Wii: A Threat to Gaming?

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by Angrist

I don't really get the frustration that TheGame and other gamers have with the Wii. How does it hold back development? Did the people who bought Halo, Morrowind, Warcraft III, etc. suddenly stop buying those games because there's a Wii now?
There is still a market for 'high quality' titles as you call them (which I think is not a fair description). But the market is slowely realizing that creating better graphics and bigger worlds costs more money that it used to. But games still sell for the same price. So it's less profit. It's just how the market works.

The Wii, DS and I guess PSP motivate the creation of cheaper games, which can still be about as fun. The gnome in the backyard has shown where the money is.

Angrist, the Wii hasn't been around for 10 years. We can't look back and see the impact yet.

I agree entirely with The Game, actually. He makes a really, really good point. Nintendo (and developers for Wii games) have taken a super casual route to gaming this generation. Games are short, arcade-ish, and relatively "cheap".

The fear is not that since those games exist now, nobody will buy other games.
The fear is that since casual gaming and "safe development" does/did so well, that more companies that make games for Sony and Microsoft will take that route and move away from the epic titles for shorter, casual games. Because it's all about money.

[BreakABone]

To me it sounds like a validation thread really. Seems that you haven't moved past your old empty points that may have actually meant something 2 weeks after Ps3 launched. Its pretty much me saying I don't like where gaming has went this gen, while you're trying to make it sound like I'm not qualified to make that judgement for one reason or another.

Trust me on this, I don't need you or anyone else on this board to validate my purchase.
The point of this thread as I stated before was to gauge a reaction to this notion that the Wii is doing more harm to the industry, you get outted because honestly you were the only one who responded directly to the question posed.

I actually don't have a problem directly with Wii, other then the fact that it represents a very broken part of the industry in my opinion. You can sit there and say a lot of work went into Wii, which it may have.. but the end result is 5 year old technology being used to make a simplistic shallow game that's nice at parties. (Granted, that's not ALL the games, just the majority of the big sellers)

In my opinion that shouldn't be rewarded.

Putting the Wii aside, I don't see how creating games that could be enjoyed at parties is necessarily a bad thing.

I agree entirely with The Game, actually. He makes a really, really good point. Nintendo (and developers for Wii games) have taken a super casual route to gaming this generation. Games are short, arcade-ish, and relatively "cheap".

Games as a whole seem to be getting shorter, not just on the Wii but as the size of the budget increases, people are trying to cram more into less time. I mean Gears of War, Halo, Portal, CoD, Batman can all be beaten in a relatively
long sitting. Hell, I saw Adam work his way through Mirror's Edge the weekend I was visiting.

I think people forget that many games were longer because they had to justify people buying it, nowadays people want shorter experiences so they can move on to the next big thrill. It may not be how many of us operate, but just check the NPDs to see how many games carry over from month to month.

The fear is not that since those games exist now, nobody will buy other games.
The fear is that since casual gaming and "safe development" does/did so well, that more companies that make games for Sony and Microsoft will take that route and move away from the epic titles for shorter, casual games. Because it's all about money.

The thing I don't get is why cant the two ideas exist together?

I mean before this generation we have always had games that reached out to a larger audience and was made with a lot less money and effort than other games. Tetris is one of the highest selling games of all-time, I'm almost certain it didn't take millions in research.

Hell look at all the games PopCap sells. Developers and publishers are people as well, they have an audience to feed, they will feed it. I don't see that changing... or we would have seen an exodus of talent and development to the Wii, but we don't.

And also, there is no proven formula for success in this industry. Look how many GTA 3 clones popped up last generation and are probably buried in some desert somewhere never to be heard from again.
Hell, the Wii has a dearth of mini-game and sports collections, you probably never heard of or saw in stores because most retailers wouldn't give it the time of day.

The fact of the matter is, software sells across the board, and I don't see developers changing their mind to go with the risky move. I mean its been 3 years since the Wii has come out and we are still getting "epic" games this fall and earlier into next year, and I'm sure years to come.

I was just talking to Bond and was gonna use a movie analogy, but hard to make since they run opposite, but here it goes.

Superhero movies for the better part of the decade have been big money, The Dark Knight is the 2nd highest grossing movie of all-time, Watchmen made money, all 3 Spiderman and X-men and Wolverine.

Does that mean every movie that comes out is now a comic book movie? No because producers and directors realize that the market can sustain other movies even though it may not make near as much.

The same will happen with video games... and always will.

At least my stance on the matter.

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by BreakABone

The thing I don't get is why cant the two ideas exist together?

They can. But that doesn't mean that the fear of it happening will suddenly vanish. I personally don't think that it will happen, but I'm still afraid of it influencing the market to a noticeable degree.

