Wii: A Threat to Gaming?

[Thespis721]

Hm. Been a while...

Anyway, I think that anyone who thinks that the Wii is going to be the harbinger of death to gaming is being very dramatic. I see at least ten articles a year about how the Wii is ruining gaming just like I see at least ten articles a year about how PC Gaming will be dead before the year is up. Point is, there are still fantastic games out there and PC Gaming is just as strong as it was five years ago.

I also feel like arguments in this thread are rather pointless. Not everyone is going to like the Wii. I'm sure BaB was just trying to gauge opinion but no one is going to suddenly change their minds on gaming from this thread. Microsoft is doing just fine, even better, this generation and will not be disappearing anytime soon. SONY is having some problems but that is more their mistakes then anything Nintendo is doing. And Nintendo has put out a lot of sh*t games and I don't buy them. I buy the good ones and I enjoy them and my friends enjoy them and Yahtzee doesn't and that's fine.

I appreciate Nintendo, though, for at least taking a shot in a new direction, which is more then you can say about SONY and Microsoft. I love that the big two have IMPROVED what was already established last generation (especially online community) but having an innovator in more then just what is established is necessary. And if the result of all this is that Microsoft improves on what Nintendo has done and makes a bomb-ass battle suit game with Natal, then I'm happy everything happened.

I personally am happy with the generation. Lots of great games. More then I can buy. I can't really ask for anything more.

[Angrist]

Maybe the market is temporarily shaken because hardcore developers start making casual games. But there is still a big enough market for hardcore, so it only takes a while before that gap is filled up again.

I also think the casual focus might put some more fun back into games again. Realism isn't all there's to it. Example: A friend of mine only knows Lord of the Rings games. Hack & Slash etc. Then I let him play Metroid Prime 3. He fought Ridley while falling down. He defeated enemies in a very unusual way for him. He said "Wow, this game is really designed as a game!" And I was like "d'uuh... isn't it supposed to?"

[Thespis721]

Originally Posted by Angrist

Maybe the market is temporarily shaken because hardcore developers start making casual games. But there is still a big enough market for hardcore, so it only takes a while before that gap is filled up again.

I also think the casual focus might put some more fun back into games again. Realism isn't all there's to it. Example: A friend of mine only knows Lord of the Rings games. Hack & Slash etc. Then I let him play Metroid Prime 3. He fought Ridley while falling down. He defeated enemies in a very unusual way for him. He said "Wow, this game is really designed as a game!" And I was like "d'uuh... isn't it supposed to?"

That's actually how I feel about video games. There's enough people out there with enough desires.

For me, I like to play GAMES. Realism has its place but nothing makes me happier then sitting with a side-scroller or a 2D fighter, something old school where the purpose of the game was gameplay. Some of my friends play games for the storyline or the innovation, but I don't care of the story is as good as the Godfather, if the gameplay is broken, I get bored. (sort of like Assassin's Creed)

[magus113]

I've never blamed a company for wanting to make money. That's all well and good, because hey. You WANT to stay in business, you want to earn a profit. And I'm sure that the Wii was designed with profit in mind because they wanted more and more people to purchase it because it would appeal to what everyone wanted, or at least to everyone in some specific way. I think the biggest problem with the Wii (aside of the lack of true immersion from motion controlling) was the fact that they never delivered with what they promised about motion controls until 3 years later with WM+. It turned what could have been very interesting games into waggle fests that everyone got sick and tired of.

But then there were the people that did things RIGHT. Like Suda51 with the controls for No More Heroes. They made what could have been a waggle fest with that light sword and made it into something a little more interesting by giving the mote a swing when you wanted to give the baddie the business after a slew of attacks. That was fun, and got at least MY adrenaline pumping.

The Wii was more of a gimmick because everyone saw it as a gimmick. "We have a controller that detects motion now! Let's find ways that we can abuse the hell out of it!" And it goes back to what I said about waggle fests.

I dunno. There are the games that shine out and the ones that are hidden underneath all of the shovelware. That's fine. That's been around forever regardless of whether there's more of it to shovel through with the Wii or not.

[Angrist]

Somebody should make a shovel Wii game. Or just the art box, that would be awesome.

[BreakABone]

First on the movie analogy, it was actually what I was going for as I explained to Bond before making it, the movie industry runs opposite of the video-gaming one at the moment. The big budget, action movies are the more casual movies while the more intimate movies are dubbed "indies" So I know how the analogy works.

