PC & Video Games

Nintendo Wii to outsell PS3?

  • Last Updated:
  • Oct 25th, 2006 12:04 pm
Tags:
None
Deal Addict
User avatar
Feb 14, 2002
3362 posts
125 upvotes
Vancouver
Sheky wrote: .... the remote is niche because that's all the Wii can do. The PS3 can offer a different style of gaming but the Wii can't because of the pad and hardware limitation. PS3 can do Wii's games, Wii can't do PS3's games. Reread my post earlier. That's why it's niche; the PS3 and 360 is not counting on a remote to sell their systems. Like I said earlier, the moment Sony releases a Blu ray remote that doubles as a Wii like controller, the Wii is sunk.

And stop deluding yourself about the power of exclusive titles. Why the hell would people buy the system if they don't like the games for it or have no idea what the games on it are like? Have you seen how ******** people are when a new DQ, FF, and Halo lauches? The more of these titles you have for your system the more likely it is that'll succeed. It's been shown time and time again, people like certain franchises. You don't have those franchises, well, chances are people are not going to put your console on the top of their shopping list.

Games are what sells the systems and innovation /= success. HTH
i think you've got that the other way around, ps3 games (call of duty 3, madden) can all be done easily on wii with less graphics, you continue to switch the controller functions out of the previous arguments and replace them with graphical power counters

the truth of the matter is the wii will be able to loads of games that will either be exclusive to the system or will have exclusive functionality from other systems, like in call of duty 3

and you're deluded if you think that because the wii controller is short 1 shoulder button you can't recreate basic functionality of any other game on the market because the second motion sensor (1 in nunchuk 1 in remote) can easily replace 4 to 8 buttons with basic movements

obviously you could try to port over a game like zelda but you don't have 2 motion sensors, or the free motion of being able to move your hands in different directions at the same time, it's nothing like the original experience, and when you change the experience, you change the game

if you had to play the ps3 with your feet you could be playing the same ps2 port but it's not the same experience as it originally was

it's funny you brought up innovation too, what exactly has sony been innovative with since they got into gaming? what have they brought to the table that no one else has? other than a bigger storage space or dual analogs (which i thought were completely useless until nhl 07 on 360) and graphics and hardware upgrades don't count, that's progression, that's been happening since pong
Deal Addict
User avatar
Feb 14, 2002
3362 posts
125 upvotes
Vancouver
Sheky wrote: I said a Wii like remote. If you've read my previous posts, you should see it's implied that some kind of sensor bar would be packed with it. Again the point is the difference between the PS3 and Wii could be bridged easily by Sony but not by Nintendo. That's the difference, which is why I said Nintendo pigeonholed themselves.



Actually, you don't need GOOD in front of it. Halo and Halo 2 were broken FPS and yet people bought and loved it. You just have to throw a lot of crap at the wall and see what sticks. If you throw enough crap at the wall, some are bound to stick. Quality is always better than quantity. And when you have 2x or 3x number of products vs your competitor, you are bound to have more quality than the competitor, at least numerically speaking. That's the current trend in games. Whether it's a good method it's up to debate, but you can't deny that it works in gaining dominance in the market.
ps3 doesn't look like it has a sensor bar, they would of shown us by now, working with them i've never seen anything of the sort

and as far as good games goes, ps2 had a large library because it had a year head start (year and a half if you count japan) on the competition, now 360 has the huge head start and sony has to catch up, i'm not sure how you can call halo and halo broken fps when they have some of the highest metacritic ratings around, that's just slander

since i brought up the whole year head start thing i see the same thing happening this time around too, sony system comes out with new graphics, microsoft makes the market wait 1 year for slightly better graphics, people choose slightly lesser graphics over 1 year wait

this time around it's microsoft out for a year with next gen graphics, and sony making the market wait a year for slightly better graphics, with millions of installed 360's now around the world you can't help but think deja vu
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jun 24, 2004
3226 posts
107 upvotes
Edmonton
SuSHi wrote: i think you've got that the other way around, ps3 games (call of duty 3, madden) can all be done easily on wii with less graphics, you continue to switch the controller functions out of the previous arguments and replace them with graphical power counters

