THE PACK Message Boards

Well I decided that I would put my money into buying a Wii. Not only is it cheaper, but you can ineract wth the controller. That there to me sounds like a winner I hvae been a fan of the Nintendo System since I was a pup and I plan to sapport it. heh you know since it's came out it doesn't sound so funny anymore I haven't gotten my Wii yet, but the plan is to get it by March 2007 if not sooner not later. I went to 7-11 the other day to get a slurpee and I laughed at what I saw.

The flavor I got said StarwberrWii Banana. I was almost on the floor laughing. This is some why to advertise a system alright As far as I'm concerned with the PS3 I will pass. I personally cannot afford such a system atm an prollie not for a good while There were quite a few riots an fights here over that PS3. People were trying to rob the systems clean outta people who had them in their hands already. It's insane.. And they call animals..animals..Well you know what I mean.. I can wiat for the new systems even if i had the funds to buy it I just wouldn't risk getting shot or attacked..not worth it

Getting the Wii is worth it IMO. Cool controler, Zelda, downloadable games (Genisis, N64, SNES, NES, Ect...), and it's cheap. Later on the Wii will be able to use an internet browser, weather channel, and news channel. Over all I pick the Wii. I too have been a nintendo wolf since I was a pup.

I have been a Nintendo supporter since I can remember. I had the original Nintendo system (NES), Super Nintendo, N64, and Gamecube.

I plan to purchase a Wii in the near future. It is the cheapest system of the three and it has such a unique interface. Besides, it has the games I definitely want to purchase like Twilight Princess and Sadness.

I want a Wii!
Playstation lost me for good with the freaky beyond all reason baby commercial.

I may purchase a Playstation III in about five years, once it becomes smaller and with a lower price.

I got a Nintendo Wii on day one (November 19th) and have been enjoying it thoroughly ever since.

Zelda: Twilight Princess is Awesome! ...


...in case anyone has been wondering where I have been lately, most of the time I have either been playing Zelda (nice and slow, with no online hints or strategy guides. ...I don't want it to be over too soon...), or goofing around with Wii-Sports, ExiteTruck and Rayman: Raving Rabbids. (and Altered Beast, Bonk, and Bomberman off the "Virtual Console".)


Speaking of which... if anyone here also has a Wii Console, feel free to PM me and we can exchange "Friend Codes" and Message addresses if you like. ...even though all that would do is let our "Mii"s wander onto each others systems and let us share messages and pictures from the "Photo Channel" right now...


I was actually hoping that the Internet Channel would be up and running on day one so I could post a message from my Wii Console here on the boards to announce my joy...but I guess that was not to be.

I'm thinking of getting a Wii. But I want to wait a while 1st. I still have my eyes on that 60inch Sony HDTV. My current set is a 45inch

Figarou wrote:I'm thinking of getting a Wii. But I want to wait a while 1st. I still have my eyes on that 60inch Sony HDTV. My current set is a 45inch

I only WISH I had the spare cash to buy a good 32+ inch Widescreen HDTV. ...then I could play Zelda in Full View and Progressive Scan.

That's not going to happen any time soon though. I spent all of my "Fun Money" on my Wii Console and games, and I'm going to be hard pressed for cash until after the holidays.

...I might have my first widescreen set by sometime in 2008...maybe...

Vuldari wrote:

Figarou wrote:I'm thinking of getting a Wii. But I want to wait a while 1st. I still have my eyes on that 60inch Sony HDTV. My current set is a 45inch

I only WISH I had the spare cash to buy a good 32+ inch Widescreen HDTV. ...then I could play Zelda in Full View and Progressive Scan.

That's not going to happen any time soon though. I spent all of my "Fun Money" on my Wii Console and games, and I'm going to be hard pressed for cash until after the holidays.

...I might have my first widescreen set by sometime in 2008...maybe...

You may get that widescreen set sooner than you think. LCD and Plasma will soon take over. The tube sets will be marked down for clearance. I think the smallest and cheapest widescreen tube TV is 26inches. Only a few $100. Keep an eye on those...Unless you have your heart set on a LCD or Plasma. (I'd stay away from Plasmas. Its still to pricey.)

Hrrr.... still enjoying my little PSP, as I'm saving for a new pc resp. the parts. However it's very tempting to get the Wii, especially while reading your experience with it... and I feel a strong urge simply to play Zelda, as I've only missed The Wind Walker & Four Swords (never been interested in owning a Gamecube). Related commercials are starting to dig through...

