Sony and Microsoft fail to understand our market - Nintendo

Nintendo of America Boss George Harrison has lashed out at Sony and Microsoft claiming that they don't have the DNA to understand what the gaming market wants. Speaking to the wired blog Harrison said, "So far, they haven't spent a lot of time focused on us. Now that we're having some success, they probably will. We can already see some of the things that they've tried. For last year's E3, at the last minute, Sony rushed out their Sixaxis controller as an effort to respond to the Wii remote. We saw Microsoft roll out Viva Piñata as their killer app for the Pokémon set. And neither of those worked really well."

"We also have a belief that we can be, of this lifecycle, 40-45% of the hardware that's being sold. And that would be a phenomenal increase for us over the GameCube era. But on the other hand, we could get over 50%. And a lot of that depends on what our competitors do. If they only focus on the Grand Theft Autos and the Halos and things of that nature, they're focusing on a very tiny part of the market. The overall market is growing so dramatically that they're going to miss out on the opportunities that we're seeing in the expanded audience."

Whether you believe Mr Harrison or not, you have to agree with him on one thing, Nintendo is kicking everyone's ass.

News source: Wired

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Cyberhawk 2.0.4.34

Next Story

Mozilla Firefox 2.0.0.4

66 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

How can anyone forget about Virtual Console? That right there is a gold mine by itself. That pretty much adds backwards compatibility since they used cartridges for so long.

I feel like Nintendo has the right to be cocky. They've been treated as a second-rate video game company for a long time by graphics junkies.

they werent treated as a second rate company because of graphics, they were treated that way because the games they released weren't appealing to the people.

When GTA was exploding, they didn't have anything that could match that. other than the Wii, nobody has ever said Nintendo's consoles aren't powerful. the gamecube was very capable, so was the n64, snes, and nes. the gamecube had a huge amount of potential that Nintendo itself failed to realize on. On the first day they had many different colors for the system but failed to release them in a quick time frame. They showed online ability but NEVER took advantage of it. Everything the Wii does now, the gamecube could have done then. So the only people Nintendo has to blame for their previous system being a failure is themselves, not the consumers.

Lol at all the fanboys fighting. I can say that because I don't and will not own a console now, or in the foreseeable future. But even I have to admit, Nintendo's on to something.

Mike Frett said,
Lol at all the fanboys fighting. I can say that because I don't and will not own a console now, or in the foreseeable future. But even I have to admit, Nintendo's on to something.

Consoles are currently and have been dominating the market for 2 years now. Open your eyes, and buy a next-gen console--whether it's Sony or Microsoft, they both have PC gaming on its knees ready to collapse.

When companies like Epic Games states it, then you know it's no joke. Mike Capps, President of Epic Games, says it all in this video.

What was once rumor and speculation is now a reality.

Mistwaver said,

Consoles are currently and have been dominating the market for 2 years now. Open your eyes, and buy a next-gen console--whether it's Sony or Microsoft, they both have PC gaming on its knees ready to collapse.

When companies like Epic Games states it, then you know it's no joke. Mike Capps, President of Epic Games, says it all in this video.

What was once rumor and speculation is now a reality.

With Intel vs Amd, Nvidia vs Ati PC quickly out pace console's in term of tech and ability.
The leap pc's make in 1 year is huge. Console by there nature only refreshed every 3-5 years.
It's a cycle. I would call pc gaming collapse a bit pre-mature.

Nintendo can say what they want, but they need to release some more quality games before they start talking ****. I'm getting bored waiting for all the big titles to come out.

And you can already see their arrogance. Nintendo's arrogance was what screwed them in the 90's. In fact, they dug their own grave, getting Sony into the console market.

Nintendo, stop talking like you own the place, you have not won yet. This type of superiority complex is what killed you in the first place.

Cole said,
And you can already see their arrogance. Nintendo's arrogance was what screwed them in the 90's. In fact, they dug their own grave, getting Sony into the console market.

Nintendo, stop talking like you own the place, you have not won yet. This type of superiority complex is what killed you in the first place.

I agree, they are slowly getting mouthy, thats not what I like in a company, microsoft and sony never took nintendo seriously and look whats happening.

