Wii will rock you: How Nintendo's Wii is beating out Sony and Microsoft

[fearsomepirate]

I think it's pretty simple: longevity depends on games. It depends on the big titles. After the Xbox launched, PS2 didn't have a single hardware feature commending it anymore. The Xbox had a hard drive, built-in Ethernet, better graphics, and (eventually) a killer online service that has yet to be matched. What didn't it have? It didn't have a game library that could compete with PS2. Splinter Cell and Halo couldn't save it. Same goes for Gamecube.

And it's a snowball effect. People will continue buying games for the console they have. If in 2008, various 3rd party Wii games have sold by the truckload, sales will not suddenly vanish when 360 drops to $199. People will keep buying games for the Wiis they already have, publishers will keep making games for Wii, and the library will sway more new adopters. If the kind of people who are buying Wii games now pick up gaming as a frequent activity, there'll still be a Wii audience in a few years. That snowball effect is the reason why PSP is never going to catch up to DS.

However, perception among a large number of devs seems to be that Wii is for kids and old people. The next core iterations in Resident Evil, Silent Hill, Devil May Cry, Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy, Splinter Cell, Ghost Recon, and Grand Theft Auto are still not coming to Wii--not to mention all the new franchises like Assassin's Creed and whatnot. The crowd that buys those kinds of games numbers in the millions. Unless some major games bomb on X360--and it doesn't look like they're going to--I wouldn't expect to see a lot of big-name action titles coming to Wii.

But I would expect longevity. The crowd that buys DDR and Mario Party also numbers in the millions.

 

[Phil]

They get it from the commercials and a lot of new gamers who think they have to play that way in order to get the game to work. Granted many of them spazz out, but it isn't required. hehe.

In an ideal scenario where the tv and the couch are lined up in a way that that would work - sure. Sometimes, I just hang around the couch, more or less in a lying position where using the Wii remote would be just... awkward.

While we're on the topic of a Metal Gear Solid type game on Wii - where would the Wii-Remote be better suited? Immersion? Hardly - the gameplay typically found in the MGS type games are quite simple: Walk in either direction and each button is more or less an action. Where would the motion sensor come into play in such a game? Camera movement? Perhaps - but that wouldn't really enhance the gameplay and is just as easily done using one of the analog-sticks (and less awkward). Aiming and shooting? Yeah, it probably would be more precise - if the game would be more or less limited to that kind of gameplay. It isn't though.

Even in games of other genres can I find faults with the controller. It's not the best solution for a driving game - not even better than a controller with an analog-stick devoted to steering. It most certaintly is a lot worse than a dedicated force-feedback steering-wheel.

And lets not even start with ego-shooters.

At the end, it's a great input device for party games - but for anything that goes beyond simplistic gameplay, it's not the ideal solution and is less convinient than a 8 button, 4 directional and 2 analog-stick controller all at the tip of a single finger that can be - for all we care - used under some blanket in a lying position in whatever awkward angle to the tv without significantly compromising the experience.

I have to stress - for simple games and party games such as Nintendo is pushing for its platform - it's an awesome solution and I for one will be getting a Wii for this sole reason. For the more complex targeted games, I'd use a controller, if only for convinience.

 

[Entropy]

I have to stress - for simple games and party games such as Nintendo is pushing for its platform - it's an awesome solution and I for one will be getting a Wii for this sole reason.

It is worth noting that simplifying the control scheme of games was one of the clearly expressed goals of Nintendo for this generation.

Also worth considering is that just about all real-life games have extremely simple control schemes - run, throw or kick a ball, or at most use a tool to hit a ball. This has nothing to do with the complexity of the game itself, soccer for instance requires a sense of game flow, good motor skills, good technique with the ball, predictive ability... Having to fiddle around with a bunch of pads, sticks and little buttons in various combinations is unique to computer games, and gets in the way of playing the actual game. (Which is probably a large reason PC FPS games, in spite of being incredibly derivative, still have a fairly large audience: WASD + mouse carries over between games, making it possible to immediately get into the action without having to stumble through an awkward learning phase just to do basic actions.)

