I was wondering this myself - if nothing else, it would be good for the "look at the PS3 sales, bitches!" that Sony could unleash, and then "offer" other extras to the non-gaming Blue Ray folks (like movie trailer downloads and such)they wouldn't get from a "normal" Blue-Ray DVD player.
Hm - looks like my plans to sell a PS3 on eBay this Christmas are going to be very profitable indeed....
I put a protector on mine, since I have young children who tend to like to play with it. On the Lite, since that's "Daddy only", I think I should be all right.
I went to a local Wal-Mart, but the staff were too lazy and incompetent (example: typing in "DS Lite Sistem" into a computer screen doesn't help bring it up) to look. So I did the Sears pickup thing - 1'15" after walking into the Sears pick up department, I had my DS Lite.
It's a lovely thing - just showed some go workers "Big Brain Academy" - took half an hour before they could give it back;).
This helps
on
DDO Goes Solo
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I was talking to a friend the other day about how I don't play WoW because a) I just don't have the time, and b) the later missions pretty much require that I always have to have a group with me.
The problem with that is finding said group, organizing them, keeping them there long enough, before I decide I need to go to bed, blah, blah, blah.
But when I was playing Oblivion, I actually thought it would be nice to have other people around to chat with or trade things with (like "I'll restore charges on your weapon for some potions"), or just chat about things in game or otherwise. Some really good discussions I've had came around through old MUD gaming while talking to guild members about Friends or religion or politics.
What we decided is that the fun of MMRPG's isn't necessarily grouping together - it's just the shared experience. I'd be perfectly happy never having a group of people with me on a quest, but just being able to chat or trade with them as I chose.
So, I'd love to see a MMRPG with mostly solo quests that can ramp themselves up if you have a group to provide a challenge - but don't *make* me try and herd these cats you call other gamers if I don't want to.
I can understand his frustration - there have been games that I've never completed just because of the time and energy commitment to them.
On the other hand, no challenge is usually no fun (see the complaints about "Kingdom Hearts 2" being too easy).
So it's the balance that's the issue. Probably the best game that gets that "right" was "Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time". Challenging, but never felt impossible, plenty of side quests (mask trading, finding all of the golden spider-things, racing, etc) - but I never felt like I *had* to do the side quests to win - they were a truly added bonus.
Too often, though, these "side quests" becomes necessary to beat the game it seems. I don't want to spend hours level grinding - I want to *play*, so if you have "extras" that I can work for - fine. Just don't *make* me do them if I don't want to.
Kind of like watching "The Matrix". If I do my homework about mythology and the Bible, I'll get more out of it - but I shouldn't need a seminary degree just to enjoy the movie.
When the Gamecube first came out, I was actually pretty pleased with the graphics - Monkey Ball, for example, was smooth and just a pretty game (as well as being a blast to play - playing "Monkey Punch" is one of those cracktastic party games).
The current Wii games that have just been shown look to be as good as "current" Gamecube games, which doesn't surprise me. Most of the dev kits the developers have were modified Gamecube kits with the controller, so odds are, that's the level of tech they focused on. So E3 shown games looked just like Gamecube games.
Since we can bet that the graphics chip has gone under a 2.5 - 3 x increase since the Gamecube, that should mean that within a year or so (as devs get used to the actual Wii developers kits and their power level), games should look better graphically.
Then again, with the Wii, most of us will shrug and go "Whatever". I've been playing "Digital Devil Saga: Avatar Tuner 2" today, and only just noticed that there were reflections on the floor. Then I tuned it out while I played. With the Wii's controller, odds are they won't have to compete on the graphics, letting Sony and MS developers spending the extra money on artwork that could have gone to game play.
The question isn't "Can it run my games", but "Is there a value to installing Vista that will make my games run better"?
The only reason why I have a WIndows box is for the games (and if they ever get the virtualization stuff fast enough in OS X, then that goes too). It runs XP, and seems to work OK (except that Oblivion keeps shutting down. Shrug.)
With Vista, the two extra goodies are:
ESRB rating lockdown - as a Dad of three, that's all right. Personally, I find it easier not to buy my children games I don't feel they should be playing, or let them play it - but OK, it's a nice feature.
DirectX 10, which evidently will *only* be Vista (though I've yet to see a technological reason why it can't go into XP other than "We need a reason for you to upgrade to Vista).
