I highly doubt that the depth of gameplay is what keeps his family entertained with Wii Sports, it is more likely that they enjoy gaming together in the similar way that people still were accessing Halo or Halo 2 on Live. The social component to that interaction is what makes it fun as much as anything else once you master the game play mechanics.
Old Discussion Thread for all 3 motion controllers
- Thread starter betan
- Start date
- Status
I highly doubt that the depth of gameplay is what keeps his family entertained with Wii Sports, it is more likely that they enjoy gaming together in the similar way that people still were accessing Halo or Halo 2 on Live. The social component to that interaction is what makes it fun as much as anything else once you master the game play mechanics.
To a significant extent, it's the accessibility of the interface that makes the Wii such a dominant social gaming platform - and allows simple, social minded games to be a huge success.
One of the best gaming moments I've ever had was taking turns playing Flatout: Ultimate Carnage with my (at the time) flatmate and his parents. It was an absolute blast, but without question the controls (as simple as they are) were a massive barrier. It took at least 45 minutes before they were able to keep the car driving in a straight line at low speed.
Personally I think the reason Wii is popular is because it's the right price and easy (as well as fun) to play - parent/grandparents and kids can all play together and the barriers that previously were in place (controllers/gaming being for youngsters) are largely gone and replace with 'lifelike' gestures and minimal button presses.
IMHO the reason Ninty games sell well is partly because there's a real lack of quality in opposition, and partly because of their customers. It's why a simple HD version of Wii would not (IMHO) sell well. They have something they are happy with, so why replace/upgrade it?
Going back to the PS3 software - there's no reason why Sony cannot release "party games" to fill the hole that the Wii fills (Modnation Racers = Mario Kart, LBP = Mario and it can't be too hard to replicate the sports titles). Sure they might not be as good - but Sony offer other experiences that the Wii cannot, so all-in-all the PS3 is 'jack of all' and offers a great all-round solution.
IMHO the reason Ninty games sell well is partly because there's a real lack of quality in opposition, and partly because of their customers. It's why a simple HD version of Wii would not (IMHO) sell well. They have something they are happy with, so why replace/upgrade it?
Going back to the PS3 software - there's no reason why Sony cannot release "party games" to fill the hole that the Wii fills (Modnation Racers = Mario Kart, LBP = Mario and it can't be too hard to replicate the sports titles). Sure they might not be as good - but Sony offer other experiences that the Wii cannot, so all-in-all the PS3 is 'jack of all' and offers a great all-round solution.
The are far from the comparable experience. LBP's platforming is harder and frustrating. Modnation Racers has attitude and a lack of polish (at least the Beta) that sees it failing to capture the fun of the original MK. There are posters here who say the Wii MK has been dumbed down to elliminate true competition for the sake of the casual gamers, though I haven't played it to have my own opinion.
Nintendo's software for Wii has been simplistic, allowing a numpty with zero hand control to wave their arm around and manage to skill-lessly win a tennis match or fight. I don't think any other developer would be willing to go that simple and so appeal to the non gamers.
Could it be because one console has a lot more of a 'hardcore whoop-a gamer' type than the other along with less 'casual gamer' titles so they feel they need to push harder than the other?
Just a thought.
TBH that's pretty much what I was trying to say! lol
Like I said, Sony can produce a title which fills a gap, it might not be as good - but it's still worthy of play-time, and with LBP & MNR having user created content they also add something that both Ninty titles lack.
But it won't be filling the gap if the audience who picked up the Wiimote and enjoyed racing cows cannot pick up the Move and enjoy the experience because it requires skill from them! So much depends on what's created and how the public ultimately responds.
Surely it depends how tweakable the Move settings are?
I think Shifty's point was that PS3 games are probably more likely to demand a higher level of skill to play. Be it player coordination, or simply being familiar with how games work.
You actually bring up a very thorny issue. To beat Nintendo - or any company - at their own game you can't simply match them, you have to significantly outdo them or provide something distinctly different. No question Sony have outdone Nintendo hardware, but that is really only one part: Without a key differentiator, your software needs to ace Nintendo's as well.
Better graphics don't really factor in - they are great for increasing immersion, but don't necessarily make a socially targeted experience better (in some ways, more realistic graphics can detract from it).
I can't help feel that many of the games Sony have shown (with the biggest exception being EyePet) are simply competing with existing Wii titles. If you are trying to pull a customer away from a competitor, offering the same experiences isn't exactly a winning strategy in my book.
There was a post on NeoGaf (I can't seem to find it) directly comparing the Sony titles (boxing, archery, sword fighting, etc) to their Wii counterpart. The reaction in the thread was very much 'Night and Day!', but I couldn't help think how sterile and serious (boxing) they looked.
