I'm extremely disappointed in the WII

[wiimaniac]

My reply

The way I see this whole Wii (not WII Ken) situation is simple, basically comprised up of 4 ingredients: Gameplay, Zelda, price, and everything else is a bonus. You will see that graphics is not always the selling point in games, it's how the game is played, simple as that. Do graphics help? Sure, I would be lying if I didn't state that obvious fact, but it's never my main concern. Crap, I still play Diablo II for PC....why? Because the graphics are what I want in a RPG and the gameplay of D2 is second to none. Here is also something to think about, developers never really maximized the GC's potential, if they did with the Wii it would look PHENOMENAL, prolly better then most 360 games out today.

Wiimaniac

 

[jssmrkingrevenge]

I played the WII at Gamestop for about 30 minutes (excite truck) and based on that experience, along with the hundreds of screen shots, reviews starting to pour in, and the actual hardware specs now pretty much public, I must say that I'm extremely disappointed in Nintendo and the WII.

First, on a positive note, Nintendo really hit the ball out of the park with the new controller scheme. I must say that it was VERY slick and does show some amazing promise to take console gaming in a new (and better IMHO) direction. Sadly, N left way too much on the table for this to be a long-term success.

There are some critical flaws, here, that make me wonder if the WII will end up being a Dreamcast... Lots of potential but dying fairly quickly.

The single biggest flaw is the hardware. Based on the specifications that I've seen and the numerous statements posted by developers and others, this is merely a sped-up gamecube. The Horsepower looks to be about 1.5x the current gamecube and one must keep in mind that some of the new horsepower will be required to manage the new controller interaction. Even if the new controller system uses zero overhead, we're still only talking about CPU, GPU, and memory that are very similar to the original XBOX. Sadly disappointing. I would have expected N to produce hardware that was at least halfway between a ps2 and ps3 or 2/3 of the way from the XBOX to the 360. The Xbox, for example, was a 733Mhz CPU or so. The 360 is a 3.2 Gigahertz multi-core processor. I'd certainly think that a dual core 1+ Ghz or 2+ gigahertz single core CPU would have been more in order here. Same goes for the GPU... It should certainly have much healthier texturing capabilities than it does. The (slightly) stronger GPU will help some, but textured surfaces will continue to be flat and polygon counts will continue to be quite low for WII games. (note that every round or cylindrical object on the WII demos is a low-polygon shape. This is a clear indication of the lack of polygon-pushing-prowess) All of this said, there won't be a "revolution" in the quality of games in the next year that many keep saying will happen. This is because the development platform for the WII is a tweaked Gamecube and is quite mature. Pretty much everything is known and it will just be a matter of maximizing texture, polygon count, framerate, resolution, etc. for each specific game based on the ability to push a few more polygons. Nothing new here. No new co-processors or special chips designed to help the CPU/GPU by offloading some heavy number crunching tasks...

The second major issue which is strongly correlated to the first, is pricing. Given the very marginal bump in hardware performance, the Price of $250 is simply ridiculous. The GameCube can be had for 79 dollars at retail and that is presumably profitable or at least breakeven for Nintendo. Given that, I can't see where this box should have been priced more than $179 or maybe $199 as a stretch. At $250, this box should be a helluva lot closer to the X360 in terms of raw computing power! To add insult to injury, the cost of a wii-mote plus a nunchuck runs, what, 69.95 per unit? Four players will be costly indeed!

In addition to the WII hardware price point, the games are listed, at the moment, as a $49.95 price point -- this stated by Nintendo as their goal to keep their games $10 cheaper than PS3 and X360. Unfortunately, the games aren't going to be that much better graphically and I personally don't want to pay $50 bucks for last-gen presentation. I'll admit the WII-Mote adds some value, but twice the price? There are a LOT of GC games out there that are $19.95 and the premium titles like Star Wars Lego II are $39.95. Given that a Gamecube will be close in terms of graphics quality, I suspect that many, like myself, will just stick with the GC for family games and see how the WII plays out over the next year. I suspect the WII will have a $149 price point by next Christmas as people begin to realize the unit, graphically, is already hitting a wall. Nintendo is really going to be in a pickle when the Xbox 360 price comes down in line as they'll have to drop their price and many will be angered by having to pay such a high price for the unit at launch only to see the price drop rather significantly less than a year later.

