Why is Apple going to be at E3? - Page 2

I wanna play Top Gun DS.



Must be a lot of fun with the stylus.

Ok, they might be fun to play if you are an angst filled teenage girl. Sadly, I am neither a teenage girl nor teenage boy but in the group of 20-something occasional gamer - a group that children's games just don't satisfy.

Even though this is an APPLE forum, I feel it is necessary to address all of this slaming on Nintendo. In a previous post, I read that games like "Nintendogs" and "Animal Crossing" are not good games; however, in the same post a mention of how Nintendo is not for the mass market...right... Nintendogs, animal crossing, and Brain age are among the select few games of all time that have apealed to the mass market. What is the top selling video game of all time? Mario Bros. 1 (Mario 3 is the top selling video game not bundled with a system and Mario is the top selling game series of all time). That's right, a Nintendo game. Most of the hottest game right now are made by Nintendo.

Now, about the design of the DS. I really wish people would not use their own opinions as back up for their arguments. As of right now, The DS has massivly outsold the PSP. Why? Because Nintendo dares to innovate. Sounds like Apple doesn't it. The PSP is basically the same exact thing as all of the other games that we have played for the past 20 years. Nothing new. Speaking of which, I believe I also read that all of Nintendo's games have been sequals or what not. What are the biggest games on PS2 or XBOX (by the way, I sure hope nobody who speaks of the DS as ugly can support the XBOX or the 360, both the ugliest things ever made)? Sequals...Final Fantasy, Halo (or every FPS), GTA...the list goes on.

So back to apple. To answer the thread, the reason Apple is at E3 is for marketing. This is a BIG event, so why not be there. However, before everyone jumps on the video game industry bandwagon...hardcore gamers only constitute a small fraction of the demographics; however, Apple wants to appear as a cool company, and that is why they will appear at E3.

The subject is still relevant because someone suggested the reason for Apple being at E3 was a link up with Nintedo.


That's what I said. The only thing keeping Nintendo alive is that legacy. Those Nintendo games came out over 16 years ago.


I doubt that:

2005 best selling games-
US Console Top Ten 2005 (NPD)
1. Madden NFL 06 (PS2) - 2,900,000
2. Pokemon Emerald (GBA) - 1,700,000
3. Gran Turismo 4 (PS2) - 1,500,000
4. Madden NFL 06 (Xbox) - 1,200,000
5. NCAA Football 06 (PS2) - 1,100,000
6. Star Wars: Battlefront II (PS2) - 1,000,000
7. MVP Baseball 2005 (PS2) - 970,000
8. Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (PS2) - 930,000
9. NBA Live 06 (PS2) - 820,000
10. LEGO Star Wars (PS2) - 800,000

and surprise surprise it's a Pokemon game from Nintendo. IGN has a list of most popular current games and there are about 5-10 Nintendo in the top 100. Guess what they are. You guessed it: Zelda, Mario, Metroid Prime, Harvest Moon in various versions.

Now I'm not saying sequels don't have their place but when you are pushing sequels to games from nearly two decades ago then you lack innovation.


What would you rather they use? The idea that since Nintendo are doing something different they must be better? Different is only better when it works better.


Or maybe Japanese people prefer stupid games and there are far more of them. The UK figures are different:

More than 185,000 PSPs were sold in its first four days in UK shops, say official Chart-Track figures.

Rival handheld, the Nintendo DS, sold 87,000 in its launch week in March.

Statistics don't cover a cultural divide. Remember Apple is a US company.


Well, when you reach a design that works, it's sometimes better to stick to it than change the design for the purposes of hype. Did Apple change the imac, powerbook, ibook, Mini designs for the Intels?


Yeah sequels in their 3rd or so incarnation, not 15th with the exception of Final Fantasy, which is a Nintendo game anyway.


The Xbox 360 isn't too bad. The Xbox and DS are damn ugly.

To be honest, at E3 I would rather see Apple hook up with Sony to offer PSP games from itunes. It would be a shock if they hooked up with M$ to sell Xbox games. Maybe one day itunes will become the new Amazon but with the edge of serving direct media content.

I thought i'd chime in on all this Nintendo bashing....

1. the DS is "new"...its unlike any portable gaming console out there. the PSP is a backwards console with beefier specs. The DS also happens to have a lot of new games that appeal to women, kids, seniors and your average gamer, as opposed to the PSP that ONLY appeals to middle aged geeky men.

