Why the Wii is not a plausible choice for serious gamers

While I don't agree with your ultimate conclusion, I agree with your earlier statement. Comparing the Wii to the other two consoles is like comparing apples to oranges, metaphorically speaking.

Not only do the 360 and PS3 have completely different goals in terms of user experience from the Wii, the types of games on the Wii are different from the games you'll be seeing on the other two consoles. The Wii's game library seems slanted towards simple, accessible games (Warioware, Wii Sports, SMG, etc.), whereas the other two consoles' libraries are focused more on complex, deep, epic titles (Mass Effect, Metal Gear Solid 4, Halo 3, etc.). As a result, you give yourself a different experience on the Wii than on the other consoles.

I'm not going to judge which of those is better. Both are sensible choices, and the really serious gamers will get both groups if they can. But they're fundamentally different.
sonicmj1

So I'm not a serious gamer anymore? :|

This topic sucks. Shooters will be more fun on the Wii. There are more lifelike.lild1425

umm, if you can have fun playing the wii, I don't see any reason why you shouldn't play it ...

Im a serious gamer and I chose Wii

/thread

nintendogamer6

You "think" you are a serious gamer.  Big differance.

SHUT UP ALL U SHEEP SAYING THAT WE'RE NOT REAL GAMERS JUST SHUT UP!!!!!!1!1!ONE

You need to understand that you are not a serious gamer. Why? Because you buy Nintendo games. Nintendo games are about sitting down and having fun. Let's take... say.... a game from EPIC. That's a game that will A. Get you wrapped up in competition B. Have you seriously pissed off at other people by the end of the match and C. Have you staring in awe at the magnificence of a player model/game world.

These are things that the Wii will NEVER do. The Wii will provide you with some fun physical activity, and maybe a cute Nintendo game here and there, but never the visceral, pulse-pounding action of a hardcore shooter on the 360/PC/PS3.

pyoob

[QUOTE="nintendogamer6"]

Im a serious gamer and I chose Wii

/thread

Coyo7e

You "think" you are a serious gamer.  Big differance.

[QUOTE="nintendogamer6"]

Im a serious gamer and I chose Wii

/thread

Coyo7e

You "think" you are a serious gamer.  Big differance.

If you brag about knowing the truth:

You ""think""... which is a big difference from the rest of us...

[QUOTE="Coyo7e"][QUOTE="nintendogamer6"]

Im a serious gamer and I chose Wii

/thread

camzaman

You "think" you are a serious gamer. Big differance.

The Nintendo Wii still needs more games and not "mini-games". I'm starting to feel after TP the Wii was just an impulse buy ._.Gigas_Yuu

The Nintendo Wii still needs more games and not "mini-games". I'm starting to feel after TP the Wii was just an impulse buy ._.Gigas_Yuu

Serious gamers? Serious gamers play all consoles.Kikouken

qft. A serious gamer wouldn't be ignorant enough to disregard an entire console because it doesn't make him feel cool.

First off, a preface:

I have played at least a little bit of all three systems. Each is, in its own way, a really cool device, and I'd buy every one if I had the money. However, I think that the Nintendo Wii has been getting some undue attention in the XB360 and PS3's arena. The wii is nothing like the these two systems. It's an apples to oranges comparison. Why?

Here we go:

Reason #1 - No dual joysticks. In order to play some games, especially shooters, you need to have two joysticks. One for the camera, and one for control. Using the controller's motion sensing to aim is not a substitute, because it's not as accurate.

Reason #2 - Games are about escapism. The whole point of using joystick and buttons controller is to find a portal between the world you live in and the world you want to experience. The Wii's vague approximations of a gun, a tennis racket, a golf club, or a steering wheel, although fun, are a distracting compromise between real world and dream world.

Reason #3 - Nintendo has long been kid game directed. Though this works great for party games and some RPGs, its focus on kid games has led to limited development of FPS's and other more mature games.

Reason #4 - The Wii is seriously underpowered. This issue might not make a difference to sugar-high kids or hip senior citizens, but graphical performance is important in creating complex AI, immersive worlds, etc.

