Topic: "Wii HD" in 2011?

[Pale]

When my 2001 panasonic tv-vcr combo finally breaks down i sure as heck am not getting HD, and definitely not DTV. Count me out.

Uhmm, that's... noble of you I guess.  Wait why now?

I'm confused.

[NWR_Lindy]

I don't know why you wouldn't want an HDTV, if you can afford one.  Not having one will eventually be like not having a touchtone phone: pretty silly, since they're cheap and have better features than older technology.

[Spak-Spang]

I think it is because affording one and needing one are two different things.

I want and HDTV, and some time in 2009, I will probably get and HDTV, but as of right now, they are expensive and I can use my money elsewhere. 

[EasyCure]

Mario doesn't just jump and run anymore, he can sideflip, backflip, triple jump, slide on his belly, kick, wallkick, stomp, ... Why? Wasn't jumping and running enough?

You don't want games to move forward or innovate?  You don't want new ideas?  Why the hell aren't we still just playing Pong clones then?

I want innovation that makes sense, not craptons of moves that people don't even use (there's a reason they got stripped down in later versions). If you just randomly innovate you get Plättchen, a total mess that may be innovative but doesn't fit together at all because the innovations don't work together. All these extra moves for Mario did was make it even harder to maneuver the 3d space (at least when you were expected to use them) and add some stuff to exploit for speedruns.

Ehh... i wouldnt use Mario 64's moves as a good example cuz all those moves were useful in the right situation, except maybe the crouched spin kick. Such a melee attack would of been useful when surrounded by enemies but that never happened.

[Ian Sane]

I want innovation that makes sense, not craptons of moves that people don't even use (there's a reason they got stripped down in later versions). If you just randomly innovate you get Plättchen, a total mess that may be innovative but doesn't fit together at all because the innovations don't work together. All these extra moves for Mario did was make it even harder to maneuver the 3d space (at least when you were expected to use them) and add some stuff to exploit for speedruns.

I want innovation that makes sense too.  Know what makes no sense?  Mapping what would normally be a button press to waggle.  Waggle is less precise then a digital button.  And why are you using Super Mario 64 as an example?  Practically everyone loves that game.  I think those new moves are very useful and are an important part of that game.  Now there are games that add stuff and don't make proper use of them.  Splinter Cell's cool-but-useless wall split is an example.  The levels didn't provide many situations where the move could even be used.  But that's poor game design and that will happen regardless of technology or basic game design theories.  Bad games have always existed.

Regarding HDTVs eventually everyone will have them.  No we're not going to all go out and get one while we still have working TVs.  But eventually when your TV breaks that's what's going to be in stores.  It will make no sense to hunt down an older TV.  They probably won't even make them anymore.  It's like buying a black & white TV in the 80's.  Eventually HDTVs won't be expensive.  They're be selling cheap crap ones in Wal-marts with 21" screens.

[EasyCure]

I want innovation that makes sense, not craptons of moves that people don't even use (there's a reason they got stripped down in later versions). If you just randomly innovate you get Plättchen, a total mess that may be innovative but doesn't fit together at all because the innovations don't work together. All these extra moves for Mario did was make it even harder to maneuver the 3d space (at least when you were expected to use them) and add some stuff to exploit for speedruns.

I want innovation that makes sense too.  Know what makes no sense?  Mapping what would normally be a button press to waggle.  Waggle is less precise then a digital button.  And why are you using Super Mario 64 as an example?  Practically everyone loves that game.  I think those new moves are very useful and are an important part of that game.  Now there are games that add stuff and don't make proper use of them.  Splinter Cell's cool-but-useless wall split is an example.  The levels didn't provide many situations where the move could even be used.  But that's poor game design and that will happen regardless of technology or basic game design theories.  Bad games have always existed.

Regarding HDTVs eventually everyone will have them.  No we're not going to all go out and get one while we still have working TVs.  But eventually when your TV breaks that's what's going to be in stores.  It will make no sense to hunt down an older TV.  They probably won't even make them anymore.  It's like buying a black & white TV in the 80's.  Eventually HDTVs won't be expensive.  They're be selling cheap crap ones in Wal-marts with 21" screens.

thats why eventually nintendo will roll out an HD system and chose to hold off for this generation

I can honestly say i dont know anyone in my family or friends from my personal life that own an HDTV.

[NWR_Lindy]

You can already get 19" HDTVs (720p) on Amazon for $300.

[EasyCure]

You can already get 19" HDTVs (720p) on Amazon for $300.