Given all this, I do love a whole lot about what Nintendo does. They have a library second to NONE for family and younger kids entertainment. There is no substitute for the Big N when it comes to family/party games and games for younger kids, period.

IMO, Nintendo SHOULD have designed the WII-mote system for the GC and launched it as an accessory with a pack-in (wii sports) and Zelda. They could refine the technology and then release the WII as a closer to next-gen console next Christmas and maintain backward compatiblity including the wii-motes so the cost was a new console only.

One last thought: Given the desire for N to appeal to mass audiences with the WII, grabbing adult and hardcore gamers (in addition to family/kids) is a must. Adults and hardcore gamers love complex sports and deep, graphically-rich FPS games. This is fact... The WII simply doesn't have the graphical horsepower to provide enough graphical pleasantry to attract that core group and hence, the WII is going to be relegated to the same place the Gamecube is: Family/Party games and kids games. Hardcore gamers won't be showing up for the party and once again, Nintendo will have a fringe console that relies very heavily on 1st person licenses.

Feel free to disagree, but please provide a legitimate reason where my reasoning is flawed and offer an intelligent counter.

I do disagree and I do think my reason is legit. First I would like to say I admire your constructive criticism of the Wii in its graphical power relative to other consoles (whichever you choose to compare it to) and I agree that, although the Wii is clearly graphically superior to the Gamecube I would've expected at least a little more punch from Nintendo, though I have to say that I do not play games for the graphics with exceptions in 2 areas, racing and sports. And while I'm not a really big sports gamer anyways, the Wii still offers me enough graphical power to have good looking racing games. I'll admit that higher quality graphics do enhance the gaming experience. But then again, as far as graphics go I don't have an HDTV anyways. Which brings up my point: The Nintendo Wii will not follow the path of the GC, and CERTAINLY NOT the DC simply because of the gamin interaction capabilities unlocked by the unique controler, and the doors opened once again to new ideas involving the motion sensing capabilities of the Wiimote/Nunchuck combo. "Hard" "Core" "Gamers," whatever that means, aren't neccisarily looking for better graphics introduced to the same games they've been playing for years(on the same controller *coughps3cough*). Innovation will take the Wii far, and whats more the non-gaming functions of the Wii, taking for example Wii Messaging and Opera Browser, will make it a welcome addition into many entertainment centers. And while it is obvious enough, the old cartriges themselves cannot be played via Wii, VC really opens the doors to backwards compatibility and replay value.

Anyway I think thats about all I have to say about that. Good post though.

 

[vagrant]

If your going to buy a wii, then your going to buy a wii, if you aren't, you aren't. Yet, what boggles my mind...is why do people who seem to have little interest in it....invest so much time into talking about it. I know there are plenty of ps3 forums. ps3 and wii should not be compared. Yes the ps3 has better graphics. It also costs over twice as much.

like I have said many times, if you are so keen on graphics, then why not just pc game? I'm a PC gamer mostly, and with how fast gpu's update now, and with directx 10 coming, I really see no need to buy a ps3 because it looks nicer. It looking nicer isn't personally going to make me enjoy it better. I actually have the ability to differentiate between reality and game. So no matter how good the graphics are, it's not real. So obviously I am going to the wii because it is so much more interactive, and different.

I applaud those folks who even with the next gen of consoles out will still be playing there xbox ps2 and gamecube. Because those people truly understand that it is about the games. But making arguments against the wii on a wii forum is going to cause conflict. We are buying a wii because we want to play a wii. If you don't want to, then don't buy one. Just learn to understand people buy/do things for different reasons.

 

[m7ticalm]

Pfft, who cares if Wii is at the same level as the cube? Im sure its not and even if it is, who cares? Its all about gameplay isnt it? And Kenn did mention that the controller was good..... Last time i checked, GCN had like NO loading time. It was so quick.

