Which ones only charge you the price of the game and nothing to play? Or only charge you to play (minus those micropayment ones--which I don't think I'll ever get into). I only want to pay for one thing, not both. Or if they do charge for both, they better not charge more than $60/year (as I am willing to do that--as it's only about the cost of a new game--as opposed to three new games...) I don't have time to play games heavily, so I don't want to sink $200 to play one game for 1 year... This whole double payment system is what's made me avoid MMORPGs. I bought Guild Wars (the collector's edition even) mostly to support the idea of only charging for one thing and not both... although it was a pretty fun game (for a few months any way).
I, personally, think a menu based battle system makes it boring, not an RPG. Why would a menu based battle system be required for a role playing game? Doesn't that distract from the role you are supposed to be playing? Doesn't that take away from the game element as well? I consider RPGs to be quest driven stories where you take on the role of a character and lead a party. Often times with leveling, but always with collecting items of some type.
The Prius with similar safety features to the hybrid Honda Civic I bought was $3,000-4,000 more in the Chicago area because they chose not to sell package 4 in this area--and anything less than that and I wasn't getting the safety features I wanted/needed. Estimated EPA of the Prius is higher, but not by that much more, and I'm getting higher than the EPA of the Civic hybrid. I actually thought the Civic was more comfortable to drive as it allows greater adjustment of the seat and steering wheel. The main things the Prius had over the Civic (besides slightly higher EPA rating) were storage space and cool tech items (that I didn't need, and some I didn't even want). The keyless entry was a feature I DID want and might've been enough to tip me over toward the Prius had it not been for the security issue.
But if you want side air bags and all those other nice safety features, you have to get the smart key. You also have to get the Bluetooth calling thing and the upgraded stereo system in the Chicago area (they don't have package 4, and below package 4 you don't get all the safety features...)
The keyless feature of the Prius was one of the main reasons I was considering it over the hybrid Honda models, but after considering the higher price of the Prius and reading about the insecurity of RFID I decided against it. Now I'm even more sure I made the right decision.
The Vista "Ultimate Edition" is focused on gamers as it features "game optimization" tools or some such nonesense. It's also supposed to be the version with the most digital rights management/"hardest" to pirate.
'men and women whose power, talent or moral example is transforming our world.'
Yes, but is it for the better? Changing the world is great and all, but if people (and I realize it's their own fault, not the game creators) become so obsessed with these games that they stop going to work and such then is this really something we want in the world? I think.Hack makes some very good points about the dangers of online gaming/gaming in general. That said, it's always nice to have another reality to go to once in awhile to escape the real world--just as you remember to keep the two properly seperated and focus more on the real world than the virtual one.
Considering they also hired Peter Moore to do the marketing for the XBox 360 (who also handled the failed marketing for the failed Dreamcast--although I, personally LOVED the Dreamcast and was sad when it died...) I would say he's probably batting 1,000. You don't take a team of failures and expect them to succeed.
But yes, I agree it is too early to make a call either way on this. Although if they don't get a killer app on the system before the PS3 & Wii launch (or on the launch dates of the PS3 & Wii) then I think their SOL and will be dead in the water. By that time the 360 will have been out for a year, and if they don't have a killer app after a year then that's definitely not a good sign...
Very true, but the PS2 was launched (at least in Japan) with crappy games but it broke sales records because it was, at the time, the least expensive DVD player available (in Japan at least). After 3-6 months the aliasing issues with games were fixed and some 3rd parties began to roll out some better games, but still the launch sucked. I'm not a Sony fan (I sold my PS2 because I hadn't bought a game for it in over a year as my money was going toward XBox and GameCube games); however, their power to be able to sell millions of pieces of crap should not be underestimated. If they manage to retain their control of the third parties the games will come, then they will win. But if Nintendo manages to win over the hearts and minds of developers by offering them a new playground and Sony has supply problems or launches the PS3 at too high of a price (just to try to get the Blu-Ray system out there), then the PS3 will fail as a game system (although it may still get enough Blu-Ray players out there to win the format war...) Microsoft won't win because they have failed to win over the Japanese developers (or gamers for that matter...)--they may not fail, but they won't number one either...
