If you’re a Nintendo fan you might want to check out Game Over by Daivd Sheff. It’s a little outdated, but it gives a pretty good overview of the company. In it, one of the big factors of the delay between the release of the Genesis and the SNES was because Nintendo was trying to come up with a cheap BC solution for NES games, because they didn’t want to leave their fans behind.
And look at all the Game Boy/DS releases. Breaking BC for the DSi took them almost 20 years.
Nothing is stopping devs from adding Wii Speak support to their online-enabled Wii games.
I think this is unfair - a number of 3rd party developers have put a reasonable amount of effort in Wii titles, only to have them bomb horribly. In part, this is because it’s hard to design games that don’t suck using the Wii motion control - in fact, traditional games ported to use it almost invariably suffer (Part of the gripe from those of us who like traditional games).
It’s not that 3rd parties aren’t TRYING to make good games for the Wii, it’s that they’ve failed repeatedly and are tired of it.
I’ve been on the Nintendo bandwagon since the Nintendo 64 and right now we have a Gamecube,a Wii and a DS. I also have a Playstation,but at the moment,the Wii is getting more play.
Some hard core gamers used to dismiss Nintendo as a kiddy console,but I think the Wii could change all that. After all,I wouldn’t really call Medal of Honor a kids’ game,nor would I call Silent Hill that,either. I love the Wii more than any other Nintendo console we have ever owned…the games are mostly fun,the graphics are decent and the remote is pretty intuitive once you have some practice with it.
I don’t play online games and have never felt an urge too. I could go online with my Playstation,but I just don’t want too. I’d rather scream obscenities at an actual person when I am playing (namely,my husband,who has carried “bump drafting” in NASCAR 2009 to ridiculous extremes)
I wonder if there are not as many third party games for the Wii because it is more difficult to program?
And this is why the Wii is unnecessary for the most part. If you can’t use the AWESOME motion controls of the Wii and have to revert to using standard controllers then why bother playing on the POS? Just play the game on 360/PS3 in it’s full feature and visual glory instead of the watered down turds that float on the surface of the Wii toliet?
And, it’s time to come to grips with the fact that the Wii isn’t THAT much cheaper than a 360 or PS3. You’re talking about consoles with 4-5 year life spans people. The 360 is like $50 more than the Wii and at it’s peak was only like $100 more than the Wii. That’s not some huge difference for a system you will have for 3-4yrs minimum.
I agree with this. Nintendo also had the edge when Wii just came out. Developers didn’t really know how to ustilize it, and some games just tacked on some lame motion function with traditionally control games that helped prolong PS2’s life. But There were some Core hits, with Resident Evil 4. I think the what games like that would be like for the HD systems, with the Wii controls. FPS’s would benifit, imho. It’s just that it’s harder and harder to look at a Wii game and not see ugly.
I think if Nintendo wants to win next generation, they would have to think of something altogether new, perhaps utilizing the Wii remote. I think the Virtual Council and Wii’s backwards capabilities, along with some GOOD WiiWare, (that use the controls in better ways than many mainstream games), make my Wii worth it. So I hope with whatever Nintendo’s thinking, it falls into what they’ve already created with a system that has ample means of playing past, present, and ‘future’ games.
Sorry, I missed a bunch of posts. So I’m not quite up to speed…
They better have spent that extra R&D cash wisely. I also wonder about their next portable… (I hear of a patents for ‘rumble’ styluses, not that it means will be seeing it, but it just makes you wonder what other crazy sh*t they’re thinking up.
Dude, it’s like… you’re trying to break balls. I’ve conceded to many of Wii’s problems, but if you think either of the other two company’s don’t have their flaws, then why don’t you pit the Wii and “Pii on it” there.
Wait, in post #29 you talk about Xbox & PS3 games getting into the motion controller market. But then you say they don’t dev for Nintendo because that motion control stuff is hard. Then they go and do it, blowing off Nintendo.
That about right, or am I misreading? Honest question, not being (too) snarky.
Well, if the developers don’t utilize the ability to make the voice chat over multiplayer and don’t put forth more innovations on that front, they’re pretty much losing (for me) as soon as the starter’s pistol goes off.
I’ve been a PC gamer since I tired of Colecovision. I have turned my nose up at every console since, because the graphics and control schemas have never compared favourably with PC games.
Why would I want to play a watered-down version of a game on a 360 or PS3 when I can play it on a PC in its full featured visual glory? There’s a reason that we refer to clumsy, uncoordinated people as “all thumbs.”
The Wii controller has a huge advantage over the “standard” console controller design. (It also has plenty of room for improvement in the next generation - better ergonomics, more refined sensitivity, and more inputs would be welcome.)
