Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Wii Nintendo The Almighty Buck Games

Wii Gets Price Cut To $199 320

After watching Microsoft and Sony drop the prices on the Xbox 360 and the PS3, Nintendo has decided to jump in with a price cut as well. Starting September 27th, the Wii will cost $199 in North America, a $50 drop from the previous price. Japan will be getting a slightly smaller price cut, but Europe seems to be left out of this change. Nintendo is hoping this reduction and the release of New Super Mario Bros. Wii and Wii Fit Plus in the coming months will boost slipping sales rates.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Wii Gets Price Cut To $199

Comments Filter:
  • Soon (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sopssa ( 1498795 ) * <sopssa@email.com> on Thursday September 24, 2009 @12:31PM (#29530135) Journal

    And the fact that xmas sales are coming soon.

    But what actually gave Wii some boost and made me pick it up again was the Motion Plus extension - it feels a lot better than the regular controller without it. Sadly, theres still not many games for it.

    Also like was discussed a few days ago, Wii might be on end of its lifecycle soon and Nintendo might go a little different route with next console, which I actually find a little sad. The control scheme is a nice change and it could be utilized really well with some types of games. Nintendo should have pushed indie game developing a lot more, since thats where some great ideas could had been coming from and because of Wii's limited graphic powers, indie game developers could had concentrate on the control and gameplay a lot more.

    • Re:Soon (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 24, 2009 @12:39PM (#29530255)

      Nintendo should have pushed indie game developing a lot more

      Yeah. I hate Microsoft as much as the next guy, but XNA and XBLA were fantastic ideas that have led to some great games. Same with Apple and iPhone apps. You pay $100 and off you go. But Nintendo...$2000 for the SDK? Ick.

      • by tepples ( 727027 ) <tepples@gmail.BOHRcom minus physicist> on Thursday September 24, 2009 @12:43PM (#29530305) Homepage Journal

        Same with Apple and iPhone apps. You pay $100 and off you go.

        Plus $600 for Xcode if you don't already have an Intel Mac, but your point is still valid.

        But Nintendo...$2000 for the SDK? Ick.

        That's peanuts compared to the cost of doing an internship in another state and then leasing an office. Nintendo requires developers to have a dedicated office and experience in the mainstream video game industry [warioworld.com].

      • Re:Soon (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Reason58 ( 775044 ) on Thursday September 24, 2009 @12:48PM (#29530359)

        Nintendo should have pushed indie game developing a lot more

        Yeah. I hate Microsoft as much as the next guy, but XNA and XBLA were fantastic ideas that have led to some great games. Same with Apple and iPhone apps. You pay $100 and off you go. But Nintendo...$2000 for the SDK? Ick.

        This has always been Nintendo's biggest weakness. While their in-house development is good, they have an abysmal track record when it comes to third-party support. With the reinvention of the one-man "indie" developer this problem is exacerbated.

        • Re:Soon (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Beardo the Bearded ( 321478 ) on Thursday September 24, 2009 @02:15PM (#29531403)

          I've found that the game library for the Wii is terrible and THAT is its greatest weakness.

          The better games - like Smash brothers - aren't even Wii games (How much motion control is in it?) which shows that Nintendo knows how much their control scheme is lacking. There's no Zelda for Wii (it's a Gamecube port) and Mario Galaxy was meh at best. Mario Kart is a decent party game, but it requires you to race so much in single player that you honestly can't play a pickup game against your friends. The guy who unlocked everything is going to dominate.

          The motion controls, while innovative, are move confusing than enjoyable. Otherwise decent games end up frustrating because you don't have the right kind of control. Now there's a motion plus sensor, which for $100, lets you and your wife have the control that they should have put into the controls in the first place.

          There isn't a decent native RPG or racing game in their library, and if I'm wrong, I'd love to hear the titles. Look at the all-time ratings on Gamespot; half the top games are games you got tired of playing 10 years ago.

          It's been great to lose 20 pounds with the fitness games, but the two I've used (Wii Fit and EA Active) are fucking terrible. I imagine the interview process at EA was like this:

          "Have you ever played a game -- any EA games in particular?"


