graphics isn't the drive for games, so no wii hd

Wow.. You got the WHOLE point wrong, yes Wii HD will be able to sport crisper graphics, but nintendo has always been nintendo..They are not going to become microsoft and go "graphics is haxxors".WII HD is going to allow nintendo and 3rd parties to create games with more depth to them because the SYSTEM LIMITATIONS are higher, some games might use that power to use for graphics, but others will use it to create deeper and more intense games, immagine zelda twilight princess with with twice as much gameplay and slightly better graphics rendering.here is a quote,"The fundamental issue in the logic flow is that gosh it's such an opportunity to take HD capability and link it with the Wii. And what we have said, repeatedly, is that that's not the way we at Nintendo do things. The way we at Nintendo do things is, you know, when we will move to a new generation, it's because there are some fundamental things the [current] console cannot do. What that says is that simply the addition of HD capability will not be the next step for us. There will be more to it. There will be additional capability. There will be additional elements, and, given that, it is far into the future."Try to google before you freak out and think Nintendo is going graphic haxxor.

KeykAgain, you are assuming that making games pretty would automatically affect gameplay negatively.For people for that era, the old 60s James Bond are memorable because they were cutting edge then. The people then undoubtedly thought the special effects then were awesome. A person who loved Super Mario 1 wouldn't stop liking it just because Super Mario Wii came out. In the same vein, anyone who's first experience of Mario is the new Super Mario Wii would probably think Mario 1 is awful.I don't care about PS or Xbox and don't care if Nintendo causes those consoles to die. All I care is that Nintendo sticks to their gameplay focus. I thought I was a fanboy but you-with wanting the PS and Xbox to die by Nintendo's hands-take the cake. Sadly my friend, no argument, regardless how good, will sway you.And to add, one of the bigger reasons Nintendo didn't give the Wii support for HD was so they could sell the Wii for cheaper than th PS and Xbox. A totally wise decision, but not 100% idealistic as you would think.

what sony and microsoft are doing are a really bad thing for all gamers. there are on people on the internet who are looking forward to this happening and i too can't wait because then gaming will flourish again. what sony and microsoft have created is an industry and that industry is killing gaming. if the video game market dies, these industry companies don't care about the gamers. these industry already got their money from you and they will move on to the next thing to sap money out of. what nintendo has done is a remake of the classic 1984, when the nes toppled the great atari system.of course a fan of nintendo but what they do as a company. those who were born with an nes have no doubt have loyalty to this company. look at the nes days and for someone to not be a fan of the company is simply an idiot. do the research on the early nes days and you'll see why many gamers love nintendo. btw, nintendo is a great company but they do have flaws and those flaws are some of the reasons why nintendo are stuck at times.

You're talking crap with no evidence, yet again.

Is it me or every topic you open lately has a Wii propaganda?

Replying to #24

to a hardcore, yes wii propaganda but to others an understanding on the attacks of 360/ps3 towards the wii. a lot of money was spent that was to attack the wii. there are people on the internet who sees right through this and when i read their post it was very revealing. three years after what many 360/ps3 marketers have done to the minds of the hardcore gamer, the hardcore is still the same.marketers brainwashed the hardcore into thinking the wii is a gimmick and a fad. three years later it's successful, shouldn't that tell the hardcore gamers that they've been played all along by these marketers paid by the 360/ps3 corporations. but of course three years is not long enough for them to realize that. maybe it takes 10 years or when the market has deceased. but by then the marketers would have blamed nintendo for casualizing. so when the market dies, it isn't the 360/ps3's fault but nintendo's. that has to make sense, there is no other logical understanding.

Replying to #25

Sounds more like you're the brainwashed one, to be honest.

it's been three years and the wii is doing a pretty good job. hardcore gamers don't have a clue why other then that the people buying them are stupid.if i ask you why the wii is successful after three years? you'd say, fad, gimmick, casual, stupid people, mommies, kiddies, girls, etc.... none of them are actual reasons. the hardcore don't have a reason because they are only the puppets and puppets don't need an understanding of anything.

Loony is right, ultra. We're not the ones brainwashed here, you're the puppet/brainwashed/one sucking off Nintendo.This topic, along with the comment on the DLC topic I posted in. You're just spouting off a bunch of crap. If you want to discuss how you think the hardcore are retards, put it in the topic it should be in.All your reasoning is coming from illogical nonsense with no sources or fact behind them.That being said, the 360 and PS3 are both successful, and the PS3 is going to have it's best Christmas sales it ever had. I wouldn't be surprised if it outsold both the Wii and 360.Having good graphics doesn't detract from the gameplay, as you're probably thinking, it adds to the game. Nintendo is going to make a console with better hardware and specs eventually, with the same or near the same quality of game, what does that tell you? With technical advances in technology, comes advances in games and gameplay. Having a game like Dead Space with it's atmosphere and graphics help make the gameplay more refined, which in turn made the game better. Stuff like PhysX help make the game more immersive and that makes the experience better. A game like FEAR, even though it doesn't have much advanced features in terms of gameplay, nothing replaces the during effects and after effects of a big gun fight. The particles bouncing everywhere and anywhere and the dust and the decals that the bullets make against the wall add a whole new dimension in satisfaction after you complete a segment.None of what I said are able to be done on the Wii. The Conduit, although a somewhat above average game doesn't have any of the after effects of a fight that I just described, no Wii game has this sort of satisfaction I have with a FPS genre. Even though some of them control great, they don't offer me the same type of experience.An experience of a game is the whole culmination of the game, this includes graphics. A game doesn't have to be a technical marvel, but it does have to look pleasing to the eyes. A game like Mirror's Edge isn't the most technically advanced game out there and doesn't push the system's limits but it look nice, clean, and pretty. Even more so on the PC with the PhysX added. Having all that makes the game feel more personal and realistic without being totally, you know, realistic.I have a Wii, along with all it's Nintendo exclusives. I'm enjoying the hell out of Mario right now, the boost in clarity to the game would do wonders for my eyes because once I look elsewhere from the screen, everything looks blurry for a second. The game looks nice on a SD screen and is visually appealing, just upscaled on a HD TV, ugh. Blurry.Even games that didn't have HD in the past, that have been remade look great. Look at the Banjo Kazooie remakes on the Xbox 360, those games look great and nice without all the tech.