Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Wii Nintendo Games

Wii Hardware Upgrade Won't Happen Soon 325

Posted by Soulskill
from the can't-show-ugly-mario-in-hd dept.
As high-definition graphics become more and more entrenched in this generation of game consoles, Nintendo has had to deal with constant speculation about a new version of the Wii that would increase its capabilities. Today, Nintendo of America president Reggie Fils-Aime bluntly denied that a hardware revision was imminent, saying, "We are confident the Wii home entertainment console has a very long life in front of it." He added, "In terms of what the future holds, we've gone on record to say that the next step for Nintendo in home consoles will not be to simply make it HD, but to add more and more capability, and we'll do that when we've totally tapped out all of the experiences for the existing Wii. And we're nowhere near doing that yet."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Wii Hardware Upgrade Won't Happen Soon

Comments Filter:
  • by sopssa (1498795) * <sopssa@email.com> on Friday January 15, 2010 @03:53AM (#30776208) Journal

    Wii has a large userbase of casual gamers. There wouldn't really be anything that new for then. HD sure, but I know many people who really aren't that interested in it. I am, sure, I would love a Wii HD with Motion Capture Plus. But thats probably not the case for majority of people, especially girls who usually don't understand why their boyfriends/husbands want a huge HDTV.

    The only thing Wii was missing was the better motion sensors, but it wasn't possible financially at that point, the technology was too costly for competing with better priced console. After that it would be just everything that more hardcore players would want, and that isn't Nintendo's largest market.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by xtracto (837672)

      Yeah, similarly as Sony CEO denied the existence of a PS3 Slim before they unveiled it.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by Bai jie (653604)
        Yeah because Sony lying totally means that Nintendo is too.
      • by Maxo-Texas (864189) on Friday January 15, 2010 @11:51AM (#30779492)

        Everyone learned the lesson of Osborne computers.

        If they said there was a new WII coming out in 11 months or that the new Wii's controllers would impale your hand with spikes, sales would plummet.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Golddess (1361003)
          As far as I am aware, sales of the DS, DS Lite, and DSi did not plummet when the DS Lite, DSi, and DSi XL were announced (respectively).

          Though I will admit that when I personally heard about the DSi XL I decided to skip the DSi.
    • by phantomfive (622387) on Friday January 15, 2010 @04:31AM (#30776364) Journal
      In addition to that, half the games don't even make full use of the graphics capabilities already available. Zelda, for example, looked basically the same as on game cube. Right now I'm playing fire-emblem, and while it's a great game, the graphics aren't much better than you would see on PS1. It's kind of amazing to me now, that after all these years of chasing graphics, finally there is a console that ignores the race and still does well.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Toonol (1057698)
        I've stopped caring about advances in graphics since about the time of the PS2. There are new things the current gen of consoles offer... networking, motion sensing, better storage... but if you look fundamentally at the games, I don't think the improved graphics make them any more fun. There's nothing on the 360 that couldn't have been done on the x-box, if the developers had just cut back the complexity of the graphics; and it would have been no less fun.

        At some point, the majority of televisions wil
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Inda (580031)
          Are you two kidding? Full blown HD graphics with shadows, complex textures, high poly count and the like are what I want. I want to see blemishes on skin, blades of grass moving and reflections in water. I want to hear footsteps on metal, birds tweeting and monsters breathing. I want downloadable content, voice chat and massive multiplayer events.

          Any gamer who's pulled out a GFX card and replaced it with a better model will say the same.

          Wii? It's a child's toy. It's a child's toy that my child doesn't even
          • by BikeHelmet (1437881) on Friday January 15, 2010 @06:22AM (#30776890) Journal

            Are you two kidding? Full blown HD graphics with shadows, complex textures, high poly count and the like are what I want. I want to see blemishes on skin, blades of grass moving and reflections in water. I want to hear footsteps on metal, birds tweeting and monsters breathing. I want downloadable content, voice chat and massive multiplayer events.

            Sounds like you need a PC rather than a console.

            Consoles are great. I need one so that when people visit, they keep their mucky hands off my computer. Guess which console I went for?

          • by Toonol (1057698)
            It's more powerful than the PS2. Did you not enjoy a PS2? I would give up all my current gen consoles before I gave up my PS2.

            I guess I look for very different things in a game than you do.
          • by polar red (215081)

            Any gamer who's pulled out a GFX card and replaced it with a better model will say the same.

            wrong. did you ever try the wii out ? the controller is at least half what it makes interesting, and i'm waiting for "red steel 2" to come out, it will blow your mind ...