DirectX 10 won't really be interesting to me until I upgrade the video card, and in a year with the Wii, and maybe a reduced-price PS3 purchase next year, I don't see myself upgrading to Vista then for DX10 until at least 2008 - which would be in time for the first service pack to come out to fix the things they missed in Vista.
So, for these two things, I'm not ready to shell out the $130 or whatever it will cost - but I guess it's good to know that the games that run under the gaming OS I use now will continue to run.
I think you're being a little too sensitive about this.
Take a breath. There we go. Calm? OK. Good.
1. I am calling Microsoft's console launch bad. Now, I'm not saying that you need a hard number to justify sales - but let's face it: Microsoft simply did not have enough units to meet the semblance of demand. In their case, a 6 month wait would have:
a) Made sure that they had plenty of units for the US launch for the initial purchase period b) For the Japan launch, given more time for more Japanese-centric games (RPGs, rhythm, etc) to come into play. (The fact that we're almost at 1 year now, and the only RPG for the 360 worth people's time is Oblivion, tells us they haven't done their research in Japan *still*. Next year may be different, but by then people will be looking at their shiny new PS3's with "Final Fantasy XIII and Wii's with their "Super Smash Brothers".)
2. If Nintendo is able to look at the data trends, naturally they don't have access to "pre-order numbers" the day they occur. But if they have 1 million units right this second, and they plan a worldwide launch, I think we can both agree that is not nearly enough. The goal isn't just to "be the first to market", but "to so overwhelmingly penetrate the market as to give no mistake to gamers and developers where they should be looking".
I'm willing to bet that Nintendo could launch the Wii right this second, if they so wanted to, but they would find themselves in position unable to provide enough units for demand. The problem with that? If a person who wants a Wii can't get one, they will start looking at the other consoles and wonder if they are worth the money instead. So instead, they wait a few more months until their supply is sufficient to meet demand. If they are wrong - so be it, but at least it won't be wrong because they rushed into it.
Therefore, it is in Nintendo's best interest - especially if they launch before the PS3 - to make sure that there is no way possible for anyone who wants a Wii not to get one. If there's a spare $300 (after cost of Wii + games) out there not being spent, that's another Wii sale that might not happen when the PS3 comes out. So rather than launch now, they wait a little bit longer. Not forever, as you seem to think I am suggesting: just long enough, which they appear to have already planned for.
So, I'm willing to bet that Nintendo will "overproduce". They have a number in mind, and it's probably a far greater number that just what they think will meet the initial market rush. They looked ahead and said "OK, Microsoft moved X number of 360s in X months. Let's assume we'll sell that many that week. We probably won't come close to that number, but let's make far more than we think we will actually sell at first blush - just in case. We'll take a short term loss off of this, but if the risk pays off, we'll be doing great. And if we made too many, we can always have the factories slow down for a bit while we reduce inventory."
The reason why they they should make so many? Flood the market with Wii's. Make it so if somebody sells it on eBay, they aren't going to get anything more than the market price, not some overhyped "You won't get one for 6 months if you don't buy it here" sale. Let everybody who wants to play it play it. Have a huge release-date launch of games that include your heaviest hitters so that if someone can only buy 1 game at Wii launch, they will come back in 2 weeks and spend their money on another Wii game.
I am sorry if I was not clear on this. I'm also sorry that you feel the need to get offended over something that really doesn't matter. So, let's all calm down, say "You know, we won't know for another six months anyway", and call it done.
Overproduce: produce more then they believe there is a market for. If they look at the pre-orders and have enough to meet those, then they should "overproduce" and ensure there's enough for that and more.
I think you're doing a little bit of hair splitting here - I'm recommending that Nintendo make far more consoles than they think they may have to meet initial demand (aka - overproduce). You seem to think that I'm inferring that they just stop making consoles at a certain point, which I am not. I don't see why you are confused about this issue.
I don't think that was what I was intimating - my criticism is that if MS did not have enough console sales for initial launch, perhaps they should have waited another 5-6 months (and, seeing the Japanese sales, perhaps those were consoles better held in reserve for the US market). I don't think MS stopped making 360's - they were too impatient to wait until they had "enough" to at least meet the preorders!
My bet is the Nintendo has not given a specific date as of yet in the hopes of building up enough stock, because, to turn a Miyamoto phrase, "A delayed launch may yet be good. A bad launch is bad forever."
As of yet, the 360 isn't selling that well in Japan, and there's little in the future that indicates that will change (regardless of "Dead or Alive Extra Booby Breast Physics), though it probably won't be a total wash as the Xbox was in Japan.
