Intel, Nintendo Collaborating on New Console?

By Cy-Kill
in Nintendo

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

Chasethebase Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
I agree, wii is for kids not hardcore gamers. And Nintendo wasn't like that with the 64 and cube, some of the best games were on cube and 64.... can't say the same on the Wii... The only reason I play wii is for guitar hero and GH is on all consoles AND pc...

See, this is where your point fails. It isn't the console that is for kids, it's the games. Who's fault is that? The third party developers that's who. If the good developers had better hardware to work with we could have seen MW2 or <Insert other hit 360/PS3 game here> on the Wii. Nintendo went for innovation with the Wii, now it's time to get the POWWWERRRRR.

Grand Master

Eric Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
I thought they were basically the same console?

Err, they have a better processor and video chip, normal-sized discs, on-board save storage and different controllers. By this logic the Xbox and PlayStation lines are the same console, too.

Grand Master

Joel

Posted
Posted
Although it is wrong of you to consider people who enjoy collecting trophies and watching decent cutscenes as having no lives? such games are also considered fun

someone who plays these "fun" games as you put it can also have no lives even if the game is simple so thats an unfair generalization

Thank you, you got the point. It's equally unfair to have every hardcore gamer call the Wii useless because THEY don't like it. Right?

Mentor

Creamy

Posted
Posted
Thank you, you got the point. It's equally unfair to have every hardcore gamer call the Wii useless because THEY don't like it. Right?

Right. I discovered I can be both. I'm can play Wii all night long if I wanna achieve something in a game but I also enjoy an hour just playing for fun...:)

Grand Master

LiquidSolstice

Posted
Posted
Nintendo is no longer an official gaming console competitor. They are the ******** for Disney and other licensed garbage games to dump themselves on, and it caters to a lame attempt to get females and elders/toddlers to "get into gaming". This isn't gaming, Nintendo, this is interactive TV with a few wand-waving gimmicks that no serious or self-respecting gamer cares about anymore.

When I said this, I was saying on a level of serious gaming that utilizes the power of today's technology to great effect. Currently, the Wii is running out of tricks to make it seem "new" and "cool". If you find it fun, by all means play it, but don't expect to be taken seriously if you try and defend it as a real gaming system.

Community Regular

basques

Posted
Posted
Yeah, yeah, whatever. When time comes and you do attempt to defend it, you'll get harsh feedback from the big boys of gaming, not my responsibility to prove that.

Sorry but you don't make any sense. That is completely your personal opinion. I have a hardcore gaming pc (always had a top of the line gaming pc for the last 15 years), xbox 360, psp, dsi, wii, I might probably buy a ps3 nowadays too. (I also had the previous versions of all those consoles).

I love playing fps/rts and mmorpg games on my pc. Heck if I buy a game for graphics, I buy it on my pc. Then comes xbox 360. I mostly play on my xbox 360 if I don't have any good games for pc at that time. And there comes the wii. For single player there are some great games, obviously they lack on graphics quality part, so I only resort to it if I find really smart games.

But there is the multiplayer aspect of the wii. Whenever my friends come to my place, we always play wii, not xbox 360, not pc (ok once in a while we do play xbox 360 multi, like gears of war 2 or street fighter). But not all my friends are hard core gamers, most of them are actually not gamers at all, but they love playing the wii. New mario brothers, or Grand slam tennis are very good examples of this.

So whatever your opinion is, for me Wii is still a real gaming system, because I play games on it and I do enjoy it.

Grand Master

LiquidSolstice

Posted
Posted
Sorry but you don't make any sense. That is completely your personal opinion. I have a hardcore gaming pc (always had a top of the line gaming pc for the last 15 years), xbox 360, psp, dsi, wii, I might probably buy a ps3 nowadays too. (I also had the previous versions of all those consoles).

I love playing fps/rts amd mmorpg games on my pc. Heck if I buy a game for graphics, I buy it on my pc. Then xomes xbox 360. I mostly play on my xbox 360 if I don't have any good games for pc at that time. And there comes the wii. For single player there are some great games, obviously they lack on graphics quality part, so I only resort to it if I find really smart games.