If nintendo continues to be cocky bad stuff can happen.

Cole said,
And you can already see their arrogance. Nintendo's arrogance was what screwed them in the 90's. In fact, they dug their own grave, getting Sony into the console market.

Nintendo, stop talking like you own the place, you have not won yet. This type of superiority complex is what killed you in the first place.

Finally someone with some common sense!

Ladies and gentlemen, Nintendo has not won yet -- in fact, they are a long ways from winning. When they have games powered by Unreal Engine 3, and titles like Mass Effect, Halo 3, Gears of War, and Unreal Tournament 3, hen the Wii will be a threat, but Sony and Microsoft doesn't vision last-gen technology as a threat.

I give credit where credit is due, the controller system is nice -- well, it would be nice, if it worked how it was supposed to, all the time, instead of just when it wants to.

Now reading the title of the article the first thing that popped into my mind was "oh ****...Nintendo is becoming arrogant with their new found momentum" but after reading the article I tend to agree with what they are saying...They arn't saying that Microsoft and Sony are failing to reach the market Nintendo is saying that they arn't takeing full advantage of the market. I hope that both Sony and Microsoft start to take advantage of the wider market than what they are doing...have a mix of your Halo/GTA's and Wii Sports/Play's.

I'm not going to argue with what was said, I'm an Xbox 360 owner and I know that both Microsoft and Sony have no idea what the consumer wants, the only people who buy the Xbox and PS3 are people who are power hungry and only care about graphics.

Just lately I've been playing on a few Nintendo consoles and am gagging to buy a GameCube and a DS, because of how interactive both consoles are (not going to get a Wii until more games come out for it and when I get my hands on some more space in my room :p). But I'm not going to get into a biased "console war" like everybody else seems to.

Stop moaning about the name "Wii", if you don't want the console, don't get it and don't moan about it, i don't like the Playstation 3 or Sony, but I'm still not moaning about them at all, people need to get their head around stuff before they go shouting at randomers over the internet, it's a bit lame.

Mayamaniac: of course it's to do with whether Nintendo knows more about gaming consoles, they know what the consumer wants, they don't just go for sheer power, that's why they know they don't need to make a powerful console. It's quite clear that they know it works, how do i know this? Because their console sales are going through the roof and they're making profits already.

Like I said, this is from the point of view of a Microsoft Xbox 360 owner, not a biased Nintendo owner.

Not trying to contradict myself, but I only see the Wii as somewhat of a novelty at the moment, until more games that are good come out, I'll be sticking with my 360 and saving up for a DS (a Gameboy Color for the time-being, yes Pokémon Blue is in it atm.)

I'm not going to argue with what was said, I'm an Xbox 360 owner and I know that both Microsoft and Sony have no idea what the consumer wants, the only people who buy the Xbox and PS3 are people who are power hungry and only care about graphics.

coming from a Wii owner and I want a 360, I don't mean to contradict you but i feel you got that mixed up, Microsoft and Sony do know what the average gamer wants or did. People wanted a enhanced online experience, Microsoft listened, I'm not too familiar with the PS3's online ability's so i won't comment about them. People also wanted more graphics, Microsoft also listened.

EDIT: sorry i was in a rush to type this, Nintendo also changed the name of the system to a name no gamer liked? Wii come on, you can't say you liked the name when you first heard of it. They said the system will not support HD and the people who read that article said thats just dumb. Then the power of the system got leaked out and people didn't like that either.

Nintendo did a shot to see how the general public would react to a system that does not follow most things people want and nintendo hit a target. Thats all.

do you understand what i'm saying?

I don't have time to proofread this because its my sisters grad so i must be going, comment on it if you want. Those are my thoughts on 'what the consumer wants'.

Dale said,

coming from a Wii owner and I want a 360, I don't mean to contradict you but i feel you got that mixed up, Microsoft and Sony do know what the average gamer wants or did. People wanted a enhanced online experience, Microsoft listened, I'm not too familiar with the PS3's online ability's so i won't comment about them. People also wanted more graphics, Microsoft also listened.