However, the 360 continues to do well in United States, though my friends in Europe seem to think that it's doing "OK, but not great" out there.
So I wonder if world wide domination will go to the Wii by default. Take the recent "The Wii is a great secondary system" by both Sony and Microsoft execs, and the recent polls that show that most console gamers are planning on buying the Wii.
Now, look at how Japan versus US versus Europe may go. I imagine the PS3 will still do well in Japan (though not as stellar as the PS2) because of the "big names" like "Final Fantasy" and "Dragon Quest". But if the DS versus PSP is any indication with recent polls, Japanese consumers are more willing to give Nintendo another shot at life. So final console sales in Japan (barring handhelds) may be for "first console sales" (aka - the first "next gen" console people buy):
PS3: 50% Wii: 40% 360: 10%
Granted - the 360 sales maybe be high. Not trying to be mean here - just going by history.
Then the US and Europe may split into this for initial console sales:
360: 40% PS3: 30% Wii: 30%
So just off of initial console sales alone, the Wii could win. The situation drastically changes when you consider Wii sales as a secondary console - ie: if a majority of homes with a PS3 buy a second console, it may be a Wii, and the same with the 360.
There are several things that may throw this off, of course - perhaps the majority of 360 owners don't want to buy a Wii because "I'm a 1337 gamer no doesn't like kids games n00b!" or something, but so far, Nintendo has to feel pretty good. As long as they don't screw it up in the next six months, and as long as (unlike Microsoft's launch) they have plenty of units at launch (if anything, they should *overproduce* as much as they can to make sure that everybody who wants a Wii can get one). If the number pan out, then developers might find themselves looking at the Wii for sheer number of sales alone, let alone the unique controller.
Then again, these numbers are all pulled out of my ass anyway, so who knows? The next year should be rather interesting for gamers.
Does this case work then to help establish that bloggers can be considered "press" - and just because a person doesn't work at a corporate or even print newspaper, they are still protected under typical laws and rules the protect journalists? (For whatever that means.)
How many of these titles were actually playable? It just always bothers me to see games win accolades at E3 (or any other event) using nothing but a movie trailer. (Remember how cool "Daikatana" look at first?)
That's probably the only rule change I'd want enforced: game must be played by the critics doing the voting, not just seen.
Built-in audio and wireless didn't work on his Levono laptop. It took four days to get the first installation.
So it's like installing Linux? (Rimshot!)[/sarcasm]
OK, in all seriousness, I haven't had driver problems with Linux in some time (slapped a Suse 10 installation on a line of laptops and desktops, and didn't have to go looking for RPMs or figgling with drivers once), and this is a Beta, and "out of the shop" installations from OEM vendors will have everything in it.
It just makes you go "hm". Personally, I'm still in the "I'll wait 2 years before I upgrade the gaming machine to Vista" anyway (and that's if I don't get my PowerMac Intel first so I can dual boot should virtualization not be fast enough to play some games).
I'm so happy to know that the product the NSA - with the help of AT&T - used to analyze phone number patterns and the like can be purchased by any citizen.
But - that's not the problem as I see it. The problem, to borrow and massacre a line from "Jurrasic Park", is that they were so eager to see if they could they didn't consider if they should.
Take the domestic to international wiretap thing. Under US law, listening in on foreign conversations is A-OK (whether that's legal in other countries I'm not even going to worry about). But the law is clear: the second there's a domestic person on that call, the NSA has to get permission from the courts. And not only that, it can be a secret court. And not only a secret court, but they can do it up to 3 days after they start - so there's no issue of "Dang, we'd listen to this call from an Al Queda agent, but we can't because Michael Moore's on the phone, and the warrant will take too long!" No - they can start now, get the warrant later.
Then there's the domestic phone call tracking. Even if this is not strictly illegal, it still smacks of wrong. (Yes, I think there are things not illegal that are still wrong. Like Mint Oreos. Very wrong, just not illegal.) Why? Because there's no independant, "checks and balances" oversight. And yes, I have things to hide, before you ask, so I don't want the government picking that out. Like people in politics I call because I disagree with their politicies, or calls to an abortion clinic for a friend of mine who's husband is abusive and says he'll kill her if she calls the clinic, or to a reporter because my place of work is doing illegal things (note for the clueless: the former might or might not be true, but they are examples of why people might not want the government tracking calls) - the list goes on. So I don't want the government snooping in on, especially when there's no guaruntee that Joe Politician can't look in and try and use that data against me or my family or the very government system itself.
