The double- edged Wii – Economic Success and Game Quality

[lendelin]

It was the best of systems, it was the worst of systems. The Wii produces unprecedented controversies.

The Wii is undoubtedly THE most successful system of the new generation. Its success explains the way some people have attacked it and the way other have so vigorously defended it. Although its competitors have been doing much better in the last three months, the Wii dominates hardware sales worldwide and particularly in the most important market, the US – most predictions notwithstanding, among them mine. Two years ago I said that the Wii will be a very distant third to the PS3 and Xbox 360. Famous last words!

I content that the economic success of the Wii is a tragedy for game quality and the popularity of games but has also some positive aspects for game development.

The system was marketed and built around a not-so-new control scheme, the motion sensing Wii remote. This control scheme is the only reason for buying the system. After all, no one in his right mind would have paid $250 for a mere slightly enhanced GC in 2006 when the then top-notch GC cost $200 in 2001; and let’s face it, the Wii without the Wii remote is just a super-white shining version of the GC. Five years behind in technology, it can’t hold water to its competitors.

The question is if the new controls compensate for the lack of technology – the system was marketed as such promising innovation through the new controls.

16 months after its release we can certainly say that the new control scheme is an utter disappointment on all fronts. I have been carefully reading reviews of Wii games since its release, and objective observers cannot even remotely come to another conclusion. It was a marketing gimmick, nothing else - and a very successful one.

The controls simply don’t deliver – even measured by lower expectations and disregarding the euphoric sword, baton, and club swinging commercials in 2006.

The motion sensing isn’t refined enough for rich game play. Faster movements are inadequately translated onto the screen. The technological barrier produces necessarily shallow game play. The fun is short and certainly not sweet. It’s not long before boredom sets in. The exemplary role models of Wii Play and Wii Sports are as good as it gets.

1:1 motion sensing is a failure in sword games like Red Steel, Soulcalibur Legends, Dragon Blade, and Twilight Princess, in golf games like Tiger Woods, the list of disappointing games is extremely long. The evaluations range from terrible to at best ‘doesn’t mess up the game.’ Metroid Prime 3 is with standard buttons as good as with the Wii and Nunchuk. The motion sensing doesn’t contribute a thing to game play – it is nothing more than tucked-on little gimmicky game play elements..

Table Tennis should have been the ideal game for the Wii. Because of inaccurate controls the result was a disappointing party game at best while the original game on the 360 with standard button controls is one of the best sports games I have ever played.

The recent ‘No More Heroes’ actually gets praise for its Wii controls. It was a big surprise for sure; but the praise actually points to the failure of the Wii remote. Motion sensing is dramatically reduced and dumbed down. Sword swinging is done by - surprise! - the tried and proved standard buttons. It works well, we have known that for decades. Motion sensing is reduced to up and down flickers and shaking once in a while. Incredibly, some messages can be heard through the speakers on the Wii remote – truly an innovative revolution in game experience (not).

To be sure, the Wii doesn’t prevent good games. No technology does, otherwise I wouldn’t play Bionic Commando, Ninja Gaiden, or In The Hunt every once in a while, and I’ll enjoy Super Paper Mario to no end. The point is that these high quality games developed by Nintendo itself could be on the other systems or on the GC. What makes them great has nothing to do with the new controls. This is exactly the reason why the Wii controls are nothing other than a very successful marketing gimmick.

I very often hear that lamentations about the Wii are futile. In the end, it contributes to a diverse game library. You have your PS3 or 360, and the Wii is not an alternative but a complimentary system. This is absolutely right. However, the danger of the gimmicky Wii controls and image is a simple one - its extraordinary success. The more successful system will be copied.

We already have the six-axis controller which is nothing other than a similar gimmick produced by Sony to counteract the image of the Wii, and these controls made the good Lair a sub-par game. While it is not surprising that shallow games with great images sometimes sell very well, the surprising success of the Wii sets a terrible precedent for the industry. Let’s just hope we won’t get a motion sensing controller for the 360.

There are positive aspects about the Wii for sure, and they have a lot to do with why this system is so successful.

First, the Wii success reminds game designers how important simplicity and shorter challenges in games are, and how important simple controls are. The success of the Wii is a wake-up call for game developers. In the last decade game designers delivered richer game play overall with more complexity, not simplicity. More options, buttons and button combinations galore, controllers got more complex. This trend is certainly a hindrance to casual gamers who want to simply enjoy games or play them more frequently.

Game developers underestimated one of the basic needs of every gamer, the casual ones and frequent ones alike - simplicity and challenge. This is exactly why we enjoy older games, why classic gaming experienced a renaissance in the last ten years, and the success of Xbox Live Arcade and the classic NES games on the Wii. Game development has to go more in the direction of GO and not chess. Simplicity doesn’t mean shallowness. Virtua Tennis showed how simple button controls can produce incredibly rich game play.

Second, almost everyone underestimated the potential of attracting older age groups and women to gaming. Older gamers like me knew from the early arcade times that women can be as passionate about games as men and male teenagers, but women gamers have certainly been neglected during the last twenty years.

It is great that casual gamers and non-gamers are buying consoles and becoming interested in games. The stable gender gap and gaps of age groups have to be closed - something Nintendo did with surprising success. It is high time to make new efforts to explore what game elements are attractive for the other sex and to rethink game design. The more gamers, the better – unless game quality is sacrificed on the altar of sales figures. Myst which got non-gamers interested in games was a great and rich game, games purely built around motion sensing are not.

NOTE: My apologies for the length of this post. I’ve been carrying it around with me like an unborn child. It was a difficult birth.

[swlovinist]

While I think that the Wii controls are not that great, I think that only time will tell if the Wii really is a spash in the Pan. The sad truth is that many people bought it for Wii Sports, which is a prime example of how the controls can work right. If the controls did not work right, there would not be such a demand for the system. What we have going on, is that there are good games on the Wii, outnumbered by some truly lousy stinkers.

[Bojay1997]

I bought a Wii just after launch and don't necessarily regret it, but I do think the motion sensing controls have become more of a hinderance than a positive in a lot of the third party games I have played. Most of the first party games utilize motion control quite well, but to be honest with you, I don't exactly look forward to playing most of them because I'm a bit lazy when I play games, usually after a long day of work and other stuff. If I had kids, the Wii would be a great system for them. As for me, I just don't have the energy and wish they had made the system just a little more powerful so third party developers would develop unique IPs for it that did not involve motion controls. Just my two cents.

[Kid Ice]

IAfter all, no one in his right mind would have paid $250 for a mere slightly enhanced GC in 2006 when the then top-notch GC cost $200 in 2001; and let’s face it, the Wii without the Wii remote is just a super-white shining version of the GC. Five years behind in technology, it can’t hold water to its competitors.

IMO graphics plateaued in 1999 with the Dreamcast. Last night I played Crimson Skies for the first time and thought "wow these graphics are fantastic"...that game's four or five years old? This is why I haven't been moved by the "Wii's just Gamecube 1.5" argument. I haven't seen games with graphics much better than Metroid Prime or Resident Evil 4.

In short:

1982-1987...Huge improvement in console graphics.

1992-1997...Huge improvement in console graphics.

2002-2007...Little improvement in console graphics.

Without the advent of HD I would actually say there's been NO improvement. I was very unimpressed with the 360 until I saw it in HD.

I think Nintendo's goal was to bring gaming out of the teenager's basement and back into the family living room, and they succeeded. Do you feel a loss of ownership? I do. When I'm at the lunch table with my coworkers and they're discussing last night's Wii Sports session, suddenly I'm feeling left out in A CONVERSATION ABOUT VIDEOGAMES.

[CartCollector]

My apologies for the length of this post.

Ah, it's okay. You make a lot of good points, though I will say all this been said before for the DS. A common sentiment back in late '06/early '07 was that "The DS has a bunch of interesting features, and it's defied all predictions and done well. However, it doesn't make full use of its features, and its library is filled with too-short, depthless games." And the Wii inherited this sentiment right around when it became successful.


1982-1987...Huge improvement in console graphics.

1992-1997...Huge improvement in console graphics.

2002-2007...Little improvement in console graphics.


AKA law of diminishing returns. Which is something you'd expect with graphics. The more colors, the less they're noticed; the more pixels, the less they're noticed; the more antialiasing, the less it's noticed. Check out these pictures (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_palettes#List_of_software_palettes) for proof of the first point.

[BHvrd]

Nintendo + Gimmicks = No dice.

Nintendo makes too many promises with "new devices" and doesn't deliver, history shows this.

Instead of getting more DS/Wii cross support and more actual things I have been looking FORWARD TOO, I get "Wii Fit" and MORE AND MORE GIMMICKS. Great more stuff to buy till they bring out the good stuff...

I don't like the way they are going with the Wii, all I see are a bunch of devices that are going to be useless and collect dust. As usual Nintendo needs to focus all it does around the things that have made them successful. Too often they abandon the projects that are suppose to "enhance" the experience and invest in new projects when they haven't even come close to tapping the potential of previous ones.

If i'm going to spend that much on all these "gimmicks" they damn sure better have LOADS of games to back it up! AND I MEAN SOME GOOD STUFF! The only Wii game at the moment that interests me is the Dragon Quest Sword game. It seems like a step in the right direction.

I wouldn't be so negative, but Nintendo always gets me pumped up with their new ideas only to give them half-ass support. My theory is Nintendo uses all these "gimmicks" to help financially support the occasional great game they make "face it they can make some great ones when they really focus".

I'm not buying into all this junk for now though, I got burned by last gen Gameboy Advance/Gamecube connectivity and i'm not looking for a hole to throw my money in. I have become more skeptical with bigN as time goes on.

Good post btw, hope I didn't get too far off topic but I think you bring up some good points and sound relevent to where Nintendo stands as a company.



P.S. They better not screw up the next Animal Crossing and where is a "DECENT <----key word" Wii Pokemon game!......FORGET ALL THIS FOO FOO FLUFFY POO POO. HARDCORE FOO FOO FTW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ok, I may need to go to bed now. ~_^

[mezrabad]

If I understand what the original poster is saying: You're saying that the Wii is an okay console with a few great games and a motion sensing gimmick that drew in non-gamers. You're forgetting the second gimmick: low supply. Whether intentional or not, the fact that it was and remains so difficult to get one certainly contributed to people wanting one.

I, for one, love the Wii on several levels. As a gamer, I'm crazy about Super Mario Galaxy and the Virtual Console (though I've yet to actually buy anything for it, I still like window shopping). As a member of a family, I love playing Sports and Play with my wife and children, not to mention Everybody Votes and Check Mii Out. As a couch potato, I love surfing the internet from my couch; hitting YouTube for instance and watching a pile of GameTrailers.com clips.

So, if you're saying the Wii isn't "winning" because of its library of games, but because of its gimmicks, then I can't disagree with you, but I still love its gimmicks, at least in the games I've been playing (SMG, Sports and Play).

[CartCollector]

BHvrd: At the end there, you remind me of what's-his-name... the one person who was a really successful troll around here until he got banned. What was his name again?

Anyways, I just found this great article (http://lostgarden.com/2005/09/nintendos-genre-innovation-strategy.html) on not just the Wii, but the gaming industry as a whole. Be prepared to think "Why didn't I think of that?" at some of the things in there. Unfortunately, the guy is a bit biased (read: major Nintendo whore) (actually, like quite a few people on this board) and the article was released before the Wii was, so there's no commentary on how good the controls are outside of speculation.

[j_factor]

I don't get why "gimmick" suddenly became an insult when the DS and Wii came around. Guitar Hero is a gimmick, but people don't seem to make snide comments about it. Lots of popular games were gimmicky. That doesn't mean they're not good.

I don't get why some people are so disappointed in the Wii controller. It pretty much works exactly as I expected it to before I ever touched the system. And it can add much to the game experience. For example, I think Ghost Squad is great with the Wiimote, and way better than playing a light gun game with an analog or digital control pad. And I for one wouldn't give a damn about yet another Medal of Honor game, but Heroes 2 sparked my interest specifically because of the controller (well, that and the arcade mode).

[lendelin]

Guitar Hero is a gimmick, but people don't seem to make snide comments about it. Lots of popular games were gimmicky. That doesn't mean they're not good.


If it works, it is not a gimmick. Guitar Hero works and does what it supposed to do, motion sensing doesn't; if Harmonix would have produced not only a couple of games but a hardware system for its games -- at least we could say that the controller works very well.

R.O.B. was a gimmick, but at least the NES wasn't built and marketed around it, and the machine could compete with systems of its generation. The Wii cannot.

[lendelin]

IMO graphics plateaued in 1999 with the Dreamcast. Last night I played Crimson Skies for the first time and thought "wow these graphics are fantastic"...that game's four or five years old? This is why I haven't been moved by the "Wii's just Gamecube 1.5" argument. I haven't seen games with graphics much better than Metroid Prime or Resident Evil 4.

In short:

1982-1987...Huge improvement in console graphics.

1992-1997...Huge improvement in console graphics.

2002-2007...Little improvement in console graphics.

Without the advent of HD I would actually say there's been NO improvement. I was very unimpressed with the 360 until I saw it in HD.

I think Nintendo's goal was to bring gaming out of the teenager's basement and back into the family living room, and they succeeded. Do you feel a loss of ownership? I do. When I'm at the lunch table with my coworkers and they're discussing last night's Wii Sports session, suddenly I'm feeling left out in A CONVERSATION ABOUT VIDEOGAMES.

I don't buy the law of diminishing returns. Certainly the difference of graphics between the 8-bit machines and 16-bit systems were much more dramatic than the jump from the last gen systems to the present ones.

The difference is more than noticeable in graphics, and processing power doesn't affect graphics alone.

The new systems are made for HD, and a couple of days ago I played my admired Gran Turismo 4 again in HD. I was a bit amazed. GT 4 on the PS2 is as good as it gets, it is a great game, but after I played Forza 2 some weeks before I was amazed about the difference in graphics. I played Need for Speed Most Wanted on the Gamecube (admittedly with composite cables on my vacation time in Germany), and then on the 360 at home on my HD set. Dramatic difference, same gameplay, very different game experience.

Processing power also means refinement of physics engines and AI -- the latter a big challenge of game design in the future. The Wii just cannot compete.

BTW, from a hardware standpoint the GC is still my favorite system. Do yourself a favor and buy an HDTV -- lots of GC games play in progressive scan and look gorgeous. (Zelda Collectors edition, and F-Zero GX, just great).

I'm all for bringing consoles back to the living room and making games a more social experience -- but not at the price of gamequality.

[lendelin]

...though I will say all this been said before for the DS. A common sentiment back in late '06/early '07 was that "The DS has a bunch of interesting features, and it's defied all predictions and done well. However, it doesn't make full use of its features, and its library is filled with too-short, depthless games." And the Wii inherited this sentiment right around when it became successful.


Exactly, I was one of the critics who said that the second screen is nothing else than an "innovation image" which sells well. The system has a fantastic game library, but not because of games which make use of the second screen. All Castlevania games could be on a single screen, the second screen is obsolete.

The second screen of the DS is the motion sensing of the Wii. It gives the systems an undeserved innovative image, and it worked and sold systems. The DS was Nintendo's test run for the Wii.

Nintendos strategy is even further entangled with the DS. The success of the handheld systems was the leg Nintendo stood on and with them Nintendo survived the lost console wars. Nintendo made of the Wii a cheap console system with games that have the characteristic of handheld games, family games, and short party games.

Nintendo learned lessons in particular of the Japanese market. I said already in 2006 before the Wii was released that changed leisure time activities and with it the trend to shorter, simpler games make the startegy of Nintendo a smart business decision; the same goes for the potential to penetrate the non-gamer demographic.

However, I thought of the Wii as a niche console, and completely didn't foresee its sucess. The sucess of the Wii is frightening. An outdated system with gimmicky controls that only work half way outsells the 360 2:1 and the PS3 4:1? Frightening.

[lendelin]

So, if you're saying the Wii isn't "winning" because of its library of games, but because of its gimmicks, then I can't disagree with you, but I still love its gimmicks, at least in the games I've been playing (SMG, Sports and Play).

Granted, but the question is if three or four games which are fun for the family justify the price of an outdated console which gets really expensive with the costs of controllers for multiplayer fun.

The discrepancy of the innovation image created by Nintendo's PR department and the actual gameplay irks me to no end. There is nothing innovative about the system nor the controls. This is what makes motion sensing a gimmick. A system designed around half baked controls in order to create an image. It worked.

We'll get Wii fit, too, and probably some people actaully believe that playing games leads to weight loss. Frightening and disillusional.


I, for one, love the Wii on several levels. As a gamer, I'm crazy about Super Mario Galaxy and the Virtual Console (though I've yet to actually buy anything for it, I still like window shopping).

Sure, I'll love Mario Galaxy for sure and will play it, and I like classic games as well...but my point is that this has nothing to do with the new control scheme.

[lendelin]

Anyways, I just found this great article (http://lostgarden.com/2005/09/nintendos-genre-innovation-strategy.html) on not just the Wii, but the gaming industry as a whole. Be prepared to think "Why didn't I think of that?" at some of the things in there. Unfortunately, the guy is a bit biased (read: major Nintendo whore) (actually, like quite a few people on this board) and the article was released before the Wii was, so there's no commentary on how good the controls are outside of speculation.

I agree with the core points of the article. I also believe that game design and genres and consoles go through cycles. The Wii will be important because it influences future game development. Its success cannot be ignored.

The Wii might also be an indicator for reenforced developments similar to the book and movie industry.

Diversification of games from Mass Effect to Wii Sports and penetrating segmented customer groups might become stronger developments than we eexpected. After all, we get Lord of the Rings, and also Talladega Nights, the Adam Sandler and Will Ferrell movies, and movies explicitly made only for certain age groups.

Nintendo went with the Wii the shallowTalladega Nights route. I still have the most respect for Nintendo as a game developer; certainly they have been milking franchises (Mario Party and many others) but for core games it is still one of the few developers which polish their games and do not rush them because of set release dates.

Unfortunately, as a hardware manufacturer Nintendo lost all my respect. The moment Miyamoto, Iwata, and Nintendo's PR departments stressed that gamers are not interested in graphics but only in short innovative games, and the Wii mote is the future of gaming, I felt duped.

It irks me and it is bothersome if a PR department of a track and field club tries to convince me that it is actually an advantage for a sprinter to have only one arm, and sells this as the future of the 100m and 200m dash. This is particularly disturbing after the same club stressed for two decades how important the movement of both arms is in order to achieve good times.

I cannot imagine that I would have bought in 1991 a slightly enhanced version of the NES with an advanced R.O.B., and the Genesis would have been presented as a powerful but nonetheless standard game systems avoiding innovation. Nonsense.

[Icarus Moonsight]

As a long time gamer that owns only a Wii out of the new systems I have some input. First off, why not PS3 or 360? Major factor is price point, cost of ownership (Live subs & $10 premium on new titles) lack of software offerings that appeal to my taste (PS3) and, in the 360's case, reliability issues. The tech-superior consoles are also very close both in game selection and gaming experience brought to the table by the PC (which I partake in). Only the PC does the job better, as it always has, in my 10 year playtime with the platform. So that marginalizes and oft times negates any benefit I can reap from ownership.

Another factor is I'm getting older. As a result, I have less free time to spend playing games then I used to. As a married guy with an extended family I'd rather spend time with them than by myself, thumb-jockeying (though I still do from time to time). My wife will gladly play many older games with me and we have a lot of fun. We partner up to take on some newer games as well (Baldurs Gate DA, Champions of Norrath, Burnout, DOA/Volleyball, Smash Bros. Melee and Zelda Four Swords), but our selections are fewer than on the older systems. It got to a point (2-3 years ago) when I picked up a great game, she would try it, find it too difficult and tell me that it was more fun to watch me play it and ask if I'd take over. Now, that isn't right. We fell out of step with console gaming at that point because it no longer served the purpose of a joint activity.

Christmas 2005, we got into the DS and we were back playing together. It was a handheld though and suffered from it's inherent limitations as such. So we didn't game together at home like we used to (with new(er) games) where we put in more time gaming. We mostly played while waiting in lobbies for appointments, in restaurants - before and after our meal and other out-and-about places when it was convenient. It wasn't a perfect surrogate, but it made due, for awhile.

I've said all that to say this; We bought a Wii to play together again and it worked. There are still some fantastic games (IMO there are more than it gets credited for) that I want and get that she isn't into (No More Heroes, MP3, Zelda and RE4), but there is plenty more titles we can play together and have fun doing so, in the game room (even the living room with said extended family - neat bonus), like we used to. Elebits, Tiger Woods, WarioWare, Monkey Ball, Wii Sports/Play and much more to come. For all it's failings, in our position, the Wii makes much more sense than either a PS3 or 360. Though my wife REALLY wants N3 on 360 and I would like to get MGS4, we want Animal Crossing, SSBB, Mario Kart and Harvest Moon MUCH more. We decided it's just not worth getting a second new system at this time. When we get around to them they will be cheaper, possibly more reliable (RRoD), and we'll have more familiarity with the software we want to go after and I'll be able to pick it up used or from members here. The truth is: I'm not the gamer I used to be and at the same time, I am. It's not paradox, it's change. You got to roll with it. ROFL

I could have saved you all some time and just said, "I like the Wii and I have my reasons." But, it doesn't have the same effect as the longer explanation. :)

[slip81]

to OP:

man, you gotta calm down. Alright fine, you don't like the Wii, but do you really have to go on ad nauseam about how it's just a shitty GCN 2.0 gimmick (wait, you're not Anthony1 are you)?

You're more than entitled to your opinion, everybody is, but there is a point when opinion turns into childish rant, and I think you, with your paragraphs that venture into the double digits, saying basically the same thing you said in the first post, has reached that point.

And anyone who thinks that the success of the Wii will be the downfall of the industry really needs to wake up and smell what they're shoveling. the Wii and it's bad games will not topple the other guys. It doesn't take a genius to figure out why the Wii sells so well, it's cheap and simple. I'm sure if MS and Sony dropped their consoles down to $199 they would fly off the shelves. And really bud, the motion controls work fine when the developer takes the time to make them work.

Yeah, there are plenty of games for the thing with shitty motion detecting, but that isn't Nintendo's fault. This isn't 1983, the market is too strong now to be toppled by one system with more bad games than good.

[Daria]

to OP:
You're more than entitled to your opinion, everybody is, but there is a point when opinion turns into childish rant, and I think you, with your paragraphs that venture into the double digits, saying basically the same thing you said in the first post, has reached that point.



Actually the OP both bashed and defended the Wii. Maybe if you'd read his "childish rant" you'd have caught that point.

I realize Anthony1 was a manaical technophile, but when did having a lot to say (on a forum!) become such a bad thing. I've never been to another message board that harps on long posts as a negative, but it happens regularly here. What also amazes me is that the demographic at DP is made up of much older users. It's not like you guys are children. Slow down, take you time to read the post and if you really can't slosh your way through it then move on. But some of us would like to hear what lendelin has to say.

[Daltone]

NOTE: My apologies for the length of this post. I’ve been carrying it around with me like an unborn child. It was a difficult birth.

Can I adopt it? It's very very rare that I agree with absolutely everything that someone's written.

[djbeatmongrel]

As someone in his early 20's with only a Wii out of the modern gen of consoles and probably a lot more games for it than the normal wii owner i think i can give a different demo graphically view. I personally think the wii has good motion sensing controls, its just dependent on how well the developer applies there respective games. I'll be honest, the only first party games i have played for the wii are metroid prime 3, wii sports, and link's crossbow training but theres a ton of solid 3rd party games already that are improving on the usage of controls and innovative applications. No More Heroes and Zack & Wiki are probably the two best examples so far of non "gimmicky" applications.

I hate to single you out Lendelin but I think people with your mind set are afraid to think outside of whats the norm in modern gaming. And it seems like you expect a onesided vied of how the wiimote is to be used "omg no swords wtfbbq." Really i think of the wii in the same way as the ds, its gonna take time for some reall fleashed out innovation with the control medium but after the first year or so the software really seems to kick ass only this time i think the wii had a much better first year.

Also what is wrong with shorter games? really it seems like the longer games are full of filler no a days to try to extend already lacking game play. Older games, for the most part were a lot more cut and dry and were still fun. from a price stand point i'd say a lot of wii games seem to be priced accordingly overall. its hard to complain about a short $30 title.

Theres nothing wrong with the 360 or ps3 but the wii seems to offer a more accessible experience plus a nice breath of fresh air.

[NinjaJoey23]

I agree with DJ on the quick, fun factor. I have a 360, and I love it. But many 360 games are a huge investment of time, and sometimes I'd like a quick, fun experience. I haven't played Mass Effect yet, and I can't wait, but I know it is an investment. It speaks volumes about Wii Sports that a game with no story and simple, innovative gameplay can be enough to satisfy most Wii owners for quite a while.

I agree that the Wii has failed on one level, and I think Nintendo realizes that, but they seem to have finally started crawling out of the "No good 3rd party support" hole. At the same time, they have a long way to go. The only must-have game on the horizon for me is Brawl, and I could see myself buying a Wii just to play it, whereas on the 360 I bought it with several games in mind. Even though the Wii has partially failed because its marketing was based heavily around the motion controls, it has also succeeded simultaneously in being marketed as a "complementary console."

edit: btw lendelin, I really heart your Megaman avatars.

[Rob2600]

1:1 motion sensing is a failure in sword games like Red Steel, Soulcalibur Legends, Dragon Blade, and Twilight Princess, in golf games like Tiger Woods, the list of disappointing games is extremely long.

The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess received a 9.5 out of 10 overall. Tiger Woods PGA Tour 07 and Tiger Woods PGA Tour 08 both received a 7.3 out of 10 overall. Since when is that disappointing?

Games like Red Steel and Soulcalibur Legends were disappointing because they were bad. Vampire Rain and Pimp My Ride for the Xbox 360 were bad, too. It's not the controller's fault, it's the developer's fault.


Metroid Prime 3 is with standard buttons as good as with the Wii and Nunchuk.

Really? According to IGN's review (http://wii.ign.com/articles/815/815424p1.html):

"Metroid Prime 3's new Wii-enhanced control scheme is so good and so responsive that by comparison the original title and its sequel feel clumsy. In fact, using the nunchuk's analog stick to control Samus through environments as you point the Wii remote to target with speed and accuracy obliterates just about every dual-analog control setup currently available. If there is a game that proves the potential of the Wii remote for first-person experiences, this is it, and our hat is off to Retro for stepping up to the challenge when others couldn't or wouldn't. ... Controls better than any console first-person game before it."

According to Gamespot's review (http://www.gamespot.com/wii/action/metroidprime3/review.html?sid=6177714):

"the Wii controls are terrific and intuitive, so if you hoped that controlling bounty hunter Samus Aran would be a dream, that wish has been granted ... an intuitive and configurable scheme that sets the standard for first-person shooting controls on the Wii"


the question is if three or four games which are fun for the family justify the price of an outdated console

In what way is the Wii outdated? It reads optical discs, outputs very nice high-resolution graphics, and outputs Dolby surround sound. Is it as advanced as the Xbox 360 or the PlayStation 3? No, but as Kid Ice pointed out, "graphics plateaued in 1999 with the Dreamcast. ... I haven't seen games with graphics much better than Metroid Prime or Resident Evil 4. ... Without the advent of HD I would actually say there's been NO improvement."

I wouldn't go quite as far as Kid Ice, but I definitely agree with his overall thought. Graphics have been improving since 1999, but not drastically. Compare Metropolis Street Racer on the Dreamcast to Burnout: Paradise on the PlayStation 3. Yes, of course, there's a difference in graphics, but it's not an amazingly huge difference. Compare Dead or Alive 2 on the Dreamcast to Dead or Alive 4 on the Xbox 360. Again, there is of course a difference in graphics, but - again - not an amazingly huge difference.

Even if some "hard core" gamers insist that the graphics in Dead or Alive 4 are a million times better than the graphics in Dead or Alive 2, "casual" or "mainstream" gamers don't notice a difference. I'm serious, they really don't. To my girlfriend, my family, and my friends, the graphics in good Wii games (Super Mario Galaxy, Resident Evil: The Umbrella Chronicles, Link's Crossbow Training, Zack & Wiki, etc.) look just as good as the graphics in Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3 games.


There is nothing innovative about the system nor the controls. This is what makes motion sensing a gimmick. A system designed around half baked controls in order to create an image. It worked.

I'm glad Nintendo went with motion control. I like it. Do all Wii games use motion control extensively? No...and they shouldn't. Waving my arms back and forth for an hour to swim to different locations in Endless Ocean would be stupid. Thank goodness the developer didn't implement a control scheme like that. However, flicking my wrist to pull ropes, open bottles, and open doors in Zack & Wiki is cool and fun. When the Wii remote is used in subtle and clever ways like that, I'm more connected to the game than if I were just pressing the "A" or "R" buttons all the time.

That said, I still play old games using standard controllers and they're fun and immersive too, but good Wii games pull me in even a little bit more.


We'll get Wii fit, too, and probably some people actaully believe that playing games leads to weight loss. Frightening and disillusional.

Why is that frightening and disillusional? Wii Fit won't turn people into body builders, but I don't think anyone is expecting it to. It will help them get in shape though. I bet playing Wii Fit regularly (and properly) and eating properly would make a big difference in many people's lives.

IGN - The Wii Fit Workout (http://wii.ign.com/articles/850/850936p1.html)

Also:

Yahoo! News - Doctors use Wii games for rehab therapy (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/wiihabilitation_medicine)

"WakeMed Health has been using Wii games at its Raleigh, NC, hospital for patients as young as 9 'all the way up to people in their 80s,' said therapist Elizabeth Penny. 'They're getting improved endurance, strength, coordination. I think it's very entertaining for them.'"

[blue lander]

Let me start by saying I've never actually tried playing a wii, so my impressions could be way off the mark. If I want to play simple, fun pick-up-and-play games and I don't care about graphics, I just fire up the 2600.

I think anybody who says "The wii is obsolete technology" has completely missed the bus. That matters to us, "hardcore" gamers for lack of a better term, but does it matter to somebody whose favorite game is Windows Solitaire or Bejeweled or something? Does it even mean anything to them at all?

Do you think a mom and dad playing Wii Sports with their kids are thinking "Gee, this is fun for the whole family, but I'm afraid we're just enjoying it because it's a gimmick rather than for the in-depth gameplay?" Maybe they're okay with enjoying a game because it's fun to jump around and swing the wiimote at the screen and laugh at their friends doing the same thing, even if the technology isn't perfect or they could get more precise control from a traditional pad. They evaluate a game on whether they have fun playing it or not (sort of like we classic gamers claim to). And these are the exact same people who Nintendo has gone after.

