Does the Wii deserve such high sales numbers?

[QUOTE="Tylendal"]The question, is whether or not the sales were earned for a valid reason. Just say for example, that some billionaire want to build a house, using Wii's and Wii-motes as bricks.  Would the some-odd million Wii's sold for that truly be indicative of the success of the console?  They would not be, and so would not truly be deserved sales.

ZIMdoom

I'm sorry but that is an extremely terrible comparison.  PEople are buying the Wii to play games. 

Plus, we are not arguing about whether or not somebody building a house out of Wii means it is deserving of sales.  AS I already mentioned, if somebody wants to buy enough Wiis to build a house then that is his perogative.  Arguing about whether those Wiis "deserve" to be sold is totally irrelevant.  It's like arguing whether the sun deserves to rise.  The fact is the sun did rise, hypothetically that guy DID build a house out of Wiis, and in the real world the Wii is selling such high sales numbers. The only logical thing anyone can do, is judge "worth" by the results and not by personal opinion.  Since the Wii IS IN FACT selling in high numbers it must clearly deserve to be doing so.  If the Wii sold low numbers it must deserve to be doing so.

Otherwise, all anyone is doing is creating more fanboy arguements that will go nowhere and change nobody's mind and solve nothing.  Wii haters will say it doesn' deserve the sales...only their console is deserving.  Wii fans will say it DOES deserve the sales...and other consoles don't deserve their sales.   Meanwhile capitalism says that people are buying the Wii, Nintendo is making money, and everything else is meaningless.

You've got me wrong.  I'm saying that the Wii is deserving of the sales, because people have bought it so as to play games.  If they had bought it for some other reason, like wanting a paper weight, then it wouldn't be deserving of the sales, because it would be getting ahead in the console market for invalid reasons.

Personally I don't think its too unreasonable to question why a console costs more than its predecessor, yet is nearly identical in terms of hardware features. There's little doubt among the tech community that Nintendo could have put some better hardware in there and still sold it for $250.

Teufelhuhn

Its not identically though. The console has around 2-3 times the power of its predecessor(theroetically) . It has built in memory. It has online functiionality and retro downloads. It has wi-fi and most importantly it has a radical new interface.  

250$ is not unreasonable for a console that offers a genuine alternative to the 360/PS3. Of course any console out there is only as good as its software (which is where the Wii falters) but it's only been out a few months.  in terms of the value the hardware offers you the Wii is not as great as the PS3/360, but at the end of the day the PS2 was not as feature packed as the Xbox (yet it was still more expensive). We are gamers, we play games. the box we play it on is largely irerelevant, it is the content that concerns us. Insecure children (like some of the others on this topic) who cry over the fact that a console is not marketed at a minority of videophiles are a disgrace to gaming and to be honest i cant wait to see the back of them. 

We are gamers, we play games. the box we play it on is largely irerelevant, it is the content that concerns us. Insecure children (like some of the others on this topic) who cry over the fact that a console is not marketed at a minority of videophiles are a disgrace to gaming and to be honest i cant wait to see the back of them.

NorthlandMan

What you're talking about is 100% your preference and absolutely does not apply to all "gamers".  "Gamers" are allowed to care about the graphics or multimedia features of a console, there's no rule that says otherwise.  

[QUOTE="NorthlandMan"]

We are gamers, we play games. the box we play it on is largely irerelevant, it is the content that concerns us. Insecure children (like some of the others on this topic) who cry over the fact that a console is not marketed at a minority of videophiles are a disgrace to gaming and to be honest i cant wait to see the back of them.

Teufelhuhn

What you're talking about is 100% your preference and absolutely does not apply to all "gamers".  "Gamers" are allowed to care about the graphics or multimedia features of a console, there's no rule that says otherwise.  

The fact remains that they're a tiny minority.

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="NorthlandMan"]

We are gamers, we play games. the box we play it on is largely irerelevant, it is the content that concerns us. Insecure children (like some of the others on this topic) who cry over the fact that a console is not marketed at a minority of videophiles are a disgrace to gaming and to be honest i cant wait to see the back of them.

Tylendal

What you're talking about is 100% your preference and absolutely does not apply to all "gamers".  "Gamers" are allowed to care about the graphics or multimedia features of a console, there's no rule that says otherwise.  

The fact remains that they're a tiny minority.

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="NorthlandMan"]

We are gamers, we play games. the box we play it on is largely irerelevant, it is the content that concerns us. Insecure children (like some of the others on this topic) who cry over the fact that a console is not marketed at a minority of videophiles are a disgrace to gaming and to be honest i cant wait to see the back of them.