So, great to know that there are over the shelf components to track log files. I'm more interested in making sure that another branch of the government is at least watching out to make sure that this data is not being abused. No, I don't need all of the details - that's why we have elected leaders whom I (hopefully) trust enough to look out for my interests - I just want to make sure those interests are protected by the process.
Which said process, so far, seems to be either willingly ignored, or outright violated.
Of course, this is all just my opinion, and I could be wrong. And to the NSA folks tracking this post - Hi!
If we're talking about work and email and such - sure, the PC isn't going anywhere.
But I was asking My Lovely Wife (MLW) if she wanted me to buy her a copy of Sodoku for her iBook, since she's always using my DS to play "Brain Age" for the training and Sodoku. (Which leaves me unable to play my new "Super Mario Brothers" right now.)
She shook her head. "No, because on this, I can write down the answers, while with my laptop I'd have to enter it in, and it would get annoying."
I think there's something here. Look at console game sales opposed to PC game sales - sure, PC game sales aren't going away, but consoles are clearly dominating. Plug in to TV, and done. Look at the Wii - in a lot of ways, it's really emulating the gaming of the PC only in a true console mode (point and aim, swing and hit the ball - simple as can be).
The PC isn't going away - but I don't think it's the big deal it once was for all things computer. It's still important, but not for "all things".
Of course, that's just my opinion - it could be wrong. Now, if I can just get that DS away from her....
This would be the perfect game in the Kyle Katarn story line. Work it as a first person shooter so you can face stormtroopers and block the shots, face off against Jedi with force powers (and use the crosshair to select your own, A to execute).
Man - I loved Jedi Knight II. I'd go through levels, pull every weapon away from my enemies, and then leave them screaming "Don't kill me" while I took out the turrents. I think I was able to play all of the later levels without killing anyone but the Dark Jedi.
That game seems to resemble "Trace Memory" as well, only in a more "book like" format (you're suppose to hold the DS on its side). "Trace Memory" was an interesting idea with some blah to it - it will be interesting to see if Nintendo can do one better.
Of course this is good for Microsoft - they can sell even more Xbox 360's and lose money faster! I think they're going for some kind of record, or looking for a really good tax write off strategy.
My understanding is the Gyukatan Saiban 2 is really the story of Edgeworth, so maybe they'll start with Ace, then shift over, but kept the name for brand recognition.
Or - who knows. Guess we'll find out. I'm tring my own contacts to see what's up.
No kidding - the DS upcoming list is almost as evil. Between "Phoenix Wright 2" and "Elite Beat Force", those two alone gave me a joygasm. Throw in "Magical Vacation", the really good looking "Final Fantasy III" remake, and Castlevania with a girl who fights with a big book -
(sigh) I keep telling my wife I need to just get rich so I have more time for game play.
I was looking over the list last night of the upcoming Wii games - "Trauma Center" should be interesting on the Wii (the DS version was pretty good, even if it had some annoyances).
Either way, it would appear that Nintendo has a lot of 3rd party support time time around, which made me think of why, and then something that Ubisoft president commented on made me figure it out.
Long story short, he made some less then flattering remarks about the PS3 - how it just ups the power. The same could be said for the 360. But that's no the issue for a publisher; for a publisher, all of that extra power and HD requirements goes into cost. Now, a development team needs even bigger hardware, a bigger graphics and sound team to get the same game out, which now increases the cost of the game by a large margin - say from $1 million to $7-$10 million. For a publisher, that means increased risk, reduced margins, and relying ever more on "certain" hits (which can vanish if something goes wrong - look at the Tomb Raider franches, and what they've had to do to get it back).
Nintendo is offering publishers something more than just a gimmick: they're offering them reduced price. Look at "Brain Age" - developed, tested, and ready for market in 90 days, and it hardly needed a graphics team. Since the Wii uses really Gamecube development systems with more power, that's an easy transfer of knowledge, which is why I predict that for the first year, Wii games will look pretty much like Gamecube games, maybe a little smoother.
But for the publisher, once you get past the controller issue, it's reduced cost, reduced time, reduced risk over time. If the Wii takes off at all, it may be that publishers wind up favoring it if for no other reason than it makes them more money over time.
Of course, this is all just my opinion, and I could be wrong. But my family is pretty much committed to the Wii - the only thing I need to know is how to get DVD functionality out of it and it'll be the only console in the play room for family computer gaming for quite some time.
Slashdot Mirror
I mean, the most important game on the list has backwards compatibility already.