The Wii titles may be low-fi, but they have a real sense of character. Their colours are bright, and the simplicity simply means everything is easily recognizable. To put it simply, they looked more fun.
What I'd have much rather seen were only new and novel uses exploiting Move's technical capability applied to making fun, original games (preferably silly little games that don't take themselves seriously).
...
I know I'm ragging on Sony a lot, however I just don't feel inspired at all by Move. If Microsoft pull the same clichéd games out at E3 then I'll be doubly disappointed. While ultimately this is about money, the means to getting there shouldn't be overlooked: combining fun, originality and doing things that are new and exciting. Inspiring people, helping them discover gaming and simply making people happy.
As time passes, I find more often I'm looking at games, tech and hardware from a cold cynical perspective. Trying to imagine the process that brought that product to production and the thinking behind it.
More and more, I see 10s of millions of dollars and 100s of man years effort being spent on projects which (frankly) seem to suggest a fundamental lack of direction or goal (I'm not speaking of Move specifically, more of the game industry in general)
You actually bring up a very thorny issue. To beat Nintendo - or any company - at their own game you can't simply match them, you have to significantly outdo them or provide something distinctly different. No question Sony have outdone Nintendo hardware, but that is really only one part: Without a key differentiator, your software needs to ace Nintendo's as well.
Better graphics don't really factor in - they are great for increasing immersion, but don't necessarily make a socially targeted experience better (in some ways, more realistic graphics can detract from it).
I can't help feel that many of the games Sony have shown (with the biggest exception being EyePet) are simply competing with existing Wii titles. If you are trying to pull a customer away from a competitor, offering the same experiences isn't exactly a winning strategy in my book.
There was a post on NeoGaf (I can't seem to find it) directly comparing the Sony titles (boxing, archery, sword fighting, etc) to their Wii counterpart. The reaction in the thread was very much 'Night and Day!', but I couldn't help think how sterile and serious (boxing) they looked.
The Wii titles may be low-fi, but they have a real sense of character. Their colours are bright, and the simplicity simply means everything is easily recognizable. To put it simply, they looked more fun.
What I'd have much rather seen were only new and novel uses exploiting Move's technical capability applied to making fun, original games (preferably silly little games that don't take themselves seriously).
...
I know I'm ragging on Sony a lot, however I just don't feel inspired at all by Move. If Microsoft pull the same clichéd games out at E3 then I'll be doubly disappointed. While ultimately this is about money, the means to getting there shouldn't be overlooked: combining fun, originality and doing things that are new and exciting. Inspiring people, helping them discover gaming and simply making people happy.
As time passes, I find more often I'm looking at games, tech and hardware from a cold cynical perspective. Trying to imagine the process that brought that product to production and the thinking behind it.
More and more, I see 10s of millions of dollars and 100s of man years effort being spent on projects which (frankly) seem to suggest a fundamental lack of direction or goal (I'm not speaking of Move specifically, more of the game industry in general)
A lot of the reason some people are excited for Move that weren't for Wii motion games is that Sony makes games that are challenging and require precision. I don't think it would be a good idea to lose that base in an attempt to broaden the market that may not succeed. So I would hope they will still appeal to their current customers enough.
There is the whole thing in Blue ocean strategy of bringing consumers upstream to more challenging games, as many of us moved from one button games to 2 button to six and so on, from single screens to multi screens to scrolling worlds to 3D, Move might be too much too soon but then we could still be surprised by games pitched at different demographics.
I'm curious about Ape escape and what audience that will be targeted at.
There is the whole thing in Blue ocean strategy of bringing consumers upstream to more challenging games, as many of us moved from one button games to 2 button to six and so on, from single screens to multi screens to scrolling worlds to 3D, Move might be too much too soon but then we could still be surprised by games pitched at different demographics.
I'm curious about Ape escape and what audience that will be targeted at.
Last edited by a moderator:
That's totally true. I've said a few times that I believe Move will primarily sell to existing PS3 owners.
The open question is how well, and that will mainly be determined by how 3rd parties support it in hardcore games.
As I tried to say in my last post, the views I express generally aren't my own personal desires toward products. I want to see gaming expand and bring in a much bigger audience (not just stealing the Wii audience). Move has a lot of potential to do that, but I just don't see Sony going down that path - and that really disappointed me. I admit I can get a bit wound up over these things sometimes
The open question is how well, and that will mainly be determined by how 3rd parties support it in hardcore games.