Sure, maybe the wii will only end up with a handful of truly excellent games by the end of its lifetime. How many games do you think the average casual gamer actually has time to play?? The wii to them might just be a fun toy to pull out at parties or on rainy days every once in awhile, not something that they devote their lives/money to and spend hours on message boards arguing about.

A lot of complaints I hear from serious gamers the wii sound like a race car driver complaining about a Station Wagon because it can't win the Indy 500. It was designed for a completely different purpose, one that some of us can't even relate to.

[Rob2600]

A lot of complaints I hear from serious gamers the wii sound like a race car driver complaining about a Station Wagon because it can't win the Indy 500. It was designed for a completely different purpose, one that some of us can't even relate to.

Amen to that and everything else you just wrote.

The Wii is bringing home video gaming back to the point it was at when it started in the 1970s and 1980, where family members would take turns playing games or compete against each other. My family's Atari 2600 was connected to the living room TV and we would all take turns playing games like Breakout, Demon Attack, Warlords, Circus Atari, etc. We'd invite relatives and friends over and have tournaments. It was a lot of fun. My family would also play the NES a lot (Super Mario Bros., Arkanoid, Q*bert, etc.). My friends' parents also got into games like Mike Tyson's Punch-Out!! and R.C. Pro-Am.

For a while in the 1990s and early 2000s, it seems like that wasn't happening. As Kid Ice wrote, "I think Nintendo's goal was to bring gaming out of the teenager's basement and back into the family living room, and they succeeded."

[heybtbm]

Arguing with Nintendo fan-boys is an exercise in futility. I'm surprised so many people here at DP haven't figured that out yet.

I love to rile up the Nintendo Mafia as much as the next guy, but writing these epic 5000 word replies just bolsters their "faith" and eggs them on even more.

[Kid Ice]

Arguing with Nintendo fan-boys is an exercise in futility. I'm surprised so many people here at DP haven't figured that out yet.

I love to rile up the Nintendo Mafia as much as the next guy, but writing these epic 5000 word replies just bolsters their "faith" and eggs them on even more.

Is the problem the "Nintendo Mafia" or the Fanboy Finger Waving Club?

I don't care much for the Wii, and I thought the Gamecube was the biggest waste of time ever produced by Nintendo (well except for the V-Boy). I just disagree with the whole "Wii sucks because it's Gamecube 1.5" philosophy.

The original post, although I disagree with most of it, was well written and thoughtful and so have been most of the replies.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Hmmm ... I need the most concise response possible ... let me see if I can respond to the original post in 5/7/5 Haiku form.

wii is great console
too much shovelware produced
despite that still fun

there you go kids, Wii Haiku for your reading pleasure.

[diskoboy]

I think the only reason the Wii is selling is because of the nostalgia factor. The NES generation is now grown up, and buying consoles for their kids now.

Adults want it because of the Nintendo brand name, and because it's rep as a family friendly console - Nintendo has used the same characters for generations now. Everybody who grew up in the late 80's would recognize them in an instant. Not to mention, it's the cheapest console of the three. But the old adage in the industry is "give away the razors to sell the blades" is a bit off, here. The razors are selling, but the blades they're giving us are dull.

Kids want it because all their friends want or have one, or they wanna play Pokemon. When I gave my 7 year old nephew Super Mario Galaxy or Christmas, he looked at me as if I murdered Santa. When he opened up Pokemon and Lego Star Wars his face lit up again. Kids could care less about Mario or franchises they aren't familiar with.

[Rob2600]

I think the only reason the Wii is selling is because of the nostalgia factor. The NES generation is now grown up, and buying consoles for their kids now.

Adults want it because of the Nintendo brand name, and because it's rep as a family friendly console - Nintendo has used the same characters for generations now. Everybody who grew up in the late 80's would recognize them in an instant. Not to mention, it's the cheapest console of the three.

If that's really the case, then why didn't the GameCube outsell the Xbox or the PlayStation 2? It was made by Nintendo, so - according to you - it had the nostalgia factor, it had Super Mario games, so - according to you - adults should've felt comfortable buying it for their children, it had Pokemon games, so - according to you - children should've gone crazy for it, and it was the cheapest of the three consoles.

Perhaps the main reason the Wii is selling so well is because, like the iPod and the PlayStation, it has that mysterious "cool" factor.

[CartCollector]

I thought the Gamecube was the biggest waste of time ever produced by Nintendo

A very true quote. How much time have I wasted with my friends playing Super Smash Bros. Melee and Pac-Man Vs.? Far too much. At least it's some of the best gaming out there.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

For what it's worth, Nintendo sure as hell makes it easy for people TO BE critical of their console efforts.

Sure, with their position in the handheld marketplace in the US, it was what they gave ya' or NOTHIN for about 10+ years ...

... but with the other Consoles/Developers/Choices out there, and the successes the others are having with both third party software developers being on-board in a big way with exclusives, consistent above-average third-party releases, success on the online-gaming front, quality original downloadable exclusive software, multimedia options ...

... it's pretty darned easy not only for non-Wii owners but also people who have had one since launch (myself included) to go ... "WHAT the HELL Nintendo!!??" on a pretty regular basis over any number of decisions.

But, out of fairness, I've been doing that since the N64 in response to most of their decision making processes at the retail marketplace.

[Rob2600]

Nintendo sure as hell makes it easy for people TO BE critical of their console efforts.

Microsoft doesn't? The whole red-ring-of-death debacle...

Sony doesn't? $600 price tag...no rumble...ports that run at half the frame rate...releasing upgraded machines every three months...

"Hey, I just bought the PlayStation 3!"

"Cool, which one?"

Which one? Come on. The beauty of a home video game console is that everyone has identical hardware, which usually lasts about five or six years. It's supposed to be cheap and simple. If I wanted to pay $600 for a machine, only to have the company bring out an upgraded version every three months, I'd buy a Dell computer.

Am I too old fashioned?

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Microsoft doesn't? The whole red-ring-of-death debacle...

Sony doesn't? $600 price tag...no rumble...ports run at half the frame rate...releasing upgraded versions of its machine every three months...

"Hey, I just bought the PlayStation 3!"

"Cool, which one?"

Which one? Come on. The beauty of a home video game console is that everyone has identical hardware, which usually lasts about five or six years. It's simple. If I wanted to pay $600 for a machine, only to have the company bring out an upgraded version every three months, I'd buy a Dell.

Am I too old fashioned?

Sure Microsoft and Sony also make mistakes...

...every console developer makes mistakes...

Nintendo just seems to have a knack for doing things that cause for huge, massive question marks to pop up over my head on a pretty regular basis ... where MS and Sony get more ... I don't know, squiggly heat lines from frustration ...

... Nintendo's consistent inability to move with standardized hardware trends - most notably frustrating being moving to the CD/DVD format in a timely fashion, and their outwardly xenophobic online "friend coding" (which nearly defeats the purpose of having "online communities" when everybody is relegated to a non-memorizable, non-customizable NUMBER) ... when comparing the way that Nintendo has handled their own approaches to those (amongst other) things to both of their main competitors (who have both been major successes in both fields of taking advantage of disc-based hardware as well as online gameplay) well, it often makes me do just what I said I've done since the N64 era.

Go "WHAT the HELL Nintendo!!??"

But, again, when discussing anything related to Nintendo, one needs to take into account that any amount of success/failure in any area of gaming will be staunchly defended by obsessively faithful Nintendo loyalists.

To those who are in that camp - if Nintendo didn't want to move to discs at the time that they did, it was a good move. If they never did, it would have been a good move. It was a good move that they used a proprietary disc-based media with smaller storage size on the Gamecube, and a good move that the Wii uses DVD media, but doesn't play DVD video or music CD's.

All good, defend-able decisions, and no amount of quantifiable successes from any other company in the global market is evidence against that.

Now ... don't get me wrong ... I love my Wii (not so much the selection of software in the market, but the hardware - it's nice.) and there is little about the Wii that I think is "wrong" that couldn't be solved with a bit of firmware tweaking (Get online ramped up some more, change the way that online ID and "friend making" handled, add online components to the classic emulated software on the Wii Virtual Console, and give the thing some external HDD support, and you've got a system that IS in fact comparable to the 360 and the PS3 ... but, I doubt Nintendo will do any of those things ... because they simply have never and will never listen to their critics, especially when their critics are their biggest fans! *Yes, yes, thank you, late 90's with the Gameboy line ... but still searching for an instance on console hardware.*)

[neuropolitique]

More of the same lendelin. You've been on this track since at least Jan 07 and before foretelling the demise of Nintendo. Maybe you could just try to enjoy games for once?

Myself, I'm not sure where I stand on the Wii yet. Mario Galaxy was fantastic, but it's the only game of the four I have I can say that about. Paper Mario is ok, but I can't seem to get into it. Wii play hasn't been in since the day I got it. Wii Sports is good, but how much of that can I play? I'm hoping things improve now that it has a huge install base, but for now I see myself buying one game this year, Brawl.

And to keep things fair, I have about as many 360 games so far. This generation in general is leaving me feeling Meh.

[neuropolitique]

... because they simply have never and will never listen to their critics, especially when their critics are their biggest fans!)


It was nearly completely through the outcry of the gaming public (transmitted through voices -and the wallets of retailers) that Nintendo was ENCOURAGED to keep the GameBoy line alive, and in turn encourage 3rd party developers to continue to support an aging, technically limited system.

Just curious, which is it?

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Just curious, which is it?

Ah, touche mon petit fromage.

Okay. In the case of the Gameboy, they wanted to scrap it, but due to the massive amount of demand from retailers and consumers, they kept the line alive (un-altered hardware-wise for the next few years, but alive nonetheless).

I wish I could think of an instance over the past three console cycles where people have been critical of their decisions and they've gone back and re-thought/re-formatted anything mid-cycle at all based on public outcry, where we've clearly seen that to SOME degree from Sega, MS and Sony.

I mean, look at the great hardware revisions that Nintendo gives us with their handhelds (GBP<GBC<GBA<GBASP<DS<DS Lite) ... why can't they stop, look, listen and adjust with their consoles in the same fashion?

[diskoboy]

If that's really the case, then why didn't the GameCube outsell the Xbox or the PlayStation 2? It was made by Nintendo, so - according to you - it had the nostalgia factor, it had Super Mario games, so - according to you - adults should've felt comfortable buying it for their children, it had Pokemon games, so - according to you - children should've gone crazy for it, and it was the cheapest of the three consoles.

Perhaps the main reason the Wii is selling so well is because, like the iPod and the PlayStation, it has that mysterious "cool" factor.

Because Nintendo stuck with the kiddie motif during the Gamecube era. The Gamecube (and now the DS and Wii) were a dumping ground for Nickelodeon\Disney\Cartoon Network shovelware. As a 33 year old, it's just hard to take the Wii seriously. There was a new Mario Kart or Naruto game every 6 weeks, it seemed. Plus there were no NEW IP's to speak of. Eternal Darkness and Pikmin - maybe. But that's about it.

What I meant was Adults are now looking at the Wii through the rose-tinted glasses of childhood. For a few bucks, you can go and download all those NES/SNES/Genesis games you loved as a kid, and maybe they'll make a new Metroid, Zelda, or Mario to keep the cycle going.

If you ask me, Nintendo is slowly becoming the Disney of the gaming industry.

[djbeatmongrel]

you forgot chibi robo and animal crossing, they were also new IPs

[blissfulnoise]

Excellent original post. In 100% agreement. Well, nearly 100%... Talladega Nights is a damn funny movie.

Where people get off track in lendelin's argument, what I perceive it to be anyway, isn't so much a bashing of the console. But a bashing of the technology. And it's well deserved because, frankly, it's faulty.

The decision to use RF and Accelerometers was an incredibly poor one. And don't tell me it's the cost. Nintendo makes money off of each Wii sold; an exclusive attribute in this generation.

The Sixaxis offers an infinitely superior motion control experience due to the tech applied. And if, as a company, you were putting all of your eggs into this proverbial basket, you'd think they'd have made the effort to focus R&D into your systems main selling point.

I made a big deal in my mini-review of No More Heroes that it was the first game I've played to incorporate the motion control gimmick nearly flawlessly; its unobtrusive, engaging, clever, and, most important, creative. Most so in Japan where the "sword-charge" motion actually has you mimicking something else. But its not the core component of the game play.

Take a look at a game like WarioWare where the core game component does exclusively rely on the motion controls. Several of the mini-games are extremely difficult to complete due to the faulty nature of the controls. Others are nearly broken. WarioWare should have been a showcase for what the Wii was capable of. Instead it had the direct opposite effect and showcased every flaw in the mechanic.

When I play a particularly intensive motion sensitive Wii game (of which, there are not many), I have to ensure that there are no reflective surfaces in the path between the TV (sensor bar) and myself. I also have to dampen any direct light sources. When I play flOw or Warhawk, I focus on having a good time, regardless of surroundings.

So, in response to this, most Wii (not necessarily Nintendo) fans will point to the games popularity and success of a handful of games: Metroid (I totally disagree with IGNs review), Zelda, Wii Sports, et all. I think this is a bit of a red herring and I'll try to filet the fish...

Let's start with sales. Yes, the Wii is moving systems at a nearly unprecedented rate (I say nearly due to their success with the DS) but what about the larger picture? The global attach rate is 3.6 games per console. This takes into account that Wii Sports is not bundled with the system into Japan and that the game has a nearly 1:1 attach rate there. Wii Play is also sitting a nearly 1:1 attach rate both there and here. This doesn't leave room for many 3rd party titles and the trend suggests that people are only interested in 1st party games. The Gamecube suffered a similiar fate, however, the install base wasn't nearly as large. What does this mean? That, should the trend continue, the Wii will see some interesting one-off unique, quirky, or otherwise interesting titles in the 3rd party scene but not much else. Also, Nintendo will make a boat load of cash.

So, sure, Nintendo's strategy of appealing to non-gamers is working, at least superficially. But what we're learning is that non-gamers don't really like to game. And so long as the Wii is a game system (and I'm pretty sure it is), that has to count as a failure in principle (though not in Nintendo's pocketbook).

Regarding the games, and let’s be clear that this is the most important factor, yes, there are some great games for the Wii. Endless Ocean is a breath of fresh air on retail shelves. (Though not as unique as its made out to be. See: Aquanauts Holiday, Everblue.) No More Heroes is essential gaming. Super Mario Galaxy is very entertaining (though I seriously thought that Sunshine was the better game). Super Paper Mario is a fine and fun time (though clearly a Gamecube game). Twilight Princess is much the same way and shows that Zelda is getting a little long in the tooth. And the Virtual Console offers some fantastic gaming even if the return on investment is a bit high.

We all know that the Wii will deliver some very high quality gaming. So much so that gamers would be remiss not to get one to experience it. But that high quality will crux on the motion controls that set the system apart. My guess is that most games will steer clear of it and focus on traditional content. This is what makes the DS so successful over the technically superior PSP. Some of the best games on the system don't use the touch functionality at all, or if they do, only in a superficial way. It's all about content and Nintendo is set to deliver as well as (if not better) than anyone else.

As far as "Next Generation" goes, I'm not much of a graphics guy, some of my favorite games highly style and originality over technical prowess and this is well documented on the forums. But there are some games on the system that look abysmal in context of modern games (Metroid, I'm looking at you); so much so that it detracts from the game-play experience. This reiterates that if the Wii is looking to plant a stake in the ground with gamers, they're going to have to do it through gameplay.

I own 9 Wii Games. Of them, I've played 4 for more than a few hours. But, that said, I own zero physical games for the PS3 so read into that what you will.

For all my gripes about the Wii, I'll say again that I think it's an essential system for gamers. Just like the 360 and just like the PS3. I know not everyone can own all three, especially with the price points (and let's face it, $250 isn't "cheap" or a casual purchase for most of America) and that's probably where a lot of these stupid arguments come in. People who don't have (or can't afford) to own all three consoles feel as though they're backing something and take offense at criticism levied against their metaphorical horse. I understand the sentiment but blind obedience to a brand because of how you voted your dollars is pretty dumb.

All three current consoles have their strengths. It's just the Wii's strength isn't where people expected it to be (controls). Instead, its in the place that all Nintendo consoles strength lay; in the first party games.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

What Blissfulnoise said.

I've always been of the position that one can be both a supporter AND a critic of something. In fact, I think that it's most important for supporters TO be critical of small failings or find areas for improvement in any thing that anybody is passionate about.

That's how the learning process works most effectively. If you're a student of any art, (Nintendo being the student in this scenario) personal breakthroughs come at a certain speed, but if you listen not only to what your teacher says, but also your critics and your peers, you'll move more quickly towards the next level of quality/learnedness towards perfection (though, perfection is almost never realistically attainable anyway).

I've always been a supporter of what Nintendo has done in the marketplace, however, any time I provide a criticism, which in most every case is meant to be a provision of advice, and not a personal attack, I'm usually publicly stoned by the more ... "blindly patriotic" of the Nintendo faithful.

[blissfulnoise]

Eternal Darkness and Pikmin - maybe. But that's about it.

Crystal Chronicles, Cubivore, Killer7, Odama, Donkey Kong Jungle Beat, Metroid Prime (so different, it revitalized the franchise), and Baten Kaitos were other new, successful IPs.

Animal Crossing, however, wasn't a new IP. It was Animal Forest 1.5. Though it was new to the US.

[Kid Ice]

A very true quote. How much time have I wasted with my friends playing Super Smash Bros. Melee and Pac-Man Vs.? Far too much. At least it's some of the best gaming out there.

I knew the way I worded that was going to come back to haunt me. ;-)

True it is a great multiplayer console.


If you ask me, Nintendo is slowly becoming the Disney of the gaming industry.

In a poll a couple years ago it was found that more children worldwide recognized Mario than Mickey Mouse.

[lendelin]

As a long time gamer that owns only a Wii out of the new systems I have some input. First off, why not PS3 or 360? Major factor is price point, cost of ownership (Live subs & $10 premium on new titles) lack of software offerings that appeal to my taste (PS3) and, in the 360's case, reliability issues. The tech-superior consoles are also very close both in game selection and gaming experience brought to the table by the PC (which I partake in). Only the PC does the job better, as it always has, in my 10 year playtime with the platform. So that marginalizes and oft times negates any benefit I can reap from ownership.

Another factor is I'm getting older. As a result, I have less free time to spend playing games then I used to. As a married guy with an extended family I'd rather spend time with them than by myself, thumb-jockeying (though I still do from time to time). My wife will gladly play many older games with me and we have a lot of fun. We partner up to take on some newer games as well (Baldurs Gate DA, Champions of Norrath, Burnout, DOA/Volleyball, Smash Bros. Melee and Zelda Four Swords), but our selections are fewer than on the older systems. It got to a point (2-3 years ago) when I picked up a great game, she would try it, find it too difficult and tell me that it was more fun to watch me play it and ask if I'd take over. Now, that isn't right. We fell out of step with console gaming at that point because it no longer served the purpose of a joint activity.

Christmas 2005, we got into the DS and we were back playing together. It was a handheld though and suffered from it's inherent limitations as such. So we didn't game together at home like we used to (with new(er) games) where we put in more time gaming. We mostly played while waiting in lobbies for appointments, in restaurants - before and after our meal and other out-and-about places when it was convenient. It wasn't a perfect surrogate, but it made due, for awhile.

I've said all that to say this; We bought a Wii to play together again and it worked. There are still some fantastic games (IMO there are more than it gets credited for) that I want and get that she isn't into (No More Heroes, MP3, Zelda and RE4), but there is plenty more titles we can play together and have fun doing so, in the game room (even the living room with said extended family - neat bonus), like we used to. Elebits, Tiger Woods, WarioWare, Monkey Ball, Wii Sports/Play and much more to come. For all it's failings, in our position, the Wii makes much more sense than either a PS3 or 360. Though my wife REALLY wants N3 on 360 and I would like to get MGS4, we want Animal Crossing, SSBB, Mario Kart and Harvest Moon MUCH more. We decided it's just not worth getting a second new system at this time. When we get around to them they will be cheaper, possibly more reliable (RRoD), and we'll have more familiarity with the software we want to go after and I'll be able to pick it up used or from members here. The truth is: I'm not the gamer I used to be and at the same time, I am. It's not paradox, it's change. You got to roll with it. ROFL

I completely agree. Your situation and the reasons you gave why the Wii is attractive for you makes very clear why the Wii is a success. Gamers like you were neglected, and family oriented games became a niche. Nintendo emphasized multiplayer games for the family, and it was successful. With increased living standards the families became smaller and the houses became bigger with multiple TVs. The result is that peer groups play together, not the family.

However, my criticism about the the Wii still stands. Family games yes, but imprecise motion controls which was marketed as innovation and don't deliver, no.

I admit, however, that they do deliver for to acertain degree for short party and family games with not too much in-depth gameplay. No more Hereos, Zelda, RE 4 are good games but not of the motion controls which was according to N the justification for a lack of power. If the new controls don't work what's left is a clearly underpowered system compared to its competitors.


I could have saved you all some time and just said, "I like the Wii and I have my reasons." But, it doesn't have the same effect as the longer explanation. :)

Great that you elaborated about your incentives to play the Wii. I'm not interested in short judgement calls, I'm only interested in reasoning. :)

[Rob2600]

my criticism about the the Wii still stands. Family games yes, but imprecise motion controls which was marketed as innovation and don't deliver, no. ...

No more Hereos, Zelda, RE 4 are good games but not of the motion controls which was according to N the justification for a lack of power. If the new controls don't work what's left is a clearly underpowered system compared to its competitors.

Why do you keep insisting the controls in Twilight Princess, No More Heroes, and Resident Evil 4 don't work?

[lendelin]

to OP:

man, you gotta calm down.

I'm very calm.



You're more than entitled to your opinion, everybody is,...

My experience: People who stress this obvious fact are tempted to suppress dissenting opinions.


...but there is a point when opinion turns into childish rant,...

see above. I hope not, I'm 50.


And anyone who thinks that the success of the Wii will be the downfall of the industry really needs to wake up and smell what they're shoveling.

If someone says this he deserved the 'idiot of the year medal.' Note: Instead giving me generously the right to my own opinion you should actually read it. Don't reason gainst something which was never said, otherwise you turn into Don Quixote fighting against windmills.


Yeah, there are plenty of games for the thing with shitty motion detecting, but that isn't Nintendo's fault.

No? They are responsible for the hardware...and as a developer, do you think the sword slashing in Zelda works well? Do you think the tennis game in Wii Sports and the little mini games in Wii Play allow for refined ball control or is the motion sensing dumbed down to the basics becasue the translation of movements onto the screen are imprecise?


This isn't 1983, the market is too strong now to be toppled by one system with more bad games than good.

What an insight. Again: Don't play Don Quixote. I think I could explain much better than you why 2008 isn't 1983. It's the extreme opposite.

[lendelin]

...are improving on the usage of controls and innovative applications. No More Heroes and Zack & Wiki are probably the two best examples so far of non "gimmicky" applications.

If you mean with innovation to use the Wii remote as a flashlight like in Super Paper Mario, or shake it once in awhile with no meaningful gameplay, or open a door by pointing the remote, and many other applications, I wholeheartidly disagree.

I don't know about Zack and Wicki, but I stressed that the motion controls in No MOre Heroes is reduced and dumbed down to such a degree that it truly deserves the label 'tucked add-on.'

The developers were smart enough to ignore the motion controls for essential gameplay and use standard buttons for sword slashing. Thank goodness because No More Heroes is a playful, quirky, well designed game that deserves much better than the Wii motion sensing. Again, it is a great game, but not because of the new controls. It would be a good game on the Cube and on every last generation and present generation system. I'm glad it was released in America.


Also what is wrong with shorter games?

Absolutely nothing. On the contrary, I stressed the demand for and the necessity of them.

[lendelin]

More of the same lendelin. You've been on this track since at least Jan 07 and before foretelling the demise of Nintendo.

Even if this were true I certainly dont "foretell the demise of Nintendo." I stressed the economic success and criticized the motion controls which were the main reason to justify technological power of 2001 for a $250 system in 2006.

In the past I stressed that N is in a very difficult situation in the console business, and that the decision for the Wii was a smart business decision. The latter opened the door to survive. However, I thought with many others that the Wii would be a niche console and a very distant third to its competitors. The latter is hardly foretelling the "demise" of Nintendo.




Maybe you could just try to enjoy games for once?

Cheap nonsensensical response. I do, that's why I'm critical of them. I love good games. But that doesn't mean that my brain shuts down when I'm playing.


Myself, I'm not sure where I stand on the Wii yet. Mario Galaxy was fantastic, but it's the only game of the four I have I can say that about. Paper Mario is ok, but I can't seem to get into it. Wii play hasn't been in since the day I got it. Wii Sports is good, but how much of that can I play? I'm hoping things improve now that it has a huge install base, but for now I see myself buying one game this year, Brawl.

Maybe you could just try to enjoy games for once?

[lendelin]

The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess received a 9.5 out of 10 overall. Tiger Woods PGA Tour 07 and Tiger Woods PGA Tour 08 both received a 7.3 out of 10 overall. Since when is that disappointing?

C’mon, this is besides the point. Why do enthusiastic defenders always point to lions in order to demonstrate the greatness of crocodiles?

I didn’t criticize Zelda, I criticized the tucked-on motion play elements of Zelda. Zelda is a great game despite the motion sensing, not because of them. Or do you believe seriously that the motion control elements of the game increased the score even by .1?

I criticized the motion sensing for various genres in comparison to the standard controls, and the result of this “revolution” in game play is very disappointing. I read the reviews since the Wii release very carefully, and my opinion might be wrong but it is neither arbitrary nor biased. I made a case that the standard control at this point in time delivers by far the most precise and best control.

You mention Tiger Woods. Tiger Woods 07 on the Wii was a sub-par game because of the Wii controls; and since you like review scores, IGN gave the 360 version a 8.5, the PS3 version a 8.3, and the Wii version a 7.0. Quote:“The real question is whether or not the Wii remote perfectly simulates a golf club. The answer is no - there are still some issues, which we'll outline, but it works well enough most of the time for us to recommend Tiger Woods,...”

The score gaps for the different version of TW 08 were similar: 360 and PS3 8.5, Wii 7.1. So much for the notion that developers will learn to implement the new control scheme. One year wasn’t apparently enough to get it straight.

I still remember the bad review of TW 07 in Game Informer, that’s why I mentioned the game in my OP.

Quote GI: “Lagging well behind the series’ standards, the Wii remote has a hard time detecting your backswing. Thus, it’s harder to control. There were even times the game putted for me by accident.” (Score 6.5)

If the controls work better like in Hot Shots and Wii Play and Sports, they are dumbed down to the basics because the technology just isn’t capable detecting complex movements, and even worse, misinterprets faster movements. The result is limited game play suited for party games, but nothing else.

If I have a frantic boss battle in Devil May Cry, I certainly don’t want to play the game in slow motion so the controls work.


Games like Red Steel and Soulcalibur Legends were disappointing because they were bad. Vampire Rain and Pimp My Ride for the Xbox 360 were bad, too. It's not the controller's fault, it's the developer's fault.

The two games on the 360 were hardly great opportunities to show the emphasized new opportunities of the system, they are shovelware we find on every system. Red Steel (in particular as an early title) and SC Legends were prime examples to demonstrate the alleged revolutionary gameplay the Wii design revolves around; and in all seriousness, do you really want to compare the amount of shovelware for both systems in order to make the case for the Wii? I don’t think so.

In the cases of Red Steel, SC Legends, Table Tennis and many others the inadequate game play isn’t the developers fault, it is the limit of the technology. No More Heroes is proof that developers gave up on motion sensing in particular for sword swinging because it would have made an excellent game mediocre at best. The remaining game play elements of the Wii remote in the game are trivial.


Really? According to IGN's review (http://wii.ign.com/articles/815/815424p1.html):

As someone who just HAS to play every Metroid game I remember very well the IGN review. It was too enthusiastic, and even sometimes contradictory. However, granted, the motion sensing was an alternative on par with the standard control scheme. I remember very well the DP thread about the game. Some said they liked it, some said they prefer still the standard control, at least it was something different worthwhile to try out. That’s why I evaluated the motion sensing in Metroid Prime in my OP carefully. Still, Metroid Prime was and still remains an exception.



In what way is the Wii outdated? It reads optical discs, outputs very nice high-resolution graphics, and outputs Dolby surround sound. Is it as advanced as the Xbox 360 or the PlayStation 3? No,

Are you serious?


but as Kid Ice pointed out, "graphics plateaued in 1999 with the Dreamcast. ... I haven't seen games with graphics much better than Metroid Prime or Resident Evil 4. ... Without the advent of HD I would actually say there's been NO improvement."

Isn’t that like saying without FoxNews CNN would be still in good shape? The new systems are tailored towards HD, that’s the point; and if you say that the Wii “outputs nice high resolution graphics” don’t you admit that they are 1) important, and 2) that 480p compared to 720p/1080p is a very noticeable difference? (Besides many other graphical abilities the Wii just can’t deliver)


Compare Metropolis Street Racer on the Dreamcast to Burnout: Paradise on the PlayStation 3. Yes, of course, there's a difference in graphics, but it's not an amazingly huge difference.

I don’t have Burnout Paradise, but just two days ago I compared Metropolis Street Racer to Project Gotham Racing 4 which I started playing last week. Granted, I have my Dreamcast on S-Video on a good STDTV; the STDTV and the HDTV are side by side.

Actually, I was amazed about the difference in graphics. I remembered the graphics of Metropolis Street Racer much better than they actually are.

Still, I like the original Dreamcast racer better because of its music and relative straight forwardness. I admit, the new concept and freshness of the original is still more impressive than the more refined gameplay of the old idea. However, the difference in graphics IS huge.


However, flicking my wrist to pull ropes, open bottles, and open doors in Zack & Wiki is cool and fun. When the Wii remote is used in subtle and clever ways like that, I'm more connected to the game than if I were just pressing the "A" or "R" buttons all the time.

That said, I still play old games using standard controllers and they're fun and immersive too, but good Wii games pull me in even a little bit more.

You know, this might be a valid reason why gamers (like the two of us) evaluate the new motion controls so differently. I admit that I feel like a hopping around idiot using the thing, and I can accept that pulling ropes, pointing the remote as a flashlight, turning doorknobs and so many other little things immerses you and others a bit more in the game. This might be a difference in personalities and human nature.

I feel more detached from the game when I do it, in particular if the motion controls don’t work accurately even for little game play elements, while you feel less the screen between you and the game. I have no difficulty to admit that I arrogantly belittled such an effect on gamers in my posts.

Still, even with those effects, isn’t the new motion control overall disappointing and doesn’t come even close to meet expectations?

[p_b]

Ok, Lendelin, you don't like the Wii, or at least it's not the system for you. That's ok, no problem at all. I still don't see why the Wii is supposed to be the demise of the video gaming industry. It's bringing "new" people into gaming, while the "traditional" gamers will still buy a PS3/360 and maybe a Wii as well. So, that means more money goes into the industry, which probably isn't the worst thing that could happen...

