Is the wii underpowered?

[bakakame]

The Wii has about the hardware capeabilities of the Xbox (assumed, Nintendo is really finniky about releasing any information until it's already out). And yea, that does seem kinda meek, but then again an extra $100, or even $200 isn't gonna bring them up to speed with 360 and PS3.

Other than that, Nintendo is still catering the price to it's primary market, paren't buying an innexpensive, child friendly system for their kids. If they added extra hardware and upped the price, they'd lose sales in that catagory.

I won't bother with the whole changing the interaction thing, we all know that. Though I still think it's coming a good generation or two ahead of it's time. Maybe it just has to start somewhere.....

[Miss Moonlight]

Nintendo did say that they were going a different route from the other systems.

They aren't focusing as much on making it look pretty, so they can focus more on making it feel pretty. Opening doors to better gameplay and more intuitive controls, and not limiting it to games that offer eye candy alone.

Yea, nintendo likes to do new and innovative things, instead of just following the crowd and making things all pretty and shiny. But then again, that's what makes them nintendo.

[Sega saturn x]

Yea, nintendo likes to do new and innovative things

The snes, n64, game cube, gameboy color and game boy advance disagree with you they only started innovating very recently.

[Buruku]

The snes, n64, game cube, gameboy color and game boy advance disagree with you they only started innovating very recently.

You just love bursting everyones bubble dont you?

[Miss Moonlight]

The snes, n64, game cube, gameboy color and game boy advance disagree with you they only started innovating very recently.

I'm sorry, what do you mean by that?

nintendo has always been innovative - which is why they decided to make a unique 'cell-shaded' style in windwaker (a style no one was doing at the time) instead of the usual 'realistic' style (that they are doing now, for 'twilight princess', to shut up the complaining fans.)

I like the old-school systems very much still - I still have, and still play the snes, N64, and the gamecube. Alot of the greatest games exist on the SNES and N64.

[Sega saturn x]

You just love bursting everyones bubble dont you?

Well duh

And that terrible cell damage game used cell shading long befor Zelda did. Very few nintendo consoles are actually innovative, the nes, DS and wii are and I take my hats off to them because of it. But the rest was the same old same old and it shows, they did nothing but lose market share with the snes, n64 and cube. The handhelds are a different story thorugh. The game boy isn't the first handheld but it got people caring and strangled the market, if that's innovative or not is up to you. But the GBC and GBA are nto innoavtive, now not being innovative doesn't equal bad mind you but lets call a spade a spade here.

[Regex]

Well duh

And that terrible cell damage game used cell shading long befor Zelda did. Very few nintendo consoles are actually innovative, the nes, DS and wii are and I take my hats off to them because of it. But the rest was the same old same old and it shows, they did nothing but lose market share with the snes, n64 and cube. The handhelds are a different story thorugh. The game boy isn't the first handheld but it got people caring and strangled the market, if that's innovative or not is up to you. But the GBC and GBA are nto innoavtive, now not being innovative doesn't equal bad mind you but lets call a spade a spade here.

That's totally untrue. The SNES was a huge step forward. The Genesis couldn't compete with it, and the Saturn just didn't survive because Sega simply sucks at marketing. But Nintendo's biggest innovation in that generation was in their games, and their evolutions from the previous ones. Super Mario World and Zelda III are still often argued as the best in their respective series. Mario Kart was a totally new twist on an old idea.
Furthermore, the N64 had a very innovative approach, with the very different controller style (that worked quite well for Action/adventure and FPS games), and the way they handled graphics. You notice how everything manages to look more smooth on the N64 compared to the PSX? It wasn't from a higher poly count, that's for sure. And once again, Nintendo did it again with their games.

As for their handheld systems, the Gameboy Color was the first one I was willing to even get. The first Game Boy was a nice start to the portable gaming, but they milked that for too long. I honestly felt like they were waiting to release a better handheld system until they were satisfied they got enough money from their first one. It was like they didn't get serious until about the time of the Advance SP.
The Advance was a great system, but honestly what I had hoped for was something that could be as good as the SNES was.. It just didn't have enough buttons.

On a side note, while Wind Waker was a different innovative approach to the Zelda series, it was far from the best example to use.

[Miss Moonlight]

On a side note, while Wind Waker was a different innovative approach to the Zelda series, it was far from the best example to use.

I don't see why, because at the time of the release of 'zelda: the windwaker', it was the only game to have that kind of cell-shading at the time. And no other game looked like it.

They took alot of flack for the different graphical style, but I think they were creative enough to make a new graphical style then just do what everyone else was doing at the time. The cell-shading style enabled the characters to do more then they could in the N64, and it looked more fluid and very lively.

[red storm]

Yes, because it does. Find me something that says otherwise, since nintendo makes pure profit on every cube sold. IE they cost way less to make than they are selling it for.

Question, do you know what goes into creating a new console? It's not all puzzling together a few pieces of plastic, I assure you.

First there is the development cost. This cost includes years of research in order to get the basics of the console right.

Then there is the hardware manufacturing cost. This includes the numerous cards that drive the console.

Then there is the marketing cost. This includes comercials, advertizing, boots at the E3 etc. etc.

