Five Thoughts on the Nintendo Wii

[naum]

http://www.stevenberlinjohnson.com/2007/02/five_thoughts_o.html

1. Playing Wii Sports Tennis for the first time was the most revelatory, breakthrough gaming experience I've had since I first saw Myst in the mid 90s. It's truly one of those transformations where you immediately think: this whole medium is capable of something radically different from what we've expected of it to date.

2. Others may disagree, but from my perspective, Wii Tennis is so much better than all the other Wii Sports games that part of me wonders whether the controller interface is in fact uniquely suited for tennis games, and will prove to be a disappointment elsewhere. (I'm sure it will be wonderful for golf, actually -- I just have higher expectations for golf sims than the Wii Sports version.) Wii Bowling, to its credit, probably sets some kind of record for being the closest approximation of a real-world sport in the history of games. Other than the weight of the ball itself, there's basically no difference between bowling in real life and bowling on the Wii. Not being a huge fan of bowling personally, I consider this to be both good and bad news.

3. Wii Tennis is the first videogame since the second SimCity that my wife has taken even the slightest interest in playing. This alone leads me to believe that they have a massive, category-changing hit on their hands.

4. Part of the beauty of Wii Tennis is what they left out. It's absolutely crucial to the game that you don't control the players' movements, that they just chase the balls on their own. If you'd added player-controlled movement, the learning curve would have been much more steep. Same goes for letting a single player control both onscreen players in a doubles match without actively switching between them. By removing those variables, they made a game where it's fun to play the second you pick up the controller. (For what it's worth, I still think they should add an "accelerate" button for shots that your onscreen player won't reach on his or her own. If you press the button your onscreen avatar will run just a little faster in whatever direction he or she is running.)

5. Having written so much about the complexity of today's games, it's fascinating to see a platform so heavily promoting its comparative simplicity. But I think the success of the Wii is slightly more complicated than that. Wii Sports trades the onscreen complexity of goals and objectives and puzzles for the physical, haptic complexity of bodily movement. Since the days of Pong, games have been simplifying the intricacies of movement into unified codes of button pressing and joystick manipulation. What strikes you immediately playing Wii Sports -- and particularly Tennis -- is this feeling of fluidity, the feeling that subtle, organic shifts in your body's motion will lead to different results onscreen. My wife has a crosscourt slam she hits at the net that for the life of me I haven't been able to figure out; I have a topspin return of soft serves that I've half-perfected that's unhittable. We both got to those techniques through our own athletic experimentation with various gestures, and I'm not sure I could even fully explain what I'm doing with my killer topspin shot. In a traditional game, I'd know exactly what I was doing: hitting the B button, say, while holding down the right trigger. Instead, my expertise with the shot has evolved through the physical trial-and-error of swinging the controller, experimenting with different gestures and timings. And that's ultimately what's so amazing about the device. Games for years have borrowed the structures and rules -- as well as the imagery -- of athletic competition, but the Wii adds something genuinely new to the mix, something we'd ignored so long we stopped noticing that it was missing: athleticism itself.

[Sky]

If I wanted a visceral feel of playing tennis, I'd play tennis. Ditto golf, etc.

I play games because I want to sit on my couch and not do stuff. If I want to do stuff, I do stuff.

Whatever.

That killer topspin shot not even he could explain? We call that exploting AI.

[HaemishM]

Except that it isn't exploiting AI, it's just his fairly unique way of responding to the controller.

I agree that sometimes there are games I just want to sit on the couch and play. Strategy games, TBS, things of that nature. But I also want to have games that MAKE me do things, like the way Red Steel gets me out of my chair for sword fights. I tend to agree with this guy on the Wii.

[SnakeCharmer]

I was thinking about the Wii last night after I got the email from LucasArts about their next Star Wars game (The Force Unleashed). 

How cool would a game like that be if you could use the Wii controller to swing a lightsaber around?

[Rasix]

If I wanted a visceral feel of playing tennis, I'd play tennis. Ditto golf, etc.

I play games because I want to sit on my couch and not do stuff. If I want to do stuff, I do stuff.

Whatever.

That killer topspin shot not even he could explain? We call that exploting AI.

I'm going to have to agree to a point.  I like the layer of abstraction that a controller gives me, especially for activities that I have a closeness to. 