[lendelin]

Ok, Lendelin, you don't like the Wii, or at least it's not the system for you.

It is not a matter of like or dislike, it is a matter of hardware and the limits in gamequality it can produce evaluated on the basis of what it was designed for.


It's bringing "new" people into gaming, while the "traditional" gamers will still buy a PS3/360 and maybe a Wii as well. So, that means more money goes into the industry, which probably isn't the worst thing that could happen...

Said the same thing. Read before responding. Or are you like President Schwarzenegger from The Simpsons Movie?: "Im elected to LEAD not to READ."

[Rob2600]

two days ago I compared Metropolis Street Racer to Project Gotham Racing 4 ... the difference in graphics IS huge.

Of course, you and I can tell the difference between the graphics in Metropolis Street Racer and Project Gotham Racing 4, but to normal people who haven't played video games every day for the last 25 years, they both look good.

To quote one of my previous posts in this thread:

Even if some "hard core" gamers insist that the graphics in, for example, Dead or Alive 4 are a million times better than the graphics in Dead or Alive 2, "casual" or "mainstream" gamers don't notice a difference. I'm serious, they really don't.

Big-budget AAA games look great, but graphics have reached a point where even mediocre games look fine to "casual" or "mainstream" gamers. That's what I meant when I wrote, "In what way is the Wii outdated? It reads optical discs, outputs very nice high-resolution graphics, and outputs Dolby surround sound." To most people, the Wii isn't outdated...they think it's really cool and have no problem with the graphics.

However, to a rich technology fiend who can afford the best big-screen TVs and the latest high-tech gadgets, yes, I guess the Wii would seem a bit outdated.

[blue lander]

It is not a matter of like or dislike, it is a matter of hardware and the limits in gamequality it can produce evaluated on the basis of what it was designed for.


I don't know, it seems like the wii was designed for non-gamers to have fun playing simple easy-to-pick-up games, and to not cost more than a non-gamer would be willing to pay for a quick diversion. Doesn't seem like any of the wii's technical limitations keep it from doing that... Who knows how much more it would have cost to give the wii perfect 1:1 motion detection? And who knows if the wii's target audience (read: not you or me) would give a crap if it did? Maybe the average wii user is just happy waggling a piece of plastic at a TV screen. Maybe it works just as well as it needs to in order to deliver the experience Nintendo was aiming for. How you expected the wii to work and how Nintendo intended it to may be two completely different things.

[Wirestone]

I have so far resisted posting in this thread. It's no good for my blood pressure. However, allow me to toss a bit of gasoline on the flames, after which I will scurry away like the tiny woodland creature I am.

At least the Wii does not regularly spontaneously combust, like the XBox 360.
And, unlike the PS3, there are games I actually want to play on the Wii.

That is all.

[CartCollector]

[The Wii] outputs very nice high-resolution graphics

480p component might be high resolution, especially when compared to an RF or composite connection, but it's not high-definition. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hdtv#High-Definition_Display_Resolutions) Using "high resolution" is misleading, though you probably didn't intend it to be. And anyways, most of the people playing the Wii probably use a composite connection, as the games are usually made to accomodate this (large cursor, not-too-saturated colors, etc).
Let's find out what the people on this board use. Sure it might be biased, but it should be telling. Show of hands, what's your Wii A/V connection?
I'll go first: Component. Though I did use composite for the longest time (I had to get a component/VGA converter).

Anyways, now that that's out of my system, let me say why the control system is so crappy: Money. If Nintendo added another accelerometer (an ADXL330, (http://www.analog.com/en/prod/0,,764_800_ADXL330%2C00.html) according to Wikipedia), it might cost them only $.50 (price at 1,000 units: $5.45). That might not sound like much, but how many consoles have they sold? According to nexgenwars, (http://nexgenwars.com/) about 20,000,000 as of February 12, 2008. So that's how much in savings? And that's not even counting extra controllers and WiiPlay.
But then again, you'd have to account for the abscence of a sensor bar, the glass window on the controller, and the camera (to capture the LEDs). But if it would have been the same price or cheaper, why did Nintendo use the method that they did? The only remaining possibilities, it seems, are ease-of-use for programmers or a rushed development team.

And Lendelin, are you Anthony1 ressurected? The long posts, the Nintendo criticism, the mobs with torches and pitchforks...

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

I use the 408p component cables. Got them from Hong Kong a week after the Wii launched.

I have my Wii hooked up to a 52 inch TV, so, any little thing I can do to get a 480 system up a notch in resolution helps.

As any gamer with a big TV will tell you, when you start stretching 480 level resolution systems that big, you can get some really ugly looking tearing and bleeding in the resolution ... and it can actually get pretty stressful on the eyes.

[blissfulnoise]

I have so far resisted posting in this thread. It's no good for my blood pressure. However, allow me to toss a bit of gasoline on the flames, after which I will scurry away like the tiny woodland creature I am.

At least the Wii does not regularly spontaneously combust, like the XBox 360.
And, unlike the PS3, there are games I actually want to play on the Wii.

That is all.

Scurring away is probably a good idea seeing is how little you added to the conversation.

Yes, the 360 has serious hardware issues that have gone long unchecked. No, it doesn't combust. Xbox 360 hardware failure is very well documented; intellegent, constructive Wii critism isn't. But, please, feel free to add yet another subject on this issue if you'd like.

And, as far as the PS3 game library goes. Yes, it's smallish at this point. But to say you don't want to play Uncharted, Ratchet and Clank, Resistance, flOw, Everyday Shooter, PixelJunk Monsters, Calling All Cars, Super Stardust HD, and Tekken 5 says more about you as a gamer than anything else you posted.

[Rob2600]

Show of hands, what's your Wii A/V connection? I'll go first: Component.

I'm using an S-Video cable on a very nice 27" standard-definition Panasonic TV (model CT-27G14).


I have my Wii hooked up to a 52 inch TV... As any gamer with a big TV will tell you, when you start stretching 480 level resolution systems that big, you can get some really ugly looking tearing and bleeding in the resolution and it can actually get pretty stressful on the eyes.

I'm not an HDTV expert, but I've been told that some HDTVs have excellent upscaling chips in them and some have cheap, horrible upscaling chips in them. Is this true?


to say you don't want to play Uncharted, Ratchet and Clank, Resistance, flOw, Everyday Shooter, PixelJunk Monsters, Calling All Cars, Super Stardust HD, and Tekken 5 says more about you as a gamer than anything else you posted.

I don't want to play any of those games, either. I guess I'm not a true gamer. :(

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Well, it's not about the set's ability to handle upscaling at all.

480i is ACTUALLY only 240 lines of resolution (interlaced) for each image displayed 60 times per second.

480p displays the entire 480 lines of resolution 60 times per second.

On a 19 inch screen, 480i doesn't really have any discernable distortion when viewed by the naked eye ...

but when you take a native 480i image and STRETCH it to a 52 inch (or bigger) display, you're going to see things that weren't previously noticable in the form of bleeding, blurring and crawling distortion.

480p does make a difference, regardless of any built-in smoothing / upscaling features a modern big-screen TV has.

[Wirestone]

Blissful -- You realize the combustion thing was a joke, right? Just checking.

It seems that some folks here resent the Wii a bit. I'm not sure why. Exploding consoles aside, the 360 caters pretty much exclusively to the hardcore. Do we need another machine for that audience?

The Wii seems like a logical step from the DS, another machine that experimented with game input. It doesn't work perfectly -- neither does the DS. (Tried to do any voice recognition on it, lately?) But the pointing functions and the basic tilt mechanism are both robust, and I expect we'll see most polished games use those and avoid extensive waggling. (Let's take Mario Galaxy -- some pointing, some tilting, only a touch of waggle. That suggests that Nintendo knows precisely what the strengths and weaknesses of the console are).

But anyway, I've said too much, and I need to scurry away once again.

[Kid Ice]

Exploding consoles aside, the 360 caters pretty much exclusively to the hardcore. Do we need another machine for that audience?

How does the 360 cater exclusively to the hardcore? I'd be hesitant to hang that tag on any of the 3 consoles because all 3 have downloadable casual games (the 360 even moreso than the others).

[Icarus Moonsight]

lendelin isn't Anthony1, by a good measure, I can actually enjoy reading his posts, while long he doesn't repeat himself over and over, ask the same thing 40 different ways or sacrifice chickens and goats over a Commodore Monitor altar. :p I think some need to actually read what he has written in this thread and remember to place things within context. Makes for better discussion. ;)

Look how he responded to my post. He isn't argumentative or belittling my position at all. He understood it and thanked me for my input. I wish that would happen more often around here, that's for sure.

[Wirestone]

My point isn't that the 360 has only hardcore games. (If that's the case, how have I managed to play Lumines Live for the last two months?). But the console caters to enthusiasts, in the sense that Microsoft seems to see such gamers as its core constituency. Much of the xBox live experience has been designed for that hardcore crowd (Mountain Dew ads, leaderboards, gamer scores, emphasis on multiplayer shooters, etc.).

That being said, if there's money to be made from the post-hardcore or casual markets, both Sony and Microsoft seem interested. But they're sure not deserting their bread and butter by removing buttons from their controllers.

[lendelin]

Rob2600 and blueLander:

I don’t dispute that very casual and non-gamers don’t really care about the cutting-edge technology and about the latest in processing power which means worse AI, phsysics engines, and graphics. Otherwise the Wii wouldn’t outsell its competitors, and I bet (that’s a mere guess) there are a lot of Wii owners out there who don’t have the two other systems and couldn’t care less about them.

I criticize, however, how cheaply these gamers are won over; by that I don’t mean the price tag of the Wii but the shallow game play even for the party games the Wii delivers best. This might sound elitist, but it’s not intended as such. As a weak clarification of my basic position I refer to this old link at DP:

http://www.digitpress.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18021

I cannot be on the side of frequent gamers and the targeted new demographics, both of whom lower expecations about the Wii after its release. Sometimes gimmicks sell, and for some time they even dominate. When Clay Aiken sold a lot of Cds and David Hasselhoff's songs were popular in Germany, I still thought they are shallow songs and I preferred Willie Nelson and Bruce Springsteen.

We have to make judgement calls about the game quality of the new motion sensing controls independently of sales figures.

The demand for shorter, challenging, playful games for the whole family was certainly neglected, but that doesn’t mean that 1) game quality should be sacrificed, and 2) PR departments should be successful with marketing gimmicks. The image of the Wii as an innovative game system with new controls drives its sales, and the image of the Wii is shallow because it doesn’t fulfill expectations of the image.

I have a neighbor who hardly plays games, but a couple of months after the release of the Wii he told me that he thinks the Wii is interesting and he might buy it. I asked him why, and he said ‘well, it get’s you off the couch.’ A couple of weeks later Wii Fit was announced, and in the meantime Wii Fit is one of the top selling games in Japan!!? God help us all. I’m glad the Aerobic games for the Xbox and PS2 didn’t outsell God of War.

I’m indeed concerned about upcoming wars of marketing gimmicks because they really worked well so far.

[lendelin]

I have so far resisted posting in this thread. It's no good for my blood pressure. However, allow me to toss a bit of gasoline on the flames, after which I will scurry away like the tiny woodland creature I am.

At least the Wii does not regularly spontaneously combust, like the XBox 360.
And, unlike the PS3, there are games I actually want to play on the Wii.

That is all.

There are no flames in this thread. Your gasoline merely fell on the ground and evaporated. :) I won’t flame anyone.

Your assessment about the PS3 and 360 are absolutely right. (I’d go even beyond that; the 360s design flaws are outrageous, and I’m VERY glad that the PS3 at the original price tag didn’t sell well and lost hands down to the Wii. At the same time I would have mentioned their positives – the great game library of the 360, and the reliable hardware of the PS3)

You point fingers at the weaknesses of the other two systems, but that doesn’t change the evaluations about the Wii and about the game quality its new controls deliver. It just says something about the alternative of the Wii as a buying option.

[blissfulnoise]

There are no flames in this thread. Your gasoline merely fell on the ground and evaporated. I won’t flame anyone.

I sure will if they deserve it.


I don't want to play any of those games, either. I guess I'm not a true gamer. :(

Why wouldn't you?

What type of games do you enjoy? Because outside of sports/racing, those games pretty much covered every genre and are very highly critically received. You've proven here that you're obviously a fan of the Wii (though not necessarily rabid). Are your blinders on here or is there an actual critical reason for not wanting to try some of those breakthrough games other than, "I just don't want to"?

I guess I'm just fucking dumb (feel free to quote that apologists) but I don't get it. Why wouldn't gamers want to try high quality games, regardless of platform?

What I'm gathering the main defense of the Wii to be is that its casual appeal. Doesn't the PS3 and the X360 have games that are also explicitly designed for (or even by) the Popcap audience (Hexic, Jewel Quest, Luxor, Bejeweled, Chessmaster, Backgammon, Solitare, among many others)?

So is it the quality of the "causal" games? I've got to be missing something because from the games lists on the Wii there seems to be just as much shovelware crap as any other system (more actually, discounting the DS).

The only argument I'd think would be valid would be their Virtual Console service. It's offering something that neither of the other online services really offer, and that has access to a library of games with staggering timeless appeal. But, simultaneously, it shows just how badly Nintendo failed all of us gamers by not offering any improvements (and in some cases, creating determents), trickling out quality games while releasing some really abysmal ones, and offering the games at a high price point.

Regardless, none of this is even really relevant as these lofted “casual-gamer” Wii owners aren't exercising any real opinion on gaming. The numbers are already showing that most Wiis are collecting dust, and these “non-gamers” are certainly not buying any games for their systems. It's the real enthusiasts out there that are buying the NiGHTS and the No More Heroes. The only thing the Wii has proven is that Nintendo can still market the hell out of a piece of hardware and push consoles like few others. Some of it was savvy, some of it was luck.

And the arguments about being able to play Wii games for short periods of time extends to every system. It's the games, not the system that offers that type of play style. The Wii has many games that require bigger time investments just as every other system (Zelda, Metroid, Fire Emblem). Or are we holding up Wii Sports, WarioWare, and Mario Party as the sole representatives of the platform?

Look, I'm not trying to keep gaming in the basement. I couldn't even if I wanted to; it came out of the basement with the PS2. But what I do want to see is gaming to move in interesting new directions while still able to make excellent games to drive down already established roads. The Wii stood better than most to make this happen but squandered it on faulty hardware and traveling the same road they've gone down since the N64. Shovel junk software out there and let us put out a few triple-A games a year that people will actually buy.

It really pisses me off when “gamers” blow off whole libraries of games because of the platform they're on, but then uphold mediocrity just because that's how they (mistakenly?) spent money. Judge the games themselves after trying them, and then you'll be in a place to critically respond.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Why wouldn't you?

What type of games do you enjoy? Because outside of sports/racing, those games pretty much covered every genre and are very highly critically received. You've proven here that you're obviously a fan of the Wii (though not necessarily rabid). Are your blinders on here or is there an actual critical reason for not wanting to try some of those breakthrough games other than, "I just don't want to"?

Blissfulnoise, as a Sony console owner who obviously takes the time to explore their library beyond just scratching the surface and shopping for AAA releases (based on the games you just listed) ... I'm SURE this isn't the first time you've run into that ever-familiar response of anything you list that's a Sony exclusive causes a reaction like a kid who wont eat their vegetables (even though they've never tasted them before).

Now, I'm not claiming that's what Rob2600 did, because he didn't ... but as a Sony enthusiast, I've lost count of the amount of times I've tried to extol the virtues of some of their PS1, PS2, PS3, PSP and most recently PSN catalog and gotten that "Meh, sorry, couldn't be more DIS-INTERESTED (even though I've never even tried any game you're listing)" response.

And, well, it's like the vegetables thing ... how could you possibly know you're "not interested" in a game like flOw unless you've actually tried it ... it practically defies genre placement, or any "I've played similar types of games before" kind of assumptions about it.

[Wirestone]

Bliss writes: "Why wouldn't gamers want to try high quality games, regardless of platform?"

Well, in the case of the PS3, the entry-level price is too high, and the number of games I'm interested in is too low. That was the case for the xBox 360 until last year, at which point (probably around the BioShock and Orange Box releases), it tipped over into the "purchase" catagory.

Unlike movies or music, gaming requires a lot of upfront investment if you want to play everything that's out there. Let's see --

PSP (170), DS (130), Wii (250), 360 (350), PS3 (399), gaming-competent PC (800) -- that's over $2000 bucks right there to experience everything that comes out (1300 without PC). And full games, bought new, run from 40 to 60 bucks.

So most folks, for better or worse, buy a system (at most, two), and become familar with it and its software library. They're not being neglectful -- it's just economic reality. And of course people are going to defend their system(s), because they've made a pretty big cash investment.

Frankly, as a GB, GBA, DS, NES, SNES, N64, PS2, Wii and 360 owner (and still buying games for all of the systems) I feel like I have a broader view than many. But there are still things I know I won't play, just because I don't have the time or bucks.

(And lendelin -- I'm not going to defend the Wii. I enjoy Nintendo products, sure, but I enjoy other stuff too. The system, the games available, and the experience of players speak for themselves. For good or ill.)

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

A major issue I have with the concept of "defending" (as you put it Wirestone) the systems that one owns ...

... is that what often goes on isn't so much "defending" one's personal choices and owned consoles/software rather - it's attacking the consoles, platforms and exclusive software on the consoles and platforms that one DOESN'T OWN.

And if it's not "attacking" it's passing judgment without any actual experience.

It's all tantamount to digital bigotry. Making up one's mind that something isn't worth owning without taking the time to spend any amount of time with it, and passing judgment against it in a public forum.

Sure, I understand that not everybody can afford to be a multi-console owner, or that even if they can that they WANT to be one ... but it's frustrating to see so many people speak out against consoles for reasons other than genuine critical shortcomings ... and it's kind of insulting when they admit to their exposure to said systems is little to none.

I mean, would you listen to a film critic that hasn't seen the movies they're reviewing, and would you respect them if they said that a movie was bad JUST because the price of the movie ticket was too much?

I only WISH that more people could find the strength and tact to "defend" what they own without "attacking" what they don't...sadly, that's rarely the case.

[lendelin]

Blissfulnoise, I agree with almost everything you said. You are right to point to the diverse library of arcade games of short, fun, accessible games on XboxLive, and Sony will soon follow and reach the same standard. Great, fun, simple, challenging, short games can be on every console; and noone should be blind about the offerings of different consoles, and we certainly should NOT discuss on the dreadful and blind defense/attack level.

However, you have to admit that there is something unique about the Wii remote no other game system delivers. It is new, attractive, fresh, simple and has an unsurpassed accessibility. You see the thing laying on a table and watch how it is used, and almost everyone is tempted to pick it up and try it out.

I didn’t change my opinion about its limits and stand by me previous posts...

...BUT the success of the Wii has two very important positive aspects. It showed how important simple controls are and it made people interested in games who already gave up on them. It was difficult to explain the button controls of a simple tennis game to a non-gamer and motivate him to play...not to mention shooters or adventure games. The Wii tore this barrier down.

With the Wii you just have to say ‘hit the ball and be careful that the thing stays in your hand.’

Nintendo did something truly admirable with the Wii. It showed there is a video gamer in all of us. Not only children who are anyways playful, but also parents, and grandparents and younger and older women want to play. It is just fun to watch and amazing how easily non-gamers pick up suddenly the remote and start to play. We want to play, it is innate.

I think we all (including Nintendo executives) were surprised by the success of the Wii and underestimated the gamer potential out there. We knew (and sometimes corrected statistics about gamer habits for it) that older gamers play simple and short games, card games, puzzle games, and many others on the PC.

You have to admit that Nintendo is the first video game company that tapped in these neglected and relegated demographics. I think this is more important and will have more consequences for game development than even the broadening of the demographics Sony achieved with the PS1.

Video games grew up, they became more serious, darker, storylines developed, they deliver movie-like experiences, we discuss if they are ‘art forms’ and defend them against Roger Ebert. These are all great developments, and Mass Effect shows what videogames can achieve.

During these important developments game developers neglected another important aspect of videogames – the lighthearted, simple, challenging, and sometimes quirky playfulness of their arcade grandfathers which made them so popular in the first place. In this vacuum jumped Nintendo with the Wii.

While the library of all systems are diverse, the Wii game library (despite its good portion of cheap shovel ware, despite the downplay of motion controls) offers more than the libraries of other systems lighthearted playful games – and that is a good thing. The game industry and the gamers took themselves a bit too seriously in the last two decades.

That is why I’d never ‘bash’ the Wii, and I wouldn’t anyway ‘flame’ someone who points out these advantages of the Wii. It is indeed a very important console.

IMPORTANT:

This...


In 100% agreement. Well, nearly 100%... Talladega Nights is a damn funny movie.

...is just plain sad and unforgiveable. :)

[Chadt74]

I've been gaming for almost 30 yrs and I enjoy my Wii. Plain and simple because instead of playing alone almost anyone can play with me. My parents visit and we all bowl or try and hit home runs, I have never seen my parents play a video game before the Wii. At half time a football game friends and I have just enough time for some Wii Sports. I enjoy most types of games but the Wii has brought back social (non-internet)gaming. The controls might not be perfect, and yes I am aware of the technical limitations of the motion control set up, but pretty much anyone can pick up the games and play. As much as I love my PS2 I can not make this statement for any other system.

I am not a Nintendo fanboy, I've only owned an NES, and N64 (which didn't get much use) so there isn't much Nintendo love here.

As for the FPS, after playing MP3 I have to say that was the best FPS I've played in terms of controls. I started with Doom on the PC and played everything up to Halo2 and IMHO the Wiimote and chuck are a very good set up. Even Red Steel (which I liked) has a good and easy to remember reload/pick up, you just lower your left hand which shows the potential for the control set up.

I think the quality (in person) time with family and friends is being discounted and that is the Wii's best feature in my mind. If this was an "I only game alone" thread I would have some slightly different comments.

[blue lander]

Reading this thread, I can't help but think of all the technophiles I've heard spaz out about the iPod being an inferior piece of technology and how much better other mp3 players are, yet the casual consumer keeps buying them for the same reason casual consumers are buying the wii: They're small, cute, and hip. Plus they work well enough and deliver the experience the casual user was looking for.

There are far more solitaire-playing "non-gamer" gamers out there than there are casual and hardcore ones combined, so it shouldn't be suprising that the console aimed at them is doing so well. Maybe the Xbox 360 has similar non-gamer friendly titles out there, but I just can't imagine some 35 year old soccer mom walking into Gamestop to shell out $300+ on a 360. Why buy something that does so much more than she needs it to? What will her friends say when they see a 360 hooked up to her television?

And so what if most wiis spend more time collecting dust than they do playing games? They're aimed at people who don't want to play games every day! I don't think the average non-gamer would spend any more time with their wii even if it had a solid library.

[Rob2600]

The demand for shorter, challenging, playful games for the whole family was certainly neglected, but that doesn’t mean that 1) game quality should be sacrificed

I don't think game quality is being sacrificed. True, there are garbage games on the Wii, but I don't buy them. I only buy the good, fun games.


the Wii is shallow because it doesn’t fulfill expectations of the image.

It meets my expectations just fine. The graphics are nice, the controls are clever, and the games are fun...at least in the games I buy.



I have a neighbor who hardly plays games, but a couple of months after the release of the Wii he told me that he thinks the Wii is interesting and he might buy it. I asked him why, and he said 'well, it get’s you off the couch.' A couple of weeks later Wii Fit was announced, and in the meantime Wii Fit is one of the top selling games in Japan!!? God help us all. I’m glad the Aerobic games for the Xbox and PS2 didn’t outsell God of War.

I'm excited about Wii Fit, too. Again, it goes back to video gaming being dragged out of the teenager's bedroom and back into the living room so the whole family can play and have fun.

Some gamers want video games to keep getting more complex and specialized so that the number of people who enjoy them gets smaller. They want gaming to be like a special club, where only the veterans should be allowed to join and share stories. I, on the other hand, want video games to get simpler so that everyone - my friends, my family, and I - can have fun together, like back in the Atari 2600/NES days.



I don't want to play any of those games, either. I guess I'm not a true gamer. :(

Why wouldn't you?

What type of games do you enjoy? Because outside of sports/racing, those games pretty much covered every genre and are very highly critically received. You've proven here that you're obviously a fan of the Wii (though not necessarily rabid). Are your blinders on here or is there an actual critical reason for not wanting to try some of those breakthrough games other than, "I just don't want to"?

I enjoy playing old games like Super Mario Bros., Super Mario Bros. 2, Contra, Life Force, Mega Man II, Castlevania, Super Castlevania IV, Star Fox 64, Burnout 2, Beach Spikers, etc. These aren't very long, involved games. They're more arcade-style.

Sure, in the past, I've devoted a lot of time to more in-depth games like The Legend of Zelda, Dragon Warrior, Metroid, Super Mario World, EarthBound, Super Mario 64, The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, Rayman 2, etc., but for the last few years, I just haven't had the time to play long games like that.

For example, every time I'd start to play Wind Waker, I'd play for a few hours, make decent progress, and then come back to the game a few weeks later when I had another several hours of free time. The problem is, I'd forget where I left off. Where was I? Where was I supposed to go? What was I supposed to be doing? I can't remember! Time to start from the beginning...again.

That wasn't fun for me. I really wanted to enjoy Wind Waker, but my full-time job, extra freelance work, and personal life (going to the gym, having dinner with friends, etc.) prevent me from dedicating more than a few hours a week to gaming...which is fine.

That's why instead of getting involved in long, complex games like Halo, Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, Final Fantasy, Gran Turismo, etc., I decided I wanted a Wii. These days, I'd rather play something fun and relatively short with simplified controls, like Kororinpa Marble Mania, Mercury Meltdown Revolution, Zack & Wiki, or Mario Kart.

That's another reason I like the Wii: the controls are simplified. Games on the other consoles have complex control schemes. Yes, I enjoyed Nintendo 64 games like Perfect Dark and Turok 3, but that's my limit of complexity. The controls in a game like Splinter Cell were so complex that I could never remember which button did what. A is to shoot, B is to duck, C is to switch weapons, D is to switch to night vision, L is to throw grenades, R is to...wait, what does A do again?

I'm the same way with modern sports games. Madden NFL and NBA 2K are too complex for me. I'd much rather play Tecmo Bowl or Double Dribble.

Of course, every once in a while I make an exception and play a long game, but it's rare. Super Mario Galaxy is the only long game I've gotten excited about in the last few years. Usually though, I prefer to pay $20 or $30 for games like Link's Crossbow Training, Kororinpa, or Ghost Squad than $50 for games like Fire Emblem, Medal of Honor Heroes 2, or Twilight Princess. I'm not implying those are bad games. They're highly rated and part of me wants to play them and enjoy them, but I just don't have the time or the patience anymore. My brother is much younger than I am and has more free time than I do. Whenever I visit him, I watch him play long games like that for a few hours. I enjoy watching him play...I also enjoy being exposed to good epic games...but when I go home, I stick to the arcade-style games. I like them, my girlfriend likes them, and my friends like them. We enjoy Wii Sports and are looking forward to Wii Fit, which we don't think is lame or stupid at all.

The fact that the Wii is relatively cheap at $250, it comes with a game, and many good new games only cost $20 or $30 is great, too.

I guess for gamers like you, the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 are the next step in gaming progress. However, for a gamer like me, whose lifestyle and needs have changed since I was a teenager, the Wii is exactly what I needed...back to basics.

[blissfulnoise]

For those of you who like graphs (http://kotaku.com/355812/say-did-you-know-how-many-wii-games-suck):

http://kotaku.com/assets/resources/2008/02/wiireviews.jpg

Comparing the popularity of the iPod next to the Wii only proves one thing; that most consumers don't care about seeking out superior (or just alternative) products. Most don’t even understand what they're really buying; they just want what the Jones' have. You can chalk this up in any given category of consumerism. Bose speakers, iPods, Ethen Allen furniture, the list goes on.

This was further proven to me via talking with a co-worker who casually picked up a Wii last week simply because they were in stock. Not because he necessarily wanted to play any games on it. And what games did he buy for his new purchase? None.

And let’s be fair here. The X360 core retails for $299, the PS3 starts at $399, and the Wii goes for $249. We're not talking about vast differences in money here. You can argue that the PS3 is 60% more (and it clearly is) but at those price points, most people are apt to make the best investment for them regardless if the Wii is cheaper or not. $250 is not, and never has been, a casual price point for consumers.

As far as group gaming goes, people can defend casual entry point games on any system here (well, admittedly less so on the PS3). Rock Band is perhaps the ultimate party game; able to be played in short bursts or "until the day moon rise". What about a game like Scene It? I know it's available as a board game, but its popularity is pretty amazing and it’s available on the 360. And what games other than Wii Sports (and Wii Play) are we really citing here for non-gamers to gravitate towards?

I too introduced my parents to Wii Sports over the holidays. They had fun (mostly with boxing each other; I think there's a term paper in there somewhere) but they were pretty much done after 20 minutes. I tried to get them into WarioWare but it just confused them. I know these experiences aren't universal, nor are they necessarily representative of everyone's particular experience, but I can't imagine they're unique.

Keep in mind that my gripes don't extend to the couple of really excellent games on the platform. I'm looking forward to Brawl more than most. And I'm anticipating a handful of Wii games very eagerly. My goal with all of this rambling is to extend the argument against, and even for, the Wii platform.

And I understand that the PS3s price point is higher than the other systems out right now (debatable against the “real” X360) and that can turn gamers away from trying quality games, but to say:


And, unlike the PS3, there are games I actually want to play on the Wii.


In jest or otherwise is just ignorant if you've never actually played the games in question. But your last response, Wirestone, was thoughtful. Just remember that you may not necessarily know what you like until you try the games in question.

I would not defend bad games regardless of platform, price point, or how foolish I felt for purchasing them. I know I wasn't expecting much from the PS3 until the big titles started to release, but I've been very pleasantly surprised. I imagine most gamers would feel the same way if they dropped the rhetoric and tried the software.

[blissfulnoise]

I guess for gamers like you, the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 are the next step in gaming progress. However, for a gamer like me, the Wii is exactly what I needed...back to basics.

See: Calling all Cars, Everyday Shooter, flOw, Super Stardust HD, and LocoRoco Cocoreccho!. All downloadable, all available for $9.99 or less.

I'd be remiss not to point out that every game you mentioned is a Nintendo game as well.

[Rob2600]

See: Calling all Cars, Everyday Shooter, flOw, Super Stardust HD, and LocoRoco Cocoreccho!. All downloadable, all available for $9.99 or less.

