Five Thoughts on the Nintendo Wii

[Margalis]

I also play real tennis, baseball and a little boxing occasionally and I don't see the uncanny valley problem. Putting slice on a ball or doing a lob in Wii Tennis is not supposed to feel super realistic. To me it doesn't come off as a strange approximation of reality.

I don't think anyone tries to market Wii Sports based on the realistic controls. More realistic? Sure. But realism isn't the point.

[Yegolev]

I don't know anything much about the GC or Wii PowerPC chip, but I will say that there is a lot of leeway in the silicon for things with the PowerPC label.  I do believe that the Wii CPU is a GC CPU with a faster clock, but there are probably some differences that most people won't notice.

[HaemishM]

Wii owners are being treated like second class citizens in the graphics department, and it's unnecessary.

Actually, there are a few reasons from Nintendo's standpoint that it is necessary.

1) It's more expensive to make the console, meaning they'd likely have to sell the hardware at break even or at a loss. I gather this is against Big N's philosophy. I happen to agree with that philosophy.
2) It's about 3 to 4 times more expensive to make the games, and takes longer to get to market with a game. See profit motive above. Also, it means the games can cost less to the consumer, which should lower some of the resistance to buying a lot of games.
3) It self-selects users of your console to the early adopters. Despite recent price cuts, there are still people without HDTV. Why sell only to them?
4) They couldn't compete in the HD department with the 360 and PS3, because they are unused to it. Both their competitors have big head starts in that department. Add in the loss of profits from 1-3 above, and that means that the Wii would have been like the GC, a 3rd fiddle console that no one paid attention to or took seriously. The competitive advantage of the motion-sensitive controls is huge, and it's so far proven to be a big factor, combined with the pricing issues.

No one has said graphics don't matter. I've said that graphics matter less than gameplay, so long as the graphics are up to a reasonable standard. To me, the X-Box met that reasonable standard (when used well) and the Wii is about on that level of graphical ability.

[schild]

Did I end up in lolsville?

They're treated as second class citizens because they are.

It's a fucking gamecube.

If companies want to make a game that's graphically awesome, they're going to make it for a system that is graphically awesome. The Wii is lucky it's getting No More Heroes.

[HaemishM]

LET THEM EAT CAKE!

[Yegolev]

Hehe.  That was funny.

[CmdrSlack]

Is the cake eating a close approximation of actual cake eating or is it just a nifty gesture that capitalizes on the unique qualities of the Wiimote?

[HaemishM]

You have to fit the whole Wiimote into your mouth at once or you fail the level.

[Margalis]

You guys never get tired of this argument huh?

"ZOMG THE GRAPHIX!!!"
"ZOMG THE CONTROLS!!!!!"

Did I just entirely summarize the debate? Yes, I believe so.

[stray]

If companies want to make a game that's graphically awesome, they're going to make it for a system that is graphically awesome. The Wii is lucky it's getting No More Heroes.

Yeah, but still....

It's bad enough that they don't even have competitive hardware, but it's worse that developers aren't even trying very hard to tweak their games on a hardware design that's already been out for 7 years now (generally speaking). You would think that they would know the in's and out's of this particular Broadway/ATI combo by now that the average game could look as good as Rogue Leader or RE4. You would think that there'd be enough love and middleware to spread around that even incompetent designers could make a decent looking title on this hardware.

There's no excuse for a game to look like Wing Island (and hell, that isn't even out yet...that's the quality of a "future" title, so to speak). I don't give a fuck if it's fun. A lot of games are fun.

Did I just entirely summarize the debate? Yes, I believe so.

No. 

[WindupAtheist]

Bushido Blade for Wii plz.

[Calantus]

Good call, if Bushido Blade came out for Wii I'd have to own one right away.

I don't see the need to play tennis or golf or any other sport with a Wiimote. I can just... play the sport. I play games to do shit I can't or won't do IRL. Abstract sports I can understand, but if I'm immitating the sport to the degree that I'm swinging my arm I see no point.

[schild]

At first I saw the Wii translating well to swordplay. After using one... no.

Just no.

Would I want Bushido Blade on something that would actually translate well? Oh fuck yes.

[stray]

All another Bushido Blade would need is more shiny.


I could see Wiimote potential in FPS sword games though, or something really zoomed on the shoulder like RE4. Not some side view/third person affair like Bushido. It's a fighting game. The controls for fighting games have been excellent for, oh....20 years now.