True but when people think HD they also think huge screens, something to fill up your living room/entertainment center. Getting something that small no matter how cheap defeats the purpose of going HD if you'll  be sitting a few feet away and have crappy eyes lol

[NWR_Lindy]

It depends what you want to do.  I game on a 24" Dell HD LCD monitor that I also use as a computer monitor.  Works like a charm, and the monitor only cost $600.  It's even cheaper now.

All I'm saying is that HD does not necessarily mean $2500 SuperTV.  You can easily do it on a budget.

[Kairon]

I refuse to get an HDTV until it costs $250 and ISN'T MEANT FOR A COMPUTER.

Friggin... keep my TVs the same price, and keep them separate from my computer monitors!

[Dirk Temporo]

I've never seen an HDTV "meant" for a computer.

[Kairon]

When it looks more like a monitor than a TV screen, it's meant for a computer. *harrumph* whippersnappers.

[ATimson]

When my 2001 panasonic tv-vcr combo finally breaks down i sure as heck am not getting HD, and definitely not DTV. Count me out.

You can no longer get a non-DTV TV; new models have been required to have DTV tuners for about two years now.

You might be able to get away with buying a computer monitor that has HDMI/DVI in, and a converter box for component/composite (though maybe they have monitors with those inputs too?). But you're not going to be able to get a very big one.

[BranDonk Kong]

HDTVs really don't cost any more than non-HD (equivalent size) sets did 5-7 years ago. I paid $500 for a 37" CRT in 2000, by Thanksgiving, that would basically be the standard price for a 37" HDTV. HD isn't the future, it's the present.

[KDR_11k]

Waggle isn't innovation, it's the reluctance to innovate. When you're still thinking in on-off states and then mapping those to an analog input you're failing to innovate. Wii Sports demonstrated how you can use more than on-off states. It's not surprising, we saw a lot of failure to innovate in the early days of the DS. Of course it's also to be expected because most core genres were designed with buttons in mind and using genre conventions means you'll only have button inputs. I guess we can't really expect much since we're the ones who are mostly interested in core genres and don't get to play things like Carnival Games. Do those make more use of the motion sensing?

[Kairon]

I DO plan on moving to HD, as does my family at home. Actually, we don't care about HD at all, we just want a flat tv so we can reclaim some table space. There's no question that HD is coming, if only because flat tvs are cool and there are no such things as flat SD tvs... it's just a matter of price and convenience for a lot of us.

Actually... ARE there flast SD TVs? I'd buy one of those!

[IceCold]

Ian, you're wrong. You talk about the Wiimote as being driven by novelty and ignorance and that once that wears off people will go back to humongous uboat control gamepads that are just fucking clunky for any purpose, you're just like those retarded analysts that predict every week that the Wii fad is just about to end. The pointer is less precise than a mouse? So what, how do you use a mouse without a desk? Wii Motion Plus is an improvement? Well, guess what, that shows the technology still has room for improvement that can be done with the next system.

You always talk as if the masses are stupid and will be enlightened to your ways any moment now. You. Vs 32 million gamers. I say it's YOU who's ignorant and needs to be enlightened! You talk about how the Wii cannot play "current" games but what about the competition? I don't see the PS3 or 360 being capable of playing Wii Fit! Yeah, sure, the PS3 and 360 owners won't care and that's why the Wii is winning: It picked the market that DOES care and that does not pursue some snobbish perception of how videogames should be art and epic and ****, all they want is a fun game. Hell, all I want is a fun game yet games are so concerned with beating each other in terms of epic and art that at times the fun has to suffer for it because they ram another cutscene down your throat. **** the cutscenes, **** your crappy excuse for a story and **** your "great writers" that you hire because they'd be ridiculed as second rate hacks in the book market! Bring back the euphoria from overcoming a challenge that is actually difficult, not jsut called such by the manual! Throw away the 20 hour game length mentality because you cannot make a game challenguing and that long, noone would make it to the end. Make something that your skill alone can beat! This. Is. THE EXPANDED MARKET! Yes, that's right, the expanded market is really a resurrection of the retro market. Irony, eh?


BTW, to say Nintendo will only change when they're no longer ahead is to call them stupid, they'll change while they're ahead to STAY ahead!

*salute*

[NWR_Lindy]

I refuse to get an HDTV until it costs $250 and ISN'T MEANT FOR A COMPUTER.

Friggin... keep my TVs the same price, and keep them separate from my computer monitors!