Complexity of control is typically a sign of bad interface design. Check out space games on the PC for a truly horrible experience even within a narrowly defined genre.
If you can't leave a game for two months and then pick it up where you left off, because of control issues, that really says that the control scheme itself was the challenge. Not good.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

While we're on the topic of a Metal Gear Solid type game on Wii - where would the Wii-Remote be better suited? Immersion? Hardly - the gameplay typically found in the MGS type games are quite simple: Walk in either direction and each button is more or less an action. Where would the motion sensor come into play in such a game? Camera movement? Perhaps - but that wouldn't really enhance the gameplay and is just as easily done using one of the analog-sticks (and less awkward). Aiming and shooting? Yeah, it probably would be more precise - if the game would be more or less limited to that kind of gameplay. It isn't though.

You should play the godfather on Wii. It perfectly shows how you can use the wii remote for this kind of games. Yes pressing a button to kill kick/punch/kill someone is less effort than moving the controller like your hitting someone but one aspect of the wii remote was that it should connect you more to the game, and it does. Godfather shows how you can have usefull, easy, fun and not over the top wii controlls in a ''big'' game and actually having a improvement (though obviously that also depends a bit on what you want) over what a normal controller can do.

Even in games of other genres can I find faults with the controller. It's not the best solution for a driving game - not even better than a controller with an analog-stick devoted to steering. It most certaintly is a lot worse than a dedicated force-feedback steering-wheel.

How many good driving games does Wii have? Exite truck is the only decent one and the controller works fine there, takes a bit of getting used to but after that it defenitly isnt worse than analoge sticks. Obviously comparing the wii remote to a raceing steer is a rubbish argument as its a controller used for every genre vs a dedicated device. Thats like complaining your steering wheel doesnt work for fighting games.

And lets not even start with ego-shooters.

nothing wrong with the wii remote and fps games. If developers make a good controller scheme that is. Again here its not so much the Wii remote not being suited as good, or better as a normal controller but developers not taking their time to figure out a good controller scheme though i personally think Red Steel has far better controll than any console shooter I played. Analoge sticks just arnt accurate enough for me.

 

[archangelmorph]

nothing wrong with the wii remote and fps games. If developers make a good controller scheme that is. Again here its not so much the Wii remote not being suited as good, or better as a normal controller but developers not taking their time to figure out a good controller scheme though i personally think Red Steel has far better controll than any console shooter I played. Analoge sticks just arnt accurate enough for me.

Huh???

Now I know your not making sense!!

Red steel's controls are by far the most atrocious implementation of FPS controls using the Wiimote I have ever put my hands on..!!

They feel clumsy and broken at best.. There's literally no accuracy and playing the game reminded me of the days where console FPSs had to deal with some abstract and extremely fractured control scheme of a d-pad and face buttons (pre-duel analogue sticks)..

I definitely don't blame this on the Wiimote itself however since playing Super Monkey Ball: Banana blitz which had a FPS mini-game (shooting fruit-weapons) proved that clean, reasonably-accurate and responsive FPS control was possible with the Wiimote.. Definitely wasn't a touch on KB + Mouse but only slightly better than duel-analogue..

// NOTE: I did however really become attached to Red Steel's implementation of the Wiimote's built-in speaker + mic.. Having the Wiimote ring like a mobile phone during a multiplayer fight only to have some woman give you private, specific objectives to fulfill within the round was not only hillariously fun but was probably the most novel and interesting implementation i'd seen of the peripheral since it was first introduced.. I would love it if Wii developers did more interesting things like this with the controller to add that little bit more depth to the experience..

 

[Phil]

You should play the godfather on Wii. It perfectly shows how you can use the wii remote for this kind of games. Yes pressing a button to kill kick/punch/kill someone is less effort than moving the controller like your hitting someone but one aspect of the wii remote was that it should connect you more to the game, and it does.

Godfather shows how you can have usefull, easy, fun and not over the top wii controlls in a ''big'' game and actually having a improvement (though obviously that also depends a bit on what you want) over what a normal controller can do.

