PixlBit

Haha. It's not the most popular way, I'm sure of that, but I don't derive any enjoyment from playing online with voiceless strangers. I don't mind a local race with friends or family, but I don't care to waste time online playing race after race against strangers.

I like being tasked with a very specific, invariable challenge. If the courses aren't being traveled by AI or human racers and there aren't items in the way, I can run consistent laps and figure out the best possible routes.

Don't get me wrong, I still enjoy the zaniness of multiplayer races, but those don't happen very frequently, so I've grown accustomed to enjoying the single player aspects of the game.

For Mario Kart DS at least, I played in a couple tournaments, which had no crazy rule sets, just general races. Lost to my brother in the local one and placed second in the national tourney. It was all snakers in the top 3 of course, but the degree to which I got beat in the national tourney was astonishing. I beat the game with a 3 star rank and I had beaten every staff ghost in the game by a significant amount (who also snaked in MK DS). This guy made it like it was my first race in the game, he beat me so badly. It was unbelievable. So as I said, even in competition, snaking perfectly is unbelievably important to being the best.

Anyway, I think I've beat the point to death. I think what draws me to snaking and not the new version of boosting, is that the current version of boosting is so much more straightforward and it simply comes down to one variable, which is perfectly racing through the track. Snaking added in the variable of needing to continuously execute the boost, race along a much less defined line and often, breaking the standard boundaries of the course to reach the finish line the fastest.

At the end of the day, it all boils down to preference, and like I said in the editorial, I will mourn its loss, though I know I'm clearly in the minority. Good news, Mario Kart DS still works just fine and I can enjoy it indefinitely.

@Kyle

If he's got world records, that's the only way. That's exactly how I play MKDS - if you're not snaking, you've got problems. Try snaking through some narrow sections of a course or on light bends, it's insanely hard to do effectively while trying to hug the edge to reduce travel distance.

I guess we'll agree to disagree. Snaking requires the same level of perfection for the best possible times. I might not have made this clear, but I play Mario Kart mostly for Time Trials, so every move counts.

I suppose in terms of a competitive race, I can see where that perfection isn't as necessary and Mario Kart DS allows snakers an unfair advantage. But even still, better snaking will likely lead to a better position in the race.

I think you should definitely look into some of the many sleeper titles of the Wii. There's a whole bunch of them that essentially boil down to XBLA games on discs. I too love XBLA and I think it offers an absolute ton of enjoyable, original games. I love the Wii for the exact same reason.

I can agree to disagree though - different strokes, different folks. I think without the Wii this would be a hollow generation devoid of much of the personality past generations have brought. Combine the Wii's offerings with the 360/PS3 and this generation is absolutely stellar, offering titles that range from AAA to cult classics.

1). Do you believe that the majority of gamers do not like change?

I believe most gamers do not like changes in beloved series. I also think that they like what has been proven to work. That's not to say that they never want innovation, but I do think if you were to draw a continuum between innovation and stagnation, it would sit closer to stagnation.

2). If so, do you think the core audience's general dislike of the Wii is proof of this?

I believe that not liking the Wii has partially become a group think issue. It's an easy beating post and the media makes it a point to take digs at it whenever they can. I think gamers as a whole dismissed the Wii because they felt it was inferior. I think this was partly due to the system's lack of power, partially because third parties abandoned the console because they couldn't easily port games to it, and partially because gamers would prefer to play things they are comfortable with on a controller they're comfortable with. I like to play shooters with the Wii set up, but I also don't mind dual analog, or keyboard and mouse. But hardcore Xbox/PlayStation folks will have it no other way than dual analog.

3). Do you think a majority of core gamers express elitism?

I don't think elitism is the right word. I think they are exclusionary. They don't want stuff/people in their club that they don't want in their club - whatever that happens to be. I feel that the gaming media plays a large part in controlling mindshare and can easily mobilize readers to align with their viewpoints.

4). If so, do you think Nintendo's goal of marketing to those who don't normally play video games rubs these people the wrong way?

I don't think Nintendo's marketing is the issue. These people haven't liked Nintendo since the SNES. The Wii may have been the biggest console, but Nintendo's shrinking fandom has been an issue since the N64. They still own the portable market, 3DS problems be damned, but on the consoles, people don't care for what Nintendo's dishing out. That's why the Wii U is a problem for Nintendo. They want the hardcore, but the hardcore doesn't want them. The casuals have moved on to smart phone gaming and Facebook gaming, and all that's left are the hardcore Nintendo fans and a few new acquisitions from the Wii.

Nintendo's a company that can sustain themselves on their own hardware and software. They are a self serving company and always have been - even as far back as the NES. The Wii U's only benefit is that it will be equally/better powered than other consoles, so stuff will be ported there once again. Prepare for another Gamecube generation with the Wii U.