          "Hmm, what do you think makes a game fun?"

          "Absolute precision, interrupting gameplay for no reason, and a repetitive soundtrack."

          "Hmm, have you ever exercised before?"

          "Does shaving count?"

          "You're hired."

          I've never had a problem with the graphics on the Wii; perhaps that's because one of the first games I played was a black square racing down a blue path surrounded by orange. It was called "speedboat". If I want immersion, I'll go outside.

          • Re:Soon (Score:5, Interesting)

            by ultranova ( 717540 ) on Thursday September 24, 2009 @02:36PM (#29531617)

            There's no Zelda for Wii (it's a Gamecube port) and Mario Galaxy was meh at best.

            Mario Galaxy is great; however, the control scheme in the main game - shake the controller to spin - is a hindrance, not an asset. The same is true of Zelda. On the other hand, Metroid 3 works fine, not as fine as 2D Metroid but fine nonetheless.

            Offhand, I'd say that compulsive use of 3D in what's really platformer games is the greatest weakness in current game consoles.

          • "I've found that the game library for the Wii is terrible and THAT is its greatest weakness."

            I've been tinkering with the idea of getting a game console. I've not really had one I played since the old original Nintendo console with the first Mario Bros. For awhile back, I had a PS1 or maybe PS2 that was chipped...I played with that a little, but not much.

            I was thinking of getting the new PS3 since the price dropped...figuring it would be a good price to play for a Blu-Ray player I could mess with, that h

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by vux984 ( 928602 )

            The better games - like Smash brothers - aren't even Wii games (How much motion control is in it?) which shows that Nintendo knows how much their control scheme is lacking.

            That's some serious spin you've got there. How about, "Some games, like Smash Brothers, don't use motion control, which shows that Nintendo knows that not every single game is enhanced by motion control."

            That doesn't mean the control scheme is 'lacking'.

            There's no Zelda for Wii (it's a Gamecube port)

            Yep it was a launch title that supporte

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by elrous0 ( 869638 ) *
      "Nintendo" and "Indie games" are two terms that have never, and likely will never, mix. Even getting them to accept 3rd-party games was like pulling teeth.
  • Wii upgrade. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jellomizer ( 103300 ) on Thursday September 24, 2009 @12:38PM (#29530231)

    The Wii when it was sold a couple years ago was already behind the time in terms of graphics and performance. Today it is that much further behind. It is in really need for an upgrade. Granted I am not a hardcore gammer and I don't think graphics are the most important part to good gaming. However its graphics are a bit early 2000 compared to what the other guys have.

    • The Wii when it was sold a couple years ago was already behind the time in terms of graphics and performance. Today it is that much further behind.

      I seem to remember reading that the Wii's Hollywood GPU is ahead of the Intel GMA that comes in many budget PCs. The popular GMA 950 relies on the host CPU for transformation and lighting, much like a Voodoo3.

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by rAiNsT0rm ( 877553 )

        Actually the GPU in both the Gamecube and Wii are phenomenal and actually outpace most current videocards in some ways... they are just horribly limited by the surrounding architecture. They can do like 8 layers of rendering on all surfaces at once. So you can have texture, bump map, lighting, etc. all at once on every surface. I've seen tech demos of it's capabilities that just blow the mind.

    • Re:Wii upgrade. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ledow ( 319597 ) on Thursday September 24, 2009 @12:50PM (#29530379) Homepage

      You give your own criticism to your own comment.

      When it was *released* it was out of date. And it's still the best-selling games console. So what makes you think that the graphics/performance have any effect on *sales* at all? Did you ever seriously believe that game console wars have *ever* been solved by technical prowess and not by games, marketing, gameplay, etc.? At best you could claim that you prefer games with style/content but the sales figures speak for themselves about how bothered the general populous is about the "out-of-date"-ness that the Wii was released with... None.

      It's been a wonderful product because it proves the point that I've always maintained - games don't even *need* graphics at all to be great games. It's always been true, but people lost track of that during the last few generations of console wars.