Good point. However, I can't afford to buy multiple game consoles just because a few arcade-style games exist on each one. I had to decide on one console. For my needs, the Wii was the most appealing. I'm excited about games like Wii Fit and Mario Kart. I'm not excited about games like Devil May Cry or Gran Turismo. I grew up with games like Pac-Man and Frogger, so cartoony games don't seem childish to me.


I'd be remiss not to point out that every game you mentioned is a Nintendo game as well.

Kororinpa Marble Mania, Mercury Meltdown Revolution, Zack & Wiki, and Ghost Squad aren't Nintendo games.


What I'm gathering the main defense of the Wii to be is that its casual appeal. Doesn't the PS3 and the X360 have games that are also explicitly designed for (or even by) the Popcap audience (Hexic, Jewel Quest, Luxor, Bejeweled, Chessmaster, Backgammon, Solitare, among many others)? ...

The Wii has many games that require bigger time investments just as every other system (Zelda, Metroid, Fire Emblem).

Yes, every game console has user-friendly, "casual" games, but the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 aren't targeting the user-friendly, "casual" audience the way the Wii is. On the other hand, the Wii has some great complex, "hard core" games, but it isn't targeting the complex, "hard core" audience.

When I hear "Xbox 360," the first thing I think of is Halo 3, a complex game targeted to "hard core" gamers. When I hear "PlayStaion 3," the first thing I think of is "Resistence," a complex game targeted to "hard core" gamers. When I hear "Wii," the first thing I think of is Wii Sports, a user-friendly game targeted to everyone, not just "hard core" gamers.

That's why those great "hard core" Wii games sometimes slip through the cracks during message board debates. For some reason, the complex, "hard core" games on the Wii aren't taken as seriously as the complex, "hard core" games on the Xbox 360 or the PlayStation 3 because the Wii isn't marketed as a complex, "hard core" machine. Likewise, the user-friendly, "casual" games on the Xbox 360 or the PlayStation 3 aren't taken as seriously as user-friendly, "casual" games on the Wii because the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 aren't marketed as user-friendly, "casual" machines.

It's silly, I know, but that seems to be how things work.


Look, I'm not trying to keep gaming in the basement. I couldn't even if I wanted to; it came out of the basement with the PS2.

The PlayStation and the PlayStation 2 brought gaming out of the tennager's basement or bedroom a little bit, but not nearly as much as the Wii. My girlfriend's mother, sister, and aunt and uncle had no interest in video gaming at all and couldn't care less about the PlayStaton 2, but now all three are buying Wii consoles. Maybe they'll only buy four or five games each, but...guess what...that's four or five games that otherwise would've sat in the back room at GameStop unsold.


Reading this thread, I can't help but think of all the technophiles I've heard spaz out about the iPod being an inferior piece of technology and how much better other mp3 players are, yet the casual consumer keeps buying them for the same reason casual consumers are buying the wii: They're small, cute, and hip. Plus they work well enough and deliver the experience the casual user was looking for.

Exactly. The Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 come off as being complex, expensive, and intimidating to "normal" people. The Wii comes off as being user-friendly, affordable, and cool.

The same philosophy applies to the DS and the PSP. The DS is perceived as being more user-friendly. The PSP is perceived as more complex and "hard core," which can be intimidating to some.

As Apple has proven with the iPod, marketing and "coolness" is more important technical capability.


there is something unique about the Wii remote no other game system delivers. It is new, attractive, fresh, simple and has an unsurpassed accessibility. ...

It showed how important simple controls are and it made people interested in games who already gave up on them.

Thats why I like it. :)


You have to admit that Nintendo is the first video game company that tapped in these neglected and relegated demographics. I think this is more important and will have more consequences for game development than even the broadening of the demographics Sony achieved with the PS1.

Video games grew up, they became more serious, darker, storylines developed, they deliver movie-like experiences, we discuss if they are ‘art forms’ and defend them against Roger Ebert. These are all great developments, and Mass Effect shows what videogames can achieve.

During these important developments game developers neglected another important aspect of videogames – the lighthearted, simple, challenging, and sometimes quirky playfulness of their arcade grandfathers which made them so popular in the first place. In this vacuum jumped Nintendo with the Wii.

While the library of all systems are diverse, the Wii game library (despite its good portion of cheap shovel ware, despite the downplay of motion controls) offers more than the libraries of other systems lighthearted playful games – and that is a good thing. The game industry and the gamers took themselves a bit too seriously in the last two decades.

Excellent post overall. Thank you for taking the time to write it.

[blue lander]

Comparing the popularity of the iPod next to the Wii only proves one thing; that most consumers don't care about seeking out superior (or just alternative) products. Most don’t even understand what they're really buying; they just want what the Jones' have. You can chalk this up in any given category of consumerism. Bose speakers, iPods, Ethen Allen furniture, the list goes on.


So... either people who like the wii are dumber than you or I, or maybe they're just evaluating the wii by different criteria than whether or not it can produce graphics they won't appreciate or have games more complicated than they're willing to learn or a library larger than they have time to play? I'm sure the 360 and PS3 have non-gamer games as well, but why pay the extra money when they can not only get the wii for less, but have something they can talk about all their non-gamer buddies about? I doubt your average 40 year old non-gaming yuppie would impress any of his wine-and-cheese eating buddies by saying he got a 360 or PS3.

[blissfulnoise]

So... either people who like the wii are dumber than you or I, or maybe they're just evaluating the wii by different criteria than whether or not it can produce graphics they won't appreciate or have games more complicated than they're willing to learn or a library larger than they have time to play? I'm sure the 360 and PS3 have non-gamer games as well, but why pay the extra money when they can not only get the wii for less, but have something they can talk about all their non-gamer buddies about? I doubt your average 40 year old non-gaming yuppie would impress any of his wine-and-cheese eating buddies by saying he got a 360 or PS3.

Not necessarily dumber, but less informed by choice. The problem is that they're not evaulating the Wii by any criteria other than its popularity. They're simply following the herd or curious about the heralded motion controls. Fine and good but, judging by sales numbers, most people appear to be unimpressed after playing. Or perhaps the Wii is the Pong of our era and people are content to simply break out Wii Sports every once in awhile.

All this talk about complicated games and casual games needs to be put to bed. All systems have games that cater to both sides of the fence. If the Wii is perceived to be a more casual, family-friendly console, and the X360 and PS3 are much more "hardcore" (What does that even mean? I thought they all just played games. Is it because of HD support?) than it’s not a problem with the systems, it’s a problem with the perception. Statistically speaking, the only thing the Wii is excelling at is making crappy games based on ponies, Nickelodeon shows, and popular lines of dolls. And if that makes the Wii "casual", then is that even a good thing?

Talking about complexity, I'd argue that the Wii controls are more complex than that of other consoles on most games. I couldn't play Metroid to save my life. The outline is simple; move with the analog stick, point at what you want to shoot at. But shifting out of visor displays with the d-pad, holding B and Z to do different locks and jumps, using 1 and 2 to change weapons, and wiggling the controller to execute actions... that's intuitive? It would take me 20 seconds just to get my ship moving because I couldn’t get the Wiimote to mimic turning the damn ignition key. The only thing that Metroid excelled over more traditionally controlled FPS games was in giving me a hand cramp and sending accuracy to hell because of "Wiimote jitters". As much as I loved No More Heroes, I could only play it for 2-3 hours at a time because it was causing my hands to hurt when using the lock-on system.

And yes, I bet your non-gaming yuppie buddies would be impressed talking about the 360 or the PS3. They're fixtures in any high end home theater; not only for their comparative graphical prowess, but because they can play high-definition DVDs.

The Wii stands as a curiosity to non-gamers, something perceptively unique to casual-gamers, and as the home to Nintendo exclusives to the more "hardcore" among us. All three are fine and good, but it doesn't change the fact that the hardware can be faulty and that most games released on the platform are pretty crummy. That was my original point.

But I've gotten so derailed trying to defend the other platforms against bias and misplaced opinions that I don't even know what I'm arguing for anymore. Actually, I've been so hardlined that I've made lendelin a Wii apologist.

My main beef now is with all the "Wii is casual", "Wii has games I can play for a short time", "This would be perfect on the Wii", "Wii is innovative" nonsense. You can apply those thoughts to any given game on any given platform. Casual gaming is not exclusive to Nintendo; perceptions be damned.

So I guess my new goal is to defend the other game platforms that bask in the light of video games' proverbial second coming; the Wii.

[Rob2600]

Blissfulnoise, I understand that all types of games exist on every game console, but as Wirestone wrote:

"most folks, for better or worse, buy a system (at most, two) ... it's just economic reality."

As a responsible adult, I can't spend hundreds of dollars on a Wii, an Xbox 360, and a PlayStation 3, plus games for each. I decided on one console. For me, it's the Wii. For you, maybe it's the Xbox 360.


judging by sales numbers, most people appear to be unimpressed after playing. Or perhaps the Wii is the Pong of our era and people are content to simply break out Wii Sports every once in awhile.

I don't think it's because people are unimpressed. We're dealing with an entirely different audience now. Yes, some people on DP are used to buying a new $50 game every week, but this new audience probably thinks that's geeky and excessive. Buying one new game every three of four months seems more appropriate to them. Playing video games has now become a small part of their lives, but hasn't consumed their entire lives like some gamers.

Like I wrote in my previous post:

"Maybe they'll only buy four or five games each, but...guess what...that's four or five games that otherwise would've sat in the back room at GameStop unsold."

Why is that a bad thing?

[Wirestone]

Bliss: You write "judging by sales numbers, most people appear to be unimpressed after playing. Or perhaps the Wii is the Pong of our era and people are content to simply break out Wii Sports every once in awhile."

That is simply false. According to lifetime attach numbers for the three current consoles (http://arstechnica.com/journals/thumbs.ars/2008/01/25/wii-attach-rate-soared-to-81-for-december)

Wii -- 4.64 games per console
PS3 -- 4.26
360 -- 7.0.

(As for the review score graph, no arguing there. The Wii has some terrible games. But that doesn't mean it lacks good ones.)

[blue lander]

Not necessarily dumber, but less informed by choice. The problem is that they're not evaulating the Wii by any criteria other than its popularity.

So you're saying that nobody in their right mind who is evaluating the wii by anything other than trendiness would ever buy one? Isn't that sort of arrogant?



All this talk about complicated games and casual games needs to be put to bed. All systems have games that cater to both sides of the fence.

... and it's flat out impossible that anybody could prefer the casual games on the wii to the casual games on the 360 or PS3, even if it's just because of the novelty of the wiimote?


If the Wii is perceived to be a more casual, family-friendly console, and the X360 and PS3 are much more "hardcore" (What does that even mean? I thought they all just played games. Is it because of HD support?) than it’s not a problem with the systems, it’s a problem with the perception.

I'd say that the perception of the wii being for casual gamers and the 360 being for "hardcore" (More complicated, I guess?) gamers would directly result in developers tending to release games on the console that caters to the audience they're trying to reach. Thus more casual games on the wii, more hardcore games on the 360.



All three are fine and good, but it doesn't change the fact that the hardware can be faulty and that most games released on the platform are pretty crummy. That was my original point.

That could easily be argued for every system ever released.


My main beef now is with all the "Wii is casual","Wii has games I can play for a short time", "This would be perfect on the Wii", "Wii is innovative" nonsense. You can apply those thoughts to any given game on any given platform. Casual gaming is not exclusive to Nintendo; perceptions be damned.

So it's impossible that the wii does anything better than the 360, other than be trendy and gimmicky? The 360 is superior to the wii in every way for every type of game that any sane person could possibly evaulate the systems by?

[blissfulnoise]

Bliss: You write "judging by sales numbers, most people appear to be unimpressed after playing. Or perhaps the Wii is the Pong of our era and people are content to simply break out Wii Sports every once in awhile."

That is simply false. According to lifetime attach numbers for the three current consoles (http://arstechnica.com/journals/thumbs.ars/2008/01/25/wii-attach-rate-soared-to-81-for-december)

Wii -- 4.64 games per console
PS3 -- 4.26
360 -- 7.0.

(As for the review score graph, no arguing there. The Wii has some terrible games. But that doesn't mean it lacks good ones.)

My 3.6 attach rate was based off of global numbers as of December. I can't tell if these numbers are global or not, but it doesn't look to be.

Here's a more recent one detailing global attach rates. And, to contridict some of my original sentiment, it looks like the North American attach rate is pretty healthy but Japan is very poor:

http://www.videogamer.com/news/24-01-2008-7333.html

[Rob2600]

http://www.digitpress.com/forum/showthread.php?p=166014#post166014


I nver paid a lot of attention to the Dreamcast ... and then...I bought one a year ago, and now I have around 25 games. Damn are they good. :) Virtua tennis...a gem, like a sophisticated Pong, simple two button controls...

I don't know, there is something unique about the games ... they just give you those old shool gaming feel. Crisp, clean graphics, fantastic 2D shooters, some great arcade style games, plus at least two first RPGs, and many great action-adventures games. I fell in love with the DC. :)

Apply this same sentiment to the Wii and then you'll understand where a lot of people are coming from.

[blissfulnoise]

So you're saying that nobody in their right mind who is evaluating the wii by anything other than trendiness would ever buy one? Isn't that sort of arrogant?

Of course not, but we were talking in broad terms about these mythical casual gamers. And from my experience, trendiness (followed closely by curiosity) is a major factor leading to purchase by said set of people.

I bought my Wii because I knew there would be games I wanted to play on it; I'd be very remiss if I didn't concede that point for most purchasers. Especially among the crowd who would be reading this.


... and it's flat out impossible that anybody could prefer the casual games on the wii to the casual games on the 360 or PS3, even if it's just because of the novelty of the wiimote?

No, but in that same breath you'd have to agree that people could just as easily enjoy the games that the PS3 and 360 have to offer. My point was that previous posts were pigeonholing how people enjoy each of their system; my goal was to rebuke that sentiment.


I'd say that the perception of the wii being for casual gamers and the 360 being for "hardcore" (More complicated, I guess?) gamers would directly result in developers tending to release games on the console that caters to the audience they're trying to reach. Thus more casual games on the wii, more hardcore games on the 360.

Again, unless you're counting all that Shovelware as "casual", I don't think you're making a point. The 360 has Halo 3, Beautiful Katamari, Viva Pinata Party Animals, and Geometry Wars. The Wii has Metroid Prime 3, Elebits, Mario Party 9, and Geometry Wars. You could make a case for the Wii Sports/Wii Play/Wii Fit, but those are unique among to the hardware. You could just as easily hold up Warhawk or flOw with the same breath (discounting popularity).


That could easily be argued for every system ever released.

Yes, it could. But we're talking about the Wii here and how control issues are intrinsic in discussion about the system.



So it's impossible that the wii does anything better than the 360, other than be trendy and gimmicky? The 360 is superior to the wii in every way for every type of game that any sane person could possibly evaulate the systems by?

No, it's not. Reread the quote, I don't think that's what I was getting at. Though, to answer your question, in terms of a general, quality gaming experience, I do think that the 360 and the PS3 have more to offer than the Wii does right now. And I encourage all who ask me what system they should purchase to buy the Xbox 360. This is primarily due to the faults in the Wii hardware and the lackluster implementation of "Wii controls". That said, I do extol the virtues of the Wii and, to play my own devil’s advocate, if they want to use it strictly "off" gaming.

And Rob, I was referring to your games list as all Nintendo platform games. Not necessarily made by Nintendo. Do you currently own any non-Nintendo systems? My point being is you seem to have an inherent bias (though certainly not a mean spirited one) against other platforms. And to me, thats the antithesis of truly enjoying gaming. Maybe that’s what makes me "hardcore"...

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

This thread is fucking epic.

[blue lander]

No, but in that same breath you'd have to agree that people could just as easily enjoy the games that the PS3 and 360 have to offer.

Maybe, maybe not. Maybe some people really do enjoy the wiimote and how games play with it. Maybe they'd enjoy the 360 just as much as the wii, but they see no reason to spend at least $50 on the system when the wii would suffice. Maybe they genuinely find the gameplay experience on the wii... gasp... better than the 360?!?


Again, unless you're counting all that Shovelware as "casual", I don't think you're making a point.

I guess my point is that if both consumers and developers/publishers see the wii as a system for casual games and the 360 as a system for serious ones (who knows if this is true or not), then you'll probably see more casual style games on the wii and more serious ones on 360. That includes shovelware and and grade A titles. So the perception of a system catering to a specific audience is indeed important.



Yes, it could. But we're talking about the Wii here and how control issues are intrinsic in discussion about the system.

So the wii has hardware problems and most of the games for it suck. So what? Would you only take the wii seriously if the hardware was perfect and the majority of the library was awesome? Why are you holding the wii to a higher standard than other consoles?

I'm not even considering buying a nextgen system right now, but if I was, I'd probably go with the 360 before the wii (assuming the hardware reliability issues were resolved). It just has a larger library of games I want to play, it has nothing to do with trendiness or hardware power or control schemes.

If I did buy the wii, I'd expect that 90% of the library was junk (like every system), 90% of the games had awkward control (like every system), and I'd find maybe 10 or so games that I'd like enough to pay full price for (like every system). I'd expect to play it only every so often, especially when non-gamers were over. I think most casual gamers would be fine with that amount of usage too. They have other equally pointless things to do than sit around and play video games all day like the rest of us.

I wouldn't expect it to be a perfect virtual reality machine (especially for just $250), I wouldn't expect it to have great games in every single genre (which is status quo for every post-SNES Nintendo system), and I wouldn't expect many of the third party games to be that great (also par for the course for Nintendo).

[Rob2600]

Again, unless you're counting all that Shovelware as "casual", I don't think you're making a point. The 360 has Halo 3, Beautiful Katamari, Viva Pinata Party Animals, and Geometry Wars. The Wii has Metroid Prime 3, Elebits, Mario Party 9, and Geometry Wars. You could make a case for the Wii Sports/Wii Play/Wii Fit, but those are unique among to the hardware. You could just as easily hold up Warhawk or flOw with the same breath (discounting popularity).

You're right, but overall, the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 are targeted to a different audience than the Wii...and vice versa. To quote myself:

Yes, every game console has user-friendly, "casual" games, but the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 aren't targeting the user-friendly, "casual" audience the way the Wii is. On the other hand, the Wii has some great complex, "hard core" games, but it isn't targeting the complex, "hard core" audience the way the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 are.

When I hear "Xbox 360," the first thing I think of is Halo 3, a complex game targeted to "hard core" gamers, not Viva Pinata. When I hear "PlayStaion 3," the first thing I think of is "Resistence," a complex game targeted to "hard core" gamers, not Flow. When I hear "Wii," the first thing I think of is Wii Sports, a user-friendly game targeted to everyone, not Metroid Prime 3.

See what I mean?

Of course the Wii has great "hard core" games like Metroid Prime 3, Twilight Princess, The Godfather, etc., but so far, that's not what the Wii is known for overall. And of course the Xbox 360 has great "casual" games like Viva Pinata, but that's not what the Xbox 360 is known for overall.


I encourage all who ask me what system they should purchase to buy the Xbox 360. This is primarily due to the faults in the Wii hardware and the lackluster implementation of "Wii controls".

What are the faults with the Wii hardware? If Wii games looked like old PlayStation or 3DO games, then I'd say there's a problem. That isn't the case though. So far, high-quality first-generation Wii games look just as good, if not better, than GameCube and Xbox games, so I'm happy. Compare the graphics in the upcoming Super Smash Bros. Brawl to the graphics in Super Smash Bros. Melee. Super Smash Bros. Melee looked great, but Brawl looks quite a bit better. Super Mario Galaxy, Resident Evil: The Umbrella Chronicles, and Zack & Wiki look great too, and Factor 5 promises its upcoming Wii game will, at the very least, blow everyone away visually.

To me, the Wii hardware is fine. Keep in mind though, I'm not interested in HD at this time.


That said, I do extol the virtues of the Wii and, to play my own devil’s advocate, if they want to use it strictly "off" gaming.

How does the Wii provide an "off" gaming experience? What about the Wii is "off?" You keep insisting the Wii remote is flawed, but I don't experience flaws when I play. Yes, the Wii remote has limitations, but that doesn't mean it's flawed. That's like saying a car is flawed because it has a speed limit of 60 mph. That's not a flaw, it's a limitation. Now, if the car overheated and stopped working, then that's a flaw.


And Rob... Do you currently own any non-Nintendo systems?

The Atari 2600. :)

Throughout the years, I've owned a Sega Master System, Game Gear, Saturn, and Dreamcast. I've also owned an Atari Lynx and an NEC Turbo Express. Out of those, I thought the Dreamcast and Lynx were pretty good, but the others weren't worth keeping. I eventually got rid of the Dreamcast and Lynx too, as well as some Nintendo consoles (Game Boy, Virtual Boy, GameCube, and DS).

My collection had gotten too ridiculous. I'm also much more responsible with my money now and avoid buying stuff I'll hardly ever use. What once took up multiple bedrooms and closets now fits into one or two cardboard boxes.

My former video game collection: http://www.digitpress.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1296087#post1296087

I kept the Atari 2600, NES, SNES, N64, and Game Boy Advance. These are the machines that have given me the best memories and the most fun. Now, I also have a Wii.


My point being is you seem to have an inherent bias (though certainly not a mean spirited one) against other platforms. And to me, thats the antithesis of truly enjoying gaming.

I'm not against the other platforms, I just don't care about them. Is that wrong? I didn't hate the Sega Genesis. There were a few fun games that I liked playing on it, but for my money, the SNES was a better value. Nowadays, I don't hate the Xbox 360. I'm sure there are a few fun games that I'd like playing on it, but for my money, the Wii is a better value.


This thread is fucking epic.

I agree and I'm glad it's remained civil and intelligent. I'm enjoying it.

[blissfulnoise]

How does the Wii provide an "off" gaming experience? What about the Wii is "off?" You keep insisting the Wii remote is flawed, but I don't experience flaws when I play. Yes, the Wii remote has limitations, but that doesn't mean it's flawed. That's like saying a car is flawed because it has a speed limit of 60 mph. That's not a flaw, it's a limitation. Now, if the car overheated and stopped working, then that's a flaw.

"Off" gaming meaning "casual" (I'm starting to hate that word) gaming. For people who just occassionally want to roll a virtual bowling ball and aren't interested in doing much more. For anyone who is interested in trying video gaming as a hobby - they get sent right to the 360.

I call the Wiimote flawed because it does not always do what I want it to when playing a game. Go back to my Endless Ocean comments in its respective thread. With my experience, pointing the Wiimote on the edges of the screen to navigate can occasionally result in your diver going in random directions if the sensor fails to pick up the Wiimote’s location. This may have not been your experience, but this was also noted in IGN's and the AVClub's review of the title.

Additionally, I'll go back and site WarioWare. Granted I haven't played it for some time, but as I recall, the dog paw minigame required such a high level of precision on the Wiimote that it was virtually impossible to finish. Also, I found the Samurai Sword mini-game to be unfinishable because the sensor would lose track of the Wiimote when you mimicked the "sheathing" motion. These sentiments were also noted in various reviews of the game.

Wagging the Wiimote or Nunchuck around typically works fine since the sensor isn't really concerned with the position of the cursor. On the other hand, when you have to make precise spatial movements, the sensor may not pick up the exact location of the controller for a moment or two (creating the "Wiimote jitters" I previously mentioned).

Now on a traditional console, if you move right and your character doesn't move immediately, two things are at play: either your controller is broken or the game has god awful controls. On the Wii, other issues come up. Is your sensor bar working? Do you have external factors influencing the precision of the Wiimote? Are you holding the Wiimote wrong?

The fact that it's RF leaves way too many possible issues to come up during play. To expand on a previous example: if I hit "X" and Dante doesn't swing his sword, as he's supposed to, then I might die. Likewise, if I waggle the remote too and fro, and Dante doesn't swing his sword, then I might die. The problem lies in the fact that, in a lot of people's experience, you can't always expect that waggle to work with the way the Wii is designed (Alliteration fans: I couldn't think of another "W" word that fit).

Will your bowling ball always go as you rolled it? Can you click on that object in the 1 second time limit? Do you need the camera to be position just such to make that jump? The fickle nature of the Wiimote flies in the face of established game "rules" and can impact enjoyment of playing the game. This is the very definition of a hardware design flaw (as are combusting consoles). I know not everyone has a similar experience but mine is far from unique.

On the flip side, with the Sixaxis, there are no sensors or interference to worry about. When playing Warhawk, tilting my controller works every time. While it may not have spatial awareness, it ultimately works better when using motion controls for navigation. People knock Lair due to the motion controls. The controls themselves work as designed, but they were implemented in such a poor fashion that it was tedious to use them. When control is a game is compromised, we typically look at the game itself for its poor design or implementation. The Wiimote, on the other hand, may cause significant control problems in a game but be "working as intended".

That is my core issue with the Wii. I really don't even care about all of the crappy games released on it as I don't intend to buy or play them. The Gamecube had heaps of crappy games, but I still very much enjoy the best parts of its library. The PS2 had tons of "me-too" and crummy games, but no sensible person would knock its successes. In the same vein, I very much enjoy several Wii games now and expect to continue to do so; but at the possible consequence of the motion controls.

I don't really care who is or isn't buying a Wii and what they think about the various games for the Wii and otherwise. Its irritating when people badmouth games they've never played, but that's their ignorance, and outside of some of the cool people around here, it isn't my prerogative to correct their mistaken opinions and/or chastise them for it.

But never before (ok, rarely) has a controller put the reliability of operation of a specific console into so much doubt. This is a severe hindrance for the platform and could possibly make an otherwise excellent game into a broken one. This is the Wii problem and why I'm bothering to post all of this in the first place.

@blue lander: So you don't have a next gen console; have you had a chance to play the Wii yet? I'm curious if you've had any first hand experience with controller issues.

[Wirestone]

Bliss -- the Wii remote doesn't always do what you want it to in a game. I'll take your word on that.

But if you sit down and play a game that uses nearly all of the xBox 360's buttons, you're not going to be able to make your character do everything you want either.

Why? Because you have to learn the button layout. You have to learn that one button makes the character jump. One makes him run. Pushing X and Y with a trigger releases some sort of special attack.

It's precisely the same with the Wii. Each game uses the controller differently. You have to learn how to use it for each game. In Endless Ocean, for example, the IGN review you cite notes that: "After a while, this functionality, while forced, becomes second nature."

Now, are there games that use the controls poorly? Sure. Is the Wii remote perfect? No. But some games just require learning how to play them. And that's precisely how all current game consoles are and how they have always been.

And that's me for this thread. Sorry for the cheap shot at the beginning, and otherwise it's been fun.

[esquire]

Bliss writes: "Why wouldn't gamers want to try high quality games, regardless of platform?"

Well, in the case of the PS3, the entry-level price is too high, and the number of games I'm interested in is too low. That was the case for the xBox 360 until last year, at which point (probably around the BioShock and Orange Box releases), it tipped over into the "purchase" catagory.

Unlike movies or music, gaming requires a lot of upfront investment if you want to play everything that's out there. Let's see --

PSP (170), DS (130), Wii (250), 360 (350), PS3 (399), gaming-competent PC (800) -- that's over $2000 bucks right there to experience everything that comes out (1300 without PC). And full games, bought new, run from 40 to 60 bucks.

So most folks, for better or worse, buy a system (at most, two), and become familar with it and its software library. They're not being neglectful -- it's just economic reality. And of course people are going to defend their system(s), because they've made a pretty big cash investment.


Wii -- 4.64 games per console
PS3 -- 4.26
360 -- 7.0.

Looking at just the difference between the Wii and the 360, while the entry point may be less for the Wii, if the avergage consumer is only purchasing 4 games (I took the .64 to equal the Wii Sports), than the cost per game must also consider the cost of the hardware as to whether they are getting a return investment on that hardware.

Assuming most consumers are going to buy at least two fo the high end Wii games at $50 and say one at $40 and one at $30, that's $420, or $105 per game.

With the 360 at $350 (or less for the Arcade version), and seven games with 5 at $60 and 2 at $40, that's $730, or $104.28 per game.

If you are going to use the cost of the hardware as a reason not to buy one system, you have to also consider other factors, including average time spent playing each console.

Frankly, I'd rather spend $400 for a system that I going to get more use out of than spend $250 for one that is going to collect dust.

[blissfulnoise]

Bliss -- the Wii remote doesn't always do what you want it to in a game. I'll take your word on that.

I know you said "you're out" but based off of the above I'm guessing you don't own a Wii either?

What I'm talking about isn't learning the controls, or even necessarily the forced implementation of them. I'm talking about it working period.

Once you learn that X + Y = special attack, that's it. You're in.

I'm talking about the remote cursor shooting across the screen because of random interference with the sensor bar causing your special attack to fizzle out sending you back to the load game screen. This is what is unacceptable.

[mezrabad]

Granted, but the question is if three or four games which are fun for the family justify the price of an outdated console which gets really expensive with the costs of controllers for multiplayer fun.

If that is the question, then the answer, for my family at least, has been "Yes".

$250 isn't really that much for the basic system, is it? I mean, the wireless network adaptor alone is worth $100 according to what the Xbox sells theirs for. It also came with a pack-in, Sports, so that's another $50 I didn't have to spend for my family to start having fun together right out of the box. So, for the price of $250 and one trip to Toys R Us, waaaay too early on a Sunday, I get the first gaming system in my home in 30 years that my entire immediate family (plus my parents) can play for three solid hours, three nights in a row and have a great time doing so.

Is that worth it? Worth 250 bucks? YES! YES! Was the extra controller, along with another 9 games (on Play) worth $50? YES!

My parents haven't been interested in a videogame since Space Invaders on the Atari VCS. My wife actually owned an original Odyssey back in 1972 and couldn't give a rat's ass about videogames. To have all of them enjoying the hell out of the Wii with the kids and myself was a complete blast.

Can you show me a current gen-system that can entertain people aged 6 to 64 (literally, the ages of my daughter and my dad) with the same game that doesn't offend, frustrate or insult anyone in that age range of participants and cost less than $250?

EDIT: Lendolin, I read beyond your response to my post and saw that you agreed that buying the Wii for family purposes is reasonable decision. For "family time w/ videogames" the Wii is a great package.

I should admit, however, that I am impatient to get a 360 (or a new computer) because the games that appeal to me and either don't appeal or are inappropriate for the rest of my family(BioShock, Oblivion, GTAIV, Dead Rising, Orange Box and Final Fantasy XI to name a few) are only on the 360 (or a new computer). To get one game (BioShock will be first) plus wireless network adaptor and the pro/premium system will cost me at least $505. I'd rather get the Elite, but I either put the $100 extra bucks to the Elite or to the Wireless adaptor, I'm choosing the adaptor.