2. The DS Lite is very reminicent of Apple design...it reminds me of an iBook. it's lighter, smaller, brighter and has better battery life than the PSP.

3. It has "new" games....sure its got sequels and ports...but it has a lot of new IPs as well. as opposed to ONLY having PS2 ports on the PSP....oh and also, every other game on the DS is not just another racing game like on the PSP.

4. The DS is cheaper, both for consumers and developers.

5. It has a free online Nitwork, courtecy of Nintendo. The PSP does NOT have an online network.

You can complain about "sequels" all you want. Every generation of Mario, Zelda, Metroid and Donkey Kong differ vastly from previous generations....the characters might look the same, but every game has introduced a new control mechanic or interface that everyone else has copied and repackaged eventually. Unlike the sequels on the other consoles, which are essentially different "skins" on the same old game again and again with no innovative titles anywhere in sight...that is, until Nintendo invents it, and they copy it.

Whether it's shoulder buttons, analog control, rumble or wireless.....every other manufacturer has copied those UI elements into their following generation consoles.

You got industry heavyweights like Microsoft and Sony *trying* to play the game now....so what have they improved about gaming ? apart from HD, whats different about the XB360 over the XBox, and the PS3 over the PS2 ? beefier specs ? great....it's like having a G5 and running DOS on it. they arent doing anything with it. theyre so great, and yet they cannot innovate or take risks.....and then you have Nintendo i nthe other corner..... taking chances, making strides and appealing to everyone, wich isnt easy. Sony and M$ are such niche players it's rediculious. And it shows...look at the ROI that Nintendo enjoys, then look at Microsoft...practically paying people to take their console home....and Sony, just barely into the black despite investing so much into beefier specs.

Nintendo is the Apple of the gaming world. it's not about marketshare, or profit, it's about innovating and doing things differently and generating fun for everyone as opposed to the 3G formula(grit, guns and girls) which appeals only to middle-aged-geeky-men. As opposed to riding the coat tails of other company's successes and constantly copying.

Cheers

Yup, it's ugly. No wait, so is the gameboy advance.


LMAO, yeah the only people buying PSPs are middle-aged men. All the 40+ year old men queuing up in the store. Keep dreamin'.


But the ibook looks nice. As for the screen, don't even think you're going to convince me or anyone who knows what Sony's display technology is like that the DS is better on that front.


If the DS was powerful enough, it would have gamecube ports but it's not. It's only powerful enough to handle N64 games. Also, from what I can gather, the PSP has a far better game selection than the DS. People keep saying they only have stereotypical games but from the games listings that's clearly not true. If anything it's true about Nintendo. Yes, you do have more games in the same genre but that's called choice, which the DS does not provide.


Not by much. Games are typically £10 cheaper and the machine is about £50 cheaper. But you can play movies on a PSP, it has a larger and far nicer display and the gaming is far better.

On a PSP, I can blaze through the streets at 200mph and cause millions of dollars worth of damage (and no the DS version of Burnout isn't the same), on a DS I can treat patients' wounds by scrubbing them with the touch display, yay.


Advantage DS.
DS 1 - PSP 457.

But who needs a network? I have real friends. I only play games when I am bored and alone.


Name the innovative titles and their innovation. If you can come up with 5, I'll leave Nintendo alone.


True but we are still talking about two-decade legacy here.


What have Nintendo improved? The PS2 had the dance mat and the eyetoy. Different but they suck IMO just like Nintendo's bongo drums.


Where do your analogies come from? PSP is like running a PS2 in a stylish, powerful portable machine. The DS is like running an N64 on a strange, ugly portable machine.


Wii anyone? Didn't think so. If they appeal to everyone, why is their marketshare so low?


What niche? Nintendo has practically zero market share. Sony has about 65%, Microsoft about 30% and Nintendo 5%. That's the only thing they have in common with Apple - they are niche players.


They spend more money and are willing to make a loss to make the gaming experience better for the user. Nintendo are on such a knife edge, they can't afford to take such risks in case it kills them. Anyway, they make more money on the games to recoup losses over time.

The original DS is ugly, I admit, but all the other gameboys are very nice to me (the mini, DS-lite and advance).