But there is the multiplayer aspect of the wii. Whenever my friends come to my place, we always play wii, not xbox 360, not pc (ok once in a while we do play xbox 360 multi, like gears of war 2 or street fighter). But not all my friends are hard core gamers, most of them are actually not gamers at all, but they love playing the wii. New mario brothers, or Grand slam tennis are very good examples of this.

So whatever your opinion is, for me Wii is still a real gaming system, because I play games on it and I do enjoy it.

Ok.

Grand Master

Joel

Posted
Posted
Yeah, yeah, whatever. When time comes and you do attempt to defend it, you'll get harsh feedback from the big boys of gaming, not my responsibility to prove that.

I don't have to defend against someone who labels video games because he's insecure about his gamer-penis. Maybe the 'big boys' (I still can't believe you typed that) of gaming are too much like you to notice that there's a whole wide world out there that maybe, just maybe, couldn't care less what the 'big boys' call a game. To them, games are fun, not something that's your life.

How old are you, anyway? You're one of those teens who fear even being associated with a Wii, aren't you? Your gamer big boy buddies might laugh at you, right? :rolleyes:

Grand Master

LiquidSolstice

Posted
Posted
I don't have to defend against someone who labels video games because he's insecure about his gamer-penis. Maybe the 'big boys' (I still can't believe you typed that) of gaming are too much like you to notice that there's a whole wide world out there that maybe, just maybe, couldn't care less what the 'big boys' call a game. To them, games are fun, not something that's your life.

How old are you, anyway? You're one of those teens who fear even being associated with a Wii, aren't you? Your gamer big boy buddies might laugh at you, right? :rolleyes:

Gee, someone's riled up.

Like I said, I don't need to bother explaining to you why you'll be scoffed at in a serious discussion about gaming if you bring up the Wii. No, I'm not talking about teenage ****ing contests, I'm talking about the gaming industry at large. Nintendo strayed away from their faithful audience, which the gaming culture considers to be a huge mistake, and is running out of tricks.

Watch yourself. Your "Veteran" rank doesn't give you the right to make judgment calls about me, you don't even know me, whereas I actually own a Wii for one single purpose (Wii Sports for parties with my wife and my friends), and when I want to play an actual game, I turn on my 360. Make judgment calls about the games and systems for all you want, but attempting to downplay me is a losing battle.

That being said, I have yet to insult anyone, all I've done was state the facts (what niche Nintendo is aiming for now after vs. what niche Microsoft and Sony are after) and all of you are getting ridiculously butt-hurt.

Pretty obvious who's insecure here. Cheers :)

PS: I don't actually remember saying there was anything "wrong" with the Wii per se, all I said is where it stands in the gaming industry. Don't put words in my mouth, thanks. If I was a Wii-fearing adolescent, you would certainly have known by now.

Grand Master

LiquidSolstice

Posted
Posted

I think the issue is that you people are still defining a game the way the mass-market now sees them; quick little mini-game style games that don't require much thought which are good for parties.

All I'm stating is that the niche of people that video games were originally designed for, those people do not feel that the Wii is a real gaming console. There's nothing wrong with calling it a real console if you want to, stop getting so butt-hurt and defensive about it, sheesh.

Grand Master

Solid Knight

Posted
Posted
All I'm stating is that the niche of people that video games were originally designed for, those people do not feel that the Wii is a real gaming console.

I'm going to ignore the part where you try to speak on my behalf and ask you what defines a "real gaming console"?

Grand Master

LiquidSolstice

Posted
Posted

Yeah, whatever. Back in the day of what games really stood for, they weren't so ADD that you only found enjoyment by swinging a controller around and watching your character do the same on screen.

I'm about to encounter a lot of butt-hurt right now, and I really don't feel like doing it, so I'm going to leave this thread and watch you guys fight it out.

Grand Master

Solid Knight

Posted
Posted
Yeah, whatever. Back in the day of what games really stood for, they weren't so ADD that you only found enjoyment by swinging a controller around and watching your character do the same on screen.

I'm about to encounter a lot of butt-hurt right now, and I really don't feel like doing it, so I'm going to leave this thread and watch you guys fight it out.

