Isn't the WII a next generation console, cause at lucasarts official website says it will be made by lucasarts personlly for the next Gen. consoles so doesn't that mean PS3,XBOX360 and the WII?

One would think thats what it means, but in this video (http://www.forceunleashed.net/force-unleashed-news/force-unleashed-panel-part-2/) Haden Blackman says the announced platforms are Xbox 360, PS3, PS2, PSP, and DS. And there are various other articles that don't include the Wii.

Well, Wii is not included so far. And obviously PS2 is not a nextgen console, even though it is included.

Wii has too weak hardware - technically it should be compare rather to PS2 than PS3/X360. It's just GameCube with Wiimote and developers don't think about Wii as a next-gen console, rather a toy with good controller, thats wy they releasing for Wii games like Lego SW

Wii has too weak hardware - technically it should be compare rather to PS2 than PS3/X360. It's just GameCube with Wiimote and developers don't think about Wii as a next-gen console, rather a toy with good controller, thats wy they releasing for Wii games like Lego SW


More often, it is heard that the Wii (at bare minimum) has the same power as the original Xbox. The Wii can still produce some very nice (although admittedly non-HD) visuals as can be seen in Super Mario Galaxy

http://i.i.com.com/cnet.g2/images/2007/191/915692_20070711_screen006.jpg)
http://i.i.com.com/cnet.g2/images/2007/066/915692_20070308_screen001.jpg)


With that in mind, if the developers are planning a PS2 version, that build of the game could easily translate to Wii.

I believe that the real reason that The Force will not be Unleashed on Wii with this title is because Lucasarts already has a Wii-remote based game in the works.

I believe that the real reason that The Force will not be Unleashed on Wii with this title is because Lucasarts already has a Wii-remote based game in the works.Unfortunately it turned out that game was Lego SW The Complete Saga. :( Not a new lightsaber game.

http://www.forceunleashed.net/gaming/wii-lightsaber-game-revealed/)

Unfortunately it turned out that game was Lego SW The Complete Sage. :( Not a new lightsaber game.

http://www.forceunleashed.net/gaming/wii-lightsaber-game-revealed/)


>.<

Shiggy needs to call them up and set them straight.

Unfortunately it turned out that game was Lego SW The Complete Sage. :( Not a new lightsaber game.

http://www.forceunleashed.net/gaming/wii-lightsaber-game-revealed/)

Is there any official word on this, or is it just likely conjecture? I couldn't see anything in the source article claiming that this was the game he was talking about.

Is there any official word on this, or is it just likely conjecture? I couldn't see anything in the source article claiming that this was the game he was talking about.Yeah i came to the same conclusion, i really hope that the game they are talking about isn't LSW as it would be a shame. The Wii has a certain uniqueness to it and a proper lightsaber game would be a nice addition for the Wii (think Red Steel but in the confines of Star Wars). A game that utilises the nun-chuk controllers in the vein of lightsaber control would be an awesome addition to the Wii, and will help Nintendos modest little current gen console compete even better with the HD consoles. My point? The Wii needs a strong title in it's aresnal, Zelda is good but the Wii definately needs more distinct titles like that.

Unfortunately it turned out that game was Lego SW The Complete Sage. :( Not a new lightsaber game.

http://www.forceunleashed.net/gaming/wii-lightsaber-game-revealed/)

Well doesn't mean it would be a bad game either. And I do think a lightsaber game will be in the works soon.

And yes if it works on a PS2 it will definitely work on a Wii. We know that if we would call PS2 a next-gen now then next week Atari can be a next-gen too.

I think its assumed that its the game he was talking about because it was confirmed that LEGO SW would have lightsaber controls. So its not confirmed that this is the lightsaber game mentioned, but it is likely.

It isn't because of Wii's hardware that Wii isn't getting Force Unleashed, it's because LucasArts doesn't have that much faith in Nintendo and haven't for quite awhile. Even with Wii's popularity I would think that from LucasArts point of view, it's an audience they can't tap with Force Unleashed. In their view it won't sell well on Wii therefore why bother?

EDIT: Oh and to be blunt, Wii doesn't actually need Force Unleashed, as much as I like to have it on the system, Nintendo is happy with the crowd its captured with Wii Sports and related titles and the people who love Zelda, Metroid, Mario, Smash Bros, etc.

Yeah well I think LucasArts should reconsider those views. Wii is the best selling console right now, so even if the game isn't as appealing to Wii owners as it is to 360 and PS3 owners, one would think it would still sell at least as many copies on Wii as it does on the other consoles. Maybe I'm wrong but thats how I see it.