In Conclusion:

The Wii, although it can be a lot of fun, is not a serious gaming machine. The PS3 and XB360 are much better choices in this regard. Parcheesi and Chess are both fun boardgames, but which one is truly strategic in nature?

Mintshebang

First off, a preface:

I have played at least a little bit of all three systems. Each is, in its own way, a really cool device, and I'd buy every one if I had the money. However, I think that the Nintendo Wii has been getting some undue attention in the XB360 and PS3's arena. The wii is nothing like the these two systems. It's an apples to oranges comparison. Why?

Here we go:

Reason #1 - No dual joysticks. In order to play some games, especially shooters, you need to have two joysticks. One for the camera, and one for control. Using the controller's motion sensing to aim is not a substitute, because it's not as accurate.

The Wiimote is actually more accurate than dual-analogue, by a large margin infact but takes time to break in. Most people that have issues don't give it a chance or simply can't handle the change.

Reason #2 - Games are about escapism. The whole point of using joystick and buttons controller is to find a portal between the world you live in and the world you want to experience. The Wii's vague approximations of a gun, a tennis racket, a golf club, or a steering wheel, although fun, are a distracting compromise between real world and dream world.

That makes no sense the things you describe actually immerse yourself in the dream world of the game to a higher than normal degree. Thats like saying when VR comes along it'll suck or having a trigger to pull is bad for shooters.

Reason #3 - Nintendo has long been kid game directed. Though this works great for party games and some RPGs, its focus on kid games has led to limited development of FPS's and other more mature games.

Well the N64 had the best shooters of the time like Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Turok series, etc. The Gamecube had a lot of the multiplat FPS's but nothing exclusive that packed a punch. It also had many mature games but they simply didn't all deliver much quality, except the RE series and Eternal Darkness to name a few of couse.

Reason #4 - The Wii is seriously underpowered. This issue might not make a difference to sugar-high kids or hip senior citizens, but graphical performance is important in creating complex AI, immersive worlds, etc.

Yeah thats why people including me will get a 360 or whatever, nobody buys a Wii for its 133t graphics and what not. But its a lot more fun at what it does regardless of its raw power.

In Conclusion:

The Wii, although it can be a lot of fun, is not a serious gaming machine. The PS3 and XB360 are much better choices in this regard. Parcheesi and Chess are both fun boardgames, but which one is truly strategic in nature?  

Mintshebang

Bad reasons in my opinion and I'm a multi-plat gamer too. I don't even consider it a hardcore system myself but it offers gaming pleasures no other system can. No-matter what Sony or MS get up to it'll still be successful doing its own thing.

[QUOTE="ZebethOrZebes"]According to the topic creator, artificial intelligence is directly correlated to graphical power. Do you think he has any credibility?pyoob

hey dude, he's saying that the guts of a machine is closely related to the strength of AI. That's being way too picky on your part, and you know what he meant.

[QUOTE="pyoob"]

[QUOTE="ZebethOrZebes"]According to the topic creator, artificial intelligence is directly correlated to graphical power. Do you think he has any credibility?ZebethOrZebes

hey dude, he's saying that the guts of a machine is closely related to the strength of AI. That's being way too picky on your part, and you know what he meant.

The reason you are not a plausible choice for being taken seriously:

Your topic makes zero sense.  Clearly Nintendo is working on getting a better variety of games on Wii, you don't think Rockstar decided to put Manhunt 2 on Wii by themselves do you?  Plus, why would we need dual analog if thats what the wiimote is for?

The reason you are not a plausible choice for being taken seriously:

Your topic makes zero sense. Clearly Nintendo is working on getting a better variety of games on Wii, you don't think Rockstar decided to put Manhunt 2 on Wii by themselves do you? Plus, why would we need dual analog if thats what the wiimote is for?

REVOLUTIONfreak

"serious" gamers own all of the consoles.

/thread

First off, a preface:

I have played at least a little bit of all three systems. Each is, in its own way, a really cool device, and I'd buy every one if I had the money. However, I think that the Nintendo Wii has been getting some undue attention in the XB360 and PS3's arena. The wii is nothing like the these two systems. It's an apples to oranges comparison. Why?

