It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Nintendo Wii U will Fail, Nintendo fall, sony buyout, my prediction

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Nov, 25 2012 @ 08:28 AM

Originally posted by eNumbra
Haha; console gaming.

Glorious PC gaming master race reporting: Nintendo won't likely reach SEGA status unless they try to rehash the Virtual Boy. Nintendo has its core fan base, all they really need to do is remember that and keep making those games and similar titles and they will be ever present in the market, regardless of the American lust for Call of Duty and Madden clones. Nintendo does seem to be stuck in the same-room multiplayer days. Online multiplayer for the Wii was unintuitive and well, a hassle, so sure the WiiU is going to have a hard time competing with the PS3 and 360; but if you think the WiiU or the Wii were ever really competing with the two of them I don't think you've been looking at it right.

Even if the WiiU does "fail" Nintendo is still the better portable console producer and will always dominate with the on-the-go gamer.

But for now I must take my leave. I'll allow you dirty console gaming peasants to play in the mud or whatever it is you do.

and for those of you who are no doubt missing the reference Zero Punctuation; game reviews from someone more jaded on the subject than I am. Caution, naughty language.
edit on 11/25/2012 by eNumbra because: (no reason given)

edit on 11/25/2012 by eNumbra because: (no reason given)

Nice idea but your portable theory is flawed..... two words..... SMART PHONE. I will return to my mud

posted on Nov, 25 2012 @ 08:38 AM
Without the N64 and Zelda: Ocarina of time there is no TPS on consoles That console and game was ground breaking in the way they meshed the controller and the game for a better experience. It made gamers feel liek they were actually holding a slingshot and launching seeds at things. So to say the N64 was bad is ridiculous.



Also, I bought a Wii when Super Smahs Bros. Brawl came out, played it for a few months...haven't touched the Wii since....that's like 4-5 years. Nintendo has fallen to the wayside with it's gimmicky/childish games.

Hopefully, the change to hi-def graphics will allow game manufacturers to help expand Nintendo's target demographic...doubt it though. Xbox has the US/Euro market on lock down and Sony has China/Japan.

What Nintendo does have is a better console for families to invest in, they make AMAZING party games.
edit on 25-11-2012 by MmmPie because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-11-2012 by MmmPie because: spelling

posted on Nov, 25 2012 @ 05:33 PM
SNES was a good console loved it Then the 64 come out, Wave Race, Mario 64, Rally, Holden HSV racing(AKA beetle racing, just a rip off using holden cars) .
hours and hours rainy days kept 3 kids occupied, while our nan looked after us.

I don't see Nintendo going bust, they always entertain all ages.

posted on Nov, 25 2012 @ 06:09 PM

Originally posted by DreamerOracle

Nice idea but your portable theory is flawed..... two words..... SMART PHONE.

Which, while being powerful, still don't have the capabilities of a dedicated portable gaming console.

Touch controls suck. They always have, probably always will. I've got about half a dozen apps on my smartphone that could be lots better if they were on an actual console. Smartphones may take the casual crowd away from Nintendo, but that would be about it.
edit on 11/25/2012 by eNumbra because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 1 2013 @ 11:58 PM
Bumping an old thread since the item in question has launched and appears successful. I have played the WiiU and were it not so invasive with the biometrics and online stuff I would wholeheartedly adopt one. Unfortunately I will probably never buy an online gaming device with attached cameras and such good thing I am a retro gamer. Too bad everyone else is deciding to be one also which is causing the price of SNES games to become ridiculous.

posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 12:25 AM
Biggest problem for me with Nintendo is that they really just keep coming up with better ways to play Mario.

posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 12:30 AM
Nice bump!

I always though the Wii was a brilliant idea. It didn't try to compete in the graphics wars, instead it went back to the philosophy of gaming just for fun. Then the exercise capabilities right when everyone is trippin about eating right and living a healthy life style.

Sony I think is in trouble. There isn't a lot of money in panel displays and they are not very popular in audio.

Nintendo could end up buying Sony if the new PS doesn't knock peoples socks off.

Nintendo might have to find its own gaming niche away from displays eventually. Smart T.V's are going to pair up with mobile devices which will obviously start offering more serious gaming.

Nintendo might be odd man out but that doesn't mean they wont find some way to entertain us... and we will buy it.

posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 07:33 PM
So here we are in 2013. It is really easy to buy a nintendo wii u. Honestly, there not even that hard to find. Meaning they aren't selling/selling out like other consoles. (in the past with first release)

So, i predict i was right
edit on 2-1-2013 by Jordan River because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 06:49 PM
reply to post by Jordan River

I think they didn't want shortages like with previous models so they could make quicker profits. The site I am about to link shows a serious slump in European sales so its possible the economic situation is at fault there.