 

[yuzi87]

*start rant*
ARRGGH!! all this talk about the wii's graphics dont compare to 360 or ps3

GET IT IN YOUR HEAD the wii isnt about graphics its about advancing in gameplay

so saying its graphics are bad is wasting your time! its like buying a fat free packet of crisps and saying these are rubbish the other crisps have more fat,
dont like the fat free then dont bloody buy them!!! get a fat inducing heart clog of a ps3

you get what you pay for, in this case you get a very small energy efficiant sleek looking games console with motion sensing technology,

people say graphics is an advancment, well to me if i saw someone playing a racing game on ps3 and then i saw someone moving around a wii-mote using the pointer, i know which looks more advanced and fun!

now nintendo planned to make the wii a $100 machine originally, but the cost of the motion technology pushed the price up, now lets suppose nintendo made the wii equal power to the xbox 360 imagine the price for the motion tech and the powerful components, it would prob be around ps3 price and then everyone would be like nintendo sucks making to powerful machine n putting price up we dont need all that power,

so now u have 3 powerful consoles that not everyone can afford and so loads of people miss out.

nintendo isnt stupid they have been around a long time, now imagine when sony and ms get to the point where they are so big (prob size of a small fridge lol)and powerful that the graphics just cant get better where do they go then?

ill tell you where they will try and improve control methods, but oh look nintendo started doing that years ago and now nintendo has not only perfected the controls but now its graphics are catching up with the big boys.

people where perfectly happy playing there decent games on gc, ps2 and xbox a couple years ago and the wii is more powerful than the gc so the graphics are going to improve and will improve as developers make the most of the hardware

so stop moaning! if you want innovative gameplay a small energy reducing sweet looking console go for the wii,
if you want graphical content then get a good electric supplier and go for a 360 or worse ps3
and if your a rich bastard then buy all 3
*end rant*

 

[kenn]

The original poster writes well and articulates "his" views well. Unfortunately, everything he has said about the Wii, it has been said before by someone else.

In good scholarship, the writer adds to existing arguments or even comes up with a new one by examing two separate arguments.

All I see here is the same old tired regurgitation of criticisms.

I posted somewhere (not sure where) why graphics were not important after a certain level of realism.

Cognitive film theory studies the effects of films on viewers. Why do we react to film as we would to similar situations in real life? Why do scary movies make us jump? Why do we cry when we witness a celluloid tragedy?

Film is only 24 frames per second. It is blurry and has soft edges. The look of film is anything but realistic. So why does it affect us as if it were real? The answer is simple. It is close enough. We don't need 400 frames per second. We don't need to witness the actual event to be affected emotionally or physiologically by it.

Having said this, viewers tend to prefer film over high definition. Filmmakers are always comparing HD with film. Which is better!? The argument continues. Many people say it is like apples and oranges. You can't compare the two.

High definiton is sharp and real. The colors are vivid and life like. There may come a day (very soon) when HD is numerically superior to film. Will people still prefer film? What do you prefer: the look of a soap opera or the look of a film?

As I am a filmmaker, I use the argument of cognitive film theory that graphics are unimportant after a certain level. Realism is . . . not necessarily better or efficient.

Please add some new arguments or perspectives rather than vomiting out old criticisims and ideas.

Though I had already considered myself done posting in this thread, I felt compelled to respond to the irony in this post. You are basically saying that graphics are great up to a point but after that, they are essentially gratuitous. The gameplay over graphics debate is as tired as the console wars themselves and offering cognitive film theory/HD vs. film as a metaphor to reintroduce or provide supporting argument for that long fought battle is hardly new ground. I fought the same battle of graphics over gameplay while enjoying my Saturn and my Dreamcast as I played PD Zwei, Virtua Fighter, and other Sega greats.

JeremyDay -- What I have written is a synthesis of what I have experienced through hands-on gameplay, my experiences with quite a number of consoles, many years of videogaming systems back to the original NES and Sega consoles. (I also did the Atari thing -- i.e. 2600, 5200, etc., but didn't feel those were relevant to console war discussions). There are only so many ways one can discuss a video game console regardless of the writing being pulitzer prize-winning prose or 5th grade English. Your "vomiting" comment is just a tad harsh don't you think?

I'll add a few bullet points to sum it up and I'll leave it to everyone else to finish out this thread because I'm truly done trying to take words out of my mouth that keep getting put in by others.

-I never said I wanted HD out of the Wii. That was inserted into the debate to dramatize by a number of posters. I don't currently want or have an HD set. Keep in mind that HD is generally a discussion of Horizontal resolution and scanning method. I was speaking purely in terms of texturing and polygons -- a completely different topic.

-I didn't even begin to imply that the Wii should be capable of producing the same graphics as the 360 or PS3. My point was that Nintendo should have gone a bit higher tech in the hardware department and gotten closer to the PS3/360. Go back and re-read my post and you'll see that I said 1/2 or 2/3 of the power would have been great.

