Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 25th Apr 2011 20:21 UTC
Games Ah yes, this was pretty inevitable. Nintendo is facing dropping sales and earnings for another year, and as such, it should come as no surprise that they have just announced the Wii's successor. The Japanese gaming giant will unveil the machine during E3 in June, and the device is scheduled for release in 2012.
Order by: Score:
Not sure I agree...
by PresentIt on Mon 25th Apr 2011 20:49 UTC
PresentIt
Member since:
2010-02-10

I've never made a secret of the fact that I do not like the Wii. It is underpowered, and its controls are inaccurate and simply don't work as well as a normal, honest-to-god controller.

Underpowered doesn't matter. It's the games that matter. Wii has the best selling games this generation.

I play games to unwind, to relax - and you can't relax flailing a piece of plastic around randomly in the hopes the darn thing will finally register the correct movement.

You don't have to wave it around. Flicking your wrist works fine.

The Wii's controller was fun for 15 minutes, and then the novelty wore off for me.

Exactly. It's the games that count.

Worse yet, the selection of games is abysmal. The few games that can be classified as 'good' only serve to highlight the total lack of creativity in Nintendo's game design department - Mario this, Zelda that, Metroid whatever. No truly epic games like Dragon Age: Origins, Oblivion, Heavy Rain, Mass Effect, and so on. There's only so many times you can shove a Mario platformer in my face - and it stopped being fun right around Mario 64 was released.

Maybe because 3D Mario is no fun? I think there's a reason why New Super Mario Bros. Wii sold like crazy. People want more 2D Mario.

I only do think that the slump in sales, and the fact that most of the Wiis I know are collecting dust in closets, illustrate that I'm not alone.

If it's all about sales, Nintendo should make more 2D Mario and Wii Sports games.

this is the same company which released Super Mario Bros. Wii and Wii Sports Resort as something new and innovative

Oh come on. Wii Sports made the Wii a huge success.

When did Nintendo claim NSMBW to be new and innovative?

You seem to be overly focused on technology and graphics. Motion controls are here to stay, and can make games accessible to a larger audience. But in the end it's the games that matter.

Edited 2011-04-25 20:52 UTC

Reply Score: 12

RE: Not sure I agree...
by Thom_Holwerda on Mon 25th Apr 2011 20:58 UTC in reply to "Not sure I agree..."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

But in the end it's the games that matter.


Yup, and there Nintendo fails to deliver. Story and emotion are two of the most important aspects in games for me - when was the last time you actually cared about Mario? How many times has the princess been kidnapped at this point?

You seem to be overly focused on technology and graphics.


Then you didn't read carefully at all. In case you haven't noticed - Dragon Age: Origins is my best game of this generation, and if there's one game that lacks in graphics, it's that. It makes up for it with a great and epic storyline, fantastic characters with deep and intricate back-stories and interactions, witty and truly funny humour and dialogue - and the best gameplay I've seen in a long time.

THAT is what I'm missing from Nintendo.

You're trying to paint me as some sort of graphics-whore, because that seems to be the usual kneejerk defensive response from Wii fans. However, I don't care about graphics. It's all story, emotion, and gameplay for me. I want to feel *connected* to the characters, I want to *immerse* myself. Nintendo doesn't offer that anymore.

Edited 2011-04-25 21:00 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Not sure I agree...
by PresentIt on Mon 25th Apr 2011 21:26 UTC in reply to "RE: Not sure I agree..."
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

Story and emotion are two of the most important aspects in games for me - when was the last time you actually cared about Mario? How many times has the princess been kidnapped at this point?

Sorry, but the sales tell a different story. So-called "deep" games based on detailed storylines sell poorly compared to fun "arcade" type games like NSMBW and Wii Sports.

Why on earth does Mario need a story? It's a game! If you want a story, read a book or watch a movie.

It makes up for it with a great and epic storyline

Really? Epic storyline? And what's so great about it?

THAT is what I'm missing from Nintendo.

Evidently, the mass-market doesn't care about storylines or "deep" stuff. Nintendo needs to sell to the mass-market, not to a niche of hardcore gamers.

You're trying to paint me as some sort of graphics-whore, because that seems to be the usual kneejerk defensive response from Wii fans.

I'm not a Wii fan. In fact, the Wii has disappointed me greatly. It held so much promise, but Nintendo failed to deliver in the end.

Why did they release crap like Metroid Other M? Why didn't they do another 2D Mario?

However, I don't care about graphics. It's all story, emotion, and gameplay for me. I want to feel *connected* to the characters, I want to *immerse* myself. Nintendo doesn't offer that anymore.

Story? Emotion? Ugh. Games don't need stories. They need to be fun. They are interactive, and a story will just force you in a specific direction.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Not sure I agree...
by Thom_Holwerda on Mon 25th Apr 2011 21:37 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Not sure I agree..."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Sorry, but the sales tell a different story. So-called "deep" games based on detailed storylines sell poorly compared to fun "arcade" type games like NSMBW and Wii Sports.


So, sales figures are all that matters now? Sales != quality. Also, while they may not outsell some Wii games, games like BioShock and Mass Effect sell like CRAZY. In the MILLIONS. Proof that games with stories sell just fine, thank you.

Why on earth does Mario need a story? It's a game! If you want a story, read a book or watch a movie.


Games shouldn't have stories? Why not? You're basically saying - why do we need Radiohead or The Velvet Underground when Lady Gaga and Kesha sell so much better?

Really? Epic storyline? And what's so great about it?


You clearly haven't played things like Mass Effect, Dragon Age: Origins, and so on.

Story? Emotion? Ugh. Games don't need stories. They need to be fun.


Things with story and emotion can't be fun? Wtf?

They are interactive, and a story will just force you in a specific direction.


You do realise that modern RPGs and even some modern shooters offer A LOT more freedom and direction-less gaming than Wii games, right? Your argument makes no sense.

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: Not sure I agree...
by Soulbender on Mon 25th Apr 2011 23:29 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Not sure I agree..."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

So, sales figures are all that matters now?


It's the most common way to measure "success" in the market, yes.

You're just not part of Nintendo's target demographic Thom.

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Not sure I agree...
by fran on Tue 26th Apr 2011 11:36 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Not sure I agree..."
fran Member since:
2010-08-06

Thats just the thing. The reason behind new console is Nintendo's push into the "Western Core gaming market" as they put it. i.o.w to expand their market demographic and reach out to Thom and co.

