Wii/Zelda rant.. no spoilers whatsoever.

[n2006]

its a gamecube with a new controller. i already had a gamecube so basically i paid $250 for a controller. could they have made this console more powerful? absolutely. would it have taken anything away from the controller? of course not. would it have made the games less fun? of course not. would it have given the next generation of games a fresh new visual look? absolutely. you guys really need to get off this kick that you can have graphics or fun but not both. you've been brainwashed.

(sorry for my poor english, i'm portuguese)

Would it have costed $250?

Nintendo hasn't made the wii for the guys who bought gamecube. we all know gamecube didn't do very well.
They could make a better Wii and sell it for $400 but then most gamers would prefer sticking with 360 or ps3. This way, people who have a 360 or a ps3 can still think of buying a Wii just for the fun of it.

I think they wanted to make it one step at a time: first, expand their territory to other gamers and non-gamers; than I believe that if they do well in this chapter, in 3 or 4 years there will be a wii hd with which dvd player that wins the competition (blue-ray or hd-dvd).

 

[Taero]

To the poster who was complaining about TP not featuring 1:1 controls for links sword movements and thus not being able to do elegant combos, I ask you, could you ever pull off an elegant combo even if the game allowed ? Also think on this, from our perspective we are looking down on links world mostly, we see him as a small character, perhaps a bit larger when we're close up in tunnels etc or zoomed in but I would find it hard to guage distance to pull off 1:1 combos at enemies. This isn't really a first or second person game now is it, it would be much easier to pull it off in Red Steel had they done it or No more Heroes when it comes out (which is the route I believe they're going).

How can people still be saying that it has the same graphics as a gamecube >_< I really don't understand it, it IS more powerful than a gamecube, even if it's 50% look at it this way, I have £1000, ad 50% to that and I have £1500, quite a bit more money even if its only 50% (terrible analogy I know )

 

[jibjab]

Yeah I really disliked the TP controls at first but I love them now and they're second nature...and as far as Wii Sports, personally I love it. It sounds like maybe you'd be happier with the PS3 and thats fine....return the Wii and go get one. But it wasn't a big surprise that the graphics wouldn't be as good with the Wii...they weren't keeping that a secret. A system that costs $250 and has the Wiimote innovation is amazing...If you don't like it thats fine but you'll have a hard time convincing people on a Wii-specific board to agree with you lol

i've never owned a sony or ms console, i pretty much only play videogames these days if its a nintendo first party title. charging $250 for a system thats a little more powerful than the gamecube (twice as powerful is nothing, compare intels fastest chip in 2001, p4 2ghz 400mhz bus to todays fastest intel, the quad-core 5300, 4 x 2.66ghz w/ 1333mhz bus). technology moves fast, the quad core is actually cheaper than the p4 was in 2001..

anyways, a token increase in power and a remote that kinda works, thats not worth $250 and the fact that you guys think you got a deal is even more shocking. its a ripoff, if the remote worked flawlessy, that would be one thing, if the remote worked as well as it does but came with a truly upgraded system, that would be fine too..

but yes i will definitely be selling my wii, as soon as i'm done with zelda.

 

[jibjab]

To the poster who was complaining about TP not featuring 1:1 controls for links sword movements and thus not being able to do elegant combos, I ask you, could you ever pull off an elegant combo even if the game allowed ? Also think on this, from our perspective we are looking down on links world mostly, we see him as a small character, perhaps a bit larger when we're close up in tunnels etc or zoomed in but I would find it hard to guage distance to pull off 1:1 combos at enemies. This isn't really a first or second person game now is it, it would be much easier to pull it off in Red Steel had they done it or No more Heroes when it comes out (which is the route I believe they're going).

