I actually like your idea too, but my vote goes "yes" simply because I LOVE Capcom. If it weren't for them, I would have given up on my Wii long ago. They are a company that just astounds me with the quality of their titles almost every time I pick up something they make.

So far, I like what Dementis says best (as in please, people, can we just kill this family of "will the WiiU be powerful enough" threads?)... I think a LOT has been said about this topic already, in a lot of different places... and I think that if people have real, legitimate doubts about the system's power or its value or its ability to perform, that it would be VERY worth their time to find and to read those threads in their entirety.

So as not to be a kill-joy, however, I'd love to add my two cents to this particular flavor of the old rant... Alex makes a great point about the Wii's graphics being distracting - not just "not as good" as the other systems'. The generational gap will, by all accounts, not be as noticeable this coming generation (that is, if you don't listen to the insane people who expect top-tier PC performance from a console for under $500). He has VERY reasonable requests of the new system, and I think that, from the most reputable sources I've read, the WiiU will certainly be able to do what he expects it to do.

Tre also makes a very reasonable point when he says that it is pretty much impossible to consider all the factors that go into consumer choices... and honestly Tron isn't doing himself any favors, because I find it utterly impossible to decipher what he really cares about. Is he one of those Nintendo fans he admits will be fully satisfied with the system? Is he one of the "PS360" fans who would definitely (*read with sarcasm*) switch from making fun of Nintendo to shelling out the cash for one of their consoles if it ONLY offered them blu-ray and a copy of the games they can already buy on their own systems, but with marginally better graphics (how many die-hard console fans choose to buy multi-platform releases on their PC because the graphics are better, anyway)? Whichever of these camps he's in (or even if he's in a totally different camp), it would be pretty hard for him to argue that he has an accurate bead on Nintendo's consumer prospects.

I would love to see cold, hard sales data on who spends the most money on games per year - and on what those people want to play, and what would make them buy a new system. Even then, however, predicting what people will actually buy is near-impossible. As others have pointed out, no one in sales and marketing knew that what EVERYONE wanted was an iPod until Apple made one (and honestly, I doubt that even consumers knew it until Apple made it... there were plenty of cheaper mp3 players on the market at the time, with just as much storage or more and a sizable online music library). It's hard to tell what will change the game... but I think that Nintendo's approach of interface over horsepower makes about as much sense as any strategy out there, especially at this juncture, where processing power is an issue that developers have pretty much universally discounted as a factor holding them back from doing what they want to do. Can you afford a $1000 console just to have the satisfaction of running BF3 with DX11 at 60fps? The jump just isn't that spectacular...

Agreed. We need more games like Secret of Mana. Those were the days...

If by this you mean co-op games... then I think you're in luck. There are a WIDE array of great co-op games on the current HD consoles, and I imagine we'll be seeing a steady stream from our beloved big N now that they have the horsepower to pull it off without taxing the processor.

btw... I also LOVE Secret of Mana... most nostalgic gaming experience in my memory... played it with my brother on and on until the save file died.

Thanks for the heads up on this! someone said something the other day about halo "paving the way for the modern fps" and I almost blew a brain gasket, lol... Goldeneye was amazing.

The only console I ever pre-ordered was the N64, because it gave me Mario 64 and a real Pilotwings game on day one, with Shadows of the Empire right on their heels.  Those games BLEW MY MIND at the time, especially Mario.  I'm just not sure that they could impress me again in the same way, and if they could, it would *probably* take more than a Mario game.

If they give me a game that revolutionizes my play experience, I'll put money down tomorrow.  Until they do, I'll wait and see what the catalog looks like a few months after release.  I have not been genuinely impressed (in the way that Mario 64 impressed me) by a game since Gears of War, and that makes me sad... sad that it was Epic/Microsoft and not Nintendo that impressed me, and sad that Nintendo really hasn't stepped up to the plate in the intervening time.  

The idea of Wii and its motion controls excited me, but the experience itself didn't live up to its promise (though I have had some pretty enjoyable moments with Wii Sports and Red Steel 2)... what I really wanted, a GOOD, realistic baseball experience, never came.  The idea of the 3DS really excited me... but what do I play on it?  Can Nintendo really not come up with anything more revolutionary (in terms of actual gaming experience) than what they did 15 years ago?  I'm not looking for a "good" game... I'm looking for a game that fills me with wonder - a game that transports me.  I would say that I'm being unrealistic if Nintendo hadn't done it before...

