Wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!

Syenye · Post by **Syenye** » September 18, 2006, 5:46 pm

trauma center: second opinion

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » September 18, 2006, 8:23 pm

masteen wrote:There are rumors of many of the supposed launch titles being delayed not just past release, but into 2007.

For me, that's unacceptable. I don't need a $250 console to tell me the fucking weather.

Me too. Yes I am going to play a couple of the old titles (even though I have a working NES and a bunch of games for it) but the main reason I would be buying it is for the new Mario, Zelda, Metroid, etc and if those are not out at release the Wii is going to get pushed to the back burner for me until after I get a PS3 also (probably end of next year).

It was silly that people were expecting Nintendo to pull of some great console release, when have they ever? I think they are actually the worst for delaying releases on games... This new Zelda has been delayed nearly 3 years now (and it's coming out on the Gamecube and the Wii).

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 19, 2006, 4:49 pm

This is a non biased poll from Xbox-Scene web site:

masteen · Post by **masteen** » September 19, 2006, 6:50 pm

Winnow wrote:This is a non biased poll from Xbox-Scene web site

LOL. Clearly unbiased.

I still wonder why there hasn't been a Diablo style game made for the Xbox. With the functionality of Live, it could have the ranking system, the ability to play solo or with friends, online or off. As a bonus, no burning through mice due to the constant clicking.

*~*stragi*~* · Post by ***~*stragi*~*** » September 19, 2006, 7:54 pm

i dunno, thinking about playing diablo with a controller just seems awkward to me.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » September 20, 2006, 12:55 am

Targeting would need to be redone, but other than that I think it would adapt well to consoles.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 20, 2006, 3:18 am

Getting back to the Wii, I edited the most recent 1UP Yours Gaming pod/zencast to include just the comments from one of the hosts that went to New York and played around on the Wii last weekend.

Besides the guy initially saying he was a little disappointed, it's a pretty non biased view of the current state of the Wii and its games. He played Metroid Prime, Zelda and the other launch titles.

Worth a listen. Even though I edited it, it's still 14mb and 31 minutes. In the middle, they debate the pricing of the Wii so if you just want to hear about the games and gameplay, and Wii channels, skip the middle part.

They say "fuck" a few times so if that matters for NWS, take heed.

1Up Yours Wii Discussion Pod/Zencast: MP3, 31 mins, ~14mb

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 28, 2006, 2:57 pm

So the Wii only comes with a composite cable...no S-Video or Component cables.

How d the Wii lovers out there feel about paying 60.00 for a component cable? Even an S-Video Cable is going to cost you 40.00.

Pure ripp off. $60.00 for a simple component cable? Holy fuck. Xbox 360 has mad catz or something..some third party that has component cable for 29.00...still a rip but in line with other consoles.

60.00 is crazy high. For anyone with a decent TV, tack that cost on. I'm surprised they didn't just go for 99.00.

I wonder what they would have charged for the composit cables which you could get for free in a cereal box as a prize...39.99?

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » September 28, 2006, 3:49 pm

and im almost certain that madcatz and other generic companies wont come out with their own cheaper cables.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 28, 2006, 4:16 pm

So far, MadCatz has only announced third party controller type Wii products.

Can anyone find info on third party component/s-video cables? I searched and couldn't find anything. If not, have fun sending a composite source from your new Wii to your TV as Wii is so cheap they don't even include s-video...or pay 40.00 for one of those...or pay 60.00 to get your awesome 480p.

Lame-O

Edit: oops, the 360 came with a hybrid composite/component cable. I was thinking of the original Xbox. Add 60 to the cost of the Wii for all but those playing on their grandmother's TV if you want at least 480P out of the Wii.

Wii = $310.00, Premium 360 = 399.00

It's getting closer.