I am curious - what's the improvement to you? I simply don't see how moving the Wii-Remote in a certain way to trigger an array of hitting moves is more convinient than simply pressing one of 4 buttons - all accessible at the tip of my finger, regardless in what position or angle I am to the TV.

Besides, waving around the controller to trigger a hit or kick (as per your description of mimicking a kick/punch as in reallife) is against what I call convinient and to what you argued further above that it's possible to simply move your wrist for the correct movement. Either, I want something immersive - like using a steering-wheel or perhaps using a pointing-device such as the Wii-Remote - or I stick to more traditional controles. For more complex games, I'd take the traditional controlles which offer more versatility (by offering more buttons) over the pointing-device everyday. That would be like playing a MGS type game with a mouse and keyboard. It just doesn't work as well and in the case of the Wii-Remote, it would be at the cost of making the MGS game mechanics simpler (if you have played MGS, I'm sure you know how many possibilities there are using all available buttons on the DS2).

 

[Shifty Geezer]

In an ideal scenario where the tv and the couch are lined up in a way that that would work - sure. Sometimes, I just hang around the couch, more or less in a lying position where using the Wii remote would be just... awkward.

That's definitely a factor. This weekend playing the Wii required moving the furniture more in front of the TV, rather than the more side-positioned places we're used to when playing PS2 or XB360. Wii isn't so straight-forward, a bit like EyeToy. You can't just slob down in any old place and position! But then that's also the appeal of the console. Different strokes for different folks.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

Huh???

Now I know your not making sense!!

Red steel's controls are by far the most atrocious implementation of FPS controls using the Wiimote I have ever put my hands on..!!

They feel clumsy and broken at best.. There's literally no accuracy and playing the game reminded me of the days where console FPSs had to deal with some abstract and extremely fractured control scheme of a d-pad and face buttons (pre-duel analogue sticks)..

Hmm I actually liked it. I thought it was pretty accurate and besides from the occasionall glitch in were whatever I did the crosshair just went spinning around it worked pretty decent I think. Though I might add that I hate shooters with analoge sticks so I might not be the best example around.

I am curious - what's the improvement to you? I simply don't see how moving the Wii-Remote in a certain way to trigger an array of hitting moves is more convinient than simply pressing one of 4 buttons - all accessible at the tip of my finger, regardless in what position or angle I am to the TV.

Maybe because playing games isnt only about being convinient? if you like convinience that much tell me what is so conventiant about having a dozen of triggers, buttons and sticks? why not go back to the atari days and have 1 stick and 1 button, thats what I call conveniant. In my example of the godfather it isnt so much about what is more conveniant, but more about fun and feeling more connected to the game (afterall, I assume you play games for fun). Sitting on the couch beating the crap out of someone is alot more fun that just pressing button 1 to 4 and seeing a animation kick in. After a dozen of times that just becomes necesarry to advance in the game, not necesarrily fun. In the godfather it takes alot longer before it starts to become boring because you are actually doing something, you can kick someones ass in different ways, your not doing the same time after time.

You probably dont like that because its not as conveniant but look at it like this: You can stick your dick in your GF and be done with it in 3 minutes and you did your job in ensuring mankinds survival. Fast and doesnt take much energy. Very conviniant. However its not nesecairily more pleasing or more fun than spending some more time

 

[Anvil]

Huh???

Now I know your not making sense!!

Red steel's controls are by far the most atrocious implementation of FPS controls using the Wiimote I have ever put my hands on..!!

They feel clumsy and broken at best.. There's literally no accuracy and playing the game reminded me of the days where console FPSs had to deal with some abstract and extremely fractured control scheme of a d-pad and face buttons (pre-duel analogue sticks)..

I also loved the controls of Red Steel and really helped with the immersion of the game. Although I bit clumsy at times the controls allowed me to actually enjoy the game instead of fighting with the controls.

The same cannot be said with Perfect Dark on the 360 where I was constantly fighting with the controls and simply gave up in frustration.

I am personally looking forward to fps games on the Wii as developers fine tune the wiimote and nunchuck functionality for these types of games.

 

[archangelmorph]

I also loved the controls of Red Steel and really helped with the immersion of the game. Although I bit clumsy at times the controls allowed me to actually enjoy the game instead of fighting with the controls.