I own a PSP, and never use it - there just are not enough good games. I think that a lot of people bought it expecting more - maybe when Devil May Cry comes out for it I will pick it back up. The PSP graphics are definitely better, though.

Nintendo has 15% market share in consoles, and 64.5% marketshare (advance + ds) in portibles.

Handheld unit sales and market share numbers for 2005

Dean Takahashi, 06:27 PM in Dean Takahashi, Gaming

Nintendo GameBoy Advance 41 percent 4.26 million

Sony PlayStation Portable 35 percent 3.63 million

Nintendo DS 23.5 percent 2.43 million

Source: Mercury News Research


Console unit sales and market share numbers for 2005

Dean Takahashi, 06:32 PM in Dean Takahashi, Gaming

Sony PlayStation 2 5.51 million 55 percent

Microsoft Xbox 2.40 million 24 percent

Nintendo GameCube 1.56 million 15 percent

Microsoft Xbox 360 607,343 6 percent

Source: Mercury News Research

Where did you get the market share numbers??? Last time I checked, Microsoft and Nintendo were very near the same market share. Nintendo is also making a lot of profits...I don't see how that is a bad thing for a company...

It is obvious that there is nothing that can be said that will get you to appreciate Nintendo's innovative ideas. I am nottrying to get you to go out and buy a DS; however, as a gamer you should have nothing against Nintendo. Also, you should support what they are doing. I too love my PS2, and will probably buy a PS3 (once the price drops...noway am I paying $500 for a gaming console). The thing is, right now the gaming industry has become so dull. FPS after FPS. Please, I want something new. That is what Nintendo is trying to do.

Do I believe Nintendo will be able to pull it off? I don't know, but that is not the point. I support them for trying, unlike Microsoft and unlike Sony. Improving graphics is not innovating at all. Why would I want to buy a XBOX360 right now. What advantage does it have? Better graphics...that is it. No innovation. Nothing new. That is why I support Nintendo, and every gamer should support Nintendo. Where would the gaming industry be without Nintendo?

They don't worry about what their competitors are doing, they worry more about improving the industry by innovation. That is very similiar to Apple. That was the point that was made. And if you can not even agree on that, then I feel that any further argument is futile as it would be obvious that your opinion on the subject is far to strong for you to see things objectivly.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/aei/200...e_unit_sa.html

I think that the gamecube must have not sold very well in the last half of the year.

Sorry...I wasn't actually responding to you, I was responding to the 65% Sony, 30% Microsoft, and 5% Nintendo...

Your numbers seem a little more accurate.

The PSP is a great piece of hardware. Anybody who tries to tell you that it's a "backwards console" or "lacks good games" is uninformed or a Nintendo fanboy. (which are the same thing)

The DS is also a very nice system, however, what it lacks is the slickness, in both graphics and physicality, that the PSP has. For every hack the DS has, the PSP has a full-featured solution. Video, internet, all that stuff is available on the PSP without any hassle.

The DS has, however, pioneered a very interesting niche of game control with the touchpad concept. The thing that's too bad is that it's a really broken experience, with an awkward way of playing games and hardware that looks almost comically overstated.

If I buy another console, it's probably going to be a PSP revision. But what I really want to see more than anything is a handheld that's innovative without being unpolished, and polished without being unoriginal.

Damn--I thought it only got nasty when the occassional troll wanders in... But start debating Nintendo and Sony's game consoles, and the gloves really come off!

I own a PSP, do not own any nintendo gear, and still think that the PSP lacks good games.

Marvin,

Between the GameCube, GabeBoy and Nintendo DS...Nintendo has sold more hardware and software than Sony or Microsoft.

And yeah...marketshare doesnt matter to me anyway. if it does to you, ask urself why ur on a Macintosh forum. u might be better offf with Windows if it matters so much to you.

Innovations:
-Shoulder buttons
-analog control
-direction pad
-rumble
-wireless controllers
-3D controls (Mario 64 was the first)
-touch controls


And yes, the NDS Lite is georgous...as opposed to the bulky, button clad, darth-vader design of the PSP. (Thats why the NDS has outsold the PSP in every territory)...and strangely selling to many more demographics than the PSP is.