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: Not sure I agree...
by Soulbender on Tue 26th Apr 2011 16:52 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Not sure I agree..."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

SO I guess he should wait until it's released then and not judge it based on the previous model.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Not sure I agree...
by Aragorn992 on Wed 27th Apr 2011 05:56 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Not sure I agree..."
Aragorn992 Member since:
2007-05-27

So, sales figures are all that matters now? Sales != quality. Also, while they may not outsell some Wii games, games like BioShock and Mass Effect sell like CRAZY. In the MILLIONS. Proof that games with stories sell just fine, thank you.


The story IS about Nintendo's dropping sales and you bring up the point that Nintendo "fails to deliver" on the games. You made the association between sales and "quality" in your post.

Games shouldn't have stories? Why not? You're basically saying - why do we need Radiohead or The Velvet Underground when Lady Gaga and Kesha sell so much better?


He said "games don't _need_ stories" to be good. Not that they "should not have stories". This is reads alot like intentional misunderstanding i.e. trolling.

Things with story and emotion can't be fun? Wtf?


Same point as above. Games should be fun. Games with stories can be fun. Games without stories can be fun. At least this is my understanding of what was written .. :o

All of this reminds me of a few friends who always said that games have to be more realistic to be fun. Its like they remembered one game years before that was really good (e.g. CounterStrike, I can't remember exactly) and after this game they had it stuck in their head that realism == good game. Then when a game like Quake3 RocketArena game around they couldn't accept it because it wasn't real enough (ok maybe Q3 RA is not a fair comparison to the awesome HalfLife). I agree with the original poster in that the _only_ thing that matters is fun. Everything else is (realism, story lines, whatever) is a means to an end.

Edited 2011-04-27 05:57 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Not sure I agree...
by linux-lover on Mon 25th Apr 2011 22:15 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Not sure I agree..."
linux-lover Member since:
2011-04-25

God, I hope you are trolling.

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Not sure I agree...
by Icaria on Tue 26th Apr 2011 11:56 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Not sure I agree..."
Icaria Member since:
2010-06-19

Evidently, the mass-market doesn't care about storylines or "deep" stuff. Nintendo needs to sell to the mass-market, not to a niche of hardcore gamers.
This is just wrong. Videogames may have abysmal stories, direction, acting, etc but they're pretty crucial in the modern industry. Downloadable dual-stick shooters and racers don't have enough legs to prop up the whole industry. You seem to be pleading gross ignorance in an attempt to merely contradict Thom.

Story? Emotion? Ugh.
Right, there's no emotional dimension to gaming. Competition, novelty, non-tangible reward seeking, entirely dispassionate pursuits, right? One wonders why a big boy like yourself would waste time gaming, associating yourself with pansies and troglodytes.

Games don't need stories. They need to be fun. They are interactive, and a story will just force you in a specific direction.
Never mind that this premise is false, by your own reasoning, a game without a story is abjectly directionless. I suppose you don't drive, either, given that there's only a finite number of places you can drive to; you'd rather stay in your basement.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Not sure I agree...
by makc on Tue 26th Apr 2011 18:08 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Not sure I agree..."
makc Member since:
2006-01-11

Nintendo has clearly chosen their target aiming at a wide, simple audience. I fit well in their target: I play just once in a while at some friend's place, the more people participating the better. Which implies that I suck using "real" controllers now. Don't play an FPS on a console with me, I take half an hour just picking up the controls ;)

My hobby and part of my job is realtime computer graphics. But to play Mario Party or what-it's-called I don't really care... Players like you need more hardware, more investment and frequent novelties. You need to be big, whealty, and to compete in a crowded market. Nintendo choose (and did so long before the Wii) to catch another market.

So it's perfectly fine for you to not like or enjoy anymore their products, but try to think if it's because of the company or because of you changing interest, growing up, changing your mind! Would you still love Super Mario, or become a fan of Pokemon today? For how useless we think it could be, if we were 8 we'd probably be into it. Realize that it's you who changed, more than they did - and it's much more interesting! ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Not sure I agree...
by Morgan on Wed 27th Apr 2011 21:11 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Not sure I agree..."
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

Story? Emotion? Ugh. Games don't need stories. They need to be fun. They are interactive, and a story will just force you in a specific direction.


Sorry, but I'm going to have to agree with Thom on this one. Take a game like Final Fantasy VII. It had a great story, quirky but fun dialogue, and amazing visuals (for its time of course). Strip away all of that, and you still had an RPG that incorporated elements of RTS games, as well as a great magic-combination system (materia) that kept the technical gamers happy, along with fun little mini-games. It was the best of both worlds, and sadly that philosophy is missing from most of today's games.

Granted, there is a place for mindless platformers and story-less sports titles, and I've enjoyed those games in the past too. But not everyone is exactly like you; we can't all be happy with strictly twitch-gaming like you seem to be.

Variety is never a bad thing, and if we only allowed a particular type of game to be made then only a fraction of the gaming populace would remain, and that would be bad for the entire industry.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Not sure I agree...
by linux-lover on Mon 25th Apr 2011 22:20 UTC in reply to "RE: Not sure I agree..."
linux-lover Member since:
2011-04-25

Yup, and there Nintendo fails to deliver

I mostly agree, the majority of WII games are a failure in my eyes and lack a lot of the things I want in a game. Like you said Story and Depth. But there have been a few games (I'm a Zelda fan and i thought twilight princess was great). But tis mostly repetition. At least we get all of Nintendo's masterpieces from back in the day on virtual console. =P

I'm considering getting a 3DS and I'm hoping Nintendo can deliver. (and that Square Enix will release a Final Fantasy VI remake for it!)

Reply Score: 1

Contradiction...
by mrhasbean on Tue 26th Apr 2011 00:35 UTC in reply to "RE: Not sure I agree..."
mrhasbean Member since:
2006-04-03

I play games to unwind, to relax...


It makes up for it with a great and epic storyline, fantastic characters with deep and intricate back-stories and interactions...


So you want great and epic storylines with deep and intricate back-stories to "unwind and relax"?

Well see, that's probably why you, unlike much of the rest of the world, don't like the Wii. Personally, and I suspect this applies to most people who play games for this reason, if I'm going to play a game to unwind and relax I want to either just kill sh1t or mindlessly flail about in a Mario Kart or something similar, so for me the Wii is the perfect "unwind" console...