I was wondering this myself - if nothing else, it would be good for the "look at the PS3 sales, bitches!" that Sony could unleash, and then "offer" other extras to the non-gaming Blue Ray folks (like movie trailer downloads and such)they wouldn't get from a "normal" Blue-Ray DVD player.
Hm - looks like my plans to sell a PS3 on eBay this Christmas are going to be very profitable indeed....
I put a protector on mine, since I have young children who tend to like to play with it. On the Lite, since that's "Daddy only", I think I should be all right.
I went to a local Wal-Mart, but the staff were too lazy and incompetent (example: typing in "DS Lite Sistem" into a computer screen doesn't help bring it up) to look. So I did the Sears pickup thing - 1'15" after walking into the Sears pick up department, I had my DS Lite.
;).
It's a lovely thing - just showed some go workers "Big Brain Academy" - took half an hour before they could give it back
I was talking to a friend the other day about how I don't play WoW because a) I just don't have the time, and b) the later missions pretty much require that I always have to have a group with me.
The problem with that is finding said group, organizing them, keeping them there long enough, before I decide I need to go to bed, blah, blah, blah.
But when I was playing Oblivion, I actually thought it would be nice to have other people around to chat with or trade things with (like "I'll restore charges on your weapon for some potions"), or just chat about things in game or otherwise. Some really good discussions I've had came around through old MUD gaming while talking to guild members about Friends or religion or politics.
What we decided is that the fun of MMRPG's isn't necessarily grouping together - it's just the shared experience. I'd be perfectly happy never having a group of people with me on a quest, but just being able to chat or trade with them as I chose.
So, I'd love to see a MMRPG with mostly solo quests that can ramp themselves up if you have a group to provide a challenge - but don't *make* me try and herd these cats you call other gamers if I don't want to.
I can understand his frustration - there have been games that I've never completed just because of the time and energy commitment to them.
On the other hand, no challenge is usually no fun (see the complaints about "Kingdom Hearts 2" being too easy).
So it's the balance that's the issue. Probably the best game that gets that "right" was "Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time". Challenging, but never felt impossible, plenty of side quests (mask trading, finding all of the golden spider-things, racing, etc) - but I never felt like I *had* to do the side quests to win - they were a truly added bonus.
Too often, though, these "side quests" becomes necessary to beat the game it seems. I don't want to spend hours level grinding - I want to *play*, so if you have "extras" that I can work for - fine. Just don't *make* me do them if I don't want to.
Kind of like watching "The Matrix". If I do my homework about mythology and the Bible, I'll get more out of it - but I shouldn't need a seminary degree just to enjoy the movie.
When the Gamecube first came out, I was actually pretty pleased with the graphics - Monkey Ball, for example, was smooth and just a pretty game (as well as being a blast to play - playing "Monkey Punch" is one of those cracktastic party games).
The current Wii games that have just been shown look to be as good as "current" Gamecube games, which doesn't surprise me. Most of the dev kits the developers have were modified Gamecube kits with the controller, so odds are, that's the level of tech they focused on. So E3 shown games looked just like Gamecube games.
Since we can bet that the graphics chip has gone under a 2.5 - 3 x increase since the Gamecube, that should mean that within a year or so (as devs get used to the actual Wii developers kits and their power level), games should look better graphically.
Then again, with the Wii, most of us will shrug and go "Whatever". I've been playing "Digital Devil Saga: Avatar Tuner 2" today, and only just noticed that there were reflections on the floor. Then I tuned it out while I played. With the Wii's controller, odds are they won't have to compete on the graphics, letting Sony and MS developers spending the extra money on artwork that could have gone to game play.
Good point - especially as the article mentioned that unless you massage some Admin rights, the Starforce protected games wouldn't run.
The question isn't "Can it run my games", but "Is there a value to installing Vista that will make my games run better"?
The only reason why I have a WIndows box is for the games (and if they ever get the virtualization stuff fast enough in OS X, then that goes too). It runs XP, and seems to work OK (except that Oblivion keeps shutting down. Shrug.)
With Vista, the two extra goodies are:
ESRB rating lockdown - as a Dad of three, that's all right. Personally, I find it easier not to buy my children games I don't feel they should be playing, or let them play it - but OK, it's a nice feature.
DirectX 10, which evidently will *only* be Vista (though I've yet to see a technological reason why it can't go into XP other than "We need a reason for you to upgrade to Vista).
