Some people fail to realize graphics are becoming a commodity, whereas precise motion controls is like the web 2.0: the new eldorado. MotionPlus will attract 3rd party investments massively, because no company will want/afford to miss this boat/competitive advantage.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Nintendo Raises Forecasts on Wii, DS; Shares Surge
- Thread starter marc^o^
- Start date
Starchasing
Member
PS2 launched with fantavision
Wii launched with Zelda....
nuff said!
Wii launched with Zelda....
nuff said!
Starchasing
Member
TwinIonEngines said:
Its a financial report made by Nintendo... i dunno how this ended like it did... Financially speaking Wii is kicking ass... i dunno how wnyone can say otherwise
Shin Johnpv
Member
JudgeN said:
Those games and Devil May Cry, were the only worth while titles on the system in its early days and almost all of them didn't show up till the 12 month mark and later. The first 12 months of the PS2 were a barren waste land for the most part. Then you got a small handful of games in its second holiday on sale (12 month mark). Then another half a year or so of nothing and then the games started rolling. Those first 12 - 18 months were slow though.
Aaron Strife
Banned
I'm not sure why a 30 million (and fastest growing in history) user base would be less of a deciding factor than MotionPlus, but the two events do seem to correlate.marc^o^ said:
"30 million? That's only .004% of the world's population! NintenDOOMED!"Starchasing said:
Starchasing
Member
oh selective memory... what a bless
milanbaros
Member?
Shin Johnpv said:
And that was the sequel to the Playstation, the most surefire success of a console you can get. The Wii was a complete unknown when it was launched and uses a radically different control method. Surely its going to take an extra year for the wave of good software i.e. 2nd half of next year.
I also think until Nintendo starts treating 3rd parties like Microsoft and Sony then they will continue to get less resources than they should for a huge selling console.
Starchasing
Member
Kilrogg said:
A commodity is something that can be bought with an uniform quality, meaning anyone can provide it without differentiation...
Electricity is a commodity.... to whoever you buy it it will be the same thing
In that context I meant graphics do not provide a competitive advantage anymore. Most games look good enough: even a limited wii can please most people. You can be sure a Tiger Woods with real 1:1 MotionPlus controls will attract more people than a new next gen edition with better graphics. Most genres will feel new with MotionPlus controls, whereas mere graphical enhancements don't get us rid of a deja vu feeling.Kilrogg said:
Kilrogg said:
Okay
Wikipedia said:
Wikipedia said:
So when people say graphics are becoming a commodity, they mean that the graphics performance of all products sold are approaching a point where they are all satisfactory to the market's demand for graphics performance, and purchase decisions are increasingly aligned around other values.
While we are quite some ways from graphics truly becoming a commodity value, in which there is little to no qualitative differentiation across products, we are definitely beginning to see parts of the market treat the value of graphics performance as if it were a commodity.
I hope this helps.
Graphics most certainly provide a competitive advantage. On the margin more rather than less users will want a Wii if it had better graphics all else equal.
The point that is often lost or perhaps deliberately ignored by the trolls and defense forces of various interest groups is to ask the question of whether simply having good graphics was ever a major selling point.
Considering the Megadrive outsold the SNES in Europe and America for several years until Sega's strategic implosion allowed Nintendo a window to make up the difference at the tail end of the generation, my answer would be no.
This isn't some new phenomenon brought on by soccor moms being oblivious of graphics. Graphics have never mattered as much as the die hards asserted.
The point that is often lost or perhaps deliberately ignored by the trolls and defense forces of various interest groups is to ask the question of whether simply having good graphics was ever a major selling point.
Considering the Megadrive outsold the SNES in Europe and America for several years until Sega's strategic implosion allowed Nintendo a window to make up the difference at the tail end of the generation, my answer would be no.
This isn't some new phenomenon brought on by soccor moms being oblivious of graphics. Graphics have never mattered as much as the die hards asserted.