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by nloop (665733)

            Are you two kidding? ... I want to see blemishes on skin, blades of grass moving and reflections in water. I want to hear footsteps on metal, birds tweeting

            Look around, see that door? Yeah, that one with the sunlight behind it. Close the computer, and walk out it.

            Fixed that for you.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Negatyfus (602326)
          I have often wondered if what I saw the Xbox 360 put out would have been possible on the Xbox. My conclusion is: no, it wouldn't have been. It would have been a scaled-down, lesser experience. The consoles are power-beasts this generation and can barf up some very impressive things. Not only in terms of graphics do the games provide a better feeling, but also in amount of enemies on-screen, AI and animation. The latter plays a big role in gameplay. I also like in-game cut-scenes. The Xbox could do that, su
        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by timmarhy (659436)
          here is the counter arguement - HD graphics allow you to place details in the game that otherwise would be impossible. translucent walls, fog, 3d sound. they all add to the atmosphere of the game and CAN make a more enjoyable and immersive experience.

          having said that, i'm flat out thinking of more then a handfull of games that actually make use of it. that's not a problem with HD however, it's a problem with our current distribution system for gaming, which favours the wrong people.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Hatta (162192)

            Translucency and fog have been used to great effect on previous gen consoles. Hell, on the N64 it seems like there's nothing but fog. :)

        • by DrXym (126579) on Friday January 15, 2010 @08:26AM (#30777550)
          I've stopped caring about advances in graphics since about the time of the PS2. There are new things the current gen of consoles offer... networking, motion sensing, better storage... but if you look fundamentally at the games, I don't think the improved graphics make them any more fun. There's nothing on the 360 that couldn't have been done on the x-box, if the developers had just cut back the complexity of the graphics; and it would have been no less fun.

          The "graphics don't matter" argument doesn't hold much water. If we go down that route, then through backwards induction there was nothing in the PS2 that couldn't be done on the PS1 with cut back graphics. And nothing on the PS1 that couldn't be done on the Sega Saturn. And nothing in the Sega Saturn to Sega Megadrive. And nothing in the Sega Megadrive to NES. And nothing in NES to Atari 2600. And nothing Atari 2600 to the Telstar. etc.

          Except of course graphics wasn't the only thing that changed between console generations. Processing power, memory, storage, general throughput, controllers, number of players, modelling, animation, audio, networking, physics are all improved. Each generation was capable of delivering experiences that you simply couldn't get on the one before. Do all these things guarantee a better game? Of course not, but they are powerful tools that can and should be used to deliver the best experience.

          An obvious example of this would be Dead Rising. The concept worked so well on the 360 because the console had the power to render hundreds of zombies. A veritable horde of them. When the game was ported to the Wii, even with cut down graphics, the game had been emasculated so you were lucky to see a dozen zombies at once. The game lost its soul in the transition. Some games simply do not translate well even if you cut down the graphics.

        • by NeMon'ess (160583) *

          It sounds like you're in the minority of console gamers who never has moments like "holy shit that looks amazing!" Better graphics make that possible.

        • by Hurricane78 (562437) <.gro.todhsals. .ta. .deteled.> on Friday January 15, 2010 @09:44AM (#30778122)

          I’ll make a bold statement:

          I am a game designer. And you know which games I personally like to play most?
          Small innovative (flash) games and the like! (Think kongregate.com.)

          It sees that big budget games tend to go all aesthetics and technology.
          But small games go more in the direction of good gameplay (mechanics).

          I wish people would not forget, that it’s all four (story, gameplay, aesthetics, and technology) that are relevant.
          And the quality of a game, is all those things, multiplied with each other. (With story having the biggest factor, but the others being not much less relevant.)
          They have to support each other.

