Rush2thestart
Member
I love how now that the Wii U is failing, people are trying to rewrite history. Last gen is over. Wii dominated.
-
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.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Why do people keep saying that "Wii won last gen?"
- Thread starter Comandr
- Start date
I'd say it has. It's apparently gotten 73% of GAF's knickers in a twist for all eternity.The Wii fizzled early, has had no lasting impact
In what way were they so incredibly similar? The hardware is pretty much as different as xbox and PS2. They got a lot of the same 3rd party ports, but so did PC.
There's literally no reason to make that grouping based on your other gens.
We are watching the Strategy change before our eyes. We have jump around and included everything ranging from "feeling", 'future path of the industry', lumping the ps3 and 360 together, 'Nintendo is doomed'.
Also for all the fanboy talk, I havent owned a Nintendo product since the DS, but I don't let that cloud my objectivity when it comes to something as simple as profit and sales. Which are the only metrics anyone in the past has seriously used to determine the 'winner'. All other arguments were discarded as fanboyism, but now that the non-favorite won, its time to use all of those previously laughed at excuses.
Any other arguments people use to correlate that the WiiU is the reason why the Wii didn't win can be used against the PS2.
captmcblack
Member
Genesis outsold Super Nintendo and won the 16-bit era; they're still selling Genesis' today!
Is your question about the 360/PS3? Their software library has like a 95% overlap. How is that not similar? The hardware being different is irrelevant. Both had the same library and roughly the same power. They were very similar.
No way, especially not if we count digital.
Anyway, almost all of OG xbox 3rd party games ended up on PS2 (and many of GC's). They are all much more similar to each other. Gameplay machines that boot to a disc, regular controller input, limited online, greatly overlapping libraries.
I love how now that the Wii U is failing, people are trying to rewrite history. Last gen is over. Wii dominated.
Using some of the arguments in this thread, PS2 didn't "really" win because when consumers were presented the choice between consoles with Nintendo games and consoles without Nintendo games, they chose Nintendo games.
I guess it's time to go back and rewrite the 'best selling consoles' lists to reflect the fact that sales only count until a newer console is released.Genesis outsold Super Nintendo and won the 16-bit era; they're still selling Genesis' today!
Then all hardware sales of past systems need to be revised to reflect the generations "ending" early to satisfy the new revisionist version of a generation.
yeah but the point is: are we arguing against, or about the same thing? lol
The thread title doesn't specify "in sales".I love how now that the Wii U is failing, people are trying to rewrite history. Last gen is over. Wii dominated.
Generally, a console that "dominates" a gen walks away with the longest-lasting support and the widest library of well-regarded titles firmly in hand. Can you say Wii is possessed of these accomplishments?
Mariah Carey
Member
The thread title doesn't specify "in sales".
Generally, a console that "dominates" a gen walks away with the longest-lasting support and the widest library of well-regarded titles firmly in hand. Can you say Wii is possessed of these accomplishments?
Because people in the industry didn't want or try very hard to support the direction Wii was heading despite audience demand.
Opinions of Customers > Opinions of Industry Folks
randomengine
Banned
What is gaming culture? There has never been a time when there's been a general gaming mindset. You know how people talk about the casuals with the Wii, people were talking about the users of the SNES and Megadrive in the same light back in the 90s! Tastes have always differed. Also I find it odd that you split generation 6 when the three main systems (sorry Dreamcast) shared a lot of third party titles. In fact it was the last time Nintendo's home console had the big third party games. And then you lump the XBone with the PS4 when the two machines have a different message. XBone is all about the complete all in one entertainment package whereas the PS4 seems to follow the GCN's ethos of being all about the games. So much for that branch not taking off.
Lumping the systems together is due to their similarity. Systems with very similar content usually share the same sales/fate. While Xbox and PS2 had some of the same games, it came too late to enter gamers consciousness as a similar alternative.
Because PS2 dominated its generation, the PS3 was the successor. Microsoft did something smart by making the 360 similar to the PS3 in content before it was released, therefore piggy-backing onto it and intertwining its fate with it. Whether Microsoft was trying to mimic the PS3 in terms of content or the other way around, it worked.
Generation 8 will play out similarly to Gen 7 as long as the two systems (PS4 and Xbox One) remain similar. They are both accepted by the mainline gaming culture (that is to say most console gamers as a whole).