Reply Score: 5

RE: Contradiction...
by WereCatf on Tue 26th Apr 2011 00:56 UTC in reply to "Contradiction..."
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

So you want great and epic storylines with deep and intricate back-stories to "unwind and relax"?


It might sound illogical but yeah, I'm actually also exactly like that: I play games with long storylines and much interaction with the gaming world and settings because I find it relaxing and enjoyable.

As for illogicality: hopping online to frantically trying to kill other players before they kill you while adrenaline pumps through your veins doesn't sound too relaxing either..

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Contradiction...
by Icaria on Tue 26th Apr 2011 11:59 UTC in reply to "RE: Contradiction..."
Icaria Member since:
2010-06-19

Perhaps we've all got it wrong and we should all just be napping instead of gaming.

Edited 2011-04-26 11:59 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Contradiction...
by Aragorn992 on Wed 27th Apr 2011 06:00 UTC in reply to "RE: Contradiction..."
Aragorn992 Member since:
2007-05-27

"So you want great and epic storylines with deep and intricate back-stories to "unwind and relax"?


It might sound illogical but yeah, I'm actually also exactly like that: I play games with long storylines and much interaction with the gaming world and settings because I find it relaxing and enjoyable.

As for illogicality: hopping online to frantically trying to kill other players before they kill you while adrenaline pumps through your veins doesn't sound too relaxing either..
"

Heh yeah I have a friend like that. He loves single player missions with really great stories. Its what he does in his spare time. I'm more the kill everything type of player (preferably online multiplayer) ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Not sure I agree...
by Yanni Depp on Tue 26th Apr 2011 10:27 UTC in reply to "RE: Not sure I agree..."
Yanni Depp Member since:
2010-02-17

(This comment has no spoilers. Read on.)

Your comment on 'story and emotion' being important is spot-on, and very timely, since I've just completed Portal 2.

Would a game where you shoot a blue circle at one wall and an orange circle at another wall and walk through them be nearly as much fun without the back story, GLaDOS, creepy talking gun turrets, Aperture Science, Cave Johnson, Wheatley and the 'Space Core'?

I won't spoil the ending of the game, but wow. Just wow.

Edited 2011-04-26 10:29 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Not sure I agree...
by tuaris on Fri 29th Apr 2011 00:40 UTC in reply to "RE: Not sure I agree..."
tuaris Member since:
2007-08-05

If you want "Story and emotion", go watch a movie.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Not sure I agree...
by Laurence on Tue 26th Apr 2011 11:13 UTC in reply to "Not sure I agree..."
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

to be honest, I'm siding with Thom on this one.

While the Wii does have some good games, the ratio of good vs crud is massively biased towards the shit end of the spectrum.

The Wii seems to suffer massively from novelty games with no depth - so sifting through all that shit to find a few good games is hard work at times. Where as the Dreamcast -my previous console purchase- had a lot of arcade-like short games but they were highly addictive. Whats worse (and I know you've already commented about how graphics don't matter), the Wii doesn't seem any graphically better than my 10 year old DC. So why even bother playing on the Wii when it looks the same but plays worse!

These days the only time I dig out the Wii is when I have a few mates round and we fancy a half hour of some mindless novelty - which isn't often.

I guess it's each to their own, however being (at best) a casual gamer, you'd expect me to be the Wii's target audience.

Edited 2011-04-26 11:17 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: Not sure I agree...
by Phloptical on Tue 26th Apr 2011 23:53 UTC in reply to "Not sure I agree..."
Phloptical Member since:
2006-10-10

The poster seems to still be miffed that the Wii (for a while) had managed to outsell both the ps3 and xbox 360. lol

One day the obituary for the Wii should read "It's the titles, stupid!"

Nintendo managed to repackage the Game Cube, give it motion controllers, some really fun titles and sell it to people in their 60's...who bought it. Kudos to Nintendo and props to the marketing departments.

It's called the "fun factor", which is something the other 2 consoles have been greatly lacking since inception.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Not sure I agree...
by Morgan on Wed 27th Apr 2011 21:18 UTC in reply to "RE: Not sure I agree..."
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

It's called the "fun factor", which is something the other 2 consoles have been greatly lacking since inception.


I don't think that is a fair assessment. I don't own any of the big three consoles so this is second hand experience, but my sister and her husband have all three. The Xbox360 and PS3 are technically his, and the Wii is for their 10 year old and 3 year old daughters. However, I've noticed my elder niece playing a lot of fun looking games on the Xbox console via the online gaming channels. They look every bit as fun as the Wii offerings, minus the motion control. Perhaps the "fun factor" games for the Sony and Microsoft consoles are found on their respective gaming networks and not in stores?

Reply Score: 2

Nintendo does have Originality
by VistaUser on Mon 25th Apr 2011 20:52 UTC
VistaUser
Member since:
2008-03-08

IT may be called "Mario this" or "Zelda that" and it may continue a franchise of some sort, but look beyond that and you will find creativity that is lacking elsewhere.

Giving something a different name does not make it a new and novel concept - look at all the identikit shooters on other consoles.

(Naming other franchises as proofs of innovation in the sense that they are not franchises seems a bit misguided.)

The Wii is lacking in some departments, but it more than makes up in others and that is why it has been such a stellar seller.

and the unique controller has made a major impact on the gaming industry, for the better.

Edited 2011-04-25 21:00 UTC

Reply Score: 4

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

but look beyond that and you will find creativity that is lacking elsewhere.


Such as?

Reply Score: 1

__michael__ Member since:
2011-04-26

Mario Galaxy for one. The polar geometry take on a platformer and variable gravity make it a pretty incredible, tricky game.

Nintendo are genre artists, and they create their own genres.

Reply Score: 2

quackalist Member since:
2007-08-27

Not a game person but from what I can figure there's precocious little originality in any of the platforms other than graphics and a greater understanding on how to 'nickle and dime'(if only)gamers.

But,apart from Mahjong, chess & the like, its appeal and readiness to fork out £50 on some nonsense much like the nonsense before it is a bit of a mystery to me

Reply Score: 1

v Comment by Brynet
by brynet on Mon 25th Apr 2011 21:08 UTC
Silly article
by merkoth on Mon 25th Apr 2011 21:17 UTC
merkoth
Member since:
2006-09-22

I read the article yet I fail to see exactly what you expect from Nintendo.

1. You don't want just a Wii HD.

2. You also don't want an underpowered system.

3. No motion sensing controllers for you (the only distinctive feature of the Wii).

So, what do you want? New Nintendo-style franchises on a 360-like machine?

