Editorial: Nintendo Wii, Harbinger For The Death Of Gaming

[Ether_Snake]

There is a need for a standard among consoles really. The more different they become from one another the more money devs/publishers must spend to make less money. It's already difficult to figure out which console to develop for, whether to go multiplatform or not, etc., so a lot of money is being thrown into risky ventures. It's no longer about just making a better game than the competition, just making a game for a particular platform might make or break your chances. So many uncertainties.

 

[Deusp]

Though the Eyetoy has been very successful as a peripheral, it hasn't attracted developers to take it up, and that's the issue here. Few developers have concerned themselves to create EyeToy games, and it's mostly slipped by the wayside as a concept, losing the momentum it had at launch.

Of course things would be very different if the device was included as standard. If EyeToy was packed in with every PS2 since launch, there'd be something like 40 million more out there, and you can be sure developers would be targetting that somewhere along the line!

The fact that a peripheral can hit millions of units means that hitting millions more is not that difficult. That basically states that control functionality products can be successful and success can be easily duplicated.

 

[archangelmorph]

How many people who have been enjoying PS2 games for 5 years enjoy going back to 3D games that can only be played with a D-Pad? Although a new paradigm eventually is taken for granted, it does continue to make the old ones feel obsolete. I can go back to playing an N64 game (assuming the framerate was OK to begin with), but I can't stand PS1 games for precisely that reason. Tomb Raider and Resident Evil, which seemed so awesome at the time, now just feel broken.

I certainly xan go back and play some of the great PSOne games (2D fighters, FFVII, FFVIII, Colony Wars etc..) because not only did they work very well in terms of having controls which still today feel intuitive enough for the style/pace of the game but they also look bloody darn good even by todays standards..

The fact is that there are always going to be games that, going backwards make the previous control system feel obsolete but then there are others that just outright wont work with the new paradigm system (have you ever tried playing street fighter with the analogue stick??).. This is even more of the case with the Wii..

I certainly wouldn't say that the Wiimote is any better than the conventional controller at playing conventional games (after playing Red Steel I would have said that in the case of FPSs it's worse, however after playing monkey ball blitz I changed my mind..) The true task of the Wii is to take new games and create new control models that a regular controller would not be able to provide (to at least some degree of intuitiveness) via some abstract remapping.. At the moment I just don't see any games that have done that..

On another note, It's quite clear that the Wiimote has offered developers the potential to create games (like Wii Play and that cooking game) which, had they been done using the conventional control system, would have just been plain boring.. This further solidifies my view that much of the cenjoyment in playing Wii (regardless of the game) is based soley around the novelty of the controller..

 

[Arwin]

Though the Eyetoy has been very successful as a peripheral, it hasn't attracted developers to take it up, and that's the issue here. Few developers have concerned themselves to create EyeToy games, and it's mostly slipped by the wayside as a concept, losing the momentum it had at launch.

Of course things would be very different if the device was included as standard. If EyeToy was packed in with every PS2 since launch, there'd be something like 40 million more out there, and you can be sure developers would be targetting that somewhere along the line!QUOTE]

I don't think the EyeToy was functionally good enough to become a product that you can usefully implement. It was too big a hassle to set it up properly, and the PS2 was too slow to pick up data from it. It may well turn out to be better now that we've moved to next gen, the Cell can analyse the picture, and we can crank up the resolution.

Combined with online gaming becoming a big hit, webcam chatting becoming more common, and the additional power allowing for more kinds of application of the technology, it may become more successful.

The wii is better than the eyetoy, as you can use it for much more applications. And I think it's good that the wiimote and sixaxis both share at least the six axes part of the motion tech, as this will eventually help both platforms.