Gnarr.... very VERY tempting indeed.

im an xbox360 man really, i dont have it yet but I plan on it
i would have considered the wii but like i have stated my parent and grandparents would not like me swinging a control around in my little balconaly hanging over my living room

Ehm, no offence Lukas, but isn't what you like slightly more important? After all, I think if you take care you won't fall of the balcony, besides I read the control is quite sensitive, so you don't have to swing it around that much (although seen in different videos and it surely is more fun ;))

However, after an hour reading, watching and... well, drooling I'm determined to get and buy one.


advertisement & zelda > me

My sis and I will spilt the cost, but I also plan on getting a PS3, I'm loyal to both Companies

Figarou wrote:

Vuldari wrote:

Figarou wrote:I'm thinking of getting a Wii. But I want to wait a while 1st. I still have my eyes on that 60inch Sony HDTV. My current set is a 45inch

I only WISH I had the spare cash to buy a good 32+ inch Widescreen HDTV. ...then I could play Zelda in Full View and Progressive Scan.

That's not going to happen any time soon though. I spent all of my "Fun Money" on my Wii Console and games, and I'm going to be hard pressed for cash until after the holidays.

...I might have my first widescreen set by sometime in 2008...maybe...

You may get that widescreen set sooner than you think. LCD and Plasma will soon take over. The tube sets will be marked down for clearance. I think the smallest and cheapest widescreen tube TV is 26inches. Only a few $100. Keep an eye on those...Unless you have your heart set on a LCD or Plasma. (I'd stay away from Plasmas. Its still to pricey.)

I thought I heard somewhere that plasma screens are going to stop being in production within a few years because the technology is flawed, and better, more reliable and cheaper alternatives are coming down the pipeline.

I wish more manufacturers were making good "TUBE" HDTV sets. I am generally not satisfied with the image I see on 80% of the Plasma and LCD sets I see. ...and I HATE projection screens... The Best Pictures I've seen have been on Monster sized CRT Screens that no one makes any more. Most Screens I see now, even the really expensive ones, always have visual glitches that I can see right away, like motion blurr, a sort of sandy, grainy appearance, faded colors, or sometimes I swear the images look out of focus. ...and the only CRT sets still on the shelf are the old, cheap, low quality bargain alternative ones that weigh a ton and no one wants.

I would be very happy with a set that took four adults to move, and was as deep as it was wide if the picture was Awesome and I could afford it...but no one makes them like that any more. It's all about "thinner" now. I can wander through a Best Buy or a Sears Store, look at all the HD set's they have and only see one or two with image quality that I am actually impressed with most of the time. (And those are the ones I could never afford)

That is another reason why I likely won't buy one for a while yet. ...there are just too few ( or none ) within my budget that meet my high standards. I am not going to spend $800 - $2,000 on a machine that I will be frustrated with by the first day.

The Ability for a set to display at 1080p does not impress me if the colors can not appear vibrant without bleeding, black is not "Black", there are digital artifacts on the screen, and I see blurry ghost trails every time someone moves. All I want is a Set that will display my Videogames, TV broadcasts and DVD movies with vibrant colors (minimal bleeding), Dark blacks (but bright image), and as sharp as possible. (I'm totally fine with being able so see the pixels in digital media like DVD's, as long as they are not out of focus). ...strange that so few of even the really expensive TV's seem to be able to do that...

...maybe I just expect too much...


(Gee... how did this suddenly turn into a rant about HDTVs ?)

Miragh wrote:Ehm, no offence Lukas, but isn't what you like slightly more important? After all, I think if you take care you won't fall of the balcony, besides I read the control is quite sensitive, so you don't have to swing it around that much (although seen in different videos and it surely is more fun ;))

However, after an hour reading, watching and... well, drooling I'm determined to get and buy one.


advertisement & zelda > me

yes but im a heavy family child and i dont have my own room like i said im over a balcony and i dont think everyone that comes into my house wants to see me waving a controler around
remember im a family kid, i dont what they want me to do because i belive in listening to your elders

Vuldari wrote:
(Gee... how did this suddenly turn into a rant about HDTVs ?)

heh...you can blame that on me.


