Author Topic: EDITORIALS: Controller Conundrum (Read 20827 times)

KDR_11k · « **Reply #25 on:** August 31, 2006, 10:35:32 AM »

Would a regular console be a safety net for Nintendo, though? Their sales have been continually decreasing. If the Wii were to take the fallback option it'd doom itself since it would just be a weaker copy of the other consoles. The GC had no defining feature, it was just a PS2 with less games or an XBox with no online. The Wii needs a defining feature, i.e. something that can be summed up in one sentence as the reason to pick a Wii over the other consoles, something no other console does better. The big uncertainity and low acceptance with the XC and PS3 right now also bases itself in a lack of defining features. What makes the XC unique? Some toys in the Live featureset? The PS3? Oh, right, Riiiiidge Racer and real-time weapon change. That's possibly the biggest reason people are in awe over the Wii right now, the Wii has a defining feature, a feature you can name and people will say "yes, that's the Wii".

And really, I don't think it'll fail. Even if it's not used for new gameplay mechanisms it reduces the abstraction from the interface allowing the people who find current controllers too complex to play a game. Someone can forget which button turns left or does a barrel roll but they would never ask "which way do I have to move this to move left?". Each gesture is a distinct action whereas pushing a button only differs in where that button is and that location rarely bears any relation to the purpose of the button. Why do you think games that only use the mouse and one button are so popular with the casuals? Only the cursor movement needs to be remembered, the rest is interacting with a GUI.

Kairon · « **Reply #26 on:** August 31, 2006, 10:50:16 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
I don't think Nintendo's goal was ever to make a "better" controller.

I disagree. I believe that the Wiimote is a "better" controller in the same way that the DS' touch screen is a better controller. It doesn't apply everywhere, but when you get a game like Brain Age with it, *sigh* I wouldn't have it any other way.

Like with the DS, I expect the Wii controller to not essentially improve all games, but to be absolutely positively amazingly pwnful for some games and game types that utilize it to its full potential.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

hudsonhawk · « **Reply #27 on:** August 31, 2006, 11:13:10 AM »

Good editorial. I think the poster child for this question shouldn't be Zelda, which has been debated into the ground, but rather Red Steel. Why? Because if it weren't for the Wiimote, no one would be even remotely interested in this game. If the interactivity from the Wiimote doesn't end up adding fundamentally to the experience it will just be a generic FPS.

Personally, I'm extremely skeptical. I love the DS and recognize that it allows for certain game types that wouldn't have been possible on any other system, I don't find that it adds to the core experience, it simply expands the possibilities.

I'm glad to see someone else expressing some healthy skepticism about the Wii. Everyone everywhere is so infatuated with the idea that I don't think they've stopped to think that once the honeymoon wears off, this will just be another control mechanism and nothing more.

I've owned every single Nintendo console ever made. Even the Virtual Boy. I thought the DS was cool from the get go, thought the Virtual Boy was a cool vision, and loved the analog stick from day one. But unlike most people here, and really most gamers in general, I'm personally skeptical that the Wiimote will actually be immersive and enhancing of the experience. I'm afraid that in the end it will just be a pointer with a joystick attached and nothing more.

Kairon · « **Reply #28 on:** August 31, 2006, 11:18:32 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: BigJim
They haven't demonstrated any "ZOMG" killer apps to prove their point. Half of the demos we've seen have gone in the opposite direction with things like Wii Sports and Symphony.

Did you think the same thing with Brain Age and Nintendogs?

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

Acefondu · « **Reply #29 on:** August 31, 2006, 11:21:10 AM »

No offense, but that article was a lot of nothing.

Ian Sane · « **Reply #30 on:** August 31, 2006, 11:32:25 AM »

"Would a regular console be a safety net for Nintendo, though?"

Well it is a better safety net than nothing at all to fall back on. If they had a safety net like they did with the DS then it would mean that they had a normal controller with something special added to it. And honestly the way Sony is goofing up just not sucking will pretty much ensure Nintendo will do better this time around.

"I disagree. I believe that the Wiimote is a 'better' controller in the same way that the DS' touch screen is a better controller. It doesn't apply everywhere, but when you get a game like Brain Age with it, *sigh* I wouldn't have it any other way."