Here we go:

Reason #1 - No dual joysticks. In order to play some games, especially shooters, you need to have two joysticks. One for the camera, and one for control. Using the controller's motion sensing to aim is not a substitute, because it's not as accurate.

Reason #2 - Games are about escapism. The whole point of using joystick and buttons controller is to find a portal between the world you live in and the world you want to experience. The Wii's vague approximations of a gun, a tennis racket, a golf club, or a steering wheel, although fun, are a distracting compromise between real world and dream world.

Reason #3 - Nintendo has long been kid game directed. Though this works great for party games and some RPGs, its focus on kid games has led to limited development of FPS's and other more mature games.

Reason #4 - The Wii is seriously underpowered. This issue might not make a difference to sugar-high kids or hip senior citizens, but graphical performance is important in creating complex AI, immersive worlds, etc.

In Conclusion:

The Wii, although it can be a lot of fun, is not a serious gaming machine. The PS3 and XB360 are much better choices in this regard. Parcheesi and Chess are both fun boardgames, but which one is truly strategic in nature?  

Mintshebang

Video games are serious business 8)

:lol: more of these threads

SHUT UP ALL U SHEEP SAYING THAT WE'RE NOT REAL GAMERS JUST SHUT UP!!!!!!1!1!ONE

You need to understand that you are not a serious gamer. Why? Because you buy Nintendo games. Nintendo games are about sitting down and having fun. Let's take... say.... a game from EPIC. That's a game that will A. Get you wrapped up in competition B. Have you seriously pissed off at other people by the end of the match and C. Have you staring in awe at the magnificence of a player model/game world.

These are things that the Wii will NEVER do. The Wii will provide you with some fun physical activity, and maybe a cute Nintendo game here and there, but never the visceral, pulse-pounding action of a hardcore shooter on the 360/PC/PS3.

pyoob

You don't have a clue what you're writing about. Buttons don't put you any closer to the game.

I'm a serious gamer, and I chose Wii for its new approach to in-game interactivity.

Reason #1 - No dual joysticks. In order to play some games, especially shooters, you need to have two joysticks. One for the camera, and one for control. Using the controller's motion sensing to aim is not a substitute, because it's not as accurate.
After playing Metroid on Wii, I can say that it is accurate enough.

Reason #2 - Games are about escapism. The whole point of using joystick and buttons controller is to find a portal between the world you live in and the world you want to experience. The Wii's vague approximations of a gun, a tennis racket, a golf club, or a steering wheel, although fun, are a distracting compromise between real world and dream world.
Games are about fun. Escapism is just a way of having fun. Till now, many people find the Wii a fun oriented console, and that can only be a good thing. Also by your standards, using a steering wheel to play Forza or GT makes it worse since it is a "distracting compromise between real world and dream world", right?

Reason #3 - Nintendo has long been kid game directed. Though this works great for party games and some RPGs, its focus on kid games has led to limited development of FPS's and other more mature games.
I totally agree with Nintendo being kid-oriented, but Nintendo now tries to have games oriented for mature players. Recollect the Mahunt for Wii announcement?

Reason #4 - The Wii is seriously underpowered. This issue might not make a difference to sugar-high kids or hip senior citizens, but graphical performance is important in creating complex AI, immersive worlds, etc.
So what? Previous gen games were complex enough for most people...

In Conclusion:

The Wii, although it can be a lot of fun, is not a serious gaming machine. The PS3 and XB360 are much better choices in this regard. Parcheesi and Chess are both fun boardgames, but which one is truly strategic in nature?
"Serious gaming machine"? Are you kiddying us? Game by nature is about having fun. A game doesn't have to be serious! Wiis choice of  catering to non-serious (or casual if you want) gamers is what gives it a shot at winning this console war.

Mintshebang

[QUOTE="Stabby2486"]Does it have to be a shooter?foxhound_fox

Hard Core gamer here, and I bought the Wii... Worst console I ever bought, so I'm sticking with my 360 and Ps3, and gaming computer, and psp. Nintendo isnt a HARD CORE gaming company, its a leisure, fun, party company. Any TRUE hard core gamer will agree, we want online with some seriously bad ass fire fights in Resistance or Gears, not some pokemon battle arena online.black_chewbacca

I'd like to clarify a few points that some people have been attacking. Perhaps such attacks are justified, perhaps not. Just let me know if this changes anything for you.

