Nintendo and YOU, the debate.

[Subway]

Originally Posted by Subway

I, for one, am kinda wary of what you call a minimalist approach. If games like pong, pac-man, astroids etc. what you consider the roots, then count me out. These simple games do not engage me long enough or engage me simply for that matter.

Originally Posted by tpfkanep

I am glad that you mentioned Pong, etc. Even Super Mario World. Now the move from Pong to something like SMW: That is progress in terms of gameplay. Not the rubbish that has been going on from generation to generation that culminated in what we had last-gen: The games with movie-like production values, etc. Obviously, not all games were like that.

Well if you consider last gen rubbish, there is nothing I can do about it. But, I will say this though, I found nothing wrong with last gen, I had a nice little crop of variety, Zelda WW, Metroid Prime, F-zero, RE4, MGS:Twin snakes, Tales of Symphonia, Lost Kingdoms,Bloody Roar, Mario Party, Mario Sunshine, Luigi's Mansion, Baten Kaitos, Prince of Persia, Sonic Adventure 2 dx, Mario Kart: DD, Rogue Leader, Super Monkey Ball 2, Soul Caliber II, Megaman Aniversary collection, Super Smash Bros Melee, FFX, FFX-2,Star Ocean:Till ... Time, DDR, karaoke revolution, MGS 3, Dragon Ball Z Budakai, Tekkan 5, Street Fighter 3 and a few other game cube/ps2 games im missing. Even though some games weren't the best received nor did I complete some games, I had fun and I hope I will continue having fun with this generation.( Which I did with zelda, monkey ball, Red Steel, and CoD 3 and yes...even wii sports {to some extent [not as much as the others though =( ]}).

Originally Posted by Subway

Pong in my opinion might be comparable to wii sports tennis save for the graphical face lift and a few changes in rules and types of returning shots.

Originally Posted by tpfkanep

That means that Wii tennis can be recreated on the Atari 2600, minus the graphics. Interesting. Why stop at Wii Tennis? What about Final Fantasy, Halo, Virtua Fighter, Project Gotham Racing, etc?

What I was trying to convey by comparing wii sports:tennis with pong is that wii sport's simple gameplay(and games with easy to do tasks, type of gameplay) will not have enough variety to hold down the mass for long. They will get bored with it just like they basically got bored with pong.

Originally Posted by Subway

If games continue in this direction, people will soon be bored by the similarities of each game because there isn't enough substantial material to seperate one game from another.

Originally Posted by tpfkanep

You mean the same way that gamers are getting bored with the countless yearly sports updates, World War 2 shooters, bald space marines, movie tie-ins, car games, save the universe RPGs, etc?

Ouch...I completely mis-wrote what i meant. But as for your rebuttal, nice one .

What I really meant was just an extension to what I was saying about people getting tired of just simple gameplay, and eventually thirsting for something that applies the same formula of its gameplay to something else so that gamers wont be bored (just like mario has all those different platforms, even though the general gameplay is just to jump at platforms making to the end of the level.)

Originally Posted by Subway

If games are continuing in this "mini-games" direction for another year or so, then we might as well just buy a ps3 or 360 to satisfy our needs when it comes to gaming.

Originally Posted by tpfkanep

That really is the simplest solution to "Nintendo and YOU". To those that have a Wii and feel cheated: Sell the thing before it becomes widely available. That way you can still make a profit or at worst, break even.

Maybe it's time to move on. Get another hobby. Dust off the books, DVDs, etc. There was a time when arcades ruled. There was a time when boardgames, shoot-em-ups, fighters, platformers, shooters, etc. was popular. Some still are.

I welcome back the new gaming overlords: Nintendo. Heaven is not high enough.

I'm still planning to get a wii, for some of its other games, but not games that won't engage me for a long period of time. Games for me need to be both fun and engaging (with variety). I don't play some games anymore because somewhere along the way, I lost the feeling of fun, and that is a true shame.

[Keits]

I agree with and LOVE the 'other cosole' idea. I don't miss out on ANY of the things we would have had if Nintendo had made a console thats exactly like the competition, because I maintain the option of being a multiple console owner.

Plus, I gain new experiences (even if they are old games with new controls).

Lets not get impatient here, either. Any Nintendo fan, and most gaming fans, know that Nintendo takes it damn time when it comes to releasing games. Look at the DS. Slow start, yeah, but its probably my favorite SYSTEM of all time right now. I've gotten a LOT out of it, and I have a strong feeling the Wii is going to be the same.