Back in the day games were full of bad programming and bad design. They were saturated with bad clones and movies made into games. Everyone likes to ignore this and pretend it was so awesome because they only remember all the games they did enjoy which skews what the selection was really composed of. Look through a complete list of games for an old console and you'll see just how bad it really was.

I also see that you're bailing out on the challenge to define a "real gaming console" probably because you can't even come up with something. You're the one who is claiming that the Wii isn't a real console so the burden of proof is on you.

Grand Master

LiquidSolstice

Posted
Posted
Back in the day games were full of bad programming and bad design. They were saturated with bad clones and movies made into games. Everyone likes to ignore this and pretend it was so awesome because they only remember all the games they did enjoy which skews what the selection was really composed of. Look through a complete list of games for an old console and you'll see just how bad it really was.

I also see that you're bailing out on the challenge to define a "real gaming console" probably because you can't even come up with something. You're the one who is claiming that the Wii isn't a real console so the burden of proof is on you.

Being part of several gaming forums, I go through this butt-hurt argument almost all day. My bad for expressing my opinion, I forgot that here on Neowin, any time you do that, someone else feels its their civic duty to do the whole "Oh yeah?" argument.

At the end of the day, proper game development from the standpoint of what I game really means (the phrase "really means" coming from the definition of what games were to begin with) will continue on the 360 and the PS3 and whatever next gen console Nintendo attempts to make.

But of course, since all you're going to see in either of those two statements is "you're bashing the wii give me proof, ha you can't", I really don't need feel like attempting to communicate with you. Rather than tell ME I can't possibly come up with anything, why don't YOU attempt to tell me why it might possibly be a popular opinion among mature adults that the Wii is not a true gaming machine? Not raging teenagers, adults. If you can't do that, than you are simply a Nintendo fanboy and your word is disregarded. See, I can gladly talk about what Microsoft and Sony are doing wrong. It's not like I'm totally singling out Nintendo. Sheesh, I even said there was nothing wrong in calling it a real console. I just made a simple statement and you're jumping down my throat as if I mortally offended you. Calm down, you sound like much more of a child than you make me out to be.

Mentor

morphen

Posted
Posted (edited)

Xbox 360 & PS3 are great for singleplayer and online multiplayer games, the wii is even GREATER when you are multiple people in your own livingroom playing. Never had so much fun with ANY console earlier.

I will though admit that it does lack a majority of good/great games, but the games that are good/great simply overshadows the bad games for me.

Edited by morphen
Grand Master

Solid Knight

Posted
Posted
Snip

The only person here that is crying is you. You make claims you can't even back up then cry when people call you out. Yes, there are a lot of mini-games on the Wii but there are plenty of games that follow the traditional style. The input might have changed but that is entirely irrelevant.

Grand Master

LiquidSolstice

Posted
Posted
The only person here that is crying is you. You make claims you can't even back up then cry when people call you out. Yes, there are a lot of mini-games on the Wii but there are plenty of games that follow the traditional style. The input might have changed but that is entirely irrelevant.

I'm crying? Really?

That's pretty pathetic. The whole "right back at you" thing. First off, no, it's all of you guys who are all up in arms because of one thing I said about the Wii, and I'm sure the only reason is because you all own one and are attempting to defend it, which is exactly what I said would happen.

For the last time, stop taking it as a personal insult. I'm tired of going through big long discussions of why the Wii is not a real competitor to the likes of Sony and Microsoft. But since you're so ridiculously immature and need to have everything spoon-fed to you, I'll explain. Take note, because I'm sure you're going to prepare quote-by-quote "comebacks" for everything I say.

1. Game Development

First up, game development. The majority of the Wii's top-rated titles are first-party, that is to say, Nintendo develops them. Nothing wrong with that in theory, but in reality, it means that the third-party innovation is very weak, which is a turnoff for ambitious devs looking to adapt their game project. Before you lash out with me with the usual pathetic "are you kidding me have you ever even played insert game here and insert game here!?", take a look at the dictionary and read the definition for the word "majority".