DirectX 10 won't really be interesting to me until I upgrade the video card, and in a year with the Wii, and maybe a reduced-price PS3 purchase next year, I don't see myself upgrading to Vista then for DX10 until at least 2008 - which would be in time for the first service pack to come out to fix the things they missed in Vista.
So, for these two things, I'm not ready to shell out the $130 or whatever it will cost - but I guess it's good to know that the games that run under the gaming OS I use now will continue to run.
I think you're being a little too sensitive about this.
Take a breath. There we go. Calm? OK. Good.
1. I am calling Microsoft's console launch bad. Now, I'm not saying that you need a hard number to justify sales - but let's face it: Microsoft simply did not have enough units to meet the semblance of demand. In their case, a 6 month wait would have:
a) Made sure that they had plenty of units for the US launch for the initial purchase period
b) For the Japan launch, given more time for more Japanese-centric games (RPGs, rhythm, etc) to come into play. (The fact that we're almost at 1 year now, and the only RPG for the 360 worth people's time is Oblivion, tells us they haven't done their research in Japan *still*. Next year may be different, but by then people will be looking at their shiny new PS3's with "Final Fantasy XIII and Wii's with their "Super Smash Brothers".)
2. If Nintendo is able to look at the data trends, naturally they don't have access to "pre-order numbers" the day they occur. But if they have 1 million units right this second, and they plan a worldwide launch, I think we can both agree that is not nearly enough. The goal isn't just to "be the first to market", but "to so overwhelmingly penetrate the market as to give no mistake to gamers and developers where they should be looking".
I'm willing to bet that Nintendo could launch the Wii right this second, if they so wanted to, but they would find themselves in position unable to provide enough units for demand. The problem with that? If a person who wants a Wii can't get one, they will start looking at the other consoles and wonder if they are worth the money instead. So instead, they wait a few more months until their supply is sufficient to meet demand. If they are wrong - so be it, but at least it won't be wrong because they rushed into it.
Therefore, it is in Nintendo's best interest - especially if they launch before the PS3 - to make sure that there is no way possible for anyone who wants a Wii not to get one. If there's a spare $300 (after cost of Wii + games) out there not being spent, that's another Wii sale that might not happen when the PS3 comes out. So rather than launch now, they wait a little bit longer. Not forever, as you seem to think I am suggesting: just long enough, which they appear to have already planned for.
So, I'm willing to bet that Nintendo will "overproduce". They have a number in mind, and it's probably a far greater number that just what they think will meet the initial market rush. They looked ahead and said "OK, Microsoft moved X number of 360s in X months. Let's assume we'll sell that many that week. We probably won't come close to that number, but let's make far more than we think we will actually sell at first blush - just in case. We'll take a short term loss off of this, but if the risk pays off, we'll be doing great. And if we made too many, we can always have the factories slow down for a bit while we reduce inventory."
The reason why they they should make so many? Flood the market with Wii's. Make it so if somebody sells it on eBay, they aren't going to get anything more than the market price, not some overhyped "You won't get one for 6 months if you don't buy it here" sale. Let everybody who wants to play it play it. Have a huge release-date launch of games that include your heaviest hitters so that if someone can only buy 1 game at Wii launch, they will come back in 2 weeks and spend their money on another Wii game.
I am sorry if I was not clear on this. I'm also sorry that you feel the need to get offended over something that really doesn't matter. So, let's all calm down, say "You know, we won't know for another six months anyway", and call it done.
Overproduce: produce more then they believe there is a market for. If they look at the pre-orders and have enough to meet those, then they should "overproduce" and ensure there's enough for that and more.
I think you're doing a little bit of hair splitting here - I'm recommending that Nintendo make far more consoles than they think they may have to meet initial demand (aka - overproduce). You seem to think that I'm inferring that they just stop making consoles at a certain point, which I am not. I don't see why you are confused about this issue.
I don't think that was what I was intimating - my criticism is that if MS did not have enough console sales for initial launch, perhaps they should have waited another 5-6 months (and, seeing the Japanese sales, perhaps those were consoles better held in reserve for the US market). I don't think MS stopped making 360's - they were too impatient to wait until they had "enough" to at least meet the preorders!
My bet is the Nintendo has not given a specific date as of yet in the hopes of building up enough stock, because, to turn a Miyamoto phrase, "A delayed launch may yet be good. A bad launch is bad forever."
As of yet, the 360 isn't selling that well in Japan, and there's little in the future that indicates that will change (regardless of "Dead or Alive Extra Booby Breast Physics), though it probably won't be a total wash as the Xbox was in Japan.