[flowForth]

Originally Posted by tpfkanep

What would your definition of 'videogame advancement' be? Would you say videogames really advanced since the NES to what we have today, or has there been a steady decline in gameplay values?

There's many definitions of advancing video games - the one I particularly choose is increased QUALITY. As I said - Nintendo's approach does nothing to advance video games in this regard. I find it difficult to see how a different control mechanism can make games into quality pieces of software. I don't see it addressing bugs, issues of rushing games (so called "crunch time") or any other quality and project management related issues. It does no more than other approaches.

And yes - I will say that video games have advanced since the roundabout days of the NES. Let's take the FPS genre for instance - for years it was littered with nothing but Doom clones. It was not until GoldenEye came out for the N64 that it successfully broke new ground, did away with established cliches of simply wiping out droves of enemies and introduced various new concepts. Let us also take the move from 2D to 3D as another example - the development of 3D allowed greater, more immersive, more imaginative worlds and interaction as well gameplay. Or how about Mario 64 - I'd say that was a definite advancement over the 2D games of the NES days.

I find it odd you mentioned that "gameplay values" have eroded having considered all of the examples I gave. I also mentioned Deus Ex - a brilliant, A grade game that was destroyed when the developers decided to take a minimalist, idiot-friendly approach to the game. They consequently removed or simplified everything that made the game so unique - the RPG elements were removed, the storyline was destroyed, the characters made crap, on and on and on they butchered it. In this regard, a return to simplicity only served to destroy the game - not enhance it.

Originally Posted by tpfkanep

Videogames are a waste of time. At times it can be an exciting waste, other(most?) times it can be a... boring waste of time. I am glad to see the move away from being burdened with content (!), interactive movie-like games, etc.

You missed my point about games being a "waste of time" - allow me to clarify. There are many people out there, including game designers, that believe games have artistic qualities about them and can communicate themes like books and movies can. The point is that video games will hardly be recognized as something artistic if the focus is on simple games to please people who get intimidated by the slightest bit of difficulty in a game. If games have artistic merits - why not capitalize upon them?

There is nothing wrong about video games having storylines and character development. This does not make them "movie-like" - books have been telling stories and creating atmospheres long before movies came onto the scene. If you simply do not like such games then I can assure you that it is not story driven games that have the problem, its you.

Originally Posted by tpfkanep

I am glad for this minimalist approach, a return back to the roots of the industry. When games were fun. When games were simple. When games were a great waste of time. It is great, and sad, to see the reaction of the seasoned gamer to this new approach of Nintendo. True, fun is subjective, but in the greater scheme of things, nearly all those ~6 Million people are having fun with their Wiis. People who would have never picked up a controller in the past. With games like Wii Sports and Wii Play. Tech demos for the hardened gamer and technophiles. Fun and pure enjoyment for the rest of us.

As I said before - fun is subjective. You believe that games are more fun in the NES era - I don't particularly find games like Pong or Pac-Man terribly immersive. I don't see simple games and pandering to the lowest common denominator as an excuse to throw away generations worth of evolution in various genres. I'm not saying all games should be complex, but I'm not saying that all games need to be mind-numbingly simple either.

I don't also think that simple games are going to keep casual gamers amused forever. A common theme in the casual gaming market is that they play sporadically, and they get bored very easily. I doubt simple games are going to keep them hooked for long before they start itching for something else. This is the pattern for a lot of gamers, started with simple games before getting into more complex ones. This is what is going to test the Wii's future. How will the Wii look in the face of ever graphically impressive 360 and PS3 games? Time will tell.

I find your ~6 million figure of people having "fun" unconvincing. Judging from responses I've read from the internet both on this forum and from other sources - there's more than just a handful of people who've expressed discontent with the Wii. I'm willing to believe that a good portion of people simply bought it out of hype rather than any significant interest in games. Same goes with the other consoles.

At the end of the day, Nintendo's direction seems to be more of a short-term direction than anything else. They've got a strategy for netting the casual market, but they don't seem to have planned anything beyond that. I am very curious to see what the future holds for the Wii.

[tpfkanep]

Originally Posted by Subway

What I was trying to convey by comparing wii sports:tennis with pong is that wii sport's simple gameplay(and games with easy to do tasks, type of gameplay) will not have enough variety to hold down the mass for long. They will get bored with it just like they basically got bored with pong.