      • Re:Wii upgrade. (Score:5, Interesting)

        by cabjf ( 710106 ) on Thursday September 24, 2009 @01:14PM (#29530617)
        I read just yesterday that the rumor is the Wii's replacement will bring it up to par with the Xbox 360 and the PS3. Given that both Microsoft and Sony want this generation to last much longer than your usual console generation, I'm thinking Nintendo will have an opportunity to put out two generations of their consoles in one of their competition's generations. If they manage to convince at least some of those casual players that bought the Wii to upgrade (perhaps through affordable blu-ray player or even more casual appealing games and hardware), they could easily stay ahead of Xbox 360 and PS3 in terms of consoles sold. Granted that was just a rumor, but I think it is a plausible one.
        • Re:Wii upgrade. (Score:4, Insightful)

          by PitaBred ( 632671 ) <slashdot@@@pitabred...dyndns...org> on Thursday September 24, 2009 @01:19PM (#29530681) Homepage
          If they keep compatibility with Wii games and controllers, I'd buy the new console.
        • Re:Wii upgrade. (Score:4, Informative)

          by grumbel ( 592662 ) <grumbel+slashdot@gmail.com> on Thursday September 24, 2009 @01:37PM (#29530917) Homepage

          I read just yesterday that the rumor is the Wii's replacement will bring it up to par with the Xbox 360 and the PS3.

          That must have been fanboys that still have some hope left that Nintendo actually still cares about gaming. I for one have given up that hope long ago and the last tiny bit that might have been left was smashed a few days ago when I downloaded the horoscope channel. The company that once up on a time gave us Mario, Zelda, Metroid and all the other stuff just isn't there anymore and has been replaced by some trendy lifestyle product producer or whatever you want to call what they are now.

          • Re:Wii upgrade. (Score:5, Interesting)

            by MBGMorden ( 803437 ) on Thursday September 24, 2009 @01:53PM (#29531131)

            You could take a different viewpoint though. Look at XB360 and PS3: they're as much "media hubs" as they are game consoles. There was a whole addon built for the 360 specifically for the purpose of watching HDDVD movies - it has no gaming benefit whatsoever. I can log into Xbox Live and what am I greeted with? The option to purchase television shows and rent movies. And it connects up to my PC to act as a media center "extender" so I can watch video files and the like off of my PC.

            Sure, the other systems have maintained more of a trend towards traditional console gaming with their games (and personally, I actually prefer that which is why the only system from this gen that I own is the 360), but it's hard to argue that Nintendo doesn't care about gaming - everything about the Wii is targetted towards gaming. It's just not the same type of gaming we are used to.

          • Re:Wii upgrade. (Score:4, Interesting)

            by Toonol ( 1057698 ) on Thursday September 24, 2009 @02:00PM (#29531221)
            See, I think Nintendo saved gaming from the living-room-media-hub-centric-controlling desires of Sony and Microsoft. Video game fans would be in a world of hurt if either of those companies had managed to dominate the industry.
      • What made the Wii the Wii wasn't its graphics, its sound, or its performance. What made the Wii the Wii is its controller system, which was radically different from what game consoles had previously done.

        Think about it: the Wii basically said via the way it is controlled that you should play video games standing up and moving around. Compare that to every other game system out before that, which basically said that you should play your video games veged out on the couch.

        Nintendo's game systems haven't histo

      • With no price limit-- then everything is out of date except he newest most expensive GPU, CPU, etc.

        Its all about PRICE POINT!

        The other game systems were stupidly expensive at release by any measure. For the big demo of men 18-35 with jobs (and likely single) they could pay out that kind of cash and having not grown out of games enough, they'd pay those prices. Children and teens however are priced out. Its amazing that parents would be so stupid to waste that kind of money on video games when incomes have

      • Re:Wii upgrade. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by commodore64_love ( 1445365 ) on Thursday September 24, 2009 @01:43PM (#29531001) Journal

        >>>Did you ever seriously believe that game console wars have *ever* been solved by technical prowess and not by games, marketing, gameplay, etc.?