Games....there are far, far fewer games o nthe PSP....and most of the games that are available are on the PS2 anyway. UMD ? last i checked that format has gone bellyup with every major american studio abandoning it like a disease. Even the iPod has better movie playback options allowing you to hook it upto a television to watch your videos (not to mention the iPod can store hours of it, as opposed to one or two movies).

So yeah...NDS...appealing to women and girls with Nintendogs, animal crossing, causal gamers with things like wario ware, average gamer with Marios, Zelda and Metroid....and seniors with Brain training.

PSP...appealing to middle-aged-geeky-males 18-40ish....who also own the same shyte on the PS2.

And yes, the DS looks a lot better...smaller, lighter, brighter and better battery life than the PSP. if people wanted to play console games on the go they'd get a PSP...but they dont...so they get a NDS. apaprt from your demographic that is.

Oh and strangely enough.... Time magazine, as opposed to your average-super-duper-gamer-review magazine...journal...review...has called Nintendo the Apple of the gaming world (in the latest issue of Time).

Nintendo's a trailblazer in hardware and software.....and everyone else is taking notice as well.

Wii.... caught everyones attention...the point of marketing anything. Nintendo isnt catering it's offering to gaming nerds, cause they know they will buy one anyway, theyre after the larger, untapped non-gamer market. and if that pisses u off and forces you to change to something backwards.... it's your loss and Nintendo laughs all the way to the bank, while being different and innovative.

The strange thing is... almost every crtic and analyst predicted Nintendo's doom when the NDS was announced (just like when the iMac was announced by the way), cause the PSP has *specs* going for it. they reality set in, and the PSP has joined the group of has beens of portable gaming, and the NDS continues to be a chart topper.

With the Wii...it's the opposite.... everyone...and i do mean EVERYONE who has actually used it falls in love with it...not JUST GAMERS.

With the Playstantion and Xbox... they only appeal to such a narrow niche and demographic, which is why....from an economic perspective....it's not the best. it might have a billion-big-a-herts processors, etc...but it's the same old way of playing games.... and i think, people want something more as well (remember now the Wii hasnt abandoned the old way(the way the PS3 and XBox360 play games) of playing games).

So yeah...... this year's E3 will be Nintendo's by far. not because of the number of cores, or the clock rates of their processors...but because of the games. (As opposed to full motion videos purposely conjured up to mislead audiences in an elaborate show of theoretical capabilities of a system that didnt even exist.... the PS3)

Cheers

Nintendo is offering the most unique systems and games out there and their strategy is certainly a different one. Like Apple, they distance themselves from competitors via the experience more then the specs. Have you seen how hyped up critics and columnists on blogs and sites dedicated to gaming have been? There's good reason.

The DS has been quite a success for Nintendo and the lite hopes to improve on it. It's smaller, more durable, has a better screen (more res than a PSP for the spec minded) and offers a library that focuses on varying types of handheld gameplay. Their titles explore more options and are generally more appropriate for the pick up and put down play that is conducive to the environment.

A lot of their titles are invested in much of the same franchise and characterizations, but they are far from a Madden 2006 , updated war-themed FPS, etc. Notice I haven't said those are bad, just framing the convo without vehemently qualifying my individual tastes. My argument is based on market strategy and offerings, not preferences.

The rumored PSP2 might be a step for Sony to learn that market better and try to focus the device more. Having too many options has made the PSP less of a gaming console and more of handheld that you can play games on. I am interested in the PSP since you can hack the hell out of it, but it's still a deviation of the conversation. There are some titles on it that are good and innovative, but not as consistently as Nintendo's games have been.

I like Nintendo's new home system strategy as well but for more reasons than the new interface and the price/performance. Their online strategy seems to be an excellent one... release their library of console games online as well as titles from Sega and the PC engine (Turbografix). Offering gameplay from it's early roots and on will get people playing games beyond current gen. It will also get small developers to get involved and give more options than expensive and time hungry "sure wins" from the bigger publishers. This should fuel further innovation.

I do have to mention that the other next gen offerings from MS and Sony are/will/may do this to, but I suspect at a lesser extent. Geometry Wars (for 360) was an excellent example of a good and successful game while bucking the trend. The Xbox live service is quite good and proven and developments like this are encouraging.

If anything I want the competition because the consumer wins... I just think that Nintendo placed their bets in really good areas.

