Rumor: Wii U in Development Hell

[SpaceJump]

I can't tell if you're trolling or simply a fanboy...
Why either? Is it because he see that some of guys will try to diss and over exaggerated anything Nintendo does into gimmick (negatively) by "proof"
to try to make you opinions facts?

Which is even worst when you haven't even touch the technology you dissing.

We didn't dis anyone, we didn't insult anything about Nintendo.

The thing is, you're so blinded by what I can only describe as fanboyism (from what I've observed) that anything that when something even seems like it's a negative towards Nintendo you get defensive and fight back with conjecture and twist our words. This is especially true when you don't understand what we're talking about, like my use of the words "negative connotations".

Me a fanboy

I have a 3DS (of course), a PSP, PS3, PS2, Xbox, and many more classics. The problem is you try really hard to proove us that the 3DS has great problems. Which system didn't have problems? Also Every topic about Nintendo is being raided by "fail", "gimmick" or whatever comments.

Guild

Quite honestly, I've listened to the review I posted and I'll take Yahtzee's opinion over yours. It feels like the 3DS came out and you're just trying to find some way to think everything about it is amazing.

There you have it. How about forming your own opinion and actually trying it yourself...

So you got your 360 and enjoyed it and suddenly everything Nintendo sucks?

 

[machomuu]

I can't tell if you're trolling or simply a fanboy...

Why either? Is it because he see that some of guys will try to diss and over exaggerated anything Nintendo does into gimmick (negatively) by "proof"
to try to make you opinions facts?

Which is even worst when you haven't even touch the technology you dissing.

We didn't dis anyone, we didn't insult anything about Nintendo.

The thing is, you're so blinded by what I can only describe as fanboyism (from what I've observed) that anything that when something even seems like it's a negative towards Nintendo you get defensive and fight back with conjecture and twist our words. This is especially true when you don't understand what we're talking about, like my use of the words "negative connotations".

Me a fanboy

I have a 3DS (of course), a PSP, PS3, PS2, Xbox, and many more classics. The problem is you try really hard to proove us that the 3DS has great problems. Which system didn't have problems? Also Every topic about Nintendo is being raided by "fail", "gimmick" or whatever comments.

When did I point out any problems in the 3DS in this thread? Please, enlighten me.

 

[Valwin]

wiiu does not need that unrealiable format call blue ray

 

[KingVamp]

On the flipside, you get incredible boners over it while having the same amount of experience.
No, it just I didn't try to shoot something down before even having the thing in my hands.
I see the 3DS has problems,but at the same time I see it a great handheld and I see the 3D as a great enhancer just as your beloved HD,HD-like graphics.

You going around without even touching as if it the worst thing ever.

Then dissing Nintendo altogether.

Quite honestly, I've listened to the review I posted and I'll take Yahtzee's opinion over yours. It feels like the 3DS came out and you're just trying to find some way to think everything about it is amazing.
I thought he was talking about the Wii U.

Talking about both, back and forth.
QUOTE(Valwin @ Sep 9 2011, 03:24 PM)

wiiu does not need that unrealiable format call blue ray

Dude...

 

[TheDarkSeed]

TheDarkSeed, the Wii U was never going to have a bluray drive. Ever. Nintendo wouldn't use the format created by their rival unless there was absolutely no other option.
I know

And, unfortunately, cost is always going to be an issue, in gaming or any other medium. Remember "$599 US Dollars!" debacle that Sony has only recently been able to move past?
I remember
QUOTE

Cost is always going to be an issue, because customers only have so much money to spend. The important thing is to make a console as awesome and price effective as possible.

Preachin to the quire

 

[SpaceJump]

I can't tell if you're trolling or simply a fanboy...

Why either? Is it because he see that some of guys will try to diss and over exaggerated anything Nintendo does into gimmick (negatively) by "proof"
to try to make you opinions facts?

