Nintendo Revolution renamed

[ChickenSoup]

Oranges oranges oranges! Wii is such a stupid name!

 

[MeridianFlight]

Why couldn't they have named it "w00t"? How much more universal can you get than that? Even aliens understand that one.

 

[ChickenSoup]

I concur

 

[wishanem]

I think 360 is a much much dumber name (the only worse one I can think of is Xbox XTREMEEEEEEE!!!!), but I wasn't very impressed by the 64, Playstation, or any other console name. The fact is, most of the semi-game playing and non-playing game buying population will still refer to it as a Nintendo. And no company has been as successful as Nintendo as ensuring that their systems make money for them. Consistently terrible 3rd party peripherals, family-friendliness, great Nintendo-branded games/exclusives, and a never-too-pricey marketing strategy have worked in their favor.

I think, at this point, Nintendo has become like the uber-Macintosh of consoles. Uber because it was a hegemon at one point, but it never appealed to the audience of, say, the Xbox. Frat boys and 30-somethings in the mid-late 80's didn't pool their money and play Duck Hunt for hours every week the way they have Halo/Halo2.

Wii is monosyllabic and synonimous with "We", a word any small kid can pronounce. I think more distinctive monosyllabic words would be a good move for console developers.

 

[SirThom]

The fact is, most of the semi-game playing and non-playing game buying population will still refer to it as a Nintendo.

Exactly. You never hear "Hey, wanna go play Sony?", or "I got a Microsoft for Christmas!".

 

[Tek7 (Legacy)]

Nintendo has made one fundamental error in designing the "Wii" and its controller: believing that people truly want something revolutionary and innovative. They don't. If they did, the Dreamcast would have fared much better than it did (granted, the high launch price and the ease of illegally copying DC games also contributed to the console's downfall). Without Sega to copy, Nintendo is under the delusion that it falls to them to finally create something innovative.

Truth be told, I'm pleased to see something that breaks from the "same game, shinier graphics" theme. But for Nintendo, that's what they do best--regurgitating current ideas and improving on them. They did it with the Super Nintendo, they did it with the Game Boy, they do it every time they launch a new console with Mario, Zelda, and Metroid titles.

Let's face it: Nintendo does not have a high success rate when it comes to truly innovative products. Starting with the NES, each new Nintendo console--yes, including the SNES--has sold fewer units than the previous console. There were fewer SNES units sold than NES units, fewer N64 than SNES, and so on.

And when they do try to introduce innovation, what happens? The Virtual Boy happens. Few people even recall this complete disaster of a system. I believe the person who developed the Virtual Boy resigned to "save face," even though it was the same man who designed the original Game Boy.

And the Game Boy! Nintendo's greatest success in recent (and I use the term loosely) years was with a portable that was far past its prime. If it weren't for the Pokemon games, the GB would have been buried right next to the Game Gear and the Lynx. Nintendo took the cue and developed the Game Boy Color, licensed new Pokemon titles, then, years later, developed the Game Boy Advance (with its own Pokemon titles). The GBA featured several horrid design flaws and Nintendo, doing what they do best, revised a previous product and released the GBA SP (which, by the way, I own and love).

I'm not saying that Nintendo isn't a strong company. I just think it's sad that they've developed a sudden and unwarranted interest in innovation. Regurgitating and revising is what they excel in, and durnit, that's what they should stick to. The success of the GBA SP and the miserable failure of the Virtual Boy prove as much.

All that being said, I would love to be wrong. I would love for gamers to break away from Halo 3, Final Fantasy XIII, and The Legend of Zelda: The Princess Has a Pimple! long enough to recognize innovative games like Katamari Damacy and Warioware, Inc. But the probability of gamers expressing distaste for sequels in favor of new and ground-breaking games is slim. As a community, we gamers cry out for fresh concepts, then turn back to the same game with a new face.