Syenye · Post by **Syenye** » September 28, 2006, 4:35 pm

360 owners had to pay $40 for the wireless controller + $20 for the add on play and charge kit.

and the wii + component cable is still only $10 more than the 360 base and $90 less than the 360 premium.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 28, 2006, 4:43 pm

Syenye wrote:360 owners had to pay $40 for the wireless controller + $20 for the add on play and charge kit.

and the wii + component cable is still only $10 more than the 360 base and $90 less than the 360 premium.

Yep 90.00 difference now and the 360 premium includes in addition:

20GB hard drive
wireless controller
ethernet cable
HD AV cable
headset

Wii pricing is nothing special and you lose the ability to play games in HD 720 or 1080

Syenye · Post by **Syenye** » September 28, 2006, 4:48 pm

the 360 games may be pretty but that doesn't mean anything for playability. i'd rather play a game in 480p with a decent storyline and gameplay than hammer through some of the shit that's been released for the 360 that merely "looks good."

Syenye · Post by **Syenye** » September 28, 2006, 4:53 pm

and i won't have to pay $60 for each subpar game i want to play on release day. the wii comes with wii sports.

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » September 28, 2006, 5:48 pm

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 28, 2006, 5:51 pm

I've got my eye on you Syenye!

Besides Zelda, the launch selection of Wii games isn't getting any rave reviews.

It still remains to be seen how long people are going to enjoy flailing their arms around playing Wii games.

Some people can barely lift a beer to their face to take a swig and Nintendo expects them to move around that much?

Syenye · Post by **Syenye** » September 28, 2006, 6:03 pm

you make a good point winnow... my fiance has doubts that i'll actually want to play it since it requires physical activity.

i like nintendo's friendliness towards independent developers. it will be interesting to see how easy it is (or isn't) to develop for the wii and code in all of the gestures. i have to admit that the XNA is pretty sweet, and microsoft definitely scored some points with me on that. my argument is that it can potentially alienate a lot of independent developers who don't have tens of millions of dollars to throw at graphics. but games like geometry wars have proven that you can have a good game without expensive graphics.

but really, not all games need to be in HD. yeah it looks prettier, but jebus... why is there an Uno HD game? and why did i buy it?

Arborealus · Post by **Arborealus** » September 28, 2006, 6:34 pm

Syenye wrote:why is there an Uno HD game? and why did i buy it?

The second answers the first...The second question, well you are on your own there

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 28, 2006, 6:57 pm

Uno is in HD on the 360 because you may as well make everything HD if it's supported as it looks better.

Here's someone playing UNO on the Wii:

Janx · Post by **Janx** » September 28, 2006, 9:09 pm

Rofl.

And assassins creed looks bad ass from that live vid floating around.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 29, 2006, 1:33 pm

From Xbox Scene news:

Moore Talks 'Wii-60'; Aims for Dual Owners

>> From next-gen.biz:

In a canny piece of anti-Sony propaganda Peter Moore said, "Dual platform ownership of Xbox 360 and Wii could be as high as 40% depending on what territory we are talking about. The influence of the Wii-60 movement seems to be growing enormously."

It's not the first time Microsoft's U.S. Xbox 360 chief has praised his rival, while, of course, damning Sony with no praise at all. Moore added, "I have been on the record many times talking about my admiration for Nintendo and the innovation that Wii brings. I am not even sure Nintendo fully understands what it has on its hands"

But the mischievous Liverpudlian could not resist expressing some doubts about Nintendo's machine. "The controller is innovative but it remains to be seen how innovative your shoulder will feel after an hour's play."

Of course, if Nintendo was Microsoft's only competition, you'd be hearing about how expensive the component cable was and how close in cost the Wii is to the Premium Xbox 360 package when all is said and done.

I like the small jab about a possible sore shoulder after using Wii controller for a long time though!

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » September 29, 2006, 1:47 pm

I basically have no desire to get a workout when I am playing a video game. I will probably get a Wii and sell the controller it comes with and use the profit to buy a game. I would much rather use a gamecube type controller.