Tylendal

What you're talking about is 100% your preference and absolutely does not apply to all "gamers". "Gamers" are allowed to care about the graphics or multimedia features of a console, there's no rule that says otherwise.

The fact remains that they're a tiny minority.

So I'm not a "gamer" because I'm in a particular minority group?  :?

Does the Wii deserve high sales?   ... Who cares?  It is.   ZIMdoom

[QUOTE="FoamingPanda"]

It's not really a matter of deserving.

Nintendo has done a wonderful job at lowering the standards of their fans, providing a poor quality product at an inflated price, and reaching out to a broader audience under the sales pitch of, "here, kids, moms, grannies, everyone, come play this fun little toy -- isn't it neat to hit the ball across the screen, ^___^;;."  I'm surprised how effective these 20 year old franchises, apparently gamers don't mind being fed the same trash for thing 6th time in a row, have been at retaining a fan base who would acknowledge the console as a peice of garbage if it had been made by any other company. 

It's a sick and sad thing for gaming, especially for Nintendo fans, when consumers sacrafice important values to justify their trust in a console.  Things like hardware quality, the freedom to develop all sorts of games on a console, cost, and orgionality should be universal values that go across console-lines.

But, as I've said, when you judge Wii by the values that we have always considered key and important, the console shines for what it is -- a pile of underpowered, overpriced, "family friendly" garbage.

ChinoJamesKeene

 It is overpriced hardware, its barely a step up from the gamecube but is being sold for 4 times more. It's probably cheaper to make the wii now than it is a gamecube. If any other company pulled the same trick out of the hat they would fail hard.

 i just feel digusted with their attitude towards games, they simply don't respect them as art anymore and are content to release their KFC ****mini game packages and watered down franchises.

P.S.  They are not art, they never were art and they never will be art.

[QUOTE="Tylendal"][QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="NorthlandMan"]

We are gamers, we play games. the box we play it on is largely irerelevant, it is the content that concerns us. Insecure children (like some of the others on this topic) who cry over the fact that a console is not marketed at a minority of videophiles are a disgrace to gaming and to be honest i cant wait to see the back of them.

Teufelhuhn

What you're talking about is 100% your preference and absolutely does not apply to all "gamers". "Gamers" are allowed to care about the graphics or multimedia features of a console, there's no rule that says otherwise.

The fact remains that they're a tiny minority.

So I'm not a "gamer" because I'm in a particular minority group?  :?

Did either me, or NorthLandMan ever say that?

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

So I'm not a "gamer" because I'm in a particular minority group? :?

Tylendal

Did either me, or NorthLandMan ever say that?

He did, I'm not really sure what you're trying to say. I'm confused as to why you brought up the "minority" issue.

P.S. They are not art, they never were art and they never will be art.

ymi_basic

[QUOTE="Tylendal"][QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

So I'm not a "gamer" because I'm in a particular minority group? :?

Teufelhuhn

Did either me, or NorthLandMan ever say that?

He did, I'm not really sure what you're trying to say. I'm confused as to why you brought up the "minority" issue.

Because, it's foolish to complain that companies are marketing towards a majority, or at least a larger minority, instead of a minority of a minority.

[QUOTE="NorthlandMan"]

We are gamers, we play games. the box we play it on is largely irerelevant, it is the content that concerns us. Insecure children (like some of the others on this topic) who cry over the fact that a console is not marketed at a minority of videophiles are a disgrace to gaming and to be honest i cant wait to see the back of them.

Teufelhuhn

What you're talking about is 100% your preference and absolutely does not apply to all "gamers". "Gamers" are allowed to care about the graphics or multimedia features of a console, there's no rule that says otherwise.

There is nothing wrong with caring about cutting edge graphics in your games. There is nothing wrong with wanting games support the latest 1080p HDTV sets and arre focused on the minority of individualswho own these TV's (rather than focusing on everyone).  What is wrong is morons constantly criticisng or deriding machines that ARE targetted at everyone. Machines that have chosen to forego the trend of catering to a minority in favour of catering to everyone. Machines that are capable of beautiful graphics, just in lower resolutions. Machines that have chosen to differentiate themselves from their competition through styling and interface rather than any bleeding edge technologies

 There is a worrying trend amongst some incredibly stupid section of gaming community  that suggest gaming should remain a minority pursuit and that if a game doesn't support HD graphics it is worthless. I have a real problem with these morons and if you call yourself a gamer so should you 

[QUOTE="Hoffgod"]

I guess it's how you look at it. You, a techie, look at it from a technical cost aspect and say $250 is unjustifyable.
I, an economist, look at it from an economics cost-benefit analysis, and say $250 is totally justified.