Anyway, I see your point. Crappy, disappointing third party titles are bad for the industry as a whole. Gimmicks that don't keep the market's attention for too long are merely fads. Fads with heavily invested infrastructures that crash can cause a lot of collateral damage. Look at what it did in 1983!

[CartCollector]

Statistically speaking, the only thing the Wii is excelling at is making crappy games based on ponies, Nickelodeon shows, and popular lines of dolls.

Statistically speaking, the only things the 360/PS3 excel at are making crappy games based on medieval legends, science fiction, and killing.

Oh yeah, and check this (http://www.erasmatazz.com/library/JCGD_Volume_6/Audience_Engineering.html) out. Pretty close to what the Lost Gardens guy said (page I linked to on the first page) but 7 years earlier. And by Chris Crawford, no less.

[blissfulnoise]

Statistically speaking, the only things the 360/PS3 excel at are making crappy games based on medieval legends, science fiction, and killing.

Be fair. Based off of composite reviews, they would be mediocre games about medieval legends, science fiction, and killing.

And I've spent most of my evening playing LocoRoco Cocoreccho. No one is doing anything like that. Yet another unique, fun, and creative title on the Playstation Network.

[lendelin]

Actually, I've been so hardlined that I've made lendelin a Wii apologist.


LOL, nope. I wouldn’t change one sentence in my original post because I didn’t hear one convincing reason against it. I double underline almost everything you said in your posts. I think your reasonings are one class better than the ones of the Wii supporters (what a surprise, we are at the same wave length).

In my last post, however, I tried to explain the appeal of the Wii and the good aspects of its success. We as critics of the system who point to its negative aspects have to ask why it is after all so successful.

The “cool marketing,” the undeserved win of the image wars, the gamers who jump on the bandwagon, and the price tag certainly play a role. But that's not enough. In particular the price tags of the Wii and of its competitors are a necessary but not sufficient condition of its tremendous success.

The success is based upon the appeal of the Wii remote with its instant accessibility for all gamers, and it is based upon the niche Nintendo found of existent but clearly neglected game genres. The answer that casual gamers are just ill informed and not critical enough is a non-answer.

I still think that the motion sensing doesn’t deliver beyond party games, and I still believe that it was a marketing gimmick. This is why it will be very interesting to see how the ratio hardware sales to software sales will develop, as you correctly pointed out. However, the appeal of motion sensing cannot be denied.

I just think that we all deserve much better what the Wii remote delivers. MUCH better.

[lendelin]

http://www.digitpress.com/forum/showthread.php?p=166014#post166014



Apply this same sentiment to the Wii and then you'll understand where a lot of people are coming from.

Dang, you just made the worst mistake in a debate. You introduced a comparison without thinking if it strengthen or weakens your case.

You didn’t just weaken your case. You handed me a gun and scream “PLEASE, guy, please, shoot me, and shoot me NOW!”

I could take this comparison and turn it against your case of the Wii and smash it on concrete like cheap plastic because the DC is in every possible aspect the extreme opposite of the Wii.

Let’s leave it at that, otherwise we get off track. Although I could exploit terrible weaknesses of the Wii in such a comparison, we would only end up with that – a comparison.

...but I really laughed because you dug out such an old quote. I couldn’t remember it. Am I really under so much scrutiny? LOL Terrible mistake, but good stuff.

[Daria]

I just think that we all deserve much better what the Wii remote delivers. MUCH better.

If Nintendo could just ditch the whole "waggle the remote" technique, flip the controls and implement this into their games the Wii would be awesome.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw

(note: I've wanted to post that since I first saw it like two months ago, but figured everyone had seen it by now. :P )

[lendelin]

The reasonings in this thread against critical estimations of motion sensing are not valid arguments because they distract from GAME QUALITY and are therefore besides the point.

Rob2600, blue Lander, and Wirestone, what did poor guys like blissfulnoise and me hear from you so far when we stressed the imprecision of motion sensing with specific examples and the lack of power with bad results of the Wii?

1)’ ...well, graphics maybe very important to you, but not very important for very casual gamers and non-gamers.’ I agree somewhat, but does this change the last generation Wii graphics compared to the present systems? Nope. It just gives us one reason among others why the system sells so well. Sales figures and the appeal of the Wii for specific demographics say very little about its quality, therefore they are besides our criticism.

2) ‘Wii graphics still look good enough for me, after all they are at least on par with the GamCube.’ See 1), plus graphics are not just icing on the cake, they are part of GAMEPLAY in lots of ways. Besides, would PS1 graphics or N64 graphics still be satisfying today? How far should we go back to justify the price of a current console with power processing of the past?

Then we are immediately on the question if the Wii compensates for the lack of power with its new controls. This is hardly to answer with yes considering 1) the quality of the new controls, 2) the best games (= standard, longer, time demanding games) make no use or trivial use of the controls.

3)’...well, overall the game library of the Wii might have more shovel ware than other systems, but it has good games and I play only the good ones.’ This is completely besides the point and therefore no reasoning at all because it doesn’t say a thing about the entire game library, about the criticized motion controls, and nothing if the good games incorporate or ignore motion sensing.

4)’...well, overall the game library of the Wii might have more shovel ware than other systems, but most casual gamers buy only ten games anyway.’ See 3)

5) ‘Some people enjoy the games that are available for it, the most important thing is if the games are short and easy to access.’ No one debated that, but it doesn’t say a thing about criticism of the game quality overall and in particular about the quality of the motion controls.

6) The motion sensing has flaws and sometimes is even awful, but “I wouldn't expect it to be a perfect virtual reality machine...” (blueLander) Talking about justification of lower standards by introducing unrealistic expectations.

I didn’t expect the Wii to be a perfect machine either, the question is if the motion sensing is precise enough to add something to game play beyond short party games. The answer is a clear NO, even admitted in various posts by supporters of the system. In most cases they are frustrating and decrease the quality of games.

7) Finally Wirestone picked up blissfulnoises criticism about motion sensing in specific games and actually responded to it. The response is as weak as it gets:


But if you sit down and play a game that uses nearly all of the xBox 360's buttons, you're not going to be able to make your character do everything you want either.

Why? Because you have to learn the button layout. You have to learn that one button makes the character jump. One makes him run. Pushing X and Y with a trigger releases some sort of special attack.

This is a statement about the complexity of the standard controls, not about their precision.

Learning and mastering controls are a given since we have games. The question is if they are easy to learn, reliable or unreliable, if they are precise or imprecise once learned. The answer about the motion sensing controls are a clear ‘bad’ compared to the standard buttons. Jaded gamers like us know it, and reviewers know it.

I think professional reviewers and experienced gamers are smart enough to learn the controls and then tell us how accessible they are and how good they are once learned.

There are a couple of reviews who evaluate the motion sensing in the same way like in Endless Ocean, that means a mediocre not very enthusiastic grade, and myriads of reviews who stress their insufficiency to get the task done based upon imprecision. The best evaluation they received so far is in Metroid Prime 3. I quoted the terrible reviews for the Tiger Woods games because Rob2600 claimed they are not disappointing, and many many other examples were given by bissfulnoise and me.

I still have to read reviews about a non-party multi platform game in which the motion controls are superior to the standard controls.

IMPORTANT: Just let me say that I really appreciate the civil tone of this thread. It shows that a thread can be informative and intelligent even when enthusiastic gamers pick a controversial topic. There are no blind followers here who produce below the beltline reasonings or cheaply misinterpret posts, only well-informed guys who have clashing opinions but at the same time strive for fairness.

[lendelin]

If Nintendo could just ditch the whole "waggle the remote" technique, flip the controls and implement this into their games the Wii would be awesome.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw

(note: I've wanted to post that since I first saw it like two months ago, but figured everyone had seen it by now. :P )

I didn't know it. Very interesting, thanks for posting the link.

This shows what we can look forward to and enjoy. I think that the motion sensing of the Wii was marketed way too early, and additionally dumbed down in order to deliver a cheap alternative to its competitors. That makes it a disappointing marketing gimmick with instant but not long lasting appeal.

It will be intersting to see if motion sensing will be further developed, and which videogame company will incorporate it in its system. If so, Nintendo has a window of opportunity since their image is associated with it, but others may pick it up too.

I'm all for innovative game controls. I even bought the Real World Golf Bundle when it was on sale, and its motion sensing works pretty well, but I'm not enthusiastic about it either. But it is certainly interesting and different.

One thing really irks me about the Wii. With the lackluster controls the reason to buy an underpowered system vanishes. What's left are great games on an underpowered console which have no or trivial motion sensing, and I really regret that Zelda or Super Mario Galaxy or Metroid Prime are not on a better system. In particular Zelda and Metroid Prime could have been more.

Nevertheless, since I love underwater games, I'm really looking forward to Endless Ocean.

[Wirestone]

And I'm drawn back in.

Lendelin writes: "This is a statement about the complexity of the standard controls, not about their precision. Learning and mastering controls are a given since we have games. The question is if they are good or bad, reliable, if they are precise or imprecise once learned."

I think you're wrong. If you don't know the controls, if you can't master the controls, they are imprecise. Because you can't make the game work.

I have watched many of my friends be turned off video games because they cannot make a relatively simple console game work. The buttons are not "precise" to them. They are mysterious.

I have watched these same folks fall head over heels for the Wii. Why? They understand it. They comprehend what they're doing. They feel like they have accuracy and control.

Frankly, I suspect that gamers griping about Wii controls are jealous that grandma might beat them in a game someday.

[Wirestone]

In a nutshell, this entire thread proves something pretty clearly.

Many gamers don't see a reason to change things. They like complicated controllers. They like their "precision." They like high-resolution graphics and high tech specs. They like things the way they are, the familiar way.

They say they want innovation, but they don't, not really. Not if it means shovelware games might be produced or non-gamers actually become excited about a console or people escape the groupthink of the gaming enthusiast press (Ah yes. Halos 1, 2 and 3. A trilogy of masterworks never to be duplicated). Not if it means that gaming risks looking like something silly and fun, rather than the challenging sport we know it is.

Essentially, these arguments boil down to this: the Wii would be better if it were more like the 360 (best games EVA) or PS3 (Sony ROX) or [insert console here, preferably the Dreamcast].

The other basic argument? Nintendo is pulling the wool over everyone's eyes by creating a gimmick -- their own Cabbage Patch kid. They're counting on customers' stupidity to rake in the bucks. As they count their money in Japan, preparing the next "Bratz very own Ponyz" game, they laugh at us.

Stupid crafty businessmen. We must resist them. Let's go download a multiplayer map and shout through our headsets all night long. No friends codes for us. No sir.

[Neil Koch]

OK, I have to throw my 2 cents in here, since this thread is seemingly -- at least to my eyes -- turning into a GameFAQS-style "my system is better than yours" argument, albeit with much better grammar and far fewer jokes against people's sexuality (ie, no "OMG yur ghey" comments).

And for full disclosure, I do own a Wii, but am planning on getting a PS3 when GTA4 comes out. I still have a PS2 and Xbox1, and have owned pretty much every system before that. I'm not on the side of any company.

I do think the Wii's controls have added to gaming. Metroid Prime 3 (as has been a bit bashed in this thread) becomes very inuitive once you get used to the controls, much the same as Halo's dual-analogs was before that, Goldeneye's single-analog was before that, etc...

Tiger Woods has been brought up a few times in this thread. I don't know about you, but the controls in 08 (07 was a POS, yeah) feel a hell of a lot closer to real golf rather than smacking a little nub forward and back.

Let's still keep in mind that we're still (relatively) early in the Wii's lifecycle and developers are still getting used to creating games using the controls. I remember that after the Dual Shock controller came out, there were a lot of shitty games that emphasized the analog vs "true" gameplay.

Anyway, at every point in a hobby when there are "hardcore" people who form the base, there is a watershed event which seems to send them into a tizzy.

As a metalhead, it was Metallica's "Black Album" (specifically "Enter Sandman"). When that came out in high school, all of the sudden, the jocks who previous mocked my metal t-shirts were asking what album to check out. I was able to turn on a lot of people to "classic" stuff like Iron Maiden, Slayer, Judas Priest, etc.

As a martial arts movie fan, it was Jackie Chan's US releases (specifically "Rush Hour"). Again, through people talking about them -- even with annoying and somewhat ignorant statements like "I like how those Chinese people do karate" -- that I was able to turn people on to the classic directors like Chang Cheh.

My point is, that yeah, the Wii is bringing in "casual" (like blissfulnoise, I detest that term) gamers, but with a (very) little effort, they can be made into "serious" gamers. Lord knows that when faced with what kind of garbage is on TV or in theatres, I'd rather play a game, and more people are feeling the same way.

And it's always a good thing when I bring a lady back to my apartment and she sees my collection, and doesn't automatically think I'm some kind of anti-social hairy-palmed freak. Sure, it might be because of "overrated" games like Guitar Hero and Wii Sports, but I'm cool with that.

I really think that we, as the "hardcore" and/or "oldschool" gamers, should actually enjoy the fact that more people find our hobby acceptable, instead of pissing all over it.

*plink plink*

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Wirestone, if you really believe that the simplicity of the Wii's control scheme is universally hardware-based - why don't you sit Grandma down with a copy of Metroid Prime 3, Resident Evil 4 Wii Edition, or Zelda TP and see if she can get through the tutorial levels - or how about you ask her to replicate the great golf score she got on Wii Sports in a game of Tiger Woods 07 and see how long it takes for her to get frustrated enough to pop a blood vessel.

The Wiimote is not simple by default or by design, in fact, it can be NEEDLESSLY complex at times.

I personally feel that STILL the single best bit of software for "enjoying" the Wiimote in contextual motion usage is Wii Sports.

Nintendo absolutely nailed that game with a nuanced "simplicity" that I haven't seen from them since the NES era...and I don't think that they (or 3rd party devs.) have come close to it since launch.

...and as far as what level of "innovation" gamers are willing to embrace ... it's not that a majority of hardcore gamers aren't WILLING to accept the Wiimote as a standard control feature for the Wii ... it's that hardcore gamers are savvy enough to understand the technical limitations of the hardware MUCH FASTER than a non-gamer ... and after a few months of experiencing what the Wii could do / could offer via Wiimote controls they realized that it had literally hit a glass-ceiling in terms of how it could be used in the future (without some type of additional hardware).

It's not "we don't like innovation" ... it's more "okay, this is innovative, but to a harsh end ... and we're not REALLY looking forward to a future of 'How will waggling be cleverly incorporated into future titles?' "

[Icarus Moonsight]

Let's go download a multiplayer map and shout through our headsets all night long. No friends codes for us. No sir.

Yeah, I agree with the sarcastic tone there. :D I for one, have no desire to be verbally assaulted by some potty mouth brat or have some random d-bag's junk on public display via the LiveCam. Friend codes win over that BS any day.

The Wiimote does work the way it was intended. The perceived failures source is three-fold;

- Nintendo's secrecy about the tech utilized prior to E306 which led to (in that 8-9 month span of time)...

- lofty (some could say -- unrealistic) expectations of gamers (non-gamers wouldn't know about TGS or E3 and thereby wouldn't know anything about the Wii prior to launch... only the "core" demographic observes these things). This is most personified by the huge demand/expectation for a Star Wars Lightsaber=Wiimote game. Not very likely to work the way that the hopefuls envision.

- Finally, developers outright screwing up the control implementation or making bad decisions where control is concerned (This issue is hardly exclusive to the Wii).

If anyone wishes to go into specific games and pick apart where the controls failed and/or could have been implemented better, I'm game. I'm sure the devs are doing this also, Well, at least the ones that are after more than a quick cash-in.


Wirestone, if you really believe that the simplicity of the Wii's control scheme is universally hardware-based - why don't you sit Grandma down with a copy of Metroid Prime 3, Resident Evil 4 Wii Edition, or Zelda TP and see if she can get through the tutorial levels -

That's a bit unfair and extreme now don't ya think? Considering how many "core" gamers were frustrated, sometimes to crying fits and other times pure rage, by Ninja Gaiden xbox or even (to a lesser extent) DMC3. I'd go so far as to say when the controls don't work well in Wii games it's solely the devs fault. Therefor a software issue, not hardware.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

I don't think it's unfair at all considering the statement I was responding to.

If Wirestone believes that "hardcore" gamers are honestly jealous that octogenarians are beating them at games of Wii Bowling ... then I'd like to see those same seniors play games that have been critically praised for their great use of the Wiimote ... all three of the action/adventure games I listed were NOT cited as having "poor controls" in any reviews I can recall. I'm not talking about some shovelware crap ... I'm citing games that implement the Wiimote controls well...see how "intuitive" the games are to non-gamers who are having a blast with games like Wii Sports and Wii Play.

And, as far as the online issues...

You can take simple steps to prevent yourself from being shouted at or camera-flashed on XBL or PSN, nothing more than a few basic menu options being set to "mute" or "off".

You can also exercise the benefits of being part of an "online community" on XBL or PSN through "gamertags", "avatars", "quotations" and so on and so forth ... being able to express the bare minimum of an "identity" online through these things that I at one time personally chuckled at when Moby ... I mean um, J Allard initially "explained" them at E3 / MTV's XBOX 360 "coming out" party ... have actually enhanced the online gaming experience for me moreso than PS2 and XBOX's bare-bones online interfaces.

While I've scrutinized "friend codes" since their inception on the DS, it appears that Nintendo has no desire to move away from them and allow for users to interact online in any way other than as nameless, faceless numbers ... and I'm fairly certain that it has more to do with the fact that they strongly fear their online community (if they ever allowed one to flourish) would become a very attractive marketplace for pedophiles to peruse ...

... it just seems downright xenophobic to me ... NOTHING about the Wii allows for any type of real online social interaction ... even from a creative standpoint ... look at the "Check Mii Out" channel ... you can upload your Mii's but you can't even give them anything more than two initials. It just REEKS of FEAR. Fear of offending people ... fear of "exposing the children" to a Mii that LOOKS like a celebrity that actually has a name that matches ... HEAVEN FORBID the children see a cartoon representation of Ron Jeremy named "Ron J." .... they'll be SCARRED FOR LIFE!

Nothing can EVER convince me that an online community with basic identity choices, audio, video and email options, simple send-a-friend-request communication, and of course the ever important CHOICE to turn these things on and off is inferior to NOT having a name, not being able to send a freind request without some type of exterior communication alerting the user to the "stealth" request and a twelve-digit-number that is neither memorizable nor customizable. NOTHING.

Oh...and if you don't think trash-talking goes on on Nintendo games ... try playing an online game of Metroid Prime Hunters on the DS with the headset. Amazing what comes out of some kids' mouths! On a NINTENDO system no less!

[Icarus Moonsight]

(snip)"all three of the action/adventure games I listed were NOT cited as having "poor controls""(snip)

Ninja Gaiden and DMC3's controls weren't poor either. The game is just HARD. To a grandmother the games cited are also hard. More than likely even more so to her than the games I mentioned are to us.

[Jimid2]

BHvrd: At the end there, you remind me of what's-his-name... the one person who was a really successful troll around here until he got banned. What was his name again?

Anyways, I just found this great article (http://lostgarden.com/2005/09/nintendos-genre-innovation-strategy.html) on not just the Wii, but the gaming industry as a whole. Be prepared to think "Why didn't I think of that?" at some of the things in there. Unfortunately, the guy is a bit biased (read: major Nintendo whore) (actually, like quite a few people on this board) and the article was released before the Wii was, so there's no commentary on how good the controls are outside of speculation.
That was an excellent article. Danc articulates many of my "thoughts" on the subject very nicely - I found myself constantly nodding my head and thinking "exactly!" while reading it. It's an excellent essay...

As for the Wii, I agree that a lot of what's being said about it now in the gaming press and on the 'Net appears to echo reactions to the DS in it's first 12-18 months of life. I reserve judgment on how well the controls work until I actually own one and can devote time to the more "hardcore" games, but my experience with them in a social/casual context playing Wii Sports with friends has been nothing but positive. The machine's a lot of fun at a party! ;)

[swlovinist]

(ducking the bullets, swlovinist crawls out of his hybernation shell)...

The Wii has good games and bad, just like any other system. Here are my two cents. The last time Nintendo tried to be like the other systems(gamecube system), it got its ass handed to them. I think that the Nintendo haters will always find ways to scoff at what the Wii has done. Haters can bash the control, graphics, games, budget titles, etc. etc.

Cant we just accept that the Wii is a different type of game system that is just as important as the other two systems? It offers a unique game experience, and by far is the best game system that caters to the family gaming experience.

Diversity in the gaming industry is a good thing. The truth is that the gaming industry is far beyond Final Fantasy Players, WOW players, and Halo players. For some, there might be a reaction to that.

I love shooters, RPGs, and games that are complex. But to say that good games are limited to that stuff is just plain hogwash. Wii sports is just as much as a great game as Halo is. It just is a different type of game that some may hate.

I guess my point is that the Wii is STILL SELLING OUT and kicking ass in sales. There are some stinkers out for the system, but there are also some great titles as well. It is still selling well for many things:

1. Marketing that is top notch
2. Family game system(as gamers get older, they want to share games with their families)
3. Wii Sports

When Nintendo NES came out, What one game did everyone play? Super Mario Bros! Wii Sports is the game for the Wii that is the new game that everyone wants to get a Wii for.

I own every major console except the PS3 currently. I plan to get one of those within a year. If all the consoles were trying for the same market, then that would be dumb. I welcome the Wii and its approach to gaming. It does not make those games any less fun than mature rated games. It just means that some harcore gamers wont be the only ones in the neighborhood talking and playing games. I am perfectly ok with this.

[Rob2600]

I really think that we, as the "hardcore" and/or "oldschool" gamers, should actually enjoy the fact that more people find our hobby acceptable, instead of pissing all over it.

Exactly. Excellent post overall Neil Koch.


this thread is seemingly -- at least to my eyes -- turning into a GameFAQS-style "my system is better than yours" argument, albeit with much better grammar and far fewer jokes against people's sexuality (ie, no "OMG yur ghey" comments).

I disagree. It's much more than a "my console is better than your console" debate. We're actually discussing two completely different gaming philosophies. I appreciate the fact that the Wii is bringing gaming back into the living room and getting people of all ages involved in the fun. To me, that's great. I love it. However, some others feel like the Wii is watering down or dumbing down gaming. They like complex, specialized games.

Again, at this point in my life, I actually prefer shorter, simpler games. However, if people want to play long, complex games, that's fine...but that doesn't mean the shorter, simpler games on the Wii are inferior. It's just two different philosophies.


graphics are not just icing on the cake, they are part of GAMEPLAY in lots of ways. Besides, would PS1 graphics or N64 graphics still be satisfying today? How far should we go back to justify the price of a current console with power processing of the past?

To me, graphics that are equal to Dreamcast quality are acceptable in today's market and graphics that are equal to GameCube or Xbox quality are completely fine in today's market. If graphics are even better than that, then great, but it's not absolutely necessary right now.

To quote blue lander:

I think anybody who says "The wii is obsolete technology" has completely missed the bus. That matters to us, "hardcore" gamers for lack of a better term, but does it matter to somebody whose favorite game is Windows Solitaire or Bejeweled or something?


the best games (standard, longer, time demanding games) make no use or trivial use of the controls.

Maybe to you, the best games are long, complex, time demanding games. At one point in time, those were the best games to me, too. However, as I wrote in a previous post, my life and needs have changed since I was a teenager. Back then, I had time to play Super Mario RPG and EarthBound. Now, I don't have the time or patience for long games like that. I'd rather play Kororinpa Marble Mania or Zack & Wiki for an hour once every few nights. To me, those are actually the best games now.

Regarding the controls, I quote blue lander again:

Do you think a mom and dad playing Wii Sports with their kids are thinking "Gee, this is fun for the whole family, but I'm afraid we're just enjoying it because it's a gimmick rather than for the in-depth gameplay?" Maybe they're okay with enjoying a game because it's fun to jump around and swing the Wiimote at the screen and laugh at their friends doing the same thing, even if the technology isn't perfect or they could get more precise control from a traditional pad. They evaluate a game on whether they have fun playing it or not (sort of like we classic gamers claim to). And these are the exact same people who Nintendo has gone after.


Learning and mastering controls are a given ... I think professional reviewers and experienced gamers are smart enough to learn the controls and then tell us how accessible they are and how good they are once learned.

Maybe, but remember, professional video game reviewers and experienced gamers have been playing video games for many, many years. They've grown up with controls getting more and more complex and specialized. It's been a natural progression for them. They can't relate to a newcomer or someone who hasn't played video games since the Atari 2600 or the NES. The controls in a game like Call of Duty 4 might seem perfectly simple to a veteran gamer, but would probably seem confusing to a newcomer. (I admit they seem confusing to me and I've been playing video games pretty consistently since 1982.) I feel like professional video game journalists forget sometimes that everyone hasn't been gaming every day for the last 20 years.


In a nutshell, this entire thread proves something pretty clearly.

Many gamers don't see a reason to change things. They like complicated controllers. They like their "precision." They like high-resolution graphics and high tech specs. They like things the way they are, the familiar way.

Essentially, these arguments boil down to this: the Wii would be better if it were more like the 360 (best games EVA) or PS3 (Sony ROX) or [insert console here, preferably the Dreamcast].

The other basic argument? Nintendo is pulling the wool over everyone's eyes by creating a gimmick -- their own Cabbage Patch kid. They're counting on customers' stupidity to rake in the bucks. As they count their money in Japan, preparing the next "Bratz very own Ponyz" game, they laugh at us.

Stupid crafty businessmen. We must resist them. Let's go download a multiplayer map and shout through our headsets all night long. No friends codes for us. No sir.

I agree. Great post. To quote myself again:

I'm excited about Wii Fit. Again, it goes back to video gaming being dragged out of the teenager's bedroom and back into the living room so the whole family can play and have fun.

Some gamers want video games to keep getting more complex and specialized, but that results in gaming becoming a special club where only the veterans can play. I, on the other hand, want video games to get simpler so that everyone - my friends, my family, and I - can have fun together, like back in the Atari 2600/NES days.

It's two different video game philosophies.


The last time Nintendo tried to be like the other systems (gamecube system), it got its ass handed to them.

I know what you mean, but technically, Nintendo made a fortune with the GameCube. Unlike the Xbox and PlayStation 2, each GameCube was sold at a profit from day one.

[Rob2600]

By the way, I just read this:

Dragon Speech (http://www.erasmatazz.com/library/JCGD_Volume_6/Dragon_Speech.html)

"aficionados have played an increasingly powerful role in our industry. ... the marketplace has matured, the aficionado has come to the fore, and the industry has narrowed its offerings to cater to his tastes.

The most important element that the aficionado wants is greater depth in his games. After all, he has spent hundreds, even thousands of dollars and thousands of hours of his time developing his expertise in a game genre. He wants games that allow him to build on his existing skills. He doesn't want to abandon his investment and start all over with a new genre. He wants to keep climbing the ladder, not start over with a new ladder. The aficionados have made this plain over the last few years. The games that they most appreciate (and buy) are extensions of previous designs, games that hew close to the genre while adding greater depth.

Herein lies the doom of my dream. I dreamed of a broad range of games encompassing the huge range of human emotional experience. To put it most succinctly: I dreamed of breadth, but aficionados crave depth. Breadth and depth are orthogonal. My dream lies at cross-purposes to the desires of the aficionados."


It goes back to what I wrote:

Some gamers want video games to keep getting more complex and specialized, but that results in gaming becoming a special club where only the veterans can play. I, on the other hand, want video games to get simpler so that everyone - my friends, my family, and I - can have fun together, like back in the Atari 2600/NES days.

It's two different video game philosophies.

[blue lander]

1)’ ...well, graphics maybe very important to you, but not very important for very casual gamers and non-gamers.’ I agree somewhat, but does this change the last generation Wii graphics compared to the present systems? Nope.

And does it change the fact that many people out there don't care how the wii's graphics compare to the 360 or PS3, specifically the kind of people the wii is marketed to? Nope.



2) ‘Wii graphics still look good enough for me, after all they are at least on par with the GamCube.’ See 1), plus graphics are not just icing on the cake, they are part of GAMEPLAY in lots of ways. Besides, would PS1 graphics or N64 graphics still be satisfying today?

To the Popcap audience? Sure. I doubt they're playing bejewled and thinking "Man, these graphics are so PS1. Screw this, I'm firing up Halo 3"



6) The motion sensing has flaws and sometimes is even awful, but “I wouldn't expect it to be a perfect virtual reality machine...” (blueLander) Talking about justification of lower standards by introducing unrealistic expectations.

So basically, your argument boils down to "The wii's controls don't perform up to my expectations or requirements, and I decree that all wii owners have the same expectations and requirements as myself, therefore the wii is a failure?" Okay, whatever you say! I'm sure Nintendo is really disappointed they let you down. They're crying all the way to the bank.

[lendelin]

After I wrote this...

IMPORTANT: Just let me say that I really appreciate the civil tone of this thread. It shows that a thread can be informative and intelligent even when enthusiastic gamers pick a controversial topic. There are no blind followers here who produce below the beltline reasonings or cheaply misinterpret posts, only well-informed guys who have clashing opinions but at the same time strive for fairness.

...this thread went down the drain big time. Reasoning and specific criticism is ignored, and some fall consistently back on old statements which have nothing to do with the topic.

Worse even, now we are on a campaign rally level shouting "We want change, the establishment doesn't,' which makes sense for Obama to mobilize supporters but is absolute nonsense in this thread.

I want to read something specifically about the quality of the motion controls, and all we get are distracting answers which have absolutely nothing to do with the topic.

Repeatedly others and me said the motion controls are suited for short party games, suited for family friendly games, there are lots of explanation why this system is so successful, and still we hear arguments pretending there is even a debate about it.

Criticism about the motion controls gets the response 'do you really think a a family cares, they have just fun with it.' This is ignoring what we already agreed upun (see above), but furthermore it is a completely nonsensical NON-RESPONSE.

If a film critic points out weaknesses of a movie and gives it a bad grade, how can anyone in his right mind answer "Well, people watch it, it is good enough for them and they had fun watching it." (The next step might be 'if it is good enough for them, it should be good enough for you.') OR "the movie didn't meet your standards, but it was good enough for me."

This is disregarding specific reasoning in order to save pre-existing believes. In other words: just plain bad and nonsense.

The main topic is the quality of the motion controls after more than one year after the release of the Wii. "Good enough for quick 20-minute game fixes for the whole family," all agreed. Critics pointed out that the new controls just don't deliver beyond this level,, they are overall incredibly disappointing for games which require more precise controls. The best we can say is that in rare instances for some gamers they offer an alternative (Metroid Prime), in a myriad of cases they are from mediocre to terrible or just plainly ignored which doesn't meet modest standards.

...and really it just plain nonsense if someone responds to this criticism by pointing to other systems how bad they are, or build up scapegoats of elitist dumb FPS-fanatics obsessed with graphics who refuse change, or repeat again that it is good enough for the family, or that YOUR standards are not mine, or the other systems have bad games too, or Nintendo gets rich....the list is just too long.