Generally when I am playing video games I am laying / sitting in bed. My days of standing up and playing a game were over with Track and Field for the NES.

miir · Post by **miir** » September 29, 2006, 2:05 pm

Winnow wrote:
Syenye wrote:360 owners had to pay $40 for the wireless controller + $20 for the add on play and charge kit.

and the wii + component cable is still only $10 more than the 360 base and $90 less than the 360 premium.
Yep 90.00 difference now and the 360 premium includes in addition:

20GB hard drive
wireless controller
ethernet cable
HD AV cable
headset

Wii pricing is nothing special and you lose the ability to play games in HD 720 or 1080

Add another $100 for wireless networking that's included for FREE with the PS3 and Wii.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 29, 2006, 2:24 pm

miir wrote:
Winnow wrote:
Syenye wrote:360 owners had to pay $40 for the wireless controller + $20 for the add on play and charge kit.

and the wii + component cable is still only $10 more than the 360 base and $90 less than the 360 premium.
Yep 90.00 difference now and the 360 premium includes in addition:

20GB hard drive
wireless controller
ethernet cable
HD AV cable
headset

Wii pricing is nothing special and you lose the ability to play games in HD 720 or 1080
Add another $100 for wireless networking that's included for FREE with the PS3 and Wii.

Breathing is free too but who knows what quality of air you'll be inhaling...just because something is free doesn't mean it's good.

Future Wii accessory:

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » September 29, 2006, 2:29 pm

Am I the only one who doesn't really like to use wireless for gaming?

It's all well and good for a handheld device but frankly, I would rather just have a good, solid 100M connection from my 360 to my router and not have to worry about it flaking out, interference etc etc.

Add to that that I make heavy use of the media center extender, with a wired connection, I don't have to worry about the image or the stream quality.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » September 29, 2006, 2:30 pm

miir wrote:
Winnow wrote:
Syenye wrote:360 owners had to pay $40 for the wireless controller + $20 for the add on play and charge kit.

and the wii + component cable is still only $10 more than the 360 base and $90 less than the 360 premium.
Yep 90.00 difference now and the 360 premium includes in addition:

20GB hard drive
wireless controller
ethernet cable
HD AV cable
headset

Wii pricing is nothing special and you lose the ability to play games in HD 720 or 1080
Add another $100 for wireless networking that's included for FREE with the PS3 and Wii.

Wireless networking is hardly a selling point and definately not a necessity. I have several PC's, my PS2 and my 360 all connected to a wired router and make good use of the free cable that came with my 360, I actually had to pay for an extra cord for the PS2 though.

Akanae · Post by **Akanae** » September 29, 2006, 2:32 pm

thats already a gamecube accessory Winnow

Comparing the Wii and the 360 seems a bit silly, I don't think that they are really in direct competition with each other. And they are really offering two very different things. Most people on the fence between the two will most likely end up getting both.

miir · Post by **miir** » September 29, 2006, 2:35 pm

It's all well and good for a handheld device but frankly, I would rather just have a good, solid 100M connection from my 360 to my router and not have to worry about it flaking out, interference etc etc.

Yeah, because you need a full 100meg connection to your console.

When was the last time you guys even used wireless networking?

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 29, 2006, 2:42 pm

Animalor wrote:Am I the only one who doesn't really like to use wireless for gaming?

It's all well and good for a handheld device but frankly, I would rather just have a good, solid 100M connection from my 360 to my router and not have to worry about it flaking out, interference etc etc.

Add to that that I make heavy use of the media center extender, with a wired connection, I don't have to worry about the image or the stream quality.

I'd rather, and do, physically connect my consoles. Wireless controllers for the 360 rock, never a problem, but I'm not big on wireless networking for gaming. Maybe the next generation of wireless which the Wii doesn't have so it doesn't matter.

miir · Post by **miir** » September 29, 2006, 2:57 pm

Keep in mind that you Winnow are not exactly typical of people who will be buying these consoles.... not everyone has their home provisioned for ethernet or has a router close enough to their entertainment center that they can really run a cable... and lets face it not a lot of people want to have ethernet cables running through their halls or from room to room.