        Nope. If you look at the winners over the last 30 years, it was NEVER the most powerful console:

        - Atari VCS/2600 - inferior to Intellivision and Colecovision
        - Nintendo ES - inferior to Sega MS
        - Super Nintendo - inferior to the Genesis' 32-bit capability
        - PS1 - inferior to Nintendo' 64-bit console
        - PS2 - inferior to faster-operating Cube and Xbox
        - Wii - inferior to high-def-capable PS3 and X360

        • Re:Wii upgrade. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Cowclops ( 630818 ) on Thursday September 24, 2009 @02:07PM (#29531297)

          Eh... while the Atari, PS2, and Wii examples are accurate, I don't think the NES/SNES/PSX examples are correct.

          NES and SMS were very very close in capability. The SMS might have been superior in some nitpicky sense, but if you play games on both systems it isn't apparent that SMS outpaces NES. I'll give you credit that NES won despite not having any obvious technical superiority (since it didn't.)

          At SNES vs Genesis: Genesis was noticably inferior. Genesis was NOT 32 bit capable, as it used a 68000 on a 16 bit bus. Its cpu was measurably faster, however its graphics and sound hardware were noticeably behind SNES. If you play SNES and then play Genesis, especially games that were on both systems, the SNES version nearly always had better graphics and sound. Due to the censorship issue, I wouldn't compare Mortal Kombat 1 on Genesis to SNES, but if you go to MK2, the SNES version is a lot closer to the arcade version than the Genesis version was. Having a slightly faster processor doesn't outweigh the greatly superior dedicated sound and graphics chips of the SNES. Genesis can only put 64 colors on screen out of a palette of 4096... SNES can put 256 colors on screen out of a palette of 32768. Not to mention FM synthesis in the Genesis vs 8 channel PCM mixing in SNES.

          As far as Playstation vs N64... the Playstation won because its storage system was technically superior to N64. Game developers didn't want to be limited to expensive ROM, so developers switched in droves to PSX. The 3d rendering capabilities of N64 were limited by the small amount of data each game could hold, not to mention a tiny texture cache that limited the detail in games. Granted, the main CPU in N64 was superior to the main CPU in PSX, but this isn't the only "technical" detail of the system. Playstation won due to technical superiority: In 1996, CDs were technically superior to rom cartridges.

          • NES v. SMS - doing just a quick comparison via youtube, I'd say the NES had better sound but the SMS has better graphics ability - almost like a Genesis in quality (look at Sonic 1 on the SMS). Plus the SMS' CPU runs about twice as fast. The NES was a 1982 technology and SMS used more-advanced 1985 tech, which you can see on the screen.

            >>>Genesis used a 68000 on a 16 bit bus.

            Yes and my first PC was a 386SX on a 16-bit die. That limitation doesn't alter the fact that the 386SX was a 32-bit CPU r

          • by S77IM ( 1371931 )

            At SNES vs Genesis: Genesis was noticably inferior.

            There was a period of time lasting a couple of years ("the Sonic Era") during which Genesis was beating SNES badly in every place but Japan. The two systems were really very close. I find your analysis insightful.

            In 1996, CDs were technically superior to rom cartridges.

            CDs were not technically superior to ROM cartridges; they were technically inferior. But they were ECONOMICALLY superior. Cartridges were much more expensive, and building a cartridge with storage space anywhere close to a CD would have been cost-prohibitive. This seem like a semantic quibble,

        • Re:Wii upgrade. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by DarKnyht ( 671407 ) on Thursday September 24, 2009 @02:22PM (#29531467)

          Let's look at the facts behind some of those wins

          - Atari I cannot comment on because I was too little for it and only remember playing the Intellivision.

          -Nintendo Entertainment System won because of two things, Mario and a anti-competitive contract with developers. If you wanted to develop for the NES you were not allowed to develop on anything else. Hence why most of the Sega Master System games were ports done in house by SEGA.

          -Super Nintendo won because you had a huge installed base with NES who were familiar with the popular characters of the system. Plus the Genesis suffered from attachment syndrome, you were constantly purchasing bigger and more expensive add-ons to get to the 32-bit capability.