 

[archangelmorph]

The second point is this interview with THQ. It states they're not doing titles for XB360 & PS3 & Wii, but targetting Wii separately.
"In the past a lot of publishers - including us - would say, 'Okay, let's make a game and get it across every system.' That's not our strategy going forward; there are going to be different gamers for the different systems. So our strategy is different types of content, segmented on who the users of the systems are."
According to Farrell, Xbox 360 and PS3 "very powerful machines" which are "more targeted at the core gamer", while the Wii offers unique opportunities to exploit the licences THQ has picked up from Pixar, Nickelodeon and WWE.
"When you look at the core gamer properties, these are the big bets - the high cost, very targeted games," he said, citing examples such as Saints Row and the forthcoming Frontlines: Fuel of War. "You've got to compete at the highest level of quality. There are fewer of those bets, but they'll probably be very large in terms of sales numbers."

I really don't know if this is a good thing if the majority of devs begin to adopt this strategy..

Possible advantages:-

- Creates more of a destinction between the hardware platforms with software aimed at different audiences, this could be good in terms of improving the chances of all three hardware platforms co-existing on the market instead of a single platform coming out on top..
- Developers can avoid wasting big bucks on porting b-grade titles to the more expensive HD platforms as they'd possibly have much greater sales potential on the Wii (with a larger casual userbase)
- Smaller developers who don't have the kind of funds to make the epic, big budget titles required to sell well on the HD platforms can comfortably sustain profitability doing XBLA/EDI titles and Wii games which require alot less money, time and energy to get the kind of high quality required to be considered AAA..

Possible negatives:-

- Software diversity per platform will be drastically reduced and we'll never have a "one-size-fits-all" PS2 equivalent forcing consumers with diverse tastes to go out and buy multiple boxes..
- On the HD platforms there's a chance that a lack of B-grade titles could mean that more of the bigger AAA titles would compete against each other for sales and developers would have to spend more and more money in order to for the titles to "stand out".. (This may not be the case however since the demographic who can afford to shell out big bucks for the hardware may not think twice about buying several big games at the same time..)
- This could have a detremental affect on the Wii specifically since it would lack software which truely pushes the production values and deep, rich experiences as those present on tyhe HD consoles (since developers wouldn't spend the same kind of money becuase they wouldn't need to in order to get the same level of returns..) The HD consoles however would have the potential to sell the smaller, cheaper games via there download platforms (XBLA/EDI) which could continue to grow and expand to the point where PS2 level quality titles (with HD visuals) are visible and can sell well due the the subsidized prices..

I'll be quite interested to see how the rest of the industry responds to this and how things play out in the coming months/years..

 

[archangelmorph]

I don't think the EyeToy was functionally good enough to become a product that you can usefully implement. It was too big a hassle to set it up properly, and the PS2 was too slow to pick up data from it. It may well turn out to be better now that we've moved to next gen, the Cell can analyse the picture, and we can crank up the resolution.

The PS2 could do a considerable amount with regards to image processing with the EyeToy and setting it up is as easy as putting it on the top of your TV & turning on your PS2..

There's a massive amount of potential with respect to what could be done with the EyeToy however the problem was that not enough emphasis was put on the perpheral and Sony really didn't push it enough.. I think Sony themselves realised that it would only be a niche and therefore didn't want to push the technology out there so that 3rd party developers could develop for it.. The fact of the matter was that the EyeToy itself was definitely small enough and cheap enough that it could have been bundled with games as well as with the hardware, Sony just didn't seem to want to pursue the idea..

Combined with online gaming becoming a big hit, webcam chatting becoming more common, and the additional power allowing for more kinds of application of the technology, it may become more successful.

Not only that but with servies like Home and EDI, the PS3 EyeToy could and should be pushed alot further than it's PS2 counterpart.. There's alot that can be done with the peripheral if used in very clever and interesting ways..

The wii is better than the eyetoy, as you can use it for much more applications. And I think it's good that the wiimote and sixaxis both share at least the six axes part of the motion tech, as this will eventually help both platforms.

I don't know if I agree with you on this.. From what i've heard and experienced the two peripherals actually share quite alot in common in terms of how they are used and as well, in potential use in the future.. The EyeToy however has the advantage in that it can do alot more than be used as a primary user input device and can be utilised as a form of secondary input which includes non-user input..
Overall I'd say that they both have there applications, it's just that the success of the Wii and standardisation of its controller means that we've seen alot more of what can be done with it over what is possible with the EyeToy..

