Topic: A Wii dissapointment?

[GoldenPhoenix]

While looking through Gonintendo.com I caught this article. He may have some valid points in there, but he seems to be a bit overreacting and well, a tad bit overdramatic.  So I thought I would see the thoughts of smartest Nintendo fans in cyberspace were (Gonintendo isn't even close!)

On Mario Galaxy:

Quote
This turmoil is best described by example - the Super Mario Galaxy Paradox – a title that whilst looking every bit as brilliant as it should, still manages to evoke an emptiness of cosmic proportions. I should explain.

The new Mario, Mario 128, Mario Wii, Mario whatever – it’s been a long time coming. Before even a glimpse of Wii titles snuck through the embargo, few dared to imagine how the freestyle controller would facilitate the then Revolution. Safe in the hands of new-thinking game designers, a desire grew for a new way to play, a fresh strand of thinking. With its prolonged development, it was safe to assume that Mario would be at the forefront of this brave new movement. Before its unveiling at E3, I’d have put money on Galaxy not even using the nunchuck. A transcendental, refined experience. A mission statement outlining Nintendo’s philosophy – purity, abstraction. The controller facilitating a long-awaited extension of our gaming psyche.

It didn’t happen.

Whilst Galaxy still looks like a must-have title, it disappointingly remains a natural extension of the genre. It could almost have been done old-gen. Worse still, the combination of traditional controller and onscreen pointer make it potentially the most complex control system of a platformer to date. It couldn’t be further from the ethos set out.

The Galaxy Paradox – how can a game have so much vision, and yet fall short in the area where vision was most expected? A game that now seems to fulfil everything I ask, yet when I think to how I felt pre-E3, I can’t help but feel disappointed by the safeness of everything shown. As launch day approaches, it’s emerging that very few of the early Wii titles have been developed from the ground-up, with the controller at the forefront of the design. We’re not playing new games – only the same ones, albeit with different controls. And when the initial head rush gives way to a more sobering comedown, what next?

I personally have no idea what he is talking about, from the videos and impressions I read the game did not sound complex in its controls but intuitive (BTW this guy has never touched a Wiimote either). He even goes as far to say that PS3 may very well overshadown the Wii with its controls, which is a bunch of crap in my opinion because it is becoming apparent that not many games will utilize the SIXAXIS to any degree.

Quote
The tilt and turn capabilities of Sony’s SIXAXIS, regardless of how it got them, threatens to outshine once unique Wii titles with their high definition backbone. And if Nintendo themselves, consider a 3rd person sci-fi adventure – WHILST HITTING THINGS WITH A HAMMER - as innovation, maybe that tells us all we need to know about the real direction the controller is pointing.

Talk about picking out a straw man, Project Hammer should not be used to illustrate the potential of the Wiimote and the direction Nintendo is taking.

Quote
Of all the titles displayed so far, not one comes close to a new genre. Where is the freethinking? The abstraction? The layer beyond the controller? The Minter-esque detachment? If the controller now allows response to stimuli with fluid, congenital instinct, why are we so lacking in purity? A rallying cry for true innovation is nothing original, yet on a personal level it’s never been more so required here. I’ve no doubt the Wii will be a huge commercial success; it’s just heartbreaking to see such potential give way to quick-fix Whack-a-Mole variants.

A perfect example of being way too dramatic, enough said there. Anyway feel free to take a look, like I said he has some decent points buried within but most of it is emotional fluff.

[Blue Plant]

With statements such as

Quote
Originally posted by: That site

Red Steel seems to rely on the blind faith its early information overload generated - hi-res screens that seemed reluctant to follow the generic crate-and-warehouse template looked initially promising, until various recent shots surfaced of crate filled warehouses containing jaggies so large they could spell the word BULLSHOT across the screen.

he just exposes himself as yet another graphics 'enthusiast' and these other statements of bashing the controls are his sour grapes on the matter.  Who knows what his real beef is with Wii.  My guess is the graphics, but that's really no excuse to try and drum up page hits with hyperbole (allegedly!).  

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Whilst that pre-order still can’t come quickly enough, my own motion sensors have started detecting alarm bells going off all over the place with every lethargic preview, every mild-mannered screenshot.