IMO I liked the 1-to-1 mapping to the direction of aim and the aim of the character on screen.. I liked the 1-to-1 mapping between the orientation of your Wiimote and the orientation of your weapon on screen (holding your pistol sideways just felt all kinds of cool..)

However when it came to trying to extract fast, responsive accuracy from the control scheme I just felt it too lacking.. Turning speed was one of the biggest problems for me and trying to turn around to shoot an enemy who literally just ran out of view completely broke the realism/immersion of the whole input system.. Like I said before however, SMB:Banana Blitz did it MUCH better..

The same cannot be said with Perfect Dark on the 360 where I was constantly fighting with the controls and simply gave up in frustration.

Haven't played it but I'm sure we can find bad and good implementations of good input paradigms on all platforms (you only have to look at Halo, timesplitters etc.. to see that duel-analogue sticks works fine).. That's why I wasn't attacking the Wii's ability to do FPSs well.. Only Red Steel's attempt to prove that it could...

I am personally looking forward to fps games on the Wii as developers fine tune the wiimote and nunchuck functionality for these types of games.

I'm personally much more interested in seeing developers use the Wiimote to create the "new-genre-defining-games" we were all promised pre-release and yet haven't seen practically any (or at least any of notable quality)..

 

[Phil]

Maybe because playing games isnt only about being convinient? if you like convinience that much tell me what is so conventiant about having a dozen of triggers, buttons and sticks? why not go back to the atari days and have 1 stick and 1 button, thats what I call conveniant. In my example of the godfather it isnt so much about what is more conveniant, but more about fun and feeling more connected to the game (afterall, I assume you play games for fun). Sitting on the couch beating the crap out of someone is alot more fun that just pressing button 1 to 4 and seeing a animation kick in. After a dozen of times that just becomes necesarry to advance in the game, not necesarrily fun. In the godfather it takes alot longer before it starts to become boring because you are actually doing something, you can kick someones ass in different ways, your not doing the same time after time.

You probably dont like that because its not as conveniant but look at it like this: You can stick your dick in your GF and be done with it in 3 minutes and you did your job in ensuring mankinds survival. Fast and doesnt take much energy. Very conviniant. However its not nesecairily more pleasing or more fun than spending some more time

I guess that's just where we'll have to agree to disagree then. I don't find using the Wii-Remote in the case you described to be all that more immersive. Even if I use it in a way to mimick actions in real life, I'm still just standing (or sitting) in my living room waving a controller in my hands - not out in the jungle actually defending my life. The controller is at the same time still quite seriously limited in how moves are distinguished. Either it's only very few different moves you can mimick or there are more, but the controller will have trouble associating the right move with the hit the player wanted to do. Now imagine how tyring a fighting game such as Tekken could turn out to be...

Also, if I want to go for that extra immersion that you are refering to - the Wii-Remote is used best by not only moving your wrist, but your entire arm, perhaps as demonstrated by Nintendo's ad campaign. A fun, though tiring experience I'm sure after a while.

I think the point is: The Wii-Remote doesn't let you do more things - it simply offers a different way of doing them. Instead of having 4-8 buttons, you can use the Wii-Remote to mimick those moves. And while doing those moves, you basically lose the ability to use it as a pointing device at the same time, so it's either mimicking a hit or using it as a pointer.

I'm sure there will be some great games for it - but the games I'm looking forward to most on the system are the ones that use it in a simple, yet accurate way to make a very fun experience where just about anyone can join in without having to be an experienced gamer.

On competing platforms - if I want that extra immersion like in a racing game, I'll get the wheel. If I want it in a shooter, a light-gun. And if I want the real thing to a game like MGS, I'll go out for a game of paintball with my mates. For all other things, I just enjoy sitting confortably on my couch in what ever position I like, in which ever angle to the tv and still be able to enjoy the game to the fullest - regardless of my mood or if I'm tired.

