Wii Q&A Thread

[Strazos]

Mole.

[stray]

OK. Remind me, if I ever get to meet you, to break a few of your fingers and ribs.

I don't think moles are allowed to do that.

[Velorath]

Nah, I'm not easing off. I'm happy explaining to you why even mentioning that estimate is pointless. It needs to be said.

It's only pointless to you because you think it's trying to prove success or failure.

[stray]

Man, Kageru bit right after you posted that shit. It only supplies people with material to talk crap with. Gives them the wrong idea. I broke it down to dispel things like that.

[Miasma]

OK. Remind me, if I ever get to meet you, to break a few of your fingers and ribs.

I don't think moles are allowed to do that.

Heh, wow.  Right off the deep end.

[stray]

I gave Strazos the only reply he wanted.

Go post about the how unjust the Den is or something, dork.

[Miasma]

I gave Strazos the only reply he wanted.

Go post about the how unjust the Den is or something, dork.

I don't have enough time to reply to you right now as I'm trying to find my archived "INTERNET TOUGH GUY" jpegs.

[stray]

Telling you to get the fuck out of here is being a tough guy now? Damn, your threshold is low. Don't bother with the jpegs.

[EDIT]

Just mind your own business, OK? Strazos knows me well enough by now.

[Miasma]

No telling Strazos that you are going to "break a few of your fingers and ribs" is internet tough guy.  Do try to keep up, shouldn't be too hard as it was your post - even your fanboism addled mind should be able to handle it.

[stray]

Breaking bones would be a jolly affair. The only time I've actually been tough was in bitch slapping someone.

[EDIT] And I'd never do that to poor ole Strazos. 

[HaemishM]

Scenario: New AAA cross-platform title, Chocolate Jesus, hits retail on October 16, 2007.  Let's be ignorant assholes for a minute and assume that each platform version is actually the same game, just ported.  If you could play Chocolate Jesus on any currently-sold hardware, would any of you pick the Wii version?  For this mental excercise, you may assume that you have magical access to all of the systems.  I would probably have some strenuous thought over whether or not I should get the PS3 or 360 version, or possibly the PC version if it's a FPS, RTS or somehow mod-able, but I would not spare a second considering the Wii version, nor the N-Gage/phone version, nor the DS version.  As every anime villain says right before the monster shows up: It's only natural.

Except that I've already had that choice... Call of Duty 3. Madden 07. I'd choose the Wii version, because the play is better than using a gamepad.

EDIT: And to add to that, I'm dying for a Wii verison of Fifa 08, because I want to see what could be done with motion-sensing controls on a soccer game. Or for that matter MLB 2k7 (which isn't being made for the Wii). I'm damned interested in The Bigs, a baseball game from the makers of MLB 2k7 because of what could be done with that controller.

[Strazos]

Breaking bones would be a jolly affair. The only time I've actually been tough was in bitch slapping someone.

[EDIT] And I'd never do that to poor ole Strazos. 

I dunno, by all accounts you're a pretty crazy kid.

[schild]

Except that I've already had that choice... Call of Duty 3. Madden 07. I'd choose the Wii version, because the play is better than using a gamepad.

No, you haven't HAD the choice. You don't have a PS3 or 360. You have a Wii. If you'd even experienced for 15 minutes, on a proper hi-def system, the difference - well, you'd be singing a different tune.

[Strazos]

I think you're overlooking how much some people like the Wii controls in some of these games.

And for the record, if I had to choose which platform to play Madden and CoD3 on....well, I'd obviously pick PC for CoD3, and I don't play Madden.

[Yegolev]

Well, yeah Haem, I can see where you are coming from... but the key element I was trying to dodge was the $$$ factor.  That is another discussion entirely in my mind and I don't want to talk about price and income right now despite the big influence it could have on future Wii development.  It will affect the install-base which will affect development, but that's a speculative topic at this time.

Call of Duty being a FPS, in my mental map the Wii version comes second behind PC if only due to familiarity and my general assumption that it would be a tad more difficult to swap weapons using the 'mote-chuck, thanks to my experience playing Legend of Zelda: Right-handed Bastard.  I can concede your point for these examples, though, since there's a good bit of personal preference one could apply here.  I do, however, have the admitted luxury of playing all three consoles on a HDTV with DPLII/DTS sound where applicable and I feel like I am beginning to be able to make some intelligent comparisons.