Which is even worst when you haven't even touch the technology you dissing.

We didn't dis anyone, we didn't insult anything about Nintendo.

The thing is, you're so blinded by what I can only describe as fanboyism (from what I've observed) that anything that when something even seems like it's a negative towards Nintendo you get defensive and fight back with conjecture and twist our words. This is especially true when you don't understand what we're talking about, like my use of the words "negative connotations".

Me a fanboy

I have a 3DS (of course), a PSP, PS3, PS2, Xbox, and many more classics. The problem is you try really hard to proove us that the 3DS has great problems. Which system didn't have problems? Also Every topic about Nintendo is being raided by "fail", "gimmick" or whatever comments.

When did I point out any problems in the 3DS in this thread? Please, enlighten me.

I didn't personally mean you...

 

[RisnDevil]

IMO, HD and 3D are in different ballparks. HD encompasses not just a higher resolution, but also polygon detail, texture resolution, etc to acquire that HD experience. 3D is just taking what already exists, and making it 3D.

I am glad then that your definition doesn't count. HD has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with "polygon detail, texture resolution, etc." HD refers ONLY to the pixel density/pixel count which has resulted in finer detail. Often times, it makes details that were already present (such as polygon detail or texture resolution) become visible but understand: there was no change to what was already there. With this higher density/count, developers have put more detail into games since it can now be noticed.

Now, more on-topic, while there are (rumored) "development" issues, I am GREATLY looking forward to the Wii U. I am not a developer (yet) and I see great potential for new and/or unique play with this (the tablet). Is the Wii U perfect? Hell no (or probably, more accurately since it's not done or out). My two biggest gripes are the ability to only use one tablet (Give us, the consumer, choices. Don't make them for us.) and the fact the tablet screen is not HD. Fix those and I promise you can do no wrong by me.

 

[FluffyLunamoth]

The tablet for the Wii U is basically similar; a cool piece of technology that is being pissed away as a stupid gimmick.

So, you go all that without even using it? Yeah, ok.

On the flipside, you get incredible boners over it while having the same amount of experience.

Quite honestly, I've listened to the review I posted and I'll take Yahtzee's opinion over yours. It feels like the 3DS came out and you're just trying to find some way to think everything about it is amazing.

I used to enjoy Nintendo products, I rocked only a Wii and DS for years and was quite content with it. Then I bought a Xbox and realized the Wii is a completely inferior product in every way outside of having some decent platformers, which I realized aren't all that anyway. Then I bought a PSP and realized handheld gaming is more than just the DS and can have games that are quality over quantity.

And here I used to think you at least had some respectable views. In what ways is the 360 a better product then the Wii? The Wii changed things up, and got both Microsoft and Sony to move into the motion controls. Innovative, and successful. The Wii has STILL outperformed the 360 and PS3 in terms of sales. Yeah, it doesn't have the best library of games, but it has far, far, far more good games then you're making it out to be. Having owned all 3 consoles, the only thing the 360 has going for it is it's online service, which people seem more then happy to pay out of their ass for. The PS3 has bluray, and a bit inferior online play, but other then that, is nothing more then a really souped up 360 that can play Bluray, and thus have better graphics in game(And to some extent, though not often, better gameplay). As for the 360, unless you're a "hardcore" FPS lover, the 360 doesn't exactly have that good of a selection.

Same thing with the DS. It brought in two things: dual-screen gaming, and touchscreen. That touchscreen influence is now everywhere. The DS also has, despite the amount of shitware, a far better library then the PSP could ever have. You say quality over quantity, but I've yet to actually find a PSP game that didn't actually bore me to tears(P3P, Phantasy Star Portable(2)). The only games I ever really enjoyed on the PSP were remakes. Nothing else really appealed to me, of course I can't say I've looked all that much recently. Meanwhile, my DS gets played almost daily for games I actually enjoy, while my PSP sits on my table being played maybe once a month. And again, in terms of sales(and games, I'd bet), the DS still outperformed the PSP.