My point is that HD isn't some impossible dream for the rich.  If you want it, you can easily get an LCD display that does 1920x1080, and voila, you have an HD display.  Now if you want it to be the family TV that's obviously not adequate, but for a PC monitor/gaming monitor 24" is fine.

I guarantee that the next TV you buy will be an HDTV.  There's no reason not to get one at this point, unless you're a Luddite.

[user0x7D]

My point is that HD isn't some impossible dream for the rich.  If you want it, you can easily get an LCD display that does 1920x1080, and voila, you have an HD display.  Now if you want it to be the family TV that's obviously not adequate, but for a PC monitor/gaming monitor 24" is fine.

I guarantee that the next TV you buy will be an HDTV.  There's no reason not to get one at this point, unless you're a Luddite.

How about this: When HDTVs actually have QUALITY output, that's when I'll think about getting one. I cannot tell you how many people gush about how much they absolutely love their HDTV but when I get a look at it the picture is pure garbage. Ghosting, pixilation, shadowing, artifacts, graininess and simply overall ugly color. I used to think it was just the TVs alone that were causing those problems but I recently saw an HD football game on an SDTV and a lot of the same issues were there as well so it's not just the TVs that are causing it but issues with the signal too.

To be honest, I simply know too much about the technology to be willing to put up with anything less than a clear, bright picture. Since I've yet to see that on a single HDTV  at any store, I won't be buying one for a long, long while.

[BranDonk Kong]

That ghosting, pixelation, and artifacts, etc. is is usually caused by the source. That would be like complaining that your current TV sucks because VHS tapes look bad.

[D_Average]

I used to never watch TV until I upgraded to HD.  Now I watch at least five hours a day, there's no other way to live.

[bustin98]

Actually... ARE there flast SD TVs? I'd buy one of those!

I have a 'flat' screen SDTV, but its not like an LCD or Plasma. Just the glass is flat. There is still the CRT, which will never shrink in size enough to make a truely flat SDTV without shrinking the size of the screen. The length (z) of the TV is relative to the Tube's ability to hit the edges of the screen without distortion.

Oh, and my video card has an HDMI out. How does that fit into your "TV made for a computer" arguement?

[Chiller]

How about this: When HDTVs actually have QUALITY output, that's when I'll think about getting one. I cannot tell you how many people gush about how much they absolutely love their HDTV but when I get a look at it the picture is pure garbage. Ghosting, pixilation, shadowing, artifacts, graininess and simply overall ugly color. I used to think it was just the TVs alone that were causing those problems but I recently saw an HD football game on an SDTV and a lot of the same issues were there as well so it's not just the TVs that are causing it but issues with the signal too.

To be honest, I simply know too much about the technology to be willing to put up with anything less than a clear, bright picture. Since I've yet to see that on a single HDTV  at any store, I won't be buying one for a long, long while.

I have to agree with you on that.  My brother-in-law, who is no slouch in the tech dept. himself, bought a top-of-the-line Sony LCD (Bravia XBR), complete with what was considered their best standalone BluRay player, and has it hooked up with all of the proper cables.  I must say, it is certainly unimpressive.  The depth and accuracy of color (particularly in the reds), and the overall purity leave a lot to be desired when compared to a quality CRT monitor.  Yes, the resolution is better, but that is it.  Everything seems pallid, and full of artifacts.  Furthermore, the quality of standard definition programming takes a HUGE hit, making it unwatchable for me.  That is a primary reason why a lot of mastering houses will not use LCD displays, except for those costing retarded amounts of money (like 10 times the average consumer-level display).

I actually had some hopes for the SED displays being touted as so amazing for the past couple of years.  The promise of CRT-quality and response times coupled with truly flat displays, and full HD resolutions would have been great.  However, that got botched pretty badly.  As such, it will be a little while before I am willing to waste my money on the current stock of HDs.  That doesn't make me Luddite, just someone who appreciates getting what I paid for.

[NWR_Lindy]

Watch HDTV over at somebody's house who subscribes to Comcast or DirecTV HDTV.  ESPNHD looks so good you'll want to have a tender, private moment with yourself.  Non-sports programs look much better as well.

SDTV vs. HDTV is like VHS vs. DVD.  Once you get the new technology, you'll never go back.

[D_Average]

Watch HDTV over at somebody's house who subscribes to Comcast or DirecTV HDTV.  ESPNHD looks so good you'll want to have a tender, private moment with yourself.  Non-sports programs look much better as well.

SDTV vs. HDTV is like VHS vs. DVD.  Once you get the new technology, you'll never go back.

Indeed, especially once Blu Ray is added to the equation.