You bring up something interesting that I probably did not make clear but is a central point to my ramble.  The game design is going to influence what is a good Wii game and what is not moreso than usual, and I say more than the visuals.  The FPS is a good fit for the Wii, moreso than the Thumbstick Twins but probably less-so than K+M on a PC.  You'll have to assume you already have a bleeding-edge rig for my arguement to make sense.  If you assume you have all of the hardware, including an HDTV, then you can focus on what I like to focus on, which is the game itself.  Reference my Katamari comments, though, and it is clear that hardware heavily influences design.

I think we are agreeing, despite my tenuous grasp of English and piss-poor point-making ability.  You're talking about sports games, which I personally put in the same category as Bejeweled, Tetris and Myst, and FPS, and I think you support my idea that games for the Wii are going to have to be made for the Wii, not ported over, or be already suitable like the FPS.  Now recall that Nintendo isn't exactly friendly with third-party devs and you can see that it is probably going to diverge quite a bit from the purview of typical game developers, more toward the cell-phone people and studios equivalent to pubic hair on the EA giant.  I could be wrong, of course, but I figure the Wii is going to have to have an obscene install-base to do otherwise.  Might get it.  Time will tell.

[HaemishM]

Except that I've already had that choice... Call of Duty 3. Madden 07. I'd choose the Wii version, because the play is better than using a gamepad.

No, you haven't HAD the choice. You don't have a PS3 or 360. You have a Wii. If you'd even experienced for 15 minutes, on a proper hi-def system, the difference - well, you'd be singing a different tune.

Doesn't matter. I'd have played them ON THE WII, because of the control scheme. FIFA 08 comes out for X-Box and the Wii... I'm getting the Wii version, without question, because I like how the Wii controls handle when they are done right. When they aren't, such as Marvel Ultimate Alliance, I'll prefer the other versions.

EDIT: You make it sound like I'm some Ubuntu Tribesman from the African Congo who has never seen Hi-Def video gaming before. I have, and while impressive-looking, nothing I've seen has made me get past the money issues involved in the Hi-Def world. Sure, I lust after a 360 with a hi-def tv bigger than my living room, I'd be crazy not to want those things. What I'm telling you is that those things are not essential to the gaming world. They don't make or break a system for me.

As for Nintendo, yes they have a significant culture hurdle to get over with third-party developers. But I think the initial sales and media buzz has most certainly given the Wii a better kick in the pants for 3rd party stuff than the GC had.

For any game to be worth a damn on the Wii, it needs to be made for its control scheme and graphical capability. How is that different from the PS3 or a 360 or any other platform? Just like shoehorning PVP into a PVE MMOG is a bad fit, shoehorning cross-platform titles onto the Wii is a bad fit, as evidenced by Ultimate Alliance.

As for typical game developers vs. mobile, all devs LIKE MONEY. If the Wii has a 4.7 million install base and games cost 3x less to make than on a hi-def console, any dev with half a brain would be a fucking fool not to want to develop for that platform.

[stray]

CoD stopped doing PC versions after CoD2, if I recall correctly.

[Kageru]

The wii control scheme looks pretty impressive to me. Nunchuk gives you an analog stick + 2 buttons on the nunchuk. Then a D-pad, pointer, accellerometer and two buttons on the other. Not enough? Then there'll be the classic, wavebird or inevitable third party controllers if the dual sticks are really needed.

I think the example is fairly much cooked up. The release of a big budget first person shooter on all three consoles is indeed the wii's weakest point. It can't compete with the PS3 or Xbox and the game won't be designed to make use of the strengths of the wii (alternative market, control scheme). Anyone who is interested in such games either owns a Xbox360 | PS3 or is planning on getting one. And if things do progress along these lines then the wii is either in trouble or of value only for Nintendo's games.

However I don't think that's the only possibility. The wii has a very good chance of a massive installed base as a casual / party gaming machine. Thinks like buzz, guitar hero, singstar, sims, katamari, ddr, <party games> will all probably do better on the wii. Not because the PS3 couldn't do them, but because the market that puts down 1000$ australian dollars on a console isn't interested. And along the way there will be some exclusive titles that are just simply great games, even if many do end up coming from Nintendo for whom this type of "easy entry" gaming isn't really new. The wii is also superbly placed to profit from games upscaled from the DS (eg. brain training wii, phoenix wright, trauma centre, elite beat agents). Heck, it might even rejuvenate the graphic adventure genre, sam and max on the wii is a no brainer.

I mostly play MMORPG's on the PC, and when I want some shooter action there's enough material on the PC... plus I prefer mouse and keyboard over the ghastly analog sticks on the PS3 and XBox360. But I could see myself getting a wii if the software base does develop as I've indicated. Especially because those games would give me 100x more chance of drawing in the SO compared to the PS3.

[Margalis]

If I was going to buy a Madden, I would get the Wii version because it's the only version that isn't exactly the same as the game I've already been playing for 5+ years.