Now include paychecks for the employees and the fact that shops want their own cut of the profit, and I'm surprised that the thing is as cheap as it is.

If that still doesn't convince you, think about this: A random selected video card for a PC already costs around $150,- The Wii is filled with more then just that.

[Sega saturn x]

If that still doesn't convince you, think about this: A random selected video card for a PC already costs around $150,- The Wii is filled with more then just that.

The vioeo card thing doesn't really fly because they get custom parts, ones that are cheaper to produce.

And while you lsited valid points, companies like nintendo make mroe off game sales than they would ever dream off of consoles. That's how MS and sony are able to sell the ps3 and 360 at a loss. So they could still very easily sell the wii for what it's actually worth.

[red storm]

The vioeo card thing doesn't really fly because they get custom parts, ones that are cheaper to produce.

If anything, Nintendo's hardware is as manufactured as you get, but the comparison still stands. One video card is only a small part of the console, and I really doupt it would cost them a mere couple of cents.

And while you lsited valid points, companies like nintendo make mroe off game sales than they would ever dream off of consoles. That's how MS and sony are able to sell the ps3 and 360 at a loss. So they could still very easily sell the wii for what it's actually worth.

You seem to be asuming that the only hardware that costs a lot of money are the ones that give shiny graphics. It isn't. The hardware for sound, motion tracking, wireless control, etc. are not exactly cheap either.

[Sega saturn x]

and I really doupt it would cost them a mere couple of cents.

Well that isn't too off actually, because big companies buy these sort of things in such huge amounts they don't pay near what one of us would.

You seem to be asuming that the only hardware that costs a lot of money are the ones that give shiny graphics. It isn't. The hardware for sound, motion tracking, wireless control, etc. are not exactly cheap either.

The controller most likely costs more than the console itself to manufacture. Since there is more tech in there than the actual console it seems. It doesn't really matter though since I know I'm right seeing as how I've talked to a programmer with a wii dev-kit and it's about the same as the cube.

[red storm]

Well that isn't too off actually, because big companies buy these sort of things in such huge amounts they don't pay near what one of us would.

I just noticed, you keep claiming such things without providing any evidence to back up your claims. I brought mine, which you shot down as inacurate because they didn't match what you said, yet you failed to bring your own. Why's that?

The controller most likely costs more than the console itself to manufacture. Since there is more tech in there than the actual console it seems. It doesn't really matter though since I know I'm right seeing as how I've talked to a programmer with a wii dev-kit and it's about the same as the cube.

And the controler is connected to the console, which does the rendering, calculating what the controler does, rendering the sound files, reading the disc, running the game, but of course the controler has more technology...

Right.

[bakakame]

While it's true that good hardware isn't cheap, old hardware is.

The cost to produce 1 Xbox 360 is about $525. The Wii uses very stale technology in the console itself by comparison, look at how fast the value of computers drop. A high end computer 6 years ago is almost completely worthless now, the Wii's hardware is too weak to be very expensive.

Also, the controler is much more detail sensitive to produce than the console itself, because of the motion aspects. While it doesn't matter too awfully much if the pieces in the console are precisly aligned (so long as they are all wired ok) all the parts to the controller have to be exactly configured otherwise it won't work well.

[Sega saturn x]

And the controler is connected to the console, which does the rendering, calculating what the controler does, rendering the sound files, reading the disc, running the game, but of course the controler has more technology...

Bakakame is right on the money, aside from the controller all the tech is quite old and very cheap. Like I said the controller most likely is more expensive, but to clairfy that's because the controller has newer tech not that it does more.

I just noticed, you keep claiming such things without providing any evidence to back up your claims. I brought mine, which you shot down as inacurate because they didn't match what you said, yet you failed to bring your own. Why's that?

I thought old tech=cheap was fairly self explainitory but I guess I was wrong. But if you ask you will recieve.
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0oGkkBX4Q...specs_revealed

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0oGkiyP4Q...%3fnewsid=5868

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0oGkjN94g...ndo_Wii_Specs/

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0oGkk4T4w...wii-specs.html
And for the hell of it the cubes specs as skwered as they are by nintendos own page.
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0oGkiyP4Q...om/techspecgcn
Want any more proofe the wii is using old tech and charging higher than they should?

[red storm]

Bakakame is right on the money, aside from the controller all the tech is quite old and very cheap. Like I said the controller most likely is more expensive, but to clairfy that's because the controller has newer tech not that it does more.

Finally good points, if provided by another member.

I thought old tech=cheap was fairly self explainitory but I guess I was wrong. But if you ask you will recieve.
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0oGkkBX4Q...specs_revealed

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0oGkiyP4Q...%3fnewsid=5868

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0oGkjN94g...ndo_Wii_Specs/

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0oGkk4T4w...wii-specs.html
And for the hell of it the cubes specs as skwered as they are by nintendos own page.
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0oGkiyP4Q...om/techspecgcn
Want any more proofe the wii is using old tech and charging higher than they should?