 

[Tek7 (Legacy)]

The site goes on to say that Wii should be easy to remember for people around the world, no matter their language, and that it will avoid abbreviation. The "ii" spelling is intended to represent "both the unique controllers and the image of people gathering to play." It may also be worth noting that "ii" means "good" in Japanese.

One industry analyst who spoke in the condition of anonymity said flat out the choice was wrong, for a number of reasons. "It's a sound that doesn't exist in Japanese, so Japanese people will struggle to pronounce it."

Source: Revolution renamed Wii, GameSpot

 

[ChickenSoup]

So what? Its a dumb name.

 

[Exo-Slayer]

I wasn't aware that the dreamcast was anything revolutionary and innovative nor that anything Sega has ever done would be catagorized as such. Dreamcast was basicly an upgraded console that came out a year to early and was outshined almost imediatley by its competitors. It had some great games but nothing that amazing.

And the Game Boy! Nintendo's greatest success in recent (and I use the term loosely) years was with a portable that was far past its prime. If it weren't for the Pokemon games, the GB would have been buried right next to the Game Gear and the Lynx.

I wouldn't go that far, lets take a look at a few numbers real quick.

* Sega Game Gear 9 Million
* Nintendo Game Boy 119 Million

I don't think Nintendo sold 110 million more Game Boys then sega sold Game Gear becasue of Pokemon. In fact I imagine most of these sales came before Pokemon was released near the end of the game boys life.

Personally I think the public does want something unique and orignal or consoles like the Nintendo DS would be destroyed by the more powerful and traditional PSP, which in fact the opposite is happening and the DS is winning in every market.

World wide figures recent as of January 2006:

* Nintendo Game Boy Advance: 74.25 million units sold [4]
* Nintendo DS: 14.43 Million units sold [4]
* Sony PSP: 13 million units shipped

Note: Sony doesn't release the number of systems sold, only the number of systems shipped to retailers, Nintendo's sales figures are of systems sold. So the DS's sitting on shelves at Gamespot aren't included in the total number sold, however the PSP units shipped includes the total number sold and the systems sitting on the shelf.

 

[SirThom]

Most excellent points, Exo-Slayer.

 

[Tek7 (Legacy)]

I wasn't aware that the dreamcast was anything revolutionary and innovative nor that anything Sega has ever done would be catagorized as such.

Though I don't have all the statistics in front of me, I believe the Dreamcast was the first console to offer online play by modem and, later, by broadband adapter. It also featured games built specifically for online play, such as Phantasy Star Online and Quake 3. The DC also connected to the Internet, ran a web browser, and featured downloadable content--including new levels and models for games like Sonic Adventure and new graffiti tags for Jet Grind Radio.

I believe the DC may have been the first system with a microphone and the first system powerful enough to support the bizarre artificial intelligence sim Seaman. Rez also offered a unique (albeit "trippy") gameplay experience.

As for "great games but nothing that amazing," I suppose that's all a matter of perspective--and whether or not you're considering Japanese games that didn't see a stateside release. Games like Super Puzzle Fighter II Turbo, Puyo Puyo 4, Musapey's Choco Marker, and other strange titles are loads of fun. And of course you can't forget Sega Marine Fishing and Typing of the Dead.

The Dreamcast, as a system, was solid. Sega's business decisions (release date, launch titles, title imported, launch price, SegaNet pricing) are what sunk the Dreamcast, not the console itself.

I wouldn't go that far, lets take a look at a few numbers real quick.

Where I said "buried," I should have said "retired." Yes, the Game Boy sold well, but the original GB's spinach-monochrome screen was technically inferior to the Game Gear and even to the Lynx. Granted, Sega shot themselves in the foot when they designed the Game Gear to suck so much battery power.

Personally I think the public does want something unique and orignal

And I hope you're right. With Sega out of the game, Nintendo is the only real contender for offering something innovative. They have a strong track record of improving on previous ideas, but their track record for innovation is lacking. Still, I wish them the best. I think the "Wii," with its strange controller, offers a host of new gameplay possibilities. I'm thinking online sword fights, personally.

consoles like the Nintendo DS would be destroyed by the more powerful and traditional PSP, which in fact the opposite is happening and the DS is winning in every market.