As I tried to say in my last post, the views I express generally aren't my own personal desires toward products. I want to see gaming expand and bring in a much bigger audience (not just stealing the Wii audience). Move has a lot of potential to do that, but I just don't see Sony going down that path - and that really disappointed me. I admit I can get a bit wound up over these things sometimes
ShadowRunner
Veteran
There are a ton of gamers, casual or not, still out there that do not own a 360 or PS3 yet, we shouldnt forget them. While going for the non-gamer crowd could certainly bring in huge amounts of new people these people are also a lot harder to get into gaming. If natal only really apeals to the non-gamer (not saying it will, we dont know yet) if the addition of Move to PS3s vocabulary is of more appeal to gamers rather than non-gamers than Natals addition to 360 then it could concieveably tip the advantage in PS3s favour for those gamers, PS3/360 have been pretty much equal up until now. 360/PS3 sold around 800,000 units last month to gamers, if Move can tip this balance in PS3s favour for gamers then there are significant gains to be made. Im not saying this will happen im just saying that if one of the HD twins can break the status quo that exist currently for the gamer demographic then the repurcussions could lead to a big success in the gamer market, which would not be negated whether the competition is hugely successful in the non-gamer market or not. In theory Ps3 could sell 140mil units to gamers without sharing the majority of those gamers with 360, while the 360 sells 200mil to non-gamers. Both consolse could see huge success if they are not sharing the same demographic. Not that that going to happen but still 
I dont think it would actualy take that much to shift favouratism of the remaining gamers out there towards one of the consoles so going after the gamers out there rather than non-gamers could be lucrative regardless of the copmetitions sucess/failure in grabbing non-gamers, and also a lot easier. Anyone agree?
Again im not saying Move is a product that will tip the balance and give PS3 an edge in goin after gamers, im just saying there are millions of gamers out there still to be fought for and they shouldnt be forgotten considering they are the much easier target.
Its easy to look at the situation with blinkers on and only see a vs. situation, this doesnt have to be the case and outside of the usual console war undertones both peripherals have a chance of success without cannibalising eachother, whether that success is minor or major for both or one or the other.
If this theory is accepted then whether or not Move/Natal apeal to gamers should be discussed which has been pretty much absent so far, pretty much all of the discussion has been on wether my mum will buy a console or not
Am i talking nonsense here or can anyone see where im coming from? Ive had a few beers, thats my defence
I dont think it would actualy take that much to shift favouratism of the remaining gamers out there towards one of the consoles so going after the gamers out there rather than non-gamers could be lucrative regardless of the copmetitions sucess/failure in grabbing non-gamers, and also a lot easier. Anyone agree?
Again im not saying Move is a product that will tip the balance and give PS3 an edge in goin after gamers, im just saying there are millions of gamers out there still to be fought for and they shouldnt be forgotten considering they are the much easier target.
Its easy to look at the situation with blinkers on and only see a vs. situation, this doesnt have to be the case and outside of the usual console war undertones both peripherals have a chance of success without cannibalising eachother, whether that success is minor or major for both or one or the other.
If this theory is accepted then whether or not Move/Natal apeal to gamers should be discussed which has been pretty much absent so far, pretty much all of the discussion has been on wether my mum will buy a console or not
Am i talking nonsense here or can anyone see where im coming from? Ive had a few beers, thats my defence
Last edited by a moderator:
The iphone and ipod are clearly pioneers.
Eye Toy is from 2003
Yeah, I think EyeToy is the first camera-based natural interface consumer product. iPhone introduced multi-touch interface and captured the phone market. iPod is a totally different animal altogether.
You're right. Depth is probably the wrong word. Polished and self-contained are better descriptions of what I had in my mind.
As for social/family gaming, I agree it's the main draw but many casual games have this trait. I was saying it is not the only success factor for Wii. e.g., I am not sure WiiFit is sold based on social gaming.
As for the stats for most played Wii games, I think the difference is between sales and most played. I see those 3 games (Super Smash Brothers Brawl, Animal Crossing, Guitar Hero 3) and others on the list (e.g., Modern Warfare) as gamers' games. Gamers will play them more. WiiFit and WiiSports bring in a load of other people to the scene, which is Nintendo's ace this gen. I think on the DS side, I would say something like Brain Training would attract new consumers to gaming too.
We agree here the key issue however which needs to be considered is that Nintendo sells everything at a profit while Sony arguably still is losing money on PS3 sales so if a 'nongamer' buys a PS3 and one game Sony actually accelerates their losses. It may very well be counter productive for Sony to attempt to grow their base unless they can get people to use their PS3s to start buying more software and also do other things: rent movies, pay for music, buy Blu Ray disc. Imagine what losses Nintendo would have experienced if they were selling the DS at a loss and all these 'casuals' bought units and only Brain Age to go with it...
The other factor in Nintendo first party sales which has to be evaluated is the contribution that well established first party mascots contribute to these sales. Mario is a lot like Mickey in that sense - games which feature Mario, Zelda, Donkey Kong all generally have extremely high production values and in many cases parents are eager to sit down and play too as they grew up playing and be familiar with core play mechanics in the case of Super Mario Brothers Wii. Including built in cheats is a brilliant idea because now nongamers who are struggling with a particular area can still enjoy the game.
