@Koos you can't really say that...

Sony and Microsoft had massive different consoles virtual consoles before Nintendo? What are you talking about? Are you high?

@Koos I think that is a legitimate possibility.

I'm perfectly fine being in the minority opinion on a Nintendo-worshiping site. This is not unfamiliar territory.

IR and motion sensors have existed long before the Wii. Taking a technology that already exists and selling more of it doesn't mean anything has been revolutionized.

To answer the question, it briefly changed gaming. It doesn't seem truly revolutionary though because there wasn't enough games to stress the potential it had. I remember being excited about the possibilities that could happen, but the concept was ahead of its time, and Nintendo had used unreliable tech to make it possible.

@alax actually I don't think this site is Nintendo worshiped at all in fact it seems to be quite the opposite

I don't envision the edits before they are written, no.

And so you think it's revolutionary simply because it has more systems? Then PC gaming is super revolutionary because it has a ton of classic games available for download, without being tied to an individual system.

Again you ignore the PC like it magically never existed.

And according to your definition, it doesn't matter who came first. So according to your screwed up logic, time doesn't matter. Even though the Wii was not the first gaming platform to have old games available for download.

@Alex Well, we clearly have very different opinions of what is revolutionary. Since it is evident nothing I say could ever change that, I really don't see any reason to continue trying. I know a hopeless cause when I see one.

The opposite would be this site has a bias against Nintendo.

If you posted half of these comments on a neutral forum, they would catch so much hell.

Yeah I don't see any worshipping or anything religious at all. You do have to wonder though about the mental stability of someone arguing in any gaming forum let alone a Nintendo forum that Wii didn't revolutionize motion gaming.

Heheh.

That's correct, you'll never convince me recycled technology is any sort of revolution.

I look at everything from a scientific perspective. I don't base leaps in technology off of popularity and sales.

PC is not a console. And in fact PC did not offer at the time easy ways to play all the old DOS and Win 3.1 games. You have to use emulators. Wii did it successfully easily on a massive scale. Revolution.

So anyone involved in a debate online = poor mental health.

And anyone not agreeing with a majority = crazy.

I am perfectly comfortable with a person such as yourself questioning my mental health. It's like when my deranged old relatives tell me Obama is a Muslim tearing apart the US from the inside, and then proceed to tell me I know nothing about politics.

Perfect I expected this

So the 3DS is revolutionary too for offering classic games for download on a different system? They do the same thing, but since they are different platforms, they both revolutionized gaming?

If you want to argue that its the same thing then console gaming was never revolutionary. And yeah cellphones aren't either. You had landlines before. Different debate.

[/div]

[/div]

Just trying to make "peace." I should probably try to go and do something more productive.

Yes, Fire Emblem is the ultimate indicator of the industry advances in digital downloads.

That's why he said LIKE alex
Anyway let's get back on topic please