Post by: MaryJane on January 18, 2007, 04:33:40 AM
I haven't heard anything about this Since pre-release.
It was something I was really looking forward to now it's another waiting game.
Are there even any rumors about this?
Post by: Edfishy on January 18, 2007, 05:18:22 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on January 18, 2007, 06:12:29 AM
Post by: Spak-Spang on January 18, 2007, 06:17:36 AM
Once again can we remind people that the system is only 2 months old...and any developers creating games are probably wanting to create actual full fledge Wii games instead of VC content right now.
What we do know is that the IGN staff are working on a secret original content VC game...so that is SOMETHING.
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 18, 2007, 06:21:43 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k I don't think original VC games are part of the plan.
Yes, they are.
I've personally inquired with Nintendo about just such a thing: they plan to do VC original content, but the top priority was the Wii launch.
We'll likely start seeing original content by the end of the year.
Post by: NWR_pap64 on January 18, 2007, 06:27:30 AM
And I agree, give Nintendo time. The Wii was JUST released...
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on January 18, 2007, 08:33:52 AM
Post by: Djunknown on January 18, 2007, 03:20:30 PM
Quote
What we do know is that the IGN staff are working on a secret original content VC game...so that is SOMETHING.
Link/Source?
This is going to be test of the 'new' Nintendo. Remember a little before the 'Cube's launch and a little after, all that was given were these vague plans for going online, Save for Phantasy Star.That never materialized. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt this time since they're already infinitely farther along they were 5 years ago...
Post by: Pale on January 18, 2007, 03:39:58 PM
GDC would be the perfect place for Nintendo to drop this bomb, as that is the best audience for the announcement. I will be there this year and I hope to find out some additional information on the subject.
Post by: ThePerm on January 18, 2007, 07:19:28 PM
Post by: MaryJane on January 18, 2007, 09:56:56 PM
But there isn't any news about original VC games. I forgot about IGN saying they're going to make a VC game, but since they made that announcement ever so long ago, there hasn't been any other mention of it.
Hopefully Pale, is right and Nintendo is just like; BOOM! "after the release of pokemon we'll be increasing the number of VC games released each week to 10, not including the original games we will be releasing at 3 a week." That would be nice.
Post by: JonLeung on January 19, 2007, 01:58:40 AM
Perhaps they plan to stretch out the classic game releases over a span of like ten years (which is half the age of some of the games, I know...as well as carry on to the end of the console AFTER the Wii) so until they get some original VC content, they have to stretch them out to maintain interest. Or something. If you're a European who waited ten years for Super Mario RPG hopefully you won't have to wait another ten more.
I'm not saying that with VC content that we can bet on every good game that exists for an older platform to come out in a year or two for the Wii's VC, but it might make them more comfortable with releasing more of the good ones and earlier.
Logically, the good ones should be early if they are guaranteed to be constant downloads. People are bound to lose interest waiting, swear off the VC altogether, and boot up an emulator on their computer instead. I suppose that's another argument for original and new VC content.
Post by: KDR_11k on January 19, 2007, 03:30:57 AM
Post by: JonLeung on January 19, 2007, 05:09:19 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
It doesn't make sense to put new games in the VC unless the VC got renamed to "games".
They could rename it in the future. They could keep the name for a long time because I think the major appeal would still be the classic games.
It's like Air Miles. I think the name is so incredibly stupid because the card is now for a lot more than just earning miles for flights from many everyday purchases. When explaining Air Miles to someone, it's dumb to say "here is your Air Miles card, but it's not just for miles." Something like "Purchase Points" or "Spender Rewards" might sound really plain, but it clearly explains that it's about more.
Post by: KDR_11k on January 19, 2007, 06:23:01 AM
Post by: MaryJane on January 20, 2007, 05:44:11 AM
Why would it need to be renamed? Why does Virtual Console only refer to old games? That really doesn't make any sense. Virtual means digital in a sense i.e there is no hard copy, no physical nature to it. How would that only apply to older games?
You must think people are really stupid if they would expect to see Wii retail games on the VC if they introduced new content. Does the X360 have (full) X360 games? Nope. And yet people don't expect them. Do you know why?