I see that you have not yet urchased a Wii. I take it you have maybe played Wii Sports (Tennis in particular)? Well, I am on level ~ 2300 in Wii Tennis, and have not yet tired of it, or any of the other Wii Sports games. To compare Tennis to Pong is really disingenius, as the two are not even remotely comparable. I agree with you tho, that both are easy to grasp.

I have read a couple of reports by gamers where they have given up on Wii Sports after a couple of hours. It is a really deep game if you invest quality time into it. And it is most important for me: Fun. Subjectively speaking of course.

People get bored of games, regardless of their difficulty, levels of immersion, production values or even sometimes gameplay values. Same thing will happen with me and my beloved Wii Sports.

I don't play some games anymore because somewhere along the way, I lost the feeling of fun, and that is a true shame.

That's how I felt when playing most of last-gen games. Something was seriously wrong: Either with me, or with the games themselves. The Wii is a breath of fresh air. For some it became stale. Others find it gimmicky. Others find it old-tech, etc.

Originally Posted by flowForth

As I said - Nintendo's approach does nothing to advance video games in this regard. I find it difficult to see how a different control mechanism can make games into quality pieces of software.

The same way increased processing power, resolutions, online, etc. does not also guarantee a great game. I think a lot of gamers thought that motion controls will automatically mean a great game. After playing Monkey Ball, and even Twilight Princess, that kind of thinking is so far from the truth. Designers, producers, etc. will still have to use tried and trusted design principles to ensure a good game, regardless of control scheme, CPU prowess, etc.

I find it odd you mentioned that "gameplay values" have eroded having considered all of the examples I gave.

You mentioned exceptional case studies - that really stand out from the crowd and defined and redefined gaming generations. I dunno flow, I just felt, esp. with lastgen, that gaming is getting too stale, too repetitive and too dull. The Wii was going to my last console. So far, it has delivered on it's promises. Maybe I was desparate enough to believe the hype, blind enough to be lead down the Nintendo path of enlightenment... whatever the reason, I do not care anymore. I am having fun again with my gaming. And so is my whole family.

You missed my point about games being a "waste of time" - allow me to clarify. There are many people out there, including game designers, that believe games have artistic qualities about them and can communicate themes like books and movies can. The point is that video games will hardly be recognized as something artistic if the focus is on simple games to please people who get intimidated by the slightest bit of difficulty in a game.If games have artistic merits - why not capitalize upon them?

Are you saying that difficulty/complex gameplay mechanics directly equate to artisic merit? I am not an artist, but I do not see that art can only have one interpretation, one design philosophy. I do not care for art in games. I only care about: Am I having fun with the game? I really challenge anyone to play Wii Sports on Pro Level. I have tried this with my Mii and some family members. From non-gamers to my brother who is a seasoned gamer. In both cases, those gamers got their socks beaten off. Anyone played Super Monkey Ball on the Gamecube? A game that only uses the control stick for movement. Try that game with it's simple controls and see if you will master the levels with your eyes closed. Simple does not mean less challenging.

How will the Wii look in the face of ever graphically impressive 360 and PS3 games? Time will tell.

It's a pity that that is one of your concerns, given the beauty and depth of your reply. In the end, it's the games. The PS2 was proof of that in the face of much more superior hardware. In the end, this industry is not driven by technology, but by games.

[Koffdrop]

OK, my turn

I have no problems with Nintendo, on the whole. I've probably played and owned more Nintendo made consoles and handhelds than any other. The Wii has never done anything for me in the slightest. It proposed games I wasn't interested in playing and it's kept good on that promise. I see nothing on the Wii bar Metroid Prime 3 that I have any interest in playing whatsoever. That's got nothing to do with the Wii and everything to do with me enjoying the Metroid series of games.

I don't regard Nintendo as wrong for not catering for where I am as a gamer. They're going in a direction, I'm going in a direction. If our paths cross then great. I'm still enjoying the games I play and Nintendo are still making heaps of cashmoney. Seems like we're both pretty happy with our lot. Good for us.

However,

I do have a big problem with the perception of Nintendo, which is completely screwed up. There's a whole 'can do no wrong' attitude and an endless barrage of excuses made on their behalf such as "don't criticise the Wii yet - it's too new - give it time!" made by many. Yet, in respect of other manufacturers, the same folk will often insist a platform is DOA, D00MED or rubbish either before it's released or mere days after it appears. This is hypocritical, of course. Another easy to find example is the notion that "Nintendo's machines are always about the games, not media centers or stuff I'll never use" followed by excited talk about weather, news and voting channels.

