That is a false choice and a severely limiting attitude. Few successful business people had that attitude. It's like defining all automobiles as either sports cars or minivans. There are many different markets, and within each market there are sub-markets. People cross the lines between markets all the time. Your classification fails horribly, especially considering people can play "hardcore" games, and follow it up immediately with a "casual" game.

So no, it is not accurate, it also doesn't work.[/quote]

I think I came out wrong on how I said it. Gamers are a mix of both now, have been for awhile. It wasnt like this on last gen. ''Hardcore'' gamers can and will probably do as you said, thats why I said that most people would have a Wii too. To try the experience. But the ones who bought the Wii, the non-gamers that Nintendo wanted to atract, and did well doing so, probably wont be playing those ''hardcore'' games or any other game that doesent have Nintendo on its title or made by Nintendo, for that matter.

Just Dance 2 sold 5 mil, all other third party games are below 2mil. I dont know if what im sayin makes much sence to everyone. Ill just put it like this, There's 85Million+ Wii's in households worldwide. But only 1% to 6% of the customers actually buy anything not related to Nintendo, as in, third party games. The numbers are good, but not when the total of people that might buy your game is from 0.1% to 6% of all Wii console owners worldwide. Nintendo knows its market, we all know its market. Casual gamers. Make something cute and slightly entertaining and youl get buyers. The same as the smartphone and browser markets which, Nintendo is afraid of. And Sony should too. Why get a 3DS or an NGP when I can do everything on my phone? And soon from my phone to my HDTV. For a fraction of the cost.

Again, that's a false choice. You are assuming mutually exclusive or limited options where none exists. Look at the huge number of people who own multiple consoles.[/quote]

Im saying why get something similar and new when A) You already have a console on your house with the capabilities or B) Theres a console already on the market with a gamepad and Motion controls, atleast thats what I was refering too...

The gamepad certainly does not work "on all most all genres". Music games? Dance games? Motion games? Racing games? Flight games? Sports games? All have custom controllers.[/quote]

Almost* My bad. Music? Parapa the Rapper. Dance, ofcourse not. Wiimote? lol... Racing? Erm...Gran Turismo 1-5? Forza 1-3? Im pretty sure the games where great with the gamepad. Flight? PS3 got that covered in Warhawk I think. Sports? We have played sport games for decades now...whats wrong with the gamepad? You have to think about the people, the user. Some games are good for the whole motion thing but others are horrible. A gamepad allows many options and support for almost all games. Its unique, its innovative but is it good?

Many genres have been crying out for new controllers for years, and I know I've been among them. Many games like puzzle games and local multiplayer games can see great benefits from a private display. Not to mention that a novel interface allows for new genres to be created.[/quote]

True. Id like another Steel Battalion(Xbox1 Mech game, huge controler) myself. Sadly tho, the sequel is going to use Kinect...

You said you would bet against it succeeding. That is a very odd thing to bet on. I wouldn't. If anything I'd be tempted to bet the other way. Nintendo has a very solid track record. They know their audiences. They know them very well. They have consistently delivered products that perform very well in the market. No other game company, and very few companies generally, can boast of such solid records.I think your mixed attitude is funny. On the one hand you are excited about it, but on the other had you think it will fail. That's a very interesting attitude to take. If people are excited that as often all it takes to succeed.
[/quote]

Yes, I bet it wont be succeeding. I dont question Nintendo's Wii success or its handheld market. Other than now with the 3DS, but I still belive what I have said above. If you are not Nintendo, you dont have a % of 85M customers, more like a % of 5Million. The Wii is more like a Casual Console, take out Mario and some of the MAIN franchises, and thats what your left with. It has its glory but I also remember a survey talking about how much time do people really spend playing with their consoles. Wii had the lowest. And what more can we innovate? We have the usual gamepad, with have motion controls and motion sensing ''controls''. We also have touch based controls. This is what makes it exciting for me. What will Nintendo do and will it work? Someone said something about a PowerGlove type thing, but is that really innovating? Sounds like what the Wiimote and PSMove is. Maybe its innovation will be more on how the console works instead of how we play the games in it. This is my guess, my speculation. Maybe it will be some sort of tablet where you just ''stream'' the content into the screen, Like what the ''superphone's'' will do in the soon to be future. Will something like that work for the demographic that they brought with the Wii?