Also, it used to be that before, when all three major systems used traditional setups of programming, porting was very easy and offered devs an easy way to expand their gaming audience. Now, arguably, going from the 360 to the PS3 and vice versa is also difficult, but when porting developers wanted to offer a game on the Wii, they had to completely redo many elements of it's programming and somehow include a way to allow the game to be manipulated by motion, and not just map the button controls to motion gestures, but to live up to the hype the Wii offered, they had to find a way to make the motion sensing gestures unique and ensure they have a real point, and that they don't just exist for the sake of existing (example: certain games which abuse the quick-time events, or as Yahtzee puts it, "tap x rapidly to not die"). For that reason alone, the best utilization you'll see of motion controls on the Wii will mostly either come from major large corporations of gaming (such as EA and Ubisoft) or even more commonly, first party Nintendo publishers. And for that, it becomes an inaccessible and almost indirectly closed gaming platform for most startup devs and publishers.

2. Hardware

Next up is hardware. Most gamers commonly agree that advances in technology should be seen inside gaming, both performance and playability wise. Many things were expected of Nintendo, seeing as they are the forefathers of gaming, but they failed on many ideas which are now regarded by most semi-serious gamers to be industry standards. For example, where is HD out on the Wii? Were we not enthralled with the idea of HDTVs and other sorts of high-definition media content presentation, because of the fact that HD had become so much more affordable in the home? And then the Wii comes out and decides not to include HD capability? Are you kidding me? The PS2 could do 1080i, the original Xbox, 720p, yet the only way the Wii will ever do anything past 480p is through tv-forced upscaling. It's native resolution is a pathetic 720x480. Most computer monitors from the 90's have better resolutions than that. What gives, Nintendo? You're supposed to be the pinnacle of gaming advancement, and here you are, decades behind in resolution and graphical power.

Speaking of graphics, did you know that the graphics card in the Wii is not that much different from the Gamecube? Yet they choose to spend more time focusing on making a sub-standard and imprecise controller that one swings around in an effort to manipulate objects on screen. Before you hit me with the usual pathetic argument of "Yeah because you probably suck with it", keep in mind I've played quite a few games on the Wii, and sadly, I have found the controllers for very few of them to be satisfactory enough to be able to play a game all the way through. And one of the games on that list, is even more sadly; Wii Sports. To Microsoft and Sony's fault, Microsoft didn't even experiment with motion-controlling at their launch, which I feel was a poor decision not to even try (although I hear snippets here and there about Natal, which is interesting but I feel still has a lot more work to be done with), and Sony tried to experiment with what they call Sixaxis, which more or less everyone hated. Very few of the launch games utilized it, and the few that did (MotorStorm) handled it poorly. People were more confused as to why their controllers were not rumbling when they were hit my an enemy or crashed a car, and it took Sony quite some time to rectify their error by eventually releasing DualShock 3, which made the already expensive controllers even more pricey, and they attempted to release patches to games which were already out to support rumble, but they did a shoddy job and in the end only newer games supported Vibration. Simply put, the Wii's only real draw here is the motion-controls, and perhaps if you're an ultra-traditional, the nostalgia.

The Wii doesn't even offer offline storage built-in! No hard drive, and the memory was flash cards to store your data. How sad is that? Are we really still in the age where ZIP drives were revolutionary and amazing? No, we're not. And forget Blu-Ray or HD-DVD, the games are not even taking advantage of dual-layer DVDs, they're still using single layer 4.7 GB discs. Oh, and even worse? Not so much concerned with gaming, admittedly, but the thing can't even play DVDs, which would have been very cheap to add.

3. Online Services

Let's face it, Nintendo promised a lot for the Online service which was so "amazingly" free, and it really didn't deliver. From a player-versus-player standpoint, it's pathetic; they offer no real dedicated server to run, no uniform system of parties and chat, which is essential to a satisfying online game. The publishers are left scrambling to create an online server system, often weeding out any small time devs from proposing the idea of online play. did you know that Brawl even has a feature called Wii With Anyone, where if your connection kicks you, a computer takes over so apparently no one notices you left, thus preserving any "reputation" you may have built up. How sad is that? Does that create attachment to you? Sentiment? Dependability? All concept that traditional and true gamers alike have been searching for as each console advances. I'd continue to keep bashing their online service, but a friend linked me to a news article from a while ago that lists more or less every gripe I have with it, you can read that here. Too Microsoft and Sony's fault, Microsoft does charge what some could call unreasonable for their onlince service, however, most people agree that the sheer amount of integration that Xbox Live holds within all of its systems and all of its games is what makes it close to perfect. To Sony's fault, they also tout "free" online service which every Sony owner and their mother for some reason seem to brag about. However, as evidenced by the recent MW2 glitches, they also handle such things poorly, do not maintain their servers, etc. However, their integration for online is still fantastic and easily comparable with Xbox Live and trumps the Wii.