Of greater concern to me is when the culture and the media dismiss anyone in the industry who dares to criticise Nintendo or their hardware. It's already a trend we've seen plenty of and, frankly, is stifling free speech by informed individuals because of such immature backlashes. The response to this is for companies actively choose not to criticise Nintendo as a method of damage limitation and for other companies to ride a wave of positivity of publicity based on nothing other than some favourable comments about the Wii. Nibris with their comments and game 'Sadness' are a prime example of this. I will be amazed if anything they ever do sees the light of day or even reaches a publisher - yet based only on their comments, their vapourware game is on numerous "most wanted" lists. This sets the stage for misinformation and manipulation and is not healthy but has already become a common practice. The media attitude is equally to blame in this regard.

The polarisation of the culture, as I see it, is not good and this more than anything makes me far more critical of Nintendo than of any other platform manufacturer out there.

I also happen to think their games are way too easy.

[Drunken Savior]

I think graphics should be a huge concern for Nintendo. Already, the graphics are showing their age. Graphics might not be a huge factor to you, but don't tell me it's not a factor at all.

The PS2 held a firm lead, allowing for 3rd parties to sell a decent amount of software. As of now, there is no firm leader. I doubt that we'll see last gen numbers; most likely we'll see balanced numbers within 20%. That means the Wii will have to compete against the PS3 and 360 when a multiplatform game is made. In addition, making exclusive games on the Wii means you are competing against Nintendo, the best developer for the last decade or so.

[tpfkanep]

but don't tell me it's not a factor at all.

It is a factor, obviously. But it's not the most important factor. I suppose that is another reason why some would feel the bitterness in their mouth when playing the Wii - it's not next-gen enough ito graphics when compared to the 360 and PS3 powerhouses.

PS: DS (or any other mod), how come I do not get instant email notifications of thread updates to my gmail account? Has email notifications been disabled? Thanks.

[flowForth]

Originally Posted by tpfkanep

The same way increased processing power, resolutions, online, etc. does not also guarantee a great game. I think a lot of gamers thought that motion controls will automatically mean a great game. After playing Monkey Ball, and even Twilight Princess, that kind of thinking is so far from the truth. Designers, producers, etc. will still have to use tried and trusted design principles to ensure a good game, regardless of control scheme, CPU prowess, etc.

True - as I said, Nintendo's direction does no more than the other consoles' directions.

Originally Posted by tpfkanep

You mentioned exceptional case studies - that really stand out from the crowd and defined and redefined gaming generations. I dunno flow, I just felt, esp. with lastgen, that gaming is getting too stale, too repetitive and too dull. The Wii was going to my last console. So far, it has delivered on it's promises. Maybe I was desparate enough to believe the hype, blind enough to be lead down the Nintendo path of enlightenment... whatever the reason, I do not care anymore. I am having fun again with my gaming. And so is my whole family.

From my perspective, gaming has always been stale in each generation - for me, it has been a case of sorting through tonnes of garbage to find the few gems worth playing. The industries tendency to obsessively copy the successful formula has always been pronounced, even in the NES days.

And I am glad that you're having fun with your family with the Wii. If you're enjoying it, there is no reason for you to stop and change your tastes. I'm certainly not advancing an argument in that regard.

Originally Posted by tpfkanep

Are you saying that difficulty/complex gameplay mechanics directly equate to artisic merit? I am not an artist, but I do not see that art can only have one interpretation, one design philosophy. I do not care for art in games. I only care about: Am I having fun with the game? I really challenge anyone to play Wii Sports on Pro Level. I have tried this with my Mii and some family members. From non-gamers to my brother who is a seasoned gamer. In both cases, those gamers got their socks beaten off. Anyone played Super Monkey Ball on the Gamecube? A game that only uses the control stick for movement. Try that game with it's simple controls and see if you will master the levels with your eyes closed. Simple does not mean less challenging.

