[Rant] Nintendo's decision making behind the Wii U

So recently it has come to my attention that there has been some confusion as to whether or not the Wii U is really a new console, not so much in the gaming community, but in the general eyes of the public. I wanted to take a moment and clear up that confusion. Yes, the Wii U is a separate console from the original Wii. It is not just a redesign with a new controller. You will need to buy a Wii U to play Wii U games, as games made for the Wii U will not be playable on the Wii. The Wii U is however backwards compatible so your old Wii games will be one hundred percent playable on it.


On another note, Nintendo decided a long time ago that graphics weren't the most important thing to them. To them, there job is to create awesome gaming experiences available to a wide range of consumers. They do not want their platform to be overly expensive, and as such when the launched the Wii they decided to stay a generation behind. This means that while Microsoft and Sony will be paying top dollar to create new consoles, Nintendo will be paying less, and therefore be charging us less. I would imagine that the gamepad is costing them a bit to make, so it won't be anything too low, but it will certainly be the cheapest next gen console on the market.


Besides, since when did a game need amazing graphics to be good? As it stands the Wii U is indeed more powerful then the PS3/ 360, so its not like the gap will be huge or anything, and Wii U games will have the power to be visually appealing, it just won't be mind blowing because that's not what Nintendo is about. They care more about being different, and offering innovation, which is honestly something that the industry desperately needs. People look at Nintendo like they are a kiddy company, but then mostly these same people complain that E3 was nothing be a "Hyper Violent Gore Fest". That's because things that aren't hyper violent get called childish!


I hope that I managed to shed some light on the Wii U, and maybe help some people form an opinion, but really, the amount of hate this thing is getting is unwarranted. A game does not need to "hyper violent" or have jaw dropping graphics to be good. All a game needs to be good is to be fun. I play games to be entertained, the gaming industry is my favorite industry because of how innovative it can be. It should always be enjoyable, and it should always be about bringing us new ways to play, and new levels of immersion. I'm all for better graphics, but I'm glad that one of the big three has decided to put gameplay first.


And just so you know, I'll be getting either the 720 or the PS4 as well. We'll just have to wait and see which I like more when they are revealed. I own a PS3 and a 360 right now. I don't even have a Wii. This isn't some angry fanboy rant. I just get tired of people on the internet dissing something just because it's Nintendo.

Assassin's Creed 3

At E3 this year Ubisoft showed a lot of AC3 gameplay, and as everyone is probably well aware it’s set during the American Revolution. There has been a lot of questions, and speculation about who the enemy would be, but as the Americans won the war, it was pretty obvious that they would likely be your allies. However when asked at E3 if the whole game was about killing the british one of the designers firmly stood his ground, stating that Conner would have targets on both sides of the war, and that the enemy is the Templar order and not the British.

However! They then proceeded to show multitudes of gameplay, with Conner doing nothing but killing the British. In recent interviews they have stated that they understand that what they said was not what they showed, and that they showed all they could. That we would have to trust them, but they understand that we are skeptical. That they don’t want to ruin a major plot twist for us. They are a canadian company. They have showed the bad side of civilizations before. Conner is Native American and British. The colonials are going to betray him. Ubisoft is going to show us just how racist America was back then. They might have something where a subset of them are Templars, and they’ll say that things like the trail of tears in the later years were the Colonial Templars trying to wipe out the rest of the Assassins.

I’m about 75% sure of this theory. It would be epic if I was right.

The alternative is them taking the "safe" route, where the paint the Americans as "I can do no wrong!" Which would make me very unhappy because that would so historically inaccurate. The colonists were sneaky, two faced miscreants. It's part of what makes that time period so interesting to me. They rebelled against the British, like a teenager rebelling against there parents. They proceeded to kick the Native Americans off of there land, and slaughter them. If they don't show this, I don't know if I can still like the game. If there aren't shades of gray all over the battlefield, with no clear right and wrong, I just don't know how well I can enjoy it. If they paint the colonist's as the good guys... You get the point.

Wii U

So, the launch of the Wii U is right around the corner at this point with Nintendo still saying that it will be launched in 2012. The question is, is there any reason to be excited about it? I would go ahead and say yes. First of all at launch there looks to be pretty great games such as Pikmin 3, Project P-100 (working name) and Zombie U to name a few. Also it's not like the console is going to flop in the long run, because Miyamoto has already mentioned that he has four upcoming projects and another new IP in mind for it later. We can assume that these games are a Zelda, full fledged Mario and other iconic Miyamoto games. Maybe a Star Fox? The new IP is apparently an exploration based co-op FPS, although he said that the other games will be coming first. EA is working to port a lot of existing franchises to the console including Battlefield 3 and Mass Effect 3. I do believe that I read earlier this week that Black Ops 2 will also be coming to the Wii U this holiday, optimized for the Pro Controller. I think that at least for the time being the Wii U will have excellent 3rd party support. And by the time the new consoles come out? It wont matter, or the Wii U will popular enough where they can still profit from supporting it. What I mean by that is that is if people can be made to be a believer of the Wii U, and people like it, then games will continue to be made for it.

And if not? Well, by that time the Wii U will have awesome first and second party games that define the console anyway. I'm personally looking forward to a new Zelda, Smash 4, and maybe a new Fire Emblem. I know that Nintendo has plans for the system, and I have faith in them. Look at the Wii. People say that Mario Galaxy 1 and 2 are both top notch platformer, Skyward Sword looks to be a fine Zelda game, and a few 2nd party games were really great as well. I'm sure that like the Gamecube and the Wii, the Wii U will survive on hidden gems, if it dosn't get full 3rd party support.

However, if Nintendo hasn't been your thing in the past, if your not big into Mario, or Zelda, or other Nintendo exclusives I would definitely wait. I don't see the Wii U getting many new exclusive IPs, I mean Miyomoto has mentioned one, but I expect that at least at first it will be the usual "Nintendo" IPs. Things like Zelda, Pokemon, Mario, and Smash. Maybe a Metroid if we get lucky.