This console war is shaping up to be played by different rules than normal. Sony is focusing on the format war with their console and just throwing in everything it can to make it a "high-tech" to appeal to those early adopters that wet their pants over such things and who will be the ones deciding the format wars. Microsoft is trying/has been trying to make a one stop media box/download service/Vista add-on/HD-DVD promotion. Nintendo is trying to turn the industry on its head (again) and release a system that isn't designed for traditional gamers (although traditional gamers will still have the classics and a plethora of new and unique gaming experiences) and they're also trying to embrace third party developers for a change. This will be an interesting console war, but I really don't think we can apply the results from previous console wars to it as the landscape of gaming is once again changing--Sony and Microsoft see consoles as a way to promote other products, while Nintendo sees the current market as becoming stale/drying up and they're trying to reinvent the console/games to fix the problem.
I agree with the assessment that the 360 is pretty much bleeding to death. The only way to revive it would be with a flood of original content that's incredible and is also exclusive to the 360. It also has to have international appeal. Microsoft lacks the resources (they have the financial resources, but not the talent/creative resources) to pull off such a feat. FPS's don't have international appeal... Japanese gamers I've talked to dislike them and a lot of the FPSs actually make them dizzy (I was told by one of them it had something to do with them not driving as much so not being as use to the sensation).
Nintendo is taking a very risky move (not just with the name, but with EVERYTHING about the Wii). They'll either blow their competition away or be blown to bits. If they have the games to back up the hype (AND the 3rd party support... the third party support is currently their key weakness and if they can fix that... well...) It's too early to judge how things will go for them yet, but they've been doing some incredible things that nobody thought would work that have done phenomally well (see the DS, Nintendogs, Brain Age, etc.) They're really a wild card in this game.
Sony owns the mindshare though and the Blu-Ray capabilities are great way to get the early adopters and start out incredibly strong. If they find a way to sell the consoles anywhere between $300-350 they'll be nearly unstoppable... They have the advantage, and they know it. But if they have manufacturing problems, or price the console above $500 then Nintendo could steal the crown (assuming Nintendo doesn't screw up...)
So, yes, I agree with some of your assessments, but I don't think it's completely over yet. Nintendo has become a wild card, and when you throw a wild card in the mix anything can happen...
They said the PS2 would last longer than the original PlayStation too... I remember reading it in some old copies of Next Generation (print magazine that doesn't exist any more). I'd have to dig up the old articles for an exact quote, but I definitely remember them saying that the current generation would last longer than the previous generation (I think they predicted 7-8 years, which it still will, but not as a primary console... it'll do the same thing as the original PS and be used by those who don't want to upgrade/used for younger children). However, they had competition and their competition upgraded, so they followed suit. If Sony had a monopoly in the conosole world (and if there wasn't this format war going on) then you better believe they wouldn't worry about moving on to the PS3 right now... But then same goes for Microsoft and their move to the 360... And same for Nintendo... But that's just why competition is good.
Unless you're a broke gamer about to start grad school...:( Then you just get to look at all the neat new games/systems and wish you had cash for them... I'll find some way to at least get the Wii (since $200 or less, I think I can manage) at launch though, but I'll (unfortunately) have to wait to get either the 360 or PS3 (or both). This current generation, I played the XBox the most (sold my PS2 to my younger brother because there weren't enough original games on it that I was interested in enough and I was strapped for cash--and most of the multiplatform games tended to look/work better on the XBox), but my favorite exclusive games were all on the GameCube.