I play tennis.  Regular tennis games can annoy the shit out of me for the liberties they take with their interpretation of the sport.  This bothers me only on an intellectual level.  Add a physical component to that interpretation and I'm just likely to see so many goddamn faults it'll drive me to destroy controllers.  I can hit topsin, IN REAL LIFE. Now, what happens if the Wii doesn't feel that my topspin is Wii topspin?  It's a close physical mapping of a physical activity.   

With the abstraction of a controller, I can hit a button and there's my topspin.  There's no interpretation of my moments. I can hit can also hit with slice or hit it flat with a button push.  All without layer of interpretation that may or may not synch with what I physically know to be accurate. 

I could try this out for myself and it could be that Wii tennis is so excellently modeled that my actual strokes will produce the desired effects on screen.  Very, very doubtful.  Maybe I'll jump around like an idiot the next time I visit schild in Phoenix.

I'm just not seeing the appeal of the Wii anymore.  Like Sky, gaming is relaxation for me. I want to be sitting down somewhere with a beverage and at most standing up for Guitar Hero (which I can only take for so long, that Anthrax guy was right, that game jacks your arm), not jumping around flailing my arms like a loopy tard.

Ninja Edit (because I see Roac replying  :-D ): this is a pure "gamer" perspective.  I'm not saying this sort of visceral interaction doesn't appeal to others.

[Roac]

How cool would a game like that be if you could use the Wii controller to swing a lightsaber around?

Cool enough that I'm surprised they didn't have a title doing that in the works well before launch.  To the point that, if someone produced a Jedi Knight III on the Wii, it would probably be an instant I Win button for this generation of console wars.  

[Rasix]

How cool would a game like that be if you could use the Wii controller to swing a lightsaber around?

Cool enough that I'm surprised they didn't have a title doing that in the works well before launch.  To the point that, if someone produced a Jedi Knight III on the Wii, it would probably be an instant I Win button for this generation of console wars. 

Should make for interesting YouTube videos.  The next "Star Wars kid" may be among us.

[Roac]

Harry Potter... that was the other game, although I'd bet it wouldn't do as well as a Jedi one.  Before the Wii came out those were the two titles that my wife and I thought were no-brainers for a Nintendo insta-win.  I haven't done much with them, but I recall that some of the Potter games liked using mouse gestures to cast spells.  Doing that with your Wii-wand would drive fans nuts.  Third thing it needs is a Halo-like shooter.  Far Cry, Red Steel, etc are just so-so.  It needs a top notch, M-rated shooter.  Unfortunately, the only one of the three which looks possible is Potter, due this summer.  There are a lot of shooter games in the works, but none of them stands out as THE game.  Still early though.

[Sky]

I, too, am not rejecting the fun factor out of hand. Just saying it's not my cup of tea. See also: Dance Dance Revolution.

[stray]

I can hit topsin, IN REAL LIFE. Now, what happens if the Wii doesn't feel that my topspin is Wii topspin?  It's a close physical mapping of a physical activity.

It's funny. I totally suck at tennis in real life. Bad. But I totally kick ass at Wii Tennis. To the point where I just have to give up the controller and let other people play.

Baseball: I'm pretty good at it in real life. I'm a pretty creative and fast pitcher (umm, relatively speaking...I'm not Kurt Schilling ;)), and generally can hit balls where I want, etc.. Totally suck on the Wii though. Even more strange, I have more success playing right handed than I do left (i.e my good hand). I'd rather take a traditional baseball game over Wii Sports (besides, the ball in play part of Wii Baseball sucks).

Just my two cents.

[naum]

My daughter & boyfriend have a Wii too and they've come over bringing their controllers a bunch of times already and with 4 controllers, playing Wii sports is a lot of fun. Mrs. Naum digs it more than me, and I haven't seen her express much interest in a video game since the DC & Crazy Taxi and Virtua Fighter… …our son gets so into it, he's sweating and for some reason, he's got the knack for tennis & baseball both, and I'm not sure how he does the wicked topspin shots. But definitely, different motion range than the real sport -- you're exercising muscles that I'm not sure there's a lot of real life use for unless you're trying to get some lever pulling experience.

I find it impossible to play Wii sports sitting down.

And I do agree that with the crossover appeal, Nintendo has a  massive, category-changing hit on their hands… …you hardcore gamer sorts can deride it all you want, but it's "freshened" video game consoles up again…

Surprised too, about no "light sabre wielding game" being available. Seems like a no-brainer……

[CmdrSlack]

I agree on the light-saber games.  I also think that those kind of games would lend very well to the "custom controller" thing that Schild said he wanted.  (I still think that's wayy too much clutter, but hey, whatever.) 