Wii U Sales Data

posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 06:56 PM

Originally posted by Jordan River
Next gen consoles are to have better graphics!!!!! Ultra realistic that is, there are articles online about it.

Nah they're not, the specs for the XBOX720(?) GPU was a modified Radeon 6770 (or similar low to mid end chip).

As a PC gamer, I can tell you that they wont be all that realistic, nice yes, realistic, nah.

BTW, I agree, the SNES was truly the last great gaming console, and the last one I played since becoming a PC gamer.

EDIT: No, I lied, the Atari Jaguar was the last console I really played on, and it was great also, just wish Atari had marketed it right.
edit on 4/1/13 by woogleuk because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 05:55 PM

I stopped reading right there...and not just because it was the end of your post. And Genesis > SNES, but N64 was a heck of a video gaming memory.

What makes Genesis > than SNes? The crappy graphics? Lack of great gem games? Awful FM synth-sound without good sample capability? Lack of memory? Lack of colors? Awful conversions?

Mega Drive / Genesis had some good games, of course. And some of them even had almost tolerable music and/or sounds. But come on.

You can't just make a statement like that and expect people to simply blindly accept it as the truth. It's like saying that a bicycle is faster than a Ferrari, and leave it at that. Sure, a bicycle can have it's moments, it can certainly be better than Ferrari if you are going to travel inside a forest on a narrow path, or if you want to exercize while moving. If you want to see the sceneries, if you want to be able to go at your own pace, taking a break any time you want, etc. Bicycle can even be faster in situations where you can take shortcuts that are too narrow for a car to fit, and so on.

But to just make a claim like that.. so typical, and so annoying. Something is better than something else. That's often not how it works, because there are many ways to compare those things.

Genesis can be better if you want to play Sonic and Streets of Rage games, and it certainly deserves it's place in the console world. I like the console and many of it's games, and play those games from time to time.

Overall there's really no way anyone could rationally say that Genesis is better than SNes. SNes had Zelda, all the Mario games, F-Zero, and the best Castlevania versions. On top of that, it had a lot of other things that the Genesis just couldn't compete with.

Let's look at FACTS now:

1) Memory.


Memory: 64 kB + 64 kB video RAM + 8 kB work RAM


Memory: 128 kB + 64 kB video RAM + 64 kB Audio RAM

What do you know. That 'inferior' machine has more memory than the machine you said is better! Well, maybe it's just an isolated incident (though memory matters a LOT in the 16-bit console world!)

Winner: SNES!

2) Palette.

Genesis: 64 or 183 (shadow/highlight mode) out of 512 possible colors

SNes: 256 or 2048 out of 32768 possible colors. That's more than 32 thousand.

Again, SNes wins clearly. Hm, a weird "inferior" machine, when it simply keeps winning all the battles. Shouldn't something that's so easily a worse console be actually LOSING these things? Weird.

And of course the number of colors and palette make a HUGE difference in the 16-bit console world, and in the visual graphics and effects. More colors, better-looking games, more fun to play. Together with larger memory, this would already guarantee the win, but let's go on, because your claim was indeed annoying and based on pure ignorance. I won't deny ignorance, I will try to enlighten you so you wouldn't HAVE ignorance anymore.

Winner: SNES!

3) Resolutions.

Genesis: 256 x224, 256x448, 320x224, 320x448, 256x240, 256x480, 320x240, 320x480.

SNes: 256x224, 512x224, 256x239, 512x239, 512x448, 512x478

These games didn't really utilize the higher resolutions much, so this comparison is slightly irrelevant. Nintendo always uses such weird resolutions anyway that it's a pain in the ass in the modern times, except with a real machine or a really capable (supporting really low resolutions) gfx card.


Winner: SNES!

4) Maximum amount of sprites.

GENESIS: 80 or 64 (depending on the mode)

SNES: 128

On top of all this, SNes has EXTRA effects that Genesis simply doesn't have (and consequently, you don't see much in the Genesis games).

- Up to 4 planes of backgrounds, each up to 1024x1024 pixels in size.
- Pixelization (mosaic) per background
- Color addition and subtraction
- Clipping windows (per background, affecting color, math or both)
- Scrolling per 8x8 tile
- Mode 7 matrix operations


5) Sound.

Genesis: A crappy and obsolete 5 channel Yamaha YM2612 FM synth chip, and TI 4 channel PSG. End result: horrible sounds that lack in number of channels, sound quality, and every darn thing. Even the early PC Adlib games have super-fantastic sound world compared to this atrocity. The worst sound thing ever invented after the Atari ST and Spectrum sound chips.