EDIT: sorry i was in a rush to type this, Nintendo also changed the name of the system to a name no gamer liked? Wii come on, you can't say you liked the name when you first heard of it. They said the system will not support HD and the people who read that article said thats just dumb. Then the power of the system got leaked out and people didn't like that either.

Nintendo did a shot to see how the general public would react to a system that does not follow most things people want and nintendo hit a target. Thats all.

do you understand what i'm saying?

I don't have time to proofread this because its my sisters grad so i must be going, comment on it if you want. Those are my thoughts on 'what the consumer wants'.

Of course I understand what you say, but I'll stick to my word, if Nintendo didn't know what consumers wanted, then people wouldn't be buying Wiis. Also, Nintendo has a lot of a repeat business, once you get onto Nintendos, then you're a hardcore fan for life and don't stop buying them. In my opinion, Nintendo has the largest customer base compared to Sony and Microsoft (Microsoft obviously has the smallest, because people haven't yet realised the potential of the 360 and would rather spend £300 extra to buy a machine which is only a little bit more powerful and only has one feature that is unique, blu-ray. Something that, in my opinion, can be likened to the mini disk generation.

You've got to be crazy to beleive that average America is going to pay $500 for a game console and $50 per game. Or have the broadband necessary for the online connectivity that is necessary to multiplayer. By all accounts, broadband only reaches a minority of all households in America.

You, members of the forum, represent a very skewed representation of America. Why go over the 10% of population of the market who want to HALO and GTA it up, when you can target the other 50% (assuming 40% isn't participating), which want to have a social experience. Moms and Dads looking for a family game for their young kids; the young adults looking to have some fun at a get-together.

The picture is much greater. The Wii appeals to a much larger spectrum of the consumer population of America. Add a low entry price, a high novelty concept, and the offer of what I would term "social gaming" ala "social drinking" and you'll see what they are doing. It's a genius step bringing the Wii into the living room, to provide a casual gaming experience unencumbered by cost and technology.

People buy the Wii because its cheaper than the X360 and PS3, that is the main reason. The Wii remote novelty factor is probably the second reason. Wii still sounds like a stupid name for a game console, thought I would get used to it by now. People who wanted the 360 or PS3 already has one. There is a number of people who want a 360 or PS3 but can't justify the price for it, I'm in this group. Since the price is a problem for me, I might opt for a Wii instead since it is in my price range. In fact I would buy the Wii if PC games no't existed. I'll play my PC games until the 360 or PS3 prices are lowered. It's all about the price, it has nothing to do with whether Nintendo knows more about gaming consoles or not.

I do agree with Nintendo on this one. I had a look at the 360 2007 release schedule, and it feels like I've already played them all

you kidding me right? paper mario, mario, metroid prime, smash brothers for Nintendo....and you have a feeling you've already played them all on the 360? RIGHT....

macrosslover said,
you kidding me right? paper mario, mario, metroid prime, smash brothers for Nintendo....and you have a feeling you've already played them all on the 360? RIGHT....

I would suggest you re-read his comment. He's saying the 360 games look like games he's played before, not the Nintendo ones =].

macrosslover said,
you kidding me right? paper mario, mario, metroid prime, smash brothers for Nintendo....and you have a feeling you've already played them all on the 360? RIGHT....
But the thing is, is that there's innovation behind them. I just feel that the schedule is littered with nothing but shooting and maybe RPG. Or a mix of both.

I bet you you can't find me five games coming out for 360 this year that don't fit that criteria

PureLegend said,
But the thing is, is that there's innovation behind them. I just feel that the schedule is littered with nothing but shooting and maybe RPG. Or a mix of both.

I bet you you can't find me five games coming out for 360 this year that don't fit that criteria

while the game types available maybe be the same, seriously how many different types of genres are there?

mario party 8 is innovative how? metroid prime 3, other than using the controller, is innovative how? it is still going to be just a FPA game, mario is a mario game. smash brothers will be online...other than that new development what else could they possible do to make it not be a fighting game? pokemon is going to be online....wow, it's still a pokemon game.

you can't sit there and knock the 360 library and say it's the same game genres over and over again, when Nintendo's library is the exact same thing over and over again. you can't knock a game like Mass Effect and say yawn another rpg coming out, and not have the same attitude with pokemon and say yawn another pokemon game coming out.