I wouldn't consider a controller that works better for some games and worse for others to be "better", just different. A "better" design would do virtually everything better. An example would be the NES controller which was better than Atari's old joystick design in pretty much every way. I wouldn't consider an analog stick to be better than a d-pad for example since both are superior for certain games. I would consider the N64 controller to be better than the SNES one, however, because it can do everything the SNES can plus more. Regarding control, the DS is better than the GBA because it can do everything the GBA can plus more.

PopeReal · « **Reply #31 on:** August 31, 2006, 11:39:45 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: hudsonhawk
Good editorial. I think the poster child for this question shouldn't be Zelda, which has been debated into the ground, but rather Red Steel. Why? Because if it weren't for the Wiimote, no one would be even remotely interested in this game. If the interactivity from the Wiimote doesn't end up adding fundamentally to the experience it will just be a generic FPS.

Personally, I'm extremely skeptical. I love the DS and recognize that it allows for certain game types that wouldn't have been possible on any other system, I don't find that it adds to the core experience, it simply expands the possibilities.

I'm glad to see someone else expressing some healthy skepticism about the Wii. Everyone everywhere is so infatuated with the idea that I don't think they've stopped to think that once the honeymoon wears off, this will just be another control mechanism and nothing more.

I've owned every single Nintendo console ever made. Even the Virtual Boy. I thought the DS was cool from the get go, thought the Virtual Boy was a cool vision, and loved the analog stick from day one. But unlike most people here, and really most gamers in general, I'm personally skeptical that the Wiimote will actually be immersive and enhancing of the experience. I'm afraid that in the end it will just be a pointer with a joystick attached and nothing more.

Actually on planetgamecube I think more people agree with you than with me. A lot of people seem real nervous about the Wii now. All that E3 momentum has turned into panic now that the release draws near it seems. I for one am not sweating it, but soon we will see if I should have been.

couchmonkey · « **Reply #32 on:** August 31, 2006, 12:10:25 PM »

In a way I wish Sony wasn't screwing up so much just so Ian would have to eat his words.

Now the doubters have Sony's mistakes to fall back on if Wii manages to dominate.

I have my skeptical moments about Wii, I worry it won't work as well as I hope. In fact I'm pretty sure it won't work as well as I hope. And yet, I still find the concept way more exciting than Xbox 360 or Playstation 3. Where are Microsoft and Sony going to go with their next generation systems? 10,000 characters on screen instead of 1000? Who cares? Somewhat better A.I. and physics? Nice, but not something that's going to get people's hearts racing. I think Nintendo is the only company that's thinking ahead more than five years.

Wait, that's not quite true. Sony and Microsoft are thinking ahead, but they're thinking ahead to what video format people will be using. As a gamer, I can honestly say, "Who gives a crap?" Where will the games be in five years? I'm hoping there's more to it than HDTV and another hundred million polygons. Nintendo is trying to give us more than that - it's trying to bring motion into games and it's trying to bring new players into games. That's exciting, and I think Nintendo is going to reap the benefits. I think even if Sony was really on the ball with PS3, Wii would still be getting the attention it is right now, becuase it's a great idea.

animecyberat · « **Reply #33 on:** August 31, 2006, 12:47:02 PM »

What worries me the most is aside form fighting games there still are a crap load of other games that could be worse on the system regardless of whta EA and Nintendo says. Lets take madden for an example, most peopel who play Madden play it because they arent good at football in real life and Madden gives you that chance and all you haev to do is press the A button and rotate the analog stick. EA says Madden 07 will be great cuz of the controler but what if people find out that its more fun to press the abutton on the dual shock-less ps3 controller? Maddenisnt the be all end all but its just one more genre that if it doesnt work oout better will hurt wii sales, with GC madden was the same as ps2 but with Wii its not even close.