Reply Score: 4

RE: Silly article
by Thom_Holwerda on Mon 25th Apr 2011 21:20 UTC in reply to "Silly article"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

So, what do you want? New Nintendo-style franchises on a 360-like machine?


So, motion controllers are the only way forward?

I'm hoping Nintendo dazzles us with something *useful*.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Silly article
by merkoth on Mon 25th Apr 2011 21:38 UTC in reply to "RE: Silly article"
merkoth Member since:
2006-09-22

So, motion controllers are the only way forward?

Of course not, but besides 3D displays and touch sensing controllers there aren't many options out there. And we have to be realistic here: I certainly doubt Nintendo will break completely with the technology that sold a royal ass ton of Wiis.


I'm hoping Nintendo dazzles us with something *useful*.

I'll stay away from this, the definition of useful is absolutely subjective. IMHO, motion sensing controllers have a lot to offer besides generic waggling (a horrible tendency among Wii games, I must admit). See WarioWare Smooth Moves and tell me how can I do that with a 360 Controller.

In any case, my point was that to have games like Mass effect or Oblivion, you only need a more powerful Wii ;)

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Silly article
by Thom_Holwerda on Mon 25th Apr 2011 21:40 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Silly article"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Of course it's subjective. I made that very clear in the article ^^.

Reply Score: 1

A rant ...
by WorknMan on Mon 25th Apr 2011 22:02 UTC
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

Let me reiterate that this is merely my opinion, and that if you are having lots of fun with your Wii, then yay for you. I only do think that the slump in sales, and the fact that most of the Wiis I know are collecting dust in closets, illustrate that I'm not alone. As such, I believe that for Nintendo to truly turn the tide, the company will need to release more than just a 'Wii HD'.


Well, there's obviously going to be a slump in Wii sales, since they'ave already sold like 9 billion of them. What do you expect?

As for Wiis collecting dust, I will agree with you that this is true, but not for the reasons that you think. See, I'm about to tell you something that's probably going to shock you; people that let their Wiis collect dust don't do so because of the lack of quality in the games, but because they just don't play video games very much.

To illustrate my point, a friend of mine and her husband got a Wii for Christmas a few years ago. They played Wii Sports for awhile, bought a few (terrible) games off the bargain bin at Wal-Mart for like $9.99, and barely touched any of them. Your classic case of Wii collecting dust, right? So one day I took the Wii, soft-modded it, hooked a USB hard drive up to it, and put like 50 of the very best Wii games on there, so at least they could try out some tripple A titles. (And hopefully actually buy the ones they liked.)

And you know what? They played several of the games while I was over there and loved them, but then hardly touched it after that. When I asked them how come, they'd just say things like 'we want to, but just haven't had time/too busy'. So do you think these people would spend any more time with a 360/PS3? I think not.

People like to criticize the Wii because a lot of Wii owners only play them during times such as when family comes over for the holidays. To that I say, so what? Some people are not in high school any more, and so either can't or don't want to play video games for 4-5 hours a day, so for them, the Wii is more than enough. There's also the issue of casual players being intimidated by controllers with 2 analog sticks and 12+ buttons, but that's a topic for another day.

As for the lack of creativity on the Wii, I would agree with you here also, especially when it comes to 3rd parties. But, there's a reason for that too, and it is because most of these 3rd parties have forgotten how to be creative. Why should they even bother, when they've been able to get by with selling Quake over and over again for 15+ years to a bunch of f--ktards who keep lining up to pay $60 for the latest FPS flavor of the month? "Just give us the same shit we played last month, but make it look better".... THAT is what the hardcore crowd wants.

As for story driven games, the problem with a lot of them is that they're about as much fun to actually PLAY as watching flies f--k, and Mass Effect (which I have played) is a prime example of this. Dragonage doesn't look much better in this regard. If you doubt me, imagine if you played some of these games without a story at all. How much fun would they be? I don't know how many times I've heard comments like, "Oh, I liked everything about this game except for playing it", and the games still get 4-5 star reviews. (*cough* Alan Wake *cough*). As someone else said, if you want an involving storyline, go read a book; that's what they're there for. Or, have you forgotten how to read?

I'll tell you this much.... I've had more fun playing downloadable titles (such as Pacman CE DX, Geometry Wars, Braid, Trash Panic, Bit Trip Runner, etc) than 98% of the shit they've been shoveling through retail this gen.

Edited 2011-04-25 22:05 UTC

Reply Score: 11

RE: A rant ...
by WereCatf on Tue 26th Apr 2011 00:52 UTC in reply to "A rant ..."
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

As for story driven games, the problem with a lot of them is that they're about as much fun to actually PLAY as watching flies f--k, and Mass Effect (which I have played) is a prime example of this.


I actually really enjoyed both Mass Effect games, and I really liked Dragon Age games too. Then again, I usually get outright bored with plug-n-play platformers and whatnot, they're way too simple for my taste :/

I'll tell you this much.... I've had more fun playing downloadable titles (such as Pacman CE DX, Geometry Wars, Braid, Trash Panic, Bit Trip Runner, etc) than 98% of the shit they've been shoveling through retail this gen.


All those games are great examples of exactly those kinds of games that just bore me to death.

But yeah, people have differing tastes to things. I'm not saying those games are bad in any way or form, they're just not suitable for me.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: A rant ...
by WorknMan on Tue 26th Apr 2011 03:00 UTC in reply to "RE: A rant ..."
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

All those games are great examples of exactly those kinds of games that just bore me to death.

But yeah, people have differing tastes to things. I'm not saying those games are bad in any way or form, they're just not suitable for me.


I actually like them because they're great in short bursts. I am 30-something now and simply don't have time to plod through 30-40 hour 'epic' games anymore, nor do I think I'd want to. So anything I can pick up for 15-20 minutes at a time is great. For this reason, I game almost exclusively these days on my cell phone. I don't own any consoles anymore, but occasionally borrow one.

Edited 2011-04-26 03:01 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: A rant ...
by WereCatf on Tue 26th Apr 2011 06:02 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: A rant ..."
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

I actually like them because they're great in short bursts. I am 30-something now and simply don't have time to plod through 30-40 hour 'epic' games anymore, nor do I think I'd want to. So anything I can pick up for 15-20 minutes at a time is great. For this reason, I game almost exclusively these days on my cell phone. I don't own any consoles anymore, but occasionally borrow one.