Press Releases
Post by: KDR_11k on January 20, 2007, 06:37:59 AM
Post by: Artimus on January 20, 2007, 07:10:00 AM
Mighty Bomb Jack
Bonks Revenge
Jewel Quest II
Sproink
Bonk III: Bonk’s Big Adventure
Dragon’s Curse
Obviously Jewel Quest II is not from a VC past-system. So there's your first "new" VC title.
Post by: MaryJane on January 20, 2007, 11:03:25 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Pale
KDR, I don't think the VC vs. WiiWare thing is anything more than an organization for the store, so I don't think it really matters. If I understand it right, every VC game is an independant channel, emulator and all.
I really don't think the original content on the VC would be a full Wii game. Besides what's in a name anyway? The point is there's money to be made by Nintendo by releasing original content for the VC whether they rename it or not the point of business is to make money, thus they should be doing it. From the consumer standpoint (i.e me) it would be good to have a quick distraction when I die in Zelda without any fairies, to have a quick distraction before attacking the stage again.
Also you should read that link I posted, Iwata (you know the guy who runs Nintendo) mentioned it, they should be doing, likely they are doing it already, I just want to know about it. Is Jewel QuestII is one of the Yahoo! games? Doesn't quite count as original, but I'll take it. Not buy it, but for the point of this thread its good.
Post by: KDR_11k on January 20, 2007, 06:24:03 PM
Post by: Plugabugz on January 20, 2007, 10:15:28 PM
Post by: NeoThunder on January 21, 2007, 12:01:23 AM
However, Wii games are not like that. VC is ment to be a flashback to the 5 retro systems and enjoying classics in their original form.
I guess my point or rather my question is, Why do you people even think there will be any original content for Virtual Console?
Post by: Artimus on January 21, 2007, 06:20:01 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: NeoThunder
Well first of all, all Xbox Live Arcade games are original to some extent since many games have the original version and a new enhanced version. Plus, all the games are not straight ports from the original as they have to add hi-def support, 16*9, and stylish new menu's for comfortable easy navigation.
However, Wii games are not like that. VC is ment to be a flashback to the 5 retro systems and enjoying classics in their original form.
I guess my point or rather my question is, Why do you people even think there will be any original content for Virtual Console?
Uhhh... Nintendo has said so repeatedly.
Plus if you check my previous post you'll see the first such game has already gone through the ESRB.
Post by: Strell on January 21, 2007, 06:21:42 AM
'Cuz I seem to remember it as a "well we could do it if we want" sort of thing.
Post by: KDR_11k on January 21, 2007, 07:09:52 AM
Is it marked as "Wii Virtual Console" at the ESRB or how do you know it's downloadable?
Post by: NeoThunder on January 21, 2007, 07:29:40 AM
If it were me I would want at least a demo to see if I like it, at least with games you buy in the store you can sell them and get some of your money back, NO DICE on VC......which I hate BTW.
Post by: Artimus on January 21, 2007, 10:29:17 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Plus if you check my previous post you'll see the first such game has already gone through the ESRB.
Is it marked as "Wii Virtual Console" at the ESRB or how do you know it's downloadable?
Because it hasn't been announced otherwise. I suppose it is possible it's a DVD title, but that seems absurd considering what it is. Every single indicator points to original download (not that the game is original).
Neo, stop being a crybaby. You pay $50 for a game new from the stores, you pay $10 or less for VC games. You do not have a right to do whatever you want, so stop whining. There are people who have to feed themselves behind these games, not robots.
Post by: MaryJane on January 21, 2007, 11:46:06 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Strell
I'd like links on the call for original VC content.
'Cuz I seem to remember it as a "well we could do it if we want" sort of thing.
more like a why wouldn't we sort of thing.
Post by: BiLdItUp1 on January 21, 2007, 12:47:45 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Artimus
Neo, stop being a crybaby. You pay $50 for a game new from the stores, you pay $10 or less for VC games. You do not have a right to do whatever you want, so stop whining. There are people who have to feed themselves behind these games, not robots.
Sorry, invalid argument. No reason that one level/stage demos - at least - are impossible so that the two or three programmers that Nintendo spared to 'port' the game don't starve...
