Why does everyone diss the Wii ?, step inside............

[Morba]

Ouch, I was agreeing with the points you were making right until your parting shot about the Wii not being a "proper games console". Care to elaborate? It's a console... it plays games, ergo it's a games console, is it not?

sorry, the proper bit was in relation to the games rather than the console.

im used to playing FPS games for many hours on a PC instead, which is what i would call a proper game, rather than nintendo games which are more 'fun' games.

its the sort of thing that you can pick up and play at any time, rather than the sort of games that need some decent time being played.

 

[GarethDW]

Ahh, that's OK then... you're not on my hitlist anymore

 

[Kreeeee]

its the sort of thing that you can pick up and play at any time, rather than the sort of games that need some decent time being played.

Played Smash Bros?

 

[Morba]

Played Smash Bros?

nope, but then in fairness, i have no intention of buying a game that needs the sort of attention that i would give to a pc game. so my view is skewed by the games that i would be interested in playing for 'fun'.

 

[FrankJH]

Why would a warranty no longer be valid if the console I auctioned did break? It was sold along with a receipt from a very large supermarket... it's a competitor, so I won't mention it, but you may have heard of it as it is the largest British retailer by both global sales and market share. There is definitely a store in their town - assuming it breaks (and remember, it's a Wii not a 360 so that's a pretty big assumption) then they can take it back to their local store and get it exchanged. Are warranties only legal if you can prove you were the original purchaser? Of course, they're not.

Secondly, I sold the console on an auction site. Maybe you're not aware how they work but if you see someone selling something you want then you place a bid for the amount you wish to pay for it, in the hope your bid is the winning one. As it happens, I started by selling the console at a loss - someone could have bid 50p and won it if they were the only person bidding. As it happens, some people were prepared to pay more than 50p... quite a lot more than 50p. But they chose to do that - that was the amount they were willing to pay. Some people placed bids that were a lot lower and didn't win, because they obviously didn't want to pay such an amount. That's the way it works. If you want to feel ****** off at anyone because of the prices that consoles can reach, you should direct your anger at the other bidders, as they were ultimately responsible for the price increasing not me.

Out of interest, do you bear such a grudge against everyone that sells anything on an auction site? Have you ever sold anything on one?

1stly - yes usually a gaurentee is ok (if its paid by Credit Card sometimes on the return some companies want to see the same card is all) but they should be ok.

My main point was that if you hadnt bought the ebay item someone in that supermarket could have paid the correct price for it - not have to bid for something in a competition. No it is YOU who is buying more just to make money Im angry at, when I COULD have been the guy directly behind you when the supermarket is immediately out of stock because you bought an extra item you didnt actually want to use - idle profiteering

For an example - OCUK, evne when they werent as huge a company as they are now, they probably had a lot less choice and maybe you paid a little extra than the lowest possible price, but as far as Im aware they have always offered top notch customer support (yes like everywhere there are always going to be problems occasionally, but they are usually tiny and sorted out amicabally). The additional customer support adds value which makes paying a little extra worth it, and now most items are roughly the lowest you can find anywhere, its even better.

If I was to buy stuff from them and sell them on for profit to freinds and aquaintences (not that I would) and expect OCUK to support any problems directly - thats idle profitteering in my book. I heartily recommend OCUK and I know several people who now buy regularly from My recommendation. Again if you sell on for the same price as you originally paid, all well and good (and I dont count petrol money etc) but adding £50- £100 to an item that only costs £200 is just scandelous imo

 

[Kreeeee]

nope, but then in fairness, i have no intention of buying a game that needs the sort of attention that i would give to a pc game. so my view is skewed by the games that i would be interested in playing for 'fun'.

Then please don't be offended if I don't take notice your opinion in future Wii slagging matches

 

[Morba]

My main point was that if you hadnt bought the ebay item someone in that supermarket could have paid the correct price for it - not have to bid for something in a competition. No it is YOU who is buying more just to make money Im angry at, when I COULD have been the guy directly behind you when the supermarket is immediately out of stock because you bought an extra item you didnt actually want to use - idle profiteering

rubbish. tescos and asda (atleast near me) had a limit of 1 per person for the first few week, to stop people buying more to sell on when the initial demand was high.

what is your opinion on stocks and shares? people buy shares cheap that other people want, only to sell them on for more money. surely that is the same thing..

adding £50- £100 to an item that only costs £200 is just scandelous imo

my items were listed at 99p starting price with no reserve. I was willing to let them go for a lot less than I paid for them, not my fault someone actually wanted to pay me £300 odd each for them.