Wouldn't a good tablet be more comfortable for gaming than a cell phone? Tablets have large enough screens to be really enjoyable up-close, and they're probably easier to hold up, too. I know quite a lot of people these days buy tablets just for gaming (atleast in these parts, I can't say for other countries), and the games are more-or-less always exactly the kinds of games that don't require hours of investment to jump into.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: A rant ...
by Neolander on Tue 26th Apr 2011 06:28 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: A rant ..."
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Why would one want to carry around this large and massive thing only to play games ? The PSP is already pretty large for a gaming device, in sense that it doesn't fit in a pocket, and whether this large screen is very useful remains to be seen. I can understand the opinion that for cofeebreak games, cellphones may be sufficiently capable without having to spend lots of money in an additional device...

That being said, I've never encountered a very enjoyable game on a touchscreen device yet (the DS does not qualify), so I'm maybe not very qualified for understanding why people would need more of this imo terrible interface.

Edited 2011-04-26 06:32 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: A rant ...
by WereCatf on Tue 26th Apr 2011 07:18 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: A rant ..."
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

That being said, I've never encountered a very enjoyable game on a touchscreen device yet


Get yourself a Nokia N900, install ScummVM and then install Monkey Island 3 on it: voila, an enjoyable game on a touchscreen device ;3

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: A rant ...
by Neolander on Tue 26th Apr 2011 07:35 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: A rant ..."
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Get yourself a Nokia N900, install ScummVM and then install Monkey Island 3 on it: voila, an enjoyable game on a touchscreen device ;3

I'm against spending so much in a phone, however I'm curious : wouldn't the screen be a bit small to play such a game with a finger ? Or does Monkey Island 3 not require precise input ?

Edited 2011-04-26 07:36 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: A rant ...
by WereCatf on Tue 26th Apr 2011 07:41 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: A rant ..."
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

I'm against spending so much in a phone, however I'm curious : wouldn't the screen be a bit small to play such a game with a finger ? Or does Monkey Island 3 not require precise input ?


A little, but N900 comes with a hidden stylus which allows for smooth gameplay. Monkey Island 3 doesn't require fast actions or such and the graphics are very crisp and clear so I quite enjoy having it on my phone wherever I go should I need to spend 10-20 minutes waiting for something.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: A rant ...
by WorknMan on Tue 26th Apr 2011 08:12 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: A rant ..."
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Wouldn't a good tablet be more comfortable for gaming than a cell phone?


Not if I'm at the dentist office or waiting in the Sonic drive thru ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE: A rant ...
by Icaria on Tue 26th Apr 2011 12:48 UTC in reply to "A rant ..."
Icaria Member since:
2010-06-19

To offer my own anecdote, I know at least 3 lifetime Nintendo fanboys who've only this generation decided to get a rival console. These are people who weathered the N64 and GCN droughts without two-timing. I, myself, had a slight bias towards Nintendo, owned all their previous generation consoles but sold my DS 6 months after purchase and never bothered with the Wii.

the problem with a lot of them is that they're about as much fun to actually PLAY as watching flies f--k, and Mass Effect (which I have played) is a prime example of this
That's a terrible example. KotOR, another Bioware game, very similar to ME but with an archaic D&D combat system: that's a good example. ME was a step in the right direction, marrying competent (not great) action gameplay with the more free-form gameplay you'd get from a proper RPG and with a moderate ability to shape the outcome of the game. ME2 takes 3 more steps in the right direction. Still carries the faults you'd come to expect from Bioware games (claustrophobic, occasionally unimaginative environments; terrible dialogue and direction) but it provides a shooter that can actually be played by people with more sophisticated tastes, while not getting in the way of people who are satisfied by pulling a shoulder trigger and watching shit explode, or lumping you with cumbersome skill trees and inventory systems.

As someone else said, if you want an involving storyline, go read a book; that's what they're there for. Or, have you forgotten how to read?
This is a false dilemma so, you know, stop propagating it. There's no technical limitation preventing games from providing every bit the compelling narrative experience of a good film, or TV series. There's also no technical limitation making this proposition mutually exclusive with fun gameplay. The reason you don't see this is more a result of budget and the people making the games. It'll probably take a generational shift to change this: the people who grew up with photo realistic, cheaply made games with a wide stock of genres to choose from and high level tools available, once they start making games, themselves. We've seen the same thing happen with film and television over the last couple of decades, with commodity equipment reaching parity with the professional stuff and outlets with less volatile income sources investing in quality productions. The prices go down, the risks diminish, marketable niches emerge and even those with more money than sense, even they have to compete with and ape the indie market.

Reply Score: 1

Blasphemy
by puelocesar on Mon 25th Apr 2011 22:04 UTC
puelocesar
Member since:
2008-10-30

Dont dare you blasphemy against The Legend Zelda!!! Don't like it, shut the fuck up

Reply Score: 3

RE: Blasphemy
by Icaria on Tue 26th Apr 2011 13:07 UTC in reply to "Blasphemy "
Icaria Member since:
2010-06-19

LttP, OoT and even TWW rate in my top games of all time. Not long ago, I went back and replayed OoT (emulated, thankfully) and it was every bit as awesome as I remember it being. A grand, ambitious game. It told a cinematic, character-rich story and married it with diverse gameplay. Some of it's technical antiquities were also overcome by emulating it (with a good Logitech gamepad).

I also recently attempted to play Twilight Princess. It was terrible. Not just average or passable but actually unpleasant to play. I don't think even Nintendo care about their product, any more. Lots of cruft from previous games, where character handling was ripped straight out of TWW (fine for cartoonish child-Link but inappropriate here) and the horseback physics, straight out of OoT (it was bad in 1998, now it's inexcusable). None of the characters stood out, none of the melodies stood out, the game was presented ploddingly, with little intrigue or flair. Artistically, it didn't so much take inspiration from Okami as it did just rip if off, wholesale. You'd swear the game was developed at gunpoint: messy, uninspired and rough around the edges. It made TWW seem complete, by comparison.

Reply Score: 1

Wii bashing redux
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Mon 25th Apr 2011 23:02 UTC
Bill Shooter of Bul
Member since:
2006-07-14

Your comments are exactly like the ones that were around when it first came out. The wii was tremendously successful. No one in there right minds would listen to those that failed to understand the appeal of the innovation that went into the first one.