The basis of my point is yeah, there are tons of people who makes superhero/comic book movies but a lot of those bomb as well. Same with casual games... or any genre that becomes popular... there are tons of FPSes this generation, do you know how many fell by the wayside? Last gen with GTA clones, this gen with mini-game collections.

And through it all, people still make games for a broad spectrum of people.

And since you want more current examples I guess, Mario Party came out every year between 99 and like 2007, and in that time it was one of Nintendo's most popular franchises, but we still got the likes of 3 Smash Bros games, 2 Mario Karts, Mario Galaxy, Wind Waker and Twilight Princess, 3 Metroid Primes, 2 Paper Marios.... etc etc

On the same hand, they launched lines like Animal Crossing and WarioWare, I think they realize it is all about balance, and I'm sure folks will point towards them not releasing much that isn't casual, but then you have to think they blew their wad early in the generation.

NEw Zelda, Mario and Metroid off the bat. They soon followed with Mario Kart and Smash Bros. They resurrected Punch-Out.

But somehow, we end up arguing in circles... as I said this isn't a Wii justification thread or validation or any of that crap. Its been 3 years, everyone has their opinion on the console.

I was just gauging if anyone here viewed the Wii as some in the media do. And maybe I should have laid out more proof than that IGN article, and as Bond noted maybe not place my personal opinions in the first post.

Simple gist of what I was going for, people see the Wii being popular as a sign that games won't ever be the same, and not for the better. I know some of you agree with that assertion, but why does it have to be that way?

[TheGame]

Simple gist of what I was going for, people see the Wii being popular as a sign that games won't ever be the same, and not for the better. I know some of you agree with that assertion, but why does it have to be that way?

As I said before, this is not a new issue. Wii just happens to be the first console to go the cheap/rushed route and be sucsessful without appealing greatly to hardcore gamers at the same time. Its just a ticking time bomb before the gaming magizines and hardcore gaming sites were going to come down on it.

Its really hard to word what I'm about to say.. but bare with me.

PsX was out the gate fast and lower priced then its competition, and what it was under powered. However it still offered a format that appealed to the companies that wanted to develop hardcore games. The ability to do cutscene videos, and the extra space vs a cartrege was used to push it above the competition.

Ps2 was out of the gate fast, and lower priced then its competition. And it was not as powerful as Xbox or Gamecube.. however it was powerful enough to compete. There was not mamy games out there in the last generation that could not be reproduced on Ps2. So all the games that appealed to hardcore gamers still could be put on Ps2. (-EDIT- The above listed reasons, besides its release date and price, are not WHY Ps2 won, its why it was still considered to be respectable by the hardcore gaming community)

Now we have wii.. which once again was out of the gate first, and lower priced then its competition. But its not powerful enough to compete.. It won competly off of a gimmick, and its a dump off system for companies that want to make cheap games. However the companies that are out there that really try to push the limits of what hardware can do out there simply can't develop anything worthwhile for Wii.

But dispite the fact that...

...Wii can never get a competitive version of Oblivion, GTA games, MGS games, full Final Fantasy Games, respectable sports sims, respectable fighting games.. MMORPGs... or any of the games that really lifted the bar this gen. ..and new companies can't take a big risk on it, because its old hardware will make anything look bad when compared to Ps3/360...

...It still manages to be far more sucsessful then the consoles that actually have heavy appeal to hardcore gamers.

Eventually companies are going to catch on and see that appealing to casual gamers will make them a lot more money thn appealing to hardcore gamers. Which will eventually result in slower evolution for hardcore games and systems. Of course they'll always still be there, its just that a time is going to come where the only games where you see big risks being taken are on sequals or games with some licence on it.

That time hasn't come yet, but Wii opened the door and exposed the market for what it is.

-EDIT-

And I already know you're going to act like Wii's motion controls were the big advancement.. but that's when it comes back to personal game preference, and where you want to see things go. Look at ign, all the games that got scores of 8 to 10 on Ps3 and 360. How many of those can really be done on Wii? That's just proof that Wii is moving in a different direction... and you see Sony's already trying to copy the motion controls.

Though sixaxis always had the ability for motion controls, its just going to be something Sony works in more with more shallow games to compete with Nintendo... Just take that as a hint of why something that's too casual winning is not going to do any good for the industry. All of the next gen consoles are going to have motion controls, unless Wii dies down and is proven to be a fluke.

[BreakABone]

Well just gonna correct your facts, the Wii was actually the last console out of the gate this generation as the Xbox 360 was out a year before it, and Ps3 I believe was out 2 weeks before it.