If PS? or the next XBox disentangle themselves, gamers will have to choose between them. If that happens, Nintendo has an opening, but until that time, they are being muscled out as long as Nintendo tries to be different.
Everything would have been different for the Wii U if it had received the PS4/Xbox One games we are receiving now, much like the 360 got PS3 games before it was released. That way the Wii U would have intertwined its fate with the main trunk and the other two. That did not happen and as such the Wii U got left in the dust. If Nintendo wants to succeed in Gen 9, they have to release their system first (by at least a year) and the content has to be Gen 9 content that Sony's and Microsoft's new systems will have as well. Nintendo with the Wii U did the first part (released 1 year early), but failed at the second part as most of the third party content was Gen 7 content and not Gen 8.
If, however, Nintendo wants to succeed by being unique, they cannot do so in a vacuum. Even as successful as the Wii was, it did not force gaming culture to diverge. That is because PS3 and the 360 remained true to the content that came before it in the previous generation. Only in a situation like Generation 5, where all the consoles are different from each other and all are different from the winner of the previous generation, would Nintendo have a chance at becoming the mainline trunk and only if gamers adopt their approach. Nintendo's fate is very much dependent on what their competitors decide to do.
I don't disagree, the industry is complicit with the Wii being a flaming shipwreck of botched and/or half-assed support. That does not undo, however, that it happened and that it's there on the beach, blazing away. You can't judge it based on what it should have been, you gotta judge by what it is.Because people in the industry didn't want or try very hard to support the direction Wii was heading despite audience demand.
For me personally, the Wii wasn't much more than a drunken party game that gathered dust in between parties.
I loved the Zelda games on it but would have much preferred to have played them on the Wii U controller.
The novelty of it wore off after the first week.
I wonder how many 10's of millions of them are now sitting in a box in the attic.
I loved the Zelda games on it but would have much preferred to have played them on the Wii U controller.
The novelty of it wore off after the first week.
I wonder how many 10's of millions of them are now sitting in a box in the attic.
For me personally, the Wii wasn't much more than a drunken party game that gathered dust in between parties.
I loved the Zelda games on it but would have much preferred to have played them on the Wii U controller.
The novelty of it wore off after the first week.
I wonder how many 10's of millions of them are now sitting in a box in the attic.
just by curiosity, what games did you get for the system?
Does this mean the GBA somehow lost in what was basically a monopoly because the DS started life as a third pillar i.e. went in a different direction thus not continuing the branch?
Don't apply the weird logic of trying to make the Wii not the victor of the last generation because anything people use falls apart and rewrites other generations that had ultra clear victors.
randomengine
Banned
Does this mean the GBA somehow lost in what was basically a monopoly because the DS started life as a third pillar i.e. went in a different direction thus not continuing the branch?
While DS and GBA games were very dissimilar mechanics wise (with the addition of touch). The content was very similar. DS even had a GBA slot, so it was truly the continuation of GBA and the main trunk of handheld gaming.
The PSP was great, but since its content did not have significant overlap with the DS and the DS just carried on the legacy of the GBA, gamers accepted the DS as a continuation.
The same problem dogs the Vita. Too dissimilar from the 3DS and the 3DS is similar enough to the DS to continue the mainline tradition.
If ever Nintendo releases a handheld that is as different content-wise as the N64 was to the SNES, will Sony have a chance at becoming the mainline trunk. Or Sony could release a handheld after the Vita that is very similar to the successor of the 3DS, release a year early, and get most of the same content that the 3DS successor will have. Looking at the history of these machines, that seems like the only way Sony is going to take over the crown from Nintendo in the handheld space.
just by curiosity, what games did you get for the system?
Both Zeldas, Xenoblade Chronicles, Okami (which lead me to get it on the PS3), Brawl, and I tried Resident Evil 4 at a friends.
The Zeldas were the only ones I spent a great deal of time on though.
I just couldn't get away with the controller, I like just chilling out when I'm gaming.
faceless007
Member
I really, really don't understand the logic that the Wii U's failure somehow retroactively makes the Wii not the winner.
The Wii U's failure is on the Wii U.
The Wii U's failure is on the Wii U.
Both Zeldas, Xenoblade Chronicles, Okami (which lead me to get it on the PS3), Brawl, and I tried Resident Evil 4 at a friends.
The Zeldas were the only ones I spent a great deal of time on though.
I just couldn't get away with the controller, I like just chilling out when I'm gaming.