-I have repeatedly stated that I am really happy with the new controller, and much of the game library that Nintendo offers for families and kids. I would absolutely love to have a Wii and will still probably buy one -- just not at launch as I want to see how it plays out a bit. I'm concerned about some of the initial reports of controller issues with high-intensity games such as Call of Duty... As far as current gameplay, I'm quite happy with the titles on the Cube and will stay on it for a while as there are still yet half a dozen titles that I want to pick up and play.

-Did any of you actually read my follow-up post where I listed all of my current/past machines and that I have no desire whatsoever to own a 360 or PS3? Clearly not based on the barrage of posts calling me a fanboy... Further, in one of those same threads, I stated clearly that I ALSO believe in gameplay being MORE important than graphics. BUT, graphics are still very, very important in the equation. Hitting me over the head repeatedly with that argument is oh so tiresome and really pointless as I've said the same. My angle is that yes, gameplay is more important that graphics, but graphics add to the immersion and I'd prefer both -- or at least a *significant* graphical improvement -- to go with solid gameplay if given the chance.

So, as my last post in this thread, I'll sum my opinion up yet again and leave it at that.

The Wii's new control mechanism is very cool indeed. It shows some great promise for the future of gaming. There are some great titles now and upcoming releases on the Wii that show promise in using the technology and creating an exciting gameplay environment for the user. However, I think Nintendo left too much on the the table graphically while having hit it out of the park everywhere else on the console.

The graphics (or lack thereof), will continue to be a sticking point for a lot of gamers and will, to *some* degree, turn away both hardcore gamers and some developers. This will be more obvious (and detrimental) to the system over time and I believe will leave the Wii ending up in roughly the same position the GC is in today -- that is a distant 3rd place with a whole lot of great family/kids games and a handful or so great T/M rated games. PS3 and 360 will be exactly the opposite, just as they are today.

Last, but not least, I still believe the unit is priced too high for the level of hardware or the hardware is not powerful enough to justify the price point -- either way. This whole issue isn't so much as a fair profit margin or price but that the PS3, according to a study commissioned by businessweek, is losing well over $200-300 PER CONSOLE. This greatly exaggerates the price/performance delta and really throws a wrench in a meaningful price discussion. Suffice it to say that I believe Nintendo should have looked at a small loss (which I belive they have done on past consoles) on the early launch of the console to push the graphical power up a notch. I really wanted the Wii to be a grand-slam homerun and maybe it will be. I believe that if they had pushed the graphics envelope a bit more, they unquestionably would have one. Instead, as I've said before, it's more like an in-field double, 2 RBI. Still a great play, but just short...

Only time will tell on the success of the Wii. Buy it or don't, it matters not to me. I'll be watching from the sidelines for a while and will get to see the Wii played out and watching fact sorted out from opinion.

P.S. Someone offer a constructive opinion on what happens if Sony and/or Microsoft decide that the new controllers on the Wii are a threat and one or both develop an excellent 3D wireless controller? What if they pack it with a highly sought after 1st person shooter -- say Halo 3 next year? That would most certainly alter the discussion here rather significantly. If you think these thoughts aren't already running through heads at MS and Sony, think again. The sixaxis was a lame attempt to steal some of Nintendo's glory. If Sony really sees the Wii control scheme take off, they'll come back with a second 3D offering -- you can bank on it.

 

[ABC]

P.S. Someone offer a constructive opinion on what happens if Sony and/or Microsoft decide that the new controllers on the Wii are a threat

Sony and Microsoft aren't even looking at the Wii as a threat. No HARDCORE gamer will have just the Wii sitting in his/her arsenal and this is the group that the Ps3 and 360 are pitched at. The Wii is more of a hardcore gamers sidekick and M$ and Sony know this. They are more worried about the battle between each other than they are about Nintendo's Wii.

 

[SuperH]

The Wii, I agree complements an overall home gaming arena. I plan to go the Wii60 route -- Wii and Xbox 360.

I find myself disappointed that the Wii doesn't have more power or a higher graphics resolution, but I'm not completely turned away from it because of it. It's all about the gameplay with the Wii. Call of Duty 3, based on video and screenshots, as well as Red Steel look quite well for 480p and the Wii's abilities, so does Rayman.

For HD gaming, sure, I'm very likely to purchase an Xbox 360 in the next couple weeks. I have a 52" TV, 480p isn't going to shine like 720p or 1080i/p, and that's all there is to it.