the truth of the matter is the wii will be able to loads of games that will either be exclusive to the system or will have exclusive functionality from other systems, like in call of duty 3

and you're deluded if you think that because the wii controller is short 1 shoulder button you can't recreate basic functionality of any other game on the market because the second motion sensor (1 in nunchuk 1 in remote) can easily replace 4 to 8 buttons with basic movements

obviously you could try to port over a game like zelda but you don't have 2 motion sensors, or the free motion of being able to move your hands in different directions at the same time, it's nothing like the original experience, and when you change the experience, you change the game

if you had to play the ps3 with your feet you could be playing the same ps2 port but it's not the same experience as it originally was

it's funny you brought up innovation too, what exactly has sony been innovative with since they got into gaming? what have they brought to the table that no one else has? other than a bigger storage space or dual analogs (which i thought were completely useless until nhl 07 on 360) and graphics and hardware upgrades don't count, that's progression, that's been happening since pong
You do realize that developers like ports right? And that making a game for a smaller market is a big risk that even big companies like Capcom and EA can't afford to take repeatedly? And that porting between systems where one is far more powerful, chances are the inferior system will get bad ports or no ports at? And that graphics sells and its impossilbe for a company to cater to the common denominator in presentation when 2 of the 3 consoles demand good graphics? And that you never get flagship titles from a franchise unless you're the most popular console? Really, the exclusives that you'll get on the Wii will be Nintendo games and other inferior ports with a new interface. That's not even counting the fact that the Wii interface could be easily reproduced.

As for the lack of sensor bar, that could be a peripheral. Assuming the Wii's idea takes off like a firestorm, in my previous posts, I was saying Sony could easily copy that idea too and release an add on to simulate the Wii experience. Sell a sensor bar, disk with driver for the HD, a blu ray remote that doubles as controller and a pack in game and you basically have a Wii on PS3. Not to mention they could make it an easier sell by saying we'll support this device on the PS4 too, so buy it. Tell me, what could the Wii add on to itself to emulate the type of horse power the PS3 or 360 has? Even assuming the remote ideal cannot be reproduced, everything I wrote in the first paragraph stands and the only guarantees you can have with the Wii is that you'll have Zelda, Mario, and non flagship titles with a new interface. None of these will win you the console war. Look at the Cube.

Nintendo don't seem to get the point that you don't have to invent the wheel to be successful. All Sony ever did was copy good ideas from other people and it works. Look at their choice of storage, controller design, interface. All ripped off from Nintendo, Sega, and MS. Innovation and success are separate things. Hell, Sega CD and Virtual Boys were innovative too and look where they went.
Deal Addict
User avatar
May 24, 2006
2040 posts
26 upvotes
Sheky wrote: Nintendo don't seem to get the point that you don't have to invent the wheel to be successful. All Sony ever did was copy good ideas from other people and it works. Look at their choice of storage, controller design, interface. All ripped off from Nintendo, Sega, and MS. Innovation and success are separate things. Hell, Sega CD and Virtual Boys were innovative too and look where they went.
Wow..and this is the reason why I am losing more and more respect for Sony and their fans as the years go by. You don't realize that if there is no company that brings into fruition new ideas, then Sony would have nothing to jack off from. In a world where Sony would rule the world, according to you, there would be no advancement...well because no one would bring any ideas. If you are completely okay with stealing here, copying there all in the name of business, it's hard not to see why business practices these days are so shady.
One point that you've neglected to mention is cost to the user, sure developing add-ons, recreating a system on another system is nice and dandy, but that money is coming straight from the user.
CASE: the new gran turismo: sells in a core package and SONY forcing you to spend money (aka microtransactions) for every car, every track you want to add to your game.
So instead of rewarding users for achievement and unlocking secrets, forget that, that requires effort, let's make you put your money where your mouth is. At 50cent to 85cents a car, and 2.50-4.50 a track. Someone figured out the total cost of the COMPLETE game could be anywhere between 250-450 dollars. But I guess..this is the SONY way.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Feb 14, 2002
3362 posts
125 upvotes
Vancouver
BaconMunch wrote: Wow..and this is the reason why I am losing more and more respect for Sony and their fans as the years go by. You don't realize that if there is no company that brings into fruition new ideas, then Sony would have nothing to jack off from. In a world where Sony would rule the world, according to you, there would be no advancement...well because no one would bring any ideas. If you are completely okay with stealing here, copying there all in the name of business, it's hard not to see why business practices these days are so shady.
One point that you've neglected to mention is cost to the user, sure developing add-ons, recreating a system on another system is nice and dandy, but that money is coming straight from the user.
CASE: the new gran turismo: sells in a core package and SONY forcing you to spend money (aka microtransactions) for every car, every track you want to add to your game.
So instead of rewarding users for achievement and unlocking secrets, forget that, that requires effort, let's make you put your money where your mouth is. At 50cent to 85cents a car, and 2.50-4.50 a track. Someone figured out the total cost of the COMPLETE game could be anywhere between 250-450 dollars. But I guess..this is the SONY way.
that was put perfectly