That's not to say the PSV will outperform the 3DS, or vice versa. But as is already obvious, people don't want to spend $250 on a handheld gaming console. The 3DS tried that. The PSV will not be an exception at all. And you're foolish to think it will.


AS FOR the Wii U...well, I can't really see why it would perform well. It's controller, while an interesting idea, doesn't look all that comfortable to use. At all. It's a huge tablet. A tablet isn't meant to be a controller, never was. (Unless it's used for touch-controls, like current ones do for games and emulators and whatnot.) It's not really going to appeal to anyone at all, and what made them think it was a good idea, I will never know.

 

[SpaceJump]

The tablet for the Wii U is basically similar; a cool piece of technology that is being pissed away as a stupid gimmick.
So, you go all that without even using it? Yeah, ok.


On the flipside, you get incredible boners over it while having the same amount of experience.

Quite honestly, I've listened to the review I posted and I'll take Yahtzee's opinion over yours. It feels like the 3DS came out and you're just trying to find some way to think everything about it is amazing.

I used to enjoy Nintendo products, I rocked only a Wii and DS for years and was quite content with it. Then I bought a Xbox and realized the Wii is a completely inferior product in every way outside of having some decent platformers, which I realized aren't all that anyway. Then I bought a PSP and realized handheld gaming is more than just the DS and can have games that are quality over quantity.

And here I used to think you at least had some respectable views. In what ways is the 360 a better product then the Wii? The Wii changed things up, and got both Microsoft and Sony to move into the motion controls. Innovative, and successful. The Wii has STILL outperformed the 360 and PS3 in terms of sales. Yeah, it doesn't have the best library of games, but it has far, far, far more good games then you're making it out to be. Having owned all 3 consoles, the only thing the 360 has going for it is it's online service, which people seem more then happy to pay out of their ass for. The PS3 has bluray, and a bit inferior online play, but other then that, is nothing more then a really souped up 360 that can play Bluray, and thus have better graphics in game(And to some extent, though not often, better gameplay). As for the 360, unless you're a "hardcore" FPS lover, the 360 doesn't exactly have that good of a selection.

Same thing with the DS. It brought in two things: dual-screen gaming, and touchscreen. That touchscreen influence is now everywhere. The DS also has, despite the amount of shitware, a far better library then the PSP could ever have. You say quality over quantity, but I've yet to actually find a PSP game that didn't actually bore me to tears(P3P, Phantasy Star Portable(2)). The only games I ever really enjoyed on the PSP were remakes. Nothing else really appealed to me, of course I can't say I've looked all that much recently. Meanwhile, my DS gets played almost daily for games I actually enjoy, while my PSP sits on my table being played maybe once a month. And again, in terms of sales(and games, I'd bet), the DS still outperformed the PSP.

That's not to say the PSV will outperform the 3DS, or vice versa. But as is already obvious, people don't want to spend $250 on a handheld gaming console. The 3DS tried that. The PSV will not be an exception at all. And you're foolish to think it will.

Very well said. I couldn't have said it better.

QUOTE

AS FOR the Wii U...well, I can't really see why it would perform well. It's controller, while an interesting idea, doesn't look all that comfortable to use. At all. It's a huge tablet. A tablet isn't meant to be a controller, never was. (Unless it's used for touch-controls, like current ones do for games and emulators and whatnot.) It's not really going to appeal to anyone at all, and what made them think it was a good idea, I will never know.

I don't know if the tablet will be good until I actually try it. But I remember with the DS that the touch screen was labeled gimmick too and look where we are now. Maybe the WiiU will surprise us

Nintendo was always the innovator: NES pad, shoulder buttons, analog stick, rumble pack, touch screen, motion control and some others I forgot and the others are always following. The tablet could fit into the list.