I think Microsoft's biggest worry is the PS3 price point. If Sony can find a way to launch it at a price between $300-350 then the 360 is dead. At $300 with the features it has it will be considered "a bargain" and people will flock to buy them--as long as Sony can keep the supply up. The 360 has no killer app that's exclusive for it as of right now, and even if Halo 3 launches by Thanksgiving, it still only appeals to one segment of the market (the FPS fans). Even with Gears of War and one or two other "killer apps" they still won't have enough to outdo the "bargain" of a PS3 priced at $300-350 and with (more than likely) a huge outpouring of 3rd party Japanese developers (something Microsoft lacks). If Microsoft responds by slashing 360 prices, their stockholders will revolt--as recent announcements of current projected expenses related to 360 and other divisions of MS Entertainment and Research have already upset stockholders and caused a 7+% drop in stock price.
See, the launch of Halo 3 would be what I'd expect from MS if they want to seriously compete on the publicity front of E3. If they don't have anything that big (or bigger: like a TRULY impressive visual experience or an innovative new game) then they might as well just lay low at E3 and let Nintendo and Sony duke it out... Why waste the money promoting stuff if nobody is going to hear you over all the other noise?
Gears of War should be good, but it just doesn't have the huge cult base that the Halo franchise has. I'm sure Gears of War will be reported on, but I just don't see it being strong enough to make a large enough dent in all the propaganda that'll be spewing from Sony and Nintendo. Halo has the power to potentially drown out some of the news from the other camps though.
If MS doesn't want to be COMPLETELY buried this E3 (at least in terms of press coverage), they don't have a choice BUT to show SOMETHING on Halo 3. I mean, it's their biggest franchise and they're competing with launch data about the PS3 and Wii. Not to mention competing with Nintendo's launch lineup--which will contain at least 5 (if not 7 or more) of the most talked about games of the show (Zelda, Mario, new IP, Metroid, DS Zelda--although to a lesser extent, Super Smash, etc.)
To not show SOMETHING from Halo 3 would mean to not get much, if any, press coverage. Sony's news will be HUGE (expect a lower than anticipated price to make it look like a bargain--I'd say $400 or less). Nintendo's news will be HUGE. Microsoft, without Halo 3 has little to show...
Nintendo DOESN'T want to look like a "video game" company as it has negative connotations in the minds of adults around the world (including Japan). They want to appeal to a wider segment than just "gamers", they want to appeal to everybody. By ditching the "Nintendo" moniker, which has pretty much become synonymous with "video games", they hope to remove the stigma attached to "video games" and appeal to those who think games are childish. I mean, it's pretty much the "gamers" that are having the big issue with the name, so for them calling it the Nintendo will be fine.
Re:Nintendo's Wii akin to Chevrolet's Nova?
on
Both Sides of Wii
·
· Score: 1
I remember Coke II, which was pretty much just Pepsi in a Coke bottle... Is that the same thing as new Coke?
However, I don't think this IS bad publicity. Sure people are making fun of the name, but it's just a name. And they're making fun of it in a rather immature/middle school sort of way (with toilet jokes). The fact of the matter is, that it's a simple, unique name that's easy to remember and sticks out. Is the name a little silly? Yes. Is that such a bad thing? I don't think so. Will people remember this name? Yes. If the games are fun, will people be able to overlook the fact that the name is comical? Yes. Will the non-gamers be able to remember the name of the system with the cool name better because it's a little silly (and simple)? Probably...
Re:Nintendo's Wii akin to Chevrolet's Nova?
on
Both Sides of Wii
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Nintendo's board room isn't made up of marketing folks though. They are made up of video game geniuses... The idea for Brain Age came out of the Nintendo board room (and Iwata is even listed in the credits). The Legend himself, Miyamoto, is also part of the board of directors of Nintendo. These aren't exactly people who are afraid of risk (before Brain Age came out in Japan, the press expect it to fail. And Miyamoto has an obsession with innovation). So I think if the board really thought it was a dumb idea, they would have said something. I think more likely, they WANTED it to be controversial. Think of the FREE press from the controversial name...