sheky keeps talking about graphics and horsepower and such, gaming doesn't need good graphics to succeed, all games have to do is be fun, every game from the beginning to NES looked like crap, yet i know plenty of people that still play them, because they're fun as hell, graphics may be nice and fancy but they'll always be outlasted by gameplay

graphics are for tv and movies, games are for fun

i'm gonna go play FFVII now so i can sit in amazement of the 3d models made from 20 polygons now
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jun 24, 2004
3226 posts
107 upvotes
Edmonton
BaconMunch wrote: Wow..and this is the reason why I am losing more and more respect for Sony and their fans as the years go by. You don't realize that if there is no company that brings into fruition new ideas, then Sony would have nothing to jack off from. In a world where Sony would rule the world, according to you, there would be no advancement...well because no one would bring any ideas. If you are completely okay with stealing here, copying there all in the name of business, it's hard not to see why business practices these days are so shady.
One point that you've neglected to mention is cost to the user, sure developing add-ons, recreating a system on another system is nice and dandy, but that money is coming straight from the user.
CASE: the new gran turismo: sells in a core package and SONY forcing you to spend money (aka microtransactions) for every car, every track you want to add to your game.
So instead of rewarding users for achievement and unlocking secrets, forget that, that requires effort, let's make you put your money where your mouth is. At 50cent to 85cents a car, and 2.50-4.50 a track. Someone figured out the total cost of the COMPLETE game could be anywhere between 250-450 dollars. But I guess..this is the SONY way.
Whether you like Sony's practices and whether they'll succeed are separate issues. Mixing them just turns this into fanboyism.

You speak of Nintendo as the epitome of innovation, but this is the same company that claimed no one wants to play online and that people like simple games. You ever wondered why the Cube has a giant ass B button? It's because Miyamoto wanted to create a game where you can have fun with only a single button. The world is still waiting.

Nintendo's stance is a double edged sword. The claim to like innovation but they don't seem to realize their stance on technology is too limiting growth in games. They say we don't want more horsepower under our console. Err...what if I want better AI? Wouldn't I need more processing power? What if I want a game with fully destructable environment? Wouldnt I need more Ram? What if I wanted to play with hundreds of other players online? Wouldn't I need connectivity and a better GPU? There's more than one way to skin a cat.

And for the record, I'm not a Sony fan. Lawl I'd buy the Phantom if it had games on it that I like. I play my games; they don't play me. It's pointless to continue this thread. We'll just have to bump this thread 2 years down the road to see who's right.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Feb 14, 2002
3362 posts
125 upvotes
Vancouver
Sheky wrote: Whether you like Sony's practices and whether they'll succeed are separate issues. Mixing them just turns this into fanboyism.