Great, Nintendo's now doing the same thing that makes me hate Sony: being overly arrogant.

They should not be the one's to talk about rehashed games considering all that is Mario, Zelda (though I do like this one), and Metroid, among others. They're no different in the games category, they just have a different way to play. I still think the Wii is going to be the console that collects the most dust at the end of the day on people's shelves.

-Spenser

Personaly I consider myself a hardcore gamer. I play way tomany. But not going to lie. Im sick of the same rehashed games every time. Theres only a few game makers out there that try to add twists to it anymore. Don't get me wrong I do want to see kick ass graphics. Cause were not in the 80s anymore. But its time to take on game play vs making it look all jazzed. FPS shooters haven't gotten new game play added to them really sence they went 3D over being a doom like setup. Well on the Wii i can play a FPS and still move around in a 3D world like the others but my controler can be the gun at the same time. I think alot of people that bash the Wii have lack of physical body cordination vs hand cordination.

i think whether you go for the wii or ps3/x360 depends entirely on how you play games. if you want something which you can pick up and put down easily without investing a huge amount of time the wii has got you covered. if you like having friends round to play something, again, the wii is good for that. if you like hardcore 'proper' games which requires you to commit many hours to complete, the ps3/x360 is a better bet. all consoles have games which appeal to hardcore and causal gamers, it's just that the generally speaking: wii=casual; ps3/x360: serious gamer.

as somebody who has family and work commitments, i don't have the time to invest in a massive rpg epic - i just want to play something that's gonna kill a few hours on a rainy dull sunday afternoon.

there is no simple answer as to which is better, it depends on the games you want to play. i can't understand why people get excited about walking around a grey/brown map shooting things. it's boring, and nor can i understand why people think gran turismo or pgr are fun, sure, they look great, but really, driving around in a circle isn't really my idea of fun. but that's just my taste and the reason why i probably wouldn't buy a ps3.

Is it fair to compare Nintendo's console to that of Microsoft and Sony?

The Wii is:

Standard Definition
Low Price
Low Cost (to Manufacture)
Made with old Technology
Aimed at casual gamers

How can the "winner" be declared? Nintendo is winning on Price and the "novelty" factor of its console. Is it fair to place them in the same category that the PS3 and 360 are in?

A. Kaladis / nw_raptor said,
But then again, the differences between PS3 and Xbox360 are also huge...

They are? Not really. Games on the Xbox 360 and the PS3 look very similar, and the hardware specifications are not that different. PS3 has a faster processor, but is harder to code for than Xbox's and the Xbox has a superior graphics chipset. Xbox Live is also far superior to anything Sony have managed to come up with so far.

I fail to see the innovation for the Wii past the controller. You take a GameCube and make it smaller... bam! A Wii. I guess they sat in their office the whole time thinking of a new controller saying,"How do we improve from the cube?"

That said, all they really had to do was sell the idea to get everyone to buy their last-gen console. I swear, my personal "wii" could've spit something better than this. What's funnier is that they're even reselling their old games from previous consoles. Where's the revolution, Nintendo?

Samboini said,
It helps if you spell it correctly when your are being a smart arse.

Whoops, I'm a bad spellster:nuts: weeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!! Hey look its named after the emotional outburst of fun also. hmmm...I gotta rethink this.

If I list out all the games that I love to play and all the games that I want to play for my PC and 360, the list would be several times longer than if I did the same for the Wii. That reason, and that reason only is why I have a 360 instead of a Wii.

I'm not saying the Wii is "worse" or the games are not "good". I'm just saying my taste in videogames is different than what the Wii offers with it's exclusive titles. And, I completely agree that the Wii is wiping the floor with the "other 2".