Reply Score: 5

The Nintendo you like is also wrong
by RichterKuato on Mon 25th Apr 2011 23:24 UTC
RichterKuato
Member since:
2010-05-14

The Nintendo you're a fan of was slumping in sales too. The only reason Donkey Kong Country was good was because Nintendo failed to deliver a adequate Super Mario Bros. for the system after SMB4. Goldeneye and Metroid Prime were both made for completely failed systems (at least compared to the Wii's success).

The Wii's sudden failure is because they're returning to back the Nintendo of the N64 and Gamecube era. The one you like.

Reply Score: 2

hardware
by fran on Tue 26th Apr 2011 00:01 UTC
fran
Member since:
2010-08-06

Unverified hardware specs from Nintendo "project cafe" gives the hardware specs as just slightly better than xbox360 and PS3 (depending on what ATI R700 based graphics card it will get. ...HD4000 series has a lot of models varying greatly in the amount of stream processors)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon_R700

The processor: 3 core IBM power pc processor clocked slightly higher than the Xbox 360 (The Xbox 360 also has a tri-core IBM power pc processor)

The graphics card: ATI R700 based
The most recent highest spec ATI R700 graphics card is the HD4870. (But I don’t know if it's going to be this one)
The HD4000 series graphics card stream processors vary between 80 for the HD4350 and 800 for the HD4890)
The Xbox 360 uses an ATI Xenos (ATI R500 based graphics card with a 500Hz clock with 48 stream processors)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenos_(graphics_chip)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon_R520

RAM: 512MB

NOTE all this is from unverified sources.

So in other words if the Wii2 gets an HD4890 it will be significantly more powerful than an xbox360 or PS3 and together with a game optimised operating system play all the latest PC titles in full HD resolution.

About Thom statement about graphics.
More detailed graphics means a more immersive environment that many core gamers prefer.

I personally build myself a good value/quite gaming PC and buy PC titles
My graphics card has a hdmi out and I link it to my tv.
I bought an Xbox 360 wired controller with an additional USB extension cord and thus far I can play all the games I loaded with this controller for those times i want to sit back and not behind a desk.

Crisis in full Resolution and good framerates, Bioshock, Dead space, ect...
And these games cost a fraction what the console games cost.

Wishlist for Nintendo Wii2 the top of the line R700 processor and not less than 1Gb Ram.
Price the games in the PC price class and i might even buy one.

Edited 2011-04-26 00:07 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE: hardware
by smashIt on Tue 26th Apr 2011 00:28 UTC in reply to "hardware"
smashIt Member since:
2005-07-06

So in other words if the Wii2 gets an HD4890 it will be significantly more powerful than an xbox360 or PS3 and together with a game optimised operating system play all the latest PC titles in full HD resolution.


no, it won't
even the most powerfull hd4xxx won't do any good when the system only has 512mb memory.
that would be the sony-approach to console-design:
include a number-crunching monster, but don't give it ram to work with

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: hardware
by viton on Tue 26th Apr 2011 13:43 UTC in reply to "RE: hardware"
viton Member since:
2005-08-09

that would be the sony-approach to console-design:

Nintendo approach is little different.
Take some bits of fast memory on fast bus and somewhat more on slowest through-the-ass interconnect.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: hardware
by smashIt on Tue 26th Apr 2011 18:32 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: hardware"
smashIt Member since:
2005-07-06

Take some bits of fast memory on fast bus and somewhat more on slowest through-the-ass interconnect.


yeah, that would be the other extreme

the best ballanced consols imo are the dreamcast and the first xbox

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: hardware
by Darkmage on Tue 26th Apr 2011 21:45 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: hardware"
Darkmage Member since:
2006-10-20

I'm hoping they mandate 1080p output on all games. It's about time that HD gaming actually happened instead of the fake HD that Microsoft/Sony have been peddling for years. I think that Nintendo could make some pretty solid gains with a new Wii if they are smart about it. If they're trying to tap the western market they're going to have to move towards Xbox 360's base. That means more mature games and better graphics.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: hardware
by Neolander on Wed 27th Apr 2011 08:01 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: hardware"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Is the difference between 720p and 1080p on a TV screen which you're watching from 2-3 meters away worth it ?

That's a serious question... In the early days of LCD screens, we had to deal with some terrible upscaling where not playing games at native resolution meant having to deal with horribly aliased rendering. Nowadays, however, things have improved a lot, and I don't feel anywhere as much like my eyes are bleeding when I play Starcraft.

On the other hand, if you render more pixels, you eat more computational power, that you have to take somewhere else... It's the good old dilemma of the ageing gaming PC : good low-res graphics or bad high-res graphics ?

I can understand the need for high-res screens if you consider tasks like reading, but for watching movies or games... I'm not sure it's all so important.

Just my opinion, however.

Reply Score: 1

UltraZelda64
Member since:
2006-12-05

WWII. :p

But really, it's been... what... 5-6 years since the Wii came out? Based on that, I'm not surprised at all--this fits perfectly with traditional gaming time frames from system to system, generation to generation.

And sorry, while I see the Wii disappointing compared to pretty much all of Nintendo's past home systems in terms of exclusive and non-exclusive first-party (and even third-party) games--even compared to N64 and GameCube--I just don't see the flaws described in this article near as bad as claimed. The controls, for example, while not perfect, are a damn good first try; the biggest problems are those rare cases where a light in the room conflicts, or more often and more annoyingly--when you can't put the sensor bar above the TV (f***ing modern flatscreen TVs) and your leg or some other object blocks the Wiimote's sight of the receiver.

My most serious worries are: Will Nintendo continue to support GameCube backward compatibility? I hope so, but I get the feeling that they're not. And second... what will happen with those Virtual Console games I downloaded? Are they stuck on my Wii, with a forced re-purchase or keeping this (last) generation's console plugged in just to be able to play them? Once again, I am expecting the worst here.

Reply Score: 4

To whom it may concern?
by quackalist on Tue 26th Apr 2011 05:30 UTC
quackalist
Member since:
2007-08-27

Er, the "announcement" is a pdf of a text on a plain sheet addressed to 'Whom it may concern'. Is this how corporations release info into the wild now?

Reply Score: 2

Comment by ssokolow
by ssokolow on Tue 26th Apr 2011 05:35 UTC
ssokolow
Member since:
2010-01-21

I'm ambivalent to the Wii as a system. My issue with it is the games.

Mario Galaxy's world is too sparse and too linear.
Mario Kart Wii is so frustratingly "equalized" that you can accurately predict who will win a race by rolling dice and they didn't seem to realize that computer players have no feelings to hurt.
etc.
I forget why my brother and I didn't like Twilight Princess and All New Super Mario Bros., but he had deep analyses on them.