...Wii can never get a competitive version of Oblivion, GTA games, MGS games, full Final Fantasy Games, respectable sports sims, respectable fighting games.. MMORPGs... or any of the games that really lifted the bar this gen. ..and new companies can't take a big risk on it, because its old hardware will make anything look bad when compared to Ps3/360...

I think you mean graphical competitive because it could do most of those games just fine since the majority of them worked on PS2 and Xbox and those were lesser hardware.... and also...

http://www.metacritic.com/games/plat...woodspgatour10 Respectable sports game
http://www.metacritic.com/games/plat...tionsoccer2009
Another
http://www.metacritic.com/games/plat...ii/maddennfl09
One more

http://www.metacritic.com/games/plat...ackhandedition
Respectable GTA clone and IMO the best version of the game.

Video Games | Tatsunoko vs. Capcom | E3 09: US Debut Trailer

XBox 360 | Playstation 3 | Nintendo Wii

A really respectable fighter.

Video Games | Final Fantasy CC: The Crystal Bearers | E3 09: Japanese Savior Trailer

XBox 360 | Playstation 3 | Nintendo Wii

What looks like a fine Final Fantasy game.

And things don't exist in a vacuum I understand that, but if this generation has proven anything is... well graphics aren't everything and they are probably far from the mind of the mainstream audience. So if you create compelling software, which is very much possible, people will buy it.

~Edit for your edit~

And I already know you're going to act like Wii's motion controls were the big advancement.. but that's when it comes back to personal game preference, and where you want to see things go. Look at ign, all the games that got scores of 8 to 10 on Ps3 and 360. How many of those can really be done on Wii? That's just proof that Wii is moving in a different direction... and you see Sony's already trying to copy the motion controls.

Though sixaxis always had the ability for motion controls, its just going to be something Sony works in more with more shallow games to compete with Nintendo... Just take that as a hint of why something that's too casual winning is not going to do any good for the industry. All of the next gen consoles are going to have motion controls, unless Wii dies down and is proven to be a fluke.

Well, I understand its personal preference, which is why this statement would sound redundant, but some people enjoy motion controls, and see how it is possible to enhance current genres and games.

My main beef with the Wii, as I'm sure it is with a lot of folks, is for all the potential that is hidden within in the Wii-mote it usually boils down to button replacement. Developers just substitute pressing A with shaking the controller in any which direction, which isn't the point of it. Or at least not the potential people saw at the end.

And I don't like it anymore, but can you go back to calling them cheap and arcadey or whatever, I loathe loathe loathe the division between hardcore and casual gaming. People make it sound like a plight that not everyone exists hundreds of hours into games a year, and somehow those people are worse off. At least with arcadey and cheap, you are defining the game and not the person.

[TheGame]

Bab I was talking from a technical perspective. Anyone can make games that look like last gen games that are 'good'.. It just doesn't advance the industry as much. And you're right Wii didn't come out before the competition.. In this case it was more about the lower pricing.

[BreakABone]

Originally Posted by TheGame

Bab I was talking from a technical perspective. Anyone can make games that look like last gen games that are 'good'.. It just doesn't advance the industry as much. And you're right Wii didn't come out before the competition.. In this case it was more about the lower pricing.

But even still, the Xbox... arcade at least has been priced lower than the Wii for over a year, and the only way it has been catching up is that the sales of the Wii are slowing down.

I'm not saying price has nothing to do with it, but people don't seem to realize that the Gamecube launched at a cheaper price than the PS2 and the Xbox and didn't fare nearly as well.

Nintendo placed smart money on the latest graphics not always winning out, and they placed the proof in the box. If not for Wii Sports being a pack-in, I'm certain this generation would have taken on a slightly different shape.

And I can understand from most POV while having the least powerful console win would be a disappointment because you fear that next time around, everyone would take shortcuts, and that very well could happen, but I really don't see MS and Sony releasing the same hardware after such a long period or else they would have made motion controls for their current hardware if that was to be their big push next time around.

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by BreakABone

But even still, the Xbox... arcade at least has been priced lower than the Wii for over a year, and the only way it has been catching up is that the sales of the Wii are slowing down.

I'm not saying price has nothing to do with it, but people don't seem to realize that the Gamecube launched at a cheaper price than the PS2 and the Xbox and didn't fare nearly as well.

Nintendo placed smart money on the latest graphics not always winning out, and they placed the proof in the box. If not for Wii Sports being a pack-in, I'm certain this generation would have taken on a slightly different shape.