I've been thinking about this since yesterday (and my initial reaction of hatred of the name/thinking it was a stupid move, etc.) Now that I've had time to contemplate the issue though, I think it's an ingenious move. Here's why:
1) The name is simple, easy to remember, and sticks out like a sore thumb (which for marketing is good).
2) The fact that it's as weird as it is/initial reaction is "wtf" means LOTS of FREE publicity for Nintendo. Before this, NOBODY was talking about the system--there were a few small blurbs about it here and there, but even when the new controller was announced it was ignored by everybody but the gaming press. This new name though generates controversy and EVERYBODY is talking about it. Controversy sells: BIG TIME. Just look at GTA...
3) After awhile, the name DOES grow on you and instead of thinking of it as urine you start thinking of it as "whee" (i.e. fun). It's a nice, silly name. Maybe not "mature" or "hip", but I want my games to be FUN, not necessarily hip.
4) After watching the video and reading the reasoning behind the name, it opens up some great potential marketing ideas and makes sense why they chose this name.
5) People who don't like saying it will just call it the Nintendo. I mean, who ACTUALLY called the Nintendo Entertainment System by it's full name? Or even really NES (now that's used, but while it was their only system, I don't know ANYBODY who called it the NES). I don't see anything wrong with just calling the Wii the Nintendo again... As it pretty much is THE Nintendo (it can play games from ALL of their past systems after all...)
But it's a mail in rebate:P Who wants to deal with the hassle of all that? And sometimes you mysteriously don't receive the rebate check, and even when you do you have to wait like 10 weeks (about 2-3 credit card payments in between...) Is it really worth the hassle just to save $330k?
I don't know if you're joking or just not familiar with Apple's history... But the CEO when Jobs was forced out of Apple the first time was a former Pepsi exec. He's kind of credited with the string of "bad luck" Apple had in the 90's until Job's came back to the company after the aquisition of NEXT--at which time he ousted the current CEO and took over within a year (the CEO when Apple rejoined the company was a different CEO who only held the position for about 2 years).
Am I the only one curious why they'd make a major announcement like this before E3? Admittedly, it appears to be the vinegar in the batch of other items, but still... this is normally something Nintendo would keep to themselves until a major press conference. And it is official (it's on their web page), unless of course their web page has been hacked and somebody went through all the trouble of creating and uploading an elaborate video marketing the new name of the system...
Any way, I for one can't wait to see what the big E3 announcements will be... Maybe the last secret of the controller will be force feedback? That would be SWEET, but INCREDIBLY unlikely...
The XBox didn't play DVDs out of the box. By requiring an attachment to play DVDs, they shave a couple bucks off licensing fees required to play MPEG-2 files and whatever other licensing fees they would otherwise have to pay on ALL consoles when not ALL consumers will actually use the DVD viewing capability. As I more than likely won't use it as a DVD player, I'm happy to not have that extra cost passed down to me.
On another note... when I first saw the 'Wii' in the headline, I thought somebody had taken the 'f' out of 'wifi'...
Slashdot Mirror
Which ones only charge you the price of the game and nothing to play? Or only charge you to play (minus those micropayment ones--which I don't think I'll ever get into). I only want to pay for one thing, not both. Or if they do charge for both, they better not charge more than $60/year (as I am willing to do that--as it's only about the cost of a new game--as opposed to three new games...) I don't have time to play games heavily, so I don't want to sink $200 to play one game for 1 year... This whole double payment system is what's made me avoid MMORPGs. I bought Guild Wars (the collector's edition even) mostly to support the idea of only charging for one thing and not both... although it was a pretty fun game (for a few months any way).
I, personally, think a menu based battle system makes it boring, not an RPG. Why would a menu based battle system be required for a role playing game? Doesn't that distract from the role you are supposed to be playing? Doesn't that take away from the game element as well? I consider RPGs to be quest driven stories where you take on the role of a character and lead a party. Often times with leveling, but always with collecting items of some type.