Come on big N, impress me!

I would really Prefer The Nintendo Fps to be made by Nintendo and not ActiVision and for it to be a Scifi themed Shooter like Halo instead of Modern like Cod because it would seemed more like Nintendo and it would make the stages alot more funner than lets say Cod and more creative .

Even though I can't get behind the grammar of your post ( ), I couldn't agree more with your sentiment! Nintendo needs to push a new IP, made by an in-house or 2nd party studio, and it needs to make something distinctive (i.e. not another CoD clone). I'm done with companies trying to cash in on my nostalgia by offering me "pretty good" reboots, or trying to cash in on my love of great franchises by offering me mildly entertaining clones.

Where all the mad creativity at?! (Ok... so grammar really isn't that important...)

Dementis, man, you make consistently intelligent points on these forums... but at this point you're pretty much just picking on Koopa (and often, purposely it seems, mis-hearing his points).

It seems valid to say (as Koopa clarified to be his original point) that successive Activision iterations of Goldeneye would NOT be what the WiiU needs to move forward... Goldeneye itself would not make a good serial (as you point out), but even worse than a bad serial would be a bad serial produced by an Activision B-studio. Don't get me wrong, Eurocom did a great job with Dead Space: Extraction, for what it was. But honestly, this is not the studio to produce the next big thing in gaming. The thing I really agree with here is that Nintendo needs to look to a GREAT studio to make them a GREAT new IP... what they manifestly don't need is another CoD clone.

As far as the whole Sci-Fi FPS thing goes... I don't think that Koopa is really sold on the genre ideas he tossed out there at first. He was just providing an example of what he was looking for, and happened to have Halo in mind. There is nothing "mindless" or particularly "gory" about Halo (or have you, perhaps, not played it?). I found even Reach to be gripping, exciting, and just plain fun. Metroid Prime is amazing for what it is... but it is definitely not what Koopa is looking for (nor I).

Interestingly enough, as I'm sure you know, Prime was not what Retro studios developed their engine for in the first place. Metroid was tossed their way when Nintendo didn't particularly like the direction they were taking with the FPS that was in development at the time. This adds credence to your suggestion that Nintendo is not really interested in a typical FPS experience from their first parties... so ultimately, I agree with you when you say that if such a thing is to appear on the new system, it will have to come from a non-1st party source.

This being said, I have seen fruitful collaborations in this vein between Nintendo and a 3rd party studio, such as the Eternal Darkness project, in the past. So I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that Nintendo could work with a talented studio to make a real, quality FPS for its new system... and I, for one, hope that it happens.

Give me a game where you play as a Pirate commander, commanding ships RTS style on the touch screen, while boarding enemies and shooting them with you flintlock pistol on the TV screen.

This is a really cool idea for improving the workflow on genre-bending games where multitasking is a necessity... it seems like this kind of game will be what really sets the new system apart, providing intense, deep gameplay experiences with intuitive control that is also unparalleled in its precision.

Man, I have to register a pretty emphatic "no" to this thought, for a few reasons.

1st, while the game is fun... it's pretty much one of those games that, I hate to say, is "good for a Wii game"... Conduit 2 was not a significant improvement in terms of story, features, tone, or game engine either (and I think that's why it suffered from fairly universal "so-so" reviews). The scale of the game is hardly "epic", the premise is neither original nor particularly compelling, and the play dynamics are not really anything to write home about in terms of innovation or deep immersion.

2nd, and this perhaps helps to explain the first point, High Voltage has said in interviews with IGN (GameScoop) that they really had (and have) no interest in making a "killer app" for Nintendo - that they were not out to make the "Halo killer"... rather, with the Conduit, they were just trying to "have fun" and to push the limits of the Wii's hardware.

With this in mind, I think that the Conduit is hardly the franchise to be Nintendo's flagship FPS. High Voltage may, indeed, produce something great for the big N... but this doesn't seem to be their goal... and I don't think that what they make will be on par with Halo. The studio does good genre pieces... but nothing genre defining (and they seem to be okay with that).

It is more likely that Microsoft will release a new console first, but that is not going to be a "super-machine". It will probably be an upgrade of the 360; with Kinect built-in, more ram and use a bigger optical disc capacity. Anything "extra" is likely to be little more than "tweaks".