I'm still waiting for there to be reliable stock of Wii consoles in teh stores, but it sounds like a lot more fun than sitting on the couch or bed and mashing buttons. 

Kurt Schilling

Is the "k" part of that alternative political spelling thing?   

[stray]

Oh, my bad. Every "Kurt" I've known spelled it with a K, I think.



Anyways, I disagree with the lightsaber thing. Why is this even being brought it up here?

Cool idea and all, but an entirely different thing from mass crossover appeal. Jedi I-Win button? Can you be any more out of touch? It wouldn't do any more favors for the Wii as Shadows did for the N64 (not bad, but mainly a popular, but traditionally kid/geek/gamer oriented title. Same with Harry Potter).

[CmdrSlack]

Anyways, I disagree with the lightsaber thing. Why is this even being brought it up here?

Cool idea and all, but an entirely different thing from mass crossover appeal. Jedi I-Win button? Can you be any more out of touch? It wouldn't do any more favors for the Wii as Shadows did for the N64 (not bad, but mainly a popular, but traditionally kid/geek/gamer oriented title. Same with Harry Potter).

Uh, I don't know if it'd be an "I Win" button.  I mostly agreed on the "damn that'd be a fun use of the Wiimote" point.  I guess I should quote more often. 

[stray]

Sorry 'bout that. I was more replying to Roac than you.

I-Win button as far as tradtional game audiences go though. I'd agree on that. That's IF Lucas Arts actually found someone who could make a non shitty looking game on Nintendo hardware (besides Factor 5).

[Trippy]

How cool would a game like that be if you could use the Wii controller to swing a lightsaber around?

Cool enough that I'm surprised they didn't have a title doing that in the works well before launch.  To the point that, if someone produced a Jedi Knight III on the Wii, it would probably be an instant I Win button for this generation of console wars. 

Should make for interesting YouTube videos.  The next "Star Wars kid" may be among us.

You mean something like this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuzFzs0hPKc

[CmdrSlack]

How cool would a game like that be if you could use the Wii controller to swing a lightsaber around?

Cool enough that I'm surprised they didn't have a title doing that in the works well before launch.  To the point that, if someone produced a Jedi Knight III on the Wii, it would probably be an instant I Win button for this generation of console wars. 

Should make for interesting YouTube videos.  The next "Star Wars kid" may be among us.

You mean something like this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuzFzs0hPKc

Oh if only that was really going to be out for the Wii.

[Margalis]

Wii Tennis is the best game, but golf, boxing and baseball are all fun too. Bowling I find quite boring.

I would *love* a Wii Tennis game where you could control the movement, but I agree for Wii Sports they made the right choice. (But bury it is an option??) My friend and I are good enough that we can hit un-returnable shots pretty well off a non-super serve - the ability to control your characters would mitigate that.

A golf game more complex than Wii Golf would be great also...um and so would boxing and baseball...

But the Tennis is just awesome. My friend and I played a game where we were on match point for about 12 minutes going back and forth.

Edit: I do like using my body. I am in shape, I like exercise. I enjoy things like snow shovelling to some degree. Physical activty is always something I'm up for.

[Roac]

Anyways, I disagree with the lightsaber thing. Why is this even being brought it up here?

Cool idea and all, but an entirely different thing from mass crossover appeal. Jedi I-Win button? Can you be any more out of touch?

You mean something like this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuzFzs0hPKc

Because any guy under 20, and everyone over 20 who enjoyed being under 20, wants that video to be real.  Every inner geek who would otherwise want to derride the Wii will fall all over themselves to get that.

The other demographic, wives, daughters, friends, etc are covered fairly well already.  Wii Sports, Wii Play, Rayman, Warioware, Elebits, and the soon to be released Mario Party have the family/party thing nailed.  That's the main strength of the Wii right now, and why it's in such huge demand.  What you're *not* seeing are more serious gamers (very many of them anyway) dying to get one, because they're missing that Star Wars or Halo thing to clinch it.  Soon as they pull that segment off really well, you might actually start seeing some (few) households with more than one Wii.

[Big Gulp]

What you're *not* seeing are more serious gamers (very many of them anyway) dying to get one, because they're missing that Star Wars or Halo thing to clinch it. 

It also doesn't help that any way you slice it, the eye candy is substandard.  There may not be as many shallow bastards as me, but I assure you that we do exist.