[Velorath]

There's no excuse for a game to look like Wing Island (and hell, that isn't even out yet...that's the quality of a "future" title, so to speak). I don't give a fuck if it's fun. A lot of games are fun.

Wing Island was a launch title for Japan.  Yep, it looks like shit graphically and my take on why they're even bothering to bring it to the U.S. is because they see the drought in Wii games and figure they can get a few quick bucks with it.

[Margalis]

A lot of these games only had 6-8 months of development. And a lot of companies thought the Wii would do not so well and so didn't put in that much effort.

[stray]

A lot of these games only had 6-8 months of development. And a lot of companies thought the Wii would do not so well and so didn't put in that much effort.

OK, fair enough point...

Still doesn't explain that it's essentially an architecture that's already been around for awhile though, with enough tools and expert advice to enhance visuals to a more acceptable level.

[CmdrSlack]

A lot of these games only had 6-8 months of development. And a lot of companies thought the Wii would do not so well and so didn't put in that much effort.

OK, fair enough point...

Still doesn't explain that it's essentially an architecture that's already been around for awhile though, with enough tools and expert advice to enhance visuals to a more acceptable level.

There are still ugly games made for the Xbox and PS2 as well.  I don't think Wing Island is the death knell of the system.  For fuck's sake, I still can't find one in teh damn stores.

[stray]

It's not a death knell in and of itself per se. It's a symptom of the general carelessness many developers have approached Nintendo platforms in recent years. It's not an isolated case.

[EDIT] I'm really struggling to think of titles NOT made by Capcom and Nintendo that were really pushing the GC hardware. And hell, even Nintendo (and whoever they were shoving the work to) doesn't do that all the time either.

Err..Actually, the new Wii Sonic looks pretty nice, I guess.

[schild]

Ironically, Nintendo's first party game. Also: That's what people who wouldn't spluge for a PS3 or 360 built up while waiting for the Wii, savior and redeemer of the working class.

Too bad they didn't make a game called broken dreams.

[Margalis]

Or a game called "been there, done that - now with enhanced sweat graphics."

See...this debate can go on forever...and is incredibly stupid.

Novel idea: buy the system you want!

[schild]

Nope. These days it's Buy All Three Systems. This isn't Genesis vs. SNES.

[stray]

Or a game called "been there, done that - now with enhanced sweat graphics."

Sure whatever. Fighter sequels are fine by me. Fine as fine can be. Especially for a series that's only had one sequel. I'll take an enhanced Bushido Blade over some turd that

1) the developers wouldn't care about anyways (because the users keep on leading them to believe that they will all settle for shit, even when it's completely unnecessary)

and

2) wouldn't even be ideal with a Wiimote. First person motion for a game dependent on side cameras (or at best, isometric) is retarded. The Wiimote is not the right tool for every job. Not even in a minor way, as standard controllers are. It's not a valid alternative. Sure it has it's strengths, but it has some (dare I say it) game fucking breaking weaknesses too. And this would be one of them.

Also, I'm not trying to instigate a system war. I'm not offering some either/or scenario here. For the last time: I like the Wii. I like it just as much as any fanboi here. In fact, I'd say that I might even like it more for the simple reason that I recognize both it's strengths AND weaknesses, and don't try turn it into Robot Jesus. I like it more because I'd rather spare it from those silly expectations. I want to see it be good at what it's obviously good at, and stay the hell away from what it's obviously bad at. And bottom line: I like it more because I will end up having 20 to 30 more games than those cheap bastards when it's all finished with.

But this is all beside the point -- Which was simply that both the GC and Wii are capable of power, but aren't taken advantage of enough.

[CmdrSlack]

Nope. These days it's Buy All Three Systems. This isn't Genesis vs. SNES.

Maybe for people like you, who spend their disposable income entirely on games and movies.  There's plenty of people out there that can reasonably afford one console, but not all three.  Since they are entirely a luxury item, none of them are utterly essential.  Gaming doesn't HAVE to be a career or a pretentious art boy hobby.  Some people just want to play a game or two now and then.  It's true, they're out there.

[Roac]

Nope. These days it's Buy All Three Systems. This isn't Genesis vs. SNES.