All I know is that I'll eventually own a Nintendo Wii for playing all classics and new inovative type games with other people(it seems like a social machine) and a ps3 for tekken and gta games as well as kicking my friend's asses.

If Nintendo really is smart with the price EVERYONE will own one and 1 of the 2 next gen machines.

And who know maybe the big N will be able to make it without taking a loss on every machine.

I totally agree with you (seems to happen a lot )


From some of the things I've read on the web the Nintendo Wii will cost around $200, if thats true Nintendo will sell a lot of systems.

I bought the GameCube about a month and half ago and I love it, it has so many 'FUN' games and is my 'new' favorite system of all time

And since the day I bought it I thought that Apple and Nintendo would make a great team, not only would it make a lot of sense but would help both a lot.

Besides XBox has Windows, PlayStation is going to have Linux why shouldn't Nintendo have OSX?

I've been meaning to post a thread of a Nintendo and Apple union maybe I should finally do it?

And added to all that new innovative stuff... ull get to enjoy games from every past Nintendo home console, and it'll still be cheaper than the competition. And it's not like the graphics wont be a lot better either, theyre improving every aspect of the gaming experience, unlike the other 2.

The Gamecube really didn't sell well out of the gates in 2001. The XBox has outsold the Gamecube since the introduction of both units.

As for the Wii, if old game downloads are cheap, that'll be a huge selling point for the system. It will also be the only selling point for me. I'm not looking for a gimmick gamepad design or dumbed down features like 480p support.

That has to be false - as when I looked at market share a year ago both the Xbox and the Gamecube had 20% market share.

I guess great minds really do think alike!

A nintendo apple union would be too awesome, people connecting white Wiis to their imacs, or OSX lite with front row on Wiis in the living room, sharing stuff with macs in the house with bonjour.

Making the Wii a wireless media hub(cuz the mac does the downloading of movies, music etc and air ports it to the Wii) that plays all the classics as well as fun social games...all for 200 dollars and a nice slim living room pofile?

I think my mind just exploded.

Nope, I camped out for both systems since I hadn't made up my mind at the time of release which system I would go for. Both companies sold every single unit they had, but Microsoft had a larger allotment of consoles for their launch.

The Gamecube was also available in Japan 2 months earlier, so that would skewed initial numbers in favor of Nintendo.

It's hilarious to hear someone on an Apple forum slating the little guy who tries to be different because they are little and think different.

Yes, Nintendo, like Apple are the smaller fish in the games market, and just like Apple they are in that position on purpose because they decided to go for idealism over mass-market appeal, and just like Apple they are fantastically successful and wealthy and likely to exist forever with a die-hard core of fans who will buy their products even though they may cost more and have less mass-market support.

Nintendo are the Apple of the games console world. Their machines are more user friendly, their interfaces simpler and with fewer features but intentionally so because they've looked at the market and thought "how many people buy a games console to play mp3s, or watch videos?" - a bit like Apple did with the original iPod, which was slated for not having voice recording or video, and yet somehow became the most popular player in the world.

Neither Nintendo nor Apple try to target the 95th percentile of their market, and neither of them are likely to be the big player any time soon, but for the people who understand what they are trying to do they are a godsend. They will keep existing, quietly innovating in the background without getting credit (analogue joysticks on a gamepad anyone?) while their competitors wait around to see which of their ideas work best and then flog cheaper poorly-conceived knockoffs to the mass market and claim it as an innovation.

So before you slag Nintendo off because they don't roll out generic first person shooters like every other console company, consider carefully what the gaming scene would be like without them. There would probably be no hand held consoles if the Gameboy hadn't come along to demonstrate the market potential. There would probably be no Playstation if the Famicom hadn't paved the way - just as Apple did with the GUI, the laptop, the digital camera, etc.

And all of this nyah-nyah stuff has exactly what to do with Apple being at E3?

For the second time, because people speculated that Apple would link up with Nintendo.

Anyway, I wasn't saying Nintendo are bad because of a low market share. I was saying they have a low market share because they don't meet the consumer demand.

Yes, Apple also have a low market share but that doesn't mean they think alike. Apple have a low market share because they were screwed in the past. Nintendo have a low market share because they are taking the piss.

Apple were among the first on the HD bandwagon making their software products HD ready and introducing H264. Nintendo aren't even offering HD support.

Apple have switched their product line to Intel chips because they want to give consumers the best performance. Nintendo are happy to provide the lowest spec hardware in the gaming market.