This seems likely to me, as well.... "elite" editions with some better individual parts (like storage or RAM) or new bundle options for the 360 would make more sense than a new console at a time when anything they could sell for less than $1000 would be only marginally more powerful than WiiU.

As far as the "worry", however... I wouldn't be worried even if MS or PS announced a new console at E32012. Why in the world would that be worrisome? If they want to try to force their install base to purchase a new piece of tech that offers them no real, new play experiences (other than, perhaps, a few more assets from current generation game engines), then good on them. Wii owners have a reason to upgrade, as do the owners of other consoles (due to the controller and the prospect of some truly great IPs in HD for the first time), but PS or MS owners really don't.

Ok, so... does anyone feel up to explaining what, exactly, made the original Mario so great?  I mean, it is GREAT.  I played it into the ground when it came out, and I love it to this day.  But why?  It's not like the jumping is just that much fun, or that everyone identifies with a fat plumber, or that the environments and challenges were all that awe-inspiring.  WHAT IS IT?

Looking over the true classics, it's pretty universally difficult to explain the appeal.  In plenty of ways, there have been more "interesting" block games than Tetris... but Tetris is still the best.  There have been more varied, nuanced, and deep experiences than the old text-based dungeon adventures, but I would go and replay those (or even King's Quest) long before I would replay, say, Fable III.

Recently I downloaded Superbrothers:Sword&SworceryEP for my iPhone, and it reminded me about the awesomeness of those 8-bit days... and reminded me that we've been pretty much stuck in a gaming box for many, many years, still playing by the rules that Miyamoto and others like him helped to write back in the 80s.  It wasn't the particular presentations that made those games great... it was something else.

It seems that we're still trying to make games either more like movies or more like carnival games or more like a very interesting pop-up book... but is there something else we could be doing with them (and isn't it something else that those early creators were tapping into, albeit unconsciously)?  Couldn't we be messing, somehow, with interactivity itself - with the fact that we are both manipulating and being manipulated by our environment in electronic media?  Couldn't we make a game that lived in the tension between narrative (what the story is doing to you) and personal responsibility (what you are doing to the story and the characters), and asked us to find a real equilibrium with that dynamic through our in-game actions?

Maybe this is just too "heady" or esoteric for the average gamer... but if we aren't asking ourselves what makes games great, then don't we simply run the risk of games hitting the same cultural arc as film (basically peaking early as art, then becoming a special effects arms race, then devolving into formulaic blockbuster attempts in the interest of making money)?  If NO ONE cares about this question, then I'm afraid that, like the film industry, the games industry will soon be left with nothing but the polar opposites of Call of Duty blockbusters and tiny indie offerings like World of Goo... and I, for one, find that a depressing prospect.

I would just really love to see them go MMO with this franchise.  It seems like Animal Crossing was MADE for social interaction, and a persistent online world with the Animal Crossing flavor would definitely become an online hub for gamers like myself - a place to display my style, hang out and chat with friends, collect and trade items/designs with friends, etc.  They could still keep privacy in place (Nintendo-style) by allowing access restriction levels via user menus, depending on your personal privacy preferences.

Actually, it's a pretty cool idea. Like the DCL distribution in City Folk, but it could be like an ARG and there are QR codes on posters advertising the game and things.

I agree that this kind of content delivery would be very cool... maybe the potential exists for it to get a bit gimmicky, but it doesn't have to be.  What Dementis describes would add a lot to the game.

I like The Grinder.

Hey,ya... I was gonna mention The Grinder, too. From the look of it, at least, I'm likin' that game a lot.

The Conduit will NOT bring anyone to a system. People are right when they say we only accepted it because we had no alternative on Wii. It is a pretty fun game when considered as a "Wii game", but it is a lackluster, boring game on pretty much every level when compared to sci-fi FPS on other systems.

I would LOVE a new, numbered entry in the series... and it certainly wouldn't hurt if they atoned for the betrayal that was FFVII by making it WiiU exclusive (never happen, I know, but I'm still sore about the old PS1 days).

Man these threads are really starting to chafe me.... Alex and Aaron (above) know what they're talking about, so people need to read their posts and be DONE with the nonsense talk about non-facts and pseudo-figures like the "10% of its potential" and the "50% more powerful" statisto-babble. People are really running with those figures in completely nonsensical directions and it is not contributing to REAL conversation about the system's ability!