Which, I admit, is news to me. The initial lack of quality titles, the poor design (which almost guarantees glare on one of the two screens when played outside), and the initially limited nature of wi-fi capability led me to believe the handheld would tank. I thought the stylus and the dual screens were interesting and original ideas, but I thought they would backfire on Nintendo. It looks as though that's not the case.

As for the DS v. PSP numbers, are those the total sales so far? If so, what was the time gap between the launch of the DS and the launch of the PSP?

You bring up several excellent points, and I must concede that my sheer <3 for the Dreamcast and Genesis clouds my judgment. I own a Dreamcast and I love it. Of course, I also have a soft spot for bizarre Japanese games, puzzle games, and shoot-em-ups.

I also admit that Nintendo's practice of re-hashing the same characters they designed back in 1984-1986 over and over and over and over again, along with the nearly unethical business practice of re-releasing Nintendo games for the GBA at $20 gets me steamed. On the other hand, I'm having a hard time forgiving them for not releasing a GBA port of Chrono Trigger, for which I would gladly pay $20.

As strange as it sounds, I want Nintendo to succeed, if only to provide commercial motive for Microsoft and Playstation to re-think their development strategy and give gamers something new and fresh. You can only see so many Halo and Final Fantasy clones before it gets old.

 

[Exo-Slayer]

I was a little harsh on the Dreamcast (I know it has a special place in your heart). It did have a lot of interesting games (Shenume, Seaman, Soul Calibur, Skies of Arcadia which I own for the Gamecube) but unfourtunely most of them did not make it to the states.

As far as PSP vs DS In America it was about a six month gap between the two releases. DS on November 21, 2004, and the PSP on March 24, 2005 in America, but in Japan they were released within a week of eachother. According to these pages for the DS and PSP the DS has sold 15.64 million and PSP has Shipped 13.45 since Sony refuses to release any information on units sold (Kinda hinting at a lower number?) meaning since January the numbers I put before 450,000 PSP have been shipped, and more then a million DS have been sold.

As for specific numbers all I can find is for Japan numbers only form VE3d.

April 30, 2006 - The latest Media Create hardware sales figures straight from Japan (first figure indicates units sold this past week, second figure indicates units sold since beginning of 2006):

1. Nintendo DS Lite: 168,809 (996,546)
2. PlayStation Portable: 32,323 (641,722)
3. PlayStation 2: 25,763 (529,979)
4. Game Boy Micro: 18,390 (80,467)
5. Game Boy Advance SP: 11,044 (111,858)
6. Nintendo DS: 8,051 (775,824)
7. Xbox 360: 3,990 (41,279)
8. GameCube: 1,106 (44,754)
9. Game Boy Advance: 58 (2,452)
10. Xbox: 16 (1,343)

 

[MeridianFlight]

I'm going to show you some sympathy with regards to your delusional diatribe Tek. Undoubtedly, you've recently played Shadow the Hedgehog. Having to endure this type of "entertainment" could produce all sorts of raving lunacy.

While I'd agree that many of Nintendo's "innovations" are just the first successful implementations of previous ideas, which in itself is more than commendable, correct? (As an aside, there wasn't anything on the Dreamcast that hadn't already shown up on PC or even previous consoles.)

Think of it this way. Somebody designed the square for movement and Nintendo came along and turned it into the wheel.

The Revolution will change the way we play videogames, that much is clear. Like the Nintendo DS, when video game developers actually take time to explore the capabilities of the Revolution (specifically the controller), some truly innovative and fun gaming will emerge.

I do have a few questions though.

Does Sega ever rehash its popular franchise characters (err...character)? Has this character ever showed up in a quality title outside of the original 2D platform genre it originally appeared in? What was the last truly original and innovative title Sega was responsible for? Billy Hatcher and the Giant Egg?

