PS2 installed base= 107Million users. Besides that though- we were talking about Nin. If you were talking about Squenix that would be something different. Take that 6Million users paying $15 a month to play, a whopping $90 Million dollars. Nintendo moves over $20 Million in DS hardware in one week in one territory.
Yet I believe the attachrate of game to hardware sales for ps2 is between 1 to 2. A lot of those sales don't really net sony all that much money.
I'd say, world wide, there's probably only around 60 million active gamers, the rest just game every once in a while (and thus aren't giving the companies very much money and aren't worth going after). A market like WoW is definetely worth going after, since it's likely to contain the bigger spenders, and not the ones who will buy the loss leading hardware and then barely purchase software.
Oh, and that's $90 million of almost pure profit, Nintendo probably breaks even on the DS hardware.
So from close to point blank you can shoot somewhat decently. Let's back that up a bit- we'll go to 400 yards. I'll grab my AR-15 using iron sights and you grab your rifle of choice and see how those mousing skills are helping you out
It's not even worth it. Ok, the guy doesn't think the Wii is for him, so he's not going to try it. He probably doesn't like Nintendo games anyway, so no matter what Nintendo released, it would not have appealed to him.
I, personally, am excited about the Wii because they're trying something new, and it looks like their approach to it is anything but half-assed. Whether or not it's a good idea remains to be seen, but I think we'll be able to say that if it fails, it didn't fail from poor implementation. The marketplace will decide if it was a good idea or not. I believe, at the very worst, the Wii will be like those gimmicky arcade games, which are the only ones that even exist anymore. Go into any arcade, and it's likely you'll see very few games that aren't a rhythm/music game, lightgun, racing, or some motion sensor game. You may see some fighting games. Now, the failed arcade market probably isn't the best thing to compare the Wii too, but consoles have already eaten up the rest of the arcade market, maybe the Wii will gobble up what's left. Certainly what's left exists because someone wants it and is pumping money into it.
I like the way the console market is diverging.
Nintendo is trying something new and quirky, they'll at least offer a different experience to break up the monotonous activity that is gaming.
Microsoft is going for the traditional gamer crowd, just give me games, games, and more immersive games.
And Sony is going for the high end entertainment market. I don't care for this market, but if I did, I'd probably be psyched about the PS3.
They are available and working for the PS2 and the XBox- you have to ask yourself why you don't use them.
There's an easy explanation for that. There's no place to put/use a mouse when you're playing on a TV, and even if there is, the games aren't setup to make good use of it. Halo has a very limited turning/aiming speed, the primary advantage of the mouse is lost due to the sluggish movement of the game.
I saw actual gamers and none made it look easy, most were over compensating heavily as again there is no FEEDBACK to truly justify the feel of striking someone with a sword.
Well, the controller does have rumble, I'll wait to try the controller before I condemn it though. If it sucks, I don't have to spend money on it, it costs me nothing to try in a store, and not that much just to buy the system for games I'm already interested in (aka, smash bros) and then see if the rest is worth getting as well. No one forces you to spend money, and if you don't try it, ultimately you're at best losing nothing, and quite possibly depriving yourself of something that could be entertaining.
I saw Samus circle strafeing without the Wii being moved. How did they do this? With lock on only, would be impossible otherwise with this type of control system. I dont want the game aiming for me thank you very much.
Metroid Prime 1 and 2 did the same thing, and they used a standard controller. It's just the way nintendo felt the game should be played. Red Steel has a more traditional movement I believe, not certain though. Anyhow, the wiimote functions as the aiming device (and I can't see it being worse than using a joystick for that), and the control stick on the nunchuck attachment is used for movement.
As far as which racing game was zagging lmao. Are you ready to eat your words? Say Yum Yum!
Looks like about the same amount of zagginess I've seen in any racing game I've ever played, short of the completely unrealistic ones like mario kart. In fact, I've been playing need for speed most wanted lately, and I zag much much worse in that than the guy in the video did. Some racing games just aren't easy to control, especially if the car has any sense of weight at all.
why would they go with infrared technology......? my god it's 2006, use RF/Bluetooth or something besides goddamn IR.
It does use bluetooth. The IR is only used for pointing at the screen, for aiming. All controller input and motion is transmitted over bluetooth, but IR had to be used for the aiming since bluetooth could not be used to determine where you're aiming at.
I was amazed at the light gun Nintendo introduced with the NES. Now that it's here again, I want to know
The NES, and nearly all other lightguns, depended on CRTs. They made the screen flash when you plugged the trigger and they would detect a pattern to determine what you were aiming at. (the gun had a little sensor inside) Non-video game lightguns worked similarly I think, except that the gun would project the light onto a sensor. Ok, so that's not pattern based, but still.
The Wii works with an infrared port and a sensor bar on top of the TV. I'd imagine it somehow determines angle and distance to determine what you're aiming at. This allows it to work on any type of screen, since the old lightguns wouldn't work on a CRT, and flashing screens are annoying anyway.