I don't think your comment about the visuals are too well off, his "mild-mannered screenshot" seems to indicate is as well.

[Mario]

Well, honestly I felt the same way about Super Mario Galaxy at first. My first impression of it was "this would be an awesome GameCube game"! I don't know what changed my mind, maybe after I found out it was EAD Tokyo behind it (the makers of Jungle Beat) I just knew the controls would be new. There also had to be a reason they've waited this long to realise the idea and show the game off to the public, something about Wii that just made things click.

Also, it was very important for Nintendos standout game to NOT have Mario in it. They are attracting new people, with a NEW image! Mario should NOT be this mega new game that shows why Wii is worth it, because the new market Nintendo wants isn't interested in Mario.

His Project HAMMER point also isn't even a point. How does the fact that there is a hammer in the game make the CONTROLS not innovative. He's saying "Project HAMMERs controls aren't innovative" and then backs it up by saying that hitting things with a hammer isn't creative, which is a concept of the game, not the controls. He hasn't even played it, LMAO. Nothing else needs to be said.  

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario
Well, honestly I felt the same way about Super Mario Galaxy at first. My first impression of it was "this would be an awesome GameCube game"! I don't know what changed my mind, maybe after I found out it was EAD Tokyo behind it (the makers of Jungle Beat) I just knew the controls would be new. There also had to be a reason they've waited this long to realise the idea and show the game off to the public, something about Wii that just made things click.

Also, it was very important for Nintendos standout game to NOT have Mario in it. They are attracting new people, with a NEW image! Mario should NOT be this mega new game that shows why Wii is worth it, because the new market Nintendo wants isn't interested in Mario.

His Project HAMMER point also isn't even a point. How does the fact that there is a hammer in the game make the CONTROLS not innovative. He's saying "Project HAMMERs controls aren't innovative" and then backs it up by saying that hitting things with a hammer isn't creative, which is a concept of the game, not the controls. He hasn't even played it, LMAO. Nothing else needs to be said.

All great points, though I was impressed with Mario Galaxy from the start, especially the boss visuals which were mindblowing and something that could not be done on GC. Not to mention the game looked like tons of fun with intuitive use of the Wiimote without overrelying on it. I dunno about the rest of you but I'm super excited for it, then again I was that way for Super Mario Sunshine (which I prefer over Mario 64). Anyway I don't know about this guy he says he is a Nintendo fan but he seems to exaggerate alot and I really begin to wonder if he is telling the truth or not, he even makes Ian seem like a strong Wii supporter.

[ReverendNoahWhateley]

My low-res eyes have once again deceived me.  Am I one of the only folks impressed with Mario Galaxy, visually?

[Bill Aurion]

If you think Mario Galaxy could be taken in its Wii-form and put on Gamecube, you are blind as a bat... o_o

[Ceric]

I to prefer Sunshine of Mario 64.  *waits for firing squad*
Anyways.  I think what there trying to do with Project H.A.M.M.E.R  is interesting especially how they are moving the art style.
Super Mario Galaxy my biggest concern is that the environment will be lonely for the lack of a better term.  I still hold SMB3 as the best Mario of all times and it always had a vibrant background with something going on somewhere, not necessarily in the background.  Space is lonely.

[JonLeung]

Sunshine was more challenging than 64...almost TOO challenging, which is supposedly many people's beef with it.  I personally thought that in a tropical setting, it got pretty bland...there wasn't enough variety in the stages and so it didn't feel as varied, and therefore not as "epic", as 64 or even Bros. 2 and Bros. 3.  Though I suppose if they went for the usual grassy/desert/icy/volcano/etc. stages a sequel to 64 might be too much of a shadow of the former game (hence the "Sunshine", or Shadow Mario, perhaps).

So Galaxy?  In space?  Depending on the planets and how much atmosphere there is (literally and...in the other sense) and how much stuff is going on, it could be epic and exciting or...not as epic nor exciting...  I don't want every stage to feel like I'm just jumping around on spheres at nighttime, which is what it often looks like.

If control becomes more interesting, that's good.  But if it becomes so transparent that you'll now notice other things like graphics more (not that Galaxy has bad graphics, mind you) then someone's bound to make a fuss about them.

I am still looking forward to this game, of course.

