"Wii to Follow in DS's Footsteps" - Reggie

[bapenguin]

GamesIndustry.biz (http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=18950) has a few select quote from Nintendo of America president Regie Fils-Aime. Reggie addresses all that talk of the Wii-60 movement. Nintendo's stance? We don't want no stinkin' Wii-60!Fils-Aime went on to dismiss suggestions that the Wii will become the second home console of choice for consumers who have already purchased a PS3 or Xbox 360, stating: "I'd much rather have the consumer buy a Wii, some accessories, and a ton of games, versus buying any of my competitor's products."

We just want a stinkin release date!

[Scaryboy]

And a stinkin' price. Can't exactly call yourself a value system without it!

[51|RandoM]

I like Reggie. Instead of Jay Allard trying way too hard to be hip and cool, Reggie is just Reggie, and if you don't like it, tough shit. I know which one ends up cool in my book, lol.

Together with Miyamoto he gives Nintendo an excellent 1-2 punch when it comes to press events.

[bapenguin]

I like Reggie. Instead of Jay Allard trying way too hard to be hip and cool, Reggie is just Reggie, and if you don't like it, tough shit. I know which one ends up cool in my book, lol.

Together with Miyamoto he gives Nintendo an excellent 1-2 punch when it comes to press events.

Frankly I think they are all tools, including Reggie. If you don't think he's acting up there, than that's just plan silly. He's a very good salesman is all.

[Kelegacy]

My sources tell me the console was released on April 17th, 2005. Apparently it's on store shelves now, and has been for over a year! Check behind the copies of Kao the Kangaroo and Tak 2.

[Xaerin]

Oh, so now they ARE competitors? Pfft.

[51|RandoM]

Frankly I think they are all tools, including Reggie. If you don't think he's acting up there, than that's just plan silly. He's a very good salesman is all.

He's acting like a good salesman. Jay Allard acts like he thinks he's Moby or something.

In other words, Reggie is selling us on perceived business acumen, where Jay is selling us on his ability to accessorize and use trendy slang.

http://www.geekonstun.com/mt/archives/hd_allard_050605.html

[GunnyMo]

Heh, I guess Reggie hasn't talked to Miyamoto who said they weren't looking to compete with 360 and PS3 and that they were happy to be the 2nd choice.

[Kelegacy]

In terms of gameplay, the Wii will compete with the PS3 and 360 and do extremely well. Afterall, despite being a next-gen system, the 360 really offers nothing new in terms of gameplay. Graphics, and a good online system. The Wii uses slightly updated graphics and has incredible potential for new gameplay experiences. I'd go with gameplay over eye candy any day.

[GunnyMo]

Afterall, despite being a next-gen system, the 360 really offers nothing new in terms of gameplay.

You might want to add the PS3 in there as well. A poorly designed, tacked on, ten year old technology gyro doesn't actually count as "gameplay". :p

[Savok]

Fun fact: "Reggie" is in fact the chin while the rest of the body is simply the chin's host.

[EvilBob46]

Nintendo is getting cocky.

[crashedout]

If it follows the DS then I can wait for smaller, better console with a lower price and games that are more than a gimic. Cool.

[jeffool]

Shiggy's a yippie, "Let's all have fun!"
Reggie's a yuppie, "No free ride, bitches!"

[saran_js]

Ooh, it's Nintendo getting cocky now ? Before this it was like Wii-60 all the way... and Nintendo was rocking... now that Nintendo is going to compete against your poor 360, it's Nintendo suxs ?
Look out buddy, your xbox360 slip is showing.

Nobody wants to play second hoot to somebody else. Nintendo is making the right moves by snubbing Moore and his lame-ass remarks about Nintendo being second fiddle. I'm surprised that Nintendo kept quiet for this long.

[Rirath]

Afterall, despite being a next-gen system, the 360 really offers nothing new in terms of gameplay. Graphics, and a good online system.

This is where we disagree and I say that just like with the PC, a faster processor and more horsepower under the hood enable bigger, better gameplay over last gen. It's not just a matter of looking pretty, it's a matter of being able to do more than before. Like, the tons and tons of zombies on the screen on Dead Rising. And considering how many of you guys are absolutely nuts over Live Arcade, I'd say that counts too.

[jacktion]

Reggie is just a salesman. But a reelly good one. Reely good. He worked for Guiness for goodness sakes! That's all I need to know I like you.
I don't think we'll see Reggie getting a fake tattoo and going "Extreme!1" mountain biking anytime soon. Thank goodness. The way that microsoft's marketing department forces those frontmen to caper around and dress up is just embarrassing. Poor bastards.

And you can see that Reggie is not going to be happy with Nintendo being a number two console. He wants it all.
Miyamoto did say that they weren't competing with the other guys but they are in a way. They are both game systems that you hook up to your tv. Just like a hyundai and a ferrari are both machines that transport people around. But would you say that hyundai takes away customers from ferrari? Probably not. But more hyundais are sold than ferraris. But ferrari still makes money. So I think that everybody will do ok this next generation. There is enough consumers to go around.

[Kelegacy]

This is where we disagree and I say that just like with the PC, a faster processor and more horsepower under the hood enable bigger, better gameplay over last gen. It's not just a matter of looking pretty, it's a matter of being able to do more than before. Like, the tons and tons of zombies on the screen on Dead Rising. And considering how many of you guys are absolutely nuts over Live Arcade, I'd say that counts too.
Having hundreds of enemies on screen isn't a new gameplay feat. Dead Rising is great, but I can't imagine you couldn't do much of the same things on the original Xbox. Graphics ARE the primary jump with the PS3 and 360. That doesn't mean I will like the systems any less, but the Wii is tackling something entirely different, which is a godsend for gameplay.

I have yet to play a game on the 360 where the gameplay was any different than what is offered in games on the Xbox.

[EvilBob46]

This is where we disagree and I say that just like with the PC, a faster processor and more horsepower under the hood enable bigger, better gameplay over last gen. It's not just a matter of looking pretty, it's a matter of being able to do more than before. Like, the tons and tons of zombies on the screen on Dead Rising.

Bigger, better gameplay? Stuffing hundreds of enemies on screen doesn't equal better gameplay. It's not revolutionary either, nor is Dead Rising superior to last generation's top action titles.

And considering how many of you guys are absolutely nuts over Live Arcade, I'd say that counts too.

Despite of the fact that Geometry Wars supposedly makes use of all the 360 cores, 90% of the stuff on Xbox Live Arcade could run on a regular Xbox if properly optimized.

[Frogleg Special]

A confident Nintendo is good for most gamers. It will produce more games and more innovations.

[GunnyMo]

Having hundreds of enemies on screen isn't a new gameplay feat. Dead Rising is great, but I can't imagine you couldn't do much of the same things on the original Xbox. Graphics ARE the primary jump with the PS3 and 360. That doesn't mean I will like the systems any less, but the Wii is tackling something entirely different, which is a godsend for gameplay.

I have yet to play a game on the 360 where the gameplay was any different than what is offered in games on the Xbox.

So I'm confused as to why that is bad (which seems to be infered by the tone of your post). Other than graphics and the DVD capability, PS2 wasn't a "next gen" leap over PS1 to use your logic. I don't think a next gen leap needs to redefine the gaming experience every time.

Sure there will be innovations every few console generations but why change what works? That is really what worries me about the Wii. How long before the novelty wears off and people tire of moving around to play games in their living room. Let's face it: people don't play video games for exercise (DDR is the exception). How long will it be before Nintendo is forced to release a more familiar controller for games that don't use the motion sensor? I have a hard time jumping for joy to play every single Wii game with a motion sensing controller. The system looks like a lot of fun, initially, but what about long term? Maybe in a few months I'll be eating my words and the Wiimote will be as engaging and addicting as everyone says. I hope so.

