I bought a Nintendo DS Lite - it is truly awesome

[Patrick Shannon]

The DS Lite looks cool, unfortunately I needed some cash to help finish off some old bills (faster) and decided to sell one of my handhelds and games, the DS. (I have everything on Ebay right now if anyone is interested, wink wink) I might get one again if they drop in price later in life, but right now I guess it's kind of silly to have two handhelds.

Castlevania is definitely kickass on the DS, get it if you loved Symphony of the Night on Playstation. I was a little disappointed in the New Super Mario Bros, very very easy and I tore through the game in two/three sittings. (Definitely holds no torch to Super Mario World.)

[TheBluePanda]

I recently did some quick graphic work for a friend who happens to own a video game store. He gave me a GameBoy Advance SP in exchange. I then bought a Flash-Card adapter with a Mini-SD slot, and a 1gig Mini-SD card. It enables me to play roms on my GameBoy. So now I have a few hundred GBA games with me at all times. Its very sweet. I can also put movies and music on it.

I enjoy riding the bottom edge of the gaming world, and I don't really have a choice since I can't afford the bleeding-edge technology. Its fun to pay almost nothing and experience a system I've never played along with a large library of games. I havent owned a portable system since the Game Gear, so all of these games are brand new to me. I'll eventually get a DS, in a couple of years when the price is cut in half.

[wienerdog]

Originally Posted by Patrick Shannon

The DS Lite looks cool, unfortunately I needed some cash to help finish off some old bills (faster) and decided to sell one of my handhelds and games, the DS. (I have everything on Ebay right now if anyone is interested, wink wink) I might get one again if they drop in price later in life, but right now I guess it's kind of silly to have two handhelds.

Castlevania is definitely kickass on the DS, get it if you loved Symphony of the Night on Playstation. I was a little disappointed in the New Super Mario Bros, very very easy and I tore through the game in two/three sittings. (Definitely holds no torch to Super Mario World.)

Wow, really? I'm digging New Super Mario Bros. I never bought Super Mario 64 DS (how confusing this THAT title?), so the mini games in New Super Mario were a surprise, and there were a BUNCH of them.

The Lite is such an improvement over the old DS. I really was so unimpressed with the original because of lack of software and it's clunky design. I think once Nintendo saw the success of the DS in Japan (and here with Nintendogs and software that's come out since then), it was worth invested some time and $ into a nice portable.

Even though my wife made an excellent point that I don't commute by train anymore, so I wouldn't have any use for a portable system. But considering the amounts of games that are on there, as well as the ability to hang out with my wife while she watches some girly show and play Tetris, or during my lunchbreak at work is too appealing to me. It makes me wish I did still commute by train, because I could justify buying more games.

[reuber1]

You can play DS games in either system, Lite or Clunker. Mario 64 DS is basically a remake of Mario 64 from the N64. It's fun, but kinda tough to get the 3D controls down. Still fun though.

In New SMB, you pretty much have to go for 100% completion to get the most out of it. If I would have played it straight through without looking for the secrets, I would've cleared it during the ride back from South Dakota.

[Bob]

My son's a Nintendo gamer. He's 11. He's got the Cube, GBA--and he even picked up a 64 system and the original Nintendo game system for almost nothing at garage sales.

I have to say that as a dad, the whole Nintendo philosophy of designing games primarily for fun vs. for how close you can simulate so-called 'maturity' ranks it much higher for me than their competition. And the quality of the hardware itself is superb (ask any game store staffer which is the sturdiest brand by hardware, and they'll confirm this).

We're also looking forward to the Wii release. Personally, I think Nintendo's stated objective of expanding the gamer definition to include the whole family speaks volumes about their commitment to the 'not so dark' side. Editing back the overall reliance on complex controller moves is what they're really banking on with the Wii system technology to achieve this. I'm hoping that their gamble really pays off.

[reuber1]

Originally Posted by Broacher

I have to say that as a dad, the whole Nintendo philosophy of designing games primarily for fun vs. for how close you can simulate so-called 'maturity' ranks it much higher for me than their competition. And the quality of the hardware itself is superb (ask any game store staffer which is the sturdiest brand by hardware, and they'll confirm this).

I feel the same way. "Look, the 360 is shiny!!" Thing is, the better graphics get, they need to get more time to artists to take advantage of that, and thus, development costs rise. The games play the exact same though. I played Fight Night 3 at a buds house on the 360, and yeah it's purdy, but it's also relentlessly boring. The Wii looks really friggin' awesome, and it's going to be $250 at the most, not $600. Hell, just ask the people who waited 4 hours in line to play it.

Read this article on "the video game crash," it's hilarious, but on the money as well:
http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/games/crash.html

Oh, and on the durability of Nintendo products, I'll second that. During my Target tenure and after dealing with the power cable failure ordeal of the XBox and the recall of slim PSdeuce's from two years ago, I recommended the big N left and right. Sony and Microsoft left headaches for us retailers.

[Bob]

Great article! I think he's right on too. Except for the possible 'Nintendo's hostility towards older players" suggestion. The new Wii videos show golf, football sims. I think that Wii is going to represent a turning point in gaming-- it's not going to be perfect, but it will signal the turn away from evolution through video power and effects, to evolution through player interactivity. And accessible interactivity. AKA: old fogies playing video games again.