The sky is falling! I got a -1 post. Oh teh noes!
More likely you were rated down because of a combative attitude and a hardline stance against those who presented alternate views.[/quote]

Probably because I am a combatant lol...I spoke my mind, gave my opinion and I acknowledged everyones opinion. This is an opinion thread, I dont see why my or anyones ''reputation'' should be lowered or raised, based on this. And much less when you just get rated down with no comment. Rate me badly is I tell someone to start programming with Assembly or BASIC. Or if I or anyone gives a bad suggestion. But for an opinion? In a non-technical thread? But whatever, I for one feel like I have had bad luck here(GD.net) since my first thread and for no reason. And that this might make it worse, if thats possible lol

.

Reaper, my point was that with you at the helm, I don't think that Nintendo would have launched the Wii. They would have made the Gamecube 2.

It is more like a Gamecube 1.5. But I agree with you. Im not sure if I actually disagreed before but ok.

In my opinion yeah it was a last breath of sorts. If they just released a better GC and kept there business model the same, I seriously belive that they would have hit rock bottom. They decided to make a ''new'' way to play, to probably grab the people that they lost and expand the market. It worked, good job. Now what? We have to see what they bring now. but think what the competition brought also. I actually have an idea of what ''Caffe'' might be, and I dont think it will work.

This set of quotes alone makes me view your position much more skeptically. You've stated that Nintendo would not have released their insanely successful Wii if you were in charge, but rather would have made a more traditional Gamecube follow-up. Then you say that this move would have brought them to rock bottom. Then you agree that what Nintendo did worked via their innovation, and go on to predict their new strategy (which I assume from your posts is not the "back to basics" approach you advocate), as well as predicting failure for that strategy. This combination does not bode well for your business analysis skills.

I think I came out wrong on how I said it. Gamers are a mix of both now, have been for awhile. It wasnt like this on last gen. ''Hardcore'' gamers can and will probably do as you said, thats why I said that most people would have a Wii too. To try the experience. But the ones who bought the Wii, the non-gamers that Nintendo wanted to atract, and did well doing so, probably wont be playing those ''hardcore'' games or any other game that doesent have Nintendo on its title or made by Nintendo, for that matter.

Just Dance 2 sold 5 mil, all other third party games are below 2mil. I dont know if what im sayin makes much sence to everyone. Ill just put it like this, There's 85Million+ Wii's in households worldwide. But only 1% to 6% of the customers actually buy anything not related to Nintendo, as in, third party games. The numbers are good, but not when the total of people that might buy your game is from 0.1% to 6% of all Wii console owners worldwide. Nintendo knows its market, we all know its market. Casual gamers. Make something cute and slightly entertaining and youl get buyers. The same as the smartphone and browser markets which, Nintendo is afraid of. And Sony should too. Why get a 3DS or an NGP when I can do everything on my phone? And soon from my phone to my HDTV. For a fraction of the cost.

While 3rd party support can be very important (and is extremely important for companies with weaker 1st party studios, like Sony and MS), what you're describing is huge success for Nintendo regardless of 3rd party support. While Nintendo would have a stronger console with more studios making more games, Nintendo will make plenty of money selling Wii 2's and Nintendo brand games.

85 million plus units sold, with 94-99% of those consumers going on to buy additional Nintendo products (by your estimation) means incredible income for Nintendo (especially since they never sold Wiis at a loss). If they can pull that off, they don't need 3rd party support in the same way or to the same degree that the other console makers do. And even then, sales as a percentage of consoles sold aren't as important as the number of sales. Selling ~2 million copies isn't so bad, even if it's not a huge portion of the potential market. And developing for the Wii (or Wii 2) will give you potential access to that 85 million member market, so even without unbridled success developers will still be willing to try.