I just don't think you can poo-poo (yes, I said poo-poo) MS's "next gen" leap to the 360. It is most assuredly a next gen leap from the XB in terms of technology, graphics and gameplay.

[Sparky]

So, how much longer do you think it will be until ***, Sorny or Nintendo brings back Romero's famous 'Make us its bitch' campaign from the Ion Storm days?

Cause that would be xtreme! Then add a blonde with augmented boobs to the side of Reggie, J Allard or Ken, a Ferrari, and you've completed the trifecta!

[Mr.Green]

In terms of gameplay, the Wii will compete with the PS3 and 360 and do extremely well. Afterall, despite being a next-gen system, the 360 really offers nothing new in terms of gameplay. Graphics, and a good online system. The Wii uses slightly updated graphics and has incredible potential for new gameplay experiences. I'd go with gameplay over eye candy any day.
I'm looking forward to get my hands on a Wii (...) just like the next guy but please give me a break with that new gameplay crap. The only thing we know for sure is that they offer us a new input method but what new gameplay? I haven't seen anything so far that couldn't be done on another console using button presses instead of dancing.

Don't get me wrong, it MAY just make games that much more fun but please stop acting like the Wii is the holy grail of gaming and that games can't be fun and innovative without that funky controller. For all we know, we might get sick of it after a month and realize that pressing buttons was pretty freakin convenient.

And by the way, if you think the 360 doesn't offer anything new in terms of gameplay then you haven't played Dead Rising (Ed: well yes, you did but anyway...). This game could NOT have been done on the previous console. Too many characters on screen, too many objects you can use, too many textures and whatnot. Now you're probably gonna tell me that this doesn't really make the gameplay that much different but then I'm gonna reply that waving a controller around wouldn't make it that much different either.

[Kelegacy]

So I'm confused as to why that is bad (which seems to be infered by the tone of your post). Other than graphics and the DVD capability, PS2 wasn't a "next gen" leap over PS1 to use your logic. I don't think a next gen leap needs to redefine the gaming experience every time.

Sure there will be innovations every few console generations but why change what works? That is really what worries me about the Wii. How long before the novelty wears off and people tire of moving around to play games in their living room. Let's face it: people don't play video games for exercise (DDR is the exception). How long will it be before Nintendo is forced to release a more familiar controller for games that don't use the motion sensor? I have a hard time jumping for joy to play every single Wii game with a motion sensing controller. The system looks like a lot of fun, initially, but what about long term? Maybe in a few months I'll be eating my words and the Wiimote will be as engaging and addicting as everyone says. I hope so.

I just don't think you can poo-poo (yes, I said poo-poo) MS's "next gen" leap to the 360. It is most assuredly a next gen leap from the XB in terms of technology, graphics and gameplay.

I think the PS2 (and PS3) as well as the 360 offer little new over their prior consoles besides graphics. I am not limiting myself to the 360, but because the 360 is out right now, it was the easiest to make a point with.

And you don't have to move around to play games. You can sit on your ass and do the exact same things. Why do you need to dance around while playing tennis? The Wii doesn't correspond to your feet, just your hand.

Swinging a bat with a controller IS a gameplay leap. Oblivion is not. Again, that doesn't mean I don't like the consoles or games, but the Wii is trying to offer experiences that the 360 and PS3 care nothing about. They are playing it safe, while Nintendo is going out on a limb.

[Kelegacy]

And by the way, if you think the 360 doesn't offer anything new in terms of gameplay then you haven't played Dead Rising (Ed: well yes, you did but anyway...). This game could NOT have been done on the previous console. Too many characters on screen, too many objects you can use, too many textures and whatnot. Now you're probably gonna tell me that this doesn't really make the gameplay that much different but then I'm gonna reply that waving a controller around wouldn't make it that much different either.
Wrong. Dead Rising could be done, but it would mean worse graphics. Less complex character models would mean you could stuff a ton of enemies on the same screen, but they wouldn't look as nice.

If hundreds of enemies on screen is new gameplay, than Ninety-Nine Nights is going to be the most revolutionary game ever created.

[GunnyMo]

Wrong. Dead Rising could be done, but it would mean worse graphics. Less complex character models would mean you could stuff a ton of enemies on the same screen, but they wouldn't look as nice.

If hundreds of enemies on screen is new gameplay, than Ninety-Nine Nights is going to be the most revolutionary game ever created.

Ok but you can use that same argument to say Dead Rising could be on the Atari 2600. Just because you could theoretically do it on an older system doesn't mean the current one is any less. Dead Rising is a next generation game that could not be done in the form it is now without a next gen system. Period. And DR is much more than just lots of zombies on screen.

There is much more to the 360 and PS3 than just a graphical leap. It's already been said in other threads so I'll stop thread jacking.

[bapenguin]

Everyone always hears next gen and expects to be blown away with all these "amazing new worlds" etc. Don't fool yourself and buy into marketing hype. What is next-gen? it's taking the previous generations content and gameplay and EXPANDING on it. That's it. That's how it's always been. Every iteration of X title is an expansion on some other title. It grows, it evolves...but it never really changes.

[Kamalot]

If hundreds of enemies on screen is new gameplay, than Ninety-Nine Nights is going to be the most revolutionary game ever created.
I'm going to have to agree with Kelly today. More of the same isn't revolutionary or innovative. Sometimes, small steps are made to gameplay through the use of graphics, such as real-time shadows giving away the location of enemies; but these are minor gameplay improvements compared to control changes such as the analog stick, plus pad and Wiimote.

I applaud a company for taking the new road, instead of trying to build the same machine bigger, faster and stronger than before. Anyone can add power to something, it isn't at all innovative.

That said, the 360 is a fine machine. It is polished with a great interface and provides a fantastic online experience. The controller is the best I have ever used. It is the best 'traditional' video game machine available.

[Salesmunn]

Frankly I think they are all tools, including Reggie. If you don't think he's acting up there, than that's just plan silly. He's a very good salesman is all.

I have to agree with you. I don't know if anyone is buying his spin, aside of the fanboys of whom he already owns.

Following in the "footsteps" of another console doesn't sound too unique or innovative to me. I thought they were going to break new ground here? Poor choice of words.

[Gil]

Back onto Reggie, he's always felt like an dorky infomercial host to me and I've never and will never understand why people like him.

[Mr.Green]

Wrong. Dead Rising could be done, but it would mean worse graphics. Less complex character models would mean you could stuff a ton of enemies on the same screen, but they wouldn't look as nice.

If hundreds of enemies on screen is new gameplay, than Ninety-Nine Nights is going to be the most revolutionary game ever created.
I'm sorry but the graphics are part of the gameplay experience. With your logic Dead Rising could probably be ported to the Coleco Vision. I mean let's just replace the zombies with squares, get rid of the physics model and put a dozen weapons instead of a thousand. Let's scrap the voice overs and cut scenes as well, they add nothing to gameplay anyway right? There, you have the same game. It just doesn't look as good.

Yeah I know I'm pushing it but where do you draw the line? When are the graphics "good enough"? When does improving them stops adding to the immersion and the gaming experience?

Do you really think moving your hand around will make pong that much better? That's what's new gameplay to you? Some of you guys might wanna level your expectations a bit cause you could be in for a major deception. I hope I'm wrong, I really do.

Edit: GunnyMo would you please stop writing what I wanna say faster and better than I do! :D

[r3dwiz]

Combat With Large Mobs of Enemies has been done before, see Dynasty Warriors. Combat using almost anything as a weapon? That's pretty new to me.

As Long as the Wii can provide the games, then Nintendo's fine. If you have more games on your "secondary" system than your primary... it isn't as "secondary" as you thought.

[Savok]

Back onto Reggie, he's always felt like an dorky infomercial host to me and I've never and will never understand why people like him.
Because unlike everyone else, he actually says things I'm interested in. He's not trying to be something he isn't, he's not sitting there talking about the size of his dick, he's not spending hours on how many things they've fucking sold.