You speak of Nintendo as the epitome of innovation, but this is the same company that claimed no one wants to play online and that people like simple games. You ever wondered why the Cube has a giant ass B button? It's because Miyamoto wanted to create a game where you can have fun with only a single button. The world is still waiting.

Nintendo's stance is a double edged sword. The claim to like innovation but they don't seem to realize their stance on technology is too limiting growth in games. They say we don't want more horsepower under our console. Err...what if I want better AI? Wouldn't I need more processing power? What if I want a game with fully destructable environment? Wouldnt I need more Ram? What if I wanted to play with hundreds of other players online? Wouldn't I need connectivity and a better GPU? There's more than one way to skin a cat.

And for the record, I'm not a Sony fan. Lawl I'd buy the Phantom if it had games on it that I like. I play my games; they don't play me. It's pointless to continue this thread. We'll just have to bump this thread 2 years down the road to see who's right.
yeah bumping the thread idea later was brought up, but that could easily be done for so many other systems (IE PSP)

the thing is we've neglected to bring up 360 which is probably sony's biggest problem

microsoft has an established ownership base, as well as a very large online network and a year of games under their belt, alot of people are going to get what their friends have so they can play online with them (which wasn't even an option when ps2 launched, and you know what that did for the ps2 in the end), as well they're very active in the gaming community (major nelson), so when a 3rd party game comes out you'll have the choice to play with a bunch of friends or a select few that were able to get ps3's

and it may take a while for sony to bump the production to a higher rate with the issues they're having right now so the gap will just keep getting wider and wider until sony gets caught up to speed

the way i see it 360 will be the console people will own to play all the 3rd party and common games between 360 and ps3, and people will use ps3 to play the exclusive games they want to play, but that will cost sony in the end because of the billions they put into developing cell and bluray, if they survive into the next generation you'll see them going back to their feature biting ways
[OP]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Apr 1, 2006
3370 posts
343 upvotes
Brisbane
Sheky wrote: As for the lack of sensor bar, that could be a peripheral. Assuming the Wii's idea takes off like a firestorm, in my previous posts, I was saying Sony could easily copy that idea too and release an add on to simulate the Wii experience. Sell a sensor bar, disk with driver for the HD, a blu ray remote that doubles as controller and a pack in game and you basically have a Wii on PS3. Not to mention they could make it an easier sell by saying we'll support this device on the PS4 too, so buy it. Tell me, what could the Wii add on to itself to emulate the type of horse power the PS3 or 360 has? Even assuming the remote ideal cannot be reproduced, everything I wrote in the first paragraph stands and the only guarantees you can have with the Wii is that you'll have Zelda, Mario, and non flagship titles with a new interface. None of these will win you the console war. Look at the Cube.
I'd like to point out, Nintendo never released a REAL Mario or Zelda gamefor the 'Cube. In fact, the Gamecube was the first console that Nintendo released that didn't star Mario. I'd hardly call Zelda: Windwaker a real Zelda game.

And I would have to agree, Sony adding a sensor bar would be a complete flop. Add-ons never succeed unless they are essential to a wide range of games (IE, the N64 expansion pack, which came WITH many games).

If Sony had any intent of including a pointing sensor, they would have done it by now. The point has been made, Sony has not released anything innovative since being in the industry. XBox had a built-in HD and of course Xbox live (on PC but first console). Nintendo introduced the first gaming control stick (well, joysticks were around but first single finger)... What has sony done? CD's were around and theres nothing new about a DVD player. Sixaxis? already been done, in fact; stolen. Blu-ray? Players are coming out for that, expected technology.

Name one completely innovative, before-anyone-else thing Sony has done since entering the gaming industry. I have so little respect for Sony fans because they can be extremely arrogant, mostly because they are like lemmings who originally followed the pack with psx and have since stuck to their beloved company.

Sony has amazing marketers, that's it.
Deal Addict
User avatar
May 24, 2006
2040 posts
26 upvotes
Truemana wrote: Sony has amazing marketers, that's it.
But not Autralian VP's though...can anyone guess why?

