Xzeno's forum posts

  • 11 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by Xzeno (12 posts) -
@bearshamanbro: Personally I feel as though the Wii U controller won't keep casual Wii owners interested, the controller seemed aimed straight at the hardcore crowd. The Wiimote was accepted among the "non-gaming" crowd because of it's simplicity, the controller reminded them of a television remote and the controls for the system were equally as simple to grasp. My mom has a Wii, the main reason she never got an Xbox or PS3 was because the controller intimidated her. The Wii U controller goes back to that format as it has two thumbsticks, 4 shoulder buttons, a D-pad, 4 face buttons and a touch screen controller. For you casual user this is going to seem overwhelming for anything that uses more than just the touch screen, so I don't see this being aimed at the caual market which is what makes up a greater percentage of Wii owners at the moment. If a Dad was into a game like Bioshock chances are he owns a PS3 or 360 and I personally feel that the addition of (in my opinion) what looks like an extremely awkward controller to hold isn't going to make him switch over to this new console. I don't want Nintendo to fail but I do feel that they're trying to go after demographic that has moved on. What I am hearing more than anything among friends and people on the internet alike is "My 360/PS3 can already do that".
#2 Edited by Xzeno (12 posts) -

I understand what he's trying to say and I agree to an extent. The Wii was a commercial success I don't think anyone would debate that but most people I personally know only ever bought 1-3 games for the system, These are people who I would consider hardcore gamers, people who love gaming, yet when it came to the Wii most of them including myself only ever turn on the Wii once or twice every month or two. I'm more speaking from my own personal experience and it doesn't necessarily mean it applies to everyone but I do agree that in the eyes of at least everyone I know who owns a Wii it was more a toy then an investment like the 360 and PS3 were. I guess the best way I can put it is, Just because Twilight sold extremely well doesn't necessarily make it a great series of books, it just makes them popular.

#3 Posted by Xzeno (12 posts) -
@facestabman said:

Guys guys, best solution ever.

Sell classic controller pros without the need of a wiimote. Just wireless ones.

There, I just fixed it.

but then all nintendo has done is make a current gen console that still isn't as good as the one's (PS3/XBOX360) that are out already, due to the lack of an included hard drive. Not to mention the current consoles we have are already 5 years old. So essentially Nintendo just got to the starting line while PS3 and 360 are ready to take off.
#4 Edited by Xzeno (12 posts) -

I can't say this due to the subscription fee on Xbox or not but my experiences with the service on PS3 and Xbox360 have been a lot different, some small and some large. Call me nit picking but the idea that we have to usually wait a good amount more time to download games off of PSN then once their downloaded then have to wait another few minutes to install them to the console once they've already been downloaded is annoying. With Xbox I find what I need hit download and the service does the rest, all i have to do after that is wait for it to tell me that it's done. On the PSN not every game has a demo, and even if they do have demo's are often located in completely different areas in the PSN store. On Xbox every game with the exception the Digital downloads (and those might have demos not too sure) has a demo associated with it and as far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong) but I don't think you can just unlock the ability to buy a game from within the demo with the PSN.
 
Cross game chat might not mean a lot to people but it makes it a lot easier to get games going with friends, to me it's the difference between meeting up at a friends house and going to the movies with friends and everyone just planning on arriving at the theater at the same time. One has a higher success rate of making sure everyone gets there on time and can get seats together. My online experience with Playstation 3 is very limited so some of this may be out of ignorance on my part but I find it insanely easier to get into a game with friends as well. I see a friend playing a game I highlight their name, go to join game and I'm in, something I'm not sure is available on the ps3. Even with Playstation Plus there are certain games that are offered for free on the service yet once you stop being a member you lose those rights. Hate on gold as much as you want but if I go from gold to silver all I lose is the ability to play online and although the game was free you still had to pay for the service so I don't find it to be terribly different. Simple things like loading your achievements/trophies take a lot longer on the PS3, Updates also seem to take longer as do loading of the game....I could literally have started a match and have got a few hits in on Marvel vs Capcom 3 on the xbox before the ps3 has finished loading the content into the game and gone through the startup sequence. Updates are mandatory across games where as they are technically optional on xbox although you give up your ability to go online while playing said games. PS3 updates are way too frequent and sometimes become a burden where you really only see maybe 2 a year on the xbox.
 