But Wii == gameplay!

 

[zraductus]

It was clear that the cost of producing PS3 units were high for Sony, forcing the company to charge $600 per unit, but now we know exactly how high. Next-gen.biz has offered a full analysis of Sony's expenses. As it turns out, Sony is losing $306.85 for each 20GB system sold and $241.35 for every 60GB system.

The full production cost for a 20GB system is a whopping $805.85, with the 60 GB coming in at $840.35. Chief among the expenses are the RSX graphics chip at $129 and the Blu-Ray optical drive at $125. In contrast, the $400 Xbox 360 only costs $323.30. For the first time in its five-year console publishing history, Microsoft is making a profit on each system sold.



so much for next gen hd super graphics



i read somewhere that sony wasnt doing so well financially and that the PS3 was going to be theyr savior....a cut in launch units and pricey console parts
will cripple sony in the long run.


is a 6 feet muddy cold grave the future for sony ???

i think in the console wars, the winner will be either the Wii or the Xbox 360,
or maybe both because they each contribute something new to the gaming arena may it be cool new gameplay or awe inspiring graphics.

 

[Slade]

Very few seem to want to accept other peoples opinions here. If indeed that kenn thought the only important aspect of gaming was graphics (which by reading his original post i did not walk away entierly with that set of mind) is he not intitled to that opinion? Many people consider graphics to be a very important aspect of gaming, because it is are, but so is gameplay. Obviously, one will be more important to one person than it is to annother. He even said himself, he hopes the Wii suceeds, no one here wants to hear anything bad at all about the Wii. Wii is the system that i am purchasing, but i assure you there are bad things about it.

Perhaps the reason people flamed this post so much, was because of the title "I'm extremly dissapointed in the WII" I found that title harsh compared to the post he made.

Basically my only point in all of this, is more towards the community of Wii, Perhaps you have needlessly ran a quality poster out of the forum. I would like to see more posts from this Kenn person.

Kenn's title for his post was "im extremely disappointed in the WII"

I think i will label mine "I'm extremely dissappointed in WiiChat's Community" for the lack of people standing up for this person.

I know this is probally in the wrong forum, section or what ever, but I felt it needed to be said here. I dont not want to see quality posters chased out of the forum for their opinion.

I gurantee you I have offended somone here, It was not my intent. In which case I apolgize. Thank you for reading.

 

[zraductus]

also those people that are hell benti in bashing the nintendo wii
i suggest you visit this page thats full of all the bugs that come with the ps3

either upscaling issues and burning players fingers while trying to eject a disk.

IGN: PS3 Technical Trouble Report


after monday the real console war will beging and already sony has a foot in the grave.

 

[linkzeldagame]

Another thing that Wii fanboys can do is start looking at the Xbox or PS3 forums and then try taking a leaf out of their comments the posters make there. On average I have seen better comments on those sites regarding the Wii because the posters there have to enlighten the ignorant Sony or Microsoft bashers there. They have it harder there as they often get fanboy responses like -

"SIXAXIS is teh roxorz!1!1!!!!111!11"
"Wii is for kiddies!"
"I don't want to be swinging my arm around and then not be able to play again for a day or two!"
"Final Fantasy / Metal Gear is better than that stupid plumber and Zelda!"
"Wii has crap graphics"

These comments are similar to the PS3 and XBOX bashes made here and on other Wii forums -

"I don't want Blu Ray or HD"
"SIXAXIS ripped off from Nintendo!"
"XBOX 360 phailed at life!"

 

[zraductus]

as far as i remember i never had to replace a nintendo product.
the ps3 isnt even a week old and already is choke full of problems.

and paying 600$ plus dollars for a next gen system thats already full of bugs
is not worth it ..........what good does it do having next gen HD graphics, and top of the line expensive technology if u cant even use it

 

[ABC]

Everyone in this thread should

 

[wiimustfight]

I played the WII at Gamestop for about 30 minutes (excite truck) and based on that experience, along with the hundreds of screen shots, reviews starting to pour in, and the actual hardware specs now pretty much public, I must say that I'm extremely disappointed in Nintendo and the WII.

First, on a positive note, Nintendo really hit the ball out of the park with the new controller scheme. I must say that it was VERY slick and does show some amazing promise to take console gaming in a new (and better IMHO) direction. Sadly, N left way too much on the table for this to be a long-term success.