Starchasing
Member
Deku said:
But it has been a differentiating factor with past generations... Wii is the first console that doesnt
Eteric Rice
Member
Graphics do matter, but I don't think it's in a way that a lot of people are thinking. It's not really so much about shaders and polygons to most people, but the art style. The art style can get you by with no real high end graphics. Take a look at Okami, Kingdom Hearts, etc, for example.
There's a huge difference in people's eyes between...
One of these games look great, one does not. They're both on similar hardware.
I wouldn't be surprised if many future games were built around motion plus in the future, with a secondary control scheme for non-m+ owners.
I think some games on the N64 did similar with the memory upgrade. Don't remember to well, though.
There's a huge difference in people's eyes between...
One of these games look great, one does not. They're both on similar hardware.
Neo C. said:
I wouldn't be surprised if many future games were built around motion plus in the future, with a secondary control scheme for non-m+ owners.
I think some games on the N64 did similar with the memory upgrade. Don't remember to well, though.
AndoCalrissian
Member
Those games have entirely different art styles, and how a game looks is based largely on opinion. I'm sure some people would think Kingdom Hearts on PS2 looks better than the Xbox 360 version of Dead Rising.Eteric Rice said:There's a huge difference in people's eyes between...
One of these games look great, one does not. They're both on similar hardware.
Wow, thank you for all the detailed replies, guys! The Wikipedia article hadn't made it much clearer, so I'm glad I can count on you all! It even started an interesting debate, cool.
While I won't comment directly on that, it does make me wonder about music: to some extent, can't we argue that music had already become a commodity by the SNES days?
No matter how excellent some of the soundtracks of today are (Super Mario Galaxy, Ôkami, Shadow of the Colossus...), I can still enjoy old tunes from the 8-bit era, not because of nostalgia, but because they're genuinely good. When the Mega Man 9 trailer was unveiled I couldn't stop watching it because of the music in Tornado Man's stage!
I get the feeling that, if the music is really good, it doesn't matter much if it's a chip tune or an orchestrated piece. Hell, there were even people who gushed over the 8-bit remix of SMG's Gusty Garden (... and I like the orchestrated version better, go figure
).
Anyway, disregarding my original argument, I think it can't be denied that music really became a commodity by the PS1 era.
Deku said:
While I won't comment directly on that, it does make me wonder about music: to some extent, can't we argue that music had already become a commodity by the SNES days?
No matter how excellent some of the soundtracks of today are (Super Mario Galaxy, Ôkami, Shadow of the Colossus...), I can still enjoy old tunes from the 8-bit era, not because of nostalgia, but because they're genuinely good. When the Mega Man 9 trailer was unveiled I couldn't stop watching it because of the music in Tornado Man's stage!
I get the feeling that, if the music is really good, it doesn't matter much if it's a chip tune or an orchestrated piece. Hell, there were even people who gushed over the 8-bit remix of SMG's Gusty Garden (... and I like the orchestrated version better, go figure
).Anyway, disregarding my original argument, I think it can't be denied that music really became a commodity by the PS1 era.
Flakster99
Member
Neo C. said:
Such a hard line stance to take when said announcement is but a few months old, and the device will not be released for another 7+? months (spring).
Outside of Ubisoft (Red Steel 2), High Voltage (The Conduit) expressing interest in the device, we don't have much to go on in regards to 3rd parties, developers, and publishers thoughts on the add-on.
If someone has interviews, etc, on their thoughts on the MotionPlus, I would appreciate it, share away. Also, you can put me in the "excited for" camp.
Starchasing
Member
Kilrogg said:Wow, thank you for all the detailed replies, guys! The Wikipedia article hadn't made it much clearer, so I'm glad I can count on you all! It even started an interesting debate, cool.
While I won't comment directly on that, it does make me wonder about music: to some extent, can't we argue that music had already become a commodity by the SNES days?
No matter how excellent some of the soundtracks of today are (Super Mario Galaxy, Ôkami, Shadow of the Colossus...), I can still enjoy old tunes from the 8-bit era, not because of nostalgia, but because they're genuinely good. When the Mega Man 9 trailer was unveiled I couldn't stop watching it because of the music in Tornado Man's stage!