[couchmonkey]

*The crowd gasps at Couchmonkey's masterful control of the mouse, skillfully avoiding the Super Mario 64 vs. Super Mario Sunshine debate next to the Mario Galaxy post.*

The things I like about Mario Galaxy:
- The graphics are very pretty
- Matt at IGN has played it and he's more excited about it than any other Wii game (and I don't think he's the only one)
- Someone (maybe in the Iwata asks articles) commented that a coworker who always gets motion-sickness from 3D games had no problems with Mario Galaxy

I have to admit, I felt the same way at first...the game is just another platformer, where's the innovation?  But my perspective on the situation has shifted...not every game will be a mind-blowing new experience, and if Nintendo had made Mario Galaxy the type of new experience that the company wants to provide, we might all be complaining that it's too "non-gamey".  Looking at this as an evolution of the Mario series, the concept and the execution look spot-on.  Many things could go wrong, but at a glance it's hard not to have high hopes for this game to be the greatest 3D platformer ever.

Edit: spek n' spll

 

[Smash_Brother]

This guy is basing his argument on games still in their early development stages, thus invalidating 90% of his argument.

And I found this comment particularly amusing:

Quote
And when the initial head rush gives way to a more sobering comedown, what next?

These are the same people who pissed and moaned that the DS would be another sh*tty gimm!ck and that Nintendo should be dragged out into the street and shot for so heavily gambling with their own livelihood, citing lack of launch titles as their primary reason.

NOW look at the system...

This guy is basically complaining that the very first generation of Wii games won't showcase the system's true innovative potential because they're just current games adapted for use with the Wiimote.

No sh*t, really? Because it's not like games have ever slowly evolved over time, right? When given a new technology like the analogue stick or the DS or even systems with improved graphics, developers ensured that it launched with games which already were pushing the limits of the system's capability, right?

I don't expect the first round of Wii games to be the best the Wii has to offer. To do so would be ignoring the trends in game development for the past 30 years which is basically what this guy is doing.

[MaryJane]

I have to agree with one of his disappointments, it's something i've said before and will continue to say until Nintendo follows through.

The main "revolutionary" feature of the Wii is the controller. The Wii-mote. However, EVERY major game thus far (except Excite Truck) uses the nunchuck attachment.

Is that all the Wii-mote is good for? I want games that are established genres to use ONLY the Wii-mote. If the sensor bar picks up all movements, including depth perception(if the Wii-mote moves closer or further from the T.V) why can't I move solely with that? Give the game low sensitivity so not every jerk of my hand sends the character flying off. If you have left, right, forward, back, and the diagnols using only motion sensing, then 6 action buttions in the D-pad and the A and  B buttons why isn't that enough to make a game? It feels as though the Nun-chuck is a crutch. I don't believe this personally, but until I see evidence to disapprove here is the way it seems: Nintendo made this great new controller, then stepped back and said, I don't know how to utilize this! Oh wait, let's make something else so it actually is feasible to play games with this thing. I want, and expected the majority of Wii games to use the single Wii-mote, with only such genres as FPS to use the Nun-Chuck, in an FPS my suggestion for movement with motion is lost as you need to aim, but even aiming cud be assigned to the A button even, although it would then require two hands to strafe using the D-pad, but I'd rather that, cuz then it says, yes the Wii-mote can stand alone. As of now, it doesn't seem like it can except for mini-games. Which I don't consider a major game, no matter how fun.

[NWR_pap64]

Quote
Originally posted by: MaryJane
I have to agree with one of his disappointments, it's something i've said before and will continue to say until Nintendo follows through.

The main "revolutionary" feature of the Wii is the controller. The Wii-mote. However, EVERY major game thus far (except Excite Truck) uses the nunchuck attachment.