 

[Arwin]

The PS2 could do a considerable amount with regards to image processing with the EyeToy and setting it up is as easy as putting it on the top of your TV & turning on your PS2..

No, because there is considerable hassle in getting good contrast, which is affected by background, background lighting, and so on. This makes setting up the eyetoy for anything else than including your own picture pretty difficult. Some of those issues could be solved, by for instance offering a glove which has special markings that can be easily picked up visually, but I think that the PS3 would be much more suitable to do so fast enough and with depth perception.

Overall I'd say that they both have there applications, it's just that the success of the Wii and standardisation of its controller means that we've seen alot more of what can be done with it over what is possible with the EyeToy..

Much more important in that respect I think is that a lot of existing analog input from analog sticks and wheels can be replaced pretty much effortlessly with analog input from motion sensing. Movements can be thresholded and linked to button presses. The wiimote is much closer to traditional input methods in that respect, so it helps in that regard.

I think we'll get somewhere once we have an eyetoy 'pointer'.

 

[archangelmorph]

No, because there is considerable hassle in getting good contrast, which is affected by background, background lighting, and so on. This makes setting up the eyetoy for anything else than including your own picture pretty difficult. Some of those issues could be solved, by for instance offering a glove which has special markings that can be easily picked up visually, but I think that the PS3 would be much more suitable to do so fast enough and with depth perception.

Why do assume that the only function of a camera is related to colour tracking?

Motion tracking is much much easier and is something which the PS2 and EyeToy are VERY good at..

Then it only takes a bit of tinkering and wizzardry and you can put together some very neat forms of user input via the camera user such a simple hardware mechanic..

I should know... I'm developing for it as we speak..

Much more important in that respect I think is that a lot of existing analog input from analog sticks and wheels can be replaced pretty much effortlessly with analog input from motion sensing. Movements can be thresholded and linked to button presses. The wiimote is much closer to traditional input methods in that respect, so it helps in that regard.

I think we'll get somewhere once we have an eyetoy 'pointer'.

If your trying to emulate "traditional" control models via the use of EyeToy or even the Wiimote then your going about it the wrong way IMO..
New input models should make develoeprs think more about gathering and translating input in new/different ways and not about how they can use the new tech to do the same old things (better)..

 

[Natoma]

The fact that a peripheral can hit millions of units means that hitting millions more is not that difficult. That basically states that control functionality products can be successful and success can be easily duplicated.

You're missing the point that the Eyetoy has only a couple of games that were designed for it. If Sony or any other console maker is trying to introduce a new gaming paradigm that will be spread across its market as a whole, it HAS to be the default controller.

You said Eyetoy sold roughly 3 million or so. How many PS2s are out there? 125 Million or something like that?

What developer is going to target the Eyetoy with that kind of limited demographic? Not many.

 

[Natoma]

I certainly wouldn't say that the Wiimote is any better than the conventional controller at playing conventional games (after playing Red Steel I would have said that in the case of FPSs it's worse, however after playing monkey ball blitz I changed my mind..) The true task of the Wii is to take new games and create new control models that a regular controller would not be able to provide (to at least some degree of intuitiveness) via some abstract remapping.. At the moment I just don't see any games that have done that..

1) The Wii has only been out 5 months.

2) Red Steel was a launch title. If FPS titles are still showing the same kind of control problems a year or so from now, then I think the point becomes valid.

On another note, It's quite clear that the Wiimote has offered developers the potential to create games (like Wii Play and that cooking game) which, had they been done using the conventional control system, would have just been plain boring.. This further solidifies my view that much of the cenjoyment in playing Wii (regardless of the game) is based soley around the novelty of the controller..

As opposed to enjoyment of playing a PS3 or 360 being based solely on the novelty of upgraded graphics? You denigrate such an important aspect of gaming at your own peril imo.