I'm having 2nd thoughts about getting that 60inch Sony HDTV. (The set I was looking at is a 60inch rear projection that does 1080p. Its far cheaper than a Plasma thats the same size.) I have to get rid of my older one 1st. And THATS going to be a problem. You see....its a 1st generation HDTV. Meaning there is no DVI or HDMI inputs.. Just Component for 1080i and 480p signals. If the buyer doesn't care for DVI/HDMI, then I should have no problem. If he/she does, then they'll lose interest in it.

There is nothing wrong with my current HDTV. Its just WAY out of date.


I'm going to hold off and enjoy DVD on my current HDTV since its not a dying format. HDDVD and BLU-Ray is still to new.

When I walk into the store and see the new Nintendo game console on the shelf...I'll go ahead and buy it.

LCD rear projection, it's much better and more eficient than plasma, plus you need to regharge plasma every few years and that'll cost ya thousands, and It's ipossible to burn an image into LCD, making it ideal for games

My original plan was to wait until the PS3 drops in price, but as much as I hate to admit it, I'm starting to consider the XBox 360. I still hate Microsoft, but so far the only game I'm interested in for any of the three systems is for the 360. That would be Viva Pinata, but more because it looks cute and novel as opposed to addictive. So I'm still planning to hold out for a while on this one.

Right now the only games I'm really considering are for the PC. I've got my first pick narrowed down to either Neverwinter Nights 2 or Spore.

Fang wrote:LCD rear projection, it's much better and more eficient than plasma, plus you need to regharge plasma every few years and that'll cost ya thousands, and It's ipossible to burn an image into LCD, making it ideal for games

Thats the type of rear projection I was looking at.

LCD is the way to be Sharp, clear, perfect

Fang wrote: LCD rear projection, it's much better and more eficient than plasma, plus you need to regharge plasma every few years and that'll cost ya thousands, and It's ipossible to burn an image into LCD, making it ideal for games

LCD is the way to be Sharp, clear, perfect

None I have ever seen have actually looked that way. ...though I've not been in the market for one either, so I'm sure I've missed some that may look better.

I simply cant stand the image I see on all Rear projection screens. They are a more cost efficient option for getting a larger screen, but they all have viewing angle and picture clarity issues. Again, I've not seen every one on the market, but on the most part, whenever I look at the "High End" ones that supposedly have ultra-sharp high detail 1080i/p displays, the numbers are just hot air to me, because I swear the screens displaying lower resolution on non-projection screens are significantly sharper and clearer.

For people who like to watch movies and sports from across the room, I'm sure that's fine because no one can see the fine details from that distance anyway, but I live in an apartment and generally watch my screen from 4-7 feet away, so if anything is less than perfect on the screen...I notice it.


That's just me of course. ...I'm just venting again because no one seems to make TV's with MY priorities in mind. Projection TV's and Flat-Screens are for people who like having something with impressive technical numbers and sizes to brag about. There are alot of those to choose from.

I just want the sharpest image possible (Like really good PC Monitors), and would prefer an ultrasharp 32-inch screen over any 60-inch screen currently on the market. ...but no one makes those... (At least...I've never been able to find one).

Vuldari wrote:

Fang wrote: LCD rear projection, it's much better and more eficient than plasma, plus you need to regharge plasma every few years and that'll cost ya thousands, and It's ipossible to burn an image into LCD, making it ideal for games

LCD is the way to be Sharp, clear, perfect

None I have ever seen have actually looked that way. ...though I've not been in the market for one either, so I'm sure I've missed some that may look better.

I simply cant stand the image I see on all Rear projection screens. They are a more cost efficient option for getting a larger screen, but they all have viewing angle and picture clarity issues. Again, I've not seen every one on the market, but on the most part, whenever I look at the "High End" ones that supposedly have ultra-sharp high detail 1080i/p displays, the numbers are just hot air to me, because I swear the screens displaying lower resolution on non-projection screens are significantly sharper and clearer.

For people who like to watch movies and sports from across the room, I'm sure that's fine because no one can see the fine details from that distance anyway, but I live in an apartment and generally watch my screen from 4-7 feet away, so if anything is less than perfect on the screen...I notice it.


That's just me of course. ...I'm just venting again because no one seems to make TV's with MY priorities in mind. Projection TV's and Flat-Screens are for people who like having something with impressive technical numbers and sizes to brag about. There are alot of those to choose from.

I just want the sharpest image possible (Like really good PC Monitors), and would prefer an ultrasharp 32-inch screen over any 60-inch screen currently on the market. ...but no one makes those... (At least...I've never been able to find one).