The Prius with similar safety features to the hybrid Honda Civic I bought was $3,000-4,000 more in the Chicago area because they chose not to sell package 4 in this area--and anything less than that and I wasn't getting the safety features I wanted/needed. Estimated EPA of the Prius is higher, but not by that much more, and I'm getting higher than the EPA of the Civic hybrid. I actually thought the Civic was more comfortable to drive as it allows greater adjustment of the seat and steering wheel. The main things the Prius had over the Civic (besides slightly higher EPA rating) were storage space and cool tech items (that I didn't need, and some I didn't even want). The keyless entry was a feature I DID want and might've been enough to tip me over toward the Prius had it not been for the security issue.
But if you want side air bags and all those other nice safety features, you have to get the smart key. You also have to get the Bluetooth calling thing and the upgraded stereo system in the Chicago area (they don't have package 4, and below package 4 you don't get all the safety features...)
The keyless feature of the Prius was one of the main reasons I was considering it over the hybrid Honda models, but after considering the higher price of the Prius and reading about the insecurity of RFID I decided against it. Now I'm even more sure I made the right decision.
The Vista "Ultimate Edition" is focused on gamers as it features "game optimization" tools or some such nonesense. It's also supposed to be the version with the most digital rights management/"hardest" to pirate.
I think this answers this question [slashdot.org]. When virtual money is real money, it becomes taxable...
Yes, but is it for the better? Changing the world is great and all, but if people (and I realize it's their own fault, not the game creators) become so obsessed with these games that they stop going to work and such then is this really something we want in the world? I think .Hack makes some very good points about the dangers of online gaming/gaming in general. That said, it's always nice to have another reality to go to once in awhile to escape the real world--just as you remember to keep the two properly seperated and focus more on the real world than the virtual one.
But yes, I agree it is too early to make a call either way on this. Although if they don't get a killer app on the system before the PS3 & Wii launch (or on the launch dates of the PS3 & Wii) then I think their SOL and will be dead in the water. By that time the 360 will have been out for a year, and if they don't have a killer app after a year then that's definitely not a good sign...
This console war is shaping up to be played by different rules than normal. Sony is focusing on the format war with their console and just throwing in everything it can to make it a "high-tech" to appeal to those early adopters that wet their pants over such things and who will be the ones deciding the format wars. Microsoft is trying/has been trying to make a one stop media box/download service/Vista add-on/HD-DVD promotion. Nintendo is trying to turn the industry on its head (again) and release a system that isn't designed for traditional gamers (although traditional gamers will still have the classics and a plethora of new and unique gaming experiences) and they're also trying to embrace third party developers for a change. This will be an interesting console war, but I really don't think we can apply the results from previous console wars to it as the landscape of gaming is once again changing--Sony and Microsoft see consoles as a way to promote other products, while Nintendo sees the current market as becoming stale/drying up and they're trying to reinvent the console/games to fix the problem.
I agree with the assessment that the 360 is pretty much bleeding to death. The only way to revive it would be with a flood of original content that's incredible and is also exclusive to the 360. It also has to have international appeal. Microsoft lacks the resources (they have the financial resources, but not the talent/creative resources) to pull off such a feat. FPS's don't have international appeal... Japanese gamers I've talked to dislike them and a lot of the FPSs actually make them dizzy (I was told by one of them it had something to do with them not driving as much so not being as use to the sensation). Nintendo is taking a very risky move (not just with the name, but with EVERYTHING about the Wii). They'll either blow their competition away or be blown to bits. If they have the games to back up the hype (AND the 3rd party support... the third party support is currently their key weakness and if they can fix that... well...) It's too early to judge how things will go for them yet, but they've been doing some incredible things that nobody thought would work that have done phenomally well (see the DS, Nintendogs, Brain Age, etc.) They're really a wild card in this game. Sony owns the mindshare though and the Blu-Ray capabilities are great way to get the early adopters and start out incredibly strong. If they find a way to sell the consoles anywhere between $300-350 they'll be nearly unstoppable... They have the advantage, and they know it. But if they have manufacturing problems, or price the console above $500 then Nintendo could steal the crown (assuming Nintendo doesn't screw up...) So, yes, I agree with some of your assessments, but I don't think it's completely over yet. Nintendo has become a wild card, and when you throw a wild card in the mix anything can happen...