All in all, gamers are looking for advancement, utilization, and improvements within gaming. That's the true spirit of gaming which has fueled the industry since it's beginning days, worlds of fantasy, imagination, creativity, and places where our real life consequences may or may not affect us. This is the spark that Nintendo lost, and in my eyes (as well as the eyes of many others), Nintendo needs to get back on track and recrown itself as the real leader in gaming. Not saying they're out of it completely, but they have quite a bit to improve.

And now that I post this, I realize that this is the Nintendo forum and I am about to get crucified by the people who hang out in this forum, and in advance, I'd like to apologize to them, and if a mod feels the need to delete this, by all means do so.

But Solid Knight, don't you dare put words in my mouth, classify me as immature, or further insult me without even giving a tiny bit of intelligent feedback. You use counter-intelligence against someone else's intelligence. That's how discussion forms. So in the future, instead of personally insulting someone, attempt to actually see their side of it, or the professional side of matters, and as I just did, as I've been saying all along, this post concerns the gaming industry at large, so stop being so butt-hurt about what I say and stop and think about it.

When you're capable of doing that, then we can talk.

Thanks for reading that.

Grand Master

x-byte

Posted
Posted

?

The Wii doesn't even offer offline storage built-in! No hard drive, and the memory was flash cards to store your data. How sad is that? Are we really still in the age where ZIP drives were revolutionary and amazing? No, we're not. And forget Blu-Ray or HD-DVD, the games are not even taking advantage of dual-layer DVDs, they're still using single layer 4.7 GB discs. Oh, and even worse? Not so much concerned with gaming, admittedly, but the thing can't even play DVDs, which would have been very cheap to add.

The Wii have 512MB onboard flash memory for offline storage. Not much, but it does. It can play DVD's if you really want too (homebrew). They didn't add it for two reasons; a) License cost. b)The majority of people have one or more DVD player.

And now that I post this, I realize that this is the Nintendo forum and I am about to get crucified by the people who hang out in this forum, and in advance, I'd like to apologize to them, and if a mod feels the need to delete this, by all means do so.
Why should you. All I see is a detailed and informative opinion, for a change.
Grand Master

LiquidSolstice

Posted
Posted
?

The Wii have 512MB onboard flash memory for offline storage. Not much, but it does. It can play DVD's if you really want too (homebrew). They didn't add it for two reasons; a) License cost. b)The majority of people have one or more DVD player.

Why should you. All I see is a detailed and informative opinion, for a change.

True. I suppose I should have credited it for the 512 card, I forgot. The DVD Homebrew aspect is true, but I'm talking out-of-the-box, so I disregarded it. As for cost, my question is why? It would not have cost too much to add it and would certainly have made for a better converged device than it is right now.

I know, I suppose it isn't as bad as it could have been, but I read the forum description above just as I clicked post. Again, it wasn't meant to offend anyone who owns a Wii, nor was it a personal attack, I am simply stating the answer, using facts from trends and the general public, as to why most mainstream gamers do not view the Wii as a true next-generation console compared to it's predecessor.

Grand Master

M_Lyons10

Posted
Posted

This is an interesting rumor, but all it really says is that Intel is approaching Nintendo to make a deal for the next generation of consoles, which they've likely done with each and every generation... This really isn't news unless Nintendo makes a deal. With that said, given Nintendo's past architecture choices, and their desire to have backward compatibility I would not expect them to go with Intel. It's all left to be seen though, and I really don't think we're close to seeing any new consoles to be quite honest (And if they're still being approached by suppliers of integral components like Intel I would say they aren't even that far along in design...).

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.