 

[Natoma]

There is a need for a standard among consoles really. The more different they become from one another the more money devs/publishers must spend to make less money. It's already difficult to figure out which console to develop for, whether to go multiplatform or not, etc., so a lot of money is being thrown into risky ventures. It's no longer about just making a better game than the competition, just making a game for a particular platform might make or break your chances. So many uncertainties.

If all of the consoles are basically the same, there's no sense whatsoever in having multiple consoles then. There might as well be one hardware manufacturer and everyone becomes software publishers.

The closest thing we've got today to that paradigm is PC Gaming.

 

[Arwin]

Why do assume that the only function of a camera is related to colour tracking?

Motion tracking is much much easier and is something which the PS2 and EyeToy are VERY good at..

In theory, yes, but in practice, as a user (!), I run against exactly these problems.

Then it only takes a bit of tinkering and wizzardry and you can put together some very neat forms of user input via the camera user such a simple hardware mechanic..

I should know... I'm developing for it as we speak..

I believe you, but I was thinking of solutions for the problems I have. For instance, I have a TV facing the window. If the camera records the window behind me, or a lamp, or whatever, it messes up my game. How much practical experience have you got with the device outside of the lab?

If your trying to emulate "traditional" control models via the use of EyeToy or even the Wiimote then your going about it the wrong way IMO..

Well, yes and no. Because the Analog stick was all we had, it took the role of a mouse and all sorts of other devices. It is doing all these things already, but a pointing device, whether through eyetoy or through wiimote, or through a real mouse, they all do this better.

New input models should make develoeprs think more about gathering and translating input in new/different ways and not about how they can use the new tech to do the same old things (better)..

Why either/or? If I want to play C&C on a console with a pointing device, and I think using my hands combined with eyetoy would be a good way to do it, why would I necessarily have to come up with something completely original?

But of course something completely original is good too.

Are you developing for PS2 or PS3? Cause that kind of matters here.

 

[archangelmorph]

I believe you, but I was thinking of solutions for the problems I have. For instance, I have a TV facing the window. If the camera records the window behind me, or a lamp, or whatever, it messes up my game. How much practical experience have you got with the device outside of the lab?

Enough to know that you'd be silly to define your input regions by the dimensions of the entire screen.. And you'd be even stupider if you didn't take into consideration the influences of varying contrasts/lighting conditions when designing the game your making and the mechanisms of interaction.. This is exactly why I expressed the need for a more creative view of interface design with respect to such non-conventional input hardware..

Well, yes and no. Because the Analog stick was all we had, it took the role of a mouse and all sorts of other devices. It is doing all these things already, but a pointing device, whether through eyetoy or through wiimote, or through a real mouse, they all do this better.

Thats great if you "want" a pointing device.. But my point is why attempt to force your input to give you a specific model it wasn't designed to give. Why not change the game to cater for a seperate input paradigm which is much more suited to your hardware..? That's the best way to find "novelty" which in effect adds value to the user experience rather than giving him something that just "feels" the same as what he/she knows.. The best example I can give is how the Wii doeesn't
"feel" very revolutionary when your playing Red Steel (it actually feels very clunky, awkward and unresponsive) but it feels great/different when your bowling in Wii sports..

Why either/or? If I want to play C&C on a console with a pointing device, and I think using my hands combined with eyetoy would be a good way to do it, why would I necessarily have to come up with something completely original?

Why force the port of C&C altogether??

But of course something completely original is good too.

Glad to see we agree somewhere Arwin..

Are you developing for PS2 or PS3? Cause that kind of matters here.

PS3 but there's alot of PS3 work that goes on around our office so i'm not completely out-of-the-loop with regards to next gen development.. Also I don't reeaally see how it matters when we're talking about PS2 EyeToy but if you think that my lack of PS3 developer experience reduces my credibility then to each his own I guess.. *shrug* :smile:

/(sorry for dragging this thread off-topic)

Anyways about that "Wii is the harbinger of death and destruction.. and the pain... and the killing..." topic.. ?