That's okay, though, because I really don't think Nintendo is concerned about people like me.  They're concentrating on the non-gamers who vastly outnumber my demographic.  Seems to be working for them, but then again, non-gamers are non-gamers for a reason and when the novelty wears off the Wii will gather dust.  You need the hard-core for longevity, and that's where I think the Wii seriously lacks.

[stray]

I believe it's possible to get eye candy on the Wii, but most GC/Wii titles are intentionally/carelessly made to look bad. Seriously. I can't think of any other reason. Most of the developers probably think Nintendo owners don't care (and maybe they don't).

If Factor 5 can make an attractive game for the GameCube's launch, way back in 2001 (to this day, it still looks good), then the average title on the Wii should look at least that good. If they don't, then it tells me that they don't care.

[Margalis]

One thing I will say is that the number of "party" games is a bit annoying. I like party games but I don't need 15, especially not when 10 of them are mediocre.

I disagree that the Wii is for non-gamers. I see it as being for both. I honestly don't understand how anyone can play Wii Sports with a friend and not enjoy it, but I guess that is just me.

I think we'll see plenty of ports and other games that appeal to "real" gamers. For one thing the return on investment is right. Games sell more and cost less to make - winner. It is an easy economic decision.

Right now it does appear to be a dumping ground for party titles, but those titles can be made fast and cheap. As they have to compete with each other more they will die off a bit, and in addition they are coming out now just because they are *done* now.

A company that got their dev kits 8 months ago could be finishing a party game now, but not finishing a hardcore game.

[Samwise]

I believe it's possible to get eye candy on the Wii, but most GC/Wii titles are intentionally/carelessly made to look bad.

Have you seen the hardware stats on the Nintendo consoles?  There's a reason they're so much cheaper than the competition.  I'm constantly impressed by how good the developers get their games to look on those things.

Gamecube specs - 486 MHz CPU, 43 MB RAM, 162 MHz GPU
Wii specs - 729 MHz CPU, 88 MB RAM, 243 MHz GPU

I'm sure that somehow those numbers are misleading and that the performance is actually double what you'd think.  It's still pretty damn impressive what they can pull off on it.

[stray]

[EDIT] Oops, repeating what Margalis said about ROI.

[EDIT]

Have you seen the hardware stats on the Nintendo consoles?  There's a reason they're so much cheaper than the competition.  I'm constantly impressed by how good the developers get their games to look on those things.

I'm sure that somehow those numbers are misleading and that the performance is actually double what you'd think.  It's still pretty damn impressive what they can pull off on it.

But then, many games may also end up looking like this:



Gah. That's even worse than many GameCube games. What the hell?

Btw, that's Wing Island (coming next month on Wii). The same developer (Hudson Soft) makes this for the Xbox. Obviously, they're not that bad at making visually appealing titles (if they can make a freakin' puzzler look good, then they should at least make a plane flying game look better than the above. The Wii hardware can't be THAT bad).

For reference, here's a 2001 GC launch title (just to show what can be done with less power....on a launch title at that):

[CmdrSlack]

Isnt' that GC title a Star Wars title?  I sort of thought that LA was pretty adamant about how stuff should look.  I dunno if that's really a great comparison, solely based on the LA angle.

[Murgos]

Gamecube specs - 486 MHz CPU, 43 MB RAM, 162 MHz GPU
Wii specs - 729 MHz CPU, 88 MB RAM, 243 MHz GPU

I'm sure that somehow those numbers are misleading and that the performance is actually double what you'd think.  It's still pretty damn impressive what they can pull off on it.

Using clock cycles to measure system performance is misleading at best.   The only reason anyone cares is that Intel has spent a lot of money saying more clock cycles == better.  Many AMD chips, for example, out perform Intel chips that operate at 20% or greater core clock speeds.

The honest truth is that much of the CPU sits there burning cycles and not using large portions of it's architecture most of the time.  With the same architecture more clock cycles is better performance.  Once the chip architecture changes it's pretty much a meaningless distinction.

[HaemishM]

Images of Wing Island and Fusion Frenzy 2

In this case, that's hardly a fair comparison. The Fusion Frenzy you linked is on the 360, so the developers have a shitton more tricks, better anti-aliasing, etc. to work with, not to mention a greater resolution. It's why when I look at the graphics on a Wii title like CoD3, I don't compare them to the PS3 or 360 version, because there isn't any comparison. The games are going to look better on next-gen hardware, period. You'd be better off comparing Wing Island to Crimson Skies, and yes, it'll lose that battle too but at least it's a fair battle. For graphics capability, the Wii IS on a the level with the PS2, GC and X-Box.