A game that is intelligently developed for this schema is a joy. It’s too bad they are so few and far between. For now, I am content to let my PC take 90% of my gaming load, and enjoy the hell out of the stellar Wii titles that come out.
On balance, even when it comes of ports of “traditional” games (like Call of Duty) to consoles, I’m probably going to prefer to play on a PC with all the bells and whistles. …but if I’m going to choose a console port, chances are I’ll have more fun with the Wii. Because those little controllers you like so much suck hard.
How else are you (generic you) going to find lots of other sane people to play online FPSes with?
You, personally, might have lots of online friends with whom you can play Modern Warfare 2 at the drop of a hat, but most people- myself included- don’t. You want to play the latest FPS, you have to jump online onto the public servers with all the unpleasantness that entails.
As you rightly point out later, “Casual Gamers” (think someone like your Mum or your non-geek wife/girlfriend) are a HUGE market at the moment. There’s a reason The Sims and its myriad expansions always seem to occupy most of the “Top Selling PC Games” spots.
People like that are the ones who would buy (say) Modern Warfare 2, load it up, click the “Multiplayer” button, and… not have a very good time.
The simple fact of the matter is that just because you’re fortunate enough to have lots of friends with a copy of the same game as you and the spare time to play it at the same time A) doesn’t mean everyone else does and B) doesn’t invalidate the points being made about the fact online gaming isn’t the wonderful, be-all and end-all feature that games companies are making it out to be, for reasons already explained and acknowledged by pretty much everyone who has ever played an online game.
No contradiction there. You see, here’s how it works:
Sony and Microsoft look at the Wii and all the money it’s making and go “HOLY CRAP! We need some of that pronto!”
Meanwhile, the people who actually DEVELOP software for these systems (which, by and large is -not- Sony and Microsoft - both of them do have their own in house devs, but obviously those folks are only developing for their consoles) try making stuff for the Wii, but by and large don’t really -get- it, and end up making a bunch of games with crappy controls. Which generally don’t go over well, and result in the relative failure of third party titles for that console. (Not that Nintendo has had what anyone would call strong 3rd party support for any of its consoles since the SNES).
These two phenomena are not really related. Sony and Microsoft aren’t making motion controllers because of all the awesome 3rd party software for the Wii, or because all the big name game developers are making stuff for the Wii and not the 360/PS3. They’re making motion controllers because the Wii has brought in a poo-ton more money for Nintendo than the 360 or PS3 have for Microsoft or Sony (the latter of which only stopped losing money on every PS3 sold fairly recently. I’m pretty sure Microsoft was losing money on the 360 for a while too, but not nearly to the tune that Sony was).
How many people do you -need- to play MW2? I sure don’t want to play it, Single OR Multi-player, but I remember back in the day when I -did- play FPS’s, having a pretty damn good time with 4 people. Do these games still support bots, or are they deliberately condemning you to annoying people? And even -saying- that I only know ONE other person who is interested in playing this game with me… and who happens not to live nearby, which is the better method: To play the game with him online and commiserate about how much the community sucks or to not play the game with him at all?
Also, I feel obliged to point out that it can’t be THAT hard to meet other players of these games who aren’t morons without having to commit to 4 hours of FPS X every evening to stay in the “clan”. If there can be casual guilds in MMOs, there can be casual clans in FPS’s. I bet there are probably about as many as there are crazy competitive ones. So for average joe gamer, it’s not a big deal.
Now yeah, Joe Casual I-Love-My-Wii-For-Wii-Sports-Bowling… guess what? He’s NOT BUYING Modern Warfare 2 anyway so the whole debate is…irrelevant. If you are going to try to make titles for Gamers (MW2 - hell, any FPS, period) then you bloody well better have features Gamers want. And any Gamer worthy of being called one could put in a little bit of legwork to find some folks to play with without having to endure the suck of the general Xbox live community. If he wanted to. Some people are quite content with just wading through the community.
Oh. Yeah. And the Great PC-games-are-just-better people might as well leave their baggage at the door. Until recently, there was no comparison between the titles available and by and large, there still isn’t - except for the FPS’s that the PC-games-are-best crowd are so fond of citing.
You buy a console because there are games on it you want to play. And there are plenty that are still there that aren’t on the PC. Want to play Bayonetta? Tales of Vesperia? Final Fantasy XIII? Fable III? Valkyria Chronicles? Okami? I guess you better buy a console. Want to play Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2? Well, if you’ve already got a PC that runs it, great, not everyone does, and some of the people who don’t do already own consoles for other games.