I think that's the problem, there are many Wii owners, but who are they exactly? The general view is that there's these so called "hardcore" gamers, "casual" gamers and this "other" gamer which Nintendo has recently discovered. I think LucasArts is afraid that the majority of Wii's audience is made up so much of these "other" gamers that the existence of such a title won't matter for them since they're into stuff like Wii Sports. And when you come down to it, graphics to hardcore and casual gamers is worth more than motion sensing controls. It's easier to make a good looking game on the PS3 and Xbox360 than it is to try to create a game that controls well using motion sensing on Wii.

Force Unleashed on the PS3 and Xbox360 is a safe bet for them because it'll look good and it'll play exactly how people expect it to play. LucasArts doesn't have to come up with any wacky Wii controls cause they can just refer back to 20 years of traditional console gaming that they have experience with already.

DS and PSP is also a safe bet cause right now you have more DSs and PSPs owned by people around the world than you do every nextgen console (PS3, Wii and Xbox360) sales combined.

And the PS2 is a safe bet because who doesn't own a PS2 out there?

And the PS2 is a safe bet because who doesn't own a PS2 out there?Me!

But I see what you mean. I think its more them not having faith in the Wii than it being hard to make the controls. Because really all they would need to do is port the PS2 version and make the controls, it can't be that hard because thats what many Wii games consist of.

Yeah, and even if they didn't have very good Wii controls for it, they could always make the game have GCN and Classic Controller options like Dragonball Z Budokai Tenkaichi 2 and Resident Evil 4 Wii Edition.

Yeah well I think LucasArts should reconsider those views. Wii is the best selling console right now, so even if the game isn't as appealing to Wii owners as it is to 360 and PS3 owners, one would think it would still sell at least as many copies on Wii as it does on the other consoles. Maybe I'm wrong but thats how I see it.I can see why the Wii is king in sales, it's because Nintendo have cleverly created a current gen console that is innovative and fun, and more importantly, different. Instead of conforming to the HD era, Nintendo have proudly took an (admittedly risky) stance on creating what would seem to be an 'updated Gamecube', but ultimately have done well taking that risk. PS3 and XBOX 360 (although impressive) are almost alike and there is nothing really setting the two apart (the whole PS3-PSP connectivity thing is cool though). Nintendo will always be console kings, as their machines aren't always the 'best' but are almost certainly different or the most innovative, another example could be with the DS; although being no way near the power of a PSP the DS is again innovative with it's dual screen and stylus touch screen features. Apart from hardware, Nintendo has an aresnal of well loved characters such as Mario, Link & Donkey Kong that Nintendo can rely on to produce killer titles for their consoles.

I can see why the Wii is king in sales, it's because Nintendo have cleverly created a current gen console that is innovative and fun, and more importantly, different. Instead of conforming to the HD era, Nintendo have proudly took an (admittedly risky) stance on creating what would seem to be an 'updated Gamecube', but ultimately have done well taking that risk. PS3 and XBOX 360 (although impressive) are almost alike and there is nothing really setting the two apart
Wii is different, and Nintendo did take a risk with Wii, but not as much of a risk as you might think... and not in the way you think either. The reason Nintendo chose to use boosted lastgen hardware is because it's cheap and if Wii failed it would be no skin off their backs. It was the Wii Remote that ultimately sets Wii apart, the hardware power is the way it is because not even Nintendo though Wii would become the smash hit it is today. If they knew then what they know now, I'm sure the hardware capabilities of Wii would be a lot higher than it is now... I don't think it would've been PS3/Xbox360 levels, but Nintendo woudl've worked more towards giving developers better ability to create games cheaply by putting more efficient and powerful architecture into its machine.

Another thing people should know is that the Wii Remote was originally designed as a GameCube peripheral... and the Nunchuk didn't exist until Retro Studios gave Nintendo their two cents about its development, saying that Metroid Prime 3 Corruption wouldn't work with just the Remote alone.


(the whole PS3-PSP connectivity thing is cool though).
Kinda like how the GCN and GBA connected?...

Nintendo will always be console kings, as their machines aren't always the 'best' but are almost certainly different or the most innovative,
No they haven't, they weren't the kings when it came to the Nintendo 64 and GameCube, sure those two systems were still good and had lots of great games for them, but history tells us that Sony with the Playstation and Playstation 2 were the kings. And the GameCube was far from innovative. It was a "me too" machine and Nintendo wanted to get away from that which is why Wii was created.

Apart from hardware, Nintendo has an aresnal of well loved characters such as Mario, Link & Donkey Kong that Nintendo can rely on to produce killer titles for their consoles.
They may be all great to you and me, but those characters mean nothing to other people.