Thats hardly enough to decide if the platform is shit or gold.
...and 3 of those games work with CC/GC controllers...
timetokill
Banned
I'm just glad the GameCube was such a success. People were so happy with it that they each went and bought 5 Wiis! Pretty incredible.
Both Zeldas, Xenoblade Chronicles, Okami (which lead me to get it on the PS3), Brawl, and I tried Resident Evil 4 at a friends.
The Zeldas were the only ones I spent a great deal of time on though.
I just couldn't get away with the controller, I like just chilling out when I'm gaming.
No offense but this seems like the general case of people hating on the Wii library. "Oh I played 5-10 games, but the Wii didn't have shit." If you didn't play the games, how do you justify making claims on the software library?
P.S. Most of the good games had minimal use of motion controls, and imo the tethered control scheme made the Wiimote+nunchuk combo the ideal "chilling out" controller.
randomengine
Banned
I really, really don't understand the logic that the Wii U's failure somehow retroactively makes the Wii not the winner.
The Wii U's failure is on the Wii U.
In every previous generation, if the winner of the previous generation continued on with a similar product, it would succeed as well. The Wii U has not succeeded, even though the Wii clearly won its generation....which is...strange. It means our assumptions about decades of history are incorrect....which is unlikely.
There is an alternative to the idea that Wii won the generation (based on sales), but failed to carry on its legacy. If you combine the sales of the shared content of the 360 and the PS3 (only the shared content). It dwarfs the Wii sales and is a viable explanation for the way history has turned out and the reality we live in where Wii succeeds and Wii U fails.
In every previous generation, if the winner of the previous generation continued on with a similar product, it would succeed as well.
Then the PS2 is a failure because the PS3 didn't succeed in it's generation.
Then the SNES is a failure because the N64 didn't succeed in it's generation.
The Atari 2600 is now a complete failure because nobody gave a shit about the 5200.
There is an alternative to the idea that Wii won the generation (based on sales), but failed to carry on its legacy. If you combine the sales of the shared content of the 360 and the PS3 (only the shared content). It dwarfs the Wii sales and is a viable explanation for the way history has turned out and the reality we live in where Wii succeeds and Wii U fails.
Why should anyone take this seriously if you have to combine two competitors sales together to say the Wii wasn't the highest seller?
Both Zeldas, Xenoblade Chronicles, Okami (which lead me to get it on the PS3), Brawl, and I tried Resident Evil 4 at a friends.
The Zeldas were the only ones I spent a great deal of time on though.
I just couldn't get away with the controller, I like just chilling out when I'm gaming.
Thats hardly enough to decide if the platform is shit or gold.
...and 3 of those games work with CC/GC controllers...
good games in general, but you missed a lot of great ones.
Just a personal opinion, but additional to the CC and GC support, I found the wiimote + nunchuck combo was the most "chill" setup last gen, one controller in each hand made it very comfortable. Outside Wario Ware and Wii sports, I can't think of any game that couldn't be played laying on the couch.
The Ps4 Looks Great
Banned
Then the PS2 is a failure because the PS3 didn't succeed in it's generation.
Then the SNES is a failure because the N64 didn't succeed in it's generation.
The Atari 2600 is now a complete failure because nobody gave a shit about the 5200.
But if you combine the sales of all 3.......
You summon Captain Planet.But if you combine the sales of all 3.......
axisofweevils
Holy crap! Today's real megaton is that more than two people can have the same first name.
If the Wii U means the Wii didn't win, then I'd like to propose that the DS actually won. It sold 150m, and was the best selling gaming device last gen. That success continued with the 3DS, which is currently the best selling gaming device this gen.
Could someone explain to me why this thread is still alive? At this point, we are going into endless cycles if the Wii library was shitty or not, which is neither worth the time, nor has it to do anything with the original thread intent.
Yep, not threadwhining.Just having the feeling we have reached 4chan levels and the discussion is dead.
Yep, not threadwhining.Just having the feeling we have reached 4chan levels and the discussion is dead.
randomengine
Banned
Then the PS2 is a failure because the PS3 didn't succeed in it's generation.
Then the SNES is a failure because the N64 didn't succeed in it's generation.
The Atari 2600 is now a complete failure because nobody gave a shit about the 5200.
I began at Generation 3 because the gaming crash that the Atari 2600 was a part of is a special case that poisoned the well for Atari. It created a circumstance where a new winner could be crowned.
