gather is the fact that it drives away third parties. I think this is true to an extent, though I do question just how much the graphics are effecting third parties decisions from not assisting the Wii U, in comparison to other factors. In some companies cases, I wonder if they'd develop for the Wii U even IF it had more competitive hardware. I mean, even with the N64 and Gamecube, both of which were not significantly weaker systems in graphics, and yet these also had third party issues. And Knowing Nintendo's history, There's also the fact that graphics aren't exactly the only issues that third parties have, that may or mat not be a bigger detriment than graphics.

#92 Edited by Glitter (355 posts) -

I feel the Wii U is the last strand of old school gaming, but I wish this was not the case, as I want nothing to do with the Wii U or Nintendo at this point.

#93 Posted by Xplode_games (616 posts) -

@PurpleMan5000 said:

@Xplode_games said:

Wii U is not old school in that old school system were reasonable priced and offered good hardware. Imagine a competitor to the SNES and Genesis with NES or Master System graphics but the price is almost the same. It would've been laughed at.

Actually, that is what the Atari became. The 7800 was crap compared to the NES and Sega Master System and as such it was destroyed. Atari never released a competent system and was gone from the gaming industry.

The only old school console that reminds me of the Wii U is the Jaguar that was overpriced and underpowered. Not a good combination.

The Jaguar wasn't underpowered. It was by far the most powerful console on the market when it launched. It just had the worst controller I have ever seen and no games.

The Jaguar was underpowered compared to the PS1, Saturn and even 3D0. And it was overpriced when you factored in the CD drive and weak hardware.

#94 Posted by Cranler (8809 posts) -

@mrintro said:

you didn't feel like the publisher deliberately released half a game so they can keep milking you with DLC or micro transactions.

New school games typically have more content than old school games.

#95 Edited by nep321a (75 posts) -

Nintendo can do both. They can make old school style games AND games that appeal to the modern mainstream. They're just choosing not to do so.

PS4 even has a lot of indie games that can be considered old school.

#96 Posted by super600 (31090 posts) -

I hate zombie threads.