In response to your last comment Esteban, I'd say that a number of quality Wii games were released and subsequently hurt by the game media who I believe are biased against the Wii and have been from the get go. Great games on Wii have gotten a bad rap (see Fragile, Marble Saga Kororinpa, Excitebots, de Blob... and the list goes on from there) and mediocre games (like MadWorld) are praised for appealing to a crowd who didn't want the game anyway.

Having been entrenched in the Nintendo community for a long time, I can pretty confidently say that Nintendo fans enjoyed a vast number of games that were largely overlooked by the media, simply because they were on the Wii and sadly, because they weren't your typical rated M fare that seems to garner the most attention.

As backwards as this is going to sound - game media = worst thing that ever happened to gaming, IMO.

Oh also worth mentioning, the dollar to yen conversion is absolutely killing Japanese business in general. US economy being in the shitter is hurting the global economy, especially places like Japan that relies so heavily on our market.

Well first off, I disagree on the fun part. That's totally subjective. I loved Kirby's Epic Yarn and I'll surely be going back to it again and that's after completing it 100%. I won't bother naming all of the Wii games I've enjoyed (feel free to check my collection), but there have been plenty. And most of those experiences were ones that would've never found a home on either the 360 or the PS3. I think it's fair to say that the Wii just isn't for you. Nothing wrong with that, but it definitely doesn't make it a bad system, nor does it make it of spotty quality. Just a quality that doesn't align with your tastes.

In terms of motion control, Kinect is very much the centerpiece of Microsoft's focus, Move is advertised daily on TV. Obviously they aren't standards because they didn't launch with the system, but clearly that's their focus. The technology is young, for sure, but how else can it mature other than spending more time in the market?

In terms of Nintendo's business model, I'm not sure how 1 bad year in the history of the company means they have a bad model. Furthermore, they only posted a loss for the first half of the year. It was a big loss for sure, but they also didn't release a damn thing. Black Friday and this holiday season has been good for Nintendo, I wouldn't be surprised if they at least broke even at the end of the fiscal year, if not better. Figure that Sony and Microsoft post those same kind of losses or greater every console generation for years on end. You also have to take into account the 3DS launch and the cost associated there, it's a launch year and they are expensive. It's pretty unfair to say a company has a bad business model with 1 bad year on the books among decades of good ones.

Not sure I follow the complaint here. Seems like they are just making what were once cheat codes DLC. Annoying and stupid, for sure, but you seemingly do unlock it right in the game, unless I misunderstood the story. No downloading unless you want to cheat your way through the content.

The memory cards are a sucky thing too. This is just another detractor for me, considering I actually have 2 people in my household RIGHT NOW who play games. Give it a couple more years and I'm sure that will be 3 with my son. I also have a PixlBit general account that I use for other site related purposes that I now won't be able to sync. It's annoying and unnecessary. God only knows why Sony would have such a shortsighted design.

I think you're painting the Wii with a pretty wide brush, Esteban. There's no debating that the Wii has changed gaming forever, as did the DS. Motion controls and touch inputs are now standards in this industry and that's thanks solely to what Nintendo has done with both of their systems.

Bottom line, Nintendo doesn't make the games that the hardcore wants. They won't disagree that Nintendo's games are great, but they are simply not what the market is looking for. Don't get me wrong, Nintendo has far from perfect execution, but I can't say they are any better or worse than Sony and Microsoft. At least Nintendo keeps things interesting and throws all sorts of shit at the wall until something sticks. Sony and Microsoft don't do that and I don't think they are in a sustainable model for a growing market.

Like any business, change and growth is important, and neither Microsoft nor Sony have exhibited an ability to do so. They sell at a loss only to recoup years later, turning a small profit and subsequently dumping that right into R&D of their next system. That's a bad business model.

Nintendo (clearly) understands what makes a good business, though this year it's clear that some of their success caused them to lose sight of the goal. As for the Wii U, I'm excited, but like you said, I think it's a futile attempt.

The fundamental problem is that the casuals are gone and the hardcore doesn't give a shit about Nintendo. Nintendo *thinks* they can grab hold of the hardcore - they can't. The best they can do is prevent their own fans from buying other consoles by offering as much hardcore stuff as possible on the Wii U. That's not a good business model, but it's one that gives Nintendo complete control. As always, they'll bank on the hardware, they'll make the best games, and they'll continue to occupy that niche until their next breakout success.

I know the Wii gets a lot of hate, but I'd say the Wii had the most games I loved over the course of this generation. So many overlooked masterpieces that the hardcore ignore because it's on the Wii or uses motion control. The myopic views of the hardcore make me sick as a true enthusiast of gaming.