Last edited by a moderator:
No doubt Nintendo has its strength in consumer marketing. But Sony has a few consumer divisions too.
Sony and MS are certainly hampered by the high cost. However they will gain manufacturing efficiency. Now that they are close to make $$$ for their consoles, they can or will try to go after the casuals.
After the PS Move reveal, I still don't see Sony targeting the casuals. Perhaps this is intentional, they seem to be going after the core gamers by and large.
At the end of the day, if they want to excel in digital consumer space, they will have to package their software/services properly. We have not seen any of that yet (in PS Move). Most of what we saw are just tech demoes. In fact, MS is more eager to get their consumer message and concept out there ahead of Sony. Sony seems to be grappling with low level features.
People who are interested in wellness may like WiiFit too (e.g., seniors). Social gaming is not the only draw.
Sony and MS are certainly hampered by the high cost. However they will gain manufacturing efficiency. Now that they are close to make $$$ for their consoles, they can or will try to go after the casuals.
After the PS Move reveal, I still don't see Sony targeting the casuals. Perhaps this is intentional, they seem to be going after the core gamers by and large.
At the end of the day, if they want to excel in digital consumer space, they will have to package their software/services properly. We have not seen any of that yet (in PS Move). Most of what we saw are just tech demoes. In fact, MS is more eager to get their consumer message and concept out there ahead of Sony. Sony seems to be grappling with low level features.
People who are interested in wellness may like WiiFit too (e.g., seniors). Social gaming is not the only draw.
Execution and message have been the issue for Sony this generation though - how did Sony let MS get movies on 360 earlier than PS3, how did they let MS take away so many exclusives, why did it take them so long to figure out what people want in PSN and why did it take nearly 3 years to start properly leveraging their extensive catalog of existing titles on PSN?
Sony is a company with serious execution issues. IMO if MS learns how to get their core audience to migrate their Halo/MW clans to online Natal based volleyball, baseball and card games they will win the war for 2nd place by a steep margin if not actually make a real run for Nintendo's first place spot. Sony has more work to do and with their executions issues this is going to be a very interesting period to watch. I don't buy into the idea that Nintendo has the ability to things that nobody else can do with software as some seem to be arguing and honestly Sony will take advantage of the easy ports which will certainly come from EA and others but I do agree it is an uphill battle for Sony in particular on balance. Personally I really hope Sony gets their act together as IMO their software is the most diverse and takes more chances than MS does - as an enthusiast I appreciate what they doing. However if I were picking a company to invest in I would have to pass on Sony for the time being.
I think MS has more $$$ to buy exclusives. Sony chose to invest in its own studios. No point fighting MS with cash. You will lose.
As for leveraging on existing catalog, they probably want people to buy their new games. But I do agree they take too long to do their network, plus they didn't hype up its capability (e.g., Demon's Souls use the PSN user data services to create its unique online experiences, but Sony didn't create a consumer concept around it. It's probably yet another tiny feature from their point of view).
Now, PSN has become a Sony group-wide effort. On one hand, they can enjoy better economy of scale. OTOH, if they are not careful, it is also possible that thing will now take a decade to happen.
I say this because Howard Stringer himself lamented that he couldn't move their network effort fast enough.I think MS has more $$$ to buy exclusives. Sony chose to invest in its own studios. No point fighting MS with cash. You will lose.
As for leveraging on existing catalog, they probably want people to buy their new games. But I do agree they take too long to do their network, plus they didn't hype up its capability (e.g., Demon's Souls use the PSN user data services to create its unique online experiences, but Sony didn't create a consumer concept around it. It's probably yet another tiny feature from their point of view).
Now, PSN has become a Sony group-wide effort. On one hand, they can enjoy better economy of scale. OTOH, if they are not careful, it is also possible that thing will now take a decade to happen.
The travesty with PSN is that with all the copying that Sony gets accused off if they had simply copied the matchmaking and friends system from Live rather than go off on the whole Home adventure they could be so much further along at this point. I am not convinced Sony gets it to this day and the fact that PSN now has a company wide initiative potentially compromises things even more. Corporations generally don't improve execution when initiative spread company wide like that - politics, individual agendas, inertia and a lack of accountability tend to creep into the project in the same way that universal health care becomes a conduit for bridges building in some town we have never heard off, budget overruns and fraud. All Sony had to do was bring in a group of gamers who use Live, identify the strengths of Live over PSN, then validate the results with their marketing team and then assign resources to make it happen. Again execution and focus issues...
- Status
Similar threads