He's a salesman, he's selling me a product, for normal people that doesn't involve tattoos, it involves giving us information on the product and showing us all the great stuff it can do.

Also, the chin.

[Kelegacy]

I'm sorry but the graphics are part of the gameplay experience. With your logic Dead Rising could probably be ported to the Coleco Vision. I mean let's just replace the zombies with squares, get rid of the physics model and put a dozen weapons instead of a thousand. Let's scrap the voice overs and cut scenes as well, they add nothing to gameplay anyway right? There, you have the same game. It just doesn't look as good.

Yeah I know I'm pushing it but where do you draw the line? When are the graphics "good enough"? When does improving them stops adding to the immersion and the gaming experience?

Do you really think moving your hand around will make pong that much better? That's what's new gameplay to you? Some of you guys might wanna level your expectations a bit cause you could be in for a major deception. I hope I'm wrong, I really do.

Edit: GunnyMo would you please stop writing what I wanna say faster and better than I do! :D

I think that's being a bit extreme. In 25 years of gaming, I hope the Atari or Coleco has been eclipsed in almost every way. But the same atmosphere, pretty much the same graphics (Dead Rising isn't an enormous graphical leap, you have to admit) could be done on the Xbox. What I am saying is that Nintendo is taking a goddamn leap while the 360 and PS3 are taking baby steps, despite having 10x the power increases from last gen. The Wii isn't a world apart from the Gamecube's power, yet look at what it is trying to achieve.

[Salesmunn]

I'm sorry but the graphics are part of the gameplay experience. With your logic Dead Rising could probably be ported to the Coleco Vision. I mean let's just replace the zombies with squares, get rid of the physics model and put a dozen weapons instead of a thousand. Let's scrap the voice overs and cut scenes as well, they add nothing to gameplay anyway right? There, you have the same game. It just doesn't look as good.

Yeah I know I'm pushing it but where do you draw the line? When are the graphics "good enough"? When does improving them stops adding to the immersion and the gaming experience?

Do you really think moving your hand around will make pong that much better? That's what's new gameplay to you? Some of you guys might wanna level your expectations a bit cause you could be in for a major deception. I hope I'm wrong, I really do.

Edit: GunnyMo would you please stop writing what I wanna say faster and better than I do! :D

It's amazing the hype people are putting on this thing. Nintendo keeps saying that the non-gamer is their target because the controller is so simple. In reality, it isn't simple at all.

The Atari joystick is simple. ONE BUTTON. If I were a non-gamer, the Wii controller would scare the crap out of me.

[Kamalot]

Following in the "footsteps" of another console doesn't sound too unique or innovative to me. I thought they were going to break new ground here? Poor choice of words.
Unless the footsteps of the DS were away from the norm, off the beaten path, breaking new ground, daring to try new things, proof that fun is more important than horsepower and *gasp* innovation.

[benig]

I find a lot of this chatter inane. For one, graphical improvements do allow new gameplay experiences. Larger worlds with more advanced physics models allow developers to create and do things that could not have been done. I could jump through a window in say, Resident Evil 4, but those were pre-canned animations. What if I could jump through any window I wanted? With realistic glass going everywhere? Majora's Mask kept track of hundreds of characters as they went about their lives. Games like Oblivion are stepping up this number to the thousands. Eventually, you will be able to model a more lifelike environment. These are not revolutions, they are evolutions of ideas we have had for decades. Many of the things that developers have wanted to do with games are finally able to be done. There is no scale where Revolution > Evolution. They are both necessary to our industry.
The Wii is introducing a new control scheme and a new way to interact with our game consoles. This does not mean it has better gameplay, it is in its own way addressing the concerns that developers have had with the input-methods of older consoles. This is addressing these concerns in the same way the processing power boost is addressing the problem of tight, static worlds. From all accounts, the Wii controller succeeds at providing a new way to play games that will hopefully be used to offer us a better feel in our games. I have felt for a long time that the dual-analog control setup was holding back games. It forces developers to work along one track, because there are a limited number of ways to develop your game for it to work well with the gamepad as we know it. The Wii addresses this. Yay.

[benig]

It's amazing the hype people are putting on this thing. Nintendo keeps saying that the non-gamer is their target because the controller is so simple. In reality, it isn't simple at all.

The Atari joystick is simple. ONE BUTTON. If I were a non-gamer, the Wii controller would scare the crap out of me.They have never said it is simple. It is intuitive.

[Kamalot]

Back onto Reggie, he's always felt like an dorky infomercial host to me and I've never and will never understand why people like him.
Have you SEEN or HEARD the people who speak for Microsoft and Sony? He does not have to be a rock-star to be better than MS and Sony asshats.

[Kamalot]

I could jump through a window in say, Resident Evil 4, but those were pre-canned animations. What if I could jump through any window I wanted? With realistic glass going everywhere?
How on EARTH does this help gameplay at all? Better glass animations do not improve gameplay.

[Mr.Green]

I think that's being a bit extreme. In 25 years of gaming, I hope the Atari or Coleco has been eclipsed in almost every way. But the same atmosphere, pretty much the same graphics (Dead Rising isn't an enormous graphical leap, you have to admit) could be done on the Xbox. What I am saying is that Nintendo is taking a goddamn leap while the 360 and PS3 are taking baby steps, despite having 10x the power increases from last gen. The Wii isn't a world apart from the Gamecube's power, yet look at what it is trying to achieve.
I really think Dead Rising is visually stunning but that's highly subjective. I guess I fail to see the "goddamn leap" you see with the Wii. What I've seen are button presses replaced with movement, and aiming/camera control that's probably better than an analog stick but still second to a mouse, or so it seems. The games look the same to me, only with different controls.

[crashedout]

They have never said it is simple. It is intuitive.

Maybe....I still am concened about the feedback the wiimote with provide. Will it simulate hitting an object or not? Or will you just have to swing and hope for the best? I look forward to trying it but from the footage for E3 I am worried. I hope it follows the DS, I have come around on that one.

[Kamalot]

I hope it follows the DS, I have come around on that one.Isn't that what the original post is about?

"Wii to Follow in DS's Footsteps" - Reggie

[benig]

How on EARTH does this help gameplay at all? Better glass animations do not improve gameplay.If you do not see the difference between being able to jump through windows in canned situations and being able to interact with an environment such that objects like windows are destructible by your player character then you are beyond my help.

[Kelegacy]

I really think Dead Rising is visually stunning but that's highly subjective. I guess I fail to see the "goddamn leap" you see with the Wii. What I've seen are button presses replaced with movement, and aiming/camera control that's probably better than an analog stick but still second to a mouse, or so it seems. The games look the same to me, only with different controls.
Swinging a bat with a controller isn't a nice gameplay deviation from, say, pressing the X button? That's where the leap is. This isn't a Tiger Electronics gadget either, it's a Nintendo creation that is integral to the Wii's gameplay strategies.

Button presses being replaced by movement IS an innovation in the console world.

[benig]

And the DS is a very good model for the wii's success. Many of you seem to be stuck on "oh man how am I going to play XXXXX with that damn controller" and "How will I do XXXX in game YYYY!". That's not the point, and that is the hole that DS developers got stuck in early. They tried to retrofit Mario 64, Rayman, Castlevania (among many others) to the DS to use its unique functions, but many stumbled. It was when they realized that they shouldn't be trying to make old games feel new again, but make a completely different kind of game that the DS clicked. See : nintendogs, Trauma Center, Kirby.

[bapenguin]

Button presses being replaced by movement IS an innovation in the console world.

Video games have always to some degree attempted to mimmick life. The controller has always seperated you from that. If the controller ties you to it and you completely mimmick life...is that innovative? Or is that evolutionary? Or both? Possibly neither?