There are some critical flaws, here, that make me wonder if the WII will end up being a Dreamcast... Lots of potential but dying fairly quickly.

The single biggest flaw is the hardware. Based on the specifications that I've seen and the numerous statements posted by developers and others, this is merely a sped-up gamecube. The Horsepower looks to be about 1.5x the current gamecube and one must keep in mind that some of the new horsepower will be required to manage the new controller interaction. Even if the new controller system uses zero overhead, we're still only talking about CPU, GPU, and memory that are very similar to the original XBOX. Sadly disappointing. I would have expected N to produce hardware that was at least halfway between a ps2 and ps3 or 2/3 of the way from the XBOX to the 360. The Xbox, for example, was a 733Mhz CPU or so. The 360 is a 3.2 Gigahertz multi-core processor. I'd certainly think that a dual core 1+ Ghz or 2+ gigahertz single core CPU would have been more in order here. Same goes for the GPU... It should certainly have much healthier texturing capabilities than it does. The (slightly) stronger GPU will help some, but textured surfaces will continue to be flat and polygon counts will continue to be quite low for WII games. (note that every round or cylindrical object on the WII demos is a low-polygon shape. This is a clear indication of the lack of polygon-pushing-prowess) All of this said, there won't be a "revolution" in the quality of games in the next year that many keep saying will happen. This is because the development platform for the WII is a tweaked Gamecube and is quite mature. Pretty much everything is known and it will just be a matter of maximizing texture, polygon count, framerate, resolution, etc. for each specific game based on the ability to push a few more polygons. Nothing new here. No new co-processors or special chips designed to help the CPU/GPU by offloading some heavy number crunching tasks...

The second major issue which is strongly correlated to the first, is pricing. Given the very marginal bump in hardware performance, the Price of $250 is simply ridiculous. The GameCube can be had for 79 dollars at retail and that is presumably profitable or at least breakeven for Nintendo. Given that, I can't see where this box should have been priced more than $179 or maybe $199 as a stretch. At $250, this box should be a helluva lot closer to the X360 in terms of raw computing power! To add insult to injury, the cost of a wii-mote plus a nunchuck runs, what, 69.95 per unit? Four players will be costly indeed!

In addition to the WII hardware price point, the games are listed, at the moment, as a $49.95 price point -- this stated by Nintendo as their goal to keep their games $10 cheaper than PS3 and X360. Unfortunately, the games aren't going to be that much better graphically and I personally don't want to pay $50 bucks for last-gen presentation. I'll admit the WII-Mote adds some value, but twice the price? There are a LOT of GC games out there that are $19.95 and the premium titles like Star Wars Lego II are $39.95. Given that a Gamecube will be close in terms of graphics quality, I suspect that many, like myself, will just stick with the GC for family games and see how the WII plays out over the next year. I suspect the WII will have a $149 price point by next Christmas as people begin to realize the unit, graphically, is already hitting a wall. Nintendo is really going to be in a pickle when the Xbox 360 price comes down in line as they'll have to drop their price and many will be angered by having to pay such a high price for the unit at launch only to see the price drop rather significantly less than a year later.

Given all this, I do love a whole lot about what Nintendo does. They have a library second to NONE for family and younger kids entertainment. There is no substitute for the Big N when it comes to family/party games and games for younger kids, period.

IMO, Nintendo SHOULD have designed the WII-mote system for the GC and launched it as an accessory with a pack-in (wii sports) and Zelda. They could refine the technology and then release the WII as a closer to next-gen console next Christmas and maintain backward compatiblity including the wii-motes so the cost was a new console only.

One last thought: Given the desire for N to appeal to mass audiences with the WII, grabbing adult and hardcore gamers (in addition to family/kids) is a must. Adults and hardcore gamers love complex sports and deep, graphically-rich FPS games. This is fact... The WII simply doesn't have the graphical horsepower to provide enough graphical pleasantry to attract that core group and hence, the WII is going to be relegated to the same place the Gamecube is: Family/Party games and kids games. Hardcore gamers won't be showing up for the party and once again, Nintendo will have a fringe console that relies very heavily on 1st person licenses.

Feel free to disagree, but please provide a legitimate reason where my reasoning is flawed and offer an intelligent counter.

yeah i think ur wrong the wii is brill even tho i aint played it yet as im in london and it aint out till the 8th of december but i pre-ordered it wiht zelda and red steel cnt wait