Apple are expensive (another reason for low market share) and stylish but Nintendo go for cheap and ugly.

Apple have introduced the ability to use Windows and so meet consumer demand, Nintendo have a lower game selection than the competition and those games mostly cater for children or non-serious gamers.

They are different companies and are in their positions for different reasons.

Here are some reviews from E3:
http://uk.gamespot.com/pages/profile...dnNgxTCo5bMJuQ
http://uk.gamespot.com/pages/profile...ICA7nmer5bMNsg

In summary, Nintendo is cheap but looks crap. PS3 looks good but is expensive. Nintendo = Dell, PS3 = Apple. Sony and Apple have always been more alike IMO.

I probably won't buy the PS3 either for a while but remember this: the PS3 can come down in price but the Wii can't improve in performance.

I see this is one of those debates that isn't going to be settled in a reasonable period of time. The problem is that you are comparing Nintendo with Apple on a cosmetic level rather than looking deeper. It is true that Sony hardware looks nicer, in fact I own a PSP myself and it is indeed gorgeous - unfortunately it is very shallow by comparison to the DS, and this is reflected in the lack of decent or enjoyable games. Most PSP games are direct ports from other consoles, others like Ape Academy are flagrant rip-offs of Nintendo originals (Wario Ware), and not nearly as good as the games they plagiarise.

Nintendo are like Apple because they innovate and are not afraid to go against market trends. They don't do things just because their competitors do them. They are not like Apple because they necessarily share all the same specific ideals, such as stylish industrial design (although they do happen to share the ideal of user-friendliness).

When Apple decided to start making computers look like works of art, the rest of the market still thought it wanted to buy beige boxes - this was an innovation. But Sony making its PSP look pretty is not innovative - mobile phones, PDAs and other personal devices have been going that route for many years. Sony is a trend follower - they see what everybody else is doing and then they do it better, cheaper, more stylishly - whatever. This is not innovation - there isn't a single original idea in the PSP, it's just a amalgam of a bunch of pre-existing technologies and ideas wrapped in a pretty casing.

Nintendo made their console look like an ugly piece of junk, which was arguably a mistake, much like Apple's mistake in not integrating CD burners into its machines earlier, or not including USB 2.0, or leaving out analogue audio in, or any number of other blunders.

But to say that Nintendo is like Dell because they make ugly consoles is to completely miss the point. Nintendo is about one thing only and that is making innovative, fun games. They don't care that their consoles are tacky because their target audience doesn't care.

Nintendo intentionally designed the DS with an interface unlike any other console so that it would not end up with a bunch of crappy ports - it was an attempt to force the developers to innovate, to try something new, and it appears to be working, at least in some cases. There are games on the DS that could not be done on any other console. PSP by comparison is basically just a diminutive PS2, which is great if that's what you want, but it's not exactly thinking different is it?

Nintendo have consistently led the advance of console technology. I mentioned in my previous post that they reinvented the analogue controller as a 'mushroom' stick, which has been copied by every subsequent console. They also set standard for platform games with mario, and then set it again for 3D platformers with mario 64. They constantly invent new game genres and interface ideas, and continue to enjoy success despite nay-sayers who claim that they don't understand the market. And maybe not everything they invent is an immediate success, a bit like the Newton with Apple, but if they weren't out there trying new things then there would be no innovation in the console world at all.

Apple and Nintendo may not make good partners because their actual goals are different, and I don't know that Nintendo would have that much to offer Apple. I do feel however that within their own domains the two companies fill the exact same niche - that of the wise old innovator who is scorned by the flashy newcomers who think they know it all and who have grabbed all the market share, but who actually contribute very little to the advancement of the field, and rely on their ability to copy Apple/Nintendo as their only genuine means of advancement because they are too frightened or too apathetic to risk their own money gambling on a new idea.

so now that E3 is over what exactly DID they do?

|
|
|
\\/

Apple only exihibited behind closed doors - I am not sure what this entails though. I suspect that we won't know because if it was anything significant, there were probably NDAs that were signed.

I think they waited in line to play with a Wii, along with everyone else...

Maybe they showed off some technology they just patented. A touch screen iphone with wifi itunes downloading or some tablet perhaps?