I get the feeling that, if the music is really good, it doesn't matter much if it's a chip tune or an orchestrated piece. Hell, there were even people who gushed over the 8-bit remix of SMG's Gusty Garden (... and I like the orchestrated version better, go figure
Anyway, disregarding my original argument, I think it can't be denied that music really became a commodity by the PS1 era.
Oh you seem to understand what a commodity is
Music has become a commodity, yes
Remember the initial discussion I was following was to explain why I believed 3rd parties would increase their wii support, besides the leading growing userbase. My point, and I stick to it is that most studios know they have to remain competitive in this promising and game changing area. Between 2 similar games, the one with MotionPlus will be the most precise/innovative/hardcore/respected. Its commercials will look better with actors doing real gestures. Standard or not, as soon as next year most studios will develop MP titles.Neo C. said:
As you said this experience learned will be needed for the next round fight. That's why they can't afford to miss the boat, and why you will see increased wii support. It's only logic at work.
Starchasing said:Oh you seem to understand what a commodity is
Music has become a commodity, yes
Well, I wasn't sure, mainly because I couldn't find any clear enough explanation, but yeah, I think I already knew, in a way.
I can now safely say that graphics are well on their way to becoming a true commodity. They already are to some extent. When you reach a point where the aesthetic quality is what truely differentiates graphics over technology, you have a commodity (if I understand correctly). By that measure, we're almost there, as games like Ôkami can still be praised for their graphics today. The game was among the GT nominees in the graphics category some time ago, against Gears of War. That alone says a lot.
Regulus Tera
Romanes Eunt Domus
JudgeN said:
Tthe PS1's games blew the PS2's library out of the water. A couple of examples: MGS1>MGS2 and 3. FF VII, VIII, IX (and not to mention the remakes)>>>>>FF X, and X-2, XI, XII. I can continue...
I would also rate the DS's library better than the PS2's. The Wii has the potential to outdo the PS2's library.
Minsc
Gold Member
AndoCalrissian said:
That's actually a tougher call than you think it is, wiith the right hardware, KH can look mighty impressive.
Sushen
Member
And neither game sold any where near the ones for Pokemon, a mere 2d game on an underpowered handheld system.Eteric Rice said:Graphics do matter, but I don't think it's in a way that a lot of people are thinking. It's not really so much about shaders and polygons to most people, but the art style. The art style can get you by with no real high end graphics. Take a look at Okami, Kingdom Hearts, etc, for example.
There's a huge difference in people's eyes between...
One of these games look great, one does not. They're both on similar hardware.
Black-Wind
Member
Herrr ya go!Flakster99 said:
Can't find a cite other than the Go-Nintendo which links to Revo Gamer so Heres another one!
http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=220216&page=2
Capcom
http://www.capcom-unity.com/ask_capcom/go/thread/view/7371/4657117/Any_plans_for_Wiimotion_plus
So you can add those to the comments about m+.
I think there's a distinction that would have to be made with this, which has already been made in some form with the (Wii) Dead Rising and a PSP game.Kilrogg said:
I would say graphics are a commodity, or a low value, with respect to most of the market in terms of what Wii, PS3 and 360 offer when compared to each other.
Graphic technology as part of a gaming system is a commodity, but the user experience is the individual software and their is differentiation when many games are less "artistically" pleasing than others, irrespective of their technical qualities (sharp textures, etc). The less technically capable of the bunch by far, Wii, is capable of producing visuals that benefit the product's appeal nearly as much as PS3 and 360 are capable, to an overwhlemingly large mass of consumers, from my perspective. Only a minor few, mainly message boarders, are turned off the game's visuals because of "muddy textures", etc.
Another thing of note is that even if there is a notable difference in visuals, is that visuals have rarely been the reason for the success of a video game on platforms. Asking somebody why they enjoyed the many successful piece of interactive entertainment in past, from SMB to MGS, to GTA3, to OoT, nice looking visuals would rarely be the reason.