Also Fighitng games are one of my favorite genres and I still cant figure out how to make it work with Wii.
I agree with the editorial we all just have to wait and see.

mantidor · « **Reply #34 on:** August 31, 2006, 12:55:37 PM »

Although comparisons with the DS are obvious they aren't very accurate, we have relative knowledge of how a touchscreen works with games because is almost the same as using a mouse, while the remote is completly new, we have little to no experience with 3D controls. So even if Nintendo's strategy worked for the DS it doesn't automatically means it will work in the wii, it gives more confidence in the strategy though.

denjet78 · « **Reply #35 on:** August 31, 2006, 01:10:12 PM »

A few good quotes that I've run across of which I can only hope that there will be at least a few people on this boards who will understand them for what they are:

Quote
Without deviation, progress is not possible.
(Frank Zappa)

Restlessness and discontent are the first necessities of progress.
(Thomas Edison)

The most damaging phrase in the language is, "It's always been done that way."
(Rear Admiral Grace Hopper)

So much havoc has optimism wrought in this world that pessimism appears not only a legitimate way of looking at things but a moral duty.
(Christopher Spranger)

Quality has to be caused, not controlled.
(Philip Crosby)

Humanity has advanced, when it has advanced, not because it has been sober, responsible, and cautious, but because it has been playful, rebellious, and immature.
(Tom Robbins)

Daring ideas are like chessmen moved forward; they may be beaten, but they may start a winning game.
(Johann Wolfgang von Goethe)

All progress is initiated by challenging current conceptions, and executed by supplanting existing institutions. Consequently, the first condition of progress is the removal of censorships.
(George Bernard Shaw)

It is a bad plan that admits of no modifications.
(Publius Syrus)

Conventional people are roused to fury by departure from convention largely because they regard such departure as criticism of themselves.
(Bertrand Russell)

The illusion of progress can be achieved by simply rearranging the terms of description so that new acronyms are created.
(Scott Smith)

The best way to be ready for the future is to invent it.
(John Sculley)

Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back, for their private benefit.
(Robert A Heinlein)

Like a man who has worn eyeglasses so long that he forgets he has them on, we forget that the world looks to us the way it does because we have become used to seeing it that way through a particular set of lenses.
(Kenich Ohmae)

Fundamental progress has to do with the reinterpretation of basic ideas.
(Alfred North Whitehead)

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
(Arthur Schopenhauer)

Fifty years into the First Computing Era some of us in the computing arena have come to realize we’ve made a false start, and for us to finally be able to produce lasting, correct, beautiful, usable, scalable, enjoyable software that stands the tests of time and moral human endeavor, we need to start over.
(Richard P Gabriel)

Kairon · « **Reply #36 on:** August 31, 2006, 01:27:13 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor
Although comparisons with the DS are obvious they aren't very accurate, we have relative knowledge of how a touchscreen works with games because is almost the same as using a mouse, while the remote is completly new, we have little to no experience with 3D controls. So even if Nintendo's strategy worked for the DS it doesn't automatically means it will work in the wii, it gives more confidence in the strategy though.

Are you kidding me? You have a LIFETIME of experience with 3D controls.

This is why my dad pushes the controller forward when he wants to run faster in Madden.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

Kairon · « **Reply #37 on:** August 31, 2006, 01:30:03 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: denjet78
A few good quotes

Thank you. That warms an objectivist's heart. *sniff*

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

ShyGuy · « **Reply #38 on:** August 31, 2006, 02:04:11 PM »

I've become convinced some people will just never trust Nintendo.

BigJim · « **Reply #39 on:** August 31, 2006, 02:52:46 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Quote
Originally posted by: BigJim
They haven't demonstrated any "ZOMG" killer apps to prove their point. Half of the demos we've seen have gone in the opposite direction with things like Wii Sports and Symphony.

Did you think the same thing with Brain Age and Nintendogs?

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

What I *thought* was irrelevance because I didn't care about either. But that doesn't matter. Like I said, a fraction of the lineup makes the point for the DS. If you're asking if I think they're g!mmicks like Symphony, no.

The DS, at least, is easier to adopt because it's a traditional portable PLUS touch screen. The Wii doesn't have that luxury. They're gonna live or die on the Wiimote, despite the classic controller. So far, with no ZOMG content OR fail-safe, they're still left with something to prove.

mantidor · « **Reply #40 on:** August 31, 2006, 03:01:29 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor
Although comparisons with the DS are obvious they aren't very accurate, we have relative knowledge of how a touchscreen works with games because is almost the same as using a mouse, while the remote is completly new, we have little to no experience with 3D controls. So even if Nintendo's strategy worked for the DS it doesn't automatically means it will work in the wii, it gives more confidence in the strategy though.