 

[Morba]

Then please don't be offended if I don't take notice your opinion in future Wii slagging matches

no offence taken
it would have been wrong for me not to clarify my view though, as otherwise people would have considered my view (maybe!) which would have been unfair. it is also generally why i dont post in here, my opinions are not really that valid when it comes to comparisons

 

[36:)]

I really don't get it seriously, whats everyones problem with the Wii on here ?, I'm tired of reading post after post saying that the Wii is just a fad, the same was said of the DS when it came out, I remember loads of people saying the whole touch screen thing was a mistake now look at it, it has the worst graphics yet outsells the PSP 2/1 or more, and allso the Wii was never trying to be next gen in regards to the graphics, right from the start and even in the early press confrences Nintendo said their ultimate goal was to create a fun innovative cheap gaming console that's fun for all the familiy and think they have succeded, I could never see my mum playing burnout on my 360 ffs , allso to whoever does it, stop comparing the Wii to the PS3/360, the main reason why it's selling so well atm is because it's not really in direct competition with them, it fills a gap that the PS3/360 can't reach in terms of familiy entertainment, the Wii is more like a suppliment that you can add along side your big daddy console, I can guarantee their are more people that own both Wii and a 360 or PS3 than their are that own a 360 and a PS3, I think that is helping Wii sells alone,

End of the day I think eveyone is gonna be in for a big suprise ingards to Wii sales, this thread might come back and bite me in the bum but I really don't see Wii sales slowing down anytime soon.

DS/PSP you cannot compare with the Wii/Consoles....

I said the DS would do well because the games were short bursty games which is what a handheld console should be - rather than PSP which was expensive, had really long games which were out on other consoles..

Now my problem with the Wii, is they've emulated that DS strategy for it - games for short bursts of time... but it doesn't work in a fixed position!

Well for single players anyway, although you say family entertainment, my mother played it once, hated it... my dad played it thought "feh".... my sister sold hers after one game thinking it was rubbish... I guess my family hates it =)

See the Wii needs those long term games - Resident Evil 4 is the only game I've played for the Wii which I could stomach for more than 10 minutes - I played it for 14 hours. I've played 14 other games for the Wii, all of them I've played for a maximum of 15 minutes, with the exception of Red Steel, which I tried to like and was forced to play for a week while my 360 was being repaired.... couldn't stand the game. I have no problem with Nintendo games, but they are slowly becomming "Super Mario-Metroid Party: Partners teaching Zelda how to use his brain brawl".

I seriously do feel that the average number of Wii Hours will be far less than 360 hours if that could be measured (well it can on the 360 if they're connected to live).

 

[NokkonWud]

Nothi9ng wrong if you add value - if you just basically do nothing apart from get to somewhere quicker, then yes I think there is when obviously you are charging 50% more (ie to get 3 rd one free)

But that's his prerogative, it was his risk to take, his money spent buying them. Someone should have bought theirs quicker.

 

[Shamikebab]

DS/PSP you cannot compare with the Wii/Consoles....

I said the DS would do well because the games were short bursty games which is what a handheld console should be - rather than PSP which was expensive, had really long games which were out on other consoles..

Now my problem with the Wii, is they've emulated that DS strategy for it - games for short bursts of time... but it doesn't work in a fixed position!

Well for single players anyway, although you say family entertainment, my mother played it once, hated it... my dad played it thought "feh".... my sister sold hers after one game thinking it was rubbish... I guess my family hates it =)

See the Wii needs those long term games - Resident Evil 4 is the only game I've played for the Wii which I could stomach for more than 10 minutes - I played it for 14 hours. I've played 14 other games for the Wii, all of them I've played for a maximum of 15 minutes, with the exception of Red Steel, which I tried to like and was forced to play for a week while my 360 was being repaired.... couldn't stand the game. I have no problem with Nintendo games, but they are slowly becomming "Super Mario-Metroid Party: Partners teaching Zelda how to use his brain brawl".

I seriously do feel that the average number of Wii Hours will be far less than 360 hours if that could be measured (well it can on the 360 if they're connected to live).

that post probably sums up the best how i feel about the wii. I am mainly a single player gamer, most of my friends are into other stuff than gaming and any multi player i do engage in is over many miles via live. At the moment im really wanting a wii for mario galaxies but i need to see more lengthy single player experiences. At the moment theres only really Zelda afaik, the wii needs its oblivion, a long engaging role playing title, or adventure title or something like that imo.

 

[FrankJH]

rubbish. tescos and asda (atleast near me) had a limit of 1 per person for the first few week, to stop people buying more to sell on when the initial demand was high.

what is your opinion on stocks and shares? people buy shares cheap that other people want, only to sell them on for more money. surely that is the same thing..



my items were listed at 99p starting price with no reserve. I was willing to let them go for a lot less than I paid for them, not my fault someone actually wanted to pay me £300 odd each for them.