Flakster99
Member
Black-Wind said:
Appreciate the links!
Yup, I do remember Peter Moore's thoughts now that you mention it. They are exciting to see, and I'm appreciating EA's initiative and it's good to see EA backing up their claim that more Wii support, even if at this point it is EA "Sports" doing the talking atm, is on the way.
No doubt Capcom also sees $$$ and will do whatever they can do get themselves some.
Starchasing
Member
Black-Wind said:
I think this was planned from the beginning by Nintendo.
They knew that lots of companies would miss the boat on the Wii.... as it has been proved...
Now with M+ Nintendo is saying "hey guys do you want to miss the boat AGAIN?"
And by the responses i think 3rd aint missing the boat again
Parl said:
Thank you. I had the same thoughts lurking in the back of my mind, but somehow, I couldn't express them clearly.
I think that the reason why graphics and other technological aspects (like music) weren't necessarily considered as commodities was because ever since the 16-bit era, avid gamers were one of the primary targets, if not the main one. As companies focused more and more on them, they went by the assumption that these gamers demanded increasingly better technology. To some extent of course, they were right. But I think there is a point that can be made, in that maybe, just maybe, the graphics horserace wasn't really a demand on the part of the consumers, but just an assumption from the companies. Consequently, you could assume that avid gamers were somehow fell for that.
The idea might sound crazy. In fact, it occurred to me as I was typing, so I can't say I'm convinced, but I think we might be onto something here.
Eteric Rice
Member
Kilrogg said:
I agree.
I think this focus on visuals started because of competition. I don't think it was always that way, though. I know in Japan, the Famicom retailed for $63, and look at all the games and genres it spawned. It wasn't until the competition came about that Nintendo actually made the SNES.
And what happened when they made it? They touted the 16-bit graphics. I bet a good 80% of the advertising for the 16-bit consoles touted it's visuals. Heck, even some of the NES commercials.
From what someone in another thread told me, Japanese arcades still mostly run in 480p. It would also explain why Japan isn't bothered by the Wii's SD when Japan has the highest HD penetration in the world. Maybe their advertising didn't focus so much on visuals early on, so they don't care?
I dunno, but I think there's probably something to this theory.
Flakster99
Member
Eteric Rice said:
Super Mario 64
Mario Kart 64
Star Fox 64
Donkey Kong 64
Certainly on a subliminal level, one of the better Nintendo marketing campaigns for the time. It helped highlight, bring into focus mind share about the technical, graphical differences/advantages, between 64-bit and 32-bit, ei the "Nintendo, N64 difference".
Eteric Rice said:
Well, yes, but what I found somewhat crazy (although it is rooted in a well-founded theory, as I shall explain in a moment) about the idea was that, not only was there a focus on competition at some point (which led to a focus on the most demanding customers, that's to say avid/hardcore gamers), but that, somehow, avid gamers fell for it. And when I say "fell for it", I mean it.
Maybe we, the people who liked the SNES and Genesis (and the systems that followed), would have liked a true alternative (not an incremental upgrade) just as much, if not more than what we actually got. Maybe... we didn't really want or need all those upgrades, but since we already liked games, and there was no surprising alternative (everybody had the same approach), we accepted the upgrades without even starting to think about questioning those upgrades.
I mean, if you think about it for a minute, a good chunk of us discovered games during the NES era, back in the 80s, when we were kids/teens, which means two things: first, that games were still fresh for us, so we were ready to accept any kind of upgrade without getting bored, even if it meant getting nothing revolutionary; second, that we were easily impressed. Who wasn't impressed by all these new colourful 16-bit graphics at the time? I know I was (not completely, but still).