However, the 360 continues to do well in United States, though my friends in Europe seem to think that it's doing "OK, but not great" out there.
So I wonder if world wide domination will go to the Wii by default. Take the recent "The Wii is a great secondary system" by both Sony and Microsoft execs, and the recent polls that show that most console gamers are planning on buying the Wii.
Now, look at how Japan versus US versus Europe may go. I imagine the PS3 will still do well in Japan (though not as stellar as the PS2) because of the "big names" like "Final Fantasy" and "Dragon Quest". But if the DS versus PSP is any indication with recent polls, Japanese consumers are more willing to give Nintendo another shot at life. So final console sales in Japan (barring handhelds) may be for "first console sales" (aka - the first "next gen" console people buy):
PS3: 50%
Wii: 40%
360: 10%
Granted - the 360 sales maybe be high. Not trying to be mean here - just going by history.
Then the US and Europe may split into this for initial console sales:
360: 40%
PS3: 30%
Wii: 30%
So just off of initial console sales alone, the Wii could win. The situation drastically changes when you consider Wii sales as a secondary console - ie: if a majority of homes with a PS3 buy a second console, it may be a Wii, and the same with the 360.
There are several things that may throw this off, of course - perhaps the majority of 360 owners don't want to buy a Wii because "I'm a 1337 gamer no doesn't like kids games n00b!" or something, but so far, Nintendo has to feel pretty good. As long as they don't screw it up in the next six months, and as long as (unlike Microsoft's launch) they have plenty of units at launch (if anything, they should *overproduce* as much as they can to make sure that everybody who wants a Wii can get one). If the number pan out, then developers might find themselves looking at the Wii for sheer number of sales alone, let alone the unique controller.
Then again, these numbers are all pulled out of my ass anyway, so who knows? The next year should be rather interesting for gamers.
Does this case work then to help establish that bloggers can be considered "press" - and just because a person doesn't work at a corporate or even print newspaper, they are still protected under typical laws and rules the protect journalists? (For whatever that means.)
How many of these titles were actually playable? It just always bothers me to see games win accolades at E3 (or any other event) using nothing but a movie trailer. (Remember how cool "Daikatana" look at first?)
That's probably the only rule change I'd want enforced: game must be played by the critics doing the voting, not just seen.
So it's like installing Linux? (Rimshot!)[/sarcasm]
OK, in all seriousness, I haven't had driver problems with Linux in some time (slapped a Suse 10 installation on a line of laptops and desktops, and didn't have to go looking for RPMs or figgling with drivers once), and this is a Beta, and "out of the shop" installations from OEM vendors will have everything in it.
It just makes you go "hm". Personally, I'm still in the "I'll wait 2 years before I upgrade the gaming machine to Vista" anyway (and that's if I don't get my PowerMac Intel first so I can dual boot should virtualization not be fast enough to play some games).
I'm so happy to know that the product the NSA - with the help of AT&T - used to analyze phone number patterns and the like can be purchased by any citizen.
But - that's not the problem as I see it. The problem, to borrow and massacre a line from "Jurrasic Park", is that they were so eager to see if they could they didn't consider if they should.
Take the domestic to international wiretap thing. Under US law, listening in on foreign conversations is A-OK (whether that's legal in other countries I'm not even going to worry about). But the law is clear: the second there's a domestic person on that call, the NSA has to get permission from the courts. And not only that, it can be a secret court. And not only a secret court, but they can do it up to 3 days after they start - so there's no issue of "Dang, we'd listen to this call from an Al Queda agent, but we can't because Michael Moore's on the phone, and the warrant will take too long!" No - they can start now, get the warrant later.
Then there's the domestic phone call tracking. Even if this is not strictly illegal, it still smacks of wrong. (Yes, I think there are things not illegal that are still wrong. Like Mint Oreos. Very wrong, just not illegal.) Why? Because there's no independant, "checks and balances" oversight. And yes, I have things to hide, before you ask, so I don't want the government picking that out. Like people in politics I call because I disagree with their politicies, or calls to an abortion clinic for a friend of mine who's husband is abusive and says he'll kill her if she calls the clinic, or to a reporter because my place of work is doing illegal things (note for the clueless: the former might or might not be true, but they are examples of why people might not want the government tracking calls) - the list goes on. So I don't want the government snooping in on, especially when there's no guaruntee that Joe Politician can't look in and try and use that data against me or my family or the very government system itself.