Stocks and shares are completely different, the value of the company is out of the hands of the traders (and even so its not the traders who are actually buying the stock for themselves - otherwise its insider trading) infact thats a very good analogy

You are basically doing insider trading (you know where limitied stock are, so you go and buy more than you actually require and "advertise" on a larger scale) and dont give me **** about "willing to sell for less" you knew it was never going to go for less than street price - and of course its your fault others had to pay £300, who says it wasnt a guy behind you who didnt get it from Asda, because you took your sister along or whoever

But that's his prerogative, it was his risk to take, his money spent buying them. Someone should have bought theirs quicker.

I completely disagree - so just because someone can drive to asda out of town(for example) and load up his car and credit card with wii's (or whatever the "hot" product is) and then dump them on an auction site - basically being a leach on society - because he got there quicker and has easy transport etc its all ok - absolute bs

 

[Shamikebab]

Stocks and shares are completely different, the value of the company is out of the hands of the traders (and even so its not the traders who are actually buying the stock for themselves - otherwise its insider trading) infact thats a very good analogy

You are basically doing insider trading (you know where limitied stock are, so you go and buy more than you actually require and "advertise" on a larger scale) and dont give me **** about "willing to sell for less" you knew it was never going to go for less than street price - and of course its your fault others had to pay £300, who says it wasnt a guy behind you who didnt get it from Asda, because you took your sister along or whoever



I completely disagree - so just because someone can drive to asda out of town(for example) and load up his car and credit card with wii's (or whatever the "hot" product is) and then dump them on an auction site - basically being a leach on society - because he got there quicker and has easy transport etc its all ok - absolute bs

I've got to say i agree with you i absolutely hate it when i cant get a new product just because someone has bought many to sell on ebay, another prime example is gig tickets, is it alright for people to buy 10 so they can sell at a profit on ebay and for me to miss out?? no of course it isn't.

 

[Morba]

Stocks and shares are completely different, the value of the company is out of the hands of the traders (and even so its not the traders who are actually buying the stock for themselves - otherwise its insider trading) infact thats a very good analogy

You are basically doing insider trading (you know where limitied stock are, so you go and buy more than you actually require and "advertise" on a larger scale) and dont give me **** about "willing to sell for less" you knew it was never going to go for less than street price - and of course its your fault others had to pay £300, who says it wasnt a guy behind you who didnt get it from Asda, because you took your sister along or whoever



I completely disagree - so just because someone can drive to asda out of town(for example) and load up his car and credit card with wii's (or whatever the "hot" product is) and then dump them on an auction site - basically being a leach on society - because he got there quicker and has easy transport etc its all ok - absolute bs

got there quicker? i bought mine a week after launch, there was nobody queuing when i got there. it wasnt an out of town asda or tescos. it was not just off the delivery lorry. both places were walking distance from the local housing estates with easy access for thousands of people.

gig tickets - can you not only buy a certain amount per person? i am sure most ticket sites have these restrictions.

also they were not purchased on credit, all paid with cold cash. over £500 in notes handed over the counter.

regardless of whether i knew it would go for more or not makes no difference, i was willing to let them go for less than £1.

the 2 people that bought the wii's lived within a couple of miles of the tescos i purchsed them from, they had every opportunity to go during the day to buy one for rrp, but they didnt. life is a bitch sometimes yes, but hell, if stupid people want to pay stupid money for something that i have, i will not stop them.

 

[noob]

Morba I agree, I bought a Wii at launch day and sold it for £350. That's life if people don't want to queue that's up to them I saved them the hassle. The guy who bought mine drove a 911 so he wasn't short.

 

[FrankJH]

Im sticking to the principal, its still one less on the shelf that you didnt need.

Simple as that.

I dont look at it any other way than glorified theft

 

[noob]

I dont look at it any other way than glorified theft

haha. Glorified theft, you mean like what Sony are doing to us Europeans.

 

[scorza]

Im sticking to the principal, its still one less on the shelf that you didnt need.

Simple as that.

I'd agree with that.

I dont look at it any other way than glorified theft

But its not that lol. I'd call it marketeering, not illegal but morally questionable.

 

[GarethDW]

To go back to the analogy of insider trading, this is rubbish - insider trading involves you being in a position whereby non-public information is misappropriated. Considering I don't work for the retailer I bought mine from, and Morba doesn't from what I've gathered, how can this be the same as insider trading? We were simply in the right place at the right time - nothing illegal at all about that.

I dont look at it any other way than glorified theft

How on earth do you get to that?!?

theft - The act or an instance of stealing

Considering none of us walked out of any shops without having handed over a wad of money, how do you equate that to us having stolen the items we paid for?

By the way, I consider being called a thief on a public forum libellous and defamation of character.

 

[Kreeeee]

Wow... back on topic eh chaps?