Wii is different, and Nintendo did take a risk with Wii, but not as much of a risk as you might think... and not in the way you think either. The reason Nintendo chose to use boosted lastgen hardware is because it's cheap and if Wii failed it would be no skin off their backs. It was the Wii Remote that ultimately sets Wii apart, the hardware power is the way it is because not even Nintendo though Wii would become the smash hit it is today. If they knew then what they know now, I'm sure the hardware capabilities of Wii would be a lot higher than it is now... I don't think it would've been PS3/Xbox360 levels, but Nintendo woudl've worked more towards giving developers better ability to create games cheaply by putting more efficient and powerful architecture into its machine.I can see your point there, cheaper design does certainly mean that the company will take a much less of a financial hit if the console fails (luckily it hasn't :) )Another thing people should know is that the Wii Remote was originally designed as a GameCube peripheral... and the Nunchuk didn't exist until Retro Studios gave Nintendo their two cents about its development, saying that Metroid Prime 3 Corruption wouldn't work with just the Remote alone.I know this, that's why i mentioned that the Wii is like an 'updated' Gamecube.Kinda like how the GCN and GBA connected?...Exactly, just on a grander scale ;) (hmmm.... Sony could have been more original, but oh well! :lol: )No they haven't, they weren't the kings when it came to the Nintendo 64 and GameCube, sure those two systems were still good and had lots of great games for them, but history tells us that Sony with the Playstation and Playstation 2 were the kings. And the GameCube was far from innovative. It was a "me too" machine and Nintendo wanted to get away from that which is why Wii was created.I was speaking in general terms. Generally Nintendo have been on top, especially in the retro years and with their handhelds. Don't dismiss the N64 however, it had argueably some of the best games ever created on a games platform (OOT, Star Fox etc.) It was a shame about the Dreamcast aswell, it had the potential to crush both the '64 & PSX but was doomed to failure as it was just too easy to hack or run pirated games on it. The Gamecube was also very good, you give it too less of the credit it deserves. The Gamecube had the potential to atleast compete with the ps2 & XBOX as in my opinion had the power to create better graphic and quality games through the standard definition (examples would be Rogue Squadron 3, Resident Evil (the GC remake), Resident Evil Zero).They may be all great to you and me, but those characters mean nothing to other people.My thoughts exactly, however i think enough people love these memorable characters throughout the world to give Nintendo a large platform to work on in terms of software for their machines.

Exactly, just on a grander scale ;) (hmmm.... Sony could have been more original, but oh well! :lol: )
Yeah... I remember when Sony came out and said "We don't make gimmicks" and then they showed you could use the PSP as a review mirror in a racing game... yeah, not gimmicky at all. But then you talk as if the Wii and DS can't link up at all ;)


I was speaking in general terms. Generally Nintendo have been on top, especially in the retro years and with their handhelds. Don't dismiss the N64 however, it had arguebly some of the best games ever created on a games platform (OOT, Star Fox etc.) It was a shame about the Dreamcast aswell, it had the potential to crush both the '64 & PSX but was doomed to failure as it was just too easy to hack or run pirated games on it.
True, Nintendo has always been the king of handhelds, but that's not generally speaking. Generally speaking, Nintendo's best selling home console was the NES which was unrivaled back in its time. Then when the SNES came along it had to compete heavily with the Genesis/Mega Drive. Those two were neck and neck for quite a while. Yes, Nintendo did "win" in the end but the SNES sold half as many units as it did with the NES. Then the N64 came along and it had to deal with the PS which totally owned it in terms of sales. And yes, the N64 has a lot of great games, I own a lot of them, but the N64 sold half as many units as the SNES and a tiny amount compared to the PS. Then the GameCube which sold half as many as the N64 and a tiny amount compared to the PS2. Again, while the GameCube had great games, a lot of which I own, it was not the king and neither was Nintendo.

Oh and Sega was dying long before the Dreamcast came out, it was inevitable. The Dreamcast was just Sega's last hurrah.

Yeah... I remember when Sony came out and said "We don't make gimmicks" and then they showed you could use the PSP as a review mirror in a racing game... yeah, not gimmicky at all. But then you talk as if the Wii and DS can't link up at all ;)Yeah, I have a Wii, i'll have to get a DS now to try that link up thing (besides it wil be a good time to buy Final Fantasy III, 'bout time that great little gem got updated into 3D!. :DTrue, Nintendo has always been the king of handhelds, but that's not generally speaking. Generally speaking, Nintendo's best selling home console was the NES which was unrivaled back in its time. Then when the SNES came along it had to compete heavily with the Genesis/Mega Drive. Those two were neck and neck for quite a while. Yes, Nintendo did "win" in the end but the SNES sold half as many units as it did with the NES. Then the N64 came along and it had to deal with the PS which totally owned it in terms of sales. And yes, the N64 has a lot of great games, I own a lot of them, but the N64 sold half as many units as the SNES and a tiny amount compared to the PS. Then the GameCube which sold half as many as the N64 and a tiny amount compared to the PS2. Again, while the GameCube had great games, a lot of which I own, it was not the king and neither was Nintendo.I can see your points, it's not like i'm a big Nintendo fan-boy (on the contrary, i've always been into Sony and their Playstation range and have always loved Sega for the likes of the Genesis) but i think that many people underrate Nintendo because they do things differently compared to other competitors, but yes it is sales that represent a consoles stance in a certain 'console war'. I think console become stronger after their death (such as the Dreamcast, with dedicated communities still playing online on the likes of Phantasy Star Online and creating fresh homebrew for the console. There are even new games being published even now for the people who still own one (me being one of those people :) )

