Japanese Developers Changing Horses?

[NovemberMike]

The Wii isn't that far behind the 360/ps3 (and this comes from a 360 fan who isn't interested in a Wii at all). This is perhaps the least significant leap in real benefits I have seen in consoles so far. NES->SNES had much more detailed characters (ie. Mario is now an italian plumber rather than a block dude) and began the jump to 3D with StarFox. SNES->N64 and PSX was the jump to full 3D graphics and actual music/movies. PSX->PS2 meant 3D characters that could show emotion and the storage to do full voice acting.

PS2->PS3 is simply higher detail. There are few things I have seen on the 360/PS3 that couldn't be done on the Wii in a more simplified manner. It won't look as pretty, but as long as it delivers the fun I think a lot of people will be pretty forgiving (most people I know aren't graphic whores).

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

What exactly are we debating about? I mean, who cares if The Godfather and Harry Potter are the "definitive" version for the Wii, both games are not very good and not really worth talking about.

Both games score around 7.5/8. In my eyes that isnt bad at all. Mean they are defenitly worth playing.

The problem for Nintendo is that they are sorely lacking anything to compete with Microsoft and Sony's GTAs and Halo's which are unrivalled in the number of software and hardware units they can push.

GTA isnt MS or sony only so there isnt a reason why rockstar couldnt make a Wii gta if they wanted. And yes I think that will be a succes. If you played the godfather on Wii you know that the wii controlls add alot to this type of game. Maybe even more than good gfx (gta never was about gfx, so I dont see why this time that should be the selling point).

And Nintendo doesnt have software than can move huge amounts of hardware? what about mario? zelda? pokemon? (if they ever botherd to make a good pokemon console game) mariokart? N64 and GC only sold because of the nintendo titels so you cant possibly say nintendo doesnt have software that sells a buckload of consoles.

 

[joker454]

The Wii isn't that far behind the 360/ps3...

Assuming your talking about technical strength, maybe you meant to say the Wii isn't that far behind the Xbox 1? 360/PS3 are miles beyond Wii on a tech basis. Whether or not that really matters though is a different argument. If you want to bring a 360/PS3 game to Wii then you need to throw 80% of it away.

 

[<nu>faust]

All I'm asking is, as a prospective buyer of the system, what does it offer beyond shooters and racing games?

here is a selection (for 360)
current xbla
pacman:championship edition
luminees live!
catan
uno
cloning clyde
wik:fable of souls
prince of persia

upcoming xbla
space giraffe
bomberman live
castle crashers
super puzzle fighter II turbo HD Remix
super street fighter II turbo HD Remix
every extend extra extreme


current 360
winning eleven
overlord
viva pinata
oblivion
nba street : homecourt
dead rising
table tennis
kameo
enchanted arms

upcoming 360
virtua fighter 5
culdcept Saga
ace combat 6
naruto
trusty bell
mass effect
blue dragon
fable 2
last remnant
lost odyssey
cry-on
alan wake
banjo kazooie 3
beautiful katamari
devil may cry 3
halo wars
resident evil 5
soul calibur 4
ninja gaiden 2
alone in the dark
assains creed

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

Assuming your talking about technical strength, maybe you meant to say the Wii isn't that far behind the Xbox 1? 360/PS3 are miles beyond Wii on a tech basis. Whether or not that really matters though is a different argument. If you want to bring a 360/PS3 game to Wii then you need to throw 80% of it away.

Maybe he means in the sense of what your average consumer think about ps3/x360 gfx vs Wii. For the average joe there probably wont be such a big difference in gfx/power as the specs say.

 

[NovemberMike]

Maybe he means in the sense of what your average consumer think about ps3/x360 gfx vs Wii. For the average joe there probably wont be such a big difference in gfx/power as the specs say.

Exactly my point. The best example I can think of is with Metal Gear. The jump from the Metal Gear games to Metal Gear Solid was enormous. It didn't really change the gameplay that much, but it just looked and sounded great. The jump to the PS2 was equally stunning because the characters looked so real. MGS4 just doesn't have that same feeling to me. Sure you can see individual hairs, but it isn't anything that will simply blow the PS2 era games away.

I think a lot of people are looking at this from the Dev perspective, but for the consumer a lot of things have hit a wall. Adding a few million more polygons is impressive, but right now it is simply making heads more round, and most of the fun physics I have seen weren't necessarily realistic.

I am not saying that I like the Wii or the direction it is going, though. I am just saying that I don't think the average person will see it as that much worse than the 360/PS3.

 

[joker454]

Ah i see, you mean from a casual gamers perspective. Fair enough. I guess you're kinda right, I do notice that when my wife watches what I'm playing, be it Gears or Resistance, she basically can't tell the difference between them. To her they are the same even though graphically to me they are so different. Ironically the only time she's actually showed some genuine interest in what I was playing was when I was playing the new Pac Man on xbox live

I've gotta hand it to Nintendo, they've flip flopped everything. I'm guessing they are going to do with home consoles what they've been successfully doing with handhelds all these years. Basically release a cheap low power box and replace it every 2-3 years with a tweaked model thats backwards compatible. I wouldn't be surprised to see a Wii Lite (or whatever its called) in two years.