So, what was that thing I previously alluded to that makes me think that my idea, or, say, my hunch was actually more reasonable than it seemed at first? Well, the notion that consumers don't know what they want. In business, guys like Christensen (the author of the books on disruption that Nintendo used to make the Wii and the DS) have come to the conclusion that the customers, in most cases, don't know what they want. In fact, it's even worse: not only can't they formulate in an articulate way what they really need or want, they might even reject it when it's first introduced to them. That's what happened with the NES in the US, after all: Arakawa had some kids play Super Mario Bros., and they said it was horrible. Not okay, not so-so... HORRIBLE. Can you picture that? Super Mario Bros. + kids = horrible? It's really incredible, when you think about it.
So in the end, it goes back to what I said in the second paragraph: we never got an alternative to the 16-bit war. We've never known anything other than upgrades, upgrades and upgrades (which, by the way, doesn't exclude innovation on the developers' side, but it might ditch revolutionary concepts in favour of refined experiences), so getting our heads around the idea of anything substantially different and surprising than what seemed logical was almost impossible. It's as if I tried to guess anything about next-gen other than refined motion controls, better graphics and/or better online. It's almost impossible to imagine! It's the companies' jobs to find how to surprise us, after all, isn't it?
We've come to accept sheer technological progress or linear evolution because systems like the NES made us passionate gamers, and it's easy to accept the logical evolutions of something you're passionate about. I put forward the idea that maybe, just maybe, that's not what we truly wanted.
I'm sorry, maybe you find it ridiculous, insulting even, or that I'm overthinking it, but I think that's just me, it's as if I had opened the door to a whole world of questions about the video game industry and my hobby. I'm sort of confused right now. It's 2:00 AM here, which doesn't help.
Creepy.
[EDIT] Thinking about it a bit more, I think I've finally understood the concept of "falling for marketing", and it's a vicious circle: the company thinks it knows what the consumers want, so they do it, maybe in the most sincere way, and the consumers accept it, because they can't imagine an alternative, which creates a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy. The consumers accept it, so the companies think their marketing was right, so they continue. And then, some day, consumers and companies alike wake up: the ones finally get bored of the same old shit, and the others realize that what they thought to be right was wrong. Does that mean that companies themselves can fall for their own marketing and regret it later?
Eteric Rice
Member
Holy shit.
All we've ever known was a lie. :O
I mean, I've thought of this stuff myself (at least that the spec war was started by competition), but this shit just adds more demensions to it.
All we've ever known was a lie. :O
I mean, I've thought of this stuff myself (at least that the spec war was started by competition), but this shit just adds more demensions to it.
Eteric Rice
Member
I agree.
I think we've just opened a pandora's box.
I think we've just opened a pandora's box.
Eteric Rice
Member
Yeah, it's definately a new theory.
Could shed some unseen light on how this shit ended up this way.
I think it would be an interesting discussion, personally.
Could shed some unseen light on how this shit ended up this way.
I think it would be an interesting discussion, personally.
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
Kilrogg said:What!?
Do you really all think so? Isn't it a case of mass-GAF-sarcasm?
[EDIT] And by "all", I mean "you two", obviously
Well I agree, so make that three. But this is merely the calm before the battle when your allies back you up and brace you for the coming surge.
the_zombie_luke
Member
I hope that isn't some indirect spin for the Wii. I don't agree with that at all. You seem to be implying that upgrading hardware isn't needed, but it is. You want go back and play the original Rogue Squadron, and tell me that playing at 15 fps was better than Rogue Leader's amazing graphics and control? Innovation and new ways of playing should come with upgraded power. The N64 had a new way to control and power, whereas the Wii only has half of that. Ocarina of Time and Mario 64 wouldn't have come about on a souped up SNES. Even the DS, which has proved itself with touch based gameplay would have been able to do much more with more power. While I like Nintendo, the idea that introducing the Wii with less power than the 360 and PS3 is some gift to gamers, is pretty laughable. If they believed in their system, they would have matched the other guys(like they used to do) in power, and had the new controls on top of that. That's how you do a Revolution.Kilrogg said:
Eteric Rice
Member
Andrex said:Well I agree, so make that three. But this is merely the calm before the battle when your allies back you up and brace you for the coming surge.
Yeah.