Post by: Strell on January 21, 2007, 12:56:39 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: MaryJaneQuote
Originally posted by: Strell
I'd like links on the call for original VC content.
'Cuz I seem to remember it as a "well we could do it if we want" sort of thing.
more like a why wouldn't we sort of thing.
Cuz it takes time/money/resources/etc on something that may or may not give a sizeable return.
Though I'd still like links to see what they said exactly.
Post by: Artimus on January 21, 2007, 05:32:18 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: BiLdItUp1Quote
Originally posted by: Artimus
Neo, stop being a crybaby. You pay $50 for a game new from the stores, you pay $10 or less for VC games. You do not have a right to do whatever you want, so stop whining. There are people who have to feed themselves behind these games, not robots.
Sorry, invalid argument. No reason that one level/stage demos - at least - are impossible so that the two or three programmers that Nintendo spared to 'port' the game don't starve...
For original games that may not be fair. And for virtual console games its absurd. You don't get demos for all retail games and you still buy plenty of them (and lose a lot more then $5-10 on the resell). I don't understand people nowadays expecting to have games prove themselves before being bought. Ridiculous.
Post by: NeoThunder on January 21, 2007, 05:52:18 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on January 21, 2007, 07:29:24 PM
Super Fruit Fall...
For original games that may not be fair. And for virtual console games its absurd. You don't get demos for all retail games and you still buy plenty of them (and lose a lot more then $5-10 on the resell). I don't understand people nowadays expecting to have games prove themselves before being bought. Ridiculous.
Yes but they're competing with big name franchises that everyone knows. If you'd have to decide between an older game everyone says is awesome or a new game you don't know anything about, which one do you choose? There's a reason sequels and licensed games are ubiquitous, it's because most people know nothing about the games and do a first sort based on which names they recognize. The small indie dev will most likely not have a big name license for his game. Realistically I wouldn't have bought Melty Blood or Bunny Must Die had I not played demos of both to see that they're better than the noise (because many indie games are just crap). While I do recall an informal study showing that people are more likely to buy a game without a demo it was on an indie games site which would obviously attract people willing to buy indie games in first place. The VC attracts people looking for Mario games and the like, an indie game will have a hard time even grabbing their attention long enough to make them look at the game description.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 22, 2007, 04:23:44 AM
Nowadays? People have been renting videogames for over 20 years! This isn't a new thing. In a way the VC is really just denying us something we had before. In the past you could always rent and if it was a PC game often you could get a demo. Now that is taken away from us so I think it is totally justifiable to complain about that or to avoid an unfamiliar game because of it. If you're going to take away my ability to try a game before I buy it then don't complain if I completely avoid it altogether.
Post by: Artimus on January 22, 2007, 07:00:20 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"I don't understand people nowadays expecting to have games prove themselves before being bought. Ridiculous."
Nowadays? People have been renting videogames for over 20 years! This isn't a new thing. In a way the VC is really just denying us something we had before. In the past you could always rent and if it was a PC game often you could get a demo. Now that is taken away from us so I think it is totally justifiable to complain about that or to avoid an unfamiliar game because of it. If you're going to take away my ability to try a game before I buy it then don't complain if I completely avoid it altogether.
Renting you pay for. PC games did not have demos in the days of the NES.
And goodness, how can you complain about there not being enough videos and impressions online for you to make your decision? GameFaqs alone has several reviews for most VC titles. Not to mention sites like PGC and 1UP have retro reviews where they tell you the quality of all the new VC release. And, let's be frank, it's not like you can't try the game out if you want to. ROMs are very easy to find.
I have no issue with demos of new games, I think that's fair, but I think it's absurd to expect demos of emulated games. Remember that they are indeed emulated, they're not built directly from source coding. Plus, it's one thing for a team of developers to take two weeks and make a demo from their vast resources and another thing altogether to do the same 15 years later with two people and none of the original resources.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 22, 2007, 08:32:12 AM
Aren't we talking about new games? Of course I can just use the e-word for older games.