 

[Terminator02]

I haven't read this thread, but i don't understand why this is news, all of this was said two weeks ago, it came out the day after the 01net rumors about the 3ds' second slidepad

 

[phantastic91]

My two biggest gripes are the ability to only use one tablet (Give us, the consumer, choices. Don't make them for us.) and the fact the tablet screen is not HD. Fix those and I promise you can do no wrong by me.

I agree with this. Although i can live without an HD screen since ill mostly be playing on the tv anyways, I really hate how Nintendo is handling the control options. It's a mess! I am looking forward to the wiiu, really. But Nintendo themselves seem to don't even know how to handle the control situation. At one point they say that there's only going to be one controller and another won't be sold in stores. Then later someone said that it might be available down the road and that they are working on support for two wiiu controllers. How is multiplayer going to work? I see this as a massive headache to developers creating multiplayer options and to consumers looking to buy extra controllers. Using a wii motion plus, classic controller, etc is not a perfect solution and is also confusing to consumers. Plus non of these controllers offers everything the main wiiu controller offers.

 

[KingVamp]

One controller does sound like a pain.

 

[SpaceJump]

One controller does sound like a pain.

I agree, they really have to adress this issue. Hopefully they will get it to work with more than just one.

 

[Nujui]

The tablet for the Wii U is basically similar; a cool piece of technology that is being pissed away as a stupid gimmick.

So, you go all that without even using it? Yeah, ok.

On the flipside, you get incredible boners over it while having the same amount of experience.

Quite honestly, I've listened to the review I posted and I'll take Yahtzee's opinion over yours. It feels like the 3DS came out and you're just trying to find some way to think everything about it is amazing.

I used to enjoy Nintendo products, I rocked only a Wii and DS for years and was quite content with it. Then I bought a Xbox and realized the Wii is a completely inferior product in every way outside of having some decent platformers, which I realized aren't all that anyway. Then I bought a PSP and realized handheld gaming is more than just the DS and can have games that are quality over quantity.

And here I used to think you at least had some respectable views. In what ways is the 360 a better product then the Wii? The Wii changed things up, and got both Microsoft and Sony to move into the motion controls. Innovative, and successful. The Wii has STILL outperformed the 360 and PS3 in terms of sales. Yeah, it doesn't have the best library of games, but it has far, far, far more good games then you're making it out to be. Having owned all 3 consoles, the only thing the 360 has going for it is it's online service, which people seem more then happy to pay out of their ass for. The PS3 has bluray, and a bit inferior online play, but other then that, is nothing more then a really souped up 360 that can play Bluray, and thus have better graphics in game(And to some extent, though not often, better gameplay). As for the 360, unless you're a "hardcore" FPS lover, the 360 doesn't exactly have that good of a selection.

What, they're Innovative, and successful? You're kidding. The kinect was a fail, the move controlls pretty much sucked, you want a comparison look at No More Heroes. The move controlls sucked compared to the Wii. Also Motion Controll is just a fad, which they bought into. The only reason the Wii was successful was that it was advertise as a Family/Causal console and people were ohh and awwing at the motion controlls, which after people got bored of and now the Wii doesn't sell as much as it use too.

Also their is a big difference between a PS3 and Xbox 360, and they do have a lot better games then the wii does by far.
Same thing with the DS. It brought in two things: dual-screen gaming, and touchscreen. That touchscreen influence is now everywhere. The DS also has, despite the amount of shitware, a far better library then the PSP could ever have. You say quality over quantity, but I've yet to actually find a PSP game that didn't actually bore me to tears(P3P, Phantasy Star Portable(2)). The only games I ever really enjoyed on the PSP were remakes. Nothing else really appealed to me, of course I can't say I've looked all that much recently. Meanwhile, my DS gets played almost daily for games I actually enjoy, while my PSP sits on my table being played maybe once a month. And again, in terms of sales(and games, I'd bet), the DS still outperformed the PSP.