The same with me; my brother enjoys his Wii but I find it irritating and far too fiddly to say the least. I like my racing games, my beat em ups and my shooters, so I'll choose a 360 or PS3 anyday over the Wii. That said it doesn't make it a bad console; they've been highly succesful but they will never convert everyone.

the Wii is a niche market. now that everyone that wanted a wii has one, the sales will slowly start to decline. This is the same nintendo that said before the Wii came out that they were a different "experience" and was not meant to go head to head with the xbox and ps3, but now that they are ahead they are all of a sudden in the same market. Many types of games will fail on the Wii, such as FPSes, Hack n Slash games, etc. (You can't tell me that Wii has had a decent FPS game yet.)

If everyone that wanted a Wii has one then there would not be shortages of the systems and the shelves would be full of them.

Fire and Flames said,
I can go into any store here, and still see them on shelves.

While my gut instinct is to doubt the truthfulness of this statement, it may be true. However I know there aren't any around here and I know that it is still rare to see a Wii in the store, no matter where you are....except for wherever YOU are.

What a bunch of crap. I've owned every Nintendo console and apart from the SNES, they fail to deliver what gamers want. Games!

The Wii is only good for a door stop, my PS3/360/PC get far more use.

SNES and 2D graphics was the greatest era of Nintendo.

I've yet to see a Nintendo hallmark game that's made a good transition to 3D. Non of the 3D mario games have been what Mario was. the eagerness to go 3D killed the games. they complicate the games and remove the elegenace and atmosphere.

HawkMan said,
SNES and 2D graphics was the greatest era of Nintendo.

I've yet to see a Nintendo hallmark game that's made a good transition to 3D. Non of the 3D mario games have been what Mario was. the eagerness to go 3D killed the games. they complicate the games and remove the elegenace and atmosphere.

You're telling me Mario 64 was a failure? wow.

rev. sK said,

You're telling me Mario 64 was a failure? wow.

You're saying it wasn't? I have no idea how well it sold, but when I look compare it to the old mario games, it falls completely short. Paper Mario for the Wii is currently the only new Mario I am actually interested in.

rev. sK said,

You're telling me Mario 64 was a failure? wow.

Compared to previus Mario games Mario 64 wasn't only bad, it wasn't even a Mario game. The character was there.. sort of. but the game itself had no character, and it certainly was no mario game, it was the perfect example of goign 3D for the sake of going 3D.

Go back and play the last SNES Mario games, then play Mario 64, and tell me that Mario 64 even comes rmeotely close to what Mario was as a game, bad controls, graphics that could and should have been done so much better, lame gameplay(platformers never work in 3D), bad camera anc controls.

Imagine what they could have done had they not been so intent on the 3D aspect, we're only now seeing that witht he DS mario translations, notice how they're going back to 2D gameplay, but with 3D graphics. Sure for now they're recreating the old Mario games, because that's where the magic was, that's what sold. compared to the amount of consoles sold, I don't think Mario games has saturated their market nearly as much as the original mario games did. with the possible exception of Mario 64 because that was the first one to start the decline, and people where still in the "ooh look 3D, Cool!" stage.


When nintendo released the N64, that's when I sold my SNES and moved to computers, untill I bought a PS2 wich I sold and bought and xbox instead. the N64 was the end of nitnendo for me, the DS brought them somewhat back for me, but not untill they proved that the ual screen was more than a gimmick (incidentally, I remember Nitnendo sayign that the DS wouldn't replace the regular Gameboy when they launched it, it was a paralell product and was supposed to be gimicky). I still think Nintendo could have done better by going bigger higher res widescreen gaming with a analog stick like control rather than the DS, but I got my portable mario classic Mario gaming, I'll settle for that.

HawkMan said,

Compared to previus Mario games Mario 64 wasn't only bad, it wasn't even a Mario game. The character was there.. sort of. but the game itself had no character, and it certainly was no mario game, it was the perfect example of goign 3D for the sake of going 3D.

Go back and play the last SNES Mario games, then play Mario 64, and tell me that Mario 64 even comes rmeotely close to what Mario was as a game, bad controls, graphics that could and should have been done so much better, lame gameplay(platformers never work in 3D), bad camera anc controls.

Imagine what they could have done had they not been so intent on the 3D aspect, we're only now seeing that witht he DS mario translations, notice how they're going back to 2D gameplay, but with 3D graphics. Sure for now they're recreating the old Mario games, because that's where the magic was, that's what sold. compared to the amount of consoles sold, I don't think Mario games has saturated their market nearly as much as the original mario games did. with the possible exception of Mario 64 because that was the first one to start the decline, and people where still in the "ooh look 3D, Cool!" stage.