And I can understand from most POV while having the least powerful console win would be a disappointment because you fear that next time around, everyone would take shortcuts, and that very well could happen, but I really don't see MS and Sony releasing the same hardware after such a long period or else they would have made motion controls for their current hardware if that was to be their big push next time around.

Nobody can deny that Nintendo was smart about how they handled things this generation. Its not that the 'least powerful' system winning is a problem, as I pointed out Ps2 and Psx were the 'least powerful' systems of the competitive systems in their generation. Its the fact that the that's 'least appealing to hardcore gamers' is going to win out that bothers me.

[Thespis721]

Originally Posted by BreakABone

And I can understand from most POV while having the least powerful console win would be a disappointment because you fear that next time around, everyone would take shortcuts, and that very well could happen, but I really don't see MS and Sony releasing the same hardware after such a long period or else they would have made motion controls for their current hardware if that was to be their big push next time around.

The industry will advance in the direction the market takes it. If that means that graphical enhancements stall for innovative gameplay, then I feel that is just as strong of a technical advancement as any. Is the Wii's motion perfect? Nope. But like it was said earlier, you gotta go through the bad period to perfect the technology (Motion+ is a perfect example). I hated the PSX because I thought all the graphics were crap and took me out of the game. But PSX eventually became what we have today.

[Thespis721]

Originally Posted by TheGame

Nobody can deny that Nintendo was smart about how they handled things this generation. Its not that the 'least powerful' system winning is a problem, as I pointed out Ps2 and Psx were the 'least powerful' systems of the competitive systems in their generation. Its the fact that the that's 'least appealing to hardcore gamers' is going to win out that bothers me.

I personally don't like the distinction between hardcore and casual. I love to play Call of Duty, Batman, Dead Space, Super Mario Galaxy, Wii Sports, Zelda, Street Fighter IV, Mario Party, etc, etc. Does that make me hardcore or does that make me casual?

We're all gamers. We all like different games. And the developers create games that appeal to every which type of person.

[Typhoid]

And since you want more current examples I guess, Mario Party came out every year between 99 and like 2007, and in that time it was one of Nintendo's most popular franchises, but we still got the likes of 3 Smash Bros games, 2 Mario Karts, Mario Galaxy, Wind Waker and Twilight Princess, 3 Metroid Primes, 2 Paper Marios.

So...Mario game, Mario/typical Nintendo character centric game, Mario game, Mario game, Zelda game, Zelda game, Metroid game, Mario game.


Remember what I said about success having a lot to do with household names?

The big budget, action movies are the more casual movies while the more intimate movies are dubbed "indies" So I know how the analogy works.

That wasn't my point.
My point was that in the mid-90's a lot of comic book/graphic novel movies started to be made, so others started to follow suit. About 8 (or so) years later, the movie industry explodes with a constant stream of crappy (and sometimes not crappy) superhero/comic movies.

The analogy is that superhero movies are casual games. We won't see the impact on the market right now, but years down the line, casual games will undoubtedly envelope the vast majority of the industry. I'm not saying every casual game is crap. I'm just saying soon they will flood the market.

[BreakABone]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

So...Mario game, Mario/typical Nintendo character centric game, Mario game, Mario game, Zelda game, Zelda game, Metroid game, Mario game.

Remember what I said about success having a lot to do with household names?

There were other successes, but people associate Mario, Zelda and Metroid as Nintendo's "hardcore" franchises" which is why I used the example.

There were a lot of games this generation that sold without household recognition though I guess a point could be made they were backed by big publishers, but stuff like Mass Effect, Bioshock, Dead Rising, Lost Planet and Assassin Creed.

That wasn't my point.
My point was that in the mid-90's a lot of comic book/graphic novel movies started to be made, so others started to follow suit. About 8 (or so) years later, the movie industry explodes with a constant stream of crappy (and sometimes not crappy) superhero/comic movies.

The analogy is that superhero movies are casual games. We won't see the impact on the market right now, but years down the line, casual games will undoubtedly envelope the vast majority of the industry. I'm not saying every casual game is crap. I'm just saying soon they will flood the market.

I get your point, but you don't look at the reasons.

Comic books movies died down near the end of the the 90s because the general public was no longer interested in them and then Spiderman came out and there was a new surge of interest.

And that fits exactly with your point, but it also works with my point. The industry will follow the leader until a new leader emerges.

You think if another string of movies prove successful, there won't be a bunch of those to replace the comic book movies?

But I completely understand your point, and to a lesser extent TheGame's.