[Mr.Green]

Swinging a bat with a controller isn't a nice gameplay deviation from, say, pressing the X button?
In all honesty, I don't know because I haven't tried it yet, and neither have you. Sure it sounds more fun but for how long? EA came up with a fantastic contol scheme for their Fight Night games that's a lot more organic and logical but a lot of people, especially online, prefer using buttons because it's quicker and easier.

Anyway, like the other guy said, both companies offer evolutions in the gaming experience, not revolutions. I just wish the Wiimote would work on the 360. Can't we just have it all for crying out loud? :)

[Xenkylm]

He's acting like a good salesman. Jay Allard acts like he thinks he's Moby or something.

lol, Jay WOULD think Moby is the pinnacle of cool. It's like when your parents try to rap.

[Xenkylm]

Other than graphics and the DVD capability, PS2 wasn't a "next gen" leap over PS1 to use your logic.

You're right. It wasn't. There hasn't been a true "next" generation since PS1/N64 era. This would be the second "Old-gen Upgrade," though, which is essentially the same thing? No?

The only real innovation from the previous generation was XboxLive, which shouldn't be downplayed. It actually did change the way console games are played, and expected to be played... but now it's a standard, so what else is new in this generation from MS/Sony?

I'm not saying the Wii is the ultimate-totally- amazingly-fresh- new-next -generation, but at least the strategy is to change the fundamental way games are played. It's all about $$$ when it comes down to it, but I'd rather the business model involve new games instead of sucker punches.

/tired of playing clones of FFVII,MGS, GTAIII, and TombRaider

[Eran Hawke]

enhanced interactivity with an environment does not make a better game by itself.

If I make a game where I can punch holes in the drywall or pull nails out of wood, is that a better game than say, Zelda?

Which is more interactive, being able to break anything in a game compared to limited things vs. pressing a button to swing a sword or swinging a sword?

I also seem to remember a game called Dewcent that would let you shoot out the lights. The rooms would get dark. why can't I shoot out the lights in dead Rising?

Dead rising is cool, but it is more of the same, only bigger.

[Watership]

I like Reggie. Instead of Jay Allard trying way too hard to be hip and cool, Reggie is just Reggie, and if you don't like it, tough shit. I know which one ends up cool in my book, lol.


Why is there this thing about J Allard being compared to other Marketting execs. He's not.. he was in charge of developing the Xbox and Xbox 360. Previously he wrote a famous early 90s memo as a software engineer at Microsoft, that changed the companies direction, and is the reason most of us started to use the internet on windows OSs.

Reggie is from sales and marketting dude who's background Proctor & Gamble and Pizza Hut. It's Better to compare Reggie to Peter Moore, also in Marketting.

Peter Moore could kick the crap out of Reggie. Just with his golden tongue.

[GunnyMo]

Edit: GunnyMo would you please stop writing what I wanna say faster and better than I do! :D

That's the power of Pink, baby! :p

[Rirath]

enhanced interactivity with an environment does not make a better game by itself.

If I make a game where I can punch holes in the drywall or pull nails out of wood, is that a better game than say, Zelda?

Yet, when that same advancement does come to Zelda, you'll claim it's the best thing since sliced bread. Twilight Princess should look absolutely amazing compared to OoT, and even Wind Waker. It should definitely have enhanced interactivity with the environment, some of it through the new controller.

Many folks have echoed my thoughts exactly, we're in the evolution phase of consoles. Nintendo does it too, just look at how many Gameboy systems we had. GC was just an upgraded N64. We really haven't had a true revolution since the N64 / PS1. Despite that though, the PS2 was still a large leap over the PS1 in my book. Compare FFX and X-2 to FFVII / VIII / IX, and most reasonable people will see what I mean. The same goes for the GC and the 360.

I enjoy evolutions and look forward to the Wii's supposed "revolution" as well. They really pulled through with the DS. Though, I fully expect to be playing the Wii in "evolution" mode with a standard controller, too... starting with Super Smash Bros.

[Shifteh]

I predict the Wii will be released for this Christmas. Mark my words ; )

[EternalGamer]

After reading these damn console arguments for like the 100th day in a row, I vow to never contribute to this bullshit again. If any of you don't see the value in the same consoles I like, well fuck you. I don't care if you don't like them. That means your an asshole with no sense of value or merit, and I don't much care whether or not assholes enjoy themselves. ;)

[Vagabondllama]

I don't understand how people can say that the jump from the N64/PS1 -> PS2/GCN/Xbox era wasn't a true next gen jump. There, the changes in graphics were so profound that yes, that was a true jump. More power allowed for SO many more options in gameplay.

But now, the same isn't so true. Is there anything really major that is being done on the 360 that couldn't have been done on the Xbox?

[jBusy]

Why is there this thing about J Allard being compared to other Marketting execs. He's not..
I guess you didn't see his keynote at game developers conference '05. He introduced The Xbox360 as part of the HD Generation. Regardless if he is an marketing exec or not, Microsoft was using him as one.

edit: Allard was also listed as one of Top 35 Entertainment Execs according to His profile (http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/exec/jallard/default.mspx)

[Xenkylm]

I don't much care whether or not assholes enjoy themselves.

you obviously don't visit the same porn sites i do.

[GunnyMo]

you obviously don't visit the same porn sites i do.

:D

That has to be the best comeback I've read in a long time. New sig time!

[Xenkylm]

New sig time!

Thanks gunny, i'll try not to let it go to my head ;)

[DoubleUranium]

Funny, the message I got out of "Wii to follow on DS's Footsteps" was to wait for the 2nd iteration, as the first one will be vastly inferior to the improved model that comes out 6 months later.

[Achilles]

Having hundreds of enemies on screen isn't a new gameplay feat. Dead Rising is great, but I can't imagine you couldn't do much of the same things on the original Xbox. Graphics ARE the primary jump with the PS3 and 360. That doesn't mean I will like the systems any less, but the Wii is tackling something entirely different, which is a godsend for gameplay.

I have yet to play a game on the 360 where the gameplay was any different than what is offered in games on the Xbox.Didn’t you just say that you can’t imagine that you couldn’t do much the same thing on the original Xbox? That would indicate that the gameplay was different than the games offered on the Xbox, since that one didn’t exist there. So your first and second paragraphs conflict. You have a theory that this could have been made on an Xbox, Playstation 1, SNES, Atari, or whatever, but it wasn’t, and it’s not going to be ported to the Wii. Horsepower does matter.

[Xenkylm]

Didn’t you just say that you can’t imagine that you couldn’t do much the same thing on the original Xbox? That would indicate that the gameplay was different than the games offered on the Xbox, since that one didn’t exist there.

wait, why does that indicate different gameplay? He said that he can't imagine that they can't do the same thing, meaning he CAN imagine that they CAN do the same thing. The fact that a game doesn't currently exist for a given console doesn't mean that a similar game couldn't be made for the system. Is it impossible to imagine that they could make an xbox game where you run around killing zombies? No. Would it look less shiny? Yes.

Does the fact that it looks more shiny on the Xbox360 influence the gameplay? That's up to you to decide, but he's saying it doesn't. The first and second paragraphs are the same.

***edit***
that should be: "the first and second paragraphs both accurately reflect his opinion."

[Achilles]

wait, why does that indicate different gameplay? He said that he can't imagine that they can't do the same thing, meaning he CAN imagine that they CAN do the same thing. The fact that a game doesn't currently exist for a given console doesn't mean that a similar game couldn't be made for the system. Is it impossible to imagine that they could make an xbox game where you run around killing zombies? No. Would it look less shiny? Yes.If he has to imagine it, instead of just pointing to an example of a game with the same gameplay as Dead Rising, than the first Xbox didn't have it. There's more to getting a lot of guys on screen than just making them shiny/not shiny. How many bones the model has is a consideration, the perf hit from them interacting with collision, etc. They made Zombie games for Xbox, they had Stubbs. Did it have the same gameplay as Dead Rising?