Wireless routers are dirt cheap and the best solution for a lot of people.

Syenye · Post by **Syenye** » September 29, 2006, 3:01 pm

the wireless controller tech for the 360 is really slick. i can't stand the wireless controllers that logitech released for the ps2 though. i don't mind the wavebird for the gamecube, but i really can't tell the difference with the 360 even in games like PGR3.

wireless networking is fine for me if i'm just look at the interwebs on the laptops, but i have everything else connected with gigabit. just a personal preference that's really nice when i'm moving files between my machines.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » September 29, 2006, 3:03 pm

Or you could pay an electrician a couple hundred dollars to run the cat-5 to a few rooms and do it the logical way. Or you could do it yourself for that matter, drill a hole in your floor/wall etc.

I don't see why you would pay more money for a wireless router to get a lesser quality connection because you are too cheap/lazy to do it the right way.

Syenye · Post by **Syenye** » September 29, 2006, 3:15 pm

Akanae wrote:Comparing the Wii and the 360 seems a bit silly, I don't think that they are really in direct competition with each other. And they are really offering two very different things.

specwise, yeah, they are apples and oranges. but as far as price points and gaming expectations, it's perfectly reasonable to compare them.

one thing that i was hoping the other consoles would adopt is the swappable hdds. it was really nice to be able to take mine over to my boyfriend's house and play on his 360 with my saved games.

miir · Post by **miir** » September 29, 2006, 3:21 pm

I don't see why you would pay more money for a wireless router to get a lesser quality connection because you are too cheap/lazy to do it the right way.

Here's what I discovered doing a quick check on router prices....

(in Canadian $)
Linksys 4 port router $61.99
DLink 4 port router $52.99

Linksys 4 port Wireless G router $63.50 + $20 mail in rebate
DLink 4 port Wireless G router $48.99
(these wireless routers listed have 4 wired ports)

It looks to me like wireless routers are actually cheaper than non-wireless.... dumbass.

It seems kinda stupid to me to pay upwards from $200 to have your home provisioned for ethernet when most people are not even going to notice the extra speed on ethernet... and you can't tell me that 35-40 meg throughput is too slow.... well maybe for someone like winnow who is probably streaming 4 simultaneous porn streams to his 360 as we speak.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » September 29, 2006, 3:29 pm

miir wrote:
I don't see why you would pay more money for a wireless router to get a lesser quality connection because you are too cheap/lazy to do it the right way.
Here's what I discovered doing a quick check on router prices....

(in Canadian $)
Linksys 4 port router $61.99
DLink 4 port router $52.99

Linksys 4 port Wireless G router $63.50 + $20 mail in rebate
DLink 4 port Wireless G router $48.99
(these wireless routers listed have 4 wired ports)

It looks to me like wireless routers are actually cheaper than non-wireless.... dumbass.

It seems kinda stupid to me to pay upwards from $200 to have your home provisioned for ethernet when most people are not even going to notice the extra speed on ethernet... and you can't tell me that 35-40 meg throughput is too slow.... well maybe for someone like winnow who is probably streaming 4 simultaneous porn streams to his 360 as we speak.

Well, let me provide a little clarification since I am such a dumbass. For the 2 years I worked at Sears Wireless was more expensive than wired. For the 1.5 years I worked at Circuit City wireless routers were more expensive than wired. And about a week ago when I walked into both Best Buy and Circuit City, wireless was more expensive than wired ( I know because mine is shot and thats what I was at the store to look for.)

And calling me a dumbass, then quoting that something is cheaper because of a mail in rebate is extra super retarded on your part.

miir · Post by **miir** » September 29, 2006, 3:49 pm

You are right.... the wireless Linksys is actually $1.51 more expensive than than it's wired counterpart.

Looking at Bestbuy in Canada, the same Linksys wireless router is $69.99 plus the same $20 rebate... so basically 50 bucks.... they only have 3 models of wired routers and the cheapest is a DLink 4 port which is $69.99.

