I still don't get how people are considering the Wii system a failure. Isn't the success of a product based on the profit made off of it in comparison to competing products? Or have the laws of business that have always existed not apply to the software entertainment industry, or have changed somehow overnight?
Just because there is a select group of "hardcore snobs" who say the Wii is a failure because it doesn't appeal to them, consider this: with Nintendo's strategy of capturing the untapped market of the "casual gamer" and converting non gamers with a way to control games that is familiar to those who have never played (because everyone knows how to use a remote, and what can be easier than pointing?) they have managed to overtake the market after a rather lackluster 6th generation performance. It's also a testament to business success when the competitor is now copying the same business plan. Why? Because its a good business strategy to widen your client base. And like a previous poster said, Microsoft and Sony have been hurting with the costs they've endured with expensive and faulty hardware, to the point to where both have removed functionality or features that originally came with the systems. Nintendo hasn't had to do that at all. Why? Because it wasn't playing in the "one-up" war Microsoft and Sony were. Nintendo has stated that it considers neither of those two competitors because they have chosen to go a seperate direction in development from those two.
And everyone loves to compare visual fidelity. Between the 360 and PS3 in realtime, side by side comparisons, for most games there is no difference, because both sets of hardware have different bottlenecks which actually bring them both down to the same basic real life performance levels. And besides, we have actually reached a ceiling of visual fidelity in the market that we are not really able to break past. Poly counts have plateued, because at the current level adding more doesn't give anymore visual improvement that's worth the cost in performance. Texturing has become the new trick in establishing greater fidelity, and that's most reliant on the available memory a system has to keep large textures flowing smoothly. And the whole 1080p BS people keep touting, look around the internet, there are plenty of sites that tell you that the vast majority of games on those two consoles do not display at true 1080p, if anything its usually process at 720p, or some custom resolution within a 100 pixels either way, that is upscaled to 1080p. Tekken 6 is a great case for that, as you can actually change the resolution of the game based on turning certain visual features on and off (it doesn't advertise it's doing this of course). And most games for the consoles are complete crap, cloned FPS's of the same angsty character, with the same grudge, against the same oppressive government/alien army/random monsters, those games have become as predictable as EVERY CSI/Law and Order show and knockoff.
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]Nintendo and will announce that they will have Steam support.Impossible?OK Steam now support OSX and Linux and there is even Steamplay where you buy the game once and it works on any platform, so exactly how difficult would it be to make games on Steam work with a new Nintendo console.Not very, a few hardware minimum requirements, a large hard drive and all of Nintendo's catalogue available as Direct Download via Steam also.[/citation]
Steam is only supported on OSX and Windows. And the OSX is pitiful, small library of games and a buggy interface. There will not be a Linux version, Valve just recently confirmed that. So the only way to get Steam on Linux is through a program like Wine. And PS3 is the only console to get Steam service in the forseeable future.
Facebook
Twitter