[RMan]

If he has to imagine it, instead of just pointing to an example of a game with the same gameplay as Dead Rising, than the first Xbox didn't have it.
Yea, the current generation of consoles lacks proper zombie tech. Although games like Dynasty Warriors display enough characters to produce the same gameplay, this only demonstrates the current generation's samurai warrior tech, which is clearly less fun than the wonderful new zombie tech available in the 360 :).

[Xenkylm]

There's more to getting a lot of guys on screen than just making them shiny/not shiny.

hmm...
http://picnic.ciao.com/uk/90379.jpg

[Kamalot]

hmm...
http://picnic.ciao.com/uk/90379.jpg
LMAO!

So true. You could make dead rising using paper sprites, and it would be damn cool!

[Achilles]

hmm...
(image from Mario with a bunch of skeleton sprites on-screen)
I guess 'lots of guys on screen' is a kind of gameplay, whether the game's an action game, a side-scroller, or even whether it's in 2d or 3d. And any game that has lots of guys on screen has the same gameplay as Dead Rising. :rolleyes:

Some folks on this site have a very strange idea of what gameplay is. I can only assume people are arguing this because Nintendo has decided to not go with a powerful system, and they want to believe that their favorite system will be able to do all the same gameplay stuff as the 360 + more from the gameplay inducing controller.

[Xenkylm]

I guess 'lots of guys on screen' is a kind of gameplay, whether the game's an action game, a side-scroller, or even whether it's in 2d or 3d. And any game that has lots of guys on screen has the same gameplay as Dead Rising. :rolleyes:

Some folks on this site have a very strange idea of what gameplay is. I can only assume people are arguing this because Nintendo has decided to not go with a powerful system, and they want to believe that their favorite system will be able to do all the same gameplay stuff as the 360 + more from the gameplay inducing controller.

Fair enough. I'm not trying to be a fanboy, I'm just trying to be a bit of a devil's advocate. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that you can make a different, and better, gaming experience with the 360 than you could with the current generation systems. If we're claiming that certain things can _only_ be done with the technology from this generation, though, then I'm going to pick nits. The issue I have is the claim that certain games are "only possible" on the 360. Dead Rising doesn't seem like that kind of game yet, nor do any sports games, but Mass Effect does. Seamless interactive CG-movie-like graphics are definitely next-gen material in my book, and that's why I'll get a 360 when those games start coming out more regularly (and when I've saved up enough).

**edit**

This perspective leads to a lot of nintendo fanboyish comments because it is FAR easier to say exactly what it is you can do with your Wii (ahem) that you can't do with current systems. Those claims just become much easier to substantiate.

[Achilles]

This perspective leads to a lot of nintendo fanboyish comments because it is FAR easier to say exactly what it is you can do with your Wii (ahem) that you can't do with current systems. Those claims just become much easier to substantiate.I’m glad to hear you’re not a fanboy. :)

For the Wii controller; the Wii airplane flying game that’s going to be included in Wii sports. The gameplay is the same as many games that have come out in the past. You fly around and go through hoops. This is exactly the same as some of the games off Pilot Wings for SNES. The birds are a neat way to show how many hoops you’ve gone through, but that’s all that’s different as far as what you're doing. The controls are part of gameplay, but there’s two schools of thought on this; controls should be intuitive and transparent (people shouldn’t even notice the controls after a short time, and concentrate on what they’re doing in the game only), and controls should be part of gameplay (aiding to create the challenge of the game, having a learning curve, being part of the ‘fun’). I’d be curious to hear what you think about that Xenkylm. (I picked the Wii Sports game because it's a straightforward example)

I agree that it’s easiest to point to the Wii and say ‘it won’t be like playing the 360’. But there’s a lot more to a game than just how you move your guy around on screen and shoot. There’s a huge difference between the controls on Halo PC versus Halo Xbox, but the gameplay is the same. So I’m not sure how much controls count for gameplay when you sit down and start playing.

[Xenkylm]

Well I i'm a half-fanboy by history, since I had nintendo systems growing up, but I try to be as objective as possible. The trick is to shout "I LOVE [insert company] SO MUCH!" out loud while typing, that way the videogame gods don't know you're cheating on them ;)

There are a couple of ways you could look at the Wii airplane game and the controller. On one hand, controlling it with the Wiimote doesn't _inherently_ add value to the game. The fact that it's different isn't necessarily better, and "changing the controls" can happen in a lot of ways (saying you're using the triangle button instead of the square button is a change too, but doesn't add value either).

If, on the other hand, using the Wiimote actually makes you feel more connected to the plane on the screen, then I'd say that it's different in a meaningful way. The benefit of using a Wii instead of a SNES, even though the basic idea (fly through a hoop) is the same, would be that you are experiencing that event in a new way. If Nintendo is telling the truth, then it's actually going to be a pretty enjoyable experience and will feel fundamentally different from playing a traditional game. If they're lying to us, which they might be because they're a company like everyone else, then our arms will be tired and we'll wish they stuck with a regular controller.

Have you ever played any of the bongo games they made for GC? You can play them with a regular controller, but they're substantially more fun with the bongos. Similarly, I'd imagine Guitar Hero would suck without the guitar controller. These are situations where the method of interaction adds a LOT to the gameplay experience, but they're obviously gimmicky and limited. The Wiimote has an advantage of being pretty ambiguous. It adds a similar method of interaction, but isn't specifically designed to be a bongo or guitar or hula hoop or gun.

I'd expect that some early Wii games will overuse the controller gimmick, but that ultimately most developers will figure out how to use it in moderation in ways that add to the experience. If they don't, the system will absolutely bomb.

**edit**
ew, what a long post. sorry.

[RMan]

Well, some people are lumping all aesthetics in with gameplay, and my definition of gameplay doesn’t include that. For me, all these things contribute to the overall game experience, but gameplay refers to the mechanics of how the game plays.

I think a useful comparison would be the story/plot of a movie as it compares to gameplay. A movie like The Matrix likely couldn’t have it’s story told effectively without the technology, as little as ten years before it was made a movie like The Matrix would have been a shadow of what it was because of technical shortcomings. However, fast forward to today, and there are no movies that couldn’t have their story told just as effectively at that time. This, I think, is the same thing happening with the newer games, they look better (just as The Matrix would look better if made today) but the stories aren’t better because of the technology, and there isn’t anything dramatically new being done with the technology, CGI in movies is here, doing it’s job, and now it’s pretty much getting light incremental changes, not huge changes in what can be accomplished in storytelling.

The more powerful technology in games is certainly noticeable, but not significant in terms of changing the experience, much like recent improvements in film CGI.

[RMan]

The controls are part of gameplay, but there’s two schools of thought on this…and controls should be part of gameplay (aiding to create the challenge of the game, having a learning curve, being part of the ‘fun’).
I’d never really thought of this as a school of thought so much as something developers just deal with. I’ve never seen a game where they intentionally make the controls complex or challenging, even though I might sometimes think they’re too complex, I always feel they tried to make the controls transparent. In short, I’ve seen games where it can be argued that it’s a part of the game, but not really a desired part.
There’s a huge difference between the controls on Halo PC versus Halo Xbox, but the gameplay is the same.
They are the same game, you know, don’t you think they made an effort to make them the same?

[Durandal-217]

Nintendo is over.

[Achilles]

Well I i'm a half-fanboy by history, since I had nintendo systems growing up, but I try to be as objective as possible. The trick is to shout "I LOVE [insert company] SO MUCH!" out loud while typing, that way the videogame gods don't know you're cheating on them ;)

Have you ever played any of the bongo games they made for GC? You can play them with a regular controller, but they're substantially more fun with the bongos. Similarly, I'd imagine Guitar Hero would suck without the guitar controller. These are situations where the method of interaction adds a LOT to the gameplay experience, but they're obviously gimmicky and limited. The Wiimote has an advantage of being pretty ambiguous. It adds a similar method of interaction, but isn't specifically designed to be a bongo or guitar or hula hoop or gun.