I'll use one of my Personal Favorite games: portal. The idea is simple; you have a gun that can shoot holes in the walls that are linked together. The execution, on the other hand, is brilliant. It makes Physics fun.

Ya, I totally agree about this game... it's such a great example of a very simple mechanic making for a really deep experience. I think this must be a central facet of truly great games - the ability to put your active involvement with the game world front-and-center through a movement or mechanic that feels good to execute.

For me it is just plainly the content... Also the content has to be good obviosly

Yeah... this makes sense to me, in terms of a sense of value. I can think of a lot of games with massive content that are not at all fun... but it seems true that wealth of available content allows for a richer interaction with the game world - allows you to inhabit that created space more fully.

What makes a game good is how much you feel like your in it. The major advantage is that you are the fat plumber. You finally get to be the hero (or villian) you always wanted to be without any real life consequences... also, accomplishment. In games such as Tetris we aren't being a great hero. What keeps us coming back is the feeling of accomplishment you get from winning. Sometimes this victory makes us feel powerful, sometimes it makes us feel smart. That is what makes a game.

I'm not completely sold that I have a secret fantasy about being a fat plumber, lol , but I get the "chance to be a hero" thing. The odd thing is, however, that the games that seem most to make me really become the hero feature heroes that I don't want to become, whereas games with "bad-a" heroes that I would love to become feel only incidentally or artificially attached to me as a player. (Sure player man, you're Marcus Fenix, *wink*)

The sense of accomplishment is a great point. There is something about victory over a challenge that is just inherently appealing (something about the way our brains are wired... curious little monkeys, yes...)

In Mario 3, the rules of engagement are simple... Due to the simple mechanics (run and jump left and right) and the flexibility afforded to the player in how to overcome challenges, the game becomes fun and intriguing to try to complete. Hell if I get a Tanooki suit I start being super careful because it's so rare and so awesome, I don't want to lose it. What is there in Galaxy to REALLY make you care about your playing like that?

This also makes a lot of sense to me... and this is really what sets Mario apart from other great games featuring simple mechanics (like Angry Birds)... the fact that your performance is carried over between levels. It adds a requirement on the player, while keeping the challenge basically related to the simple core mechanic of moving, waiting, jumping.

Again, I think that this kind of greatness really stresses the interactivity of gaming - the fact that the machinery of the game world revolves around your input.


But now... what about the other side of gaming? What about the narrative aspect? Is that really (as Miyamoto has told us before) incidental to the experience, rather than central? Are games just being crazy in trying to integrate narrative with interactivity? Should they simply be providing backdrop to the mechanic, or framework for the mechanic to hang upon, rather than innovating a path toward real interaction with deep narrative?

But the Dreamcast was more powerful than everything else at its time and easy to develop for, yet nobody flocked to it.

Too true... the hope for the Nintendo console has never been in its superior power.  

It seems that the new system will be adequately powerful, and it is nice to have a system that is relatively up to par with the market... but the real question has always been about the games.  Will Nintendo give us some real, quality 1st/2nd party titles (as well as new, exciting IPs), and will they adequately court quality 3rd party developers?  

Second to this has to be the concern of the online functionality... Will they develop a substantial community network, and will the social buzz be attractive enough to establish a real, involved community of gamers?

I HAVE to think that the only reason you would choose Xbox over Nintendo if you had to choose would be because of these issues... am I right?  Nintendo's hardware has always had impressive quality in terms of reliability and true control innovation (I, for one, would drop my Xbox in a second if there were anything worthwhile to play on my Nintendo systems).  This reinforces to me that Nintendo really must put their focus on these areas...

I would be really excited about this (I'm a HUGE fan of Tri, as it was literally the only Wii game to accumulate a somewhat shocking 500 hours of play time)... but I'm not sure how likely it will be to see the light of day on WiiU.  

Tri always had a very strong, dedicated online presence on the Wii, but compared to the franchise's typical audience (PSP and PS2, mostly in Japan) the numbers were abysmally low (the PSP Monster Hunter game following Tri went multi-platinum on day one in Asian markets)!