This is where we have the paralell development issue. It's like Murgos's comparison of Intel/AMD, where using the same measurement (clock speed) is no longer applicable because they work differently. Only with artwork and graphics, the measurements are totally subjective, with about the only objectively measurable comparisons are with things like use of anti-aliasing, colors or effects. Wing Island does look worse than say RE4, but I'd say there are next-gen games that don't look as good as RE4 did on a GC.

Wing Island looks bland, but I'm still interested in it, because of how it MIGHT play. If the play sucks, the game sucks. If the graphics are bland but the play is great, it's all moot.

[Baldrake]

I play tennis.  Regular tennis games can annoy the shit out of me for the liberties they take with their interpretation of the sport.  This bothers me only on an intellectual level.  Add a physical component to that interpretation and I'm just likely to see so many goddamn faults it'll drive me to destroy controllers.  I can hit topsin, IN REAL LIFE. Now, what happens if the Wii doesn't feel that my topspin is Wii topspin?  It's a close physical mapping of a physical activity.

This is a very insightful comment. It's analogous to the idea of the uncanny valley, which we often use to describe the phenomenon where graphics that are too close to reality become creepy. It's ironic that by improving our control scheme, we magnify any dissonance with reality.

But we wouldn't say we should stop working on graphics because of the uncanny valley. We are aware of the problem in game design, and try to not to fall into it. We need to do the same with motion sensitive control. But it's a challenge to be aware of.

[Yegolev]

There are at least two different directions here, in my mind.  More than two, really, but considering the way the wind blows in console discussions it comes down to two major ones.  Simply put, there are games that look good in the way that, say, Paper Mario: TTYD looks good or Metroid Prime looks good, or in the way that (since I don't have an x360) Resistance looks good.

I will put it out there flatly.  If you play Prince of Persia: Warrior Within on the Cube, you are going to think the Cube sucks balls in a technical way.  The dithering alone is painful.  If you start off with Mario Sunshine, then move to Eternal Darkness and on to Metroid Prime, you can see the progression where developers are working with the platform.  Not only is this in the realm of knowing-the-hardware, it's also in the realm of knowing your limitations.  This is exactly how such great-looking titles are being produced for the PS2; it's not just that programmers know how to optimize for the hardware, they also know the limits and are able to optimize in design.  The GC and it's sequel are not as powerful as the competition, and that is a fact.  I would submit that there is a lot of leeway in what is done with those restrictions.  Creative people do not like restrictions, but the truly creative can create within restrictions.  I will go out on my own here and say that the example of what is being done with the PS2 in 2007 is an example of what can be done on the Wii... eventually.

For me, it's easy since I will end up owning all of the consoles.  Even the x360 that I don't have right now, especially since it looks like I'm not going to "finish" Phantom Dust.  The question is, am I going to have a reflection of the Cube library when it's all said and done?  The hardest titles on the Wii are likely to be the Zelda that everyone has now, plus palette-restricted stuff like Paper Mario.  I'm OK with that.

[stray]

The hardest titles on the Wii are likely to be the Zelda that everyone has now, plus palette-restricted stuff like Paper Mario.  I'm OK with that.

I'm OK with 20 titles like that (note: I'd say the same for any other console).

[EDIT]

In this case, that's hardly a fair comparison. The Fusion Frenzy you linked is on the 360, so the developers have a shitton more tricks, better anti-aliasing, etc. to work with, not to mention a greater resolution.

I know it's a 360 title, but I'm only pointing it out to show that Hudson isn't an incompetent or careless developer. They're able to take advantage of the 360, even for a puzzler. But for a flight game on a Wii? No.

Also, the real comparison is between Rogue Leader and Wing Island.

Wing Island looks bland, but I'm still interested in it, because of how it MIGHT play. If the play sucks, the game sucks. If the graphics are bland but the play is great, it's all moot.

You should be playing Pilot Wings 64, and not even owning a new console then.

[EDIT]

Oh wait. Nevermind. Wiimote. 

[HaemishM]

Wing Island looks bland, but I'm still interested in it, because of how it MIGHT play. If the play sucks, the game sucks. If the graphics are bland but the play is great, it's all moot.