 

[Arwin]

Enough to know that you'd be silly to define your input regions by the dimensions of the entire screen.. And you'd be even stupider if you didn't take into consideration the influences of varying contrasts/lighting conditions when designing the game your making and the mechanisms of interaction.. This is exactly why I expressed the need for a more creative view of interface design with respect to such non-conventional input hardware..

Well, if you can take that into account without greatly limiting what you can do with the medium, then power to you! (I am insanely jealous anyway of your job, so just you know ).

Thats great if you "want" a pointing device.. But my point is why attempt to force your input to give you a specific model it wasn't designed to give. Why not change the game to cater for a seperate input paradigm which is much more suited to your hardware..?

My point(er) only is that IF you can make the EyeToy a better pointing device than, say, the DualShock, and GIVEN that you have need for pointing devices in games anyway, then why NOT use it in that way?

That's the best way to find "novelty" which in effect adds value to the user experience rather than giving him something that just "feels" the same as what he/she knows.. The best example I can give is how the Wii doeesn't "feel" very revolutionary when your playing Red Steel (it actually feels very clunky, awkward and unresponsive) but it feels great/different when your bowling in Wii sports..

But in a sense you are just proving my point. Tekken Bowl uses three different timed inputs to obtain pretty much the same input as you can get from one realistic motion with the wiimote. That the wiimote wasn't available yet didn't stop a bowling game from being released however. But the wiimote (still waiting for a sixaxis version by the way) is (much) more suitable to the task.

Why force the port of C&C altogether??

It's not force - it's just seeing that given a desire to play a C&C type game, and given that an eyetoy could be a better way of controlling it than a DualShock (never mind whether it would be perfect for it, better is enough), then why not?

Glad to see we agree somewhere Arwin..

Game ideas evolve. If you can find a novel way of using new technology and create a whole new game type out of it, that is great and definitely worth it. But it's not either/or, in my view.

Also I don't reeaally see how it matters when we're talking about PS2 EyeToy but if you think that my lack of PS3 developer experience reduces my credibility then to each his own I guess.. *shrug* :smile:

Not at all. I just think that the PS3 will be able to do much more with the Eyetoy than is currently possible. But I'm looking forward to having you prove me wrong!

Anyways about that "Wii is the harbinger of death and destruction.. and the pain... and the killing..." topic.. ?

We're in a sense contributing to that discussion, somewhat. In the sense that we acknowledge novel control methods contribute to gaming, and are constructive rather than destructive. Or something.

 

[archangelmorph]

My point(er) only is that IF you can make the EyeToy a better pointing device than, say, the DualShock, and GIVEN that you have need for pointing devices in games anyway, then why NOT use it in that way?

But my point is that your perceived "need" for pointing devices is suspect..

But in a sense you are just proving my point. Tekken Bowl uses three different timed inputs to obtain pretty much the same input as you can get from one realistic motion with the wiimote. That the wiimote wasn't available yet didn't stop a bowling game from being released however. But the wiimote (still waiting for a sixaxis version by the way) is (much) more suitable to the task.

It was a bad example so I'll give you that..

It's not force - it's just seeing that given a desire to play a C&C type game, and given that an eyetoy could be a better way of controlling it than a DualShock (never mind whether it would be perfect for it, better is enough), then why not?
Game ideas evolve. If you can find a novel way of using new technology and create a whole new game type out of it, that is great and definitely worth it. But it's not either/or, in my view.

Fair enough.. :smile:

Not at all. I just think that the PS3 will be able to do much more with the Eyetoy than is currently possible. But I'm looking forward to having you prove me wrong!

I definitely don't disagree with this sentiment.. I just disagree'd with your earlier comment which implied that the PS2's capabilities with respect to the device we're in some way too limited to provide any form of reasonable/effective use..

We're in a sense contributing to that discussion, somewhat. In the sense that we acknowledge novel control methods contribute to gaming, and are constructive rather than destructive. Or something.

Fair enough then..

 

[Ether_Snake]

If all of the consoles are basically the same, there's no sense whatsoever in having multiple consoles then. There might as well be one hardware manufacturer and everyone becomes software publishers.

