Do you consider Wii a next gen console?

[Moonblade]

1. I don't think nintendo ever released official Wii specs.

2. Even if it's 3 times more 'powerful' than a PS2, it still doesn't mean games can look 3 times better.

3. This is my last post in this topic since we're going off-topic and Vysez already summed it up really nice.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

1. I don't think nintendo ever released official Wii specs.

2. Even if it's 3 times more 'powerful' than a PS2, it still doesn't mean games can look 3 times better.

3. This is my last post in this topic since we're going off-topic and Vysez already summed it up really nice.

1. That doesnt mean we dont know anything about the hardware. Alot more memory and 2x clockspeeds are basically confirmed so that would put it above GC and ps2 no matter what.

2. No but it also doesnt mean gfx actually have to look worse than the games on the last gen console. So you can blame that on the devs, not the hardware.

3. Seems like a good idea as you dont seem to be interrested in having a discussion at a worthy level and rather talk alot of nonsense.

 

[Diamond.G]

To lighten up the mood in here a lil bit.

 

[Kryton]

It's surprising the amount of novelty a new input device can offer. A bit like the DS, touch-pad was new.. did well. Personally, I think the media have ensured Wii's success by building it up as a 'revolution' since the internal code-word leaked. If it with this aspect (which I suspect has caused all the sales as people rush to find out what is so 'revolutionary'), I still view it as last-gen. Even the DreamCast had a motion sensing fishing-rod which everyone enjoyed , if Sega brought it back with an "OMG" attitude and offered positioning capability they could easily give Wii a run for the money.

 

[Frank]

The next generation is simply that: the new kid. If it is decided the market wants something simpler, slower, smaller and cheaper, that would be next-gen as well.

 

[Kryton]

The next generation is simply that: the new kid. If it is decided the market wants something simpler, slower, smaller and cheaper, that would be next-gen as well.

I think people here take a more pragmatic view. The market may want a simpler, slower, smaller, cheaper console but nothing stops the heavy-weights offering such an experience in their games. What people seem to be intrigued about with the Wii is purely the motion-sensing, this is a novelty as much as it was in the 90s. It died then so people here (who remember it) are naturally sceptical over its reincarnated form.

 

[Entropy]

I think people here take a more pragmatic view. The market may want a simpler, slower, smaller, cheaper console but nothing stops the heavy-weights offering such an experience in their games.

Hmm. You're mixing "console" with "games" here.
The heavyweights may or may not be able to offer a similar experience in their games, but they cannot offer the same console ergonomics this generation.

What people seem to be intrigued about with the Wii is purely the motion-sensing, this is a novelty as much as it was in the 90s. It died then so people here (who remember it) are naturally sceptical over its reincarnated form.

It's a different implementation introduced to another demographic. But I'd like to point out that you are simply wrong in claiming that the motion sensing is the only thing that attracts customers. While it is instrumental in the fun-factor and party worthiness of the console, the fact that the Wii is extremely compact, offers wireless controls out of the box, and is silent are also big pluses in many peoples books. Being cheaper than the new Sony and Microsoft offerings doesn't hurt either.

The only one I know who has bought a PS3 sent it back because he thought it made too much noise. (Buying it partly due to Blu-Ray.) The 360 is no better. The low power draw and quiet, compact design of the Wii adds to its appeal. It may not be the most important factor, but it doesn't have to be in order to affect consumer attraction and satisfaction.

 

[archangelmorph]

It's a different implementation introduced to another demographic. But I'd like to point out that you are simply wrong in claiming that the motion sensing is the only thing that attracts customers.

It's definitely the fundemental defining point of the console and by far the biggest reason the vast majority of buyers (especially casuals and non-gamers) have jumped on board.. The second biggest being price.. The other factors you mentioned are significantly minor to most users and I definitely don't see them being in any way the driver of consumer purchase of nintendos little box (Especially since most casuals probably didn't know it had wifi or was quiet until they got it home and read the manual)..

The only one I know who has bought a PS3 sent it back because he thought it made too much noise. (Buying it partly due to Blu-Ray.) The 360 is no better.

He must have incredibly sensitive hearing because the PS3 is as quiet as a mouse.. The xbox360 on the other hand is a different story..
Plus your arguement isn't even relevant because if what you say is true then it's obvious your friend bought his PS3 because he was looking for a low cost Blu-ray device and not specifically for the gaming functionality offered.. In contrast neither the Wii nor the Xbox360 offers Blu-ray playback functionality at all..

 

[_xxx_]

Well for me it was not the price but rather the low noise/power and the sleek design.

Motion sensing a novelty? Have you actually played Wii Sports? To me, the motion sensing is THE best thing since sliced bread.

My shoulders and biceps are still recovering from a long Wii-boxing session with friends two days ago