When nintendo released the N64, that's when I sold my SNES and moved to computers, untill I bought a PS2 wich I sold and bought and xbox instead. the N64 was the end of nitnendo for me, the DS brought them somewhat back for me, but not untill they proved that the ual screen was more than a gimmick (incidentally, I remember Nitnendo sayign that the DS wouldn't replace the regular Gameboy when they launched it, it was a paralell product and was supposed to be gimicky). I still think Nintendo could have done better by going bigger higher res widescreen gaming with a analog stick like control rather than the DS, but I got my portable mario classic Mario gaming, I'll settle for that.

Oh you're full of it. Mario 64 was one of my FAVORITE Mario games (Mario RPG aside). Just because it wasn't that same ol' 2D sidescroller doesn't mean jack! You don't judge a game by whether it's just like the old ones. You judge it by the quality of the game. If every game was like it's predecessor, Final Fantasy games would be BORING.

And if you want to go by sales, Mario 64 did great in sales. The only reason I believe it didn't sell as many games as it did in the NES years seems to be due to a wider variety of games. If you notice as the console generations progress with more systems than just an NES, there are less and less games being sold to a system. I mean, even the beloved Halo and Halo 2 games didn't sell as many as Mario 64 did.

Graphics do not make a game, sure. But that also works reverse-wise. Bad graphics do not make a game "good". Not that the old Mario's were bad, it's just the idea that Nintendo making Mario 2D will make it a "good game".

Super Mario 64 was praised in the gaming press, and is still highly acclaimed. It has collected numerous awards, including various "Game of the Year" honors by members of the gaming media, as well as Nintendo's own bestseller Player's Choice selection. It has placed high on many "greatest games of all time" lists, ranked #1 by Next Generation Magazine, #5 and #1 in Nintendo Power issues 200 and 100 respectively, #1 by Super PLAY, #5 by IGN,[19] #5 by Electronic Gaming Monthly, #12 by GameInformer[20].and #13 by GameFAQs users [21]. EGM awarded Super Mario 64 a Gold award in its initial review, and in Edge, the game was the first of only five games to ever score a perfect 10/10. GameSpot called Super Mario 64 one of the 15 most influential games of all time.[5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mario_64

I love Nintendo, always have, but this is coming from the company that said CD's would never catch on in the game market and stuck to cartridges for years after PS1 came out..

Nintendo is "kicking everyone's ass" only because of price.

If you look at sales figures...you'll see from least expensive to most expensive is the same as the number of units sold. It's a price thing dummy.

The real correlation would be if all consoles cost the same, then we'd see the real difference.

But I wouldn't get all worked up about this...it's just because of price.

So does that not count? And if it's strictly a "price thing," why didn't Microsoft and Sony act appropriately? My guess it that the average consumer fails to justify the price for a PS3 or even an Xbox360.

How is it just a price thing? Since if u really thing about Nintendo could have sold there Wii for alot cheaper then what it is right now.. but they said why not make money off of each console that is sold..

unlike Sony and microsoft who lost of money on each console.. So there now trying to fight for that money they've lost and nintendo don't got that problem at all..

So hands down i do agree with this artical 100%, since the company has been around for over 100 years now.

It's obviously not just about the price -- it's about innovation. PS3 and 360 offer nothing truly different from the previous generation other than better graphics. Take John Madden Football for example. Just because it looks better doesn't make it more fun. The Wii version didn't look as good, but was a lot more fun to play. It's the same with the DS vs. the PSP. People just get tired of the same thing over and over with just shinier graphics.

Sorry Sony, but it's 2007; I'm not interested in playing the same game I was playing ten years ago, even if you have tried to hide the same boring old gameplay with some pretty pictures

Galley said,
Sorry Nintendo, but it's 2007; I'm not interested in your standard definition product.
Get off that high horse you are riding before you get a nosebleed!