What Sony has going for them, is a good reputation from their back in the day MIJ QUALITY products...y'noe, it's brand power, proven 8/10 times when it comes to television and other big electronic purchases. But that was before they stepped into the foray of electronic gaming, and now that they have, they have that to back up all their products, a reputation of quality, but that doesn't mean they have to abuse it at the cost of the user. But I guess if the consumer is willing to dish out to pay premium, why should the company ask for any less right?
Deal Addict
User avatar
Oct 12, 2005
1171 posts
15 upvotes
Sheky wrote: Whether you like Sony's practices and whether they'll succeed are separate issues. Mixing them just turns this into fanboyism.

You speak of Nintendo as the epitome of innovation, but this is the same company that claimed no one wants to play online and that people like simple games. You ever wondered why the Cube has a giant ass B button? It's because Miyamoto wanted to create a game where you can have fun with only a single button. The world is still waiting.

Nintendo's stance is a double edged sword. The claim to like innovation but they don't seem to realize their stance on technology is too limiting growth in games. They say we don't want more horsepower under our console. Err...what if I want better AI? Wouldn't I need more processing power? What if I want a game with fully destructable environment? Wouldnt I need more Ram? What if I wanted to play with hundreds of other players online? Wouldn't I need connectivity and a better GPU? There's more than one way to skin a cat.

And for the record, I'm not a Sony fan. Lawl I'd buy the Phantom if it had games on it that I like. I play my games; they don't play me. It's pointless to continue this thread. We'll just have to bump this thread 2 years down the road to see who's right.
- Actually, it was a huge A button; and sure the buttons were different, but it is also the most comfortable controller I've ever used.

- Just wondering if you like any games that don't have "Ultra-realistic" graphics? If you do then you are incorrect in saying "Graphics sells", same thing goes with movies, a movie could have literally the best special effects, but if the story is complete **** no one is going to pay to watch it.
Truemana wrote: I'd like to point out, Nintendo never released a REAL Mario or Zelda gamefor the 'Cube. In fact, the Gamecube was the first console that Nintendo released that didn't star Mario. I'd hardly call Zelda: Windwaker a real Zelda game.

And I would have to agree, Sony adding a sensor bar would be a complete flop. Add-ons never succeed unless they are essential to a wide range of games (IE, the N64 expansion pack, which came WITH many games).

If Sony had any intent of including a pointing sensor, they would have done it by now. The point has been made, Sony has not released anything innovative since being in the industry. XBox had a built-in HD and of course Xbox live (on PC but first console). Nintendo introduced the first gaming control stick (well, joysticks were around but first single finger)... What has sony done? CD's were around and theres nothing new about a DVD player. Sixaxis? already been done, in fact; stolen. Blu-ray? Players are coming out for that, expected technology.

Name one completely innovative, before-anyone-else thing Sony has done since entering the gaming industry. I have so little respect for Sony fans because they can be extremely arrogant, mostly because they are like lemmings who originally followed the pack with psx and have since stuck to their beloved company.

Sony has amazing marketers, that's it.
- Mario Sunshine was a pretty good game if you gave it a chance, sure it isn't like any other Mario game, but I still enjoyed playing it. Same goes for Windwaker, a bit different than usual but still a good game; except for the extended sailing time, that was the only thing that irritated me. :mad:
[OP]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Apr 1, 2006
3370 posts
343 upvotes
Brisbane
quikkid wrote: - Just wondering if you like any games that don't have "Ultra-realistic" graphics? If you do then you are incorrect in saying "Graphics sells", same thing goes with movies, a movie could have literally the best special effects, but if the story is complete **** no one is going to pay to watch it.

- Mario Sunshine was a pretty good game if you gave it a chance, sure it isn't like any other Mario game, but I still enjoyed playing it. Same goes for Windwaker, a bit different than usual but still a good game; except for the extended sailing time, that was the only thing that irritated me. :mad:
Exactly bang on with graphics. Seems like the people who consistently buy a Playstation are the same people who think special effects make a movie. Like Matrix Revolutions, or Waterworld.