      • by bronney (638318) on Friday January 15, 2010 @05:26AM (#30776642) Homepage

        Exactly bro, ever notice the people in Pixar's film don't exactly look like people? Yet their movie completely rocks? It's always the content. The actors do play a part but if you've seen great actors in shit high budget movies you'd know what I mean :)

        • by Calinous (985536)

          People are used to a kind of look, and won't accept anything less.
          I started gaming on the Sinclair Spectrum clones, with their 256 * 170 something displays. I still think those games were looking great, but I hate the look of the flash-based clones with similar resolutions.
          People that are used to a level of graphics in games won't accept something lower, even if the play is fun. While Doom could look nice on a phone screen, they look terrible on 19" displays.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Hurricane78 (562437)

          That’s because Pixar avoids the uncanny valley like hell. And they are right to do so.
          Pixar could already go practically 100% on making realistic humans. But that tiny bit missing would make it a very creepy experience. Which perhaps works if it’s supposed to be a monster in a horror movie. But not in your typical Pixar movie. ;)

          I agree, that we are past “realism” as an ideal.
          Nowadays, it’s like art: You try to create a style. Its own “realism”.
          Like Finding Nemo, wh

    • by fm6 (162816) on Friday January 15, 2010 @04:49AM (#30776456) Homepage Journal

      Well, they already made the decision to drop out of the graphics arms race, and instead concentrate an features that made the system more usable. That strategy has paid off handsomely. Why go back on it now?

      I wonder if consumers are beginning to get tired of all that expensive tech that ends up being obsolete in a year or two. The recession is a factor, but even before, we saw people asking themselves if they really wanted Blu-Ray, HD, or whatever. The fact that cheap-but-fun Nintendo products are outselling the fancier competition is consistent with that.

      • by zmollusc (763634) on Friday January 15, 2010 @05:07AM (#30776558)

        Might it be that, for most people, DVD resolution is 'good enough' for video, like mp3 is 'good enough' for audio? Or am I just restating the '640k' thing?

        • DVD resolution is 'good enough' for video

          Most of the time - yes. Many movies gain little to nothing from HD.

          Or am I just restating the '640k' thing?

          Yes and no.

          My point is that many movies/games jumped on HD (and next - 3D) without actually trying to add anything new to it. My friend after seeing a new movie in HD once commented that only difference to experience was that in the boring moments of the movie he could entertain himself by reading the signs and numbers on the license plates.

          Where HD could make huge difference in games IMO are the action scenes. Pixel count really hel

          • Talking of 3D (off topic) but I can't watch it. My depth-perception kicks in and I try and focus on different parts of the scene. Avatar was pretty, but gave me a headache.

            Does anybody watch a movie by staring dead-straight at the centre of the screen?
            • Does anybody watch a movie by staring dead-straight at the centre of the screen?

              Majority does.

              And that's what Hollywood execs care about.

              I have similar problems though not to such extent: during Avatar I had to take off glasses not once but otherwise I was OK.

              In fact it is not so much of an off-topic. HD has similar problem - supplying too much redundant information which human perception simply can't swallow. Most people ignore it. Though some like me (or you) who like to look not only at what film/game makers expects us to look at get the headaches.

          • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

            by plastbox (1577037)
            What I don't get is that the Wii already supports HD. Depends on your definition I guess but 480p is, per definition, HD. Sure, you'd need to buy an extra cable or break out the proper output yourself (I recall seeing someone hack this together a while back), but 480p should look a lot better than 480i or whatever VHS players of ye olden days used (that we still, for some reason, use).
      • by Obyron (615547) on Friday January 15, 2010 @09:37AM (#30778062)
        They jumped out of the graphics arms race and into the peripherals arms race. In Canada the Wii costs around 200 bucks at Costco, which is the cheapest I've seen it, and around 200 dollars cheaper than the xbox. But you need to get a nunchuk to play certain games: 25 dollars. A second controller and nunchuk, around 50 bucks total. Want to get motionplus for both of those to improve the motion sensing? 50 dollars. You're now at 325, compared to the xbox with a second controller which gets you to about 450 (and also comes with the Elite system, Modern Warfare 2, and a 250gb hard drive). The average new game for the 360 up here runs 60-70 dollars. For the Wii they're slightly cheaper... unless they're some hokey peripheral game like WiiFit, where you're going to pay 100 dollars. Want another balance board? That'll be 60 or 70 dollars. Want to buy Mario Kart and get two little steering wheel controllers? 90 dollars. If the Wii is not the most outright profitable console of this generation I'd be shocked, because they nickle and dime you to death with cheap peripherals, and people buy them. It seems like every game they come out with comes with some new gadget you need to buy, and I hardly think that's an accident. I'd like to see Microsoft and Sony put out a commercial comparing Total Cost of Ownership, because even if you're paying for Xbox Live Gold every a year, you'll probably end up spending more money for your Wii.
        • by JayAEU (33022)

          If you're paying so much for all that gear, you're doing it wrong... ;)
          http://bit.ly/8Mjw6x [bit.ly]

        • by tepples (727027)

          But you need to get a nunchuk to play certain games: 25 dollars.