At least we know what Alienware did, those copying sons o' bitches:

http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/05...ware/index.php

Not sure why you would want to copy the imac design though. It's ugly as hell. Yeah, yeah, it's all about looks with me, whatever. I'm an artist and I just appreciate beauty.

Artist Fartist

Are you blind?
Get your head out of your ass and learn something about esthetics.

I could care less if Nintendo produced a system with 10Ghz processor with a million pixels, blah, blah, blah...

I want a system that has good fun games and from what I've seen and read the Wii will have more launch titles then the PS3...

(The PS3 will have about 10 title while the Wii will have more then 10)

Heres a list of some Wii games..

Oh and one more thing I've read the wait times to play Wii demos was about 4 hours long while the PS3 was less the 30 minutes and that it has been reported that there was (in one day) around 1500 to 2000 people in line.

Ya the PS3 really impressed everyone

I used to work with several video game companies designing music for games, and I went to E3 on several occasions. Apple was there every time. In fact, in 2000 it had an entire room full of computers, G4s and iMacs, all networked and with people playing a variety of games on them.

I think it's a no-brainer that Apple would be there this year probably more than ever before, now that software development for Intel-based Macs is a lot easier to bring about than for PPC versions.

If you like the imac design, I have a boyfriend for ya:

http://images.google.co.uk/images?q=...=Search+Images

pfft, esthetics my ass.

The optical drive should be in the base and possibly the hard drive. Then the chinny chin chin contents should go where the optical drive was.


Sure if you like the same games again and again. Like I said, Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Sonic, Super Monkey Ball, WarioWare, Dragon Ball Z, Bomberman and then some silly party games with a handful of popular titles that are even themselves very tired out. That sort of thing doesn't impress me.

What does impress me is flying through cities in a souped up machine and hitting 3 nitros to scrape first place by taking a shortcut through some arches that are just wide enough to fit your car in.

But you don't get Midnight Club for Nintendo consoles.


That's because the PS3 is 8 times faster than the Wii .

I figured that out already and it's talking too.

What was the explanation for dumping the Sunflower? Christ, what an innovative and elegant piece of hardware.

To answer the original question, Apple is there because E3 is the Electronic Entertainment Expo. It's not strictly a video game event, though you'd be hard pressed to know that anymore with the way coverage of the event is.

Exactly. The obvious issue is size but they just need to find a way to detach the monitor from the base.

The base could also be smaller but they could do what I said. The CPU/GPU/ports/Ram could be in the middle of the display at the back and the optical drive and HD could be placed in the base. That would make a footprint smaller than the Mini.

This also separates the parts which are generally user serviceable from the parts which are not so Apple could make the base easily accessible for minor modifications like HD upgrade.

It evenly distributes the size of the display and the base so that neither the base is too big nor are there huge bulges on the display.

Ya just like the hundreds of first person shooters and racing games!


actually there is a GBA version, but Nintendo does have Need For Speed: Most Wanted which looks great.

But like I said there sooooooooo many racing games and versions that it gets boring...


hahahahahahahaha!!!!!

Do you really think that most people care if it's 8 times faster or if most people EVEN notice?

They only care about the games being 'FUN' (the majority, not game geeks)

Sony screwed up (IMO) they made the system to expensive and parent arent going to buy it, especially when both the XBox 360 and Wii will be cheaper and have plenty of great games...

The PS3 will only cater to the same people who spend lots of money on an alienware, etc., which is a small fanbase compared to the average joe.

But thats my opinion...

Btw I used to love the PlayStation and I still have the PS1, but Nintendo has really impressed me so I know where I'm spending my money this year

Yah the only people who are gonna buy the PS3 are the dedicated fanboys who will buy anything PS, even if it sucks (trust me, I know many *shudder*) and the people who want the fastest possable system...even if it doesn't necessarily have all the games they want.

I know if I was between the age of 7-12 when parents usually buy most things for you (and there are lots of people who play video games in that age group) then my parents sure wouldn't drop $600. And most kids don't like to settle for the "bad" version. They would rather go for a $400 360 than a $500 PS3.

And the parents will LOVE the Wii. Cheap, small, simple. Something to appease the wants of their kids without really paying as much as they could have and also keeping them (for the young kids) more safe from the violent games. The only violent one is Resident Evil. Unless you count jumping on turtles heads with a plumber violent.