Is that all the Wii-mote is good for? I want games that are established genres to use ONLY the Wii-mote. If the sensor bar picks up all movements, including depth perception(if the Wii-mote moves closer or further from the T.V) why can't I move solely with that? Give the game low sensitivity so not every jerk of my hand sends the character flying off. If you have left, right, forward, back, and the diagnols using only motion sensing, then 6 action buttions in the D-pad and the A and  B buttons why isn't that enough to make a game? It feels as though the Nun-chuck is a crutch. I don't believe this personally, but until I see evidence to disapprove here is the way it seems: Nintendo made this great new controller, then stepped back and said, I don't know how to utilize this! Oh wait, let's make something else so it actually is feasible to play games with this thing. I want, and expected the majority of Wii games to use the single Wii-mote, with only such genres as FPS to use the Nun-Chuck, in an FPS my suggestion for movement with motion is lost as you need to aim, but even aiming cud be assigned to the A button even, although it would then require two hands to strafe using the D-pad, but I'd rather that, cuz then it says, yes the Wii-mote can stand alone. As of now, it doesn't seem like it can except for mini-games. Which I don't consider a major game, no matter how fun.

MJ, you are worrying a bit too much about the Wiiimote. Your argument can easily be applied to the DS. I remember a friend of mine was complaining about how they want you to use the touch screen, yet added in buttons and a D-pad, saying that it was contradicting the purpose of the DS. Did that hurt the system at all? No. They were added so that more traditional DS games could still be played, and so far the DS has featured both kinds of games.

Like S_B said, the first batch of Wii games will NOT truly show what the Wii is capable of because developers and even Nintendo are still toying with the controls. The nun chuck issue isn't that big of a deal. The reason they added it was so they could ease the controls in some games. And you forget that the nun chuck also shares the same technology as the main Wiimote, so it picks up some movement during game (if not with the same degree as the Wiimote).

Again, give the Wii some TIME before saying that it doesn't have potential.

[MaryJane]

Never said it doesn't have potential, I actually said I don't believe what I said, but there just isn't anything to oppose it yet, I fully agree with you though, the Wii does need time, you would just think that having already developed for the DS they'd have realized how they should step in, and I think it would have been a ton better to step in with only One true controller.

[NWR_pap64]

Quote
Originally posted by: MaryJane
Never said it doesn't have potential, I actually said I don't believe what I said, but there just isn't anything to oppose it yet, I fully agree with you though, the Wii does need time, you would just think that having already developed for the DS they'd have realized how they should step in, and I think it would have been a ton better to step in with only One true controller.

The DS and the Wii are two very different gaming systems. Developing for the DS is far different than developing for the Wii. The development of DS games involves touch screen mechanics, as well as voice recognition and Wifi. Wii game development involves motions done by the player, motion sensing and nun chuck gameplay.

So developers can't just drop into Wii development expecting it to be exactly like DS development. Movement takes a  lot more time to develop and study than, say, touch screen input.

[zakkiel]

Quote
(BTW this guy has never touched a Wiimote either).

So, uh, why would anyone take anything he says about a Wii game seriously? I mean, are there some hidden credentials here I'm missing?  

[Smash_Brother]

I must have missed that part...

I thought he must have played these at E3 or something. Ignore what I said: he's 100% full of sh*t.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: zakkiel

Quote
(BTW this guy has never touched a Wiimote either).

So, uh, why would anyone take anything he says about a Wii game seriously? I mean, are there some hidden credentials here I'm missing?

Well you would be surprised, just look at some of the responses on GoNintendo.com. In response to a fear that the Wiimot utilizes the nunchuck, thus showing a lack of "potential". I think you need to view the Wiimote as we did the N64 controller, it has some revolutionary functions but still maintains tried and true control methods.

If the Wiimote did not include a nunchuck, platformers would be clunky as heck along with various other games. With the nunchuck you are open to so many possibilities perhaps even further expanding the potential of the Wiimote to maximize immersion from mixing both classical (analog stick) and the motion sensing functions of the Wiimote. Some games may be more intuitive with just the Wiimote, while others are best realized with both the Wiimote and nunchuck. It opens up so many possibilites and I see nunchuck as helping in innovation while still being fun (sometimes there is a disconnect between those two).

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
I must have missed that part...

I thought he must have played these at E3 or something. Ignore what I said: he's 100% full of sh*t.

Well that is what I have gathered from reading other responses, and even by reading his own preview because he is always citing other sources and not his direct interaction with games.