And like the motion controlls, touchscreen is a fad.

That's not to say the PSV will outperform the 3DS, or vice versa. But as is already obvious, people don't want to spend $250 on a handheld gaming console. The 3DS tried that. The PSV will not be an exception at all. And you're foolish to think it will.


AS FOR the Wii U...well, I can't really see why it would perform well. It's controller, while an interesting idea, doesn't look all that comfortable to use. At all. It's a huge tablet. A tablet isn't meant to be a controller, never was. (Unless it's used for touch-controls, like current ones do for games and emulators and whatnot.) It's not really going to appeal to anyone at all, and what made them think it was a good idea, I will never know.

 

[FluffyLunamoth]

Spoiler

The tablet for the Wii U is basically similar; a cool piece of technology that is being pissed away as a stupid gimmick.

So, you go all that without even using it? Yeah, ok.

On the flipside, you get incredible boners over it while having the same amount of experience.

Quite honestly, I've listened to the review I posted and I'll take Yahtzee's opinion over yours. It feels like the 3DS came out and you're just trying to find some way to think everything about it is amazing.

I used to enjoy Nintendo products, I rocked only a Wii and DS for years and was quite content with it. Then I bought a Xbox and realized the Wii is a completely inferior product in every way outside of having some decent platformers, which I realized aren't all that anyway. Then I bought a PSP and realized handheld gaming is more than just the DS and can have games that are quality over quantity.

And here I used to think you at least had some respectable views. In what ways is the 360 a better product then the Wii? The Wii changed things up, and got both Microsoft and Sony to move into the motion controls. Innovative, and successful. The Wii has STILL outperformed the 360 and PS3 in terms of sales. Yeah, it doesn't have the best library of games, but it has far, far, far more good games then you're making it out to be. Having owned all 3 consoles, the only thing the 360 has going for it is it's online service, which people seem more then happy to pay out of their ass for. The PS3 has bluray, and a bit inferior online play, but other then that, is nothing more then a really souped up 360 that can play Bluray, and thus have better graphics in game(And to some extent, though not often, better gameplay). As for the 360, unless you're a "hardcore" FPS lover, the 360 doesn't exactly have that good of a selection.

What, they're innovative and succsseful? You're kidding. The kinect was a fail, the move controlls pretty much sucked, you want a comparison look at No More Heroes. The move controlls sucked compared to the Wii. Also Motion Controll is just a fad, which they bought into. The only reason the Wii was sucessful was that it was advertise as a Family/Causal console and people were ohh and awwing at the motion controlls, which after which people got bored of and now the Wii doesn't sell as much as it use too.

Also their is a big difference between a PS3 and Xbox 360.
Same thing with the DS. It brought in two things: dual-screen gaming, and touchscreen. That touchscreen influence is now everywhere. The DS also has, despite the amount of shitware, a far better library then the PSP could ever have. You say quality over quantity, but I've yet to actually find a PSP game that didn't actually bore me to tears(P3P, Phantasy Star Portable(2)). The only games I ever really enjoyed on the PSP were remakes. Nothing else really appealed to me, of course I can't say I've looked all that much recently. Meanwhile, my DS gets played almost daily for games I actually enjoy, while my PSP sits on my table being played maybe once a month. And again, in terms of sales(and games, I'd bet), the DS still outperformed the PSP.

And like the motion controlls, touchscreen is a fad.

That's not to say the PSV will outperform the 3DS, or vice versa. But as is already obvious, people don't want to spend $250 on a handheld gaming console. The 3DS tried that. The PSV will not be an exception at all. And you're foolish to think it will.


AS FOR the Wii U...well, I can't really see why it would perform well. It's controller, while an interesting idea, doesn't look all that comfortable to use. At all. It's a huge tablet. A tablet isn't meant to be a controller, never was. (Unless it's used for touch-controls, like current ones do for games and emulators and whatnot.) It's not really going to appeal to anyone at all, and what made them think it was a good idea, I will never know.