HD Monster Hunter seems like a no-brainer to me.  I think it would look awesome, and they could get rid of some of the annoying parts of the game (like the lack of realistic monster interactivity/ecosystem awareness) and add tons of weapons, locations, and new monsters.  To make such a game, however, they would have to pretty much ignore their demographics data, which suggests that the people who are really going to buy their game mostly play old, clunky handhelds!

Of course I would buy it!  Sure I don't have a load of cash lying around... but that's what kidneys are for, right?

Whatever they call the new Star Fox game... great.  Assault 2 would be fine with me (though to be honest I'd prefer not to have a name that suggested a fresh approach).

Story line is not really a problem for a game directed by a Japanese developer... mega man was always reinventing itself by retelling the story with a completely different scenario and plot arc, but using the same universe.  Personally, I thought this was brilliant (even though it often confused me as a kid)... a new story for a new generation, but always referencing familiar characters, themes, and fan-beloved elements.

I'm actually pretty intrigued by Killer Freaks, as well... though I won't be exactly waiting in line to buy it on day one.

The third party "love" that I'm looking for is mostly potential, rather than actual. I would love to see what 2K is cooking up, and I'll be paying close attention to Rockstar for something like Red Dead or GTA (though I like the former better). Even more than this, however, I'm excited about studios like Remedy, who have made great games in the past, have a history of producing exclusives, and are currently un-signed for their next project. Nintendo needs to snatch those games up!

As far as multi-platform games, I like that Ubi Montreal is working on a new AC game for WiiU (whether that means an updated Revelations or a new title altogether). I'm also waiting to see if Dead Space 3 hits Wii because of EA's strong show of support.

MH shouldnt have a difficulty setting, that would be ridiculous.

I could not agree more with this statement... Monster Hunter KILLED me with its difficulty at various points along the way, but that's what is so fun about it.  Once you accomplish one seemingly impossible task, you feel like the ultimate bad-a for a while... then you get to move on to the next seemingly impossible task.  This is a huge part of what kept my interest, and kept me committed to the game for 600+ hours to date.  There is plenty to do in the game when you are "stuck" at a particularly difficult monster.

Ya, there really need to be more answer options in this poll.  The jump will almost certainly be more noticeable than the indiscernible difference between 360/PS3 (which I defy anyone to truly demonstrate via video sample with commentary on specific visual features), but it will not be NEARLY as big as the truly embarrassing gap between Wii and PS3/360.  

So as not to be a hypocrite, here is a video from IGN detailing some of the exact differences that I think will exist between the WiiU and its future competition.  The video outlines the differences between Crysis 2 running in DirectX9 (WiiU will be able to push 10.1, so it will be capable of doing slightly more than 9, but none of the advanced tesselation or real-time reflection mapping) and DirectX11.  It seems likely that Sony, at least, will wait until they can produce hardware that will run DX11 (though even this would be prohibitively expensive if attempted right now... the commentators referenced major framerate issues at points, and this was a top-of-the-line gaming rig).  Still, say what you will about Sony, they spring for the best stuff out there.  The PSVita is a good example of that, and evidence against the people who keep saying that Sony has "learned their lesson" with the PS3 and its lack of profitability.  And please, for the love of God, don't throw that one quotation from the windbag Sony rep at me... let's look at concrete decisions the company has and is making, not off-hand comments.

Now, I say this looks pretty good for the WiiU.  I'm no Sony fan (in fact, most days I think I would open a bottle of old bubbly if the company went under)... but I think they will make a top-of-the-line machine with their next console, and I still say that, even this being the case, the jump is not that big of a deal.  Do I like real-time reflection mapping and advanced particle tracking with motion blur effects?  Sure... but I can wait six or seven years for them to find the hardware to run them cheaply and efficiently without losing any sleep at all (and my wallet will thank me).

While I agree that it seems HIGHLY unlikely that Nintendo will charge for its online service, I can't say that I am particularly happy about this...

XboxLIVE is a great service. It really is... and millions of adopters, "hardcore" and "casual" alike, agree. I'm not saying that I really want Nintendo to do something similar, but I AM afraid that I will end up paying each individual company individual, monthly fees on separate account systems for online functionality in their particular game (which is a nightmare). A few things that Nintendo has said make me think in this direction, and I am REALLY hoping that this doesn't happen (but don't know how it can be avoided, especially being that companies like Ubi are already headed there)...