I came off impressed, having only briefly played a few Rayman games before. After playing for an hour or two of Rayman Origins with family a month ago, I can appreciate how much they're looking forward to the title, as it does look pretty good. Hopefully this also puts to rest the odd rumor that Wii U can't output graphics on par with the PS3/360. I don't know where this idea came from, but I suppose it stems from the erroneous belief that Nintendo's always sucked at graphics compared to the competition.
Lemme put that to rest: they weren't. The Nintendo Entertainment System was pretty decent back in '85, as were the games that accompanied it. Granted, it was an 8-bit system, and all of them had that charming blocky quality you either see as rosy or pixelated. The Super NES was also decent in comparison to the Sega Genesis, lack of "blast processing" or not; that generation's graphics hold up the most, since genuine care and personality were present in many of those 16-bit sprites. While most know Sony's PlayStation won against all competition (including the Nintendo 64) by the widespread use of discs instead of cartridges, the N64 was a damn-powerful machine, worthy of the codename "Project Reality". It could produce true three-dimensional worlds, the most prominent being Super Mario 64 and The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, that helped set the standard on how 3D games should work, yet it was limited by cartridge space and how difficult it was to program.
Entering the last decade was the Nintendo GameCube. The little cube was actually more capable than the PlayStation 2, contrary to popular belief. Nintendo made the conscious choice to make it much easier to develop for, stuck with mini-discs to combat piracy and other means, yet that didn't seem to diminish the quality of titles first- and second-party developers that managed to shine through the dark times of the early 2000's. However, the PS2 was again the undisputed winner of the sixth generation, where third-parties by and large deserted Nintendo's little purple lunchbox. When it was time for the seventh generation, Nintendo decided to take a gamble, not satisfied with the Console Wars' fixation on technical prowess and graphical limits: the first step came from their then-crazy gamble known as the Nintendo DS. The dual-screened wonder was a runaway success all things considered, and was followed up two years later by the Wii, with Nintendo's attempt to target a new audience to mingle with the current crowd with simpler controls and a mainstream push for motion controlled game play. Both the DS and Wii were technologically inferior to the opposition, Sony's PlayStation 3 and PlayStation Portable and Microsoft's Xbox 360.
Nintendo's only been the 'weakest' hardware since '05, but as the sales will show, there's more to gaming than graphics. The DS absolutely smashed the PSP and the Wii is now owned by practically everyone on the planet who's wanted one by now. While their technical limitations prevented them from having an even port of multi-platform releases and ignored by most third-parties, the DS was truly a unique experience, combining button and stylus control schemes for some truly exclusive experiences, including Squeenix's The World Ends With You and made established franchises more accessible, including Animal Crossing: Wild World and the Generation IV Pokémon games. Wii also brought in people of any age into gaming, albeit with the unfortunate labeling of the "hardcore vs. casual" nonsense that happens every week. As an unintended sideeffect of the new control scheme, many developers didn't know how to tackle the Wiimote's unique simplicity and instead created loads of broken and under produced shovelware and minigame collections. It didn't even get many large-scale games like Skyward Sword and Xenoblade Chronicles until its twilight years on the market.
Wow, I go on and on. Point is, the Wii U looks fine, it seems to be able to handle the two things the competition had over its predecessor: a decent online component and high-definition graphics. With its new tablet/classic hybrid controller, it can both handle current 'hardcore' games like Darksiders 2 and Assassin's Creed III while still being the home for Nintendo's iconic first-party efforts, which is where I end my argument: Nintendo makes hardware for their own ideas, and they know better than anyone how to use their own creation. As long as Nintendo games exist on Nintendo systems, said systems will always sell. As for their half a billion dollar loss, let's not forget what they gained from the Wii alone: they have around $10.5 billion in the bank. That billion with a capital B. They'll be fine; the 3DS is on a roll since Mario showed up last November and 3D Land sold over 5 million alone.
All this doom-and-gloom for Nintendo, all the "make cellphone games" or "stop making console" talk is ridiculous. I admit I'm a Nintendork, but you don't see me laughing at Sony's ridiculous initial $600 asking price for the PS3 (okay, I lied; we all mocked them at the 'you'll want to work more to save more for this obviously superior system' talk) or their more consistent losses as a company. It doesn't represent their gaming faction and I think they've been doing fine since '08. Competition's good, something Microsoft does a good job at doing. While they were first out of the gate, answered Nintendo with Kinect and still throw their money for advertising anything they wish, I'm sure they're also doing fine. I may not care for the Xbox line in general (I'm not a shooter fan, nor do their exclusives or controllers really feel 'right' in my hands) but I also don't spout the sheer bigotry and hatred you see on the Internet, which we all know is utter truth.Can't we be happy a Nintendo console can have HD graphics and decent third party support?
*sigh*
TETRIS.
 |
| Gotta love the logo. |