How can people still be saying that it has the same graphics as a gamecube >_< I really don't understand it, it IS more powerful than a gamecube, even if it's 50% look at it this way, I have £1000, ad 50% to that and I have £1500, quite a bit more money even if its only 50% (terrible analogy I know )

you've always had to guage distance, that part doesn't make much sense. and yeah it would be really nice if i slashed left to right, so did link, exactly when i did, and if i slash right to left, so did link, exactly when i did, if i jab he jabs, etc.. and yes that would be easy to control. right now the game is just a bunch of senseless slashing, no better than button mashing in my opinion, and actually less accurate.. sometimes you slash and nothing happens, that doesn't happen when you push a button.

also, the gamecube is 5 years old, its nearly worthless at this point, you can get a console, couple controllers, memory card and a couple games on ebay for $40. your new system is twice as powerful as that $40 piece of hardware.

 

[Inspire]

Sorry to hear you didn't like it. I'm enjoying the hell out of mine.

I really hope you had an HDTV and component cables before you took shots at the graphics / textures...

 

[jibjab]

(sorry for my poor english, i'm portuguese)

Would it have costed $250?

Nintendo hasn't made the wii for the guys who bought gamecube. we all know gamecube didn't do very well.
They could make a better Wii and sell it for $400 but then most gamers would prefer sticking with 360 or ps3. This way, people who have a 360 or a ps3 can still think of buying a Wii just for the fun of it.

I think they wanted to make it one step at a time: first, expand their territory to other gamers and non-gamers; than I believe that if they do well in this chapter, in 3 or 4 years there will be a wii hd with which dvd player that wins the competition (blue-ray or hd-dvd).

exactly, nintendo didn't make this console for people that bought a gamecube, they made it for everyone else, but in the process they're screwing all those people that actually supported them and bought a gamecube. $250 for a minor horsepower upgrade a new controller. this console is worth $125, tops. the gamecube wasn't even top of the line in 2001, doubling that power makes the wii something that could have easily come out in 2002.

ps. whats this obsession with having dvd players as part of the console? all it does is increase the cost of the console without actually improving the games in any way.. how many people actually watched dvds on their playstation 2's?

 

[jibjab]

Sorry to hear you didn't like it. I'm enjoying the hell out of mine.

I really hope you had an HDTV and component cables before you took shots at the graphics / textures...

nope, and while those would be ideal viewing conditions, it doesn't change the fact that if i plug my friends 360 into my tv, the improvement in graphical quality, textures, sharpness, polygon size, etc.. is -quite- noticable compared to the wii. the 360 would look better on the hdtv too y'know, its all relative.

 

[CoryChevalier]

Yes...nobody is saying the 360 doens't look better...and nobody is saying they'd be against the Wii having better graphics if it didn't bring the price up...the difference is you don't like it overall and we seem to. It's not some big dramatic thing so stop trying to prove some "point". I'm intelligent and can make up my own mind as I'm sure you are. And the controller does work GREAT but in Zelda it doesn't function as full as it does in other games and in games to come because its pretty much a GC port (and still a great game).

 

[xbandaidx]

absolute nonsense.

Clearly you don't understand much about televisions.

Here I'll clear it up some more for you. Televisions are just like computer monitors, they have screen resolutions just like CRT and LCD screens. Standard Televisions are basically 680x480. (some newer ones like ones that can sport 480p are a bit higher)

That means analog televisions have 480 interlaced lines, however from how televisions are designed they can only use 70% so in this case about 400 lines are displayed on your screen.

The more lines you have, the more detail and clarity. It would be pointless having a gaming system that is HD on a standard TV. You could probably get a away with it a bit if you had a television that can handle 480p, but even then you are only using a fraction of it and still have half decent graphics.

If your a graphics buff, then get a HDTV (720 or 1080 lines) set, and then a PS3 or Xbox360, but quite frankly you'd just look funny having these console that has so much graphics potential not being taken advantage of because you have a standard TV which can't display all those lines, those lines are what make graphics look amazing! Having a 360 or PS3 on a normal TV, you just have an incredibly dumbdown image.

So how does this all go together?

Well, the latest statistics show that only 5% of all american households have a HDTV set. Why should Nintendo have to dish out all this money (as well as consumers) for a system that would be used on a standard television that can't truely show graphics?