PS3 did succeed, but it shared its fate with 360. 360 made itself so similar to the PS3 that sales were shared between them.
You missed the point that about the N64 being too dissimilar from the SNES. The N64 had 3D games and very few games that played similarly to SNES games. It was a completely different gaming world. No system in that generation was like the SNES or the Genesis. This created a situation where gamers got to choose as there was no clear successor. The N64 did not play SNES games, and did not have content similar to SNES. Gamers chose Playstation as the mainline trunk and continues as the mainline trunk. It just so happens that Microsoft made the XBox so similar to that trunk that it gets to piggy back onto it. If a new Playstation and Xbox come out in the same generation that are dissimilar from each other in terms of content (and dissimilar from the previous generation of content), gamers will have to choose and there will be a clear winner and clear loser.
If on the other hand a new XBox comes along with different content from the Playstation and the Playstation remains true to the content of the previous generation the XBox would fail.
JacksUsername
Member
It definitely had a rough couple of years towards the end, and it will be interesting to see where total sales fall for all last gen consoles a couple of years down the road. I think people forget that software like Just Dance was still selling like crazy even after the system's popularity died down.
It also depends on what you consider a success; sales obviously mean a lot, but in terms of mind share, the Wii had an unprecedented amount within the first three years of its life. People I've never heard talk about games were so excited about the system, and the system was mentioned or featured in mainstream media for quite awhile.
Looking back at this generation, for non-gamers especially, the Wii would be the console that sticks out the most, whether it would be with positive or negative recollections. The 360 had a lot of momentum afterward, but in terms of mind share, I think it was more focused on the Call of Duty brand than the 360 brand (luckily for Microsoft, a lot of people thought of them as synonymous).
It also depends on what you consider a success; sales obviously mean a lot, but in terms of mind share, the Wii had an unprecedented amount within the first three years of its life. People I've never heard talk about games were so excited about the system, and the system was mentioned or featured in mainstream media for quite awhile.
Looking back at this generation, for non-gamers especially, the Wii would be the console that sticks out the most, whether it would be with positive or negative recollections. The 360 had a lot of momentum afterward, but in terms of mind share, I think it was more focused on the Call of Duty brand than the 360 brand (luckily for Microsoft, a lot of people thought of them as synonymous).
faceless007
Member
Define "similar." In a way that includes Wii -> Wii U but does not include:In every previous generation, if the winner of the previous generation continued on with a similar product, it would succeed as well.
PS2 -> PS3
N64 -> GameCube
There about a dozen factors that have been discussed ad nausem over the last year -- disruption of mobile/tablet devices, terrible marketing and confusing branding, lack of compelling software, poor value proposition, to name a few -- that have nothing to do with the Wii yet do a much better job explaining the Wii U's failure. It's not exactly a difficult thing to explain and doesn't require you to jump through these bizarre rhetorical hoops based on your own peculiar "assumptions."The Wii U has not succeeded, even though the Wii clearly won its generation....which is...strange. It means our assumptions about decades of history are incorrect....which is unlikely.
I guess it's time to go back and rewrite the 'best selling consoles' lists to reflect the fact that sales only count until a newer console is released.
"winning a gen" seems like it would count sales in the gen and "best selling consoles" seems like it would.... you know what? Forget it. Being intentionally dense is probably more fun.
The Wii sucks so bad, that the brand and company image are damaged, which is clearly evident. That has cost them the delta in sales units from last gen. therefore we need to debit Wii sales with unsold Wii U's as well as the cost of recouping notariety. The Wii sold -3M unit equivalents, narrowly beating virtual boy's -3.5M. Wii lost the gen clearly. Pie charts on the way.
No offense but this seems like the general case of people hating on the Wii library. "Oh I played 5-10 games, but the Wii didn't have shit." If you didn't play the games, how do you justify making claims on the software library?
P.S. Most of the good games had minimal use of motion controls, and imo the tethered control scheme made the Wiimote+nunchuk combo the ideal "chilling out" controller.
It's just down to personal preference, I don't like platformers like Mario etc... and if games were multi-format I found them to be a much better experience on PS3 or 360, due to liking the controllers on them more and having much better graphics and network etc...
The Wii was just not for me I guess.
good games in general, but you missed a lot of great ones.
Just a personal opinion, but additional to the CC and GC support, I found the wiimote + nunchuck combo was the most "chill" setup last gen, one controller in each hand made it very comfortable. Outside Wario Ware and Wii sports, I can't think of any game that couldn't be played laying on the couch.