I'd expect that some early Wii games will overuse the controller gimmick, but that ultimately most developers will figure out how to use it in moderation in ways that add to the experience. If they don't, the system will absolutely bomb.In my opinion most people are fans and take sides in the areas they enjoy and get engrossed in (as most of the people on this site are about games). Frankly it’s fun to root for something in a competition, and the game industry is a competition, plus since we’re all gamers we’re probably naturally competitive. But yeah, trying to remain objective is the difference between being a fan, and being a parrot for your favorite company’s marketing division (or Troll).

I see what you’re saying about the bongo games, DDR as well, and you mentioned Guitar heroes. I’d toss Steel Battalion onto that pile too. In each case the controller, and controls helped make the game more fun and unique. I should have said in my last post, of the two schools of thought (which can also be blended, but you find people in those camps frequently), I think games can be designed around either and be successful. Even with regular controllers the game can be about the controller, for example Katamari Damacy wouldn't have felt the same if you were playing it with a different controller; it wouldn't have felt like you're rolling a ball.

I agree that it remains to be seen (and will probably mean the success or failure of the Wiimote) whether developers get hung up on making games about the controller and if they're able to go the other rout with it and make the controls intuitive and transparent, instead focusing on what the player's able to do in the game.

[Vanthar]

They are the same game, you know, don’t you think they made an effort to make them the same?

The point he's trying to make is that the controls had absolutely no affect on the gameplay of Halo 2, so why should the controls on the Wii have any affect on the games?

[Achilles]

They are the same game, you know, don’t you think they made an effort to make them the same?They clearly made an effort to make them the same, but the controls are still very different. My argument is that different controls don't nessesarily make for different gameplay. Same with the Wii Sports flying game. It's got different controls, but it's the same gameplay. It may feel better because of the different controls, in the same way that one or the other Halos feel better, but at the end of the day it's gameplay is the same as Pilot Wings.

As an aside: Work would be really tedious today if this discussion wasn’t going on. Evil Avatar rocks.

Edit: Vanthar got it. For example, Zelda:TP. Same gameplay, new controller. Will it be more fun/ less fun with the Wii controller? Are Wii games always going to have to be about the controller in order to be really engaging? SB is a mech game, there are many others like it but it’s unique because of the badass controller, the controller is why the game's fun as well. The gameplay is the similar, but slower because it's actually harder to control with the unique controller. The controller makes things that would otherwise be tedious, acceptable, which allows them to put stuff in like washing your windshield.

But I wouldn’t want to play Chromehounds with that controller because it’s inefficient and it would slow the gameplay down. And if it were the only controller for mech sims you'd never find a really fast paced mech game because it couldn't support it. Having a more general controller can allow you to make it all about the gameplay of mechs moving around on screen, and if that controller works really well, than you can make that gameplay faster paced and more detailed, where games that focus on a controller typically have either slow or simple gameplay.

[RMan]

The point he's trying to make is that the controls had absolutely no affect on the gameplay of Halo 2, so why should the controls on the Wii have any affect on the games?
Yea, I understood his point, the short answer is ‘Because the developer wants it to.’
They clearly made an effort to make them the same, but the controls are still very different. My argument is that different controls don't nessesarily make for different gameplay.
Absolutely, I was trying to make a point that was likely too subtle. Basically, you used Halo in a discussion of why the Wii won’t be significantly different in gameplay terms than the 360. The point I was making is that they didn’t want Halo to be different, it’s the same game. IOW, the Wii doesn’t inherently/automatically make games have better gameplay, it opens up new options to the developer. However, if they choose to make the same game, as in Halo, then it won’t be significantly different. I still think many are considering ‘How is it going to help make my games better?’ when the real question should be ‘How is it going to help make better games?’. In case that was too subtle, the point was that if simply retrofitted on existing games as a pure control replacement, with no change to the game mechanics, then yea, it’s comparable to Halo for 360/PC.

[Achilles]

In case that was too subtle, the point was that if simply retrofitted on existing games as a pure control replacement, with no change to the game mechanics, then yea, it’s comparable to Halo for 360/PC.Honestly that's a lot of what I'm seeing at this point in the Wii's portfolio. How different is the gameplay in Red Steel, Metroid 3, Mario Galaxy, Wii Sports, or Zelda. If you're going to take something like Mario and give it a Wii control scheme while keeping the gameplay largely the same, I don't see a lasting advantage (after the novelty of the new controls wears off) unless the Wiimote is actually a better controller for platformer gameplay than the 360 or Game Cube controller would be.

I'm sure the Wii controller will be better for some types of games, such as point-and-click games like surgery games, or games that need motion like fishing games. But I can't see it being a better controller for many of our existing genres. What would you say would be the upcoming game that really shows off the unique, original gameplay that will result from the Wii controller? Something unlike platformers, shooters, flight sims, etc that we currently have. I'm thinking maybe Elebits, not that it looks that interesting, but it's the sort of point and click game that'll work better with the Wiimote than it would with a regular controller.

[Xenkylm]

What would you say would be the upcoming game that really shows off the unique, original gameplay that will result from the Wii controller?

As far as new IPs are concerned, maybe that Wii Music game they've shown from time to time (though I don't know if/when that would be coming out), and I'm not sure exactly what they have planned for Rayman in terms of controls, but Ubisoft certainly seems to be excited about it (however biased they may be ;)).

I'm actually kinda interested to see Madden for the Wii, though that could potentially be a fiasco. It certainly could show off some of the unique gameplay (if you're using control scheme as a marker of gameplay) offered by the Wii. Oh, and this is probably because i'm an idiot, but I really love monkeyball, so I'm kinda excited about it on the Wii. The sensitivity of the analog stick on the GC was always a bit too much for me, so I'm looking forward to actually tilting something to make my monkey move.

I hope that the launch shows that you can do fun stuff with the Wiimote, but that you can also play a normal game without having to do too much with it. If nothing else, at least there's the virtual console ;)

[destoo]

I think a useful comparison would be the story/plot of a movie as it compares to gameplay. A movie like The Matrix likely couldn’t have it’s story told effectively without the technology, as little as ten years before it was made a movie like The Matrix would have been a shadow of what it was because of technical shortcomings.


Good thing you're mentionning this 10 year figure.
Because 5 years before the matrix it happened. It's called "Ghost in the shell".
I find the storytelling of GitS better than that of The Matrix, but that's just my opinion.

[RMan]

Honestly that's a lot of what I'm seeing at this point in the Wii's portfolio. How different is the gameplay in Red Steel, Metroid 3, Mario Galaxy, Wii Sports, or Zelda.
Yea, but don’t you think that you’re placing an unreasonable expectation on the system? You want it to show it’s full potential well before it’s launch, I don’t think nearly the same expectations are being placed on the PS3 and 360 by it’s fans. I think the launch games (disregarding possible quality shortcomings) are what they should be, they need to be games that are going to attract people, not try to exploit the controller at every turn. IOW, for the vast majority of early adopters, they’re going to be very interested in the controller, but that doesn’t mean they’re ready to handle the crazy stuff, like anything new they need to be eased into it. I do think the Wii sports one looks like a pretty significant change to me, but it’s also something that’s easy to understand and intuitive, so I don’t think it’s going to be intimidating to many players. Anyone remotely interested in the Wii is not going to be turned off by the lack of crazy new games, and having the crazy new games and trying to sell them to people not yet comfortable with the system/controller would cause them not to get purchased, and lost in the shuffle, I think (which would be a bad indicator to publishers thinking of doing crazy things).
If you're going to take something like Mario and give it a Wii control scheme while keeping the gameplay largely the same, I don't see a lasting advantage (after the novelty of the new controls wears off) unless the Wiimote is actually a better controller for platformer gameplay than the 360 or Game Cube controller would be.
You have a point, but I don’t think for one second that Mario Galaxy will be like that (although I do expect many launch titles to be that way for the reasons I listed above). They’ve always done pretty creative things with the Mario titles, and I’m quite sure they’ll do much more than the little we’ve seen so far.
What would you say would be the upcoming game that really shows off the unique, original gameplay that will result from the Wii controller? Something unlike platformers, shooters, flight sims, etc that we currently have.
Well, assuming the thing works as advertised, it’s advantages are not just simplicity, but increased range and subtlety. It’s going to be at a disadvantage compared to traditional controllers for some traditional games if they’re based on very quick response and quick actions (likely fighting games are the best example here). Also, these may be quite different in the way they play, but still feature platformer, shooter or flight mechanics (I mean, not much is left if you remove every action we’ve ever seen in a game, but we can look at how they can play differently/better). I’m going to skip by the obvious sword fighting, fishing (ugh?), boxing, golf, etc. since they could clearly be cool. I think the marble madness/monkey ball stuff would be fun, it’s an obvious and predictable game mechanic. I think a more traditional downhill skiing/snowboarding game would be great, we really haven’t seen these in some time (the SSX style games are great for tricks and what not, but devalue the subtlety of the mechanics), this could have ducking and jumping not based purely on timing.