First of all, I love the Wii. Really, I do. It's really nifty, lots of fun for party games. My only gripe with my Xbox 360 is that it treats Live as a substitute for being with the people you're playing with. In reality, co-op and splitscreen are completely different animals. Live has advantages I really like, but I sometimes wish I could play Lost Planet with my friend next to me, not an hour away. Anyways, the Wii has some serious advantages as far as family fun is concerned, and being able to afford 4 controllers after the Wii's low price probably helps a lot of people in this regard.

Second of all, when I said that dual analog is better than a motion controller, I wasn't kidding. As a matter of fact, I also think that it's better than a steering wheel for racing games. Why? Mainly because dual controllers can be implemented perfectly in any game at this point. Look at excite truck, call of duty, or zelda for the wii. In excite truck, you have to hold the controller in a specific orientation in order to make it work right (hold at both ends). The controller is just too small to be a steering wheel like that, and if you want to use any other orientation or button map, you can't. With a gamepad, you have many more options, and you don't have to treat it like an object from your real life, so you can stop thinking about how you're supposed to use it and just use it. In call of duty, you point the controller at the screen to aim. If my experience with the Wii's menu system is any indication, this is highly innaccurate. The buttons on the wii are gigantic not because they can be, but because they need to be in order for you to hit them. Plus, the slightest movement will cause the pointer to move. On a gamepad, you can aim at something and know that your aim will not change till you tell it to. In zelda, or so I've heard, the use of motion sensing is more an afterthought, and that the gamecube edition is actually more fun. Although this may seem to be an area where I have no experience, I can clearly tell you that on ports like Marvel Ultimate Alliance, the same is true. Developers aren't going to bother with making the motion sensing perfect when they already designed the game to work well without it on another console. In some games, the Wii's motion controller makes a lot of sense, as in Wii Sports bowling. For the most part, however, the Wii controller limits user customization of control schemes, reduces accuracy in aiming, and has imperfect implementation in many games.

Third of all, I like impressive graphics. They immerse you in the game the way almost no other factor can. Why? Because humans are highly visual. It's how we relate to the world. That's why people like HDTV, that's why people talk about cinematic realism in CGI, and that's why Gaming companies, for the past 25+ years, have been emphasizing their system's or software's superior graphics. A motion sensing controller, for this and other reasons (like those mentioned above) is not a substitute for graphics capability. I like immersive gaming. I think it's fun, surprising, and interesting. The Wii simply can't offer this experience through graphics power.

First off, a preface:

I have played at least a little bit of all three systems. Each is, in its own way, a really cool device, and I'd buy every one if I had the money. However, I think that the Nintendo Wii has been getting some undue attention in the XB360 and PS3's arena. The wii is nothing like the these two systems. It's an apples to oranges comparison. Why?

Here we go:

Reason #1 - No dual joysticks. In order to play some games, especially shooters, you need to have two joysticks. One for the camera, and one for control. Using the controller's motion sensing to aim is not a substitute, because it's not as accurate.the pointer may not be as accurate but can be a lot quicker if you wanted accurate you'd be a keyboard and mouse man plus as most thumb sticks use a kind of forgiving lock on if youre close enough plus as on the spot demoed the god father has a lock on feature that lets the pointer lock on to the guy but still lets you shoot him where you want

Reason #2 - Games are about escapism. The whole point of using joystick and buttons controller is to find a portal between the world you live in and the world you want to experience. The Wii's vague approximations of a gun, a tennis racket, a golf club, or a steering wheel, although fun, are a distracting compromise between real world and dream world's is rubbish you obviously have never played a wario ware game

Reason #3 - Nintendo has long been kid game directed. Though this works great for party games and some RPGs, its focus on kid games has led to limited development of FPS's and other more mature games.