More proof about old tech? Hardly, what I want you to answer is this: You like to say, new is expensive, old is cheap. Why is it so strange to you then, that with a piece of new and inovationg hardware like the motion sensoring controller te price goes up? Like it or not, a controller without a console is a useless piece of plastic.

And on another point, I already told you what goes into the procces of creatinga console. That has influence on the price, because any of the console creators want to minimize their losses as much as possible. therefore: More research, production and marketing costs equal higher price for the eventual product.

[Sega saturn x]

Why is it so strange to you then, that with a piece of new and inovationg hardware like the motion sensoring controller te price goes up?

Lets not call motion sensititve controllers "new" they have been on the market for close to a decade now. Pelican made a ps1 motion sensitive controller some years back. The simple fact of the matter is nintendo is charging more than it's worth because they can not because it's really worth it.

I already told you what goes into the procces of creatinga console

Yeah and like I've already said comapnies like nintendo get more profit off of games than they ever could with consoles. That's where they make their big money not consoles.

[red storm]

Lets not call motion sensititve controllers "new" they have been on the market for close to a decade now. Pelican made a ps1 motion sensitive controller some years back. The simple fact of the matter is nintendo is charging more than it's worth because they can not because it's really worth it.

You're comparing a controller that had 4 degrees of motion to what Nintendo is doing right now? So, according to your logic, we could also say that assasin's creed is in no way 'new' as compared to Thief. You might want to stop right there, as you are undermining your entire thread.

Yeah and like I've already said comapnies like nintendo get more profit off of games than they ever could with consoles. That's where they make their big money not consoles.

I am going to asume you missed the part where I said "any of the console creators want to minimize their losses as much as possible."

[Regex]

The problem you have here is that you have a small amount of understanding of the electronics and the industry, and you think that means you know a lot about it.

Nonetheless, as someone who is a software engineer, and has experience in hardware engineering, I think I have a little bit more understanding about these things than some guy who knows a guy with a Wii dev kit.

For all the hardware that was specially designed for this console, no matter how old you believe it is, a $200-$250 starting price is quite reasonable. Look at any other computer, and try to tell me you can get something comparable for that cheap.

Now, the motion sensing controller, that is a relatively new design. It's not just some little inaccurate gyro setup like the old crap. That comparison shouldn't have been even made.

[bakakame]

And on another point, I already told you what goes into the procces of creatinga console. That has influence on the price, because any of the console creators want to minimize their losses as much as possible. therefore: More research, production and marketing costs equal higher price for the eventual product.

True, research and development are usually pretty expensive, but once that part is done the cost is over. The research and development cost per unit sold goes down with every system they sell.

[Regex]

True, research and development are usually pretty expensive, but once that part is done the cost is over. The research and development cost per unit sold goes down with every system they sell.

That's one of the reasons they tell you that manufacturing gets cheaper with time. Initial development costs, creating the templates for mass producing the units, etc.

[Gorion1928]

Right now there are small armies of developers at work at Nintendo, specifically working on the Wii. When the Wii becomes more established many of them will move on to othe jobs, such as software design for games, and by extension reduce the cost of the system itself. It is not all about the raw materials that go in to a machine folks!

[Anime is poison]

If Nintendo has better hardware than the competition, it would be sold for more, simple as that (unless they found a way to make it cheaper). Since its sold for less, it can be assumed that the system provides less.

Most companies that I know don't sell their products for what they paid for it. Companies at the end of the day want profit, or else they wouldn't bother making it. I can't imagine Nintendo paying more than $50 to produce a GC if they're selling it for $100. Then again, I don't work for Nintendo, and they have been known to be kind to their fans, so they may pay from 70-90 to produce it (doubt it though), to gain minimum profit while giving the fans a good deal.

This argument seems kinda pointless since none of you work for the company, nor seem to have provided financial information for the production of any Nintendo system, so until then, you guys are just using what you know, which may not be correct.

[Regex]

If Nintendo has better hardware than the competition, it would be sold for more, simple as that (unless they found a way to make it cheaper). Since its sold for less, it can be assumed that the system provides less.

Untrue. Supply and demand. If a company feels they can sell a product for more, quite often, they will.

Most companies that I know don't sell their products for what they paid for it. Companies at the end of the day want profit, or else they wouldn't bother making it. I can't imagine Nintendo paying more than $50 to produce a GC if they're selling it for $100. Then again, I don't work for Nintendo, and they have been known to be kind to their fans, so they may pay from 70-90 to produce it (doubt it though), to gain minimum profit while giving the fans a good deal.

It's been well established that with the recent game console generations, the first several shipments of game consoles were sold at a loss, with the intention of making up that loss in game licensing and game sales. It's been rumored that the Wii is actually breaking this trend, and being sold at a slight profit. Not completely surprising.

[Anime is poison]

And if the other companies think they can sell it for more, then they obviously think they have a good system under their belts. So that theory kinda kills Nintendo since they are selling it cheaper than the rest. So it could be assumed (like I said before) that Nintendo isn't offering as much since they are selling it so cheap. Unless they just believe their system won't be as popular for some reason.

My theory behind Nintendo selling their system cheap was just to kill the competition, regardless of whether they could sell it for more or not, just so they can sell more than the others. But thats just my opinion.