Your argument seems (to me) to be that Nintendo can't count on having many people buy the Wii 2. But I just don't see much justification for that, aside from your assumption of what the Wii 2 will bring to the table. And, as I mentioned above, your business analytical skills do not appear sound enough for me to take your word for it that your predictions will be right. You might be right in your predictions. But you have not made a persuasive case to me.

[quote name='xDxReaper']
Probably because I am a combatant lol...I spoke my mind, gave my opinion and I acknowledged everyones opinion. This is an opinion thread, I dont see why my or anyones ''reputation'' should be lowered or raised, based on this. And much less when you just get rated down with no comment. Rate me badly is I tell someone to start programming with Assembly or BASIC. Or if I or anyone gives a bad suggestion. But for an opinion? In a non-technical thread? But whatever, I for one feel like I have had bad luck here(GD.net) since my first thread and for no reason. And that this might make it worse, if thats possible lol
[/quote]

The rep system is imperfect in many ways. I'm sorry you had to find out like this.

First. You're alive! Good to see you.

/me waves

Second. Yeah, but if we did that, it'd be no fun talking about rumors.

Heh. I'm not a fan of rumors because I consider them and speculating over them a huge waste of time. Wait a bit, doing something better (in terms of time utilization) in the meanwhile, and then you get official announcements. *shrug* Then again, I have moved away from technology enthusiasm...

[quote name='frob']The gamepad certainly does not work "on all most all genres". Music games? Dance games? Motion games? Racing games? Flight games? Sports games? All have custom controllers.

Almost* My bad. Music? Parapa the Rapper. Dance, ofcourse not. Wiimote? lol... Racing? Erm...Gran Turismo 1-5? Forza 1-3? Im pretty sure the games where great with the gamepad. Flight? PS3 got that covered in Warhawk I think. Sports? We have played sport games for decades now...whats wrong with the gamepad?[/quote]
You missed his point. The gamepad is a compromise for all of these genres, which is why dedicated input devices like the DDR dance mat, a plethora of racing wheels and pedals, joysticks and throttles and more exist. Do you actually play sports games? The control schemes continue to get more and more byzantine in an attempt to reflect the nuance of the games - the shot stick, FreeStyle™ control in EA Sports games, icon passing... It's a mess that favors long-time gamers and makes games harder for novices to approach.

Your argument seems (to me) to be that Nintendo can't count on having many people buy the Wii 2. But I just don't see much justification for that [/quote]

My argument is that people bought the Wii because what it brought. Easier way to play and different. The mass market appeal. And most games are pretty casual, easy to play and dont take much to finish. In a way, its like the overall casual game market that you find now, in the millions, in phones and browsers. This worked on 2006, pre Iphone/Android time. But will something similar to the Wii work again? I doubt it. Why? Because of the same reason most people dont update their browsers. It does pretty much the same thing, right? Why do it? And not only that, we have Kinect and Sony's Move. And smartphones and Ipod's and Tablets. Their competition, Nintendo's, is more challenging now. Sony and MS dont have this problem. They know their market and it will remain the same till who knows what. Nintendo's market is huge now. But can they maintain it? Thats my question. And my answer, as you already know is, I think not. Not at all. (EDIT: Forgot to mention that it depends on what they do. Can they really innovate something better than what is out there?)