Complexity and difficulty do not directly equate to artistic merit - but they can play a significant role in the artistry. Let's take Dues Ex again for instance (I know you're probably getting sick of me mentioning it but I really hold that game in high regard), it would have been nowhere near as enjoyable and deep if I could just run through each mission with guns blazing. The complexity of Deus Ex is what made it so unique and deep compared to the myriads of other FPS' out there - the way it blended RPG elements into the game, the way it allowed you to take multiple approaches to solve the same problem, the whole biomod system and the way it influenced your approach - it was all done and blended in brilliantly and seamlessly. The game is simply another FPS clone without these elements, which is why I hated its sequel. The actual influence of difficulty and complexity on gameplay is much more pronounced than this - but exploring it would mean I would have to write an essay.

I'm not saying simple games are artistically impaired (you are right that art has many interpretations) - but I'm saying complexity can also aid artistry and it should not be forsaken just because a lot of casual gamers get put off easily. I don't have a problem with simple games being artistic but I have a problem complex games being overlooked to favor those that simply are unwilling to invest time to engage themselves with a deep game. The particular artistry I'm looking for (I'm a proponent of games-as-art) is excellent and deep storytelling with deep, innovative interaction (that eliminates MGS out of the equation - it is not as interactive as it should be). Few games have satisfied me in this regard.

Originally Posted by tpfkanep

It's a pity that that is one of your concerns, given the beauty and depth of your reply. In the end, it's the games. The PS2 was proof of that in the face of much more superior hardware. In the end, this industry is not driven by technology, but by games.

I wasn't making judgments on what effect the Wii's lack of graphical power will have on its success nor am I in any position to make an accurate judgment - hence why I said "Time will tell". I'm saying it could be a significant factor.

[tpfkanep]

I'm a proponent of games-as-art

I am totally the opposite.

The particular artistry I'm looking for (I'm a proponent of games-as-art) is excellent and deep storytelling with deep, innovative interaction (that eliminates MGS out of the equation - it is not as interactive as it should be). Few games have satisfied me in this regard.

Excellent and deep storytelling - I am not so sure that stories are even needed in games. Deep or otherwise. It does not fit in with the medium, and robs one of interactivity - the one characteristic that sets games apart from any other medium.

Final Scene, Final Act: You just finished off the minions of the evil overlord (bear with me). You come face to face with your nemesis. He delivers a speech of intensisity that has you in tears and goosebumps on your skin. Suddenly (!) he attacks you and the final battle ensues. You die at his hand.

Press [a] to continue...

You go thru the same long and drawn out process with the speeches. You're lucky as you can skip all that and get straight on with dispathing the evil overlord and save the world.

A very poor example... but the very repetitive nature of games means that whatever story there is needs to be repeated until the game/level's objective is reached. I died in SPM (oh gosh!) at one end of level boss character. The 1st time I read the speech bubbles, the second time I skipped thru all of that to get to the boss and fight. Had the end boss had no speech bubbles, it would not have made the game less enjoyable.

with deep, innovative interaction

Can you clarify this? Does the Wii remote not offer the promise of this for you? After playing Wii tennis, there is no way I am going back to button based tennis games. No way.

Few games have satisfied me in this regard.

Besides Deux ex, what other games have you played that satisfies your needs/criteria?

[Alexander]

It's not like the wiimote is even advanced enough to offer a realistic tennis game, guys.

[Joker]

Originally Posted by Drunken Savior

I think graphics should be a huge concern for Nintendo. Already, the graphics are showing their age. Graphics might not be a huge factor to you, but don't tell me it's not a factor at all.

The PS2 held a firm lead, allowing for 3rd parties to sell a decent amount of software. As of now, there is no firm leader. I doubt that we'll see last gen numbers; most likely we'll see balanced numbers within 20%. That means the Wii will have to compete against the PS3 and 360 when a multiplatform game is made. In addition, making exclusive games on the Wii means you are competing against Nintendo, the best developer for the last decade or so.

If we count the handhelds (and I see no reason why not) then there is a very clear leader in the industry.

[Reality]

Originally Posted by Drunken Savior

I think graphics should be a huge concern for Nintendo. Already, the graphics are showing their age. Graphics might not be a huge factor to you, but don't tell me it's not a factor at all.

The PS2 held a firm lead, allowing for 3rd parties to sell a decent amount of software. As of now, there is no firm leader. I doubt that we'll see last gen numbers; most likely we'll see balanced numbers within 20%. That means the Wii will have to compete against the PS3 and 360 when a multiplatform game is made. In addition, making exclusive games on the Wii means you are competing against Nintendo, the best developer for the last decade or so.