Post by: SixthAngel on January 22, 2007, 08:41:51 AM
New games will not be big adventures like on past consoles. When they are released they will most likely be small games with a neat idea. Don't expect these games to be rival the good vc ones.
Post by: JonLeung on January 26, 2007, 06:35:05 AM
---
I also worry about "new content".
"Old content" was once new and so we had NES and Super NES games that were as epic as they could be at the time. Now we look back on them with nostalgia, and even if we haven't played some of the specific games at the time of their original release, they would still recall good times.
I really can't help but keep thinking that developers of "new content" for the VC will want them to be graphically boosted since they can. And with the Wii's power, it would be easy to use a mere fraction of that and make some games that could visually put the best Super NES games to shame (again, I'm only talking visually). The problem is that the download will be larger, so graphics might take up a lot of time to download, or the game will be made simple to compensate. I can't help but think that new VC games will often be fancy-looking puzzle games, and even if some use the Wii Remote, I won't care. I want a meatier experience, and a real NES game will beat any fancy PopCap game that I could play in an Internet browser.
Is the VC for "real" games or just diversions? If you ask me, I would much rather buy something like the original Final Fantasy and Dragon Warrior on the NES than a Wii Remote-enabled, fancy-pants-effects BeJeweled clone.
Post by: Artimus on January 26, 2007, 07:01:05 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
(I originally posted this in another thread but I think it fits much better in this one.)
---
I also worry about "new content".
"Old content" was once new and so we had NES and Super NES games that were as epic as they could be at the time. Now we look back on them with nostalgia, and even if we haven't played some of the specific games at the time of their original release, they would still recall good times.
I really can't help but keep thinking that developers of "new content" for the VC will want them to be graphically boosted since they can. And with the Wii's power, it would be easy to use a mere fraction of that and make some games that could visually put the best Super NES games to shame (again, I'm only talking visually). The problem is that the download will be larger, so graphics might take up a lot of time to download, or the game will be made simple to compensate. I can't help but think that new VC games will often be fancy-looking puzzle games, and even if some use the Wii Remote, I won't care. I want a meatier experience, and a real NES game will beat any fancy PopCap game that I could play in an Internet browser.
Is the VC for "real" games or just diversions? If you ask me, I would much rather buy something like the original Final Fantasy and Dragon Warrior on the NES than a Wii Remote-enabled, fancy-pants-effects BeJeweled clone.
Well, there will obviously be BeJeweled and crap. That's natural. But then there can also be (if properly nurtured) treasures like Geometry Wars and other games that are distributed online. If Nintendo helps developers they can really create an indie scene where tiny developers can make money off of well executed indie games. Not to mention the possibility of episodic content such as Sam and Max (already mentioned as possible for the Wii).
Post by: The Omen on January 26, 2007, 09:03:00 AM
Post by: Kairon on January 26, 2007, 09:53:23 AM
... indies...
That is all.
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: JonLeung on January 26, 2007, 10:04:02 AM
It's like I'm putting notches on my belt or whatever the term is, and claiming that I finished The Legend Of Zelda: Twilight Princess has more "weight" than, say, finishing Gish or Mr. Robot or Starscape. (It's kind of like how in porn, I'm totally turned off by amateurs.) I guess it's the snobbish or elitist attitude that you have to be good to be under a big name; if you're still making indie games that there must be something wrong with your games. I'm sure I'm wrong, I won't deny it. And big-name publishers can put out crappy games too.
It's really ironic because I wanted to be a film director, and I know that it's unlikely to start off as a Hollywood director right off the bat. Indie films are the standard beginning for would-be Hollywood bigwigs. And yet I can't bring myself to spend time looking at indie games.
Post by: MaryJane on January 26, 2007, 10:09:45 AM
Another thing that needs to be realized is that the Wii is made to be a social console, pick up and play, and really there's nothing easier to pick up and play than puzzles games. also a survey in the not too distant past revealed that women over 40 are the ones who most play those free puzzlers on Yahoo!, and the same people are also the ones who download/pay for them most often as well. Why wouldn't Nintendo want to tap into this market, much like how the DS has many puzzlers, and my mom keeps buying them up. She's one of those over 40 women who play the Yahoo! and MSN games, although I stricly forbid her to pay and download them, since she has a DS already. (she's only barely not computer illiterate and would need me to download the games for her, which is how i can forbid her).