They said the PS2 would last longer than the original PlayStation too... I remember reading it in some old copies of Next Generation (print magazine that doesn't exist any more). I'd have to dig up the old articles for an exact quote, but I definitely remember them saying that the current generation would last longer than the previous generation (I think they predicted 7-8 years, which it still will, but not as a primary console... it'll do the same thing as the original PS and be used by those who don't want to upgrade/used for younger children). However, they had competition and their competition upgraded, so they followed suit. If Sony had a monopoly in the conosole world (and if there wasn't this format war going on) then you better believe they wouldn't worry about moving on to the PS3 right now... But then same goes for Microsoft and their move to the 360... And same for Nintendo... But that's just why competition is good.
Unless you're a broke gamer about to start grad school... :( Then you just get to look at all the neat new games/systems and wish you had cash for them... I'll find some way to at least get the Wii (since $200 or less, I think I can manage) at launch though, but I'll (unfortunately) have to wait to get either the 360 or PS3 (or both). This current generation, I played the XBox the most (sold my PS2 to my younger brother because there weren't enough original games on it that I was interested in enough and I was strapped for cash--and most of the multiplatform games tended to look/work better on the XBox), but my favorite exclusive games were all on the GameCube.
I think Microsoft's biggest worry is the PS3 price point. If Sony can find a way to launch it at a price between $300-350 then the 360 is dead. At $300 with the features it has it will be considered "a bargain" and people will flock to buy them--as long as Sony can keep the supply up. The 360 has no killer app that's exclusive for it as of right now, and even if Halo 3 launches by Thanksgiving, it still only appeals to one segment of the market (the FPS fans). Even with Gears of War and one or two other "killer apps" they still won't have enough to outdo the "bargain" of a PS3 priced at $300-350 and with (more than likely) a huge outpouring of 3rd party Japanese developers (something Microsoft lacks). If Microsoft responds by slashing 360 prices, their stockholders will revolt--as recent announcements of current projected expenses related to 360 and other divisions of MS Entertainment and Research have already upset stockholders and caused a 7+% drop in stock price.
See, the launch of Halo 3 would be what I'd expect from MS if they want to seriously compete on the publicity front of E3. If they don't have anything that big (or bigger: like a TRULY impressive visual experience or an innovative new game) then they might as well just lay low at E3 and let Nintendo and Sony duke it out... Why waste the money promoting stuff if nobody is going to hear you over all the other noise?
Gears of War should be good, but it just doesn't have the huge cult base that the Halo franchise has. I'm sure Gears of War will be reported on, but I just don't see it being strong enough to make a large enough dent in all the propaganda that'll be spewing from Sony and Nintendo. Halo has the power to potentially drown out some of the news from the other camps though.
If MS doesn't want to be COMPLETELY buried this E3 (at least in terms of press coverage), they don't have a choice BUT to show SOMETHING on Halo 3. I mean, it's their biggest franchise and they're competing with launch data about the PS3 and Wii. Not to mention competing with Nintendo's launch lineup--which will contain at least 5 (if not 7 or more) of the most talked about games of the show (Zelda, Mario, new IP, Metroid, DS Zelda--although to a lesser extent, Super Smash, etc.) To not show SOMETHING from Halo 3 would mean to not get much, if any, press coverage. Sony's news will be HUGE (expect a lower than anticipated price to make it look like a bargain--I'd say $400 or less). Nintendo's news will be HUGE. Microsoft, without Halo 3 has little to show...