You should be playing Pilot Wings 64, and not even owning a new console then.

[EDIT]

Oh wait. Nevermind. Wiimote. 

Yeah, that's the X-Factor. IF it's used correctly, it's the shiznit. If not, well, it's just another game on an X-Box level system.

[Trippy]

Gamecube specs - 486 MHz CPU, 43 MB RAM, 162 MHz GPU
Wii specs - 729 MHz CPU, 88 MB RAM, 243 MHz GPU

I'm sure that somehow those numbers are misleading and that the performance is actually double what you'd think.  It's still pretty damn impressive what they can pull off on it.

Using clock cycles to measure system performance is misleading at best.   The only reason anyone cares is that Intel has spent a lot of money saying more clock cycles == better.  Many AMD chips, for example, out perform Intel chips that operate at 20% or greater core clock speeds.

The honest truth is that much of the CPU sits there burning cycles and not using large portions of it's architecture most of the time.  With the same architecture more clock cycles is better performance.  Once the chip architecture changes it's pretty much a meaningless distinction.

No it's not misleading in this case. The Wii uses basically the same PowerPC chip as the GC except that it's clocked faster. I.e. unlike Sony (MIPS to PowerPC) and Microsoft (x86 to PowerPC), Nintendo stuck with the same processor architecture when moving to its latest generation.

[CmdrSlack]

I find this stuff amusing on two levels.  I'm not a hardware guy by any stretch of the imagination.  I see spec lists and my eyes glaze over.  My rule of thumb is that bigger numbers = better stuff.  I also know that it's a stupid mindset, so I tend to do tons of research before buying stuff.  It's also funny because I wonder how many people are like me, but without the research.  Is the eye candy really that important for the average person? 

I'm planning on buying a Wii for a few reasons, but eye candy isn't one of them.  Our current TV isn't an HD model.  We're not in a position to buy a flat HD tv, and short of strong arming the Mrs. into contributing part of her tax return towards that purpose, we're not looking at getting one any time soon.  We could get a tube HD, but that seems like a waste. 

The other factor is that the Wii interests her.  This is huge because she is generally not interested in games.  At any rate, I think we're a good example of a household that would buy a Wii over the other systems.  The hardware specs don't matter to us.  The price point, nifty control system, and apparently fun game (Wii sports) do.  Looking at our media racks, we have exactly six Xbox titles and twenty PS2 titles.  That's it.  We don't spend a ton of money or time on console games.  However, I think that most  people who know me would describe me as a gamer who is casual by force, not by choice. 

I just don't get alll the Wii hate/skepticism/mehness.  Granted, I also don't understand console partisanship in the first place.  It seems like the console vs. PC debates of the late 90s, but more inane.

[stray]

I just don't get alll the Wii hate/skepticism/mehness.

Who hates the Wii?

I, for one, am not hating. Saying Wing Island looks like shit has nothing to do with hate. It's the truth.

Wii owners are being treated like second class citizens in the graphics department, and it's unnecessary. It's a decent enough console, if they make the effort. Games on a new console don't have to look that bad.

It's also partially the owners' fault too. It's like the gaming version of Stockholm syndrome: You get so used to that second class status that you start defending it (not you necessarily, but Nintendo fanbois in general). Saying things like "graphics don't matter in video games" is asinine and just encourages them to do a half ass job.

Graphics do matter (the whole package matters), else you'd be playing Hungry Hippo or Uno.

[CmdrSlack]

Graphics do matter (the whole package matters), else you'd be playing Hungry Hippo or Uno.

I agree that they matter to some extent, but if the Wii is basically PS2 quality graphics, that's fine for me considering the price point.  We can only afford the clunky version (tube HDTV) of the hardware that makes the 360 or PS3 worthwhile, so the whole 1080whatever action is not important to me.  If someone comes out with a game that looks like ass, that's cool, but "looks like ass" is largely a subjective measure.  My 1 year old daughter (who is the most beautiful kid ever in the history of kids) apparently loves sock/finger puppets, even though we've shown her much cooler media.  If a game  truly sucks as far as graphics goes, then yeah, it sucks, but the Wii itself isn't necessarily without potential (as you've indicated with your "GC launch" screens). 

Also, Hungry Hungry Hippos is the mack. Moreover, Uno rocks, although I prefer "Hot Death Uno," a PC game that was in existence back in 1994. I have no idea if you can still find it, but it was way better/more abusive than Uno.