Puzzlers fall directly in with Nintendo over-stated philosophy of tapping the casual gamer, those they are going to produce and develop a lot of casual games, JUST LIKE THE DS!! The Wii is the DS on T.V (except T.V's don't have dual screens).
Anyway, there is also going to be a fair amount of non-casual games, hopefully we see a lot of typical freeware developers making games for the Wii to make a buck, and provide us with entertainment, there are a lot of good free to start, pay to continue games on the web, and the Wii would be a good market for them. I would name a few but I haven't played since I got the Wii (actually I should say since my brother got the Wii since I still can't find my own to buy) but if they were on the Wii, I would find the time.
Edit: Since these games are likely going to have their own channel, and not work the same way as the VC games, I have to admit I was wrong, and I've changed the title to reflect this.
Post by: Kairon on January 26, 2007, 10:38:44 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
It's really ironic because I wanted to be a film director, and I know that it's unlikely to start off as a Hollywood director right off the bat. Indie films are the standard beginning for would-be Hollywood bigwigs. And yet I can't bring myself to spend time looking at indie games.
You mean you never bought Cubivore? or Cooking Mama? /sad
I weep for you. Please use netflix. Easiest and cheapest way to rent movies, and utterly painless because all you have to do with movies is open your mail, weatch 'em, and mail 'em back. You don't have to lift a finger except to populate your queue with the recommendations of friends... I just watched Hard Candy (an awesome suspense thriller with an awesome premise) for instance!!! <3 <3 <3
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Ian Sane on January 26, 2007, 11:02:31 AM
I don't spend much time with indie games either but that's mostly because it's hard to find the good stuff. Indie ANYTHING usually has two things going against it.
1. Lack of quality control. Big companies with the aim of making lots of money usually are a little more picky about what gets released to the public.
2. It's hard to find a good review. Due to the passionate supporters of indie scenes a lot of stuff gets overrated. Something competent often gets praised as being great. Supporters want indie stuff to succeed so they're more forgiving they go nuts over anything half decent. This happens with pretty much anything that has "something to prove". I find underrated games get this sort of ironic overhyping after they're "discovered". If something isn't very popular it's not uncommon for its fans to overhype it so as to feel superior for "getting it" when no one else does. As a result I rarely try out something I've never heard of unless someone I know personally recommends it.
I would classify indie games as games without a major publisher. So this would be mostly stuff you download on your PC. I would not consider an officially licenced console third party game as an indie game because of the costs involved in making one.
Post by: KDR_11k on January 26, 2007, 08:32:46 PM
Exactly, you're not spending enough on marketing or aren't using a theme that appeals to the majority of buyers (movie tie-in, WW2, Vietnam, modern war, space marines with huge moon boots). OTOH, considering that indie only means not owned by a big publisher, perhaps you just failed to accept EA's buyout offer.
Lack of quality control. Big companies with the aim of making lots of money usually are a little more picky about what gets released to the public.
That depends greatly on the company. Superman 64, Catwoman and Charlie's Angels did get published...
Post by: NeoThunder on January 26, 2007, 08:58:56 PM
I do wana ask, how is anyone going to buy a game that they can't demo first. I'm guessing that is how it will be. Unless the game is free to download, which I really doubt, what makes them think people are going to up and buy a game they know nothing about.
Post by: MaryJane on January 27, 2007, 04:00:37 AM
There were a lot of people disappointed in Red Steel, but they still bought it, because they were only disappointed in it after they bought and played it. There are some kiosks to play but they don't feature every game.
Maybe I'm not understanding your point, because from this side of the fence it seems irrelevant... I honestly don't mean that to be insulting.
Post by: NeoThunder on January 28, 2007, 08:32:32 AM
See, big name titles most of us probley don't demo, however, we always buy them with an idea of what it's going to be like
example, well, they made this game, or it's like this game, or it's the sequal to this game, so i'm pretty sure it's going to be good.
we demo 50 dollar games in different ways such as commercials, E3 news, actual gameplay video, actual gameplay pics, early impressions.