          -Playstation One won because Nintendo stuck with the expensive Cart-based system. 600+ MB of cheap CD to work with or 64-256 MB of expensive RAM chips was an easy choice for developers. Plus, Nintendo screwed up their relationships with important developers such as Squaresoft.

          -Playstation Two won because their marketing department promised Toy Story quality graphics that only appeared in non-playable cut scenes. Plus at the time, the PS2 was the cheapest way to get your hands on a DVD Player. Gamecube was hurt itself in the US by making itself look like a kid's toy and using proprietary DVD discs that had less storage capability (making multi-platform releases harder on it). SEGA was hurt by focusing on 2D over 3D graphics, although they did have a superior online system for the time.

          -Wii won mostly because of novelty and price. It was accessible to people that otherwise would not touch a game system.

      • by Toonol ( 1057698 )
        Add to that that the most popular console, by far, was the weakest graphically. Nintendo's Gamecube was graphically superior to the PS2, but it didn't matter. Then go another generation back... how did the 3DO fair?

        If there's one lesson to be learned, it's that the graphics hardware is never the determining factor for success for a console.

        Besides, the best looking game this generation (Muramasa) is on the Wii, proving how a game really looks is 10% hardware and 90% artistic style and design.
      • "It's been a wonderful product because it proves the point that I've always maintained - games don't even *need* graphics at all to be great games."

        Yep, to this day, my favorite game in the world is Robotron 2084 on my MAME cabinet (old Tempest cab transformed).

        The graphics and sound were tops in the early 80's....but, the game play is what still makes it one of the most fun games to play.

        Even when my friends bring their little kids over to parties, they start seeing us playing it, and get just as enthr

  • by SoTerrified ( 660807 ) on Thursday September 24, 2009 @12:38PM (#29530241)
    I just bought a Wii two weeks ago. So of course the price would drop...
    • Futureshop Price Guarantee?

    • by Chris Mattern ( 191822 ) on Thursday September 24, 2009 @12:59PM (#29530469)

      I got you beat. I bought a Wii *and* a PS3 a month and a half ago...

      • I have a standing policy of never buying ANY console that costs more than $200. This has served me well by helping me avoid doomed, overpriced consoles like the Atari Jaguar or 3DO. Also even though consoles sometimes drop below $200 it's usually not until the end-of-life anyway. And finally, waiting ensures there will be a massive library spanning 3-4 years time. I won't get bored.

        (goes off to buy a Wii)

        Now I need to decide which console I want for my second console. Perhaps an Xbox360 when it drops t

        • >>>(goes off to buy a Wii)

          On second though I think I'll wait for one more pricedrop. I played the Wii last spring at a friend's party, and it really didn't impress me too much. Of course neither do the PS3 or X360 games. This whole generation has left me with a "blah" feeling.

    • So can we get you to buy a Ferrari FXX [wikipedia.org] like 40,000 times? You do that while I look for change in the couch in my Mom's basement. i.e my bedroom/living room.
      • shit car.
      • You miss the point. You but a Ferrari to drive and impress supermodels. It's all part of my master plan.
        1. Buy Ferrari
        2. Get out of this basement
        3. ???
        4. Date a supermodel

        Once I get enough change to get past 1, I just need to figure out how to achieve 2.

  • For casual gamers, I would say here in the UK that it's the game prices that are too high, and not the console. It'd be nice to pick up games for under a tenner, but even 2nd hand games are still quite pricey. Maybe the US demographic is different.

    • Maybe the US demographic is different. Nope, we're paying about $45 for good new Wii games, about $15 for used. PS3 and XBox games can go up to $60. You do understand that the console business model is to sell the hardware at a loss and make all the profit on game licensing, don't you? You can rent games for much less, but I still feel the best approach is to form a co-op with like-minded gamers with the same console. You each buy a different game, then rotate the games every week.
      • by tilandal ( 1004811 ) on Thursday September 24, 2009 @12:53PM (#29530415)

        Its funny how the most profitable console maker doesn't follow that business model.

        • You can't be serious. Nintendo's games are always overpriced. Last generation while I was able to acquire PS2 Greatest Hits for $15-20 (new), the Gamecube Players Choice games were $30, even after being on the market for three years.