At least the new control scheme gives it a novel new element.

That said, why anyone needs to buy a Madden game more than once every 5 years is beyond me.

[schild]

Pffft. Why anyone would support Madden (period) is beyond me.

That said, I keep seeing people step in and support my argument that the Wii is competing with the board game sector. Honestly, I'd like to see Nintendo prove me wrong.

Biggest 3rd Party information in months for the Wii: A Wiimake of the PS2 version of RE4...

Not kidding.

[Azazel]

For any game to be worth a damn on the Wii, it needs to be made for its control scheme and graphical capability. How is that different from the PS3 or a 360 or any other platform? Just like shoehorning PVP into a PVE MMOG is a bad fit, shoehorning cross-platform titles onto the Wii is a bad fit, as evidenced by Ultimate Alliance.

I'd suggest the major difference is that most games (aside from FPS ones) are made for the default console gamepad experience. Crosspad, 0-2 analog sticks, maybe some triggers, and a bunch of right-hand thimb buttons. It's tried-and-true, and it works.

To make a game feel natural for the Wii, it's really a large rethink, and quite frankly a lot of games just feel more natural without waving the stupid wiimote around the room. As I've said before, FPS was a big failure to me, and sports games I could see going either way. I don't care one iota about American Football, so Madden isn't something I've experienced, and so FIFA would be a rental to see if the control reeks like most other Wii titles to date, or if it works. I go in with an open mind, but not with high expectations of robot jebus, either.

The Wii's not going to do particularly well with the cross-platform ports either, because if most all else is the same, and the control is ok but not outstanding, you're competing visually. And I thought CoD looks like total arse. If the control was outstanding I would have lived with it, but the control blew dead dogs in it's painful awkwardness.

Okami on the other hand sounds like it would work really well with the Wii.

Niche games, "interactive" sports games, party games. That's what I see it doing well with, and that's why I bought it. Lack of graphical shiny doesn't mean these games will suck or be "less fun" than titles on the other consoles, especially as "fun" is subjective. Kageru also points this out, and I also think that's where the Wii's niche will be, if they can out-Sony Sony on that prionciple, since the PS2 is pretty much rocking the party game genre right now. The Upgade-DS genre is also a good point, I don't use a portable, so it wasn't something that came to my mind.

[stray]

Pffft. Why anyone would support Madden (period) is beyond me.

That said, I keep seeing people step in and support my argument that the Wii is competing with the board game sector. Honestly, I'd like to see Nintendo prove me wrong.

Biggest 3rd Party information in months for the Wii: A Wiimake of the PS2 version of RE4...

Not kidding.

I was under the impression that the GC version was actually better than the PS2 version (think it was with the big rendered scenes, while the PS2 devs opted for fmv)?

[schild]

GC version had less content. They're porting that content to the Wii version from the PS2 version.

[Kageru]

Biggest 3rd Party information in months for the Wii: A Wiimake of the PS2 version of RE4...

Not kidding.

Not kidding, but not accurate.

I check google news each morning as a sort of aggregated and compressed news source.

This morning had 3 wii stories: Brothers in arms, Nights (a new exclusive title?) and Mario
strikers (which isn't third party of course).

Hm, Strikers will be interesting though... get to see if Nintendo has managed to grow a clue
about online gaming.

[schild]

If Ninty had a clue about online gaming, they'd announce it.

A NiGHTS, have you looked at it? Honestly. Sega. There was nothing I was more stoked for, but Nights should have been on the 360 or PS3. The game was a visual tour de force (stylized for sure, but the power to push it was necessary). The Wii one actually looks WORSE than the Saturn one.

Brothers in Arms. Great. That'll be 1/10th as good as RE4.

The reason I said RE4 is the biggest title is because even after it's remade, it's still better than anything Nintendo or anyone else is going to put out. And hell, it may actually be fun with the Wiimote. Unfortunately, it's the third time the game has gone through the recycle bin.

I didn't say it was the "Biggest Original Announcement."

[sigil]

Still happy with my purchase.

I made the easiest decision.

Don't come to this site for Wii info.

Problem solved.


It's a wide world of internet. I'll come here for other things. There's a lot of good stuf here.

If you have trouble with the vibe you get from the posters, do the same thing. Less piss and vinegar ftw.

[HaemishM]

Hm, Strikers will be interesting though... get to see if Nintendo has managed to grow a clue
about online gaming.

Strikers will have up to 4 player online multiplayer.

[naum]

The question in our household, is when o when is Super Smash Bros. going to come out for Wii?

