...
and Wii!
We. Oui. Wee-wee. "Nintendo P*ss" if you're an Xbox or Sony fanboy. What was Nintendo thinking?
This is what happens when you think the code-name is bad...
The same thing happened to Longhorn/Windows Vista, IMO.
Wtf, The name Revolution is ten times better than Wii and like tepples said it makes me think about piss for some reason. I apoligize in advance if this pisses anyone off, bwahahaha.
Anyways Nintendo's official website says the reason for the change was "While the name revolution expressed our direction. Wii represents the answer (hmmm, what exactly was the question might I ask). Wii will break down the wall that separates video game players from everybody else. Wii sounds like "we," which emphasizes this console is for everyone. Wii can easily be remembered by people around the world, no matter what language they speak (ok, if you guys say so).
All in all it seems like a stupid idea to me guys and gals so feel free to speculate on the reasons for the change and how much of a difference it makes. I mean no matter what they do I'm still not going to be wasting any of my money on it. Unless of course they figure out a way to make it clean my room and dare I say give me a blowjob. Once again I apoligize in advance if this comment or any other comment I have made on this board offends anyone, hehehe.
This is obviously a creation of their marketing department of monkeys at typewriters. On the one hand, it's just a freaking name of a console with no bearing on the games, so why should we care? On the other hand, why waste a name on something like this, with an even stupider marketing explanation? Reminds me of the claimed
reason Hello Kitty has no mouth (the real reason is probably that she was sniffing glue and accidentally sealed her mouth shut).
Makes me want to go on a swing and scream 'Wii!!'
blargg wrote:
On the one hand, it's just a freaking name of a console with no bearing on the games, so why should we care?
I agree. I'd still like to see how the games turn out.
lynxsolaris wrote:
blargg wrote:
On the one hand, it's just a freaking name of a console with no bearing on the games, so why should we care?
I agree. I'd still like to see how the games turn out.
Nomen est omen
Nintendo's successful consoles: NES, SNES, and Game Boy (all of them).
Nintendo's failures: Virtual Boy, N64, and Game Cube.
Still undetermined: DS, Wii.
I totally agree with Blargg.
Here you are my opinion :
The DS actually IS a failure (two screens to have twice enjoyment ? Isn't that VERY stupid marketting ??). The GC is a bit intermediate, it is less a failure than others, but far as great as NES, SNES and Game Boys.
well.. according to sales figures DS is no failure (imho).. and I thought that was how they messured success from failure(?)
so in what way is it a failure?
Bregalad wrote:
The DS actually IS a failure
Name one market in which the PSP outsells the DS.
I was saying *my* opinion, so if *I* like the console and the games developped for or not, regardless of other parameters. Sorry if that confused someone.
I think more people are interested in PSP than in the DS (while I'm still unsure). If only Sony wouldn't have added copy protection on PSPs after the very first release that had no protection at all, allowing homebrew software, the PSP would sure be one of the greatest game machine ever. But now........
Quote:
The DS actually IS a failure (two screens to have twice enjoyment ? Isn't that VERY stupid marketting ??)
I'm
still confused about the Nintendo DS. I remember before it was released reading that it wasn't a replacement for the Game Boy Advance and not really a game platform, or something like that. But all I've heard about are games. Maybe just marketing to keep people buying GBA units at the time, but it sure confused the hell out of me and has never been resolved in my mind.
blargg wrote:
I'm still confused about the Nintendo DS.
First, Nintendo wanted to stick it to Sony before they released the Playstation Portable. Second, Miyamoto likes to deploy his ideas with specific hardware.
Considering the DS as a Game Boy would insult the whole Game Boy series. So, the DS isn't a Game Boy, because Game Boys have only one screen, have no pen, have interesting games developped for and are 100% backward compatible.
Bregalad wrote:
So, the DS isn't a Game Boy, because Game Boys have only one screen, have no pen, have interesting games developped for and are 100% backward compatible.
By the same logic, one could have claimed in 2001 that the GBA wasn't a Game Boy, because Game Boys have a smaller screen, have no 32-bit CPU or Super NES style PPU, have interesting games developped for and are 100% backward compatible. (GBA was not compatible with GBC titles that relied on the GBC's infrared link.)
Bregalad wrote:
Considering the DS as a Game Boy would insult the whole Game Boy series. So, the DS isn't a Game Boy, because Game Boys have only one screen, have no pen, have interesting games developped for and are 100% backward compatible.
So true. The newest "Game Boy" is the GBA SP2 (new backlit version) that was released last year 2005, and it still plays the very first Game Boy game ever released (from 1989). The "Game Boy micro" isn't really a Game Boy, in my opinion. It as much a DS as it is a Game Boy.
There still has yet to be a Game Boy that is across the board better than all other Game Boys. The SGB has its advantages, while the original GBA has the best form factor for comfort, yet a crappy D-pad and a crappy screen. Similar things can be said about every Game Boy. Hell, multi-tracking on the GB people claim that the original Game Boy has the best audio.
All I've heard about trouble on backward compability is that some sound hardware timing is clocked differently on the GBC/GBA than on the original Game Boy, so it cause some minor sound glitches. The impact should a bit similar than interchangin the 5-step sequence and the 4-step sequence via $4017 on NES games, wich sometimes causes minor sound glitches.
The GBA screen is a lot better than GBC one, wich definitly have too low resolution. It caused a lot of problem with menus in games, because they didn't have room to write enough text.
Now for many people "Game Boy" mean "Portable gaming system", regardless of if it is manufactured by Nintendo or not (because the Game Boy is the most popular). So most people are refering portable telephones, calculators, PSPs, Tamagoshis, etc.... as "Game Boys" just because they are small portable devices where games can be installed. In that case, yeah the DS is a Game Boy. But else, it isn't officially called "Game Boy". It is "Nintendo DS", no "Game Boy DS", as many says.
Maybe it is just maketing purposes, to still have people buy GBAs, tough.
Wii?
Might as well call it The Pussy. You know, like pussycat.
Hyde wrote:
Might as well call it The Pussy. You know, like pussycat.
Hey, that'd rock !! It is a cool name, for a game console ! Well, it still would sound a bit childish, but who cares ?
Bregalad wrote:
Hyde wrote:
Might as well call it The Pussy. You know, like pussycat.
Hey, that'd rock !! It is a cool name, for a game console !
Atari Jaguar failed.
Maybe, but it probably wasn't cause the name.
One a side note, the games developped for a console sure influence more than it's name but... the name of a console influcence on people developping games for. So, unlike some people say, the name still is important.