          Meanwhile my Gamecube cost only $100 with a free copy of the Zelda Collection (Z1, Z2, Z64, and MoM). It seems clear to me that Nintendo "gaves away" their hardware for cheap, while keeping their game prices high ($20 v. $30 for older GH games).

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by DarKnyht ( 671407 )

            Parent was referring to the Wii which is basically a Gamecube on steroids. The price of manufacturing as Wii vs. the sale price meant that the Big N made a profit on the Wii Console from day one.

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by Chris Burke ( 6130 )

            No, he's completely serious. Nintendo sells their hardware for a profit, always have and always will. When you bought your GC for $100 that was late in the console's life and it cost less than $100 to make. When the GC was launched at $200, it cost less than $200 to make. All they do is games -- they can't afford to subsidize their gaming business with money from other sectors like Sony and MS.

            In fact, it's only recently that selling hardware at a loss became popular. For most of its life, the PS2 was

      • by Starayo ( 989319 )
        Y'know, here in Australia, new games go up to, according to the exchange rate, NINETY FIVE US DOLLARS. WHAT THE FLYING FUCK, SERIOUSLY. If I could pick up new games for 45-60USD I would be a happy gamer.
    • You might want to check out the titles on WiiWare. While big name commercial games you buy in the store are quite expensive, a lot of casual games on WiiWare are $10 or under. And a lot of them are really high quality games.
    • by Ihmhi ( 1206036 )

      Britain and Australia always get screwed over on game prices. I've certainly heard enough complaints in Yahtzee's videos.

      • by maharb ( 1534501 )

        Currencies have relative values and minus a slight markup to cover the currency conversion the games are priced about the same. The game companies are not going to eat currency conversion costs, so you can get hit twice on this, once for the buffer, then again for a conversion disadvantage. You can also get a currency advantage, though you will probably never come out better than the US prices.

        I just looked up Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2, which has a US price of $60 and I found it in the low 70's Aussie

    • Ignoring the obvious response that consoles profit based on game sales, while taking a loss on the hardware, I still wouldn't say the games are too expensive. Going back to the early 90s, games usually cost $50-60. 15 years later, they cost roughly the same. And the dollar is worth roughly slightly more than half of what it was worth back then. The console prices have increased with inflation; they were already taking a loss and couldn't afford to lose more. But the games have remained a decent value.
  • by sajuuk ( 1371145 ) on Thursday September 24, 2009 @12:47PM (#29530331)
    Almost down to that $100 price they said it was going to be originally.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by NoYob ( 1630681 )
      It'll get there. I'm expecting a really shitty Christmas season - there are more job loses coming. When these guys start seeing their sales keep falling, they'll lower prices more to get rid of inventory.
    • Wait, when did they say that? In all the discussions prior to the beginning of this generation, every piece of scuttlebutt said that the Wii/Revolution would debut at $200, largely because that's the price every other N home console had debuted at. If there had been any kind of statement about an expected price, then some fanboy of some console would have brought it up.

      I'd be interested if you had a link. But that price point, and announcing such, seems very un-Nintendo.

  • Boosting sales (Score:2, Insightful)

    by eNygma-x ( 1137037 )
    Actually to get the last great push for sales... enable the DVD drive to play movies!!! I mean come on! And upgrade the flash player!
    • Actually to get the last great push for sales... enable the DVD drive to play movies!!!

      That would presumably cost more to build. There is a DVD-Video player for the jailbroken Wii, but it makes the drive wear out faster.

      And upgrade the flash player!

      Nintendo upgraded Internet Channel to Flash 9 a few weeks ago. See Slashdot coverage [slashdot.org].

    • The update to the internet channel earlier this month upgraded the flash player to version 9.

    • Are there really that many people out there looking for a DVD player such that it would make a difference in their decision to buy a Wii? Standalone players are like $25 now - and that's assuming you don't already have one or don't have one of the other many consoles that will play them.