Thats all i'm saying is we expect a certain level from some of the games cause we more than likely have heard about them somehow
Post by: Edfishy on January 29, 2007, 03:26:32 AM
What the large publishers offer is a big enough check to insure that the game will meet the latest graphical expectations and have the most recent Unreal 3 engine available, so the developers can spit out just another carbon copy <insert popular game genre>.
But in all honesty, all Original Content games will do is keep real video games alive. AAA games are slowly moving towards literal interactive movies, and by the next decade, they won't even be in the same boat as games like Mario, Ocarina of Time, and F-Zero. They'll be less about the controls or your skills and more about the emersion and experience. So allowing a developer to make a simple puzzler for less than a million dollars, and without the Disney characters being prominent throughout, we could have some decent "Retro" games that could continue to be created.
I'm all for that.
Post by: MaryJane on January 29, 2007, 05:36:36 AM
Game demos would be a fantastic idea, especially if they included downloadable DS demos.
Although if I'm not mistaken Demos have a risk factor/cost factor that not all companies would be willing to take. The risk factor is that if you allow someone to download the whole game and then a need a code to unlock the rest of the game, someone could crack it and then spread the word on how others can do it, and then you have people playing your game free, and if you're an indie developer that could really hurt. The cost factor is that if you create a demo seperate from the rest of the game, it requires extra time, which in turn translates to extra money, and again this could hurt indie developers.
Maybe Nintendo will publish some of these games themselves in order to provide the extra funds for some sort of marketing scheme.
Post by: JonLeung on January 29, 2007, 06:25:46 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KaironQuote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
It's really ironic because I wanted to be a film director, and I know that it's unlikely to start off as a Hollywood director right off the bat. Indie films are the standard beginning for would-be Hollywood bigwigs. And yet I can't bring myself to spend time looking at indie games.
You mean you never bought Cubivore? or Cooking Mama? /sad
No, no, no. I think what I mean by "indie games" would be those not picked up by a major publisher. I have played Cooking Mama on the DS, and look forward to Cook Off on the Wii. Cubivore - wasn't it developed by Nintendo themselves, just published by Atlus or someone for the North American release? - was one of the games I wanted to play but that Blockbuster never stocked, and Blockbuster's lack of acquiring particular titles is my weakness for not playing games. (Yes, I've discussed the temptation of services like GameFly in another topic...)
Perhaps I'm confusing "indie games" with "homebrew games".
Anyone can make a homebrew game. As Ian mentioned, there's a lack of quality control, that's why there's a lot of crap out there, no matter how much you can say you found a few gems.
I stick by my point that my avoidance of homebrew games is still mostly because officially published/licensed games are marketed enough that everyone knows the game exists and that there is worth in my spending the time on it.
Think of it like sports. Would you rather say that you can play "tennis", "golf", "hockey", etc. and spend the time on them, or would you say that you play your kid sister's variation of hopscotch, the Calvinball-like game you devised with your brother when you were younger, or BASEketball, just because you liked the movie? There's no recognition for being skilled at a sport that isn't recognized, and the same thing goes for games. I may honestly enjoy them, and that may be the whole point of games, but if there's something equally fun that's actually published, there's little question which I would spend my time on.
Post by: KDR_11k on January 29, 2007, 08:24:34 AM
Creating a separate demo isn't that hard, usually you just strip out some content and add a few lines of code to display a "please buy the full version" message at some point. Obviously it's a bad idea (though popular with western indies) to put the full version out there and just require a code for unlocking. But then again you could probably download a warez version just as easily as a crack so maybe it's not much of a problem...
Perhaps I'm confusing "indie games" with "homebrew games".
Homebrew usually means using some hacks to get your game onto a console or handheld without a license, indie means a game sold normally but not using a big publisher (keep in mind that these days publishers use selection criteria like "uses movie license"). I hear in the US these games never reach store shelves, here in Germany we see shelves full of them.
but if there's something equally fun that's actually published, there's little question which I would spend my time on.
Keep in mind that indie games are usually cheaper than normal ones. Those that aren't are often much better than the big publisher equivalents (e.g. GalCiv 2 or Space Rangers 2).