These days most people like to do things besides sit on a couch.  Hell, I think I play games more than anyone I know IRL and there's no way I can burn through all the games I'd like to play just on two consoles (PS2/Wii).  For that matter I'd be happy with just one; the only reason I got a Wii when I did is because the wife likes to play 2p stuff on it, and that's a bonus for me.  I'm hardly the poster child for healthy recreational activities, but fuck man.

Get

Out

More

[stray]

Dude, c'mon. This is a gaming forum.

Or at least it should be.

If you take the time to TALK about games on the net , then it doesn't matter how many "more" games Schild or anyone else plays than you. It's a big enough hobby to put you far, far out of the norm too.

And if you actually aren't that far from the norm, then why talk about them so much? That's just weird.

[CmdrSlack]

Dude, c'mon. This is a gaming forum.

Or at least it should be.

If you take the time to TALK about games on the net , then it doesn't matter how many "more" games Schild or anyone else plays than you. It's a big enough hobby to put you far, far out of the norm too.

And if you actually aren't that far from the norm, then why talk about them so much? That's just weird.

That doesn't mean that owning all three consoles is required.  I think that's the point.

[stray]

Owning all consoles has less to do with not getting out enough than it does 1) not being a cheap bastard and 2) going where the games are at. They all demand attention.

Besides, he never said one should get all of them now. We have about 4 or 5 years to see what they all have to offer (well....maybe...I think Microsoft would love to have 3 year cycles instead of 5).

[schild]

It took me 3 years and a hell of a modding scene to convince me to get an Xbox. Even then, I bought it for 1. Ninja Gaiden, and 2. Xbox Media Center.

I almost never condone getting a machine at launch for people besides myself and people that actually buy games new.

I like to pretend that people that wait to buy new games used don't exist around these parts.

[Roac]

If you take the time to TALK about games on the net , then it doesn't matter how many "more" games Schild or anyone else plays than you. It's a big enough hobby to put you far, far out of the norm too.

Of course I'm outside the norm.  I even went so far as to say exactly that in my last post. The difference between Schild and I, and the criticism that I'm making, is that unlike him I don't expect anyone else to be like me.  I don't really expect anyone to buy one console, let alone two or three.  I don't care if Schild or anyone else buys all three consoles.  I don't care that it's his mission in life to buy all the titles for all three consoles. The joke is where he thinks that he's the norm, or that buying all three consoles is what you're somehow "supposed to do".

Margalis is right, buy whatever system you like.  Or none of them, if you don't like any of them.  Or all of them if you do.  Yes, this is a gaming forum, and as such it boggles me that Schild either honestly doesn't understand, or at best won't take seriously (I hope that's it), that a lot of people like the Wii who won't get anything else.  No buyer's remorse, no regret.  They're doing what Margalis suggested; got what they enjoy.  And Schild is right behind him, shitting on that statement for people not buying up all three.  I said he needs to get out more not because he needs to game less (even if he might), but because he needs to get it through his head that other people aren't him.

These days it's not Buy All Three Systems.  These days, it's If You Buy A System And Aren't Sure You Like Gaming, You Will Probably Want A Wii.  Because hey, it's got lots of family friendly stuff, has a friendly/fun controller, plus just enough of other genres to keep those sorts of people interested.  Soon as you point that out though he reacts like you shot his kitten and fed it into a lawn mower.

Owning all consoles has less to do with not getting out enough than it does 1) not being a cheap bastard and 2) going where the games are at. They all demand attention.

It's not being cheap.  It's that most people don't care.  He does, I guess you do, and I do.  That's fine.  Most people don't.  Nor do any of the consoles demand attention.  Family and friends demand attention.  Gaming is an affordable and enjoyable luxury.  Don't confuse them. 

Edit: spelling

[HaemishM]

Owning all consoles has less to do with not getting out enough than it does 1) not being a cheap bastard

No, I'm going to have to be snotty here about this one.

$600/$500 is TOO FUCKING MUCH. That's not being a cheap bastard, it's just too fucking much for a console. Period. It's turning a console into a luxury item, and when you talk about owning all 3, schild is on fucking crack. Buying all 3 of the previous generations of consoles, if bought at release, would cost a grand total of $800. This generation? It costs $1250, and that's not even counting the cost of an HDTV to really get the full effect of 2 of those consoles. I mean, seriously, do you honestly think that's an acceptable price point for anyone? Do you really not understand that that's a fucking insane price increase from one generation to the next, one that is pretty unprecedented in the history of the industry?