If you get an awesome developer to make a game for all three consoles, and make the graphics as best as the system can handle, and then display it on a crappy standard television, they'll all be on par with each other.

I'm talking about detail here, you need a screen that can show that detail (lines).

So in conclusion, Nintendo was smart. They found the middle ground which can be found on most TVs today (480p). They are targeting the mass. Sure consumers probably don't know this, but at least Nintendo isn't trying to screw over people.

 

[ToadIsDoingMagicMushrooms]

I'd rather just push the A button to make him swing his sword.. granted you can still do some sword attacks by pressing A and not having to swing the remote

Lazy Bas**rd! :lol:

 

[jibjab]

Clearly you don't understand much about televisions.

Here I'll clear it up some more for you. Televisions are just like computer monitors, they have screen resolutions just like CRT and LCD screens. Standard Televisions are basically 680x480. (some newer ones like ones that can sport 480p are a bit higher)

That means analog televisions have 480 interlaced lines, however from how televisions are designed they can only use 70% so in this case about 400 lines are displayed on your screen.

The more lines you have, the more detail and clarity. It would be pointless having a gaming system that is HD on a standard TV. You could probably get a away with it a bit if you had a television that can handle 480p, but even then you are only using a fraction of it and still have half decent graphics.

If your a graphics buff, then get a HDTV (720 or 1080 lines) set, and then a PS3 or Xbox360, but quite frankly you'd just look funny having these console that has so much graphics potential not being taken advantage of because you have a standard TV which can't display all those lines, those lines are what make graphics look amazing! Having a 360 or PS3 on a normal TV, you just have an incredibly dumbdown image.

So how does this all go together?

Well, the latest statistics show that only 5% of all american households have a HDTV set. Why should Nintendo have to dish out all this money (as well as consumers) for a system that would be used on a standard television that can't truely show graphics?

If you get an awesome developer to make a game for all three consoles, and make the graphics as best as the system can handle, and then display it on a crappy standard television, they'll all be on par with each other.

there are so many factors that go into visual quality.. resolution is only one, its so overhyped its ridiculous. computer monitors have been 'hd' for years, and are even higher than 'hd' resolutions..

 

[jibjab]

Clearly you don't understand much about televisions.

Here I'll clear it up some more for you. Televisions are just like computer monitors, they have screen resolutions just like CRT and LCD screens. Standard Televisions are basically 680x480. (some newer ones like ones that can sport 480p are a bit higher)

That means analog televisions have 480 interlaced lines, however from how televisions are designed they can only use 70% so in this case about 400 lines are displayed on your screen.

The more lines you have, the more detail and clarity. It would be pointless having a gaming system that is HD on a standard TV. You could probably get a away with it a bit if you had a television that can handle 480p, but even then you are only using a fraction of it and still have half decent graphics.

If your a graphics buff, then get a HDTV (720 or 1080 lines) set, and then a PS3 or Xbox360, but quite frankly you'd just look funny having these console that has so much graphics potential not being taken advantage of because you have a standard TV which can't display all those lines, those lines are what make graphics look amazing! Having a 360 or PS3 on a normal TV, you just have an incredibly dumbdown image.

So how does this all go together?

Well, the latest statistics show that only 5% of all american households have a HDTV set. Why should Nintendo have to dish out all this money (as well as consumers) for a system that would be used on a standard television that can't truely show graphics?

If you get an awesome developer to make a game for all three consoles, and make the graphics as best as the system can handle, and then display it on a crappy standard television, they'll all be on par with each other.

I'm talking about detail here, you need a screen that can show that detail (lines).

So in conclusion, Nintendo was smart. They found the middle ground which can be found on most TVs today (480p). They are targeting the mass. Sure consumers probably don't know this, but at least Nintendo isn't trying to screw over people.

there's a hell of a lot more that goes into visual quality than simply screen resolution. pc monitors have been 'hd' (or high res) for years, even higher res than hdtv..

 

[Wii_Smurf]

I'd rather just push the A button to make him swing his sword..

