Yes you do, unless they include memory on the game card itself. If they don't, there's no on board memory to save to. Also, some games need a memory card to even boot up. So yes, the small one will work but it's not smart for a long term investment, which a handheld always is. The Vita is going to be Sony's handheld for at least five years.
I'm actually looking for Wii games to play, thanks to Gamefly. Up next is Call of Duty 4 on the Wii, a recommendation I remember about a month ago from Nate.
The 32-bit generation is my favorite generation of games. So many great games and for everyone. However, the graphics have not aged well. At all. Completely agree with you there. Calling it the teenage years is very accurate, I think. I do think Super Mario 64 holds up. I somehow end up playing it once a year. I haven't gone back and played the Final Fantasy games on the PSone though. Maybe I'll try that. Virtua Fighter doesn't hold up at all though. Virtua Fighter 2 does...
Well, the Wii U in all honest hasn't been released yet and there's still time to make changes. Maybe when we can see actual games instead of tech demos and a revised hardware (they have to be doing that right now) my impression will improve. The silver lining is that it has a touch screen like the DS, which they proved then can do. Also, no matter what, Nintendo is trying something new in hardware, if not software. I have to applaud that. Much better than the avalanche of shooters on the 360. My favorite aspect of the 360 is actually the XBLA games. I don't care too much for shooters. The quirky platformers like Splosion Man and puzzle games like Braid and RPGs like Bastion are what I dig.
I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree, Nick. While I do find it strange that the Wii was as underpowered as it was, it never really bothered me, as long as the games were good. They were for the most part at launch (and the 2010 holiday season, sort of). Other than that, it proved to be sparse for good gaming experiences in my opinion. I never considered myself a Nintendo fan but I adored the SNES. The N64 ruined that and I moved onto the PlayStation which is my favorite console ever and later the Saturn, which has proved to be a treasure in my mind. There was a misunderstood console! You can be a Nintendo fan and I'll be a Sega fan (which doesn't really exist anymore). I don't think many gamers practice exclusion-ism. I think a loud few do. I like innovations in games. I believe many core gamers share my taste for the alternative in games. So I guess we just disagree.
Hmm. de Blob is actually a game I still want to try. So is Excitebots. Never heard of the other two though. Let me just ask this. Nintendo has been the main example to the underlining issue and I think it's become about the Wii in general. Let's get to the main issue. Do you believe that the majority of gamers do not like change? If so, do you think the core audience's general dislike of the Wii is proof of this? Do you think a majority of core gamers express elitism? If so, do you think Nintendo's goal of marketing to those who don't normally play video games rubs these people the wrong way?
I personally don't like how Nintendo operates their business and many of their games (on their consoles) disappoint me in my mind. I'll admit that. However, I know I'm not alone in this belief and I don't think that equals elitism or a fear of change.
Oh and labeling as hardcore and casual may be elitist in its implication. Then again, by that I would say stop calling girls who play video games girl gamers or gamer girls. Which I'm actually for. So there's merit to that argument.
I'm not saying the Wii didn't have good games but it failed on consistently having good games. That's why we're having discussions on what's next for the Wii and not for the 360 or PS3. As a contrast, Sony did not start this generation well. My favorite console this generation is the 360 because the PS3 had too many problems at launch and the Wii disappointed me. However, since the last time I had a PS3 (which was over three years ago), a lot has changed. They improved. That's why this holiday I'm getting one again. They were successful in persuading me that they had worthwhile games I want to play. Fun games. Varied games. Exclusive games. The Wii did the exact opposite. When it first came out, I love Wii Sports, Trauma Center, ExciteTruck, WarioWare: Smooth Moves and Rayman Raving Rabbids. Twilight Princess is still something I need to play again to remind me but I loved the launch. It was straight downhill from there. This is because Nintendo started spreading out their rosters and 3rd party developers weren't making engaging games. Sure, every now and again, there was a House of the Dead Overkill or Madworld but those moments were few and far between. Unfortunately, they never learned how to properly utilize the technology. Core gamers realized that. Maybe quality of games is subjective but if no one is buying these games and no one is praising them critically, then who is saying these are good? You say these just weren't for core gamers so the critically bashed it. Well, with a few exceptions like Just Dance and Carnival Games, the casual market wasn't buying these games either. Games like Madworld didn't sell well because by that time, it was too late. Core gamers weren't around anymore and the casual market was still happy with their copies of Wii Fit and Mario Kart Wii.