Another interesting problem Nintendo may have is the real possible lack of traditional games. Take Resident Evil Wii for example. Capcom claims the controller was to hard to make a Re4 like game work.

[spider-prime]

but yet there is RE4 for it lol

[Subway]

Originally Posted by Koffdrop

I don't regard Nintendo as wrong for not catering for where I am as a gamer. They're going in a direction, I'm going in a direction. If our paths cross then great. I'm still enjoying the games I play and Nintendo are still making heaps of cashmoney. Seems like we're both pretty happy with our lot. Good for us.

I have to say, a very admirable view . You get + rep from me.

Originally Posted by koffdrop

However,

I do have a big problem with the perception of Nintendo, which is completely screwed up. There's a whole 'can do no wrong' attitude and an endless barrage of excuses made on their behalf such as "don't criticise the Wii yet - it's too new - give it time!" made by many. Yet, in respect of other manufacturers, the same folk will often insist a platform is DOA, D00MED or rubbish either before it's released or mere days after it appears. This is hypocritical, of course. Another easy to find example is the notion that "Nintendo's machines are always about the games, not media centers or stuff I'll never use" followed by excited talk about weather, news and voting channels.

I feel, "dont crticise wii yet-it'ts too new- give it time!" is a legitimate response for people who dismiss it at this time. The Wii has only been released since December . But, I'm pretty sure I see what you mean, and I have nothing I can think of saying which will refute what you are stating.

Originally Posted by koffdrop

Of greater concern to me is when the culture and the media dismiss anyone in the industry who dares to criticise Nintendo or their hardware. It's already a trend we've seen plenty of and, frankly, is stifling free speech by informed individuals because of such immature backlashes. The response to this is for companies actively choose not to criticise Nintendo as a method of damage limitation and for other companies to ride a wave of positivity of publicity based on nothing other than some favourable comments about the Wii.

For people to rise up and belittle someone or to harass someone for simply critizing nintendo, there has to be enough love(caring) for nintendo (sorta like people and animal rights) or the bandwagon(go with the flow and be cool). I really do not think culture is to be blamed. As for media, I think the media only propagates the image of nintendo and its wii as something amazing, and it is only the people who have already fallen to propaganda that senselessly attack someone of different views. People really need to think for themselves and discover what is truly right for them.

Originally Posted by tpfkanep

I see that you have not yet urchased a Wii. I take it you have maybe played Wii Sports (Tennis in particular)? Well, I am on level ~ 2300 in Wii Tennis, and have not yet tired of it, or any of the other Wii Sports games. To compare Tennis to Pong is really disingenius, as the two are not even remotely comparable. I agree with you tho, that both are easy to grasp.

I have read a couple of reports by gamers where they have given up on Wii Sports after a couple of hours. It is a really deep game if you invest quality time into it. And it is most important for me: Fun. Subjectively speaking of course.

People get bored of games, regardless of their difficulty, levels of immersion, production values or even sometimes gameplay values. Same thing will happen with me and my beloved Wii Sports.

I may not have personally purchased the wii, but my brother did, and I played it extensively for about 3 weeks. Within that time, I have beaten zelda:tp, beaten red steel, beat all the levels up to the octapus boss in monkey ball, played a few hours marvel, a few hours of rayman, played wii sports with friends and family for quite a while, played a decent amount of COD3. And gotten pretty far in trauma center at a friends place.

I do not see how wii sports tennis is not comparable to pong, they are both easy to play and pick up, both gameplay are similar (one paddle/racket hits ball to try to pass other paddle/racket), and both can be categorized as a game emphasized on fun (albeit, pong in retrospect to most people is not fun anymore, but that was based on really old technology).

[Drunken Savior]

Originally Posted by Joker

If we count the handhelds (and I see no reason why not) then there is a very clear leader in the industry.

In this case we don't count handhelds because we are talking about market share v 3rd party games. The PS3 and Xbox360 are not in direct competition with portable games (i.e. You aren't gonna see MGS5 being released on a handheld over a traditional console). The Wii slightly competes with the DS for games.

Anywho, that's why I don't count DS/GB sales when I talk about market share.

Originally Posted by Reality

Another interesting problem Nintendo may have is the real possible lack of traditional games. Take Resident Evil Wii for example. Capcom claims the controller was to hard to make a Re4 like game work.

I think Capcom wanted to make a quick buck off the Wii by getting lazy on RE:UC. But that's just me....