The closest thing we've got today to that paradigm is PC Gaming.

I'm not saying it should go to such extreme, but the issue right now is that we have two consoles that are practically identical and one that is very different. It becomes rather difficult to figure out what to make for which console. If you make one for PS3 and 360, then you lower the quality of your game because of the time spent on making it supported by both platforms. If you leave one of the two out you lose sales potential that you would not have lost the previous gen (because the PS2/Xbox had rather different user bases). If you make it for the Wii you can't really just port it to the PS3/360 without really affecting the quality again, probably affecting the Wii version's quality as well, and you are missing the user base from the PS3/360.

Now the real kicker is that right now it is very difficult for companies to estimate which consoles will be doing well by 2008 (and I would only leave space for 2).

If by next Christmas it isn't clearer, companies will either have to spend more money to sell the "same" games to as many people as the previous generation, or to forcefully support specific consoles and single one out to hopefully (for them) make future decisions easier by attempting to console one of the three consoles to fall out of the race and therefore unify the userbase of whatever consoles remain in the "race", reducing their risks and raising sales potential in the process.

 

[archangelmorph]

I'm not saying it should go to such extreme, but the issue right now is that we have two consoles that are practically identical and one that is very different. It becomes rather difficult to figure out what to make for which console. If you make one for PS3 and 360, then you lower the quality of your game because of the time spent on making it supported by both platforms. If you leave one of the two out you lose sales potential that you would not have lost the previous gen (because the PS2/Xbox had rather different user bases). If you make it for the Wii you can't really just port it to the PS3/360 without really affecting the quality again, probably affecting the Wii version's quality as well, and you are missing the user base from the PS3/360.

Now the real kicker is that right now it is very difficult for companies to estimate which consoles will be doing well by 2008 (and I would only leave space for 2).

If by next Christmas it isn't clearer, companies will either have to spend more money to sell the "same" games to as many people as the previous generation, or to forcefully support specific consoles and single one out to hopefully (for them) make future decisions easier by attempting to console one of the three consoles to fall out of the race and therefore unify the userbase of whatever consoles remain in the "race", reducing their risks and raising sales potential in the process.

It's an interesting idea but it's already full of holes because your arguement is completely based on the assumption that the market sustains it's size going forwards.. This clearly isn't the case for a number of reasons..:

- There exists a percentage of PS3 owners that have never owned a games console before..
- There exists a percentage of Xbox360 owners that have never owned a games console before..
- There exists a massive percentage of Wii owners that have never owned a games console before..
- The PS2, Xbox360 & GC install bases haven't shrunk (users are either happy to stick with what they have, waiting for price cuts to migrate or have already done so..)

So it's quite obvious that the industry is growing and the Wii is a masive catalyst for that growth, especially considering it's bringing so many more non-gamers into the fold than any other platform has done in a very long time..

 

[Arwin]

I'm not saying it should go to such extreme, but the issue right now is that we have two consoles that are practically identical and one that is very different.

Different from what? The Wii is more similar to a GameCube by far than the PS3 is similar to the 360. The Wii is probably more similar to the original Xbox than the PS3 is similar to the 360. In fact, the PS3 and 360 aren't all that similar to begin with. They mostly share arts and assets. But in that respect, even the PSP, PS2 and Wii could be placed in a similar group (and they are).

I've posted on this before, and it still stands. There is overlap between all of the different consoles, these days even including handhelds, in many different ways and it is interesting to analyse how this will pan out.

- 360 and PS3 share downloadable games (though right now there is very little overlap, an increase is likely)
- all of them share a limited amount of old game re-releases
- the PS3 and Wii share motion sensing
- the 360 and PS3 share asset creation options because they have comparable resolution options, rendering power and features (although in terms of how the engine creates them there are vast differences)
- the PS2, PSP, Xbox, GameCube and Wii share asset creation to some point. Especially developers seem to still target PSP, PS2 and Wii with some of their new releases.
- the DS stands on its own in terms of asset creation, but shares some pointer features that stimulates Wii releases of typical DS gameplay

etc.