Getting long, spoilered it.

On the first point, you misunderstood. I meant the Wii's motion controls were innovative and successful. Not Sony and Microsofts. But the fact that they eventually did them only proves my point. On the second point, touchscreen is not a fad, and you're ignorant to think it is. If you truly think touchscreen is a fad, you underestimate it, and fail to see the plainly obvious. Everything has touchscreen now because it's the next step. Pretty soon we'll have non-physical screens completely.

 

[machomuu]

touchscreen is not a fad, and you're ignorant to think it is.
QUOTEIgnorant:
Lacking knowledge or awareness in general; uneducated or unsophisticated.

So no, he's not ignorant at all.

 

[Nujui]

Spoiler

The tablet for the Wii U is basically similar; a cool piece of technology that is being pissed away as a stupid gimmick.

So, you go all that without even using it? Yeah, ok.

On the flipside, you get incredible boners over it while having the same amount of experience.

Quite honestly, I've listened to the review I posted and I'll take Yahtzee's opinion over yours. It feels like the 3DS came out and you're just trying to find some way to think everything about it is amazing.

I used to enjoy Nintendo products, I rocked only a Wii and DS for years and was quite content with it. Then I bought a Xbox and realized the Wii is a completely inferior product in every way outside of having some decent platformers, which I realized aren't all that anyway. Then I bought a PSP and realized handheld gaming is more than just the DS and can have games that are quality over quantity.

And here I used to think you at least had some respectable views. In what ways is the 360 a better product then the Wii? The Wii changed things up, and got both Microsoft and Sony to move into the motion controls. Innovative, and successful. The Wii has STILL outperformed the 360 and PS3 in terms of sales. Yeah, it doesn't have the best library of games, but it has far, far, far more good games then you're making it out to be. Having owned all 3 consoles, the only thing the 360 has going for it is it's online service, which people seem more then happy to pay out of their ass for. The PS3 has bluray, and a bit inferior online play, but other then that, is nothing more then a really souped up 360 that can play Bluray, and thus have better graphics in game(And to some extent, though not often, better gameplay). As for the 360, unless you're a "hardcore" FPS lover, the 360 doesn't exactly have that good of a selection.

What, they're innovative and succsseful? You're kidding. The kinect was a fail, the move controlls pretty much sucked, you want a comparison look at No More Heroes. The move controlls sucked compared to the Wii. Also Motion Controll is just a fad, which they bought into. The only reason the Wii was sucessful was that it was advertise as a Family/Causal console and people were ohh and awwing at the motion controlls, which after which people got bored of and now the Wii doesn't sell as much as it use too.

Also their is a big difference between a PS3 and Xbox 360.
Same thing with the DS. It brought in two things: dual-screen gaming, and touchscreen. That touchscreen influence is now everywhere. The DS also has, despite the amount of shitware, a far better library then the PSP could ever have. You say quality over quantity, but I've yet to actually find a PSP game that didn't actually bore me to tears(P3P, Phantasy Star Portable(2)). The only games I ever really enjoyed on the PSP were remakes. Nothing else really appealed to me, of course I can't say I've looked all that much recently. Meanwhile, my DS gets played almost daily for games I actually enjoy, while my PSP sits on my table being played maybe once a month. And again, in terms of sales(and games, I'd bet), the DS still outperformed the PSP.

And like the motion controlls, touchscreen is a fad.

That's not to say the PSV will outperform the 3DS, or vice versa. But as is already obvious, people don't want to spend $250 on a handheld gaming console. The 3DS tried that. The PSV will not be an exception at all. And you're foolish to think it will.


AS FOR the Wii U...well, I can't really see why it would perform well. It's controller, while an interesting idea, doesn't look all that comfortable to use. At all. It's a huge tablet. A tablet isn't meant to be a controller, never was. (Unless it's used for touch-controls, like current ones do for games and emulators and whatnot.) It's not really going to appeal to anyone at all, and what made them think it was a good idea, I will never know.