Personal anecdote, but I developed a neck/shoulder problems in the late 2000s and had a horrible time trying to play RE4 Wii; went back to playing it on Gamecube. Any game with heavy motion control use and pointing at the screen became irritating and uncomfortable. It really wasn't practical to play like that for more than a brief time and my favorite games of then gen were ones like Punch-Out with traditional control options.
I really, really don't understand the logic that the Wii U's failure somehow retroactively makes the Wii not the winner.
The Wii U's failure is on the Wii U.
This has been a red herring argument set up by zealous fans. No one has said that the Wii U's failure retroactively made the Wii a failure. What has been said, repeatedly, is that the Wii failed half-way into its lifecycle and Nintendo, continuing the same failed strategy, has created an even bigger mess with the Wii U.
Stuff like "PS2 is a failure because the PS3 didn't succeed in it's generation" is just nonsense that doesn't address the unique situation that occurred with the Wii crapping out so abruptly and growing consumer boredom and dissatisfaction shortly after purchasing a Wii machine. I think the Wii ultimately failed ON ITS OWN. I think the Wii U is failing ON ITS OWN because of Nintendo doing the same ol' shit it's been doing since 2008/09. The PS2 did not fail by any stretch of the imagination. Same for the PS3 given how it has helped shaped the future of gaming with the new gen. This isn't hard to understand, people.
randomengine
Banned
Let's imagine for a second that this is Generation 4. We have SNES and Genesis and Neo Geo or Turbo Grafx as a third (take your pick).
Imagine that the NeoGeo/Turbo Graphx sold 100 million units and Keith Courage was the best selling game ever (like Wii Sports is).
Now imagine that the SNES and Genesis both sold 60 million units.
Clearly NeoGeo/Turbo Grafx won the generation in terms of sales....
But looks what happens after. The gamers that played SNES/Genesis continue to define the culture of console gaming. More games are coming out that are similar to the games released for that system. No more Bonk or Samurai Showdown.
What would our conclusion be? Yes, absolutely NeoGeo/Turbo Grafx won the generation, but so what? If the content for those systems die and remain in that generation and become unpopular in future generations, what kind of victory is that?
Imagine that the NeoGeo/Turbo Graphx sold 100 million units and Keith Courage was the best selling game ever (like Wii Sports is).
Now imagine that the SNES and Genesis both sold 60 million units.
Clearly NeoGeo/Turbo Grafx won the generation in terms of sales....
But looks what happens after. The gamers that played SNES/Genesis continue to define the culture of console gaming. More games are coming out that are similar to the games released for that system. No more Bonk or Samurai Showdown.
What would our conclusion be? Yes, absolutely NeoGeo/Turbo Grafx won the generation, but so what? If the content for those systems die and remain in that generation and become unpopular in future generations, what kind of victory is that?
For me personally, the Wii wasn't much more than a drunken party game that gathered dust in between parties.
I loved the Zelda games on it but would have much preferred to have played them on the Wii U controller.
The novelty of it wore off after the first week.
I wonder how many 10's of millions of them are now sitting in a box in the attic.
So you own these games:
Both Zeldas, Xenoblade Chronicles, Okami (which lead me to get it on the PS3), Brawl, and I tried Resident Evil 4 at a friends.
For you the Wii was nothing but a "drunk party game mashine", yet out of the only 5 (!) games you ever owned for the system there was only one that could be remotely called a party game that's fun when you are drunk, namely Smash Bros. Brawl.
Then you say that the novelity wore of after a week, yet you didn't even try most of the games that made the Wii a "novelity" - Wii Sports/Resort, Wii Party, Mario Kart, Bloom Blox, Red Steel 2, Zack and Wiki, Godfather: Blackhand Editon etc...
Had you actually looked for more than 5 games, you might've actually found a lot more of those "drunk party games", let a alone the real system sellers.
The bolded part is the only one that matters, the only one being discussed.Let's imagine for a second that this is Generation 4. We have SNES and Genesis and Neo Geo or Turbo Grafx as a third (take your pick).
Imagine that the NeoGeo/Turbo Graphx sold 100 million units and Keith Courage was the best selling game ever (like Wii Sports is).
Now imagine that the SNES and Genesis both sold 60 million units.
Clearly NeoGeo/Turbo Grafx won the generation in terms of sales....