I enjoy both systems but for me Xbox live is well worth my money and until I feel i'm not getting my money's worth I doubt i'll stop being a gold subscriber it doesn't make me stupid for paying it just makes me a satisfied customer.

#5 Edited by Xzeno (12 posts) -

So I've been hearing rumors around the internet that the system will only support 1 Wii U controller 
(http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/does-nintendos-wii-u-only-support-1-touchscreen-controller/)
while every other player would be limited to using either a Wiimote and Nunchuck or classic controller. Personally I feel this is a big hit to nintendo if this turns out to be true as the appeal of using this in various ways is highly diminished if it's only limited to one person. If they are "going after the hardcore" how would people play two player games? Would one person use the Wii U controller while another uses a Wiimote or Classic controller? Seems doing that would diminish the appeal of this new controller. Even if Nintendo made a new proper controller for the system then all they've really done is make a current Gen console to compete with systems that are already 5 years old. I don't know I'm still waiting for more information to come out but I am not at all pleased by this news at the moment

#6 Edited by Xzeno (12 posts) -

I have to agree, It seems like it's an Ipad sized controller and of all people I know who have those they're all right for short uses but not extended hours of play. Regardless of how cool it is or how little it may weighs the awkward way in which you'd probably need to hold it seems like it would wear on you after a while. Ever try to comfortably sit down while holding an Ipad, some might argue with me but it's not exactly easy. 
 
As for the screen my biggest concern is that it'll have the same issues for developers as the Wii did where they just didn't know how to use it properly so most games used very basic functions of the Wiimote, like a slight waggle here or there. I have a feeling the controllers screen will be used most of the time for item menus and health bars.

#7 Posted by Xzeno (12 posts) -

Well I have a Zune so I use that to manage my music but it's not so great if I want to just listen to music through my computer as a list and not a single song. For that i either use Windows Media Player and just drop my music into there or I use VLC player.

#8 Posted by Xzeno (12 posts) -
@Mono_Listo:  Yeah it's a curious thing, One thing I don't care for too much is that the online code can only be used once so I think personally that it's wrong for those that do buy new and have multiple accounts or 360/PS3's in the house to figure who gets the online code. For example I have a friend with 4 Xbox's in her house one for her and her husband and one for each of her two kids, It's kinda wrong in my opinion if they buy a copy of a game for the family and only one gets online access while everyone else has to pay $5-$10 more to have that same access as they all have separate accounts. I understand the argument some make where they say your only purchasing it once and the way they see it you only have rights to one account similar to PC games but I still think it's kind of a Jerk move on EA's part.
#9 Posted by Xzeno (12 posts) -
@BeachThunder said:
" "Why was this thread bumped?"

@Xzeno said:
"...Why do you assume your an idiot..."
=/ "
lol wow my bad i'm actually usually not bad about that kind of stuff
#10 Posted by Xzeno (12 posts) -

This has always been a split topic for me. 
In one hand it's kind of a crappy business model to have content locked on a disc and only unlockable by code (game-stop a lot of times is pushing this type of practice with their exclusive character/weapon/armor incentives) . In the other hand as long as it doesn't take away from the overall experience I don't have much an issue with it, We're not talking about them leaving out levels, or endings to games but instead taking out things like special weapons/armor/race cars/characters which don't really affect the overall experience in a terribly bad way. For example I borrowed Mass Effect 2 from a friend meaning I never got the Cerberus network extras and really it didn't really matter to me...If I had got them it would have added more value to the overall game but I don't think it takes away so much that it ruins the game. 
 
One thing I can't agree with is EA's whole project $10 because in it they are actually taking out features like online support which in a time where most people are connected online is actually in my opinion detrimental to the overall game IMO

  • 11 results
  • 1
  • 2