Teufelhuhn

That's quite true.  And if being thrilled by the guts of the machine is one of your primary objects, the Wii is not going to provide satisfaction in that area and never will.  That's not really the aim of the product.  Does it have to be?  Should it be?

Enthusiasts say yes, but markets overwhelmingly say no.  Is the Wii using older graphics technology?  Yes.  Is the graphics technology in the Wii sufficient for the mass market?  Yes again.  In North America the Xbox 360 sold less than PS2 did last year, and so far is selling less than the PS2 this year.  The Wii is the only new home console that is consistently outselling the PS2 in any market.

Could the Wii be more powerful and still sell for under $300?  Yes, but it would either lose GameCube compatability or require a massive subsidy.  Doing a previous console as an additional system-on-chip is difficult and expensive, you saw how quick Sony was to scale that back on the PS3.

There are definitely limitations and problems associated with the Wii's hardware, but consider this - Nintendo could have achieved their product aims with far less.  They could have used overclocked GameCube chips instead of going for a better CPU variant and the reworked GPU.  They didn't have to add as much memory as they did.  And they could still have charged $250.

I'll close with this: The fact that the Wii is currently the fastest selling console in history on the software it has now should seriously suggest that consumers are not prioritizing graphics or hardware power.

Because, it's foolish to complain that companies are marketing towards a majority, or at least a larger minority, instead of a minority of a minority.

Tylendal

He did, I'm not really sure what you're trying to say. I'm confused as to why you brought up the "minority" issue.

Teufelhuhn

No, I said you're not a real gamer if you dont want more people to play games and you think that High Definition Graphics and the latest technologies are the only thing that defines gaming. From your portal sig it's obvious that this doesn't apply to you 

[QUOTE="ymi_basic"]

P.S. They are not art, they never were art and they never will be art.

Teufelhuhn

There is a worrying trend amongst some incredibly stupid section of gaming community that suggest gaming should remain a minority pursuit and that if a game doesn't support HD graphics it is worthless. I have a real problem with these morons and if you call yourself a gamer so should you

NorthlandMan

Quite frankly I get by being a gamer without considering any particular group to be "morons", but that's just me...  :?

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="ymi_basic"]

P.S. They are not art, they never were art and they never will be art.

ymi_basic

Interesting.  What makes the Sistine Chapel so different from say...Shadow of the Colossus? 

Interesting.  What makes the Sistine Chapel so different from say...Shadow of the Colossus? Teufelhuhn

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]Interesting. What makes the Sistine Chapel so different from say...Shadow of the Colossus? Jandurin

[QUOTE="NorthlandMan"]

There is a worrying trend amongst some incredibly stupid section of gaming community that suggest gaming should remain a minority pursuit and that if a game doesn't support HD graphics it is worthless. I have a real problem with these morons and if you call yourself a gamer so should you

Teufelhuhn

Quite frankly I get by being a gamer without considering any particular group to be "morons", but that's just me... :?

and yet morons they remain. You cant seriously tell me you agree with the view that gaming should remain confined to adolescent males? It'd be great to see gaming given the recognition and success it rightfully deserves

[QUOTE="ymi_basic"][QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="ymi_basic"]

P.S. They are not art, they never were art and they never will be art.

Teufelhuhn

Interesting. What makes the Sistine Chapel so different from say...Shadow of the Colossus?

I would say other then time frame and number of people contributing to it, not a whole lot. Both take time, talent, and years to create, and both are created with the idea of telling a story. They are also both labors of love for those involved, and are created in the hopes of pleasing only a few or perhaps many with their presentation, message and merit. The real difference is in the idea of interacting with that medium as opposed to looking at it. 

Games can most assuredly be art. If someone wants to compare them to a turd, then well... maybe that person should just quit gaming altogether.

Good marketing, yes

Big update from GC, no 

Whenever I think about why its selling so well I always come back to price.  It's game library isn't any better than the PS3, yet it obliterates it in sales every month.  Then you look at the 360 which has about 3x the number of AA/AAA games, and it seems as though its not seeling as well as it should.  I'd like to see MS drop the price a bit and see what happens then.Teufelhuhn

Teufelhuhn, it's more about the wii-mote than the price. All the things the same, take the wii-mote from the Wii and give it a conventional controller, would it sell as fast? Hell no!

All things the same, Increase the price to $300, would it sell as fast? Yes, it will still sell fast. Maybe not as fast, but fast nonetheless.