More to topic, I've noticed that our parent company is actually showing a bit of a shift to the Wii as well. We've had some meetings about it where it's been made clear that Wii is now "important". They aren't japanese (it's an american company) but still, it kind of falls in line with this threads topic.

 

[Natoma]

What exactly are we debating about? I mean, who cares if The Godfather and Harry Potter are the "definitive" version for the Wii, both games are not very good and not really worth talking about.

Just so you know, The Godfather for Wii scored 77% on 35 reviews at Gameranking.com. Harry Potter for Wii scored 7.8/10 at IGN and 8/10 at 1UP. So..... Maybe not worth talking about for you, but you can't say they're not good games.

I think initially we were debating over whether or not the Wii can appeal to the enthusiast gamer and got sidetracked along the way.
Based on the list you posted Wii has just as many games that appeal to mass market as the Xbox 360 does, "definitive" versions or not. What aides the Wii in appealing to the mass market is the price relative to the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 coupled with the controller which has universal appeal among casual gamers. The problem for Nintendo is that they are sorely lacking anything to compete with Microsoft and Sony's GTAs and Halo's which are unrivalled in the number of software and hardware units they can push.

I think the problem is getting back to what I posited earlier:

One thing I noticed regarding the titles you mentioned. It seems that they're all first or third person shooters, and they all look the same. Now, are you saying that this is the only style of game that the enthusiast market desires? Because when I look at the 360 library, I begin to notice that most of it is shooters and racing games. Whether its Tom Clancy, GRAW, Crysis, Gears of War, Too Human, Forza 2, etc. Not so much on RPGs, casual titles, adventure games, strategy, etc.

I purchased over 20 GC games last gen, and I've currently got over 12 DS games. I would consider myself an enthusiast. Though am I agog over Halo or GTA or Forza 2? Not particularly.

Do you think you may have defined "enthusiast" too narrowly?

 

[Natoma]

I like the Wii too, I just do not think it has what it takes to recreate the games we are seeing on the 360 and PS3 while maintaing what makes them good. One example would be CoD 3 which is vastly inferior on the Wii due to a lack of online and hardware capabilities.

Err, you do realize that CoD 3 was a horrid rush job. Considering the level of texture detail shown in games like Zelda, Metroid, etc, I think that's pretty obvious.

That game wouldn't pass muster on the PSP.

 

[Natoma]

here is a selection (for 360)

Viva Pinata, Ninja Gaiden, Assassin's Creed, Devil May Cry, RE5, Banjo Kazooie 3, Soul Calibur 4, and Kameo are the ones that stand out to me as the ones that really peek my interest. Thanks for the list.

I didn't think about XBLA btw in the same way I didn't think to list VC games for the Wii.

Any Wipeout/Extreme G3/F-Zero type racing games btw?

 

[mrcorbo]

Somewhat OT:

I think that any lack of diversity in the 360's library at the moment just shows that 3rd party developers aren't willing to take risks on unproven (at least in the XBOX market) genres. The user base just isn't robust enough yet to be able to recoup large development costs selling a title to just a small niche. This means that your seeing developers put their best efforts behind games in genres that are as close to sure things as there is in their business.

I think it is up to MS with 1st and 2nd party initiatives to prove that their user base will buy games in genres other than the stereotypical XBOX gamer staples.

I also think that XBLA could help here, as well. I think you may see some innovative things get their start there and then, if successful, make the jump to a more fully-developed boxed title.

I find it encouraging to look at the success of a game like GHII which was: a port, $90, and most certainly not a shooter or a racer and yet is creeping up on 1 million units sold in the US alone. If you build it (a good game) we will buy.

 

[Anvil]

I like the Wii too, I just do not think it has what it takes to recreate the games we are seeing on the 360 and PS3 while maintaing what makes them good. One example would be CoD 3 which is vastly inferior on the Wii due to a lack of online and hardware capabilities.

Perhaps I could get a better understanding of what you are talking about here if you define what you mean by "good"?

Is good defined as:

1. Hi-Def?
2. Shiny graphics?
3. DVD playback?

I am not following where you are coming from by saying that the Wii cannot games that can be considered as good as the 360 or PS3?

Now do not get me wrong as I own both the Wii and the 360 (as well as COD3) and I think both consoles offer great gaming experiences. To me gaming boils down to having fun and I have fun on both the Wii and 360.

I will be honest by saying that gaming in Hi-Def is great but i will be equally honest by also stating that for the past while the Wii has been getting the most gaming in my household. And when the 360 does come on it is mainly for Viva Pinata, Pac Man Ce or Lumines.

I have been having a blast playing Res Evil 4, Scareface, SSX Blur and now Harry Potter on the Wii and I am wondering they could have been made better on the 360 other then a new coat of paint and a different control method.