I've seen a few high end HDTVs displaying a bad picture. I was told its not the set. Its the source. I've seen almost all the HDTV's in the store playing the same clip. In order to do that...they use traditional RF. Its kinda hard to run all the TVs using HDMI from one player.

Figarou wrote:I've seen a few high end HDTVs displaying a bad picture. I was told its not the set. Its the source. I've seen almost all the HDTV's in the store playing the same clip. In order to do that...they use traditional RF. Its kinda hard to run all the TVs using HDMI from one player.

Ahhh...but that's just it. I don't own anything that has HDMI outputs. I would be using my TV to view signals coming from Composite, S-Video and Component outputs. LCD TV's don't seem to like anything except signals that are specifically formatted to their native resolutions in pure digital. Otherwise, there is distortion caused by the signal being translated on the fly from analog to digital.

CRT Monitors will display whatever you've got at whatever resolution you need. All these new screens can't do that. They all have to do some kind of signal translation as they upscale or downscale the signal to match the screens native display, which is less than perfect unless the signal and the screen match up exactly. (I can see the difference).

What good is a screen that can display 1080i digital signals with perfect clarity, but distorts everything else (especially analog signals like from Regular Television, VCRs and cheaper DVD players like mine that actually translate the signal to analog before displaying it on your screen) if 99% of what you will be viewing on it will be of non-ideal sources?

Case in Point...the next time you see an HDTV displaying a poor picture in an Electronics store, and the clerk blames the source signal, take a look at how that same signal looks on the traditional Box TVs on display. Does it look grainy and poor like the HD sets do...or does it look perfectly fine?

The Market may disagree with me, but I feel that CRT is a highly under rated technology, and still remains the superior when it comes to versatility and overall image quality potential. High End CRT PC monitors can display the highest, and the widest range of display resolutions of all display options.

...why the hell does no one make 32+ Inch Television versions of those beasts in the same quality as the Home Computer Versions? (everything on the shelf now is marketed as a discount alternative, and are not built to be high quality) They would have to be HUGE, but surely there is a market for such a thing...I mean...I Want One...am I really the only one?



(should we move this conversation to a different thread?)

Vuldari wrote:

Figarou wrote:I've seen a few high end HDTVs displaying a bad picture. I was told its not the set. Its the source. I've seen almost all the HDTV's in the store playing the same clip. In order to do that...they use traditional RF. Its kinda hard to run all the TVs using HDMI from one player.

Ahhh...but that's just it. I don't own anything that has HDMI outputs. I would be using my TV to view signals coming from Composite, S-Video and Component outputs. LCD TV's don't seem to like anything except signals that are specifically formatted to their native resolutions in pure digital. Otherwise, there is distortion caused by the signal being translated on the fly from analog to digital.

CRT Monitors will display whatever you've got at whatever resolution you need. All these new screens can't do that. They all have to do some kind of signal translation as they upscale or downscale the signal to match the screens native display, which is less than perfect unless the signal and the screen match up exactly. (I can see the difference).

What good is a screen that can display 1080i digital signals with perfect clarity, but distorts everything else (especially analog signals like from Regular Television, VCRs and cheaper DVD players like mine that actually translate the signal to analog before displaying it on your screen) if 99% of what you will be viewing on it will be of non-ideal sources?

Case in Point...the next time you see an HDTV displaying a poor picture in an Electronics store, and the clerk blames the source signal, take a look at how that same signal looks on the traditional Box TVs on display. Does it look grainy and poor like the HD sets do...or does it look perfectly fine?

The Market may disagree with me, but I feel that CRT is a highly under rated technology, and still remains the superior when it comes to versatility and overall image quality potential. High End CRT PC monitors can display the highest, and the widest range of display resolutions of all display options.

...why the hell does no one make 32+ Inch Television versions of those beasts in the same quality as the Home Computer Versions? (everything on the shelf now is marketed as a discount alternative, and are not built to be high quality) They would have to be HUGE, but surely there is a market for such a thing...I mean...I Want One...am I really the only one?



(should we move this conversation to a different thread?)

Naa.....this will be my final post about HDTVs.


I see it like this.

When it comes to smaller screens...we don't see the imperfections compared to a bigger screen. Take my Sony PSP for example. When I play an MPEG4 movie on it...it looks perfect. But play that same MPEG4 movie on a bigger screen...the imperfections are easier to see.


Blu-Ray and HD-DVD uses compression. There is always imperfections when something is compressed. (Like pixalization.)