My point is that Nintendo aside, just because core gamers are not supportive of the Wii or Wii U doesn't equate to elitism. It equates to holding Nintendo to a higher standard or not finding a list of quality games or wanting something different. The other point of this post is that gamers don't like change. Although motion controls were new in 2006, it's hardly evolved since then. So Nintendo has been doing the same thing for about five years now. Core gamers should love Nintendo by that logic but they don't. They like change and Nintendo isn't changing, just using a well intention ed gimmick to sell games. Repackaging old ideas into new products. Taking David Bowie and calling it Lady Gaga. Oh and it's a bad business model because it was a short term model. That's why they made a lot before and nothing now. I'm talking about their recent business model which I'm sure has changed since, say the GameCube. Actually, their business model then must've been awesome. The GameCube struggled that whole console cycle but they remained profitable. Impressive! Bottom Line: Hating on Nintendo doesn't make you elitist and I don't think many gamers are like that.
That's just it however. I don't think the hardcore community is as elitist or shallow as many think. It's just a few loud people who feel this way. Many gamers I feel do have a substantial reason why they like the games they do and they aren't greedy in that they don't want to share their hobby. These are the same people who aren't praising Nintendo games and that's because while Nintendo tend to make games to showcase an idea or a control mechanic instead of creating a game that's in itself innovative or even fun. Kirby's Epic Yarn looked like a lot of fun and it's unique design made it the first Kirby game I was interested in. Then I played it and I was left with a pretty average platformer with a unique aesthetic. See, that's the problem. At the end of the day, video games are games and the point of them are to be fun. Most games for the Wii aren't. Many of the ones that are come from Nintendo and even that's not a guarantee.
Also, how is motion control the standard in the industry. I know there's Kinect and Move but neither are successful as the standard controlled games. If anything, the idea is dead and games like Skyward Sword are just trying to prove a technology that has proven itself to be either too young or a fad. Also if Nintendo's business model is so good, why did they lost money this year for the first time since they became a video game company?
Oh and that's only about half the ideas I wanted to say about this post. I could actually write a whole blog as a response. I may disagree with you but thank you for posting such a thought provoking piece. Love it!
Lighting the fire...
A majority of gamers can be characterized as slow to change in that they buy yearly iterations of games in a series, this is true. However, it's that same community that bring titles like Catherine and El Shaddai to our attention. Titles like these are quite different, although the quality of some (El Shaddai got mixed reviews) are debatable. If the core gamer community is so adverse to change, these titles would not get the attention they did. I don't think its a matter of not liking change so much as it is games enjoy good games more than their moral beliefs in regards to the industry. Many thought they shouldn't buy Activision games after the Infinity Ward debacle but they did. We did. Maybe they believe that yearly installments in a franchise hurts it in the long run but that didn't stop them from buying Assassin's Creed Revelations because they enjoy the series more than that perspective, even though they were probably right.
In regards to Nintendo, there are several points I would like to address. I know many gamers who were excited for the Wii. The thought of motion controls were exciting. I remembering being so pumped for it. Not only because of the promises it was giving, but because Nintendo had in essence done it already. The DS is what got me into handheld gaming. It wasn't the Game Boy, or the Game Gear or even the Game Boy Advance. The reason was it worked. The DS did what the Wii later proved it couldn't: make controller-less gaming engaging and an essential part of the game's mechanics. I could not imagine playing Wario Ware: Touched with anything other than a stylist whereas I wish I could play Donkey Kong Country Returns on a controller. Now there are exceptions, including the packaged game Wii Sports, but in the grand scheme of things, the Wii was a failure in that it did nothing new from a game design point of view. Even great overlooked titles like No More Heroes is hampered by the motion controls. Doing wrestling moves with gestures isn't responsive. Hell, it's still in my backlog in part because I don't want to deal with the motion controls. But I digress.