In before, "YARRRGH THIS IS HOW IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE TECH IS SUPPOSED TO CHANGE EVERY 4 YEARS NINTENDO HATES PROGRESS AND GAMERS ARRRGH" pops up in that thread.
Edit: Holy shit, I didn't even make it before it happened in this very thread. :lol
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
Eteric Rice said:Yeah.
In before, "YARRRGH THIS IS HOW IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE TECH IS SUPPOSED TO CHANGE EVERY 4 YEARS NINTENDO HATES PROGRESS AND GAMERS ARRRGH" pops up in that thread.
Too late. :|
...
All right, guys, let's do this.
I'm posting the new thread, leaving my original posts untouched (complete with Eteric Rice's post), and then, I'm off to bed.
[EDIT] I'm posting it anyway, don't worry. To the_zombie_luke: anyone who remembers some of my posts knows that it not so much that I'm in love with the Wii as it is, but rather that I like the direction towards which the industry is heading thanks to Nintendo. I personally think it's incomplete at this point. Tossing the Nintendo thing aside, the debate might be interesting anyway.
Anyway, give me a few minutes, posting the whole thing...
All right, guys, let's do this
.I'm posting the new thread, leaving my original posts untouched (complete with Eteric Rice's post), and then, I'm off to bed.
[EDIT] I'm posting it anyway, don't worry. To the_zombie_luke: anyone who remembers some of my posts knows that it not so much that I'm in love with the Wii as it is, but rather that I like the direction towards which the industry is heading thanks to Nintendo. I personally think it's incomplete at this point. Tossing the Nintendo thing aside, the debate might be interesting anyway.
Anyway, give me a few minutes, posting the whole thing...
Black-Wind
Member
Kilrogg said:
I concur!
This reminds me of one of Malstrom's post. That instead of trying to go with what the Nes had, Nintendo saw Sega and started fighting over the "Nes gamer install base" which resulted in every Nintendo console selling less than the Nintendo console before it (Wii broke this chain cause it trys to being in new gamers, like the Nes did, over fighting only for the same old group).
Also reminds me of something Miyamoto said back in that "OMG! Miyamoto says he could have made Halo!" phase. He said something like. . . " I try to make games people don't know they want " over making something like Halo.
Thread posted here: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=12604720#post12604720
Meh. Now that I posted it, the thread title sounds pretentious to me. I had to come up with a title quickly though :/.
Meh. Now that I posted it, the thread title sounds pretentious to me. I had to come up with a title quickly though :/.
That's what I meant. If you are a developer, would you make a game with a MotionPlus mandatory? No, you will put a "support the MotionPlus" in the box art, make some mini games with MotionPlus support, perhaps an additional MotionPlus control setup etc.Eteric Rice said:
You need to make your game playable with Wiimote and Nunchuck, because these two are the basic. It doesn't make sense to cut your potential userbase by making a game with MotionPlus mandatory.
M+ will be even more pervasive than WiiFit (remember M+ will be bundled with Wii Sports Resort = massive penetration guaranteed, over 70% easily). So your mini game only argument doesn't stand. See upcoming wiiboard titles that use the device as their main set up for example. As I told you twice M+ will offer companies using it a competitive advantage over those who won't. Their ads will look better. Their games will likely play better, get better reviews, more novelty factor, buzz and respect among gamers, etc. You still don't see it coming, but that's been the case for many gaffers anyway these last years concerning Nintendo moves, I can't blame you in particular.Neo C. said:
over 70%? If Wii Sports Resort sell as well as Wii Sports, you'll get 40-50% at best (see Japan). I'm not sure how much WSR will cost, just hope it's about the normal price.marc^o^ said:
How many Wiiboard games are there? A bunch of them. How many of them have a Wiiboard mandatory? Except WiiFit it seems there's none.
Finally: How many games need motion sensoring at all? I think a lot of games are just fine with traditional controls.
I think most Wii games are fine with the basic control, M+ is a welcoming add-on. The real deal will be in the next gen.