You are talking about the cost of one good computer, one smallish HDTV, a downpayment on a car. People who have families, kids, girlfriends, wives just don't toss that much money down the drain on fucking consoles, or much else, at least not without financing the shit and paying more on the interest. Middle class folks don't have that kind of disposable income. It's not being a cheap bastard and fuck you for claiming it is. Especially not when you consider that games run $50-$60 eacb on those systems.

A cheap bastard won't buy a Wii at Target because it's $249.99 but will buy one at Wal-Mart because it's $249.47. A cheap bastard is not someone who balks at a $600 console.

[CmdrSlack]

Also, some of us "cheap bastards" have more important stuff to spend our cash on....like kids and mortgages.  I ended up with an Xbox and PS2 in the last generation.  I bought the Xbox for KOTOR.  At the time, I was single and a student.  Now I'm not single.  I have a kid.  I will be buying a Wii if I can ever find one.  I am sure that I'll eventually get a 360, but it may be a refurb and it won't be for a while. 

Maybe all three consoles deserve some attention for having nifty games, but that doesn't really mandate their purchase.  Perhaps if you want to call yourself a hardcore gamer (hardkore?) but not otherwise.  I'm fully aware of all three new consoles, yet I don't own any of 'em.  They have my attention, otherwise I wouldn't post in threads like this.  Fact of the matter is that I'll likely never own all three.  It really pisses me off, because Sony's cockblock pricing is what's keeping me from buying what I consider to be the best brand of console.

[schild]

The people here aren't most people.

The people here are here because they like gaming.

The Super Nintendo was $250 when it came out and I'm pretty sure the Genesis was $300. Super Nintendo RPGs cost $69.99 at release. Final Fantasy 6 or Chrono Trigger anyone?

I don't expect people around here to buy all 3 consoles because I did. I do expect them not to bitch and moan at all because they can't afford to or don't think they're "gamer" enough. That's just a crock of shit.

Edit: Oh, I understand why people like the Wii. I understand why they have no remorse - hell, it's a new system. Even Stray is feeling the hurt with the PS3. It just took a while. What kills me is that people don't remember how shitty the N64 and Gamecube libraries were.

[schild]

Really, I could care less what people buy. But people knocked me for buying a 360 and then a PS3 at launch because OMG THERE ARE NO GAMEZ. Look at you fuckers with your Wii. Who's the jackass now? Now I have a 360 with a shitload of games and a cheap Blu-Ray player. You have a white box that played Zelda once and a bunch of half-assed party games.

Edit: I have that white box also. So at least I have some perspective.

[Roac]

The people here aren't most people.

The people here are here because they like gaming.

No, most people come here to bitch about gaming.  Anyone who pipes up and says they like some specific game gets assraped.  Just look at you and the Wii; you can't stand letting people talk about how they like it.  You get your kicks by shitting on them.  You're still doing it.  That's fine, it's your site and all, but don't bullshit about it.

The Super Nintendo was $250 when it came out and I'm pretty sure the Genesis was $300.

Closer to $200 for both.  Considering inflation, that's roughly $300 today.  Here is a decent pic showing relative values (Unadjusted values).  However, the SNES also came with Super Mario World, whereas the PS3 and 360 come with... just the console.  So you can take $50-60 off the SNES price if you want to do a tighter comparison, which puts you at $200-225 in today's money. 

What kills me is that people don't remember how shitty the N64 and Gamecube libraries were.

It isn't that people forget (although some do), but that at $600, you better fucking have a GOOD experience.  The Wii is less than half the cost.  It's targeted for more casual players, so the games you do get are likely to last longer in relative terms even if they're about the same in absolute terms.  But hey, even if the buyer is the sort who will burn through the Wii library before some of the new titles comes out it isn't a huge deal, because they can buy a 360 AND a Wii for almost the same price as a 360.  The 360 has a good library at the moment, is much cheaper than the PS3, comperable graphics, and better online components.

Dropping $600 on something and admitting that there is anything shitty about the purchase is just wrong.  The reason it's shitty is because anyone dropping that much on a console is likely to play the hell out of it.  It's not wrong on the Wii because a) it's way less cash, and b) people just don't play as much on it.  They don't want to, not becuase they dislike it, but because they're not that "hardkore".  They like gaming on a Wii, but they like other things too, whether that be another console or another hobby.