Nintendo DOESN'T want to look like a "video game" company as it has negative connotations in the minds of adults around the world (including Japan). They want to appeal to a wider segment than just "gamers", they want to appeal to everybody. By ditching the "Nintendo" moniker, which has pretty much become synonymous with "video games", they hope to remove the stigma attached to "video games" and appeal to those who think games are childish. I mean, it's pretty much the "gamers" that are having the big issue with the name, so for them calling it the Nintendo will be fine.
However, I don't think this IS bad publicity. Sure people are making fun of the name, but it's just a name. And they're making fun of it in a rather immature/middle school sort of way (with toilet jokes). The fact of the matter is, that it's a simple, unique name that's easy to remember and sticks out. Is the name a little silly? Yes. Is that such a bad thing? I don't think so. Will people remember this name? Yes. If the games are fun, will people be able to overlook the fact that the name is comical? Yes. Will the non-gamers be able to remember the name of the system with the cool name better because it's a little silly (and simple)? Probably...
Nintendo's board room isn't made up of marketing folks though. They are made up of video game geniuses... The idea for Brain Age came out of the Nintendo board room (and Iwata is even listed in the credits). The Legend himself, Miyamoto, is also part of the board of directors of Nintendo. These aren't exactly people who are afraid of risk (before Brain Age came out in Japan, the press expect it to fail. And Miyamoto has an obsession with innovation). So I think if the board really thought it was a dumb idea, they would have said something. I think more likely, they WANTED it to be controversial. Think of the FREE press from the controversial name...
1) The name is simple, easy to remember, and sticks out like a sore thumb (which for marketing is good).
2) The fact that it's as weird as it is/initial reaction is "wtf" means LOTS of FREE publicity for Nintendo. Before this, NOBODY was talking about the system--there were a few small blurbs about it here and there, but even when the new controller was announced it was ignored by everybody but the gaming press. This new name though generates controversy and EVERYBODY is talking about it. Controversy sells: BIG TIME. Just look at GTA...
3) After awhile, the name DOES grow on you and instead of thinking of it as urine you start thinking of it as "whee" (i.e. fun). It's a nice, silly name. Maybe not "mature" or "hip", but I want my games to be FUN, not necessarily hip.
4) After watching the video and reading the reasoning behind the name, it opens up some great potential marketing ideas and makes sense why they chose this name.
5) People who don't like saying it will just call it the Nintendo. I mean, who ACTUALLY called the Nintendo Entertainment System by it's full name? Or even really NES (now that's used, but while it was their only system, I don't know ANYBODY who called it the NES). I don't see anything wrong with just calling the Wii the Nintendo again... As it pretty much is THE Nintendo (it can play games from ALL of their past systems after all...)
That's my 2 cents any way...But it's a mail in rebate :P Who wants to deal with the hassle of all that? And sometimes you mysteriously don't receive the rebate check, and even when you do you have to wait like 10 weeks (about 2-3 credit card payments in between...) Is it really worth the hassle just to save $330k?
I don't know if you're joking or just not familiar with Apple's history... But the CEO when Jobs was forced out of Apple the first time was a former Pepsi exec. He's kind of credited with the string of "bad luck" Apple had in the 90's until Job's came back to the company after the aquisition of NEXT--at which time he ousted the current CEO and took over within a year (the CEO when Apple rejoined the company was a different CEO who only held the position for about 2 years).
Any way, I for one can't wait to see what the big E3 announcements will be... Maybe the last secret of the controller will be force feedback? That would be SWEET, but INCREDIBLY unlikely...
The XBox didn't play DVDs out of the box. By requiring an attachment to play DVDs, they shave a couple bucks off licensing fees required to play MPEG-2 files and whatever other licensing fees they would otherwise have to pay on ALL consoles when not ALL consumers will actually use the DVD viewing capability. As I more than likely won't use it as a DVD player, I'm happy to not have that extra cost passed down to me.
On another note... when I first saw the 'Wii' in the headline, I thought somebody had taken the 'f' out of 'wifi'...