2 words manhunt 2 on the wii you don't get much more mature than that

Reason #4 - The Wii is seriously underpowered. This issue might not make a difference to sugar-high kids or hip senior citizens, but graphical performance is important in creating complex AI, immersive worlds, etc.

graphics and ai have nothing to do with each other

In Conclusion:

The Wii, although it can be a lot of fun, is not a serious gaming machine. The PS3 and XB360 are much better choices in this regard. Parcheesi and Chess are both fun boardgames, but which one is truly strategic in nature?  

Mintshebang

Hard Core gamer here, and I bought the Wii... Worst console I ever bought, so I'm sticking with my 360 and Ps3, and gaming computer, and psp. Nintendo isnt a HARD CORE gaming company, its a leisure, fun, party company. Any TRUE hard core gamer will agree, we want online with some seriously bad ass fire fights in Resistance or Gears, not some pokemon battle arena online.black_chewbacca

Hard Core gamer here, and I bought the Wii... Worst console I ever bought, so I'm sticking with my 360 and Ps3, and gaming computer, and psp. Nintendo isnt a HARD CORE gaming company, its a leisure, fun, party company. Any TRUE hard core gamer will agree, we want online with some seriously bad ass fire fights in Resistance or Gears, not some pokemon battle arena online.black_chewbacca

Metroid, zelda = non hardcore games, What the hell?

True hardcore gamers were around before the days of online, I doubt that they would not play games such as metroid and shadow of the colosuss just because they did not have online.

Im a serious gamer and I chose Wii

/thread

nintendogamer6

First off, a preface:

I have played at least a little bit of all three systems. Each is, in its own way, a really cool device, and I'd buy every one if I had the money. However, I think that the Nintendo Wii has been getting some undue attention in the XB360 and PS3's arena. The wii is nothing like the these two systems. It's an apples to oranges comparison. Why?

Here we go:

Reason #1 - No dual joysticks. In order to play some games, especially shooters, you need to have two joysticks. One for the camera, and one for control. Using the controller's motion sensing to aim is not a substitute, because it's not as accurate.

Reason #2 - Games are about escapism. The whole point of using joystick and buttons controller is to find a portal between the world you live in and the world you want to experience. The Wii's vague approximations of a gun, a tennis racket, a golf club, or a steering wheel, although fun, are a distracting compromise between real world and dream world.

Reason #3 - Nintendo has long been kid game directed. Though this works great for party games and some RPGs, its focus on kid games has led to limited development of FPS's and other more mature games.

Reason #4 - The Wii is seriously underpowered. This issue might not make a difference to sugar-high kids or hip senior citizens, but graphical performance is important in creating complex AI, immersive worlds, etc.

In Conclusion:

The Wii, although it can be a lot of fun, is not a serious gaming machine. The PS3 and XB360 are much better choices in this regard. Parcheesi and Chess are both fun boardgames, but which one is truly strategic in nature?  

Mintshebang

Reason #1 - No dual joysticks. In order to play some games, especially shooters, you need to have two joysticks. One for the camera, and one for control. Using the controller's motion sensing to aim is not a substitute, because it's not as accurate.Mintshebang

Reason #2 - Games are about escapism. The whole point of using joystick and buttons controller is to find a portal between the world you live in and the world you want to experience. The Wii's vague approximations of a gun, a tennis racket, a golf club, or a steering wheel, although fun, are a distracting compromise between real world and dream world.Mintshebang

Third of all, I like impressive graphics. They immerse you in the game the way almost no other factor can. Why? Because humans are highly visual. It's how we relate to the world. That's why people like HDTV, that's why people talk about cinematic realism in CGI, and that's why Gaming companies, for the past 25+ years, have been emphasizing their system's or software's superior graphics. A motion sensing controller, for this and other reasons (like those mentioned above) is not a substitute for graphics capability. I like immersive gaming. I think it's fun, surprising, and interesting. The Wii simply can't offer this experience through graphics power.Mintshebang

Do you know the game Shadowman? I still happen to love and play it. It's not because of the graphics(which are horrible in cow/lem standards), but because of the insane world in it. Because of the mad sounds and noices in the backround. It's a highly immersive game.

hmm... but I must be the only human on earth who gets immersed by games even though the graphics are terrible. Right?