I know of games that are played and enjoyed with things called "cards" and "dice". Board and card games lack the video output that you seem to require for entertainment, but you have to realize that entertainment doesn't come from pumping out more 3D-rendered pixels. It comes from the game play. And if you can get people to play interactively (like I am seeing in the Wii commercials) and have fun, then you have a winner.

unfortunately I think Nintendo is wording this entirely wrong.


Nitnendo are the ones who don't understand what he "gaming market" wants. they do however understand what the non gaming market or non gamer peopel want, a simple to use and understand machine that's also cheap, and somethign that anyone can use and enjoy. though I'mnot sold on it's longevity. and comparison can't easily be drawn between the DS and the Wii. Most hardcore gamers never cared for the Wii, or where intrigued but either lost intereste or bought one and play it occasionaly or when friends are over.

But the gamer want High def, they want nice graphic for their gameplay, and they don't care to wave their arms around and all that crap all the time.

The regular gamepad is a far better and more verstile controller still, it may not be as elegeant and simple as the Wiimote, and the wiimote is far more usefull for RTS games, except RTS players play on computer, and good gamepad RTS controls have been devleoped for pads that work really well. _As for racing games, a gamer will buy a proper racing wheel, not playt around with a pretend racing wheel int he air.

So what nintendo should have said "We understand what the non gaming people and paty gamers want out of a gaming system, and are creating new gamers out of this".

question is, where will these gamers go when they tire of the gimick control games of the Wii and the lackluster graphics, when adds on TV show photoreal HighDef graphics offfered on other platforms.

EvoHack said,
Sorry Sony, but it's 2007; I'm not interested in playing the same game I was playing ten years ago, even if you have tried to hide the same boring old gameplay with some pretty pictures

You are right, because Nintendo NEVER does this (paper mario, mario, metroid prime, etc).

Chad said,

You are right, because Nintendo NEVER does this (paper mario, mario, metroid prime, etc).

Thank you, ffs!! God. I do NOT want another Mario Party, I do not want more Mario. Zelda's fine, but one game isn't going to make me buy a console.

I just want to see some DECENT games for the Wii. Is that too much to ask? Get some third parties in there for crying out loud.

I can still have as much fun now playing Super Mario Bros. 3 on my NES as I did almost 17yrs ago now. You can make great games with silly 2d graphics displayed on standard definition and they are still a blast to play. NES and some of the classic titles are a testament to that philosophy. I wish Nintendo would create some 2d titles for the Wii rather than focusing on 3d gameplay.

For the first time I consider buying a console for all my family to enjoy. From this aspect the obvious choice Wii.

All my sympathy for the Underdog.

Exactly. This sytem is not a "gamer's" system, its a casual family fun time console with a very limited library.

I sincerely hope that Sony and MS never enter that market. As a gamer I see nothing in the Wii that I would like included in HD consoles.

WICKO said,
I sincerely hope that Sony and MS never enter that market. As a gamer I see nothing in the Wii that I would like included in HD consoles.

As a gamer I would prefer it if we weren't sold castrated console ports like Shadowrun and Halo 2 in the guise of PC games. If PC gamers wanted to play dumb console games, they would have bought consoles!

It is Nintendo that has the right idea with their console that isn't trying to be a PC. Consoles should be targeted at little kids, casual gamers, and dummies! Leave the hardcore HD gaming to PCs!

toadeater said,

As a gamer I would prefer it if we weren't sold castrated console ports like Shadowrun and Halo 2 in the guise of PC games. If PC gamers wanted to play dumb console games, they would have bought consoles!

It is Nintendo that has the right idea with their console that isn't trying to be a PC. Consoles should be targeted at little kids, casual gamers, and dummies! Leave the hardcore HD gaming to PCs!

PC gaming is dead dude, grab a 360 and join in :P

LiGhTfast said,

PC gaming is dead dude, grab a 360 and join in :P

That why new video cards come out every 6 months, wow has 7+ Million users, and the MS Vista team showed how the current dx10 is better ability once hardware/driver is out that was "partial dx9-10" implemented then what the xbox360.

Console have there place, PC's have there place and there is room for overlap.

It a cycle, new next gen console > pc.... 6months one year ... pc > console in terms of ability.