Originally Posted by BreakABone

I mean before this generation we have always had games that reached out to a larger audience and was made with a lot less money and effort than other games. Tetris is one of the highest selling games of all-time, I'm almost certain it didn't take millions in research.

That's such a bullshit point. Tetris? Really? At least pick a game from the relatively modern video game era. Not a game that was made before most of us were even alive. And considering it was made in 1984 on a really super crappy computer, I'm going to bet it's safe to say while it didn't take millions in research, it sure as shit wasn't easy to make - nor did the person know how it would do as a video game, considering it was 1984.

Originally Posted by BreakABone

Hell look at all the games PopCap sells. Developers and publishers are people as well, they have an audience to feed, they will feed it. I don't see that changing... or we would have seen an exodus of talent and development to the Wii, but we don't.

The reason Bejewelled and the like do so well, is because you can play them on A) A phone which you can take places or B) A computer during a desk job. I don't think anyone thinks "Aw, I've got a few minutes at work. Let's plug away at Fallout."

Originally Posted by BreakABone

And also, there is no proven formula for success in this industry. Look how many GTA 3 clones popped up last generation and are probably buried in some desert somewhere never to be heard from again.
Hell, the Wii has a dearth of mini-game and sports collections, you probably never heard of or saw in stores because most retailers wouldn't give it the time of day.

There is easily a formula for success. First off, the reason GTA 3 did better than the clones, was because it was a Grand Theft Auto game. Grand Theft Auto was a big title since it's release in 1997. If this was the very first Grand Theft Auto game ever released, we'd all look at it as some shitty Yakuza remake.

The formula for success is simple, really. First, you need at least a semi-compelling storyline. In lieu of a compelling storyline you can re-hash previous storylines with new features (IE: the Zelda series) and as long as the series is popular enough, it will sell.
Second, and lastly - you need properly placed marketing. No game will take off if not marketed. Nomatter how good it is. Valkyria Chronicles. Hands down an amazing game. Got no publicity.

Originally Posted by BreakABone

Does that mean every movie that comes out is now a comic book movie? No because producers and directors realize that the market can sustain other movies even though it may not make near as much.

The producers/directors who don't want to make superhero movies (for the sake of your comparison) are the people who are wanting to still make epic games. The rest of the industry, we can view as everyone who makes superhero movies.

And for the record, it practically seems like every 3rd or 4th movie out these days is a superhero movie, so that was a really poorly picked comparison.

Let's look at the list of comic/graphic novel movies in recent history here:

Note the release dates, and how little there are in the mid 90's, and how many come out between 2005-2011. There is a definite influx beginning to take place, 10-15 years after superhero movies started out in the late 80's.


30 days of night - 2007
300 - 2007
Every alien vs. predator movie
Ant-Man- 2010 (Oh, it's coming)
The Avengers -2011
Every Batman movie.
The Blade series.
Captain America: The First Avenger - 2011
Catwoman - 2004
Constantine - 2005
All of The Crow movies.
Daredevil - 2003
Deathlok - 2011
Elektra - 2005
Fantastic Four - 2005
Fantastic Four Rise of the Silver Surfer - 2007
Ghost Rider - 2007
Green Lantern - 2011
The Hellboy movies
All The Hulk movies.
Iron Man - 2008
Iron Man 2 - 2010
Josie and the Pussycats - 2001
Judge Dredd - 1995
The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen - 2003
Magneto - 2011
The Mask - 1995
Men In Black - 1997
Men In Black II - 2002
Mystery Men - 1999
Nick Fury - 2010
The Punisher - 2004
The Punisher War Zone - 2008
Sin City - 2005
Spawn - 1997
Spider-Man - 2002
Spider-Man 2 - 2004
Spider-Man 3 - 2007
Spider-Man 4 - 2011
The Spirit - 2008
Tank Girl - 1995
Teanage Mutant Ninja Turtles - 1990
Secret of Ooze - 1991
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles III - 1993
Timecop - 1994
Timecop: The Berlin Decision - 2002
Thor - 2010
V for Vendetta - 2006
Venom - 2011
Wanted - 2008
Watchmen - 2009
Whiteout - 2009
XMen - 2000
X-2 - 2003
The Last Stand - 2006
Origins: Wolverine - 2009

[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.

[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.

[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.

[Thespis721]

The thing I love the most about analogies, is that they can be used to prove anyone's point, and yet, they don't really prove any point.

[magus113]

I see no problem with sequels when done RIGHT.

See Gears, Mario (for the most part, we're keeping out Mario is Missing, etc here), Zelda, Metroid, Half-Life, most of the Final Fantasies (especially retro ones including 8-9 :P).

It's good for the consumer, good for the devs, good for profit, good in general.