          Since when was Player 1's Nunchuk accessory eliminated from the standard bundle?

          unless they're some hokey peripheral game like WiiFit, where you're going to pay 100 dollars.

          It's not the only peripheral game. Cross-platform peripheral games include DDR, Guitar Hero, and Rock Band, even on your favored X [] O. And if you're including MotionPlus in the Wii's price, do you plan to include Natal in the 360's or Eye in the PS3's?

          Want to buy Mario Kart and get two little steering wheel controllers? 90 dollars.

          The Wii Wheel is a piece of plastic. There are third-party replacements: after you buy the game and one wheel, additional wheels cost $15 or so.

    • by Lussarn (105276) on Friday January 15, 2010 @04:54AM (#30776488)

      especially girls who usually don't understand why their boyfriends/husbands want a huge HDTV

      I must be lucky, my GF already talks about 3DTV. Last year I tried unsuccesfully to hold her back on the home cinema system.

      • by clickclickdrone (964164) on Friday January 15, 2010 @06:46AM (#30776964)
        >I must be lucky, my GF already talks about 3DTV. Last year I tried unsuccesfully to hold her back on the home cinema system.
        It's a trick. Mine was the same until I married her. Now she just complains about all the Hifi, TVs, speakers etc cluttering the place up.
      • by plastbox (1577037)

        Lack of understanding doesn't exclude ability to enjoy. I wanted to hook up my old Logitech 4.1 surround speakers at home to at least get better sound than the TV's built in speakers but my girlfriend didn't like the idea of extra wires and such. She was away visiting family for a few days this Christmas though, so I seized the opportunity to do it anyways, and since she got home and heard the difference there has been no argument.

        Also, I am currently trying to hold her back from buying some large-ass plasm

        • Aren't all big screen flat panel TVs HDTV at this point? FYI, there are so few makers of plasma now (samsung and Panasonic) that any plasma is as good or better than the best LCDs(led backlit are probably about same and better depending on situation) so picking any plasma is a safe bet for a fantastic TV.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Z00L00K (682162)

      One really interesting thing when it comes to the Wii is that the controllers are talking Bluetooth, which makes them useful for other applications too.

      Just take a look at the Wiimote library [msdn.com].

      And recently I have interfaced a Wiimote with a windows mobile device, so anyone stating that it can't be done is wrong.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by sonamchauhan (587356)

      "I would love a Wii HD with Motion Capture Plus."

      Its Wii MotionPlus not Motion Capture Plus, but ... so would I :)

      you may have just started something here...

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Isbiten (597220)

      But thats probably not the case for majority of people, especially girls who usually don't understand why their boyfriends/husbands want a huge HDTV..

      Yes because women and girls are so dumb, am I right? My girlfriend was just as excited as I was when we got our HDTV to play Xbox on.

      • by plastbox (1577037)

        Well, as guys we generally notice girls who look good and girls who spend time tending to their appearance don't often care about gadgetry and tech stuff. Ergo, we mostly notice the women who are "dumb" when it comes to anything we care about.

        On a related note.. has anyone here considered the skill required in putting on a decent face of make-up? I can do amazing things with php, mysql and jQuery in no time at all, I am proficient in a good handful of languages, I can setup and configure servers and network

        • Ergo, we mostly notice the women who are "dumb" when it comes to anything we care about.

          I can't for the life of me put together an ensemble that makes me look good and stand out at a social gathering

          has anyone here considered the skill required in putting on a decent face of make-up?

          I'm really confused...

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by plastbox (1577037)

            Confused? I don't see why.. First off, I am a guy and a geek by nature.

            Ergo, we mostly notice the women who are "dumb" when it comes to anything we care about.

            Guys notice girls who look good. Girls who care about appearance don't generally care about tech. As geeks and nerds, anyone without a basic understanding of simple tech-stuff qualifies as "dumb". Ergo, we are attracted to "dumb" girls, and "Most girls are dumb" is perhaps a result of this.

            The rest was just a random rant, a bit of support for the gals we so easily disregard as being dumb because they have no interest in or understanding

    • by hattig (47930) on Friday January 15, 2010 @07:05AM (#30777096) Journal

      Never mind that this guy isn't about to Osbourne Wii sales.

      Until they want to show it off, it won't exist. Simple really.