Ok, off to check the US Bestbuy site....
Wireless : $40 for a DLink 4 port, $66 for Linksys
Wired : $40 for the DLink 4 port, $57 for the Linksys.

So unless your local Bestbuy doesn't adhere to their corporate pricing, you're basically full of shit.

And calling me a dumbass, then quoting that something is cheaper because of a mail in rebate is extra super retarded on your part

Are you fucking high?

$63.50 with a $20 rebate means you pay $43.50... That's exactly $18.49 less than the non-wireless Linksys.

miir · Post by **miir** » September 29, 2006, 3:52 pm

For the 2 years I worked at Sears Wireless was more expensive than wired. For the 1.5 years I worked at Circuit City wireless routers were more expensive than wired.

Yeah and I bet around the same time DVD drives were a lot more expensive than CD ROM drives....

Idiot.

Akanae · Post by **Akanae** » September 29, 2006, 4:18 pm

Funkmasterr wrote:Or you could pay an electrician a couple hundred dollars to run the cat-5 to a few rooms and do it the logical way. Or you could do it yourself for that matter, drill a hole in your floor/wall etc.

I don't see why you would pay more money for a wireless router to get a lesser quality connection because you are too cheap/lazy to do it the right way.

Our house is split level (4 levels in all), the computers are on the top level and TV/consoles are on the lowest level. I seriously doubt that paying someone to run a cat-5 plus the cost of cables etc would be less than what we spent on our wireless system. For my purposes (MMO's mostly) there is no latency difference going from wireless to wired.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » September 29, 2006, 4:18 pm

Well considering I will only buy Linksys because I have found anything else inferior, it looks like I am still right.

And I will break your last question down for you. Saying something is cheaper because at this current moment there is a rebate on it is stupid, go by the normal price.

Oh and Miir, are the wireless routers that you are quoting the new type with the higher ethernet speeds and the wireless g, b & a compatibillity? They should be, otherwise your comparisons are invalid.

Akanae · Post by **Akanae** » September 29, 2006, 4:19 pm

Except there are almost always rebates going on if you look for it. Especially with wireless routers.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 29, 2006, 4:40 pm

Syenye wrote:
wireless networking is fine for me if i'm just look at the interwebs on the laptops, but i have everything else connected with gigabit. just a personal preference that's really nice when i'm moving files between my machines.

Hell yes on the gigabit router/network. I also went for the additional speed boost of making sure my Terastation and SMC router both supported Jumbo Frames for even faster xfers (allowing the network to send info in larger chunks than the normal 1500 byte standard).

For me, shuffling around 7GB files is commonplace so the faster the better.

miir · Post by **miir** » September 29, 2006, 4:46 pm

Funkmasterr wrote:Well considering I will only buy Linksys because I have found anything else inferior, it looks like I am still right.

And I will break your last question down for you. Saying something is cheaper because at this current moment there is a rebate on it is stupid, go by the normal price.

Oh and Miir, are the wireless routers that you are quoting the new type with the higher ethernet speeds and the wireless g, b & a compatibillity? They should be, otherwise your comparisons are invalid.

So you think it's stupid to pay $9 more for a wireless router but it's ok to pay hundreds of dollars to provision your home for ethernet?

The routers I quoted proces for are Wireless G routers which will work with both the Wii and PS3. I didn't bother listing the prices for dual/multi band routers as it's irrelevant to the discussion.

And theres no good reason to not include manufacturer rebates in a price comparison. "Ethernet only" routers will be obsolete in a few years. Manufacturers and retailers are pushing consumers away from them by offering competative pricing and rebates on wireless routers.

Wireless is far more sensible to use for a home network . It's much cheaper than provisioning your home and the bandwidth is more than adequate for all but the most extreme cases.

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » September 29, 2006, 5:46 pm

miir wrote:Keep in mind that you Winnow are not exactly typical of people who will be buying these consoles.... not everyone has their home provisioned for ethernet or has a router close enough to their entertainment center that they can really run a cable... and lets face it not a lot of people want to have ethernet cables running through their halls or from room to room.