 

[Tek7 (Legacy)]

I'm going to show you some sympathy with regards to your delusional diatribe Tek.

I'm going to assume you meant that in jest.

Undoubtedly, you've recently played Shadow the Hedgehog.

I haven't played Shadow, as I only own a Dreamcast and a Playstation 1.

(As an aside, there wasn't anything on the Dreamcast that hadn't already shown up on PC or even previous consoles.)

The Dreamcast had features seen previously only on PCs (i.e. online web browsing, multiplayer gaming), but the DC was the first to offer feasible online multiplayer and web browsing on a console.

The Revolution will change the way we play videogames, that much is clear.

Actually, it isn't clear. If the "Wii" tanks (and again, I hope it doesn't), console development teams will be less likely to take such bold chances next time around. Fresh gameplay ideas are excellent, but it's the almighty dollar that drives Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo alike.

Nintendo's success is not guaranteed simply because their idea is original. American commercial history is filled with innovative ideas that flopped for all sorts of reasons.

Does Sega ever rehash its popular franchise characters (err...character)? Has this character ever showed up in a quality title outside of the original 2D platform genre it originally appeared in?

Touche.

Aye, Nintendo's not the only company to re-hash characters and titles, their characters are just the oldest, so it seems more prominent. I understand the reasoning: use a character that's highly visible to attract previous players as well as a new audience.

Yes, Sega overdid it with Sonic. Yes, Nintendo overdid it with Mario. And while I respect Sega for at least trying to establish a new set of characters, last I checked, Billy Hatcher did not sell very many copies.

 

[kraniac]

Rez was one of the best games I ever played. But it was also for PS2.

 

[Tek7 (Legacy)]

Rez was one of the best games I ever played. But it was also for PS2.

Aye, several Dreamcast titles were ported to the PS2 after the DC tanked, but I would estimate that the games would not have been ported had the DC survived.

And yes, Rez rocks. Especially played wearing headphones in the dark.

 

[Killerah]

Rez is one of the coolest, and most original games ever! Whoever thought that game up is a genius! But yeah, I love my Dreamcast, it has some of the coolest games on it.

 

[MeridianFlight]

I think the "re-hash" effect is most promiment with Nintendo not because of age but because of quality. Think about it. If you look at Mario and Link (and to a lesser extent, Samus), they've appeared in several top flight titles. If you were to put a list together of the greatest video games of all time you could very well run into all three of those characters on that list, quite possibly more than once.

Yes, Nintendo has rehashed its characters into oblivion, and unfortunately like everything else Nintendo does, that has been replicated by the rest of the industry as well.

I think we can all admit though that if you're looking for innovation and originality with regards to story or character design that's not particularly something you'll find with Nintendo. If Nintendo can be faulted for anything with regards to their games, I believe that's it.

As to whether or not the Wii succeeds, I think it will. The gaming community seemed skeptical of the Nintendo DS when it arrived, and it looks as if the Wii (at least before the ridiculous name change) has much more support than its handheld brethren did before launching.

We'll know just how successful when Sony and Microsoft unveil their controllers for the Playstation 4 and Xbox Global Domination Device in a few years.

 

[Corpfox]

On-Topic: Wii is a bad name, however, since I may not be buying (exception with PS3, if its good) any new game consoles, then, I wouldn't care.

Off-Topic: I thought Panzer Dragoon, Shemue, Guardian Heroes and other Sega games were awesome, however, I played them mostly on the Saturn and Dreamcast, which I still own.

Though, I am curious to how long will everyone be playing the PS3/X-Box 360/Nintendo new console, when eventually, another console system will be better than the other.

No offense, to have someone that still plays old games, he/she/they truly rock.

 

[[toj.cc]phantom]

http://dontfearthewiiper.ytmnd.com/
http://wiiwiihaha.ytmnd.com/
http://pwii.ytmnd.com/
http://mariowiifirstlook.ytmnd.com/
http://knightsofwii.ytmnd.com/