      You don't see Microsoft talking about the XBox1080, or Sony talking about the PS4 - that's because they don't want existing sales to tank as people wait for the new product. I don't see why Nintendo would be any different. The only guaranteed thing is that all three companies are more than likely well into the design process for their next generation consoles.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by JayAEU (33022)

      It's a good thing there's actually a customized version of the Wii just for those girls that don't want their boyfriends to have a proper HD setup...
      http://bit.ly/7wnVfm [bit.ly]

    • The only thing Wii was missing was the better motion sensors, but it wasn't possible financially at that point, the technology was too costly for competing with better priced console.

      Citation needed. The problem with the Wii's sensing capabilities is that has three accelerometers x, y and z. Any good mathematician/physicist/engineer would recognize the wiimote has six degrees of freedom and therefor needs more than what it has.

      This could be completely solved by adding the exact same sensing hardware in another place inside the wiimote, which I highly suspect that is all the "motion plus" is.

      The problem is their controllers not the console. So, yes, it would have increased the pr

  • by myddrn (1234656) on Friday January 15, 2010 @04:08AM (#30776264)

    In terms of what the future holds, we've gone on record to say that the next step for Nintendo in home consoles will not be to simply make it HD, but to add more and more capability, and we'll do that when we've totally tapped out all of the experiences for the existing Wii.

    Translation: We still have MOUNTAINS of shovel ware to sell!

  • by Reed Solomon (897367) on Friday January 15, 2010 @04:11AM (#30776276) Homepage

    >"when we've totally tapped out all of the experiences for the existing Wii. And we're nowhere near doing that yet."

    exactly. they've only just come out with a black wii. then they will have a blue wii, yellow wii, green wii, then they still have to do the special edition pokemon pikachu wii, the clear see through wii, the smaller wii with a different disc loading mechanism, an even smaller wii with a new controller, then FINALLY they'll release the WII HD, after all our waiting, then 6 months later they'll release the wii 2 electric boogaloo

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by FrostDust (1009075)

      While Nintendo has indeed released such variations of their consoles in the past (except for disc loading, are you thinking of Sony?), you're omitting that none of the redesigns introduced new features to the console. The user is not disadvantaged by not buying the new models.

      Having differently colored casings does nothing to the capabilities of the system. The smaller redesigns use less material and may be more "stylish" compared to when the system was first released, but still add no new features.

      The only

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Reed Solomon (897367)

        original gameboy, then came the gameboy pocket, then came various versions with different colours, then came the gameboy colour. then came the GBA with various colour editions. then the GBA SP, then came the coloured editions of that, also the NES styled edition (which I admit I own and still play) then the GBA MICRO. Then the DS, which wasn't supposed to kill the GBA but did anyways.

        Nintendo always does this. they milk the cow until blood comes out, then they kill it, bring in a new cow, and feed it to th

    • by hey! (33014)

      exactly. they've only just come out with a black wii. then they will have a blue wii, yellow wii, green wii,

      Exactly, indeed. It worked for Apple, didn't it?

      This, my friends, is how you make profit in business. Figure out what a large group of people really want at a price they'll pay and give them the cheapest to manufacture product that meets that criterion. It's all about profit, not gross. The best way to increase your market share is to stay profitable and avoid changes that disturb the cheap product that gives your customers something they want to pay for.

      If you've done this, you'd be surprised how bizarr

  • Applaud the man. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ledow (319597) on Friday January 15, 2010 @04:58AM (#30776504) Homepage

    Good for Nintendo. I don't really care about flashy sequels and having to re-buy consoles/accessories/games or hope that the backward compatibility works (if there is one). I just want people to carry on making games for a console that almost everyone has played. It's good business sense to keep your customers on a stable platform and sell optional extras / games that enhance their original purchase's value without *forcing* them to upgrade and alienating them, not to mention keeping the online Wii stores alive - how many people who have never touched emulation have been playing emulated titles on Wii without even knowing? It's good gaming sense (what matters is the game and the price, not the number of / type of peripherals, graphics, sound...) and at the end of the day, the Wii is forefront on the general public's mind... not including persistent gamers, people would struggle to give the correct name of the current version of the Xbox / Playstation, and would probably name Wii first.