STUPID!
Thats what it's for. But I can tell you I've played Tennis in GAME and the IR is brill!
With friends it would be better obviously

 

[Transfixed]

i've never owned a sony or ms console, i pretty much only play videogames these days if its a nintendo first party title. charging $250 for a system thats a little more powerful than the gamecube (twice as powerful is nothing, compare intels fastest chip in 2001, p4 2ghz 400mhz bus to todays fastest intel, the quad-core 5300, 4 x 2.66ghz w/ 1333mhz bus). technology moves fast, the quad core is actually cheaper than the p4 was in 2001..

anyways, a token increase in power and a remote that kinda works, thats not worth $250 and the fact that you guys think you got a deal is even more shocking. its a ripoff, if the remote worked flawlessy, that would be one thing, if the remote worked as well as it does but came with a truly upgraded system, that would be fine too..

but yes i will definitely be selling my wii, as soon as i'm done with zelda.

Either you're incredibly ignorant, or just completely stupid.
Did you listen to NOTHING about the Wii before it came out? It was WELL known how powerful it would be, what the graphics would generally be capable of, and there were TONS of screenshots of Zelda before it came out. Now suddenly that you've gone out and purchased it, your "disappointed" with the "minor graphical upgrade"???? Gimme a break!!
I have a 40 inch LCD HD-TV and the component cables, and Twilight Princess looks downright AMAZING. Obviously sharper and more detailed, more textured than anything I saw on the Gamecube. It's not in freaking 1080i, but did you honestly expect that before it came out? Where have you BEEN this whole time?
And as far as the control goes, I too was a little annoyed at first and thought I'd rather just push a button, but, like Redsteel, the more you get used to it, the more natural it feels, and by mixing it up with the left-hand sword spin, the jump attacks, and the rolling/dodge attacks as WELL as the shield attacks, it's a pretty diverse fighting scheme that doesn't come across as gimmicky at all.
Give it more time, get further into the game, and you will truly enjoy it. And also, get some component cables and a high-def tv. You will NOT be birching about the graphics guaranteed. The Wii is significantly more powerful and it's obvious.
$250 for a fantastically fun gaming system is not anything close to a ripoff.
And to sell your Wii before Metroid Prime 3, Mario Galaxy, and Smash Bros. Brawl come out is downright foolish. But if you want to be a fool, that's your right. ENJOY!

 

[jibjab]

Either you're incredibly ignorant, or just completely stupid.
Did you listen to NOTHING about the Wii before it came out? It was WELL known how powerful it would be, what the graphics would generally be capable of, and there were TONS of screenshots of Zelda before it came out. Now suddenly that you've gone out and purchased it, your "disappointed" with the "minor graphical upgrade"???? Gimme a break!!

like i said earlier in this thread, i said i would have been happy spending $250 on the new system if the actual wiimote worked as well in practice as it did on paper, but it doesn't.. and i'm not complaining about zelda graphics, its a gamecube game afterall, i do think its cheap that they didn't release the GC version on nov 19th.. making their loyal customers wait a month or pony up to play a game that was promised for gamecube a year ago.

Give it more time, get further into the game, and you will truly enjoy it. And also, get some component cables and a high-def tv. You will NOT be birching about the graphics guaranteed. The Wii is significantly more powerful and it's obvious.
$250 for a fantastically fun gaming system is not anything close to a ripoff.
And to sell your Wii before Metroid Prime 3, Mario Galaxy, and Smash Bros. Brawl come out is downright foolish. But if you want to be a fool, that's your right. ENJOY!

i hope the controls get better but i've already put 7 hours into the game and i'd still rather push A. i also really don't like the fact that you need to swing the wii to get link to draw his sword. i'm not that excited about metroid prime 3, if they get the controls down it could be great, but visually it will just be an extension of mp and mp2.. metroid prime 2 just felt like new levels, it didn't feel like a new game to me. mario sunshine wasn't so hot so we'll see how galaxy does, the whole outer space thing could get old.. i really wanted to play zelda, i'll wait and see for mario/metroid.