But looks what happens after. The gamers that played SNES/Genesis continue to define the culture of console gaming. More games are coming out that are similar to the games released for that system. No more Bonk or Samurai Showdown.
What would our conclusion be? Yes, absolutely NeoGeo/Turbo Grafx won the generation, but so what? If the content for those systems die and remain in that generation and become unpopular in future generations, what kind of victory is that?
I repeat - "Wii won" doesn't mean "Nintendo is in a great position", it means "Wii won". And it did. Let it go already, or at least admit PS2, SNES and PSP were failures because the following systems were huge downgrades success-wise.
This has been a red herring argument set up by zealous fans. No one has said that the Wii U's failure retroactively made the Wii a failure. What has been said, repeatedly, is that the Wii failed half-way into its lifecycle and Nintendo, continuing the same failed strategy, has created an even bigger mess with the Wii U.
Stuff like "PS2 is a failure because the PS3 didn't succeed in it's generation" is just nonsense that doesn't address the unique situation that occurred with the Wii crapping out so abruptly and growing consumer boredom and dissatisfaction shortly after purchasing a Wii machine. I think the Wii ultimately failed ON ITS OWN. I think the Wii U is failing ON ITS OWN because of Nintendo doing the same ol' shit it's been doing since 2008/09. The PS2 did not fail by any stretch of the imagination. Same for the PS3 given how it has helped shaped the future of gaming with the new gen. This isn't hard to understand, people.
If you think that's a red herring argument you have some incredible selective reading abilities.
Wasn't Wii's legacy that games can appeal to everyone? Not just all ages like ol Mario, but literally everyone. It said there was a market outside of the traditional branch model you've been painting. Just because the Wii U doesn't continue this (in fact I'd say it's more aimed at the traditional Nintendo market) doesn't mean the legacy has gone. It went to smart phone/tablet gaming, the apparent big thing in gaming nowadays. And you can twist it by claiming the XBone is like the PS4, but in reality it wants to be more like those smart devices - an all in one device that handles all the user's needs. The Wii changed what was perceived as the market and basically destroyed this "gaming culture" culture you keep harping on about.
Maybe in the end the PS3 will have more sales. Maybe it didn't get the AAA games (though I'd argue that's not really that important as something as simple as Flappy Bird gets more press than most AAA games these days). But it did something the other two systems didn't and that's change the marketplace completely.
If Wii U didn't have Wii in the name would you argue about legacy as much?
Maybe in the end the PS3 will have more sales. Maybe it didn't get the AAA games (though I'd argue that's not really that important as something as simple as Flappy Bird gets more press than most AAA games these days). But it did something the other two systems didn't and that's change the marketplace completely.
If Wii U didn't have Wii in the name would you argue about legacy as much?
randomengine
Banned
Define "similar." In a way that includes Wii -> Wii U but does not include:
PS2 -> PS3
N64 -> GameCube
There about a dozen factors that have been discussed ad nausem over the last year -- disruption of mobile/tablet devices, terrible marketing and confusing branding, lack of compelling software, poor value proposition, to name a few -- that have nothing to do with the Wii yet do a much better job explaining the Wii U's failure. It's not exactly a difficult thing to explain and doesn't require you to jump through these bizarre rhetorical hoops based on your own peculiar "assumptions."
Wii U plays all Wii games and even uses the same inputs, the games even play similarly.
PS3 sales were shared with the 360 which mimicked the content. So the PS3 was successful but could not become the sales winner because of that.
N64 and GameCube are not similar, but their similarity to each other does not matter because neither were similar to the mainline trunk.
This has nothing to do with mobile as all we are doing is comparing consoles to each other in a vacuum, relative to other consoles.
just by curiosity, what games did you get for the system?
I feel like the Wii's library of original releases is the worst of the three and think that I've tried most critically acclaimed games and many that aren't so widely-regarded. Sin & Punishment: Star Successor and New Super Mario Bros are probably the best games I've played on the system. Punch-Out, the Fire Emblem game, and Zangeki no Reginleiv seem cool, though I haven't played them yet. Might also try Last Story. I didn't like Galaxy (leading me to skip Galaxy 2 when it came out), No More Heroes, Xenoblade, Tatsunoko vs. Capcom, Muramasa, Zack & Wiki, Skyward Sword, Twilight Princess, and MadWorld, off the top of my head, but between games I've bought and games roommates bought throughout the years I wound up putting time into plenty more that didn't grab me.