      Now, I realize that there may be some precious handful of people out there that really want their Wii to play movies, but I really don't think that number is anywhere near what's needed to cause any appreciable boost in sal

  • by tedgyz ( 515156 ) * on Thursday September 24, 2009 @12:59PM (#29530471) Homepage

    They need to drop the game prices. It's hard to justify the $50 for a game like Punch-Out. For casual gamers, that's a high price tag.

    As others have said, the motion-plus is badly needed. Sadly it may be too late since so many games have already been produced without it. Star Wars Unleashed would be so much better if the light saber truly followed your motion. I don't think I want to pay the extra $50 for Star Wars Unleashed Motion Plus. How about a downloadable upgrade?

    • by godrik ( 1287354 ) on Thursday September 24, 2009 @01:17PM (#29530649)
      In the wii, downloadable upgrade must be done in the game itself since there is no operating system running when the game run. marcan explains that very well in http://hackmii.com/2009/02/why-the-wii-will-never-get-any-better/ [hackmii.com]
    • by MobyDisk ( 75490 )

      I second that. The wii never delivered up to expectations - I've been waiting for an accurate light saber game ever since I saw a tech demo that used a web cam. I'm still unclear why the original Wii controller couldn't do this, but it was a disappointment.

      • by Zerth ( 26112 )

        The base controller had mediocre ability to distinguish rotation from linear movement, the accelerometers could only detect rotation through the change in gravity(only worked when relatively still) or when pointed at the LED bar(so only within a small cone).

        The plus addon is a set of angular rate sensors that improves sensing when pointed away from the LED bar or when in motion.

    • I dunno about that. I would be interested to see the Gamestop sell back stats on the Wii (especially Nintendo titles) compared to the hardcore consoles. Many "hardcore" games are like movies and have limited replay value, so people sell them back. They sell them back at such a rate that the publishers are complaining about it. The publishers want to shut down used sales. It doesn't take very long for the new/unopened version to drop in price from $60 to $50, $40, or $30. A game like Punch Out has huge

  • I have a Wii, and if I were to buy one now I wouldn't pay more than $149. When you compare it to the Xbox 360 Arcade at the same price, it's a no brainer for most people - get the Xbox. It offers a lot more.

    The draw of the Wii was that it was cheaper than the Big 2. Now, not so much. And the novelty of the controller for the Wii wears off soon and you're left with a low powered machine that will only play dated games. No media, no Netflix streaming, none of the other fancy features of the Xbox.


    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      As opposed to the rumbling surge in sales for the XBox360 and PS3 coming up right around the corner, well after their initial break-in to the market?
    • by geekoid ( 135745 ) <<moc.oohay> <ta> <dnaltropnidad>> on Thursday September 24, 2009 @01:19PM (#29530675) Homepage Journal

      "It offers a lot more."
      like a 50% failure rate.

    • by Zerth ( 26112 )

      When you compare it to the Xbox 360 Arcade at the same price

      Isn't that the crippled no-storage version?

    • I have a Wii, and if I were to buy one now I wouldn't pay more than $149.

      That's exactly the reason why I haven't bought the Wii yet; I think it's a very interesting idea, and I even bought the controller which I plan to use for whiteboard stuff, but I'm not going to buy the console itself unless it drops below 150â.

    • by Toonol ( 1057698 )
      The draw of the Wii was that it was cheaper than the Big 2

      That wasn't the draw of the Wii, though. For the last year, you could buy a 360 for less than the Wii, and it still didn't sell half as well. (Granted, the insane price of the PS3 hurt it.)

      I think the Wii was simply more appealing to more people than the PS3 and 360 were. It would still have outsold the other consoles even if it had been the same price from the beginning. Adding interesting controls was a masterstroke; keeping focus on SDT
  • They usually have major new generations of hardware every three years. Getting somewhat stale now.
    • by tepples ( 727027 )
      Of the four non-portable gaming platforms (PC, Xbox, PlayStation, and Nintendo's console), we know about the next generation of two of them:
      • Xbox: The next generation is the existing Xbox 360 console combined with a new input device with the working title Natal.
      • PC: The next generation is a media center PC with a DirectX 11-class GPU running Windows 7 Home Premium.
  • Nobody is not buying a Wii because its too expensive. They're not buying it because they either aren't interested in it, or they already have one.