Post by: Kairon on January 29, 2007, 08:40:27 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
the Calvinball-like game you devised with your brother when you were younger
Anyone who would say no to Calvinball should DIE!!!
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: MaryJane on January 29, 2007, 12:14:29 PM
Another idea I had would be extremely simple "games" that would be free, but the sole purpose of them would be to get users acquainted with using the remote in different fashions, and having them develop individual techniques (mainly comfortability of performing said action) for the different games that would use that control scheme.
One of the upcoming airplane games (i.e heatseeker, wing island) says that the way they intend people to play is by holding the remote like you would a paper airplane, how about a 15 minute demo that would just teach someone how to do that, and get acquainted with it, even something simple like that I think would get people interested in the genre when they see how simple it is to play. It wouldn't be pure marketing since it's a generalization of all games that would use the control scheme, but it would introduce casual gamers to different kinds of games, once they see how simply they can be played with the Wii-Remote.
Post by: jasonditz on January 29, 2007, 05:25:18 PM
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on January 29, 2007, 05:38:13 PM
QuoteTelltale games -the makers of Sam & Max- are looking for Wii programers. They have been asking Nintendo for a Dev kit for sometime now, and it appears that they have finally recieved it. No word yet on what they are making, but they have acknowledged the S&M would be perfect on the Wii (yes, the pun was intended
Originally posted by: The Omen
Point and click games need to make a comeback. This is the perfect platform for it.
).Post by: Kairon on January 29, 2007, 05:48:19 PM
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: 31 Flavas on January 29, 2007, 09:00:01 PM
QuoteUh... it sounds good and is cheap? Honestly, why do you need a demo for $5-10 game? You probably spend that much on a coffee drink from Starbucks every other day.
Originally posted by: NeoThunder
what makes them think people are going to up and buy a game they know nothing about.
Gamers are so whiny these days.
Post by: JonLeung on January 30, 2007, 02:56:01 AM
LucasArts should adapt their SCUMM engine so that we can get their classic point-and-click adventure games. Those would be more feasible. Then we might also get SCUMM games not made by LucasArts too, like the Simon The Sorceror games and Beneath A Steel Sky. (Beneath A Steel Sky was rereleased as freeware a while back.) Hey, maybe someone could make a SCUMMVM version that works through an Internet browser, if they haven't already.
Post by: KDR_11k on January 30, 2007, 05:22:23 AM
Post by: Kairon on February 07, 2007, 02:07:04 PM
Quote
Developer Woes
What's the deal with Nintendo's VC support? The classic games are great, but when are they going to start letting indy developers work on games for the Virtual Console? I'm getting sick of hobbydev projects; how about a little support Nintendo!
--Dan
Speak of the devil. If Nintendo wants true innovation, it has to get development power into the hands of - drum roll please - developers. Nintendo wants the big idea to win out over the big budget, but if there's no way for that idea to become more than just a few notes on a pad of paper then it does none of us any good.
That being said, Matty and I have a feeling you'll be hearing more about the independent VC scene very soon. Come to think of it, there's some kind of conference on the way for game developers, right? Man… it'd be great if one of the greatest game designers in the world would take the stage and give us all the skinny on Wii's future relationship with developers, huh? Oh wait… Miyamoto is talking at GDC in just under a month, and I can't think of a better time to send a message if I were Nintendo.
--Bozon
Boy, it's great to have something to rumor/speculate/get-hyped-out-of-our-minds-on since the Wii launched...
hypehypeHYPE!
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: IceCold on February 07, 2007, 05:25:15 PM
Post by: MaryJane on February 08, 2007, 09:49:43 AM
Miyamoto is going to be like, oh yeah look at this game I created so easily on the Wii. It's kind of endless in the different combinations of (whatever) you can do, but it's only going to cost $8 or should I say 800 Wii Points? This game shows how easy it is to make games with the new development kit we've created at Nintendo, which we will be giving free to anyone has the (original? first? typical?) Wii development kit!
BOOYAKA!!
Miyamoto Wii Ware game :
rool::
Post by: Kairon on February 08, 2007, 10:31:20 AM
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