[lendelin]

And does it change the fact that many people out there don't care how the wii's graphics compare to the 360 or PS3, specifically the kind of people the wii is marketed to? Nope.



To the Popcap audience? Sure. I doubt they're playing bejewled and thinking "Man, these graphics are so PS1. Screw this, I'm firing up Halo 3"



So basically, your argument boils down to "The wii's controls don't perform up to my expectations or requirements, and I decree that all wii owners have the same expectations and requirements as myself, therefore the wii is a failure?" Okay, whatever you say! I'm sure Nintendo is really disappointed they let you down. They're crying all the way to the bank.

I rest the case of my last post. Geez. Is the profit of a console or a game your standard of its quality?

[blissfulnoise]

Because this thread is derailing fast, I'm going to change the tone up (but not the length) to see if we can't figure out what the hell we're fighting (?) about.

But first, a friendly moderator alert:

WARNING! A HUGE BATTLESHIP “INFLAMITORY POST” IS APPROACHING FAST.


I agree. Great post.

No, it's not a great post. It's reverting back to juvenile arguments that are better left to lesser minds on lesser message boards. But as a someone who is happy, indeed comfortable, playing in the kiddie pool, I shall respond (ego much?).

Based off of his responses and his ducking of my question I'm convinced that Wirestone does not own a Wii, or indeed any of the three systems in question. He's welcome to his opinions but I'm also welcome to call him a twit who doesn't know what he's talking about (evident on if he owns a Wii or not).

And I will…


Many gamers don't see a reason to change things. They like complicated controllers. They like their "precision." They like high-resolution graphics and high tech specs. They like things the way they are, the familiar way.

First of all, and this goes for your whole post, I think your sarcasm detectors are set to "stupid". You may want to recalibrate.

On point, contrary, change is the one element that makes me most excited about gaming. You can find me echoing this sentiment all over this board. I gushed about how wonderful games like Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, and Katamari Damacy are; pushing the medium of video gaming into new directions. I get excited about so-called "Serious Games" and their impact in mainstream gaming. Games as Art are showing what can be possible when style and creativity are weighted more than function. flOw and Portal were some of the most exciting games for me in 2007 just because of how big a sea change it represented for how we look at gaming.

Perhaps your definition of change only extends to what Nintendo's coming up with? Because, if you're paying attention, they don't have a monolopy on the effort.

But clearly the Wii represents a great potential change in how we interact with our consoles, the gripe has to do with how poorly said change has been implemented.

And I'll bold this out so people stop reading into it some sort of bias against the games, or the company, or some other random idea that pops into their head...

The Wii Remote does not function with 100% accuracy under non-optimal conditions.

That's the main issue. That's it. I'm happy to bitch about shitty Bratz games or defend the Xbox 360 or compain about unncessary or uncomfortable waggling or whatever the hell this thread has devolved into, but the above is the single, signficiantly important issue.

And if you don't sugar coat it, it's a hardware defect. To top it off, this is uncorrectable unless Nintendo does a revision to their hardware, similar to the DS Lite, and improves the technology in the Wii Remote.

If the fucking "X" button doesn't work on the Xbox 360's controller 3% of the time, and it is supposedly working as designed, wouldn't you say that's a damn critical design flaw?

Thus, "precision", a core and fundamental element in playing video games, is pretty damn important. So, yeah, you can say it's something I care about when gaming. Or would you prefer to play video games that control randomly? (Actually, that's a good project right there...)

Regarding complicated control schemes; go back and read my post on Metroid Prime 3 and talk to me about “complicated controllers”. Go play WarioWare and tell me how complicated a simple party game’s controls can be. Give a fighting game like Mortal Kombat or Dragon Ball Z a try, see how often you can do your special move out of ten tries.

Wii games practically lambaste you in the first 15 minutes or so explaining how to use your Wiimote to play the game. But Rob has a point about new gamers not able to immediately adapt to now standard control schemes like with first person shooters. People that haven’t played a video game since Pac-Man are going to be extremely intimidated trying to play something like Call of Duty 4. But does that mean that they’re NOT going to be intimidated playing Super Mario Galaxy? I bet the initial reactions are identical.

Now, taking the above into account, is it enough to keep me from playing and enjoying my Wii? No, it's not. Does that make me a hypocrite? You can be the judge but 9 out of 10 internet assholes agree.

Wii Sports is special and unique (notice it’s pretty much the ONLY Wii game we’re talking about here? Does someone want to make their case for a game that doesn’t have “Wii” in the title?) in that its control schemes are generally simple once learned. They still require a good bit of explanation (how many times did your non-gamer family and friends have to thunk a bowling ball before they managed to get it down the lane?) but the learning curve stays shallow. You don't have to master rocket jumping or using your HyperSword to cut down the Tree of Embers. You don't have to master triangle jumping or Hadoken throwing either (see: the majority of the Wii's library).

Finally, high-resolution (do you mean high definition?) graphics are change. Universal HD support is exclusive to this generation and is greatly appreciated by those of us who are own, or are planning to purchase, high definition televisions. If you meant high-resolution, yes, graphics improve every generation of hardware. Arguably less significantly as we've moved forward; regardless, it stands as progress (read: change) Or would you perfer that graphical progress simply halted because you don't see a difference between a DreamCast game and a Playstation 3 game?


Essentially, these arguments boil down to this: the Wii would be better if it were more like the 360 (best games EVA) or PS3 (Sony ROX) or [insert console here, preferably the Dreamcast].

No, they don’t. You're missing the point. The argument (so much as it is one) is that Nintendo has created a console with faulty hardware that is very poorly implemented outside of a few gimmick games (and regardless of what your mom thinks about it, Wii Sports is the goddamn definition of a gimmick game).

The Wii wouldn’t necessarily be “better” if it were like more traditional systems. But you might want to check in with Sakurai as he’s stated that Smash Brothers wouldn’t be improved with motion controls. And give Goichi Suda a call because he regrets developing No More Heroes on the Wii.

And I'm not cheerleading for any fucking console. My loyality is to the damn games. I don't care what platform its on. But, yes, it pisses me off when people slam the PS3 after never having played some of the standout titles on the system. As someone who has played said titles, I will stand to defend them from internet idiocy if I'm so inclined (and I am).


The other basic argument? Nintendo is pulling the wool over everyone's eyes by creating a gimmick -- their own Cabbage Patch kid. They're counting on customers' stupidity to rake in the bucks. As they count their money in Japan, preparing the next "Bratz very own Ponyz" game, they laugh at us.

They did create a gimmick. That's not always a bad thing; it can be a very good thing in fact (and before you flame me for my Wii Sports comment, take that into account). Nintendo has no part in all the Shovelware coming out for the system beyond simply allowing it. I've said multiple times that Nintendo's offerings on the platform are the standout experiences. Again, I see them as must play for gamers of all stripes.

I'm sure they're not counting on customer ignorance to propel the system forward. They're obviously extremely savvy otherwise they wouldn't be in the position they're in now. My stance is that non-gamers buy the Wii out of market hype and curiosity. Do you disagree with that? Are non-gamers buying the Wii so they can play Miyamoto's next great game? Are they buying it to play Sega's follow up to NiGHTS? Or are they buying it because they hear how fun it is to play tennis in Wii Sports?


Stupid crafty businessmen. We must resist them. Let's go download a multiplayer map and shout through our headsets all night long. No friends codes for us. No sir.

You don’t even need a headset for that: twit.

Side Note: If some kind, unbiased soul would like to actually sumize the points being made int his thread and set it up as some kind of a primer for newcomers, you'd be welcome to all of my invisible Meseta.

[blue lander]

Heh, at least this thread produced a good benchmark for judging if the wii is the right console for you: Do you take video games so seriously that you post voluminously about them? Do you become enraged when a company makes a console/game that isn't directly targeted at the type of gamer you are? Do you think it's patently impossible for anybody to evaluate a console on different criteria than you do? Is a videogame console an unqualified failure if it doesn't appeal to you, personally?

If you answered yes to any/all of those questions, maybe you take videogames waaaaaay too seriously to enjoy the wii.

I guess I can't blame any of you, I was just as upset when the Playstation originally came out and the marketed shifted away from the type of games I liked and companies started making games for "normal" people. I was probably just as upset at the thought of some dumb jock playing some 3D Madden on his Playstation while I was playing Dragon Force on my Saturn, as you are at the thought of some clueless "normal" person playing some depthless gimmicky minigame on the wii while you're playing Bioshock on the 360. Of course, I was like 15 at the time...

[j_factor]

1)’ ...well, graphics maybe very important to you, but not very important for very casual gamers and non-gamers.’ I agree somewhat, but does this change the last generation Wii graphics compared to the present systems? Nope. It just gives us one reason among others why the system sells so well. Sales figures and the appeal of the Wii for specific demographics say very little about its quality, therefore they are besides our criticism.

2) ‘Wii graphics still look good enough for me, after all they are at least on par with the GamCube.’ See 1), plus graphics are not just icing on the cake, they are part of GAMEPLAY in lots of ways. Besides, would PS1 graphics or N64 graphics still be satisfying today? How far should we go back to justify the price of a current console with power processing of the past?

I think that comment a couple pages ago about diminishing returns is spot-on. To me, the difference in graphics between 360/PS3 and Wii/Xbox/GC/PS2/DC isn't that vast. The main difference is that 360 and PS3 offer HD support. HD support is kind of their main selling point. And seeing as the majority of people still don't have an HD set, it's kind of a limited draw. To a lot of people, the difference isn't a big deal. For example, I played the new Ratchet & Clank on a really nice HD setup. It's a gorgeous game, really great graphics. But the whole time I was playing it, I was thinking, "it really wouldn't make much of a difference to this game if it were on a lesser system". To people who aren't "hardcore" gamers (I hate using that term), the graphics of PS3 and 360 are of little value.

I'm tangenting a little already. Diminishing returns: let's do a little comparison, shall we? Let's look at the US Dreamcast launch in 1999. Compare the Dreamcast (in your head) to the 3DO, which launched six years earlier. Now compare it to the 360, which launched six years later. Is Dreamcast squarely in the middle between the two systems in terms of graphics? I would say no. I would say the difference between Dreamcast and 3DO is much, much greater than the difference between Dreamcast and 360. Why is that? The Dreamcast launched with a price point of $200. The 360 launched with a price point of $300/$400 and couldn't provide the same leap in graphics. What's up with that?


6) The motion sensing has flaws and sometimes is even awful, but “I wouldn't expect it to be a perfect virtual reality machine...” (blueLander) Talking about justification of lower standards by introducing unrealistic expectations.

I didn’t expect the Wii to be a perfect machine either, the question is if the motion sensing is precise enough to add something to game play beyond short party games. The answer is a clear NO, even admitted in various posts by supporters of the system.

What about Zack & Wiki, Tomb Raider Anniversary, Ghost Squad, Kororinpa, and Medal of Honor Heroes 2? To me, those five games are perfect examples of how to use the Wii controller right, and in all five cases the controller does make a difference to gameplay (and they aren't party games). Incidentally, they're all fairly established/traditional types of games.

Look at Time Crisis 4 for PS3. It has to be sold as a bundle with a light gun, and the light gun is the same freakin' technology as the Wiimote. With Ghost Squad they didn't have to worry about it, and it retails at one-third the price. I think that makes a pretty big difference.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

@ Blue_Lander you forgot:

Do you support a company strongly enough based on their historical significance in the game industry to ignore a significant amount of legitimate techincal shortcomnings in a console to buy it and continue to enjoy it on it's own merits with no genuine realization of said shortcomings (or in the case of realization - admission of any diminishing returns in the quality of enjoyment) for more than, say 3-4 months post purchase?

Then the Wii is perfect for you!

[Rob2600]

The main topic is the quality of the motion controls after more than one year after the release of the Wii. "Good enough for quick 20-minute game fixes for the whole family," all agreed. Critics pointed out that the new controls just don't deliver beyond this level,, they are overall incredibly disappointing for games which require more precise controls. The best we can say is that in rare instances for some gamers they offer an alternative (Metroid Prime), in a myriad of cases they are from mediocre to terrible or just plainly ignored which doesn't meet modest standards.

The controls in - just to name a few games - Super Mario Galaxy, Medal of Honor Heroes 2, Metroid Prime 3, Twilight Princess, The Godfather, and Super Paper Mario are fine and those aren't 20 minute party games. I didn't read any reviews stating the controls in those games are incredibly disappointing, terrible, or imprecise.


Do you support a company strongly enough based on their historical significance in the game industry to ignore a significant amount of legitimate techincal shortcomnings in a console to buy it and continue to enjoy it on it's own merits with no genuine realization of said shortcomings

What shortcomings? Again, Super Mario Galaxy, Medal of Honor Heroes 2, Metroid Prime 3, Twilight Princess, The Godfather, Super Paper Mario, etc. have fine controls and those aren't 20 minute party games. I'm not sure what level of motion controls you're expecting, but I'm fine with some gestures and pointing. Are you expecting every movement to be motion-based? As I've written before, if I had to wave my arms back and forth for an hour to swim from one location to another in Endless Ocean, that would be stupid. If I had to jog in place to make Mario walk in Super Mario Galaxy, that would be stupid.

[blue lander]

To be honest, if considerations like "historical significance" and "technological shortcomings" even come into your console buying decision making process, you probably won't enjoy the wii anyways. I'm guessing wii buyers just want to play some fun quick games that get them up off their asses and don't involve pressing buttons repeatedly all day. Most people do enough of both every day at work.

And does anybody else think that expecting the wii's motion sensing to be implemented perfectly the first time around is a little like expecting the Atari 2600 to have had a perfect, fully evolved joystick? Comparing the wiimote to what it ought to ideally be is a little like comparing a 2600 controller to a saturn digital pad, or a 5200 analog joystick to a Dual Shock.

[lendelin]

Heh, at least this thread produced a good benchmark for judging if the wii is the right console for you: Do you take video games so seriously that you post voluminously about them? Do you become enraged when a company makes a console/game that isn't directly targeted at the type of gamer you are? Do you think it's patently impossible for anybody to evaluate a console on different criteria than you do? Is a videogame console an unqualified failure if it doesn't appeal to you, personally?

If you answered yes to any/all of those questions, maybe you take videogames waaaaaay too seriously to enjoy the wii.

I guess I can't blame any of you, I was just as upset when the Playstation originally came out and the marketed shifted away from the type of games I liked and companies started making games for "normal" people. I was probably just as upset at the thought of some dumb jock playing some 3D Madden on his Playstation while I was playing Dragon Force on my Saturn, as you are at the thought of some clueless "normal" person playing some depthless gimmicky minigame on the wii while you're playing Bioshock on the 360. Of course, I was like 15 at the time...

You just hit the ignorant and worst fanboy level. Completely besides the point, ignoring what was said, creating opinions which didn't appear remotely in this thread in order to avoid the reasoning of others.

This level is the capitulation of reasoning because others have better arguments. This post screams 'I just wanna believe, I don't want to think.'

[lendelin]

The controls in - just to name a few games - Super Mario Galaxy, Medal of Honor Heroes 2, Metroid Prime 3, Twilight Princess, The Godfather, and Super Paper Mario are fine and those aren't 20 minute party games. I didn't read any reviews stating the controls in those games are incredibly disappointing, terrible, or imprecise.

We went over this again already. I responded and didn't hear reasoning against my opinion. This becomes more than redundant, it becomes a waste of time.

Why do you have to fall back to the same level over and over again without picking up the response?

[blue lander]

Madam, I may be an ignorant fanboy, but in the morning I shall be sober and you will still be a person who gets seriously upset when somebody disagrees with your opinion of an electronic toy for children.

[lendelin]

Madam, I may be an ignorant fanboy, but in the morning I shall be sober and you will still be a person who gets seriously upset when somebody disagrees with your opinion of an electronic toy for children.

Now you hit also the childish level and below-the beltline-reasoning level.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

The controls in - just to name a few games - Super Mario Galaxy, Medal of Honor Heroes 2, Metroid Prime 3, Twilight Princess, The Godfather, and Super Paper Mario are fine and those aren't 20 minute party games. I didn't read any reviews stating the controls in those games are incredibly disappointing, terrible, or imprecise.



What shortcomings? Again, Super Mario Galaxy, Medal of Honor Heroes 2, Metroid Prime 3, Twilight Princess, The Godfather, Super Paper Mario, etc. have fine controls and those aren't 20 minute party games. I'm not sure what level of motion controls you're expecting, but I'm fine with some gestures and pointing. Are you expecting every movement to be motion-based? As I've written before, if I had to wave my arms back and forth for an hour to swim from one location to another in Endless Ocean, that would be stupid. If I had to jog in place to make Mario walk in Super Mario Galaxy, that would be stupid.

What shortcomings? You are reading this thread aren't you?

Imperfect accuracy, functionality, and responsiveness of the Wiimote should be enough to detail "technical shortcomings" and I'm pretty sure that they've been detailed ad nauseam in at least the last few pages (if you've been reading).

Now, as far as "expectations" let's please not jump to conclusions or make any assumptions about what I. PERSONALLY. EXPECT. from the system.

I never claimed that the controller should function in the way that you described.

If I could sum up the way that I feel about the Wiimote as concisely as possible it would be that Nintendo made me a promise in 2005 that what I'd have in my hands would make my experience in games more "immersive", "exciting", and that I'd see control features more "innovative" than I ever have before. It's now 2008 and other than Wii Sports, I don't feel that any of the above apply to any gaming experiences I've had on the system. I'm sorry, but I'd find an excellent game like Super Mario Galaxy equally fun and exciting with a Gamecube Controller. Simply put, I feel like I bought into some serious hype that has yet to be delivered on, and it has a lot to do with the technical boundaries of the controller's hardware versus the promises that Nintendo made.

Please watch this video and tell me if you think that everything in it is a completely accurate and factual depiction of how the Wii functions, because for many of us, this video was the genesis of our interest in the system and it's controls and was a large part of what we built our expectations on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8aWdWpYLcs

[Rob2600]

The Wii Remote does not function with 100% accuracy under non-optimal conditions.

That's the main issue. ... If the fucking "X" button doesn't work on the Xbox 360's controller 3% of the time, and it is supposedly working as designed, wouldn't you say that's a damn critical design flaw?

Yes, but there's a difference between the Xbox 360's controller and the Wii remote. The Xbox 360's controller is the evolution of 20 years worth of controllers. The Wii remote is new technology. Usually when new technology hits the market, there's a certain level of tolerance people have with it, right?

For example, when the PlayStation hit the market, people put up with turning it upside down to get it to read their discs. It was annoying, but the PlayStation was so cool that people overlooked that flaw. When the iPod hit the market, people put up with dying batteries. It was annoying, but the iPod was so cool that people overlooked that flaw.

People expect, for example, a controller that's based on 20-year-old commonplace technology to be perfect. People are a bit more forgiving when it comes to new technology.



The controls in - just to name a few games - Super Mario Galaxy, Medal of Honor Heroes 2, Metroid Prime 3, Twilight Princess, The Godfather, and Super Paper Mario are fine and those aren't 20 minute party games. I didn't read any reviews stating the controls in those games are incredibly disappointing, terrible, or imprecise.

We went over this again already. I responded and didn't hear reasoning against my opinion. This becomes more than redundant, it becomes a waste of time.

I'm not sure what answer you're looking for. You wrote that the Wii remote is only good for 20 minute party games. I replied stating the Wii remote works great in non-party games as well, like Super Mario Galaxy and The Godfather. If that doesn't go against your opinion, then what does?

[Rob2600]

Nintendo made me a promise in 2005 that what I'd have in my hands would make my experience in games more "immersive", "exciting", and that I'd see control features more "innovative" than I ever have before. It's now 2008 and other than Wii Sports, I don't feel that any of the above apply to any gaming experiences I've had on the system.

Nintendo made the same promise to me and I think it delivered. I am more immersed and excited about video games than I'd been during the last few years. That means you and I had different expectations.

[blissfulnoise]

Yes, but there's a difference between the Xbox 360's controller and the Wii remote. The Xbox 360's controller is the evolution of 20 years worth of controllers. The Wii remote is new technology. Usually when new technology hits the market, there's a certain level of tolerance people have with it, right?

Good point. I didn't really think of it like that. I wouldn't say that spatial motion detection is "new", and I'd argue that the PS3 does it better than the Wii does (though no spatial), but it's a good point.

Thank you.

[Rob2600]

Good point. I didn't really think of it like that. I wouldn't say that spatial motion detection is "new", and I'd argue that the PS3 does it better than the Wii does (though no spatial), but it's a good point.

Thank you.

You're welcome. That's my view regarding the Wii remote. It's not 100% perfect, but it's so new, cool, and fun that I'm willing to let little imperfections slide. The fun I have outweighs the imperfections.

And spatial motion detection might not be new technology overall, but it is new in terms of mainstream video gaming.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

You're welcome. That's my view regarding the Wii remote. It's not 100% perfect, but it's so new, cool, and fun that I'm willing to let little imperfections slide.

And spatial motion detection might not be new technology overall, but it is new in terms of mainstream video gaming.

Just curious Rob ... how long have you owned your Wii?

I'm not going to make some kind of presumption that you won't like it anymore in a few months, I'm just curious in general about how many people I meet that are still as enthusiastic about the motion controls after a year or so.

[Rob2600]

Just curious Rob ... how long have you owned your Wii?

I'm not going to make some kind of presumption that you won't like it anymore in a few months, I'm just curious in general about how many people I meet that are still as enthusiastic about the motion controls after a year or so.

I've had mine for about seven weeks, but I've been playing it with my brother since December 2006.

I think you're viewing the Wii remote as a novelty, so you're more likely to get bored of it or dismiss it. I understand that. However, I'm viewing the Wii remote as a new standard controller, so I'm taking it more seriously (for lack of a better description), which is why I don't think I'll be bored of it two years from now. To me, this is the new type of controller. To you, it's an experiment. Again, I understand that, but it seems like we have two different perspectives.

Were some gamers equally critical and apprehensive of the radical new NES controller when it debuted in 1985? I imagine going from the Atari 2600 joystick to the NES control pad probably caused debate.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

No, no.

I neither view it as a novelty or an experiment. And I've never called it a "gimmick".

If this is the direction that Nintendo wants to go moving forward with all of their systems, I'm fine with that since they failed to really "standardize" an evolutionary controller post the SNES (though the "classic" controller add on for the Wiimote is a freaking EXCELLENT design that I love using on the virtual console for just about everything that allows it) . If this is "the new" controller that Nintendo decides on moving forward - I only hope that they continue to build on it (namely add some type of spatial realizing hardware) and allow it to evolve before moving onto something different..

I DO NOT hope that Sony or Microsoft on the other hand supplant their existing controllers in the future with Wiimote style design evolutions, as they've both made ergonomic steps forward in their controller designs that have made the "gamepad" as close to perfect as I've ever seen.

I'm fine with the Wiimote, I simply feel it's technologically limited, I expected slightly more based on what Nintendo "eluded" to in early press, and I don't feel that it truly "immerses" me in the experience of a game like Resident Evil or The Legend of Zelda (or any other example that you can come up with) any MORE than a good control pad does.

[Rob2600]

I neither view it as a novelty or an experiment. And I've never called it a "gimmick".

If this is the direction that Nintendo wants to go moving forward with all of their systems, I'm fine with that since they failed to really "standardize" an evolutionary controller post the SNES (though the "classic" controller add on for the Wiimote is a freaking EXCELLENT design that I love using on the virtual console for just about everything that allows it) . If this is "the new" controller that Nintendo decides on moving forward - I only hope that they continue to build on it (namely add some type of spatial realizing hardware) and allow it to evolve before moving onto something different..

I DO NOT hope that Sony or Microsoft on the other hand supplant their existing controllers in the future with Wiimote style design evolutions, as they've both made ergonomic steps forward in their controller designs that have made the "gamepad" as close to perfect as I've ever seen.

I'm fine with the Wiimote, I simply feel it's technologically limited, I expected slightly more based on what Nintendo "eluded" to in early press, and I don't feel that it truly "immerses" me in the experience of a game like Resident Evil or The Legend of Zelda (or any other example that you can come up with) any MORE than a good control pad does.

Fair enough. :) Great post, too.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Fair enough. :) Great post, too.

Thank you kindly sir.

:cheers:

[WanganRunner]

I *do* think that the Wiimote adds an amusing-but-not-mind-blowing degree of extra immersion to some titles.

I may be alone here, but I thought that the use of the Wiimote in Twilight Princess gave me a sense of greater attachment to what was going on in-game. I liked using it to shoot arrows and aim the hookshot. I know it was silly and very much not revolutionary, but I liked it anyway and that's all that should really matter.

The kinds of titles that should really take full advantage of the motion sensing seem not to exist yet. I'm waiting for interactive building games where you can move things around in 3 dimensions with the wiimote, like interactive legos, which will really create the sensation of "reaching inside the TV", like Nintendo originally claimed.

I don't entertain the idea that this sort of utilization works or makes sense for every title though, just like every DS title doesn't need to use the two screens.

[lendelin]

Yes, but there's a difference between the Xbox 360's controller and the Wii remote. The Xbox 360's controller is the evolution of 20 years worth of controllers. The Wii remote is new technology. Usually when new technology hits the market, there's a certain level of tolerance people have with it, right?

This is your response to the statement that gamers would be outraged if the 360 or PS3 controllers wouldn't work well.

That means we have to be a bit more forgiving and understanding because the technology is new. This biased starting point is exactly the reasons for your euphemisms. A flaw becomes a "limitation" or "imperfection" and should be overlooked because it is "new" after all.

It is ok to point out that the D-Pad of the 360 controller doesn't work well, but "people" (all sorts of gamers, reviewers?) use lower standards to evaluate the new controls.

This would make the evaluations of the new controls in reviews even worse because they are held to a lower standard...unless you assume that reviewers are close minded, they don't give the Wii a fair chance, or they are so used to the standard controls that they are not able to produce an unbiased review.

I'd like to make a comment about the "new"-reasoning because I heard it very often and because think this is actually the crux of our differences regarding the Wii.

As you pointed out in a later thread, you are enthusiastic about the new controls and regard them as the new substitute ("standard") of the establsihed controls, and...


It's not 100% perfect, but it's so new, cool, and fun that I'm willing to let little imperfections slide.

I think when you play the Wii you see not only how the Wii remote is, but you also play with it its potential. This enthusiasm determines your evaluations which is admirable but leads to bias.

I understand your enthusiasm, and I think motion sensing is a great alternative to the standard controls we are all used to. It opens phantastic possibilities.

However, I evaluate what IS, not what could be, should be, or will be. For you it is already fun to an extent which make you overlook "little imperfections," for me and lots of others the flaws of the Wii remote made it suitable for short, lighthearted party games, but are insufficient beyond that level.

Beyond short fun games they are either used in trivial ways, severely hampered ways, and are just half-baked when more 'simulation' is needed than limited gameplay. Right now they are gerat for Super Swing Golf, but not for Tiger Woods, Top Spin, or Table Tennis. The latter couldn't hold water to its 360 version.

As long as the standard buttons deliver better control, I have more fun with them. I am enthusiastic about the potential of motion sensing, but I keep a cool head when I try out new hardware.


Were some gamers equally critical and apprehensive of the radical new NES controller when it debuted in 1985? I imagine going from the Atari 2600 joystick to the NES control pad probably caused debate.

This 'just give it time like other great new innovations' because gamers are not flexible enough to embrace great technology doesn't work. The NES controller was an instant success, it got immediately prasie, and after one year after its release noone in his right mind would have gone back.

The same was true for the N64 analog stick which opened new possibilities and delivered rich gameplay. In stark contrast to the Wii remote everyone agreed that it makes the games of the new generation better.

Gamers are smart enough to embrace new technology - that is if it delievrs.

[Icarus Moonsight]

To answer Frankie's query: I've had my Wii for 51 weeks now.

RE: "they are so used to the standard controls that they are not able to produce an unbiased review."

My mind immediately goes to this possibility. Especially when the term 'waggle' is used and not in a lighthearted or joking manner.

Stay with me here, I have a point I'd like to reiterate. :)

Metroid Prime really changed my views and opinions on console FPS. I enjoyed the cube versions so much, I've neglected/abandoned PC FPSs for the last few years as a result. The lock-on targeting made the genre playable on consoles for me. However, lock-on does have that 'crutch' feel to it. Sometimes I wondered if some battles were made a bit too easy because of it. Corruption took Samus off her crutches and forced you to earn those kills with actual aiming. Instead of being 2nd best to keyboard/mouse (MP and Echoes) it outright toppled the tried and true standard configuration (I still maintain that dual analog is slow-broken-crap, it never responded well to my input and how I intended and is a severe hindrance for me). The wiimote gave tactile feedback through rumble and the speaker and emulated her arm cannon to your own hand. I hesitate to use perfect to describe it but, it's pretty damn close.

That is why, in a nutshell, I don't believe the controls only lend themselves well to short multiplayer minigames fests. It lies solely in the application whether the final outcome is good or bad (my previous point, restated). If the Wiimote was responsible for making games bad there wouldn't be good games at all. For every horrible example there is a good one. Far Cry has MP3 as it's anti-thesis. Soul Calibur Legends has No More Heroes. Also, with application of the logic: 'the quality of the control equals the quality of the games' then why is there so many bad games on systems with traditional control schemes if they are truly superior? If this still can not be rejected, then I ask: Why two sets of standards?

[lendelin]

RE: "they are so used to the standard controls that they are not able to produce an unbiased review."


This shuts down every criticism and is wishful thinking. Under these assumptions the Wii remote will be always great and independently of its quality invulnerable.

We have to assume that everyone gives the Wii remote a fair shot, are not smarter or dumber, flexibe or inflexible, open-minded or close-minded than others. Otherwise we determine an elite who speaks for others, and even worse we evaluate from the desired result: bad grade from biased reviewers, good grades from impartial ones.

Do you think that the supporters of the Wii remote in this thread are flexible gamers with limited experience or stubborn inflexible long-time gamers?

[Icarus Moonsight]

Honestly, I think we all are, at least a little bit (stubborn and inflexible). We've just forked paths. If not for that division we'd probably be in majority, if not total, agreement.

I was seriously considering staying out of modern consoles this cycle. Maybe my taking up the Wii was inflexibility on my part? But, then I'd have to discount all the other reasons I own mine that I previously posted about which are genuine. It's more likely that no matter what I wasn't going to be into the new consoles and the Wii just happened to fall into both my tastes and my lap at the right time to keep me in the game, so to speak. LOL

My disdain for reviews comes more from my low opinion of professional critics. I'm a consumer reports kind of guy. I'd rather hear what real people think (as long as it's intelligible and not a unhelpful summary statement like; "It's the roxxors"). Probably why I keep posting in these types of threads. :hmm: I think, especially these days, career critics are far too prone to coercion, bias and being jaded in both material covered and their occupation. Yes, it's prejudice, blanket and preconceived, maybe a touch suspicious but, I don't think I can help it. I have trust issues. LOL

[sidnotcrazy]

And anyone who thinks that the success of the Wii will be the downfall of the industry really needs to wake up and smell what they're shoveling.