SNes: Sony SPC700, Sony DSP (an actual DSP, do you hear?).
16-bit ADPCM, 8 channels - that's EIGHT CHANNELS of 16-bit sound!
Output: 32 kHz 16-bit STEREO (Genesis can't even dream of stuff like this)

Effects: ADSR envelope, frequency scaling and modulation (gaussian interpolation), echo (!), 8-tap FIR filter, noise generation (gotta love the SNes noise sound, masterfully used for example in Chrono Trigger, another superior game that the Genesis doesn't have)

So. SNes is better in EVERYTHING, and it has basically better game library as a result - or anyway. Genesis only has slightly faster CPU, which can't compensate.

SNES is vastly better. Apart from faster CPU (which doesn't mean anything, because it can't compensate for all the "lacks"), Genesis doesn't have ANYTHING that would even compare to the SNes.

You can take any angle - the game library, visuals, sound world and musics, game styles, critical reviews, audience reception, units sold, playability, "feel/atmosphere", you name it - and SNes has beaten Genesis in all of those. It doesn't even come close! They are not even equal combatants! It's like Antonio Inoki vs. a random feminist who thinks he's as good as the 'boys'. Yeah, the liars and disinformatists will be loud and spout all kinds of clichés and lies, but when the fight starts, it doesn't really take more than a second to see who the real winner actually is.

Don't believe the hype. Check the facts, familiarize yourself with the systems and then see the truth without any personal 'nostalgy bias'. Then you will see that Genesis never had a chance.

Btw, you might also enjoy the slightly biased (towards Genesis, that is - it is shown to being close to equal with the SNes, which it of course isn't, wasn't and can't ever be) AVGN 'review' of both systems. He is wishy-washy, 'not wanting to hurt anyone's feelings', so it's not completely truthful a video, but it should give you some idea as to what you are dealing with.

Genesis is a fun machine with many good games, but it certainly cannot beat SNes in any area (having a faster CPU isn't really an 'area' that mattered, because it never influenced games in a way that SNes couldn't have kept up with).

SNes > Genesis.

posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 06:21 PM
reply to post by Shoujikina

Hardware power doesn't make a console better, it just means nicer graphics.

The fun is in the games, the challenge, the story.

Don't get me wrong, I was a Nintendo fanboy, to me the SNES was the better console, but the megadrive still had its fanbase, and they would argue blind the megadrive was better. Why? Because it gave them more enjoyment.

Same with Atari ST and Commodore Amiga fans (Me on the ST side in that argument).

Simply saying a console is better, just because it has better hardware is ignorant.

There were many times after I got my SNES that I still dug my NES out for a play...because I enjoyed the games!

posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 11:32 PM
reply to post by Shoujikina

I'm sorry you took all that time and text space to prove to me that SNES > Genesis, mostly because I didn't read one iota of it. Why?

Because when I posted that Genesis > SNES...

It was my personal opinion
and I still stand by it.

posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 11:41 PM
reply to post by Jordan River

The 64 was a fantastic system. I think most every one that plays video games will agree with that. I am not a huge gamer, but I still play my NES and 64 regularly.

I agree that NINTENDO has been going the wrong direction, and I hated the Wii and so will probably hate the WiiU, but it's not enough to stop them. They are huge and they have Mario and Zelda.

So if they fail from the Wii U they will hopefully learn and make a system that isn't aimed at 10 year olds.

Also, they absolutely DOMINATE the portable game system market. They won't be failing. I think you forgot about the 3DS, and their portables when you made this thread.
edit on 8-1-2013 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 06:34 PM
SNES VS Genesis

I had both systems growing up so never really was forced to choose sides in the battle. The hardware argument is a weak one in terms of judging a system. Ultimately it should be about the playability of the games. Sega had a big edge with sports games where as the SNES was the go to system for rpgs except maybe shining force or phantasy star. Who can forget the more mature image of the Genesis when Mortal Kombat came out. ABRACADABRA anyone?

When the Gamecube came out many people were turned off by its lack of power and mature titles but I bought one and was never disappointed. The lower specced Gamecube even pulled off the best iteration of Soul Caliber IMO.

I love Nintendo but there are many great things about Sega as well. In the end though I think it was just prudent business practices on the part of Nintendo that helped it out compete Sega. Sega had a glut of horrible and expensive addons which helped push the technology when it comes to games but ultimately cost Sega in the long run.

new topics

<< 1   >>

log in