Wireless routers are dirt cheap and the best solution for a lot of people.

I completely agree with you. Making holes in walls and running cat5 through the house isn't something that your average homeowner wants to undertake.

Gigabit routers are pointless in the home unless you have more than 1 computer outfitted with Gig nic's.

I don't think I've heard of a Cable/DSL modem that has anything higher than a 100M port and even if it did, you would still be limited by the speed cap on your ISP.

The only person that I know that would benefit from such a network infrastructure in the home is Winnow...

Post by **Sylvus** » September 29, 2006, 6:05 pm

I know that a lot of new construction projects are putting ethernet cable in with the TV cable now. Or they were, is that changing with the availability of cheap wireless alternatives?

Midgen · Post by **Midgen** » September 29, 2006, 9:27 pm

My wireless G network just didn't work for me for the xbox or the 360. I ended up running a cable (from 2 stories above). It was a hassle, but well worth it, and it allows me to hook up a small workgroup switch and connect multiple devices at high speed.

Midgen · Post by **Midgen** » September 29, 2006, 9:33 pm

Sylvus wrote:I know that a lot of new construction projects are putting ethernet cable in with the TV cable now. Or they were, is that changing with the availability of cheap wireless alternatives?

Rather than putting in a specific cable type, they need to put ducting in between floors and within floors to allow you to pull whatever kind of cable you want.

I friend just bought a new house. It was in a large development with the cookie cutter design. He talked to the builder and arranged to go in and install his own ducting and cable pulls before they put the sheetrock up.

It was just a matter of doing the work himself one weekend (I helped), and paying to have someone come in and certify the work for the builder. They had no issue with it. As far as they were concerned it was like any other subcontractor come in and do work. I believe he also had some custom electrical work done so his office would be on it's own 30 amp circuit, and had a special area set aside so he could put a central UPS on the circuit.

I wish I could have done that to my current condo (I am not the original owner).

Syenye · Post by **Syenye** » September 29, 2006, 10:38 pm

Animalor wrote:Gigabit routers are pointless in the home unless you have more than 1 computer outfitted with Gig nic's.

The only person that I know that would benefit from such a network infrastructure in the home is Winnow...

well no shit, and wireless routers are only useful if you have wireless nics. but yeah, we have about 5 computers with gigabit, and 3 of them are connected to TVs, so it makes sense for us.

and winnow isn't the only one... we just bought our first house, and my first requirement is wiring it. it's for use on our internal network, clearly. and my fiance works from home, so the ability to move around and plug into a port in any room is nice when it's needed.

the builders we were working with before we bought our house allowed us do run our own cables before they did the sheetrock as well. but then again, we looked at a number of "internet wired" houses that just had phone lines in every room.

both technologies have their places, but for anything but the surfing the internet, wireless just doesn't cut it for me. i'd love to have the mobility of wireless with the speed of a wired connection, but since wimax is still a ways off, i'll have to settle for ports scattered around my house.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » September 30, 2006, 12:00 am

When I worked for Town & Country / K Hovnanion homes wiring the house for cat5 was an option that probably 75% of people got. Especially in this case, I don't know why you wouldn't go with it.

Akanae · Post by **Akanae** » September 30, 2006, 8:53 pm

When I worked for the CIA they told me that all wired internet would be obsolete by 2014.

Midgen · Post by **Midgen** » October 1, 2006, 1:55 am

Akanae wrote:When I worked for the CIA they told me that all wired internet would be obsolete by 2014.

LOL when was this?

Define 'wired' ?

You mean the local access within your dwelling? Or ALL of the Internet?

Cuz I'd bet everything I have ever owned and everthng I will ever own that the "Entire" Internet will not be wireless in 7-8 years.

I am pretty confident that there is no technology anywhere near the horizon that would handle the amount of bandwidth my company throws around over the distance we throw it.