Exackly, there is so much variety in the marketplace now. I enjoy everything, including my WiI, and I don't think I am alone in saying such.

[blue lander]

And at the end of the day, there's nothing that can really be done about it. If that's the way the market's moving, then that's the way the market's moving. And it's obvious it's going to pass a lot of people by whether they like it or not. If companies can make more money going after casual gamers, they aren't going to stop because it angers some inflexible old nerds on some message board.

[lendelin]

And at the end of the day, there's nothing that can really be done about it. If that's the way the market's moving, then that's the way the market's moving. And it's obvious it's going to pass a lot of people by whether they like it or not. If companies can make more money going after casual gamers, they aren't going to stop because it angers some inflexible old nerds on some message board.

When are you willing to give up your angry Don Quixote role? I'm afraid never. It is convenient to go after opinions which were never stated and completeley ignore the opinion of others, but this way you'll never be able to 1) think, 2) be fair, 3) change or correct your opinion based on better reasoning of others. All of the above prevents us from becoming radicals, and point 3) is an exciting intellectual feast.

[blue lander]

You know... I've enjoyed this thread, especially reading the back and forth between Rob2600 and Frankie_says_relax, and I'd like to think I'm above name calling (like, say, "ignorant fanboy"), but I've never met anyone on these boards as thoroughly intolerant and dismissive of opposing viewpoints as you are.

I don't think you'll ever be satisfied until everybody "corrects" their viewpoint to match yours. That'd require a detachment from reality that I'm not capable of without the aid of controlled substances and I have a feeling if this thread gets derailed any further than it already is it'll get locked, so I'll just leave it at that.

[esquire]

. . . and I'd like to think I'm above name calling (like, say, "ignorant fanboy"), but I've never met anyone on these boards as thoroughly intolerant and dismissive of opposing viewpoints as you are.


If companies can make more money going after casual gamers, they aren't going to stop because it angers some inflexible old nerds on some message board.

:hmm:

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

You know... I've enjoyed this thread, especially reading the back and forth between Rob2600 and Frankie_says_relax, and I'd like to think I'm above name calling (like, say, "ignorant fanboy"), but I've never met anyone on these boards as thoroughly intolerant and dismissive of opposing viewpoints as you are.

I don't think you'll ever be satisfied until everybody "corrects" their viewpoint to match yours. That'd require a detachment from reality that I'm not capable of without the aid of controlled substances and I have a feeling if this thread gets derailed any further than it already is it'll get locked, so I'll just leave it at that.

Admittedly, this has been a tough thread to not just break down and say something easily regrettable at the end of the day.

But, like I've said about myself in the past ... as frustrated as I get about some companies and their decisions, I only ever try to make my message board ramblings constructively critical, and have them serve as a call for improvement.

IMO, This thread has so many respectable (albeit divergent) views on both sides of the Wiimote argument, that it was really tough to get into the discussion without directly opposing one while supporting another (or while coming up with a completely new one).

Though, I think when everything is said and done, the overall tone of the thread even in it's most heated segments still serve as being supportive of the Wii overall (in some cases through aggressively vocal constructive criticism), and most criticism at it's core is a cry for Nintendo to simply improve what they've started, not abandon it in favor of more traditional controls.

Dunno, that's how I sees it.

[blue lander]

Hey, we're all inflexible old (for the most part) nerds. We're still playing games that everybody else moved on from 20 years ago, after all.

[mezrabad]

Do you think that the supporters of the Wii remote in this thread are flexible gamers with limited experience or stubborn inflexible long-time gamers?

Are those our only choices? There's a middle being excluded somewhere! :)

I'm a flexible gamer with long-time experience!

What I'm seeing in the Wii is an interesting control device, the full potential of which was realized with its pack-in game. As an entertaining device that sits under my TV, it's done its job for my family videogame time and for parties. That's really all I've asked of it and I've been satisfied. I AM a Wii supporter, and though I would call it the "Winner" of this generation of consoles, I wouldn't consider it the "Best", merely the "Best Deal for the Widest Range of People".

I do see that the imprecision would be either a problem in games asking too much of it (Under the Knife for instance. I haven't played it but I can only imagine it being very frustrating using the Wiimote) or an unnecessary tacked-on feature in games that don't really call for it. Sadly, Super Mario Galaxy fits that description. An awesome game, certainly, but I think it would even be better without the Wiimote.

So, if a game's use of the Wiimote is absolutely necessary for the game to be a good play then its use is innovative: Wii Sports is the obvious example. On the other hand, for something that just uses the feature because it's there, like Super Mario Galaxy, it's a gimmick. For an application that would really benifit from the type of control offered but fails because the control is not precise enough, like Under the knife, I presume, then it could be considered a liability. (I am Presuming here and admitting it! Someone let me know how this game handles on the Wii, please. Kay? Thx.)

So, judging by this thread, it sounds like very few games on the Wii, (other than Sports and Play) are using the Wiimote to its full potential by neither tacking it on nor trying to force it to do more than it can. However, it seems that even using it to its full potential will fall short of what'd we'd like to see it do, given it's imprecision.

What we're looking at here, is similar to the Eye-Toy if the Eye-Toy had come built in with every Playstation2 sold and every game was forced to use it to some extent.

The Eye-Toy was also fun at parties and my family also enjoyed it, but my problems with it (mostly having to do with the levels of light it needed to work properly) caused me to disconnect it and put it away. Innovative and fun, but ultimately a dissappointment.

So, that's my point: Wiimote ~ Eye-Toy. It's a gimmick that has done well only because it was included with the system and every game has to use it. If it was sold separately we wouldn't be having this conversation.

I'd still think it might be fun to play Kaboom with the Wiimote. I hope that happens.

[Kid Ice]

Hey, we're all inflexible old (for the most part) nerds. We're still playing games that everybody else moved on from 20 years ago, after all.

Actually I see that attitude as the opposite of inflexible...we're still giving old games a chance AND playing new games.

[CartCollector]

The kinds of titles that should really take full advantage of the motion sensing seem not to exist yet. I'm waiting for interactive building games where you can move things around in 3 dimensions with the wiimote, like interactive legos, which will really create the sensation of "reaching inside the TV", like Nintendo originally claimed.


Actually, there is someone working on a LEGO builder (http://www.xgamestation.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=5807) who wants to use Wii-like controls. (http://www.xgamestation.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=6488&highlight=remote+lego) It's for PC, though.

[lendelin]

You know... I've enjoyed this thread, especially reading the back and forth between Rob2600 and Frankie_says_relax, and I'd like to think I'm above name calling (like, say, "ignorant fanboy"), but I've never met anyone on these boards as thoroughly intolerant and dismissive of opposing viewpoints as you are.

I don't think you'll ever be satisfied until everybody "corrects" their viewpoint to match yours. That'd require a detachment from reality that I'm not capable of without the aid of controlled substances and I have a feeling if this thread gets derailed any further than it already is it'll get locked, so I'll just leave it at that.

blueLander, when I said that you hit the fanboy and ignorant level, that was way too harsh and therfore not called for, and for that I apologize.

[blissfulnoise]

First off, I just got back from a weekend of snowboarding.

Related story: my ass really hurts.

I brought my Reggie as Bruce Lee Wii shirt and it made me think of this thread. I love that shirt.

http://www.kotaku.com/assets/resources/2006/11/reggieT.jpg


Actually I see that attitude as the opposite of inflexible...we're still giving old games a chance AND playing new games.

God bless this site.

We've disagreed on some things in the past Kid Ice, but man if I don't think we're cut from the same cloth.

Sometimes I get a little discouraged around here with random posts harping on the "good 'ol days" of gaming and how modern gaming does nothing to improve the hobby. Despite how both of our sides disagree, good to know we can debate the merits of modern gaming without drawing empty comparisons to "classic" gaming.


I'd still think it might be fun to play Kaboom with the Wiimote. I hope that happens.

WarioWare has several mini-games (and one of the "mega" games) that is essentially the same thing. I use it as an example of how the Wiimote can perform poorly.

To play, you lay the Wiimote perpendicular in your open palm and slide to the left and right to catch falling blocks. If (When) the sensor fails to recognize your spatial position, the platform you're controlling will immediately slide hard to the left or the right causing you to miss the falling objects. But I'd encourage you to pick up a copy to see how it works for yourself.

As far as forced "waggle" in Wii gaming goes, I see it fading very soon much like forced "scratching" on the DS. I've been playing Days of Ruin and, though it does offer some touch control, you can play (more successfully I might add) without using it at all. Smash Brothers Brawl is going to lead the way of getting the waggle out of the Wii. It's novel and it's gimmicky and it will certainly have its place in a few (some excellent) games; but we've seen that it doesn't belong in the entire library. Nintendo will see that soon too.

[djbeatmongrel]

I'm tired of seeing this thread near the top of the modern gaming forum so I going to post this. If you don't like the Wii, fine, don't play it. If you like it, play it like its the last system you'll ever own.

This thread sucks.

[j_factor]

I'm tired of seeing this thread near the top of the modern gaming forum

Then you shouldn't have posted in it. ;)

[Neil Koch]

I hope you're right. I haven't been burned by many Wii games, but Need For Speed Carbon is pretty much unplayable once you progress a little in the game because of the bad Wii controls. If they'd allowed for the use of the classic controller, it'd be a perfectly fine street racing game.


For an application that would really benifit from the type of control offered but fails because the control is not precise enough, like Under the knife, I presume, then it could be considered a liability. (I am Presuming here and admitting it! Someone let me know how this game handles on the Wii, please. Kay? Thx.)


I don't have Under the Knife, but the control on Second Opinion is solid. I just didn't get into the game because of the dumb story and the anime-style graphics and got bored pretty quickly with it.

[lendelin]

If you don't like the Wii, fine, don't play it. If you like it, play it like its the last system you'll ever own.

This is childish nonsense. That means everything we play we have to like and produce positive reviews. Just read the excellent review section of this site, and if a game gets a bad review feel free to post the comment: if you don't like the game, fine, don't play it.

This is a site where gamers talk about various aspects of games and consoles, past and present. Among them the quality of games and consoles, and aspects of the industry.

The Wii is THE surprise of 2007, Nintendo is certainly the comeback kid of 2007, the Wii controller is a unique controller going mainstream, and the Wii broadened the demographics of gamers like no game system before. Do you think this is unimportant?


This thread sucks.

This is as enlightening as your estimation of the Wii. I go down to your level of your first sentence: if you don't like the thread, fine, don't read it. If you like it, read it like it's the last thread you'll ever read.

I'm afraid the last two sentences make sense to you.

[djbeatmongrel]

I'm not going to bother quoting you but my only reason in my post was to point out that this thread is at the point where everyone is rehashing the same things over and over and again. Its past the point of an enlightened conversation and is now at thepoint where everyone should agree to disagree on tha mtter because its not like anyones opinions going to budge until some major shift in the market comes about.

I'm out.

[lendelin]

I'm not going to bother quoting you but my only reason in my post was to point out that this thread is at the point where everyone is rehashing the same things over and over and again. Its past the point of an enlightened conversation and is now at thepoint where everyone should agree to disagree on tha mtter because its not like anyones opinions going to budge until some major shift in the market comes about.

I'm out.

In this case...it would have made more sense to let the thread die a natural death and give it a respectful funeral instead of posting nonsense.

The sentence "This thread sucks" isn't only w/o substance, it is counterproductive. It bumps the thread, and the provoked responses bump it again.

[John_Madden]

In order to play games you have to have the controller in your hand.

[MR.TI994A]

I'm tired of seeing this thread near the top of the modern gaming forum so I going to post this. If you don't like the Wii, fine, don't play it. If you like it, play it like its the last system you'll ever own.

This thread sucks.

Your statement ("I'm tired of seeing this thread near the top of the modern gaming forum") in relationship to your action (of bumping the thread to the top by responding) reminded me of one of my favorite movie quotes...


Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Oh the irony.

[Volcanon]

The only thing Nintendo hasnt done well is gotten the next Dragon Quest or Final Fantasy or Super Robot Wars on the Wii.

Remember, the best system is not always what wins.

VHS beat Beta
NES beat Master system
Genesis in some places beat SNES
PSX beat everything
and so on.

[lendelin]

The only thing Nintendo hasnt done well is gotten the next Dragon Quest or Final Fantasy or Super Robot Wars on the Wii.

Remember, the best system is not always what wins.

VHS beat Beta
NES beat Master system
Genesis in some places beat SNES
PSX beat everything
and so on.

First, this isn't the main focus of the thread. The central question was the gamequality of the Wii independently of the state of its competitors.

Second, this is an old argument. While there is no doubt at all that technoligical power is only one factor among others for the economic success of a console, it doesn't apply to the Wii and the PS3 and the 360.

The Master System wasn't 5 years behind the NES
The SNES wasn't 5years behind the Genesis
The PSX wasn't 5 years behind the N64 and Saturn
and so on.

...they were roughly in the same ballpark. The Wii is the first mainstream console which is technologically clearly inferior and was even marketed as such, a novelty in game history.

[djbeatmongrel]

The sentence "This thread sucks" isn't only w/o substance, it is counterproductive. It bumps the thread, and the provoked responses bump it again.

Next time I'll PM you abuout your thread perpetually sucking ok? Get over it.


Your statement ("I'm tired of seeing this thread near the top of the modern gaming forum") in relationship to your action (of bumping the thread to the top by responding) reminded me of one of my favorite movie quotes...

Oh the irony.

And to rectify the problem of bumping this thread i'll do a little somethintg I learned recently to fix that problem:

SAGE goes in every field

[MR.TI994A]

Next time I'll PM you abuout your thread perpetually sucking ok? Get over it.

How about getting over yourself and let it be?

If you don't like a thread, move along and be on your way. It's not like we need to know whether or not this thread is "djbeatmongrel approved". This thread was moving along quite finely until you dropped in and contributed absolutely nothing other than reveal to us your lack of intelligence and tolerance.

[lendelin]

Next time I'll PM you abuout your thread perpetually sucking ok? Get over it.


It isn’t “MY” thread, I merely started it, it is the thread of everyone who contributed, including you. The quality of this thread is as good as its contributions.

Let me just point out when this thread went downhill. It was an intelligent thread, focusing for the most part on the quality of the motion controls, and Rob2600, FrankieSaysRelax, and blissfulnoise and others had good arguments pro and contra the precision of the controls. Noone blamed a poster disagreeing with him, noone tried to introduce negative stereotypes in order to brand disagreeing posters.

The moment Wirestone and blue Lander introduced the election campaign rally level of reasoning, the substance of the thread was lost. Suddenly they grouped the gamers into open minded and closed minded/narrow minded, into flexible and inflexible ones, into gamers open for change and gamers who want it the old ways.

Logically and necessary, even reviewers were put into the same categories. Needless to say, the people who agree with you are in the positive category. 'Good gamers and reviewers' support the Wii remote, 'bad gamers and reviewers' are against it.

This creation of groups into “us” and “them” is not only nonsense and factually incorrect, it is very dangerous. It is the starting point of non-refutable reasoning. It is the mind set of educational dictators. It necessarily introduces intolerance. Very often it is followed by the accusation that the others with dissenting opinions are the intolerant ones. All of the above happened in this thread.

You tried to introduce this level very early, I ignored it for good reasons.


I hate to single you out Lendelin but I think people with your mind set are afraid to think outside of whats the norm in modern gaming.

There you have it. Mere criticism is smashed with single-mindedness. In order to be fair you have to assume that everyone is as open-minded as you are.

How dumb would it have been if I had stated that supporters of the Wii

- are inexperienced, therefore they like the Wii remote;
- are short-sighted consumers who just don’t know how great the standard controls are;
- are jaded gamers so desperate for change that they wear blindfolds;
- are jaded reviewers so desperate for change that they cannot produce unbiased reviews.

Do you really think (same goes for blue Lander and Wirestone) that someone who plays for 20 or 30 years desperately screams “Oh no, don’t give me something new, I want more of the same, I want to be bored?”

This is a terrible assumption in particular on a collector’s website where the majority of gamers like to play their older games for the sake of VARIETY and different game experiences and not for the sake to cling to the “old ways.” Side scrolling 2D-games can give you something the newer games just can’t, and vice versa.

djbeatmongrel, Wirestone, and blueLander, I stressed this dangerous reasoning of “us” and “them” because it applies to every area of life when someone disagrees with you; the same kind of nonsense you hear already from enthusiastic supporters in election campaigns with the elistist and demeaning attributes, and it will get worse until November.

I understand your enthusiasm, but don’t shut down every criticism. The latter makes radicals in some cases, and moreover it usually leads to mere bias, unfairness and nonsense.

Never follow this kind of thinking. Otherwise you could stand in a swamp and proclaim you are in a desert, and noone will be able to contradict you because your critics are just close-minded.

[blue lander]

Are you really condemning the wiimote as a failure when it's the first iteration of a new technology and they've only been trying to write games for it for a year? No offense, but the entire premise of this thread is ridiculous.

It's like comparing the 3D polygonal graphics of Playstation or Saturn games after just one year after its release to that of 2D sprite based games after they had been around for 15 years. Those early 3D Playstation/Saturn games mostly looked like total shit. Who'd rather look at some hideous crude blocky unshaded polygonal monstrosity compared to a beautify hand-drawn, high resolution sprite based game? And how many of those games were just rehashes of 2D ones with 3D graphics added as a gimmick when it would have worked in 2D?

How many of the of the arguments you're using against the wiimote technology in 2008 have been used against 3D graphics in 1996? If you wanted to time travel back to 1996 and debate somebody on the failure of polygonal 3D graphics, you'd probably win. And it would prove exactly what the debate you're having now proves: absolutely nothing.

I don't like making any crazy predictions, but I think more sophisticated motion controls will be as ubiquitous in 2018 as 3D graphics were in 2006, and traditional controls will be as superceded as 2D graphics are by 3D ones. I wouldn't be suprised if the next generation of gamers will look at a 360 control the same way kids these days look at an Atari joystick - as a relic.

edit: to clarify, my point here is that I don't have a problem with the technical arguments people are making for/against the wii, I have a problem with the premise of the thread itself. It just doesn't mean anything.

[blissfulnoise]

Are you really condemning the wiimote as a failure when it's the first iteration of a new technology and they've only been trying to write games for it for a year? No offense, but the entire premise of this thread is ridiculous.

The problem is that you're comparing development against functionality.

Yes, programmers can learn new tricks and methods to squeeze higher quality textures through compression or increase polygon count via reusable math, etc.

The Wiimote, on the other hand, will never be operationally "more functional" regardless of whatever the development houses come up with. No programming technique will result in better visibility between the sensor and the Wiimote.

They may come up with new, innovative ways to "waggle", but to program your way out of interference with the hardware is impossible.

[lendelin]

Are you really condemning the wiimote as a failure when it's the first iteration of a new technology and they've only been trying to write games for it for a year? No offense, but the entire premise of this thread is ridiculous.

It's like comparing the 3D polygonal graphics of Playstation or Saturn games after just one year after its release to that of 2D sprite based games after they had been around for 15 years. Those early 3D Playstation/Saturn games mostly looked like total shit. Who'd rather look at some hideous crude blocky unshaded polygonal monstrosity compared to a beautify hand-drawn, high resolution sprite based game? And how many of those games were just rehashes of 2D ones with 3D graphics added as a gimmick when it would have worked in 2D?

I don't like making any crazy predictions, but I think more sophisticated motion controls will be as ubiquitous in 2018 as 3D graphics were in 2006, and traditional controls will be as superceded as 2D graphics are by 3D ones. I wouldn't be suprised if the next generation of gamers will look at a 360 control the same way kids these days look at an Atari joystick - as a relic.

First, it is not too early to evaluate the precision of Wii remote; Nintendo released Wii Sports and Wii Play as demos of the abilities of motions sensing. It works fine for short limited gameplay, and reviewers pointed out that it works best even for these party games when the controls are accurate (Wii Bowling, with limits Tennis). Wii Play was a desaster.

We have a myriad of games where motion sensing failed terribly beyond the party game level for 15 months now. Assuming that developers got developments kits earlier, we are talking about roughly one year and 9 months.

I'm afraid that this is as good as it gets; if Nintendo didn't manage to produce more precise and more flexible controls in their showcase demos as incentives to sell the machine, I'm afraid other developers can't master them in a better way.

Second, the "premise" of this thread isn't "ridiculous" because we can only evaluate what is THERE, what IS, not what will be. I'm not discussing the potential of motion sensing, I never questioned that it holds great promises. But it is nonsense to evaluate present games and motion sensing based on their future potential. I can only discuss the quality of the Wii remote how it is, not how it might be in future iterations drastically improved ten years from now.

This would be as nonsensical as to discuss the motion sensing of the Wii hardware and its use in games assuming that it goes downhill from now on and in ten years from now it won't even exist.

How should I evaluate the motion sensing in No More Heroes today on the basis of its potential in 2012? Should I say that the Wii remote is fully implemented into gameplay because in 2012 it will (or might) happen?

I can, however say, that the game and its motion sensing has great potential and needs to be fully implemented instead of simplified...which is an indirect admittance that its motion sensing is limited.


How many of the of the arguments you're using against the wiimote technology in 2008 have been used against 3D graphics in 1996? If you wanted to time travel back to 1996 and debate somebody on the failure of polygonal 3D graphics, you'd probably win. And it would prove exactly what the debate you're having now proves: absolutely nothing.

You assume again that the future result of technology and accessories are indisputable. This shuts off criticism. This is hindsight analysis and/or strong belief in their potential. The latter isn't suited to evaluate existing hardware and games today.

If I had a discussion in 1986 with someone who strongly believed that our beloved NES-R.O.B. has fantastic potential, I'd be in the same situation as I am with you now. I'd evaluate the gameplay ROB is capable of as limited and shallow, despite the fact that electronics store managers love to showcase him and despite the fact that he was on TV praised as the possible future of gaming. (which was the case) You'd say it is new technology and it will be great, developers just have to learn how to make good use of it.

Motion sensing has great potential, and I'm sure Nintendo or someone else will improve it and implement it in games. That doesn't change a thing about the Wii motion sensing: marketed way too early, incapable delivering richer gameplay beyond party games, and dominating its competitors with a marketing gimmick.

The potential of motion sensing doesn't also change the positive aspects of the Wii remote: incredible instant accessibility, the broadening of gamer demographics which has a lot of positive aspects, the necessary correction of game development to make simplicity the golden rule if complexity can be avoided withot sacrificing gameplay.

I called the Wii a wake up call for game developers, and indeed it is.

[blue lander]

The problem is that you're comparing development against functionality.

Yes, programmers can learn new tricks and methods to squeeze higher quality textures through compression or increase polygon count via reusable math, etc.

The Wiimote, on the other hand, will never be operationally "more functional" regardless of whatever the development houses come up with. No programming technique will result in better visibility between the sensor and the Wiimote.

They may come up with new, innovative ways to "waggle", but to program your way out of interference with the hardware is impossible.

Are you really comfortable saying that, after just one year, there's no way to work around the wiimote's technical limitations in software? A lot of things many consoles achieve at the end of their lifetimes were considered impossible in the beginning, after all.


First, it is not too early to evaluate the precision of Wii remote; Nintendo released Wii Sports and Wii Play as demos of the abilities of motions sensing. It works fine for short limited gameplay, and reviewers pointed out that it works best even for these party games when the controls are accurate (Wii Bowling, with limits Tennis). Wii Play was a desaster.

So based on three games released within a year of the of the systems launch, you're sure you know exactly what the boundaries of the wiimote are as far as how they enhance gameplay? I really expected people on a classic gaming board to have more perspective than that.


We have a myriad of games where motion sensing failed terribly beyond the party game level for 15 months now. Assuming that developers got developments kits earlier, we are talking about roughly one year and 9 months.

What do you expect? The majority of launch games utilizing new technology are terrible failures, just like virtually every new technology ever developed? What kind of judgment can you possibly make from that?


Second, the "premise" of this thread isn't "ridiculous" because we can only evaluate what is THERE, what IS, not what will be. I'm not discussing the potential of motion sensing, I never questioned that it holds great promises. But it is nonsense to evaluate present games and motion sensing based on their future potential. I can only discuss the quality of the Wii remote how it is, not how it might be in future iterations drastically improved ten years from now.

There's nothing wrong with evaluating what's been released for the wii. But extrapolating from that the limitations of a one year old console is ridiculous. Sorry.



You assume again that the future result of technology and accessories are indisputable. This shuts off criticism. This is hindsight analysis and/or strong belief in their potential. The latter isn't suited to evaluate existing hardware and games today.

That's the exact opposite of what I'm saying. I'm certain it's too early to declare the wii a success or failure in terms of enhancing video games as a form of entertainment, which is what you're trying to do. However, it's my personal opinion, which may turn out to be right or wrong, that wiimote style controls will be ubiquitous in 10 years. Not on the strength or weakness of a couple of launch titles, but on the enormous enthusiasm from an enormous untapped market for what the wii promised, which may or may not be completely different than what it actually delivered, which makes me think there's a huge market out there for controllers that are more interactive than sitting on your butt and waggling a joystick and pushing buttons.


If I had a discussion in 1986 with someone who strongly believed that our beloved NES-R.O.B. has fantastic potential, I'd be in the same situation as I am with you now. I'd evaluate the gameplay ROB is capable of as limited and shallow, despite the fact that electronics store managers love to showcase him and despite the fact that he was on TV praised as the possible future of gaming. (which was the case) You'd say it is new technology and it will be great, developers just have to learn how to make good use of it.

I don't recall any actual consumers being enthusiastic about the R.O.B. but for the sake of argument (which I think is the sole reason this thread exists), let's say they were. Let's also assume, against all evidence, that the wiimote is just a trojan horse to get the wii on the shelves of toy stores and that Nintendo has no intention of supporting it. And let's also make the ridiculous assumption that the wiimote is a one trick pony like the R.O.B. that was fully utilized in every possible way with the two games that were released for it. And let's make the exceedingly ludicrous assumption that there was actually some sector of the market had a demand for more R.O.B. style games that Nintendo never tapped. And let's assume... you know what? I can't twist my brain enough to make a fair comparison of the wiimote to the R.O.B. Sorry, I'm just going to concede this point rather than risk losing what little grip on reality I have left.


Motion sensing has great potential, and I'm sure Nintendo or someone else will improve it and implement it in games. That doesn't change a thing about the Wii motion sensing: marketed way too early, incapable delivering richer gameplay beyond party games, and dominating its competitors with a marketing gimmick.

Thank you for distilling all the problems your argument has into a single paragraph. I wish the rest of this thread was as succinct.

Does motion sensing have great potential? Probably, sure.

Was it marketed too early? What does tha even mean? Too early to live up to your expectations? Unless you can prove your expectations are the same as everybody elses, who cares?

Incapable of delivering richer gameplay beyond party games and only a marketing gimmick? Impossible to say after just a year. This is where your argument has absolutely no legs and why this thread is ridiculous. You may very well be right, but then again there may be some equivalent of Donkey Kong Country or Star Fox that shows the wiimote is capable of far beyond what you expected. You're ready to write the final chapter on a console that's still in it's opening paragraph.

And even if it doesn't deliver a richer gameplay experience, it may still deliver one that's quite a bit more fun, especially for the casual gamer. Which was the whole point, by the way.

[esquire]

Are you really comfortable saying that, after just one year, there's no way to work around the wiimote's technical limitations in software? A lot of things many consoles achieve at the end of their lifetimes were considered impossible in the beginning, after all.

So based on three games released within a year of the of the systems launch, you're sure you know exactly what the boundaries of the wiimote are as far as how they enhance gameplay? I really expected people on a classic gaming board to have more perspective than that.

What do you expect? The majority of launch games utilizing new technology are terrible failures, just like virtually every new technology ever developed? What kind of judgment can you possibly make from that?

There's nothing wrong with evaluating what's been released for the wii. But extrapolating from that the limitations of a one year old console is ridiculous. Sorry.

That's the exact opposite of what I'm saying. I'm certain it's too early to declare the wii a success or failure in terms of enhancing video games as a form of entertainment, which is what you're trying to do. However, it's my personal opinion, which may turn out to be right or wrong, that wiimote style controls will be ubiquitous in 10 years. Not on the strength or weakness of a couple of launch titles, but on the enormous enthusiasm from an enormous untapped market for what the wii promised, which may or may not be completely different than what it actually delivered, which makes me think there's a huge market out there for controllers that are more interactive than sitting on your butt and waggling a joystick and pushing buttons.

I don't recall any actual consumers being enthusiastic about the R.O.B. but for the sake of argument (which I think is the sole reason this thread exists), let's say they were. Let's also assume, against all evidence, that the wiimote is just a trojan horse to get the wii on the shelves of toy stores and that Nintendo has no intention of supporting it. And let's also make the ridiculous assumption that the wiimote is a one trick pony like the R.O.B. that was fully utilized in every possible way with the two games that were released for it. And let's make the exceedingly ludicrous assumption that there was actually some sector of the market had a demand for more R.O.B. style games that Nintendo never tapped. And let's assume... you know what? I can't twist my brain enough to make a fair comparison of the wiimote to the R.O.B. Sorry, I'm just going to concede this point rather than risk losing what little grip on reality I have left.

Thank you for distilling all the problems your argument has into a single paragraph. I wish the rest of this thread was as succinct.

Does motion sensing have great potential? Probably, sure.

Was it marketed too early? What does tha even mean? Too early to live up to your expectations? Unless you can prove your expectations are the same as everybody elses, who cares?

Incapable of delivering richer gameplay beyond party games and only a marketing gimmick? Impossible to say after just a year. This is where your argument has absolutely no legs and why this thread is ridiculous. You may very well be right, but then again there may be some equivalent of Donkey Kong Country or Star Fox that shows the wiimote is capable of far beyond what you expected. You're ready to write the final chapter on a console that's still in it's opening paragraph.

And even if it doesn't deliver a richer gameplay experience, it may still deliver one that's quite a bit more fun, especially for the casual gamer. Which was the whole point, by the way.

Do yourself a favor. Replace "Nintendo" with "Sony","Wii" with "PS3", and "Wiimote" with "Sixxaxis control". Now please tell me honestly whether you could not say the same thing?