Getting long, spoilered it.

On the first point, you misunderstood. I meant the Wii's motion controls were innovative and successful. Not Sony and Microsofts. But the fact that they eventually did them only proves my point. On the second point, touchscreen is not a fad, and you're ignorant to think it is. If you truly think touchscreen is a fad, you underestimate it, and fail to see the plainly obvious. Everything has touchscreen now because it's the next step. Pretty soon we'll have non-physical screens completely.

Oh yes it's a fad, and a pretty big one, what do you not see with a touchscreen these days? Pretty much everything has one, and some screens are sucky to say the least.. Also the way you worded it sounded like you were saying that Microsoft and Sony had innovative and sucessful controlls, so sorry for the misunderstooding it.

If a fad is good, people buy into it. Microsoft and sony bought into motion controlls and look where they went.

 

[FluffyLunamoth]

touchscreen is not a fad, and you're ignorant to think it is.

Lacking knowledge or awareness in general; uneducated or unsophisticated.
So no, he's not ignorant at all.

Would you rather me call him an idiot? I'd rather not start calling people names here. Should I call him dumb? Blind(I think I may have said this already, actually...)?

QUOTE

Oh yes it's a fad, and a pretty big one, what do you not see with a touchscreen these days? Pretty much everything has one, and some screens are sucky to say the least.. Also the way you wored it sounded like you were saying that Microsoft and Sony had innovative and sucessful, so sorry for the misunderstooding it.

If a fad is good, people buy into it. Microsoft and sony bought into motion controlls and look where they went.

A fad is something that goes away after a time. By your own logic, you could say a screen in general is a fad. Or even a computer.

 

[Vulpes Abnocto]

How about we keep insults out of this thread altogether?

 

[Guild McCommunist]

*stuff*

How is the 360 better than the Wii? It has better games and better graphics and better features. Sorry that my gaming diet isn't bright and cheery platformers or hack and slash Zelda adventures and we're better off not mentioning the glorified and utterly forgettable tech demos of Wii Sports, Wii Sports Resort, Wii Music, etc etc.

Adding something new to gameplay means all of horse shit when you forget to actually make the system new. When the new generation came forward, at least for the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3, they offered advanced graphics, a huge basket full of online options and integration, games that, with this new power and such, could actually push gaming to beyond what it was. The Wii just kinda stayed in the past with all that, hell, even took a step backwards with that joke of an online system, and just gave you a control you can swing in your hands. If "innovation" is just having some completely random idea instead of realizing "Hey, we've got really strong concepts that people enjoyed last generation that, if improved upon, can be some of the best in gaming history,", then fuck innovation in general.

Also, way to demonstrate you're complete and utter ignorance. Criticizing me of "not knowing the Wii library" while you know only what the random fanboy shit is on the Xbox 360 kinda invalidates any opinion you have in the same vein. Glass houses, rocks, etc.

It seems like you're one of those people who care more about your games having "innovation" than actually being fun or being complex, a disease that seems to be corrupting the whole Nintendo community nowadays. Nintendo could tell you to jump off a bridge because it's what they'd do and I'm sure you would do it.

The term "Nintendrones" becomes something I'm more tempted to use time and time again. I just find myself trying to find a few Nintendo fans with an actual sense of logic who realize that Nintendo isn't the bleeding edge of technology, but more like taking one step forward and two steps back. Pulling something new out of its ass but forgetting to keep itself up with the times technologically. And don't say the Wii U is the fixer to all this, it's offering maybe a bit passed current generation graphics all of how many years later? Am I supposed to be impressed? The Wii did the same exact thing. It's offering features and tech similar or close to the current gen without taking any step towards a next gen, just giving us a fancy controller and expecting me to think this is what makes games so much better, not the actual games themselves.