There's a feeling that core gamers have been burned by Nintendo too many times and I think that's why that community bashes them. This is why the Wii U is the strangest idea I can think of. Now, the Wii sold big and will probably be the console winner in terms of overall sales. However, can you really call that a war won when Nintendo reported record losses this year? Anyways, the Wii U is an attempt to attract the hardcore, while maintaining their casual market. Now, that idea on paper sounds great. However, the product we were shown at E3 is ludicrous. First off, the casual market has learned to play without a traditional controller and this controller actually has more inputs than any other controller out now or before with the exception (maybe) of a keyboard. The touch screen possibilities are endless and then you have the traditional button layout on the sides of the screen. Mom is not going to want this thing. The hardcore audience is then granted with a console that's promising games we can play right now. Even with Nintendo saying it'll be 50% stronger than the Xbox 360, we're still getting games that will play the same on the current gen consoles. Also, I don't care what anyone says, there is no way that controller is comfortable. Even if it does somehow grip nicely around your palms and all the buttons are comfortable to get at and press, the weight of that screen has to grow tiresome in extended play times. So what I'm trying to say here is we have a console for a casual market that's already leaving if not gone already and a hardcore audience that already has a console for the games its promising. Nintendo is trying to appease everyone but not actually accomplishing anything. Nintendo is basically an ineffective Democrat president in this sense.
You say the hardcore doesn't like change but core gamers are complaining about Nintendo not changing. They're not doing anything innovative. Hell, they're not even trying. The Wii U is basically a greatest hits album featuring music (mechanics) from a band's (Nintendo) two different periods of music styles, except all rerecorded. Do you want to hear rerecorded versions of "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous" back to back with "I Don't Wanna Be In Love"? Those are Good Charlotte songs, in case you don't know. The point I'm trying to make is Nintendo's attitude to bring gaming to all isn't what I'm upset about and I don't think gamers in general are adverse to. I think they do take offense in that Nintendo has given up on innovation in actual game productions itself. Nobody is as excited for Skyward Sword as they were for Ocarina of Time because it's the same game, even if the quality is great. Carnival Games may appeal to a lot of people but it's not an engaging game, which in turn makes it not a fun experience. Nintendo hasn't been able to merge the two together either and at this point, although it seems like they are, they're not even trying anymore. The casual market gets Transformers 2, which is visually appealing but empty in terms of content and the hardcore marker is get Saw VI, the sixth remake of a movie made six years ago (I believe). Sure it's successful overall in sales but, to use another music reference, so is Rihanna. She doesn't change at all and neither has Nintendo in the past five years (and in my opinion, aside from the motion controls, in fifteen years). By this logic, the hardcore should love them. But they don't, do they?
This has been a lot of Nintendo bashing but as crazy as it may seem, I want Nintendo to succeed. I will say that they are the only ones with a real desire (somewhere) to change how we play gaming. Sure Microsoft and Sony have motion controls now but it feels calculated. I personally want to see a console manifestation of the DS because that where this idea of expanding the market to everyone actually succeeded. I really want to see the 3DS succeed and with the recent games that have been released, it might. However, I still see problems with that, and Nintendo keeps on making announcements that seem bent on hindering any progress they may have with the handheld (redone classic games in 3D, second analog pad that requires a battery) and the Wii U is suffering the same fate. One thing about video games that's special to me is that it's my discovery. I love music but my tastes were defined by what my parents had in their collection. No one I knew at age six liked video games and I stumbled on this hobby on my own. No I would love nothing more than to share my discovery with everyone. Finding titles that everyone can understand and enjoy would be wonderful and Nintendo seems to think like this as well. Too bad they don't know how to do that.
There. There's my two (hundred) cents.