I still think a sculpting ‘game’ could be wicked cool, perhaps with a pictionary style party game integrated into it. With some kind of file sharing system, that could be an exceptional product.

I still think people are greatly underestimating what it could do for ‘shooters’, as long as you stop thinking about shooting :). Being able to use other weapons, like an intuitive grenade you can bounce effectively, a discus like throwing weapon, gravity manipulator (with spatial positioning you could slam enemies into walls and floors, way more fun than HL2’s gravity gun), whip, or other melee weapons. I’d also love to see a more FP dungeon crawler where I could use two controllers and independently assign weapons, that’d be some exceptional configuration ability (although it’d require using a digital pad for movement, it’d still be cool).

A fun party game would be a Jenga (sp?) like physics based party game, where you have a structure and you have to pull blocks out every turn you get (kinda requiring the subtle movements of one of those operation games) without the structure falling down. This would be great for a downloaded game, since it’s be very easy to develop. I have a feeling there will be almost no end to the number of downloadable party games available.

Games like darts, bowling, and pool could also be made really fun and certainly would make good downloadable games.

Discs of Tron, that would be nice.

A first person view remake of Paperboy (ahh, that takes me back). As odd as this one sounds, I think it would rock.

I don’t know, I know I’ve posted other game concepts here before, but these aren’t bad for full games. I think many games, like Mario Galaxy will get nice little mini-games, like tightrope walking, catching/throwing stuff, flipping pancakes, or some other cute things that will really immerse people into the games, but not many whole games derived off of radical shifts in design philosophies (esp. early on), but frankly, just the things I’ve listed here will be plenty for me to be very happy with the system.

[RMan]

Because 5 years before the matrix it happened. It's called "Ghost in the shell".
Well, I was talking about live action stuff, I think that one was only anime. Hand animated stuff really isn't limited by technology (at least not that I can imagine).

[Kamalot]

Games like darts, bowling, and pool could also be made really fun and certainly would make good downloadable games.And would draw in lots of people who already enjoy those types of games. They could be inexpensive to develop and loads of fun to play. :D

[Eran Hawke]

Isn't there a Bob Ross painting "game" coming to Wii? That is something I could totally get into.

Wii seems to offer a lot of possibilities for a widerange of applications aside from just gaming and movie watching. I could see a whole range of creative software for Wii that would allow people to create art, music and 3D models. Maybe Corel will make a version of Painter for Wii.

[Achilles]

Yea, but don’t you think that you’re placing an unreasonable expectation on the system? You want it to show it’s full potential well before it’s launch, I don’t think nearly the same expectations are being placed on the PS3 and 360 by it’s fans. I think the launch games (disregarding possible quality shortcomings) are what they should be, they need to be games that are going to attract people, not try to exploit the controller at every turn.This is true, launch games usually don’t make full use of anything that the system has to offer. For example the DS launch vs several months later when we start getting things like Nintendogs. But the argument is that the 360’s power isn’t giving us any different gameplay than we could have on the Xbox. Well those are launch games as well, the system’s only been out for 9 months, but already people say that the power won’t give us anything other than what we already have. In the same way people say that the Wii will be a revolution in gameplay, so I think it’s fair to ask ‘where are all the games that are turning the console industry on its head?’.
You have a point, but I don’t think for one second that Mario Galaxy will be like that (although I do expect many launch titles to be that way for the reasons I listed above). They’ve always done pretty creative things with the Mario titles, and I’m quite sure they’ll do much more than the little we’ve seen so far.Maybe, I mean you’re assuming they’re going to because you believe in Nintendo, basically. I look at the new Super Mario Bros, and it barely uses the touch screen or the dual screen, and honestly it’s a good game (great?), and probably wouldn’t be as good if they did try to use those things, because they just don’t do very much for platformers. I don't think Nintendo will shoe-horn anything into a Mario game just to show off what the controller will do. They'll probably have some mini games in there, but largely the gameplay will be something very similar to past Mario games.
I’m going to skip by the obvious sword fighting, fishing (ugh?), boxing, golf, etc. since they could clearly be cool. I think the marble madness/monkey ball stuff would be fun, it’s an obvious and predictable game mechanic. I think a more traditional downhill skiing/snowboarding game would be great, we really haven’t seen these in some time (the SSX style games are great for tricks and what not, but devalue the subtlety of the mechanics), this could have ducking and jumping not based purely on timing.

I still think a sculpting ‘game’ could be wicked cool, perhaps with a pictionary style party game integrated into it. With some kind of file sharing system, that could be an exceptional product… (bunch of other cool ideas.)Those are some cool ideas (a lot of them), but I was asking more; at the moment what game would you point to that’s been announced. You answered this with your first paragraph, explaining why we haven’t really heard about anything yet.

So when you get your system what game will you invite friends over to check out what next-gen gameplay the new controller can do? When I got my 360 I got a crowd of people together to check out how cool the games looked and how intense they were with all the effects going on and whatnot. What’s going to be the game for the Wii that gets the friends to run out and buy one I wonder.

Eran mentioned the Bob Ross painting game, which could be something to show off new gameplay options the controller would bring. Xenklym mentioned the conducting game, which is something that you probably couldn’t do on a regular controller. I just wonder what the Wii’s Nintendogs will be. What will be the game that makes everyone go ‘ah! That’s why this thing doesn’t have a regular controller’.

[RMan]

In the same way people say that the Wii will be a revolution in gameplay, so I think it’s fair to ask ‘where are all the games that are turning the console industry on its head?’.
Yea, you have to use your imagination a bit to understand it’s significance over the 360, since the 360 is a year ahead of the Wii. However, I suspect you aren’t so much interested in understanding why the Wii can have such an impact as you are validating your position that it won’t. Come back in a year, compare to what the 360 has done now, and I’m quite sure you will acknowledge the impact, or at least be unable to intelligently deny it.
Maybe, I mean you’re assuming they’re going to because you believe in Nintendo, basically. I look at the new Super Mario Bros…
NSMB is more of a remake, it wasn’t supposed to be different. Mario 64 was a significant departure from previous titles and made great use of the new controller, and many other Mario/Donkey Kong titles are very creative (although they didn’t use new controllers, except Donkey Konga or whatever it was called). It’s based on history, not blind faith, as you suggest. To bypass these other examples and hold up the remake as a mark against them clearly shows a lack of objectivity and exhibits blind disbelief.
They'll probably have some mini games in there, but largely the gameplay will be something very similar to past Mario games.
Well, they’re not going to change what already works, wouldn’t expect them to, but judging by history they’ll do plenty to validate it’s usefulness.
So when you get your system what game will you invite friends over to check out what next-gen gameplay the new controller can do?
Hehe, I don’t get game systems to prove anything to anyone, but rather to have fun with them. I’m sure many of my friends would love the Wii sports thing. Verdict’s still out on Red Steel, the indications of weak swordplay knocked it way down the list for me. Monkey Ball is likely a good choice, don’t know much about the FF game, but I’ll definitely give it a whirl. Really interested in Trauma Center too.
What’s going to be the game for the Wii that gets the friends to run out and buy one I wonder.
I think the launch lineup makes that very clear. Again, immersive control is important to many people, it doesn’t represent well in a screenshot, but it’s still very important. Few of my friends are driven by graphics, much less demand the highest quality graphics, so ‘showing’ them how cool the games are won’t be hard if they play well.
What will be the game that makes everyone go ‘ah! That’s why this thing doesn’t have a regular controller’.
No clue what game will really be the one that wow’s a particular player, there are so many options (which is the reason people are so excited by it) and so many ways an individual player can be impressed. I’m sure even with the suggestions I have, which are fairly obvious, few players wouldn’t be struck with how unique and engaging the controller/games can be, so it seems quite obvious that with all of the developers working on it there will be plenty of proof of it’s worth (to those who choose to acknowledge it, that is).