These days, the games we play from those series are:
- Mario World, Yoshi's Island, and Mario 64
- Zelda: Wind Waker (and occasionally Zelda 64 for him or Zelda 3 for me)
- Super Mario Bros. X (Fan-game that does NSMB right)
- Mario Kart: Double Dash
- Various Mario- and Zelda-series games for the DS.

Reply Score: 1

Only has to do TWO things
by kragil on Tue 26th Apr 2011 06:13 UTC
kragil
Member since:
2006-01-04

Play Blu-rays and big cross-platform games, of course in HD and with way better graphics than the fairly old and outdated 360 and the PS3. So it would need a real controller,a blu-ray drive, PPC quadcore and DX11-style graphics. It would nearly instantly get all the games you mentioned (except Sonnys Heavy Rain)

That combined with a good price will make it a sure hit and maybe it will end the PC being held back by crappy consoles and lowest common denominator games.
A decent gaming PC can produce way better graphics (different ballgame) than the current consoles.

Reply Score: 2

Ludicrous.
by crhylove on Tue 26th Apr 2011 06:19 UTC
crhylove
Member since:
2010-04-10

I read OSnews daily. And I generally agree with most of the articles. But the Wii is easily the best console out. And you don't need to use the wiimote for serious games. Nobody does. You use a nun chuck.

Whatever your opinion on the console, it's the GAMES that matter, and Nintendo has ALL the best games except Red Dead Redemption.

Mario Kart Wii alone may be the best game ever made. If you have not tried it (with the nun chuck, not the shitty wheel), then you frankly don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

New Super Mario Bros easily trumps any game released on any competing console.

Then you have all their other great back catalog of games on virtual console and via wii ware.

Nintendo is TROUNCING MS and Sony, and rightfully so. Those other products suck twice as much, and have almost no good games.

The best part about the Wii is you don't even need one to play. I play Wii games all the time on my computer via Dolphin. With a couple real wiimotes and a bluetooth dongle, I have the full Wii experience AND in HD.

Consoles all suck, really. Just game on the PC like a real nerd.

Reply Score: 1

If motion control is such a failure...
by Neolander on Tue 26th Apr 2011 06:22 UTC
Neolander
Member since:
2010-03-08

...why did Microsoft and Sony spend so much time implementing their own version of it with Kinect and Move ?

Some games make truly great uses of those features. Dragon ball Z for wii comes to mind : it is very fun to play due to it, although it would be much funnier if the controller was much more sensitive (which apparently happens with the Wii Motion +).

Myself, I used to spend lots of time playing games, but now I mostly play them for instant multiplayer fun. Metal Slug, Trine, Super smash bros, Gears of War, Modnation racers, Guitar Hero, Patapon... These are the king for me. Also interesting is the kind of strategic, slow-paced games which can be played with two players discussing the best approach around the screen, like Revenge of the Titans.

Only once in a while, I need to forget a bit about the world outside and spend a week continuously playing a single-player game until it's finished. Did this with Trine's 1p mode, Phoenix Wright, and Ghost trick.

Edited 2011-04-26 06:33 UTC

Reply Score: 4

low specs = affordable
by Adurbe on Tue 26th Apr 2011 07:48 UTC
Adurbe
Member since:
2005-07-06

One of the reasons the Wii did so well was Thanks to its low specs. This made the Wii massively more affordable at launch than the PS3 or the Xbox 360.
I think if Nintendo up the specs to much it will have to compete directly on price with MS and Sony. Sony and MS can (and have) made loss-leading consoles. I dont think Nintendo can afford that.

Nintendo have the low end console market sewn up. The problem is only that most of their market already owns a Wii now!

Reply Score: 5

Comment by Kroc
by Kroc on Tue 26th Apr 2011 09:43 UTC
Kroc
Member since:
2005-11-10

Sloppiness is their problem.

They could increase their profits with the existing Wii userbase if they:

* Made online play not suck so much

* Made the Wii shop not suck so much. Demos once in a blue moon. No videos. Few, tiny screenshots. Jazz it up dammit!

* Opened WiiWare to indie PC devs

Right now they're pretty clueless when it comes to online services and it's letting the console down.

Reply Score: 2

Lots of people like their Wiis
by 3rdalbum on Tue 26th Apr 2011 10:17 UTC
3rdalbum
Member since:
2008-05-26

1. Motion controls, done correctly, work very well. FPSes are an incredibly good fit for the Wii's control system, since it's a lightgun! Games like MoH Heroes 2 really show off what good motion controls can do; putting the remote backwards on your shoulder to enter targetting mode on the bazooka comes immediately to mind.

It increases the sense of immersion. Sure, there's a lot of shovelware that doesn't have good motion controls, but you shouldn't be buying shovelware anyway.

2. Shovelware. Nintendo should probably do something about this, really. I think the improved graphics on the Wii successor will help third parties to port their games, and help encourage real gamers to buy the console. They've done it with the Nintendo 3DS, as there are a few hardcore titles in the pipeline already.

3. Lack of good games. Well, there's enough. There's the FPSes if you want them, there are in-depth games like Zelda and Bully, and there are fun casual games like Mario Kart Wii, Guitar Hero/Band Hero and Wii Sports Resort.

4. Longevity. I have a Wii and a PS3. I bought the PS3 to play Red Dead Redemption and I've not really wanted to buy any other games for the thing. Because there's no motion controls. Sure, I like FPSes, I could buy those... except that they use that stupid control scheme of "left thumb moves you, right thumb aims". I bought the Wii to play Wii Sports and I now have a big library of games for it, many of which I still get out and play. My PS3 sits unloved, until I want to play a Bluray disc and then I have to wait for the darn thing's system software to update. Seriously, if it wasn't so costly to post I'd probably sell it on eBay and buy a standalone Bluray player.

Reply Score: 3

Comment by Lava_Croft
by Lava_Croft on Tue 26th Apr 2011 11:01 UTC
Lava_Croft
Member since:
2006-12-24

Why do you talk about creativity when your own expectations for games do not reach much further than Generic Fantasy Action-RPG 3 and Generic Sci-Fi Action-RPG 3?