[Ceric]

Actually on the Nunchuk side of things.  I thought the original design of the control was pretty much a cube controller that could be split into two and sense motion.  Fill free to correct me if wrong.
Now that being said I believe if it ain't broke don't fix it.  The Analog Stick serves it's purpose remarkably well.  Which is to guide a character around an area while giving the user and actual feel for where he's going.  I really find doing similar with a mouse is always loose feeling and doesn't feel as good as the analog stick.  I'm all for the Nunchuk.   The only part that bugs me about it is that Nintendo should have just made those two a bundle.  So that whenever you got a nunchuk you got a wiimote and vice versa.  That combination is really the Wii controller in my mind.  The others are additions.  The real concession is the Classic Controller.  As long as developers don't eventually decide just to go back to it its fine.  In fact needed for Virtual Console similar experience.
Also I wonder what happens when you have more VC games then channels.

[Smash_Brother]

I think the controller needs both the analogue stick and the pointer.

The pointer introduces a level of control which nothing else has yet achieved but that doesn't mean we don't need an analogue stick for basic movement as well.

[Ian Sane]

My interest in Super Mario Galaxy is largely based on the setting.  I think the idea of jumping from planet to planet sounds cool and is a unique twist to Mario that looks fun while being fresh at the same time.  I'll give Super Mario Sunshine credit for trying to change things up too.  It's just that cleaning up paint is, well, really lame.  Space isn't so I'm more interested.  I don't really care how it controls provided it controls well.

My reaction to the remote has always been "show me!"  Don't tell me all this stuff about games being too complicated or new standards being needed or any of that and expect me to just believe.  PROVE to me that the remote is great.  Make me see these problems that I never thought existed and then prove to me that the remote is the solution.  And I haven't seen Nintendo do that.  It's rather hard to believe that the remote is the big deal Nintendo says it is when the best use of it so far is WiiSports.

I think this guy is focusing on Mario Galaxy because usually Mario games make fantastic use of the console's key features.  Super Mario 64 has set the bar.  Nintendo made a big deal about the analog stick.  We asked "show me!" and they did with the flagship title and it proved that this was a great concept that had great ideas creating the need for the concept.  This wasn't made by marketers, this wasn't designed soley to attract attention, this was a real idea created for real games.  In comparision you look at something like connectivity.  Nintendo didn't reveal any ideas at first and when they did Pac-Man Vs, which they didn't even feel they could sell as a standalone product, was the flagship title.  That gives the impression that when Nintendo has a really good idea they prove it immediately because the whole time they've had at least one killer game in mind and when they've got a g!mmicky idea they initially have nothing to show.

The Wii needs a game that the second people even find out about it they think "oh that explains everything".  If the remote is really what Nintendo says it is we probably should have seen that game already.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

It's called "TRAUMA CENTER".

Let's move along now.

[MaryJane]

Trauma Center uses the nunchuck. IGN

Quote
Originally posted by: IGN
In terms of gameplay, the title's surgery system is now meant to play more like an action game. Listening to the advice of your nurse, you use the Wii remote to perform precision surgical cuts directly, with the nunchuck used in a few areas as well. This mode of play now has easy, normal and hard difficulty settings. You can also look forward to new types of surgery, including broken bones and heart transplants.

Quote
Originally posted by: Ceric
The only part that bugs me about it is that Nintendo should have just made those two a bundle.  So that whenever you got a nunchuk you got a wiimote and vice versa.  That combination is really the Wii controller in my mind.  The others are additions.  The real concession is the Classic Controller.  As long as developers don't eventually decide just to go back to it its fine.  In fact needed for Virtual Console similar experience.
Also I wonder what happens when you have more VC games then channels.

That's my point, the main controller is SUPPOSED to be the ONLY the Wii-Mote, no offense to how you see it, but Nintendo didn't say the controller is both, or like you said they would come together. If the Wii-mote is sold by itself, and supposed to be the main controller, prove it! That's all I'm saying.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

The Remote alone operates the default software that comes with the Wii unit.  That makes it the main input device.

Of course, having extra thingies for added capabilities is only NATURAL AND CONVENIENT.

I didn't read the thread so i'm not sure what supposed to be fussed about.

The Remote is a conflict and compromise between creative input tech and Nintendo's desire to expand the market.  Compromise:  You can't have everything, but you can get a lot done.  without making the price of entry skyrocket.

but Trauma Center rules.