Are you kidding me? You have a LIFETIME of experience with 3D controls.

This is why my dad pushes the controller forward when he wants to run faster in Madden.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

Thats no experience at all and you know it.

Acefondu · « **Reply #41 on:** August 31, 2006, 05:06:29 PM »

mantidor is right, but I'm glad we'll all start from scratch. It levels the playing field substantially. Bad gamers could transform into good and good gamers can finally be overtaken. Everything is new again! I'm nothing but excited.

wandering · « **Reply #42 on:** August 31, 2006, 05:42:22 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
I wouldn't consider a controller that works better for some games and worse for others to be "better", just different. A "better" design would do virtually everything better. An example would be the NES controller which was better than Atari's old joystick design in pretty much every way.

I disagree. They didn't add to the classic joystick design - they replaced it. The NES controller wasn't better, it was just different. What if there were problems with the d-pad - problems like thumb fatigue? There was no safety net to fall back on. Much better was the Atari 5200 controller, which took the joystick from the Atari 2600 controller and then added to it.

denjet78 · « **Reply #43 on:** August 31, 2006, 06:30:05 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: wandering
What if there were problems with the d-pad - problems like thumb fatigue?

Actually there was a major issue with the original NES controller. Playing with it for too long caused something that doctors dubbed Nintendo-itis. I think Nintendo was even sued over it at one point. Because of that, Nintendo went so far as to offer anyone who requested one, a special glove designed to help aleviate it. All you had to do was trace your hand on a piece of paper and send it into them, no questions asked.

That didn't stop people from playing though.

Kairon · « **Reply #44 on:** August 31, 2006, 06:47:02 PM »

OMG, Original NES controller made gamers exert too much effort?!?!

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

ShyGuy · « **Reply #45 on:** August 31, 2006, 07:19:53 PM »

I remember having aching thumbs from playing too much Nintendo. Heck, I had aching hands when I got my gamecube because I hadn't been playing console games regularly for about five years.

Hmm, leveling the playing field. Maybe that what all the haters are secretly afraid of. That they will become buggy whip makers.

Mario · « **Reply #46 on:** August 31, 2006, 07:51:33 PM »

Quote
Nintendo was being ignored and now everyone is talking about them. The controller is pretty much the reason for that.

No, the DS is.

Nintendogs and Brain Training are the two games that SOLELY rely on the DS's new features, and they are the same two games responsible for this market expansion. PSP and DS would be neck-and-neck without those games. More evidence that whenever Nintendo attempts to do something too samey they are just seen as a "Sony-Lite".

Before you say "oh but who cares about this new non-market it doesn't even count" there is NO WAY New Super Mario Bros would be selling so well now without Nintendogs and Brain Training greatly expanding the DS userbase. Almost any game released on DS in Japan is GUARANTEED to make a profit, thanks to the HUGE rapidly growing userbase, which is thanks to Nintendogs and Brain Training, which exist thanks to the BRAND NEW CONTROLS! Huzzuh!

So if you want to go by the DS example, then new control scheme = MAXIMUM PROFIT AND MARKET SHARE! More games! More variety! Everyone wins!

Ian Sane · « **Reply #47 on:** August 31, 2006, 08:17:13 PM »

"No, the DS is."

Well I meant specifically regarding the console market where they were completely ignored and now have a buzz going. The DS is the portable market where Nintendo has been the market leader since 1989. The buzz around the Wii is unrelated to the DS' popularity. The Wii has a buzz because of the Wii itself.

Plus as amazing as the DS is doing in Japan it did go from market leader to market leader which is probably a whole sh!t load easier to do than to go from bottom of the barrel to market leader.

18 Days · « **Reply #48 on:** August 31, 2006, 08:25:32 PM »

Shut up Ian.

PopeReal · « **Reply #49 on:** August 31, 2006, 08:31:44 PM »

My hands get tired from playing with lots of things. Oh wait maybe I said too much already.....

News:

Author Topic: EDITORIALS: Controller Conundrum (Read 20827 times)