Oh and Sega was dying long before the Dreamcast came out, it was inevitable. The Dreamcast was just Sega's last hurrah.:lol: The dreamcast wasn't all too bad, but yes the death of the dreamcast was pretty much the death of Sega (on the console front anyway). It would be best for Sega to stick to what they own in, and are perhaps best known for, Arcade games.

Well in the end LucasArts still doesn't have enough faith in Nintendo because of the crowd the Wii is geared towards, thats why Force Unleashed is not set to release on the Wii.

Well in the end LucasArts still doesn't have enough faith in Nintendo because of the crowd the Wii is geared towards, thats why Force Unleashed is not set to release on the Wii.Yeah, Nintendo does tend to appeal to a younger age so it makes sense for LA to sell the game on a HD platform, as the game would be better recieved (generally) by the gaming crowd.

Huh, I thought Wii was next gen... :( I knew it's graphics engine is not as advanced as the PS3 or Xbox 360 but akin to the PS2!? :yodac: Then that would mean the remote is the only selling point. I can't believe that... :duel:

As for the audience, that would make more sense as to why the Nintendo Wii is not going to get The Force Unleashed... not yet anyway. Other than a potentially bogus retail report and baseless rumors, there is no official word that Lucasarts has even given the Wii any thought other than for the Lego Star Wars games.

Technically the Wii is next gen, but since the graphics aren't HD some people don't group it in the same category as the Xbox 360 and PS3.

Yeah, Nintendo does tend to appeal to a younger age so it makes sense for LA to sell the game on a HD platform, as the game would be better recieved (generally) by the gaming crowd.
Yeah, I'm pretty sick of the whole Nintendo = kiddy notion. Of course Nintendo themselves try to make a lot of their games universally accessable to a wide audience and that is natural perceived as "for kids" because it's "family friendly"... all the cartoony sorta jazz with Mario and friends.... yeah it's an outdated way of thinking but it's not like Nintendo is sticking with that way of thinking. Brain Age and Wii Fit are clear signs that they're taking their general audience stance and updating it to current styles. Of course that "hardcore" gamer audience will never buy into that sort of thing at all but *shrugs*

Though it's funny, I've been playing videogames for a very long time and I play a lot of them over all platforms, but beacuse I'm a fan of Nintendo, I'm told I don't play real games. Go figure.


Huh, I thought Wii was next gen... :( I knew it's graphics engine is not as advanced as the PS3 or Xbox 360 but akin to the PS2!? :yodac: Then that would mean the remote is the only selling point. I can't believe that... :duel:
Don't get ahead of yourself there, the GameCube was way more powerful than the PS2 and could do a lot of things the PS2 couldn't. For example a lot of the things that were in the GameCube version of Resident Evil 4 had to be faked in the PS2 version. Things such as real time fire and heat effects, advanced lighting techniques, etc. It's closer to the general power of the original Xbox, the difference though is that Wii is a more efficient machine than the Xbox which wasn't even designed to be a dedicated gaming machine in the first place. It was a chopped together PC in a pretty black plastic shell, well not that literally but it wasn't designed from the ground up like the Xbox360, PS3, Wii, etc are.

Even so a lot of Wii games don't look all that great at the moment due to developers trying to rush their games to market in time for the big Wii hype... bloody morons.

So yeah, if people are expecting High Definition from Wii, they're gonna be pretty pissed... the best Wii can do is 480p. So of course, it's only natural for most people to be disappointed since what Wii is offering hasn't proven itself to most people. Better graphics every next generation is what people know best.

Hmm, I don't believe the Wii to be next-gen.

I remember a quote by Shigeru Miyamoto, who said that if next-gen means only bigger and better hardware, we would get nowhere. He said that it would end up like all very dangerous dinosaurs, who would finish each other in the end.

And that is why I prefer the Wii over the Xbox 360 and the PS3. The latter two just let you play ordinary games on a TV. Wii does much more than that.

Wii ISN'T "next gen", it's "new gen" but we try not to confuse people with all of these new terms ;)