You missed his point. The gamepad is a compromise for all of these genres, which is why dedicated input devices like the DDR dance mat, a plethora of racing wheels and pedals, joysticks and throttles and more exist. Do you actually play sports games? The control schemes continue to get more and more byzantine in an attempt to reflect the nuance of the games - the shot stick, FreeStyle™ control in EA Sports games, icon passing... It's a mess that favors long-time gamers and makes games harder for novices to approach.[/quote]

I think I did. I thought we were talking more about the Wiimote and Gamepad's. As in the market for each console. Dedicated Input Devices are great, but its not mass market as in this case. A gamepad or a wiimote. But if you had to choose one to play most genres what would you go for? Personally I belive that the gamepad fits most games well. Having a wiimote type device alone, I belive, limits the games that the devs can develop. Not all games are suited for motion controls, I belive. But this is a design decision. And makes my view and everyones, mute. No? Because the Wii has that support, even tho I dont like the GC control much. But to end this, there will never be a perfect ''control'' that fits every game. Options are a great thing to have, from the start. Dev's just have to use them. This is why I like what Sony and MS did now. Good gamepad + motion stuff. They hit almost every angle and very well. I dont play sport games, but I have, on the PS3. It felt good, ''normal'', like they used to. It was a basketball game. How does a basketball game feel on the Wii?

You missed his point. The gamepad is a compromise .... It's a mess that favors long-time gamers and makes games harder for novices to approach.

I dont play sport games, but I have, on the PS3. It felt good, ''normal'', like they used to. It was a basketball game. How does a basketball game feel on the Wii?
[/quote]

Apparently you missed it again. Your last statement about how it feels on the Wii is like pulling defeat from the jaws of victory. That is EXACTLY the point, yet you completely missed it.

Active sports games were specifically called out on page 1 of the discussion by people who DO play the games as something that could see a huge benefit from a touch-screen controller.

[quote name='xDxReaper' timestamp='1304034738' post='4804204']

You missed his point. The gamepad is a compromise .... It's a mess that favors long-time gamers and makes games harder for novices to approach.

I dont play sport games, but I have, on the PS3. It felt good, ''normal'', like they used to. It was a basketball game. How does a basketball game feel on the Wii?
[/quote]

Apparently you missed it again. Your last statement about how it feels on the Wii is like pulling defeat from the jaws of victory. That is EXACTLY the point, yet you completely missed it.

Active sports games were specifically called out on page 1 of the discussion by people who DO play the games as something that could see a huge benefit from a touch-screen controller.
[/quote]
I actually don't enjoy sports games on most consoles but have a lot of fun playing them on the wii. The ones that don't try to play to families and actually try to be good sports games I find to be a lot closer to what a sports game should be; not a sports game made for shooter gamers. That's probably on account of having to redesign them with new interface. I'm hearing a lot of really good things about the next madden wii too.

Isn't this far too early to be saying whether a system is worth it due to some speculation on specs and the controller? To me buying a console is about 2 things, the games for it and the feel of the control. The rumors abound for the Wii 2 don't address either of these

also I think Nintendo shouldn't just increase it by one, but pull another Nintendo 64, but instead of naming it after anything specific they should just pick an arbitrary number, how's the Wii 243 sound to you guys?

Isn't this far too early to be saying whether a system is worth it due to some speculation on specs and the controller?

The Playstation 9 is some sort of snortable drug. (source)

Your thoughts?

There are better motion sensing controls out there, there are touch based controls out there. My argument is simply, what will Nintendo do thats worth it? The Wii's controls arent exacly accurate thats why I personaly didnt get one. It was a false idea, all marketing. I played and I was left wanting more, it was interesting but not enough. Maybe thats why most people dont even use their Wii's? It was great for Nintendo ofcourse, but like I said. Will it work again? Now, with all the offerings out there already and to the ones to come. We arent in 2006.



And a thought about the rumored ''control''. Its supposed to have a touch screen...is it really a control? How much would this baby cost? Maybe its the console itself? What about multiplayer? Will see in E3. Opinions?

also I think Nintendo shouldn't just increase it by one, but pull another Nintendo 64, but instead of naming it after anything specific they should just pick an arbitrary number, how's the Wii 243 sound to you guys?

Only if Master Chief is handing out Wiis at launch