Not on schedule I've seen (though I haven't looked very hard)…

[Azazel]

Watching the people "play" Mario Strikers on the games' website, they seem to be using the dualshock-alike classic controllers, rather than Wiimotes...

[Roac]

Bloomberg slams PS3, hypes Wii.  And is backed up by Take 2, Ubisoft, and EA.

Highlights:
-Ubisoft saw 24% gains in sales, partially attributed to having focused on the Wii.
-EA saw a 25% drop in sales, partially attributed to not focusing on Wii and instead on the PS3.
-Numerous groups are predicting Nintendo is going to well outpace either Microsoft or Sony in sales this year.
-Estimates are that Wii titles cost 10-25% what PS3 or 360 titles cost to produce. 


Tell me more why the Wii sucks.

[Kageru]

I was going to post a similar article from one of the Australian newspapers... but then I realised it was more or less the same article re-written. The degree of journalistic plagiarism is nauseating.

[schild]

Lemme check how many UBISoft and EA games I have for either system. Once again, this isn't about the number of things being sold or not being sold. This is about the quality of things being sold.

And that quality is right below "shit."

[stray]

I don't think any of that has to do with sucking or not sucking. I mean, big deal that Ubi made money. Those games are junk-- and they're only announcing more of it unfortunately. Even the one good title Ubi made out of that bunch is still junk.

I don't see Ubi maklng money off of junk as being good news for the Wii really.

As for EA, out of the top five sellers on the PS3, four of them are third party games (granted, only one of them has stellar numbers - a Sony one - but third parties can do well at this point nonetheless). The problem is that EA came out with subpar titles -- no one's going to reward them for those games. There's enough good things going on in PS3 world right now to keep buyers from being that desperate.

On a sidenote, the Gamecube was selling as many games as the Wii at this point too. Good for Nintendo and all, but it doesn't mean the competition is hurting (or will be hurting). At the end of the day, the platforms with titles like GTA, MGS, Halo, FF, and the like are the ones that are going to be pushing forward -- It's stuff like that defines real gaming popularity. Nothing else.


I do think it's good for Nintendo that they're getting more attention from third parties though. Historically, they've fumbled in this area. Now if only those third parties didn't go about it in a such a half assed way -- then it'd be better than good.

[Kageru]

At the end of the day, the platforms with titles like GTA, MGS, Halo, FF, and the like are the ones that are going to be pushing forward -- It's stuff like that defines real gaming popularity. Nothing else.

Rubbish. There are markets for whom halo is just another FPS and any FPS is a big yawn. It's the same error schild is making, assuming there is only a single scale along which games are ranked (The console catass index perhaps?). The relevant quote in the article being:

"In addition, Wii appears to be expanding the market, rather than stealing sales from rivals, he said."

In other words yes, if you want the big exclusive titles you'll buy the console you need to run them. And if your tastes are huge budget games with cutting edge graphics that platform almost certainly isn't the wii. However that is an argument that is largely irrelevant in terms of whether the wii holds value. I mean you honestly think the people buying the wii aren't aware that halo isn't coming to their platform?

Meanwhile Sturgeons law is one of my favourites. 90% of everything will be shit. 90% of these games being thrown at the wii will be crappy, hurried and make only token gestures towards the wii demographic and control scheme. And without the shiny they'll be painfully obvious for what they are. However, in amongst all that money, there are opportunities for a game designer who can see what the wii is good at, and what it sucks at, to make some big profits.

A good example is rayman raving rabbits. It's not really that good a game and I'm confident that if it were released for PS3 it's lame graphics and shallow mini-games would have resulted in it tanking really badly. However "cute" can be rendered on the wii, will sell to the wii audience and the control scheme does make the game seem deeper than it actually is. End result being the game is almost certainly a commercial success. And ideally the next generation of wii games will be better.

[stray]

Mind you, I don't care for Halo myself, so I'm a little weary of even carrying this argument further.

I'll try though ;)


I'm not trying to take value away from the Wii. The type of game market it's (supposedly) catering to is fine. But.... If you think such things can be popular enough to carry a platform that strongly, then the same will be true for the PS3 and 360 too. They have or will have their fair share of casual or party games (and may even include similar control schemes as the Wii to boot -- at least the PS3 could, technically). And then they'll have the other big stuff too. They'll have their foot in both type of gaming markets -- and I don't really see how the Wii could be such a killer in the face of that (unless gaming as we know it changes overnight or something -- I guess it wasn't codenamed the Revolution for nothing  ).

[EDIT]

And I sure as hell don't think there will be as much market "expansion" to keep them competitive at that level. In the end, they have to appeal to gamers first (or completely change them).