And just as an interesting exercise, name an 'epic' Xbox360 game that is actually made by Microsoft and not released 5 years ago. That way your comparison concerning 'epic games' might actually not be broken. (Well, it would if the term 'epic' was in any way related to the term 'originality', but let's just ignore that for the sake of it being a really lovely Tuesday afternoon.)

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Lava_Croft
by Neolander on Tue 26th Apr 2011 15:15 UTC in reply to "Comment by Lava_Croft"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Well, the "made by Microsoft" requirement is a bit flawed. Who cares who made the game as long as it's good ? Actually, I think it's a strength of the Xbox 360 to have attracted many third-party titles, just like the DS did on Nintendo's side.

That being said... An "epic" game on Xbox 360 would be Gears of War, imo.
-Made by EPIC.
-Circular saw on the basic gun + controls that give a somewhat smooth feeling to chara motion = gamepad FPS win
-Special weapons like that giant blast from the sky whose name I've forgotten = more epicness.

Reply Score: 1

Odd Duck of an Article
by ricegf on Tue 26th Apr 2011 11:51 UTC
ricegf
Member since:
2007-04-25

It's weird to see Thom argue that the Wii has failed (i.e., has a "longevity issue"), when it has sold about twice the number of consoles as the XBox or PS3. And Nintendo actually made profit on each console sold, unlike their competitors - or so I hear.

We were late adopters of the Wii, and it fits our demographic well - family rather than hardcore gamers, we play frisbee golf and other resort and sports multi-player games, watch Netflix movies (really shines at this!), Wii Fit, and occasional web lookup while conversing in the family room. The motion controllers work well for us, though more accuracy next generation would certainly be appreciated.

Looks to me that sales are lagging due to market saturation. Most people we know already have Wiis - even our church has a fleet in the kids' department for post-service socializing. I was amazed at the number of people that sent us Miis when we connected. The Wii is ubiquitous, and the consoles last forever.

So... it's *time* for the next generation. I personally hope they continue to focus on social gaming, and leave the FPS market to be split between Microsoft and Sony. I would hate to see the computer gaming market revert to focusing primarily on twitch-gamers again. I burned out on those games back in the 80's - but of course, now I'm showing my age. :-D

Reply Score: 4

RE: Odd Duck of an Article
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 26th Apr 2011 11:52 UTC in reply to "Odd Duck of an Article"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

t's weird to see Thom argue that the Wii has failed


I never said it failed ;) .

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Odd Duck of an Article
by ricegf on Tue 26th Apr 2011 12:30 UTC in reply to "RE: Odd Duck of an Article"
ricegf Member since:
2007-04-25

You said "longevity issue" - great turn of phrase, by the way - "failed" is my interpretation. My point is that, after nearly a hundred million units sold, it's time for the next generation, and I hope they continue to focus on social rather than twitch gaming, the latter of which is already well-served by the other two major consoles. All IMHO, of course.

Reply Score: 3

I kind of agree...
by supercompman on Tue 26th Apr 2011 15:46 UTC
supercompman
Member since:
2008-09-14

I agree with Thom, but don't really at the same time. Has Nintendo failed to bring deep, epic, story-filled games to the Wii? Yep. Is it too underpowered to be used as a medium for those epic kinds of games? Not a chance. In the previous generation of consoles, it was the PS2 that had some of the biggest, deepest games of that generation and the PS2 was one of the weakest consoles of last generation in terms of raw horsepower. If immersive game play experiences were possible on the PS2, they are certainly possible on the Wii, it's just a matter of convincing the companies that it's worthwhile. Two games that Nintendo should have been more proactive about bringing to the rest of the world are Xenoblade and The Last Story. Both are epic games on the Wii... and only available in Japan. It looks like Xenoblade might get a global release, but The Last Story is probably unlikely.

The second complaint Thom has is about imprecise controls. Sometimes I would agree, but often times not. It really depends on the game and if it uses the motion controls in a smart way or if they are using the controls simply as a gimmick (which I'll admit happens more often than it should). Some people will certainly argue this with me, but I've never been able to deal with dual analog thumb sticks for playing FPSs, but I can play and really enjoy playing first person games (shooters, adventures, whatever) on the Wii. It feels far more natural to me. Another type of game that actually works on the Wii and wasn't even really possible on the other consoles until recently are on-rails-shooters. I don't get into them a ton, but they tend to work well on the Wii and games like The House of the Dead: Overkill and Dead Space: Extraction can be a lot of fun. All in all, the Wii controller is a pretty decent analog to a mouse, so games that treat it like that are fine, while games that try to replace a button press with waggle are usually a disaster. The one genre of games that I'm not so sure about is sports games... those are especially hit or miss. Wii Sports Resort works well and doesn't feel gimmicky at all, but many other sports games do (and they are usually awful to play).

Now, the next Nintendo console... Honestly, I don't see many problems with the current Wii control scheme except for games that abuse it in terrible ways which I could see being at least partially corrected just by adding a few more buttons to the Wii remote. The next thing that should be corrected (obviously) is HD. Honestly though, until at least early 2010, most households still used a standard definition TV as their primary TV, and that was the target Nintendo was aiming at, the majority of households, not just tech enthusiasts. I would say, in that regard Nintendo's aim was right on target. Even so, I do play my Wii on a 40" LCD TV and while none of them are going to blow me away, most of them still look OK. Even when I see games on the 360 or PS3, most of them are only running in 720p, which is better, but hardly taking advantage of what so many HD TVs are capable of.

Reply Score: 2

.pdf for plain-text!
by Brunis on Wed 27th Apr 2011 11:31 UTC
Brunis
Member since:
2005-11-01

Thank god they published that complex document in .pdf, it would have been unreadable as HyperTextMarkupLanguage. I'm also a retard and i post my screenshots in word and send them to my friends in .docx format! So they have to spend $1000 to see them! Technology is wonderful, if you have an effing clue how to use it!

Reply Score: 1

bad analysis
by t0nZ on Wed 27th Apr 2011 21:34 UTC
t0nZ
Member since:
2011-04-27

bad analysis Thom .
simply wrong, you have based all the article on your lack of love for the Wii.
You don't see the wii is maybe the c64 of this years, the only innovative gaming system, ps3 and xbox have clearly declared defeat with kinect and the other ugly system from sony (the so called "ice cream" ? ha ha).
In the eighties and nineties I never touched a nintendo product, but they know how to make a good gaming experience .
I have played from c64 thru Amiga, the early days of pc (386 - 486) now I am on DX11 ok but....
iperrealistic 3d ? I want only fun .

Reply Score: 1