And btw: Your analogy isn't very fitting at all.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

I suppose we just have to disagree then. Ofcourse to some extent its a matter of personal preferance but what im trying to say is that the Wii remote isnt neseraily worse (or better) than a normal gamepad for a given game. I think its defenitly possible to use the wii remote and use it so its atleast on par with your normal pad. Depending on what you like you might prefer one over another. Though I agree that the wii remote isnt suited for every genre. Fighters for example. DBZ wii works fine but I think a normal pad is better suited for this. Other genres I think the wii remote isnt worse than a normal pad.

 

[fearsomepirate]

If I want it in a shooter, a light-gun.

I didn't know that most shooters were light-gun compatible.

 

[_xxx_]

From the article about increasing the production numbers:

So hurry up, Nintendo. My grandma is waiting.

So true!

 

[_xxx_]

I am curious - what's the improvement to you? I simply don't see how moving the Wii-Remote in a certain way to trigger an array of hitting moves is more convinient than simply pressing one of 4 buttons - all accessible at the tip of my finger, regardless in what position or angle I am to the TV.

That's kinda like saying you prefer playing football on your console instead kicking the ball at the field. Football sucks, you have to leave the couch! And the playing field is not lined up with the TV!

 

[archangelmorph]

That's kinda like saying you prefer playing football on your console instead kicking the ball at the field. Football sucks, you have to leave the couch! And the playing field is not lined up with the TV!

Actually no it isn't because Wii is no substitute for the real thing.. And the focus of Phil's post was merely to stress that it's not all the time you feel like expending effort and energy to entertain ones self.. Sometimes when your not in the best of it, having to work hard to have fun just isn't very fun at all (try playing competitive basketball when you've just finished running a marathon) so in those times, a quick, lazy and convenient solution for entertainment can be the best means of getting that gaming fix (hence phil's & my previous posts)..

Otherwise non of us would play video games.. We'd either be playing football in the local park (fifa), taking our cars for a spin round the block (NFS:MW), kicking the S***t out of each other in back alleys (Tekken) or running round spanish towns with shotguns blowing peoples heads off (RE4)..

 

[_xxx_]

While it's not a substitute for the real thing, it at least does some stuff like the real thing. I got his point, but if you're not interested in movement, you don't buy a Wii, it's that simple.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

Actually no it isn't because Wii is no substitute for the real thing.. And the focus of Phil's post was merely to stress that it's not all the time you feel like expending effort and energy to entertain ones self.. Sometimes when your not in the best of it, having to work hard to have fun just isn't very fun at all (try playing competitive basketball when you've just finished running a marathon) so in those times, a quick, lazy and convenient solution for entertainment can be the best means of getting that gaming fix (hence phil's & my previous posts)..

However Phil (and you?) act as if playing Wii itself is like running a marathon. unless youre playing wii boxing its hardly any more tireing than playing a normal game. Even I with my not so great condition to say the least can play a average wii game over a hour without my hart rate increasing

 

[archangelmorph]

However Phil (and you?) act as if playing Wii itself is like running a marathon. unless youre playing wii boxing its hardly any more tireing than playing a normal game. Even I with my not so great condition to say the least can play a average wii game over a hour without my hart rate increasing

Well I don't know..

Last time I played Red Steel my arm got pretty tired.. (maybe it's because I have long arms.. )

No but I guess it's not as strenuous as i'm making it out, but it's still not the most convenient solution when you've spent the entire day programming and testing camera based games (which require you to stand in front of your desk waving your arms about alot), you get home late and can't even be bothered to get up out of your chair to eat let alone stand up to wave your arms about some more (a la Wii)..

While it's not a substitute for the real thing, it at least does some stuff like the real thing. I got his point, but if you're not interested in movement, you don't buy a Wii, it's that simple.

I agree with your sentiments exactly.. Thats why I don't own one.. And probably wont unless some really interesting, deep and involving games appear which I just can't miss out on..

 

[DeadlyNinja]

People always claim they have to use lots of movement on the Wii, yet they never bother to point out how effortless it can be to do the same motion with a quick flick of your wrist. You have to make outrageous motion for the Wii mote to work. You don't have to know how to pitch/hit a baseball like a pro to play Wii sports. Even Wii Boxing doesn't really require much effort if you don't know to flail at the TV screen like a madman.