 

[_xxx_]

Dear Japanese devs, as a happy Wii owner - thank you! Looking forward to some cool new stuff.

 

[fearsomepirate]

All those licensed games, generic sport titles, party games...

The Gamecube got most of the mass of licensed games and about half the generic sports titles. Madden and NBA Live came out every year, and the lower-selling franchises (like NCAA and NHL) came out bi-yearly. And it had more than its share of party games...including a huge-selling exclusive 1st-party franchise. What hurt the Gamecube was its overall library felt like a subset of the Xbox's library with only Nintendo mascot titles making up the difference.

I'm wondering if the Japanese market is just getting tired of JRPGs the way people got tired of 2D platformers about 10 years ago, where a few big ones will still garner big sales, but people aren't going to eat up just any old title.

 

[<nu>faust]

I didn't think about XBLA btw in the same way I didn't think to list VC games for the Wii.
Any Wipeout/Extreme G3/F-Zero type racing games btw?

maybe i shouldn't have listed a games like prince of persia or luminees live since they are just updates on old classic games(which is still waay better than simple emulation that vc offers) but, original and fresh content that xbla is bringing out (like pacman: championship edition and/or space giraffe) is definitely top quality software and is easily comparable to simple casual friendly experiences like wii play/sports.

Any Wipeout/Extreme G3/F-Zero type racing games btw?

if it's not cancelled yet (since originally it was supposed to be launch title for ps3) koei's fatal inertia is what you are looking for.

 

[Cryect]

The only types of things you can't really expect the Wii to do that the XBox 360/PS3 can do is when you have a lot of things on screen at once either due to long distance (in which case that can be reduced unless the long distance is crucial to the game which normally isn't) or a lot of items on screen at once (say Dead Rising).

Toning down graphics can always be done and as long as we don't see much in the way of 50v50 fight scenes its hard to say a game can't be done on Wii if the proper steps are taken.

Developers seem to be concerned mainly with adding detail that the average person doesn't seem to really notice or care about instead of just more objects which is something the average person can readily pick up on (they can count after all). If this changes though then for most games then arguing Wii cant' do those games makes sense.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

The only types of things you can't really expect the Wii to do that the XBox 360/PS3 can do is when you have a lot of things on screen at once either due to long distance (in which case that can be reduced unless the long distance is crucial to the game which normally isn't) or a lot of items on screen at once (say Dead Rising).

More than that, PS360 can do things like soft-body and fluid physics, or advanced virtual materials, or advanced image analysis for augmented reality applications, or complex animation systems. These can have bearing on actually gameplay rather than just being eyecandy. Whether they do get used as more than eyecandy, we'll have to wait and see. But the potential is certainly there, and can't be changed with the Wii whereas the other consoles can add novel interfaces (which MS says they're targetting - "Clearly we need to continue toward more casual-based gaming experiences, and more peripheral-based gaming experiences in front of the screen.")

 

[Cryect]

Yeah, these are things that can' be done as well. Now to see if developers will actually take advantage of them. My guess is there will be a few that will but the vast majority are just going be same traditional games with better graphics. I see the use of more items on the screen over new types of physics systems or analysis techniques since doesn't require really anything beyond what has been done in the past. We likely will see a few novelty games that show these are possible but likely take a generation before everyone really takes in the possibilities and knowledge of how to make it work in their gameplay. Then again these novelty games are also normally my favorite type of game just because they are something different

I just don't like hearing though Wii can't do Name X2 FPS for some reason that is the same thing as Name X FPS from last generation except with individual hair strands on the heads.

 

[bomlat]

I feel that the story will be the same as in the case of the audio.

Long time ago the audio capability of the machines was very interesting for everybody.
After a certain level (stereo CD quality sound) a smal userbase was interested in the newest audio systems.
Right now, only a small percentage care about the audio.

simply:the sampling frequency of the avarage human ear is lower than the capability of the new hardwares.
This will happen with the graphics too.After a certain frequency of pixel/degree/sec the AVARAGE human will not see any big diference .

This is true for even the gameplay.
an avarage human able to follow 6 events (the ideal group size for a low level leader is 6) so with too much object you will frustrate the player,and you will not get any gameplay benefit.


Dont forget, the videogame is game,not a reality simulator.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

This will happen with the graphics too.After a certain frequency of pixel/degree/sec the AVARAGE human will not see any big diference.

That's the principle of diminishing returns, but though it'll hit us eventually, we're some way off yet. Most folks won't care about getting better graphics when it's a price difference of a few hundred dollars (same with PC GPUs), ignoring the difference in controllers. Given the option though, most would notice and prefer PS360 level visuals over Wii. It's the same principle of movie effects. In ye olde days, special effects were pretty obvious. Nowadays we have better effects. They don't necessarily improve the core emotional experience (which is story in movies, versus gameplay in games), but everyone the realism of modern CGs and wouldn't chose to go back to ye olde effects, unless that was necessary for certain stories.