So, great to know that there are over the shelf components to track log files. I'm more interested in making sure that another branch of the government is at least watching out to make sure that this data is not being abused. No, I don't need all of the details - that's why we have elected leaders whom I (hopefully) trust enough to look out for my interests - I just want to make sure those interests are protected by the process.
Which said process, so far, seems to be either willingly ignored, or outright violated.
Of course, this is all just my opinion, and I could be wrong. And to the NSA folks tracking this post - Hi!
If we're talking about work and email and such - sure, the PC isn't going anywhere.
But I was asking My Lovely Wife (MLW) if she wanted me to buy her a copy of Sodoku for her iBook, since she's always using my DS to play "Brain Age" for the training and Sodoku. (Which leaves me unable to play my new "Super Mario Brothers" right now.)
She shook her head. "No, because on this, I can write down the answers, while with my laptop I'd have to enter it in, and it would get annoying."
I think there's something here. Look at console game sales opposed to PC game sales - sure, PC game sales aren't going away, but consoles are clearly dominating. Plug in to TV, and done. Look at the Wii - in a lot of ways, it's really emulating the gaming of the PC only in a true console mode (point and aim, swing and hit the ball - simple as can be).
The PC isn't going away - but I don't think it's the big deal it once was for all things computer. It's still important, but not for "all things".
Of course, that's just my opinion - it could be wrong. Now, if I can just get that DS away from her....
This would be the perfect game in the Kyle Katarn story line. Work it as a first person shooter so you can face stormtroopers and block the shots, face off against Jedi with force powers (and use the crosshair to select your own, A to execute).
Man - I loved Jedi Knight II. I'd go through levels, pull every weapon away from my enemies, and then leave them screaming "Don't kill me" while I took out the turrents. I think I was able to play all of the later levels without killing anyone but the Dark Jedi.
That game seems to resemble "Trace Memory" as well, only in a more "book like" format (you're suppose to hold the DS on its side). "Trace Memory" was an interesting idea with some blah to it - it will be interesting to see if Nintendo can do one better.
Of course this is good for Microsoft - they can sell even more Xbox 360's and lose money faster! I think they're going for some kind of record, or looking for a really good tax write off strategy.
My understanding is the Gyukatan Saiban 2 is really the story of Edgeworth, so maybe they'll start with Ace, then shift over, but kept the name for brand recognition.
Or - who knows. Guess we'll find out. I'm tring my own contacts to see what's up.
Though you could argue that the 360 and the PS3 could have this ability as well, so it's not a Wii exclusive thing.
No kidding - the DS upcoming list is almost as evil. Between "Phoenix Wright 2" and "Elite Beat Force", those two alone gave me a joygasm. Throw in "Magical Vacation", the really good looking "Final Fantasy III" remake, and Castlevania with a girl who fights with a big book -
(sigh) I keep telling my wife I need to just get rich so I have more time for game play.
I was looking over the list last night of the upcoming Wii games - "Trauma Center" should be interesting on the Wii (the DS version was pretty good, even if it had some annoyances).
Either way, it would appear that Nintendo has a lot of 3rd party support time time around, which made me think of why, and then something that Ubisoft president commented on made me figure it out.
Long story short, he made some less then flattering remarks about the PS3 - how it just ups the power. The same could be said for the 360. But that's no the issue for a publisher; for a publisher, all of that extra power and HD requirements goes into cost. Now, a development team needs even bigger hardware, a bigger graphics and sound team to get the same game out, which now increases the cost of the game by a large margin - say from $1 million to $7-$10 million. For a publisher, that means increased risk, reduced margins, and relying ever more on "certain" hits (which can vanish if something goes wrong - look at the Tomb Raider franches, and what they've had to do to get it back).
Nintendo is offering publishers something more than just a gimmick: they're offering them reduced price. Look at "Brain Age" - developed, tested, and ready for market in 90 days, and it hardly needed a graphics team. Since the Wii uses really Gamecube development systems with more power, that's an easy transfer of knowledge, which is why I predict that for the first year, Wii games will look pretty much like Gamecube games, maybe a little smoother.
But for the publisher, once you get past the controller issue, it's reduced cost, reduced time, reduced risk over time. If the Wii takes off at all, it may be that publishers wind up favoring it if for no other reason than it makes them more money over time.
Of course, this is all just my opinion, and I could be wrong. But my family is pretty much committed to the Wii - the only thing I need to know is how to get DVD functionality out of it and it'll be the only console in the play room for family computer gaming for quite some time.