I never tried Mario sunshine to be honest.... But I do agree, Windwaker was good for the fact it was Zelda but it was meant for kids and it was a rush job, meant to be the intermediate between ocarina and twilight princess. It still had the Zelda "finness" (is that spelt right?) but lacked the maturity.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Oct 17, 2001
11921 posts
89 upvotes
What pisses me off so much right now is Nintendo seemingly cancelling Zelda Twilight Princess for the Gamecube.
That lost me lots of respect for them. That's just not right pissing on your loyal userbase. I will buy a Wii at launch but I know many folks not buying one for a while and were looking forward to the Gamecube version that's been delayed for a year thanks to the game being ported to the Wii.
From a "Family" reviewer: "We Cheer teaches coordination, enticement to lust, women being used as sex objects, and team work."

From Worthy Playing: "We Cheer is, then, for all intents and purposes, the F-Zero GX of music games. It asks for so much, yet forgives so little. It is actually so casual that it's hardcore."
Deal Fanatic
Jan 16, 2003
6269 posts
106 upvotes
Truemana wrote: I never tried Mario sunshine to be honest.... But I do agree, Windwaker was good for the fact it was Zelda but it was meant for kids and it was a rush job, meant to be the intermediate between ocarina and twilight princess. It still had the Zelda "finness" (is that spelt right?) but lacked the maturity.
Man go buy Mario Sunshine for cheap or go rent it for the week end. Well worth it! :)
Sr. Member
User avatar
Mar 20, 2005
960 posts
3 upvotes
If you're gonna compare a games graphics versus gameplay as a selling point, use World of Warcraft vs EQ2 since they're both in the same genre. EQ2 has extremely nice graphics if you have the system to run it and you have the SOGA models turned on. WoW has a really low polygon count and non realistic graphics but it has a wikedly nice art style to it. One thing WoW shines in is gameplay. It's easy for everyone to just jump in and give it a go. Thus proving that graphics mean squat over gameplay but they definately do help.

What ever happened to Mario128? Miyamoto said it was still in development like 3 years ago, then said it's being pushed to the 'Revolution', and now we've got no word of 128 but we get Mario Galaxy? I'm missing the big sequel to Mario 64. A straight on Mario saving the Princess from Bowser game. Also, I've said it once and I'll say it again -- moving Super Paper Mario to the Wii isn't too smart.

This new Zelda game better be 100 hours long like they're saying it is. And I don't mean 15 hours of gameplay followed by 85 hours of flinging chickens around. :lol:
Deal Addict
User avatar
Feb 14, 2002
3362 posts
125 upvotes
Vancouver
Jump wrote: If you're gonna compare a games graphics versus gameplay as a selling point, use World of Warcraft vs EQ2 since they're both in the same genre. EQ2 has extremely nice graphics if you have the system to run it and you have the SOGA models turned on. WoW has a really low polygon count and non realistic graphics but it has a wikedly nice art style to it. One thing WoW shines in is gameplay. It's easy for everyone to just jump in and give it a go. Thus proving that graphics mean squat over gameplay but they definately do help.

What ever happened to Mario128? Miyamoto said it was still in development like 3 years ago, then said it's being pushed to the 'Revolution', and now we've got no word of 128 but we get Mario Galaxy? I'm missing the big sequel to Mario 64. A straight on Mario saving the Princess from Bowser game. Also, I've said it once and I'll say it again -- moving Super Paper Mario to the Wii isn't too smart.

This new Zelda game better be 100 hours long like they're saying it is. And I don't mean 15 hours of gameplay followed by 85 hours of flinging chickens around. :lol:
i think mario galaxy evolved from mario 128, from running around on a 3d sphere with the gravity sticking you to the ground, not sure about the massive amount of marios though
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jul 20, 2006
1741 posts
1 upvote
Toronto
Jump wrote: What ever happened to Mario128? Miyamoto said it was still in development like 3 years ago, then said it's being pushed to the 'Revolution', and now we've got no word of 128 but we get Mario Galaxy? I'm missing the big sequel to Mario 64. A straight on Mario saving the Princess from Bowser game. Also, I've said it once and I'll say it again -- moving Super Paper Mario to the Wii isn't too smart.