Also, I can see a lot of potential for collateral marketing here. Imagine a Wii controller built into a much more real-weighted golf club, or a tennis racket. Or shoes with built in 'smart' controller 3D data hookups to the Wii console.

The other big boost that Wii could get is from health activists who are desperate for ways to get kids away from the old-school controllers and get more physically activity into their daily routine. Heck, I bet it's only a matter of time before some school, somewhere, is going to install a couple of big plasmas in a 'workout' room with a bank of Wii consoles in front of them. Maybe even see this coming as a bold experiment in some cutting edge fitness centre.

[reuber1]

^Exactly.

I've heard a lot of people (Bill Gates even, but I'm sure he says this to minimize the blow of sales) have stated that it's too tiring to play games that way. This is PERFECT then. If it's too tiring to hold a controller like a TV remote forward, with a nunchuck attachment in the other hand, you need to start working out.

I've also imagined like an extra weight for a tennis type game. If they could get the precision perfect, I would own it immediately. They need to make the physics as perfect as possible. A great way to practice your game without spending $40-$60 per hour for a lesson. I like what Nintendo is doing, though a lot of the hardcore crowds are scoffing. I think American gamers are far too conservative.

[Bob]

>>I think American gamers are far too conservative.<<

Maybe it's the circle the wagons reflex. I mean, like any other 'skill' area, anyone who's invested a good chunk of their life in developing these game console skills (even though, okay, they may not do much for your resume) would be intensely protective of what they perceive among themselves as valuable. If Nintendo reverses the trend for the vid game market to narrow itself vertically, they're yesterday's warriors.

Hmm... remember when only true graphic designers knew what 'point size' or 'leading' meant? (I do!) Same kind of resistance to change from the 'in' crowd.

[Patrick Shannon]

The article is interesting, but the writer's argument flaws in many area (especially on the element of scripting, that argument could be made with anything including books), the biggest one in particular is the video game crash and video gaming as a novelty. Back then it was, but the biggest reason for the crash was that the games frankly were becoming absolutely horrid and oversaturated with so many companies releasing bad games (hell, Ralston-Purina even had one). Good and fun games were taken away, and the demand is there even if one does not realize that. That is exactly what Nintendo took advantage of and the rest is history.

Typically, the turnaround for new consoles is every five years, but you have to wonder if that is simply too fast for the public sometimes. As the articles states, the majority of Playstation 2's didn't sell until at least two years into it's lifespan. Yes, the price drop is one factor, but the other one is that there were hardly any new (or good) PSOne games coming out. Right now, I honestly think that the current gen consoles has a lot of life left, and if they went about three more years, I don't think too many people would honestly bat an eye so long as the good games are there. Right around that time, the techology and HDTV adoption would be at an affordable enough cost to build things like the PS3.

But it works in this way, one company announces a new console, then everyone's heads turn at the other companies wondering when they're going to come out with something to top it. And if they don't, then that puts pressure on them.

Look at the original Gameboy. It had a 10+ year lifespan and it's successor was released in a time when it was very affordable to build that kind of technology (well, minus the backlit screen) and didn't cost an arm and a leg. But Gameboy Advance didn't have the life span that it should have (yes it's still around, but what's really being released for it?). The PSP is the first handheld to come along to truly challenge it, and naturally the answer is a brand new handheld, the DS, which honestly isn't entirely the graphical/experience upgrade that should have been. Many of it's games, as kickass as they are, could have been done on GBA like Castlevania, Advance Wars, etc, and as for the touch screen, only Nintendo themselves (and perhaps Sega) had really used it to it's fullest advantage. (It's funny how third-parties are reluctant, sometimes.) Anyway, my point is that I don't think Nintendo would have bothered with the DS this early if not for pending competition. Sure they might have said that the DS isn't Gameboy's successor, but no one really believed that and it practically is now. (If not, why the drought on GBA games?)

So if you look at it that way, the consoles are kind of hurting one another by helping themselves. They are trying to outdo the other and that's perfectly fine as competition drives good products, but eventually the affordability just isn't there. Ahead of their time, you could say.

At this point, I think the ball is in Nintendo's court (and to a degree, Microsoft's as well), but only because Sony ridiculously outpriced themselves. The Wii is definitely something new and different and I am looking forward to seeing what it can do, but not only does Nintendo have to provide new and different things for it, but the third parties MUST come around for it as well. Nintendo needs to branch out from their franchises as well and come up with some new things, especially stuff for older gamers...the third parties could help in this department if they come around. That doesn't mean they should stop releasing all the Mario/Wario/Dario/whatever games as they serve an audience too (and they're a profitable franchise, why stop?), but the majority of players who are into PS2 and XBox type of games who can't afford a 360 or PS3 aren't going to be seduced by Nintendo's current image, even if the Wii's control is revolutionary. Fortunately, the Wii has so much potential to start some profitable new franchises that will appeal to older gamers and is something people haven't seen before. (I still stand by my opinion that the name will ouch them to a small degree, though.)

On a side note, I think Microsoft has a lot to gain as well. There is one huge strength to graphical upgrades and embracing the home entertainment system, emmersion. One only needs to play a level of Call of Duty 2 on that getup to feel that. PS3 will do this too, but naturally they've outpriced themselves, which is why Microsoft's choice to use DVD as opposed to HD-DVD for games might have been a smart move after all.