It’s not really a relevant comparsion, and I wish people would stop taking the “Oh god, why do you play those …console things, when you could just have everything so much better, faster, moddier and in higher resolution on your PC?” Well, let me count the number of console titles I own that are also available on the PC… one. Okay, that was easy. Now my choices with that one were: A) Try to play Prince of Persia with mouse and keyboard (snort Thanks, but playing Trine on the PC was painful enough.) B) Buy a gamepad to play it on the PC with or C) Just buy it for the console I already have, since some games do play better with a gamepad.
You buy the platform where the games you want are, and you play the games that come out on the platforms you have. That’s how it works. There’s no reason to play the PC-elitist card for the 114th time, unless there’s some sort of unwritten rule that someone HAS to do that in every thread that mentions a console.
The wii is now $200, the x360 is $250. If you want the wii motion plus you need to drop another $40. The $250 x360 buys you everything you need to start playing (including a MU, not an HD, but enough to save games and everything)
Quite simply the Wii isn’t nearly as capable as the ps3/x360. Not as much RAM, not as much graphical power, not as much CPU power. It quite simply is technologically inferrior, and CANNOT do what the x360/ps3 can. Not shitting on nintendo here, they made the decision on purpose. But developers want to take advantage of the high end hardware, and nintendo simply doesn’t have it
MS is by far the easiest system to program for because it’s basically a PC, same architecture and everything. I dunno which is more complicated between the wii and the ps3, but I know sony has the bad habbit of making their own architecture each time and their systems are notoriously difficult to program for. The 8-core cell isn7t helping, either, as it’s not multi-threaded and doesn’t have a separate chip for anti-aliasing. Eveyrthing has to be todl where everything is. Last gen Nintendo went with a chip that was similar in architecture to what Apple was using. So while it was more difficult than a PC (read: less familiar to game devs) it wasn’t a huge hurdle (the lack of memory on the 1.8 gig discs was, however). This gen I think it’s the same type of chip, but motion controls are where it gets complicated. There’s heaps of evidence that if you don’t do motion controls properly it ends in a crappy game
I stopped playing FPSes online because they just weren’t fun anymore, but even until fairly recently the Bots were practically useless and four human players and 28 bots on a large map wasn’t really any more fun than single-player vs 31 bots on the same map. Playing Battlefield 2 with four real people is not the fun extravaganza that games companies want people to think online play is.
Not play the game at all and find something you can enjoy together with a non-sucky community, I’d say.
Ah, the Pointy Haired Boss argument (“Anything I don’t understand can’t be that hard anyway”). A surprisingly popular but equally ineffective gambit, it must be said.
And now we’re seeing a rare combination- the Pointy Haired Boss argument and the “No True Scotsman” argument, in the same place- and they’re still both wrong!
Who are you trying to convince here- us or you?
Because basically confessing ignorance of how PC online gaming works and then saying anyone who disagrees with you isn’t a “real Gamer” before posting an entire “Consoles are awesome and are way better than PCs!” post isn’t a stellar way of getting your viewpoint across in a way that encourages people to respect it or take it seriously. Just saying.
Now, I agree with a lot of points you make here, however I disagree with your conclusions.
There are games aimed at casual gamers, which has become a huge market. There are also games aimed at the more traditional style of gamer (I hate using “hardcore”) who love FPSes and such. They are two different markets, and both have their place. Just because my girlfriend doesn’t enjoy playing an FPS online (she’s a mario kart girl) doesn’t mean there aren’t plenty of people out there who do.
As for online gaming, no it’s certainly not the end-all, be-all feature, but it is an important feature in a lot of games. You may not have fun, but a lot of people, myself included, have lots and lots of fun with online gaming. the XBL subscribers numbers are proof of that, and they’re willing to shell out $50 a year for the service. PSN has lower numbers but still a hefty community of online gamers. It’s not the super feature, but it’s important to a great many people, just a different group of people (and perhaps not so populated) as that which my girlfriend and other people inhabit.
The problem with Nintendo that I have is that they’ve completely ignored this large group of the more traditional gamers. It’s been very lucrative for them (this generation anyway, who knows about next as they’ve alienated a large majority their supportive fanbase in favor of a group that has no loyalties, a, and b, will be very hard to convince to upgrade to a new system).
So I know there are frustrations some people have with online gaming, but to literally millions of people it is seen as a very important, if not essential, feature in most modern games
(and sorry if this argument is all over the place, I’m just getting off of work and my brain isn’t quite all here)
Hardly. Pray tell how Nintendo’s first-party Wii games differe from generations past to such a degree to throw around the fallacy that they’ve “completely ignored the traditional gamer,” whatever that means. I’ve been gaming for 20 years and do not feel neglected at all by the Wii.