This new Zelda game better be 100 hours long like they're saying it is. And I don't mean 15 hours of gameplay followed by 85 hours of flinging chickens around. :lol:
Technically Mario and Zelda both suffer from Nintendo's dilemma: How do you top the best. If you were to rename Mario Sunshine and Wind Waker, and put it under another publisher, there would be no question that it will be held as the greatest thing since slice bread. It's only because of Nintendo's tradition and legacy do we get to put it on a different level.

Mario Sunshine always felt like an expansion to Mario 64 to me. It feels like they wanted to do more, but just couldn't. Collect-a-thons were overdone, so they tried to mix it up, and I guess the hype behind the "sequal" to the best Mario ever just hurted it more in the end.

Same thing with OOT and Wind Waker, Wind Waker technically had a better battle system (anyone who's gone through the 100 level dungeon will agree), but there was no way it can match OOT with the ocean system and the lacking number of dungeons.

One observation that most people tend to forget: While most people treat Mario 64 and Zelda OOT as the pinnacle, they are the bastard child when you compare the rest of the series against it (Mario totally lost the a->b levels, and OOT may be the most mature Zelda yet with an actual Adult Link). In some ways, Wind Waker and Mario Sunshine were attempts of going back to the old with ideas of new, but ended with medicore results.


Super Paper Mario to Wii, I didn't like it at first, but it's understandable. If it was left on the Cube it will never sell. A 2D side scrolling platforming/RPG/??? game? Only the hardest of all hardcore fanboys will scoop it up. Nintendo learned it's lesson with the first Paper Mario (on N64), no matter how good the game is, if it's too late in the cycle of the system, you are better off moving it elsewhere. Instead of being a forgotten Gamecube game (like Baten Kaitos 2 right now), it stands a chance as being the first Mario on the Wii.


As for Zelda being short: preview articles said it ranges from 40-60 hours with minimal side quests completed. The number of dungeons have also been confirmed to be at least as much as OOT (which had 9 full dungeons).
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jul 20, 2006
1741 posts
1 upvote
Toronto
SuSHi wrote: i think mario galaxy evolved from mario 128, from running around on a 3d sphere with the gravity sticking you to the ground, not sure about the massive amount of marios though
The massive amount of Marios is actually the 100 Mario demo. That demo turned into Pikmin.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Oct 15, 2002
18196 posts
137 upvotes
GTA
sfu_lifer wrote: What pisses me off so much right now is Nintendo seemingly cancelling Zelda Twilight Princess for the Gamecube.
Do you mean for Japanese version doing online download only? The North American version still seems to be set to release in December : http://cube.ign.com/objects/572/572738.html
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jul 20, 2006
1741 posts
1 upvote
Toronto
felix wrote: Do you mean for Japanese version doing online download only? The North American version still seems to be set to release in December : http://cube.ign.com/objects/572/572738.html
There is a nasty rumor right now that every region has been pulled. EB's SKU for GC Zelda just disappeared, suggesting that Nintendo has either cancelled it, or moved it to online only.
Deal Addict
User avatar
May 24, 2006
2040 posts
26 upvotes
AlphaTwo wrote: There is a nasty rumor right now that every region has been pulled. EB's SKU for GC Zelda just disappeared, suggesting that Nintendo has either cancelled it, or moved it to online only.

Another rumor to that is that they fulfilled ALL their pre-orders, and I heard someone saying, they remove the information for pre-orders when it's complete. Maybe I am being overly optimistic but the GC release isn't due for almost 2 months, only a month ago did we learn about Wii pricing, so don't give up hope and don't make rash accusations until you get an official word from Nintendo, as opposed to making accusations based on the disappearance of a listing on a not so great site.

And by online only, BestBuy? like c'mon is it that hard to order from BestBuy?

Top

Thread Information

There is currently 1 user viewing this thread. (0 members and 1 guest)