    If you want to Boost Revenue, make games that use the new Motion Plus - which apparently makes the controller that much more accurate and versatile.

    Then, when people see a Zelda Game where your Bow & Arrow are handled physically by your hands, and your sword slashes are your actual movements, everyone will instantly want it, and I can bet they'd shell out the

    • I am not buying a wii because it is too expensive, just like the atari 2600/adam/nes/sega/jaguar/saturn/whatever before it.
      I play on other peoples consoles at their houses and have fun, but not enough fun to justify the price of the consoles. Been this way for 27 years, don't see it changing soon.

    • by MobyDisk ( 75490 )

      No, I'd buy one if it was cheaper. Much, much cheaper. The $199 price with extra controllers and nunchucks and a few games might be nice. And motion-plus built-in to each new controller.

  • by MobyDisk ( 75490 ) on Thursday September 24, 2009 @01:26PM (#29530763) Homepage

    Nintendo needs bundle a lot more with the Wii for it to be a value. It is meant for multiplayer non-online gaming. A wii + 2 additional controllers + 2 nunchunks + motion plus + a balance board is a good gaming system. But a very expensive one.

    The other problem is that the Wii really just never worked right. Wii + motion plus is closer to what Nintendo originally promised. I love physically interactive games (DDR, Police 911 [wikipedia.org], etc.) but the Wii is really a pretty weak platform for them. Wii Tennis just detected if you swung the controller randomly. Punch Out can't tell uppercuts from high punches from low punches without relying on buttons. The balance board can't really tell if you dodge - people have figured out things like standing on one foot that makes it think you dodged, but that takes the fun away (and doesn't work on the later levels).

    I am more excited about the next generation of interactive gaming than what the Wii does now.

    • by Enry ( 630 )

      Try the Swordplay Showdown in Wii Sports Resort. You'll build up a sweat pretty quickly. Either that, or I'm *really* out of shape.

  • Good Move (Score:2, Interesting)

    by lyonsjor ( 1643757 )
    It is about time that Nintendo decided to do this. The gaming quality and high definition produced by PS3 and XBox 360 already give incentive to buyers to purchase those consoles over Wii. Hopefully the cheaper price tag will attract more consumers. Also, most consumers will purchase the new Wii Motion Plus for more accurate gameplay. Still Nintendo needs to do more to appeal to a mroe variety of gamers.
  • I still won't be getting one for 2 reasons.

    1. I happen to like my HDTV a little too much to put a wiimote through it.

    2. It's horribly lacking in 3rd party games which stinks. Wii Sports, Mario, Zelda and Metroid will only carry you so far.
    • by Yvan256 ( 722131 )

      Depends on the players I guess.

      I buy Nintendo consoles ONLY for the Zelda and Metroid games. Anything else is just a bonus.

      And before you label me as a stupid Nintendo fanboy, I know people who have the Xbox and Xbox 360 just for the Halo series. PS3 owners? Only one in all the people I know, and that was partially because it's also a Blu-Ray player.

  • If you ask me, it is still overpriced for what amounts to a very inexpensive unit to manufacture. I am willing to bet it costs about 10-20 USD to manufacture.
  • by Yvan256 ( 722131 ) on Thursday September 24, 2009 @02:03PM (#29531257) Homepage Journal

    I guess Nintendo heard Apple talk about the magical 199$ price tag [crunchgear.com] (warning: lots of photos). Look at around 1:51 PM ~ 1:52 PM:

    1:51 PM: Greg Kumparak âoeWe learned something very important a few years back.â
    1:51 PM: Greg Kumparak "Essentially, $199 is a magic spot."
    1:52 PM: Greg Kumparak "When they dropped from $249 to $199, sales of the past iPod models almost doubled."

    So if the same thing happens to Nintendo and the Wii, sales should double from now on until at least Christmas.

"Call immediately. Time is running out. We both need to do something monstrous before we die." -- Message from Ralph Steadman to Hunter Thompson