So, obviously, it's pretty understandable to me that others might not love the library.
If you think that's a red herring argument you have some incredible selective reading abilities.
Care to clarify besides blithely stating people are moving goalposts or whatever else you think my evil agenda is? I don't own Sony or MS consoles for the record. I have no personal interest in seeing any of these companies "win" like you do.
What would our conclusion be? Yes, absolutely NeoGeo/Turbo Grafx won the generation, but so what? If the content for those systems die and remain in that generation and become unpopular in future generations, what kind of victory is that?
Exactly. There isn't a single major company that relies solely on "our numbers are bigger," disregarding everything else, to make bold claims that it's winning at anything. When was the last time Amazon had net profit? Never? It's the most successful online retailer. They know they're in this for the longhaul. What is Apple's smartphone marketshare compared to Google Android's? A fraction of the latter, yet Apple is still considered the influential market leader and trendsetter.
For fucks' sake. Do some of you think the industry hinges overall success on the child-like mentality that rock beats scissors, or 5 is more than 4 therefore we win?
So you own these games:
For you the Wii was nothing but a "drunk party game mashine", yet out of the only 5 (!) games you ever owned for the system there was only one that could be remotely called a party game that's fun when you are drunk, namely Smash Bros. Brawl.
Then you say that the novelity wore of after a week, yet you didn't even try most of the games that made the Wii a "novelity" - Wii Sports/Resort, Wii Party, Mario Kart, Bloom Blox, Red Steel 2, Zack and Wiki, Godfather: Blackhand Editon etc...
Had you actually looked for more than 5 games, you might've actually found a lot more of those "drunk party games", let a alone the real system sellers.
It was Wii Sports that I was referring to, as it comes with the console, I didn't feel I would need to mention it as a game I owned. We used to play Bowling mostly, sometimes Boxing.
None of the other games appealed to me, especially those you mentioned.
If we're brining BC into this doesn't that support Wii being the victor as it is currently the only system properly supported by a current gen system? Wii U plays Wii games, PS4 and XBone don't play their direct predecessors' games. Their lineage was cut whereas the Wii still lives! It is the branch that did not snap!
Mariah Carey
Member
Let's imagine for a second that this is Generation 4. We have SNES and Genesis and Neo Geo or Turbo Grafx as a third (take your pick).
Imagine that the NeoGeo/Turbo Graphx sold 100 million units and Keith Courage was the best selling game ever (like Wii Sports is).
Now imagine that the SNES and Genesis both sold 60 million units.
Clearly NeoGeo/Turbo Grafx won the generation in terms of sales....
But looks what happens after. The gamers that played SNES/Genesis continue to define the culture of console gaming. More games are coming out that are similar to the games released for that system. No more Bonk or Samurai Showdown.
What would our conclusion be? Yes, absolutely NeoGeo/Turbo Grafx won the generation, but so what? If the content for those systems die and remain in that generation and become unpopular in future generations, what kind of victory is that?
This isn't really a fair argument considering Wii was specifically designed to be outside of "the culture of console gaming".
It's a business, isn't it? Wii got the most business, most sales, most profit, most new customers, etc. Seems pretty cut and dry to me. Sony/MS would've sold their souls to see the success that Wii got, and they spent most of the generation trying to replicate it.
If that's not a victory, I don't know what is.
If that's not a victory, I don't know what is.
I feel like the Wii's library of original releases is the worst of the three and think that I've tried most critically acclaimed games and many that aren't so widely-regarded. Sin & Punishment: Star Successor and New Super Mario Bros are probably the best games I've played on the system. Punch-Out, the Fire Emblem game, and Zangeki no Reginleiv seem cool, though I haven't played them yet. Might also try Last Story. I didn't like Galaxy (leading me to skip Galaxy 2 when it came out), No More Heroes, Xenoblade, Tatsunoko vs. Capcom, Muramasa, Zack & Wiki, Skyward Sword, Twilight Princess, and MadWorld, off the top of my head, but between games I've bought and games roommates bought throughout the years I wound up putting time into plenty more that didn't grab me.
So, obviously, it's pretty understandable to me that others might not love the library.
Yep, totally agree, I'm one that didn't like the library overall and I've owned every Nintendo console. The only IP of theirs that I totally love is Zelda (and the only reason why I've bought most Nintendo consoles) but I do have a soft spot for Pokemon.