My point is that if this thread was about Sony and the failure of the Sixxaxis, I don't think we would see many defenders based upon the same arguments you are making for the Wiimote, i.e. "It's still new", "There are only a few games that utilize it correctly" and "No one can tell what the future has for the Sixxaxis". Moreover, I think the passion for all things Nintendo would not transfer over to the PS3 and the Sixxaxis. If anything, this board has been very critical of Sony of late, and perhaps rightfully so. Moreover, its not likely that people would dispute the failure of the Sixxaxis controls after 14 months on the market.

But when we make the same argument as to the flaws of Nintendo and its Wiimote, people seem to take a different approach.

Just for the record, I am not comparing the Wii to the PS3 whether in functionality, popularity or volume of sales. Nor is anyone here saying the Wii sucks. This thread was never a Nintendo bashing thread, or meant to be a discussion on which system is better or which system sells more worldwide. It was meant to discuss the technical shortcomings of a piece of hardware and its supporting technology. That is the basis for my comparision. Both consoles were released around the same time. both consoles introduced a new technology that affects gameplay.

[blissfulnoise]

Are you really comfortable saying that, after just one year, there's no way to work around the wiimote's technical limitations in software? A lot of things many consoles achieve at the end of their lifetimes were considered impossible in the beginning, after all.

You're still not grasping the issue here. The technical issues are tantamount to a hardware flaw; not a software one. No amount of programming savvy is going to prevent sunlight (among many other issues) from blocking the IR reception back to the remote nor will it negate the need to stand between X and Y feet to enjoy your games. The issue lies in the design of the hardware.

I'm not above the possibility that some degree of "error" correction could be programmed into the games. For example, should the sensor lose site of the remote, for whatever reason, instead of shooting the cursor across the screen randomly, the game could use some sort of logic to center out the cursor. This could correct some of the issues with the IR sensor bar in some cases (clearly not all - and it may just create new issues), but it would simply be masking the underlying issue and not addressing the core problem that Nintendo's engineers created.

I asked once before in the thread; have you played the Wii beyond just a passing level (occasionally at a friend’s house, kiosks, what-have-you)? I ask again because I'm curious as to if you've experienced the sensor issues I've cited all over the thread. (If you have a Wii and I'm mixing you up with another poster, I apologize)

At this point in the discourse first hand experience is pretty important in continuing the discussion. Speculation and argument for the sake of itself don't seem to be moving the rock any further up the hill.

[John_Madden]

The thing with the Wii is the more you move your arms around, the more you move on the screen.

[lendelin]

In order to play games you have to have the controller in your hand.

The next Wii game is always the most difficult.

(Paraphrasing old German soccer coach Sepp Herberger: "The next game is always the most difficult.")

The Wii Remote is rectangular.

(Paraphrasing old German soccer coach Sepp Herberger: "The soccer ball is round.")

Please John, don't yell: GO. BACK. TO. GERMANY.

[blue lander]

Do yourself a favor. Replace "Nintendo" with "Sony","Wii" with "PS3", and "Wiimote" with "Sixxaxis control". Now please tell me honestly whether you could not say the same thing?

I'm perfectly comfortable saying the same thing about the PS3. I think people are counting it out too quickly. Personally, I think since PS3 games are incredibly expensive to produce, you'll be less likely to see developers as willing to experiment as much with the Sixxaxis as they do on the wii. And since the PS3 is such a graphical powerhouse, I'd imagine developers concentrate more on pushing the hardware to its limits than experimenting with new ways to use the controller.



You're still not grasping the issue here. The technical issues are tantamount to a hardware flaw; not a software one. No amount of programming savvy is going to prevent sunlight (among many other issues) from blocking the IR reception back to the remote nor will it negate the need to stand between X and Y feet to enjoy your games. The issue lies in the design of the hardware.

Point taken, but what do those limitations have to do with the controller only being good for gimmicky party games like whatshisface says? Would the wiimote provide a "richer game experience" (whatever that means) than a traditional controller if you could stand as far away from the screen as you'd like or play in a room where there's sunlight? Is it a "dissapointment on all fronts" because it doesn't work right all the time?

What you call flaws could also just be called limitations, which come with the territory when you introduce new technology into consumer electronics. In that case all first generation hardware is flawed, and you're back to this discussion being ridiculous.

All hardware design is a compromise between what's ideal and what's practical. If Nintendo had to use hardware that wasn't 100% perfect in every single way to come in at a price point (IE: Less than you'd be willing to pay) that would appeal to casual gamers (IE: not you) yet still provide them the functionality they need (IE: less than you need), why should we consider it a failure?

My experience with the wii has been casual, just at friend's houses (all non-gamers) and all the problems they've had have been annoyances, not crippling flaws. Sure, they don't play the wii that often, but they don't play any video game that often nor do they want to. Personally I'm not interested in any of the games enough to actually buy one yet, if at all.

[djbeatmongrel]

The wii has a lot of hidden potential and a lot of quality games that are already making innovative use of the technology provided. There seems to be a lot of untapped potential for the controllers and sensor bar.

I insist the you, Lendelin in particular, watch this video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw

Your point of view on the subject matter seems to only be formulated from the playing of some of the basic party games and reading the reviews of jaded gaming journalists. As a member of the boards I would think someone would be above that and be able to provide a view based off first hand experience instead of some formulated collage of industry types reviews. Its the gamers that matter, not some silly reviewer.

Edited for grammatical reasons.

[lendelin]

So based on three games released within a year of the of the systems launch, you're sure you know exactly what the boundaries of the wiimote are as far as how they enhance gameplay? I really expected people on a classic gaming board to have more perspective than that.

Nonsensical misrepresentation. Your next quote by me refers to the “myriad of games in which motion sensing failed” since launch time.


What do you expect? The majority of launch games utilizing new technology are terrible failures, just like virtually every new technology ever developed? What kind of judgment can you possibly make from that?

Judgement calls about the technology and games in the last 16 months. Based on the experience so far, blissfulnoise and me made careful predictions about the quality of motion sensing short term, nothing more. We don’t know how motion sensing looks in Wii games three years from now, we are careful skeptics. You are a careless strong believer.

I wouldn’t call games released 15 months after release launch titles. But since you give so much leeway to the Wii and introduce euphemisms, you might regard the entire Wii era as a launch time for something much bigger.

Your answer again: judgement calls about the Wii motion sensing are pre-mature, give it more time. Noone can argue with that, noone can work with thin air or punch a ghost.


There's nothing wrong with evaluating what's been released for the wii. But extrapolating from that the limitations of a one year old console is ridiculous. Sorry.

see above


That's the exact opposite of what I'm saying. I'm certain it's too early to declare the wii a success or failure in terms of enhancing video games as a form of entertainment, which is what you're trying to do. However, it's my personal opinion, which may turn out to be right or wrong, that wiimote style controls will be ubiquitous in 10 years. Not on the strength or weakness of a couple of launch titles, but on the enormous enthusiasm from an enormous untapped market for what the wii promised, which may or may not be completely different than what it actually delivered, which makes me think there's a huge market out there for controllers that are more interactive than sitting on your butt and waggling a joystick and pushing buttons.

Motion sensing is a failure SO FAR beyond the party game level, nothing more and nothing less. We stressed the limitation of the technology, not the alleged fault of developers. Hundreds of developers weren’t able to make the Wii motion sensing in a way accurate so it can enhance gameplay beyond party games or in dumbed down trivial ways used in great games. In this thread we focused on specific games which is only possible if we look at EXISTING games.

Your answer again: give it more time, evaluations are pre-mature. Noone can argue with that, noone can work with thin air or punch a ghost.


I don't recall any actual consumers being enthusiastic about the R.O.B. but for the sake of argument (which I think is the sole reason this thread exists), let's say they were. Let's also assume, against all evidence, that the wiimote is just a trojan horse to get the wii on the shelves of toy stores and that Nintendo has no intention of supporting it. And let's also make the ridiculous assumption that the wiimote is a one trick pony like the R.O.B. that was fully utilized in every possible way with the two games that were released for it. And let's make the exceedingly ludicrous assumption that there was actually some sector of the market had a demand for more R.O.B. style games that Nintendo never tapped. And let's assume... you know what? I can't twist my brain enough to make a fair comparison of the wiimote to the R.O.B. Sorry, I'm just going to concede this point rather than risk losing what little grip on reality I have left.

Thanks for your critique of my comparison because it applies to your comparison of the Wii remote with 3D as well. I wanted to show that both are the same nonsensical reasoning. I couldn’t have done a better response pointing out the differences between 3D and the Wii remote which you introduced.

Look, Rob2600 tried to make the same argument with the NES controller and the N64 analog stick, now you with 3D. It just doesn't work.


Thank you for distilling all the problems your argument has into a single paragraph. I wish the rest of this thread was as succinct.

Does motion sensing have great potential? Probably, sure.

Was it marketed too early? What does tha even mean? Too early to live up to your expectations? Unless you can prove your expectations are the same as everybody elses, who cares?

Incapable of delivering richer gameplay beyond party games and only a marketing gimmick? Impossible to say after just a year. This is where your argument has absolutely no legs and why this thread is ridiculous. You may very well be right, but then again there may be some equivalent of Donkey Kong Country or Star Fox that shows the wiimote is capable of far beyond what you expected. You're ready to write the final chapter on a console that's still in it's opening paragraph.

And even if it doesn't deliver a richer gameplay experience, it may still deliver one that's quite a bit more fun, especially for the casual gamer. Which was the whole point, by the way.

We are way beyond every response you just delivered and they were refuted many times.

Look, first you escaped in branding dissenting posters in just plain inflexible, past-oriented gamers and reviewers disregarding their opinions. Every dialogue ends right there as I pointed out. Now you escape into the future where also no critique is possible.

Your answer to flaws and limitations of the Wii remote is a simple one – it is new technology, give it more time, developers will make better use of it, evaluations about the Wii if it is a success or failure are pre-mature. Again you refer to the future, lots of people think the motion sensing is a failure based on what was delivered so far.

If you emphasize future possibilities, noone can argue with you and it is besides the criticism of specific present games. The Wii motion sensing might work terrific in one or two years from now because developers learned to work around its severe limitations. We don’t know, let’s hope this is the case.

So far, all we can say is that the most successful system centered around motion sensing is a disappointment if we demand more precise controls surpassing the need of party games and the implementation of this technology in great games beyond trivial ways. Where the latter was tried, it just failed. Some think the Wii remote (not motion sensing in general) has still untapped potential, others are more skeptical. I think we can agree about the last paragraph, can’t we?

[lendelin]

The wii has a lot of hidden potential and a lot of quality games that are already making innovative use of the technology provided. There seems to be a lot of untapped potential for the controllers and sensor bar.

I insist the you, Lendelin in particular, watch this video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw

Your point of view on the subject matter seems to only be formulated from the playing of some of the basic party games and reading the reviews of jaded gaming journalists. As a member of the boards I would think someone would be above that and be able to provide a view based off first hand experience instead of some formulated collage of industry types reviews. Its the gamers that matter, not some silly reviewer.

Edited for grammatical reasons.

Daria already linked to this video because I stressed that motion sensing has great potential and we deserve much better than the motion sensing the Wii remote delivers. I responded to Darias' post.

How often can we stress that we don't dispute the potential of motion sensing at all? Is it so hard to understand nuanced positions? We evaluated the Wii remote as it is now and how it is used now in games. The video shows possibilities of the Wii remote used in a different technological way. You can't play something like that on the Wii.

We might get something like that with the Wii 2 or 3. I'd stand in line to play with motion sensing like that. It doesn't change the evaluations of the Wii remote and Wii games with motion sensing at all.

[djbeatmongrel]

i have one simple question for you. exactly what games have you played on the wii?

[lendelin]

i have one simple question for you. exactly what games have you played on the wii?

I don't own a Wii. I know three people who own one, among them neighbour whose adult children long left the house, and a befriended family with a 13 year old boy, and two daughters (16 and 18). The boy has a GC, a PS2, and now the Wii.

I mention this because it explains the games I played which are very different from my preferences.

Since I was very curious about the Wii I invested much more time playing with these guys than I usually do.

I played so far since the Wii was released

Wii Play
Wii Sports
Tiger Woods (08 or 07, can't remember)
Need for Speed Carbon
Table Tennis
Rayman Raving Rabbids
Mario Party 8
Pokemon Battle Revolution
Super Swing Golf
Red Steel
Soulcalibur Legends
Twilight Princess (just tried some motion sensing out, I played it on my GC)

and then one or two other games I can't remember at the moment.

Games on my must-have list are

Wii Play
Wii Sports
Zelda: Twilight Princess (G)
Super Paper Mario (G)
Metroid Prime 3 Corruption (G)
Super Mario Galaxy (G)
Endless Ocean
Zak and Wiki
Nights Journey into Dreams XX
Dragon Quest Swords
No More Heroes

RPGs
Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn XX
Battalion Wars 2 XX


What is your point? (I suspect what's coming...in your own interest please think before you post.) :)

[blue lander]

Judgement calls about the technology and games in the last 16 months. Based on the experience so far, blissfulnoise and me made careful predictions about the quality of motion sensing short term, nothing more. We don’t know how motion sensing looks in Wii games three years from now, we are careful skeptics. You are a careless strong believer.

BS. You started this thread out by calling the wii a "Tragedy for game quality", the wiimote a dissapointment on all fronts, and the only reason the wii is succeeding is because of a marketing gimmick. That isn't skepticism, that's condemnation. You've already reached your conclusion a year into the system's life. Don't kid yourself into thinking that you're some scientist carefully debating the technical pros and cons of the wiimote, this thread is just a more wordy version of the ones 10 year olds post on a gamefaqs board saying "wii is teh suxxorz".


Your answer again: judgement calls about the Wii motion sensing are pre-mature, give it more time. Noone can argue with that, noone can work with thin air or punch a ghost.

No, specific judgment calls about the wii motion sensing aren't pre-mature. But making sweeping conclusions like "the wiimote is only good for simple party games" or "The wiimote is a dissapointment on all fronts" are.



So far, all we can say is that the most successful system centered around motion sensing is a disappointment if we demand more precise controls surpassing the need of party games and the implementation of this technology in great games beyond trivial ways.

You can say that in the same way that you can say a station wagon is a disappointment if you demand it to win the Indy 500, or in the same way you can say an Indycar is a disappointment if you demand it to carry groceries home or take the kids to soccer practice. It was designed for casual gamers who are into quick party games! Why can't you grasp that this console wasn't designed for you or your requirements?

[tom]

Hey Kid Ice, did you know that there is a spelling mistake in your avatar?

[blissfulnoise]

Point taken, but what do those limitations have to do with the controller only being good for gimmicky party games like whatshisface says? Would the wiimote provide a "richer game experience" (whatever that means) than a traditional controller if you could stand as far away from the screen as you'd like or play in a room where there's sunlight? Is it a "dissapointment on all fronts" because it doesn't work right all the time?

No, there is definately a potential in using the Wiimote for deeper interactions in games, but to a limited degree.

As Rob has already pointed out, playing games that require you to do excessive hand movements to play (e.g. the internet's holy grail Wii game - the lightsaber game) would be exercises in tedium.

No, the middle ground lies in subtle integration and clever implementation. A game I'd argue that only No More Heroes has gotten right so far. Super Mario Galaxy and Zelda come in a very close second.

As far as FPS games go, I haven't played Medal of Honor or Farcry on the Wii, but playing Metroid was very painful for me. The control scheme was way too cumbersome and the combination of pointing, moving, and random sensor interference ended up with me unintentionally running in circles ad nausum. Anyone who says that Metroid Prime 3 controls better than Call of Duty 4 on the PS3/360/PC with a straight face is a bold faced liar. I'm open to trying new types of FPS control schemes (though I think the Wii is best suited to raiil shooters) that the Wii comes up with, but from where I stand, MP3 was a outright failure.

And, no, the Wii isn't a total failure or a total disapointment. I'm very happy with a small number of games on the system despite techinical issues with the hardware. In the interest of full disclosure I'll cap up what I've played on the Wii.

Own:

Wii Sports, The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, Trauma Center: Second Opinion, Dragon Ball Z 3, WarioWare: Smooth Moves, Metroid Prime 3, Super Paper Mario, NiGHTS: Journey in Dreams, Super Mario Galaxy, No More Heroes, and Endless Ocean

Played:

Madden 07, Tiger Woods 08, Super Swing Golf, Wii Play, Rayman: Raving Rabbids, ExciteTruck

It's also worth noting that I have a Xbox 360 (about 50 games/30 arcade games) and a PS3 (2 games/8 downloadable games).

Look, again, I like my Wii. And it doesn't really bother me that there is so much shovelware out there that makes very poor use of the controller (though it should bother Nintendo). And, yes, I think there are a very small handful of games that are using the Wiimote for something (slightly) beyond a simply gimmicky experience. Though they're rare, and none of them are really doing anything revolutionary.

[Volcanon]

Can somebody give me the tech specs for:

Wii
GC
PS3
XBOX360?

[blue lander]

I really don't feel like reading back through all your posts, Blissfulnoise, but I think we agree on pretty much everything. The wiimote has limitations (it apparently can't do a lot of things people were hoping it could, but good enough for the casual gamer), isn't utilized to its fullest potential by most titles (not suprising since it's been around for such a short time), and there may be many clever and entertaining ways the wiimote could be utilized that nobody here's even thinking of. On the other hand, there are a lot of insurmountable limitations that some people just can't live with, and it's possible developers will never learn how to develop for it. After all, it requires developers to be innovative and clever every time they make a game, and these are guys known for rehashing the same old crap year in and year out with slightly updated graphics.

The whole success/failure question isn't one we should be asking until the console really hits its stride, which is certainly not after one year. Even a conventional console like the PS3 or 360 shouldn't be judged at that point, let alone one that's gone in such a radical new direction.

[djbeatmongrel]

What is your point? (I suspect what's coming...in your own interest please think before you post.) :)

First of all, fuck you for saying that. I thought heavily about how to respond to it and I realized I don't like taking shit from a holier than thou ignoramus.

Back on topic, from what i have played through on the wii which is damn near everying you have listed so far i'll say with full confidence that most of what you have played really arent the best offerings of what the wii has in terms of quality. No More Heroes, Zak and Wiki, and Metriod prime corruptions are probably the best games on the system that make special use of the controls withough feeling tacked on. while there are other good games on the system, these three seem to go beyond my expectations in quality for the wii and heres why:

No More Heroes: Overall a fine tuned hack and slash game where the motion sensitive controls are only required for doing the wrestling grapples, your special ending sword swings and recharging your beam katana. But one of the innovative things i have seen is that before every boss you get a phone call the plays through the wiimote and out of reflex you end holding the controller to your ear like a phone to hear it clearly.

Zack & Wiki: Its a cool point and click movement styled adventure with a lot of puzzle solving elements. The controls range from a numerous amount of movements that naturally make sense when playing.

Metroid Prime 3 Corruption: the game is not only beautiful but is a fantastic FPS/FPA experience. Theres some nice little touches like tracing to wield destroyed circuits, pulling off shields with your grappling hook and other small things.

[lendelin]

BS. You started this thread out by calling the wii a "Tragedy for game quality", the wiimote a dissapointment on all fronts, and the only reason the wii is succeeding is because of a marketing gimmick. That isn't skepticism, that's condemnation. You've already reached your conclusion a year into the system's life. Don't kid yourself into thinking that you're some scientist carefully debating the technical pros and cons of the wiimote, this thread is just a more wordy version of the ones 10 year olds post on a gamefaqs board saying "wii is teh suxxorz".

This is your response (“BS”) to my statement that I evaluated the Wii motion sensing ONLY based upon games we have in our hands 16 months after its release? Didn’t you read that in my OP? Again, you are making up distracting scapegoats.

I said in my OP: “16 months after its release we can certainly say that the new control scheme is an utter disappointment on all fronts.” Did you read anything about predictions of the quality of Wii games three years from now? And if not, how is it possible for me to condemn the Wii too early as you allege?

All of the things I wrote aren’t FINAL judgement calls of the entire Wii life span of probably five years. They are judgement calls of the last 16 months.

You were clearly contradicted, and again, you shift to another issue and bring up the whole condemnation thing. Does this make sense to you?

You said it is pre-mature to judge the technology so early because “utilizing new technology are terrible failures...What kind of judgement calls can you possibly make from that?” I said the judgement calls of games released in the last 16 months.

You call it BS. Am I missing something? Your response is completely besides the point. You can disagree with me because I was too harsh with the Wii, but the alleged “condemnation” is based on games which were so far produced! I evaluated in every post only what is there! I’m not dealing in hopes or religious experiences, I deal with reality.

How long should I wait to evaluate the first 16 months of the Wii? One or two years from now? Am I allowed to say in two years that the motion sensing of Wii games were disappointing in the first year after its release but developers were able to work with it and implemented it in a fantastic way since then? OR that the motion sensing of Wii games were disappointing in the first year after its release and it never changed or even got worse since then?

Are we allowed to evaluate the motion sensing in Tiger Woods 08 or should we wait one year because the game hasn’t reached its full potential yet?

No matter how the Wii motion sensing will develop, no matter how motion sensing in general will develop, it doesn’t change ZILCH about the quality of motion sensing of the Wii so far.

You are overly enthusiastic and in constant defense mode. On the one hand you admit the technical limitations of the Wii mote (nothing else is the focus of the thread, nothing else was criticized by me and others), on the other hand you demand understanding for a “first iteration of new technology” which will be in 2018 THE “ubiquitous” standard of controls.

This is your problem right there. You believe so strongly in the Wii motion sensing as the first step on a glory road that it skews dissenting opinions. You cannot understand nuanced positions. You distract from responses. You are in a defense mode. You engage in circular argumentation and fall constantly back on your statements already made and present it as NEW responses.

If you can agree with blissfulnoise, you can also agree with me because I say nothing else.

Get it out of your head that I condemned the future of the Wii. I don’t know about the quality of future releases like House of The Dead 2 and 3 and so many other games on its list of future releases..

Lets forget about the nonsensical Indy car comparison. The wii is judged by what it is supposed to do, not what the PS3 is supposed to do or a rice farmer in Vietnam; otherwise you wouldn’t 1) admit that there are limitations of the technology, 2) developers wouldn’t try to do something with it and fail for the most part, 3) Miyamoto wouldn’t demand that motion sensing should be fully implemented.

Yeah, I’m afraid your response will be that developers just don’t try hard enough and are simply out to make a buck or just like it the way it is or are not open-minded enough or just need more time to discover the full potential of the new technology or that Miyamotos standards and intentiuons are not mine.

[lendelin]

First of all, fuck you for saying that. I thought heavily about how to respond to it and I realized I don't like taking shit from a holier than thou ignoramus.

Back on topic, from what i have played through on the wii which is damn near everying you have listed so far i'll say with full confidence that most of what you have played really arent the best offerings of what the wii has in terms of quality. No More Heroes, Zak and Wiki, and Metriod prime corruptions are probably the best games on the system that make special use of the controls withough feeling tacked on. while there are other good games on the system, these three seem to go beyond my expectations in quality for the wii and heres why:

No More Heroes: Overall a fine tuned hack and slash game where the motion sensitive controls are only required for doing the wrestling grapples, your special ending sword swings and recharging your beam katana. But one of the innovative things i have seen is that before every boss you get a phone call the plays through the wiimote and out of reflex you end holding the controller to your ear like a phone to hear it clearly.

Zack & Wiki: Its a cool point and click movement styled adventure with a lot of puzzle solving elements. The controls range from a numerous amount of movements that naturally make sense when playing.

Metroid Prime 3 Corruption: the game is not only beautiful but is a fantastic FPS/FPA experience. Theres some nice little touches like tracing to wield destroyed circuits, pulling off shields with your grappling hook and other small things.

I dislike the f-word, and all the other points you make were made days ago and got responses. There is absolutely nothing new there. In my OP I specifically addressed No More Heroes.

You can save valuable time to respond if you read what others said. It also makes for good responses; and if responses or the entire thread are too long to read, it still doesn't make sense to post in this case.

[blue lander]

Heh, you know a thread has gone down the crapper when people start nitpicking things other people said 20 posts ago, but here we go...


All of the things I wrote aren’t FINAL judgement calls of the entire Wii life span of probably five years. They are judgement calls of the last 16 months.

Because you're such a good writer, you put a summary of what your argument was in the third paragraph, just like I used to do when I had to write essays in high school...


I content that the economic success of the Wii is a tragedy for game quality and the popularity of games but has also some positive aspects for game development.

And that, not an evaluation of how the wiimote has been used in the last 16 months, is what this thread was about. And that's what I'm calling BS on.

And to further contradict your attempts to backpedal from the untenable position your OP put you in, you go on to say the wiimote is a marketing gimmick and nothing else. That is a final judgment call. If it's just a marketing gimmick and nothing else, then that's what it was conceived of, that's what it was when it was designed, that's what it is after 16 months, and that's what it is at the end of its lifespan.


You are overly enthusiastic and in constant defense mode. On the one hand you admit the technical limitations of the Wii mote (nothing else is the focus of the thread, nothing else was criticized by me and others), on the other hand you demand understanding for a “first iteration of new technology” which will be in 2018 THE “ubiquitous” standard of controls.

See above on the whole focus-of-the-thread thing. I don't blame you for trying to shift it to something less ridiculous, but there it is. And I base my personal opinion on the future of motion controls on the reaction by the public to the wii, not on the wii itself or its first 16 months games or it's wiimote. If I thought I could scrutinize a handful of launch titles and come to a conclusion about what games would look like in 2018, I'd be as mistaken as you are.


Lets forget about the nonsensical Indy car comparison. The wii is judged by what it is supposed to do, not what the PS3 is supposed to do or a rice farmer in Vietnam; otherwise you wouldn’t 1) admit that there are limitations of the technology, 2) developers wouldn’t try to do something with it and fail for the most part, 3) Miyamoto wouldn’t demand that motion sensing should be fully implemented.

Exactly, what it is supposed to do, not what you wish it did or what you expected it to. And while I'm beating this dead horse, 1) all new technologies have limitations making them less than ideal, 2) Developers always fail for the most part at first when they try something new, and 3)... well, I'd have to read the interview or wherever you're taking that from to make any remark on it.

And while I don't have a problem with swearing per se, I do have a problem with getting so upset about what some guy wrote on a message board, especially about a child's toy, especially about a child's toy that's such a raging success that it doesn't matter what any of us think about it, that I feel compelled to use them.

[djbeatmongrel]

Blue lander, you've gained my respect.
Lendelin, not so much.

[blue lander]

Woohoo! I wonder if the designers of the wii knew that something they created to help people have fun (the real mark of success, rather than just pushing as many polygons as possible) would lead to so much anger.

[djbeatmongrel]

Woohoo! I wonder if the designers of the wii knew that something they created to help people have fun (the real mark of success, rather than just pushing as many polygons as possible) would lead to so much anger.

I have this theory: the cuter, simpler, generally pure fun type of games/consoles cause you to become more irate at the drop of a hat. Just think of it next time you are cursing off a E rated platformer or something.LOL

[lendelin]

bluelander and djbeatmongrel, I once apologized for saying that you two hit the ignorant fanboylevel, which is different from calling someone an ignorant fanboy.

After I read your enlightening and emotional contributions, I call you two just little ignorant fanboys.

This is it for me, reasoning with you is futile.

I leave it to everyone who has the misfortune to read your posts to come to their own concluson and treat you in the future as such -- ignorant fanboys who delve into the resentment business, dividing gamers in good ones and bad ones, deflecting from the reaoning of others becasue they run out of arguments.

You made the DP site a very uncomfortable experience, and I think I'll not log as noften as I used to.

Intellectually you suffer from autism. I suggest you create your own thread praising Wii games and the glorious future of it in three years on the road to a even brighter future for gaming in 2025. And if someone dares to disagree with your group, you should just personally attack him and just ignore what he actually has to say. It is always good to read something into opinions which were never expressed in order to save your own.

Your reaction is only explainable because you lost hands-down a debate and can only delve into personal attacks.

Sorry for my English, I'm not a native speaker and didn't grow up in America. But at least I have much more to refer to than High School essays, and unlike you I didn't stay on this level but moved on to College, two PHDs, and teaching experience in various Colleges for twenty years now. If you offer me to proof read one of my papers and articles, I politely decline. I leave that to others.

Talking to you two is like talking with someone about religion. The Wii seems to be a religious experience for you with hopes, dreams, and a future which promises paradise. You two are little missionaries who take gaming way too serious -- a suspicion I had when you attacked others as taking little toys too seriously. You are way too emotional -- a suspicion I had when you attacked others as being upset. You two are also intolerant -- a suspicion I had when you blamed others of intolerance.

You two cannot 1) think, 2) be fair, 3) pick up core points of others and respond in any meaningful way. I'm afraid with your learning curve and intelligence level that it will stay this way for a very long time.

I suggest to a moderator that this thread should be locked before I'm called an old videogame nerd again.

It was a good discussion until immature boys tried to deal with adults.

[blue lander]

You're right, this discussion is pointless. Finally we agree on something! Not because I'm an immature fanboy (I haven't actually liked a Nintendo console since the SNES, the N64 probably being my least favorite console ever), but because I read that other thread from three years ago where you predicted the demise of Nintendo with the same certainty and technical precision as you're proclaiming the failure of the wii now. Sad, but reality. This isn't speculation, no fanboy babble, it is the writing on the wall.... that's classic Lendelin! History has shown how disjointed your reality is from the one the rest of us live in.

[djbeatmongrel]

Fanboy no, someone who thoroughly enjoys the Wii, yes. I see the benefits and negatives of each system out now but the wii caters to my tastes overall. All i have been saying is try certain games out before you come to your conclusions that seem slightly short sighted given nintendo's surprise success with their other "gimmick" console the ds.

You have an incredible ability to spin around a persons post and make them seem wrong even when it's there personal view. It's almost as if you are the crappy clone of Bill O'Reiley.

Don't use your education to make a point in a conversation when its totally unrelated to it. It again not only makes you look like a holier than thou ignoramus but now you looks likea pompous ass. Good for you.

I would not call you an old videogame nerd because 1) it's a lame insult and most people who know me know i can do much better than that. 2) I wouldn't even call that an insult, and old videogame nerd would probably be more positively excitable and accepting of anything videogame related and refrain from doom saying like the crazy man on a soap box. Theres is no 3rd point although I know three seems to be the magic number for solid reasoning or atleast looks better in writing.

Really this thread shows that you have a noose around your neck and your soap box is creeking. How much longer till you hang yourself with your weighty words?

[PapaStu]

I suggest to a moderator that this thread should be locked before I'm called an old videogame nerd again.


I've heard worse than being called an old videogame nerd, but you guys are going around in a circle about opinions and nothing is going to change your opinions on this.

Yes this is new tech, yes this has some serious potential, yes its currently being poorly managed by many developers/publishers and yes there are games out there that are doing it correctly, right now.

Hows about we all take the high road on this as adults should do.

**Lockerooni**