Figarou wrote:I see it like this.

When it comes to smaller screens...we don't see the imperfections compared to a bigger screen. Take my Sony PSP for example. When I play an MPEG4 movie on it...it looks perfect. But play that same MPEG4 movie on a bigger screen...the imperfections are easier to see.


Blu-Ray and HD-DVD uses compression. There is always imperfections when something is compressed. (Like pixalization.)

I'm not just talking 72-inch HDTVs vs 25 inch tubes though...

Compare a 32-inch LCD flat-panel displaying a problematic signal to a 32-inch box CRT showing the same signal. CRTs are far more forgiving of weak, imperfect and analog signals.

Another example of what I am talking about, though slightly different. Digital Cable. When there is any loss in signal strength or any disruptions in the signal, the broadcast becomes often unviewable. I've seen LCD tv's doing this to plain ordinary analog broadcasts in stores. When I am having trouble with my digital cable box at home, I bypass it and watch the straight analog signal, and it is only slightly degraded even when nothing at all shows up through the digital signal, or only brief blips.

People tell me that this new LCD and Plasma Technology is superior with all digital, all the time. But if Digital Cable is an indication of what a pure digital future will be like...I think they are nut's to abandon what already works far more reliably and versitaly in Evolved versions of CRT which can handle analog and digital equally, and in stride.

Just think...if you are looking at a CRT monitor right now, and have not jumped on the "flat panel" bandwagon yet, just look at your monitors maximum resolution capacity. ...thats a heck of a lot higher than 1080, hunh? ...and on a very small screen.


...now if only I could force manufacturers to produce more High End CRTs...


(Okay...I'm done now too...)

-----------------------------------------------------------

I'd love to get a PS3, even if I would just end up playing it on my plain old ordinary Non-Widescreen, non HD TV...but that price is simply outrageous, I don't care that much about Blu-Ray (I still have never seen my DVD's in their full quality potential, and I'm satisfied anyway) and...well...I said the same thing when the PS2 came out.

I can Get a PS2 for peanuts now (well...not quite) and I still don't have one. Unless I come into a great deal of money and enough free time to play games on more than one new console (I have my hands full with the 6 old ones I have as it is), I wouldn't be surprised if the PS4 comes around in 5-years or so and I still don't have any of the first three yet.

...I wonder what the price of a PS3 will be during the holidays (nov-dec) 2007/2008? Will it be more affordable then, ($299.99?) or will it always be a super expensive beast?

If Blu-Ray does not become popular, do you think sony would release a less expensive PS3 console without the Blu-Ray Movie playback in the future?


As for the Wii Console...what more can I say? I can not deny that I am significantly underwhelmed by it's graphical prowess so far (Rogue Leader, a first generation GameCube Game, still looks better than all of the Wii launch titles so far, I think, excluding only some parts of Zelda), but I can also not deny that it is just so much fun to goof around with these controllers and actually play cool games with them.

...I just cant put the thing down. My Wii console is running in the background behind me as I type...I'm going to do a little midnight Zelda session before I go to bed.

Best...Zelda Game...Ever...

There is just so much to do, and 95% of it is fun. (there is the occasional annoying task now and then, but they are few and far between).


FPS games have never been my favorite genre, so the main attractions of both the PS3 and 360 are far less exiting for me as games like Zelda, SmashBros, and yes, Metroid Prime (which is in a First Person perspective, but plays quite differently from a game like Halo, Resistance:F.O.M., or Gears of War.)


In the end, it really isn't about technical specs, or extra hardware features...it's all about the games. Wii, PS3 and 360 are all awesome game platforms. If you are debating which system to buy, always look at the games, and ignore the technical hoo-haa. Buy the system that has the games you want to play the most. That is all that matters.

If you hate Mario and Pikachu and games with simplistic gameplay like WarioWare:Smooth Moves, or Rayman: Raving Rabbids, but you start drooling every time you see footage of Gears of War...as much as I hate to say it...you probably wont be happy with a Wii console. Goofy, different and Fun is what Nintendo is all about.

...for the HardCore, Gritty stuff, you should probably set your sights on Sony or Microsoft's machines instead...

If you ask me though, the PS3 just isn't worth the price or the trouble to get it yet. Your best bet would be to go with a 360 instead. It's already got a solid library of good games, and they are still coming.

...I may just bypass the PS3 and get an X-Box360 myself...eventually... If I can tear myself away from My Nintendo Games long enough to use another console that is...