[Achilles]

However, I suspect you aren’t so much interested in understanding why the Wii can have such an impact as you are validating your position that it won’t. Come back in a year, compare to what the 360 has done now, and I’m quite sure you will acknowledge the impact, or at least be unable to intelligently deny it.I’m not enamored with the Wii, no. My position is not as irrational as you think it is. I try not to assume any untested idea will work as it’s being sold to me by the company that’s making it.NSMB is more of a remake, it wasn’t supposed to be different. Mario 64 was a significant departure from previous titles and made great use of the new controller, and many other Mario/Donkey Kong titles are very creative (although they didn’t use new controllers, except Donkey Konga or whatever it was called). It’s based on history, not blind faith, as you suggest. To bypass these other examples and hold up the remake as a mark against them clearly shows a lack of objectivity and exhibits blind disbelief..Princess Peach wasn’t a remake and it barely used the touch screen or dual screen either. Love the insults though. The reason it would be based on faith is because they’ve released many gameplay videos, and people have played it, and you can clearly see that the gameplay doesn’t have that much that could only be done with the new controller. You’re saying that you’re quite sure they’re going to do much more than the little we’ve seen so far: That’s faith, I’m sorry. They’ll do it if it works, they won’t if it doesn’t, there’s no guarantee.Hehe, I don’t get game systems to prove anything to anyone, but rather to have fun with them.It’s not about proving anything to anyone. It’s about showing them why you’re excited about your new system/ game. And what they could be playing as well. I guess I’m just more social than that about gaming. I’m always talking to people about what I’m playing and showing off what’s new and upcoming. It might help that I’m surrounded by 150+ gamers every day and all of them want to see what new games are doing. Heck even putting an old, crappy PS1 game in the machine draws a crowd of people curious to see what it’s like and how it plays.I think the launch lineup makes that very clear. Again, immersive control is important to many people, it doesn’t represent well in a screenshot, but it’s still very important. Few of my friends are driven by graphics, much less demand the highest quality graphics, so ‘showing’ them how cool the games are won’t be hard if they play well.The launch lineup makes it clear what games you’d show your friends to get them excited about the Wii? I guess your answer to the question was Wii Sports, Trauma Center, and Monkey Ball. No clue what game will really be the one that wow’s a particular player...I'll take that as a dodge.

[MaxDuo]

Huh, I like a lot of RMan's ideas....


I still think people are greatly underestimating what it could do for ‘shooters’, as long as you stop thinking about shooting :). Being able to use other weapons, like an intuitive grenade you can bounce effectively, a discus like throwing weapon, gravity manipulator (with spatial positioning you could slam enemies into walls and floors, way more fun than HL2’s gravity gun), whip, or other melee weapons. I’d also love to see a more FP dungeon crawler where I could use two controllers and independently assign weapons, that’d be some exceptional configuration ability (although it’d require using a digital pad for movement, it’d still be cool).

I like that gravity manipulator idea. THat'd be pretty awesome. But what came to mind for me after reading that.... Was the Star Wars game. Everyone was always: "Wii remote.. Star Wars..... OMG LIGHTSABER DUELS!!!!!" What about force abilities through the remote as well? Like shoving people around or moving things... And maybe they could put some kind of thing in wher eif you did it too hard you might mess up... For if the game had a system where you slowly got better w/ the force. Like when you are a master you could move things really fast. But when weak you'd move them slower... I had thought of this also because I remembered that trailer from a few weeks ago for some new Star Wars game where it just showed the jedi beating Storm Troopers up with the force (and taking down a Tie Fighter as well...).

The dungeon crawler thing would be cool. A whip would be interesting for a Castlevania game maybe... But it'd be cool to have a game where you say "I'm right/left handed" and then you could hold the wii remote in your dominant hand. So in the game you'd use cool weapons with the remote since you could do more with it... And your weaker hand would use more standard weapons (or a shield) and just have more basic motions... Since the nunchaku has only motion sensing rather than the position sensing... But your character would be a representative of you in the game... RH people would use swords w/ their right and shields in their left... And LH people would do the opposite. Would be cool. And I figure that would make control easier as well.


A first person view remake of Paperboy (ahh, that takes me back). As odd as this one sounds, I think it would rock.
Haha, that would be excellent. I loved that game. Mainly because I liked to throw the paper at the wrong thing... like windows... people... cars... animals.... Yes. That was nice.

[random johnald?]

This is where we disagree and I say that just like with the PC, a faster processor and more horsepower under the hood enable bigger, better gameplay over last gen. It's not just a matter of looking pretty, it's a matter of being able to do more than before. Like, the tons and tons of zombies on the screen on Dead Rising. And considering how many of you guys are absolutely nuts over Live Arcade, I'd say that counts too.

...being able to do more than before. Like, the tons and tons of zombies on the screen on Dead Rising.

Anyone else remember State of Emergency?

[RMan]

You’re saying that you’re quite sure they’re going to do much more than the little we’ve seen so far: That’s faith, I’m sorry.
Well, from that perspective, I agree. Making assumptions about anything you haven’t seen takes a belief in an outcome. You have faith that Mario Galaxy will be more like NSMB instead of Mario 64 in terms of taking advantage of the controller, I have faith it will not, neither of us know. Personally, I think they’ve been very creative with the Mario titles using new controllers, but there aren’t very many examples of this.
It’s not about proving anything to anyone. It’s about showing them why you’re excited about your new system/ game.
Again, I think if they play Wii sports or something like that, it should be very clear. Seriously, it’s like expecting someone to validate why they love their wife. They can tell you reasons why they love their wife, but unless you and that person share the same exact values how can you expect to see eye to eye with them, and I would hope their love wouldn’t be dependant on your approval.
I'll take that as a dodge.
It most certainly is not, whether you realize it or not, you are asking a question that has no answer. What’s going to prove the worth of the controller or system to an unnamed friend of mine? Or is the question what game(s) can universally appeal to all my friends? Either way, it’s silly, all I can tell you is what appeals to me. Perhaps the problem is that there is no obvious generic shooter with great graphics that can validate the one thing the system excels at, is that what you want to hear? Perhaps you are insulted by that generalization, but that’s the only way to make the point clear. The Wii, IMO, is not about smacking a Halo game on it and expecting everyone to love the system for it, I’m perfectly happy with having no obvious killer app if that’s what you’re fishing for.

[RMan]

Haha, that would be excellent. I loved that game. Mainly because I liked to throw the paper at the wrong thing... like windows... people... cars... animals.... Yes. That was nice.
Thanks for the compliment, and yea, I really hope this one gets done. I love the idea of games using throwing mechanics, but you have to have something that's not so complicated in other respects. Any kind of on-rails movement like paperboy features would be great for games heavily using throwing mechanics (and I just love to predict lobbing in games).