    "Wii 2" isn't required. Wii already proved that state-of-the-art isn't required, just a little bit of fun and know-how and something a bit different. Whether you hate it or not, you've played Wii at least once and tried it. I know that I can't say the same about the Xbox (any version) / Playstation (any version past the original PS1) consoles, yet my PC is full of every genre of game. Give it another 5 years or so, then people will be making games that actually test the limits of the Wii to the extreme all the time, then a successor that has full backwards compatibility will sell like hot cakes. And, to be honest, everyone I know that owns a Wii would actually be happier with some bundled accessory that enhances the whole console rather than a whole new console... a "HD addon" or even some processing upgrade that the Wii can interface with (like the N64 memory expansion modules, or the SuperFX/DSP chips that were in SNES games - Nintendo know what they are doing when it comes to getting the most out of a huge investment, which is why they're pretty much the only one making a decent return on hardware alone, not just the software).

    If it works, and it sells, and it makes money, don't ditch it for a sequel... enhance it a bit at a time, one expenditure at a time, and keep your customers happy without shoving them between major purchases and platforms. If only MS could follow the same suit...

    • by AbRASiON (589899) *

      "Good for Nintendo. I don't really care about flashy sequels and having to re-buy consoles/accessories/games or hope that the backward compatibility works (if there is one). I just want people to carry on making games for a console that almost everyone has played."

      So you want Nintendo to keep re-hashing the same thing OVER and OVER and OVER as they've done (although there's some innovation with the Wii, it's the same thing again and again and again but with a new controller)

      Nintendo are famous for it, the u

      • by ledow (319597)

        Played the new mario game? It's a combination of all the previous Mario games.
        Played Wii Sports Resort? It's Wii Sports with knobs on.
        Played Mario Kart Wii? It's like every Mario kart game.

        So, yes, the Wii itself is almost *entirely* rehash. Really hurt their sales figures, didn't it? And why? Because it's still *new* and *fun* at the same time as being *familiar*.

        I don't care about them rehashing, so long as it's still fun to play with a crowd of friends. And there's still new stuff too. If you wan

  • by samael (12612) * <Andrew@Ducker.org.uk> on Friday January 15, 2010 @05:18AM (#30776600) Homepage

    An HDMI cable. Every other device connected to the TV has one, but the Wii insists on converting to analogue and back again. I can't think of any reason why this would be terribly expensive or difficult to do. They wouldn't even need to support higher resolutions - just the same ones over HDMI.

    • I agree that it would be a great idea, but not because of any picture quality. The advantage would be being able to use it with computer monitors which don't have SD component inputs.
      Even the GameCube had some kind of obscure digital output for japanese TVs, even on the american and european models. Surely a HDMI port can't be that challenging.

      • by samael (12612) *

        Yup, absolutely. HDMI is fast becoming the standard interconnect for video to all displays. And it does sound too - what's not to like?

    • by Nimey (114278)

      And since the Wii's got a proprietary connector on its end, it's another chance for Nintendo to make a mint on accessories.

      I know you can get component cables for it from 3rd parties at a lower price, but the average user won't know that.

    • by Juju (1688)

      They should offer higher resolutions with HDMI and they could probably keep it compatible and do some better texturing/upscaling like what was done for PS2 emulation on the PS3 (or PS one on the PS2.)
      There is no reason to remain on low def analog!

  • by otie (915090) on Friday January 15, 2010 @05:33AM (#30776666)
    No savvy console manufacturer confirms a hardware upgrade before it's just about to hit. Otherwise it'll hurt sales before the upgrade date.
  • It looks like no one has even mentioned the biggest problem I have with the Wii (a console a otherwise love): no hard drive.

    Of course, I don't think this would be a massive hardware change for it. Homebrewers are already putting hard drives on it. Maybe they release a Wii 2.0 with hard drive?

    • Hard drives are history. I don't think any of the next generation consoles, presumably 2012, will come with one. They're too expensive for the functionality they'll provide. Flash drives make much more sense. Even now you can buy a 16 GB SD card for the Wii which will hold more games than you could afford to download.

      • But maybe not more music than you can afford to download for music games. At least that has been my experience. And, furthermore, the drivers are part of the games themselves, so the old ones will never be able to access more than the 2Gb for the old type SD cards (though some 4gb non HD type cards work).

        Of course, the hard drive isn't going to help the old games. So you have me there.

  • I just picked up a 55 inch tv... I've not picked up the hdmi cable because 480 wont look much different from composite. I have doubts I am going to by many more wii games because of this. Seems like it would be a wasted investment.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by MrMickS (568778)

      There is a noticeable difference in image clarity when going to 480p via composite. If you can't see this on your TV perhaps you bought the wrong TV?

MATH AND ALCOHOL DON'T MIX! Please, don't drink and derive. Mathematicians Against Drunk Deriving

Working...