Topic: REVIEWS: New Play Control! Mario Power Tennis

[MegaByte]

The core problem here is that the controls are based on gestures (which requires time integration) rather than instantaneous position and velocity.  Thus the brain has to compensate for the time lag AND the Wii has to differentiate small differences (sure, you could map more motions, but they would be less realistic).  This is not a human problem; it's a technology problem.
Note: I have not played this game; I'm inferring based on other experience.

[Jonnyboy117]

I remember someone at Nintendo saying that Wii Sports Tennis recognizes over 100 different swings... of course most are subtle variations on forehand/backhand.

[Mop it up]

How on earth do you think Wii Sports Tennis use motions more effectively? It only has two different swings... forehand and backhand.

I haven't played Wii Sports Tennis in a while so I had to look it up. It has more than just forehand and backhand shots:

Forehand Topsin: Twist the Remote from the buttons facing up to the buttons
facing down.
Forehand Slice: Hold Remote with the face of it towards the sensor, followed by
swinging upwards and twist the remote away from the sensor.
Lob: Swing from a lower area to a higher area.
Backhand Topsin: Twist the Remote from the buttons facing down to the buttons
facing up.
Backhand Slice: Hold Remote with the face of it away the sensor, followed by
swinging upwards and twist the Remote towards the sensor.

The only shot it is missing is the flat shot, although I'm not sure whether or not how far you twist the Wiimote as you swing affects the amount of spin on it. I don't remember having a problem with it registering different shots than what I intended, but I'd need to play the game again to see how it works.
Since all Mario Power Tennis does is replace buttons with motions, it seems like it would have been easy to just set the Wiimote to recognize five distinct motions as opposed to making them as subtle as they currently are.

Besides, this is two years after Wii Sports so Nintendo should know how to get the controls to work in a tennis game.

Proper detection of swing direction would have made it worth the wait if nothing else. Swinging later or earlier is (and always was) a dumb way of choosing directions.

I think it worked fine in Wii Sports Tennis because the game was designed with that in mind. For a game designed with a traditional controller in mind, it isn't going to work very well.

[TheYoungerPlumber]

I'm confused. I thought this review took the position that the controls DO work--why is everyone saying they don't in a matter-of-fact way?

Anyway, you can move yourself in this game. That's a big difference between this game and Wii Sports Tennis.

[MegaByte]

Because he said that you have to train yourself to the controls and we're saying that's not a good thing.

[NWR_pap64]

Because he said that you have to train yourself to the controls and we're saying that's not a good thing.

How is learning to play a game and mastering it a bad thing?

Its understandable that people just want to play right away. But the Wii has proven that even though it takes some time motion controls can work and it becomes second nature.

If this review is to be believed, Mario Power Tennis can play well once you learn to play and master its controls.

So again, I don't understand how a learning curve can be a bad thing.

[MegaByte]

Because the point of motion controls is that they should just work intuitively.  Anything (e.g. button pressing) can become second nature with enough work.  If you're playing tennis and it does not work the same way as real tennis, then it's a failure of control even if you can eventually make it work.  Not broken does not equate to good control when we're talking about something specifically designed to mimic natural motion.  This is what we were promised for the Wii, but (with the exception of a few special cases like Kororinpa) this is what hasn't actually been possible until the MotionPlus.

[Pale]

My point is that expecting a human controlled motion to work as precisely as a button is unrealistic due to the unrepeatability of a human motion.

For example, golf is a freaking hard sport! Why is it so hard? because it's next to impossible to repeat the exact same golf swing every time.

I think it's unrealistic to expect developers to somehow magically remove human error from the formula.


In Mario Power Tennis, the only "mistake" you have to be careful of is winding up your swing too rapidly because that often registers as a swing itself.

[Pale]

Oh, and as for the supposed different swings in Wii Sports Tennis... is it terrible to say that I don't believe what they told us?

Let's just say if you can do all those different things, the ball flight isn't differentiated enough to make it worth while at all.

In Mario Power Tennis you can tell the difference, and not only because of the colored trails to label them. Top spin shots obviously bounce lower and faster. Back spin shots obviously float as they fly and bounce higher and shorter.

[Pale]

And finally (sorry for the triple post) I don't suggest forming an opinion on this game after only a couple hours of gameplay. As I said in my review, I was not happy in the beginning, but the game really grew on me and I love it now.

[MegaByte]

I think it's unrealistic to expect developers to somehow magically remove human error from the formula.

Of course it is.  But I'm wondering how much of this human error isn't human error at all, but retraining yourself to something that doesn't function quite as expected (given the fact that it took several hours to even like the game).

[Pale]

Well it took several hours to get me to stop expecting the same level of precision I had in the n64 game.

Maybe I didn't articulate this well enough in the review, but the reason I was so taken by the game is that I did not feel the game wasn't functioning as it should.  I instead felt that I wasn't doing the motion's perfect every time.

There have been plenty of Wii games where I honestly think that the motion control is garbage and impossible. Banana Blitz comes to mind.

I think the difference is that in Power Tennis, when my character does the wrong thing, I can actually contemplate some ideas for how I could perform the swing better next time. In games where the controls suck, I would be at a loss.

As an example, there are moments in the game where I do not give the ball any top spin when I try.  I realized that part of the reason for this is that instead of consantly bringing the swing up, i often do a horizontal swing with an up loop at the end...

It's the fact that I had thought processes like this that amazed me about the game.

[MegaByte]

I guess I will need to pick this up and try for myself.  What I'm thinking now is that the games with poor gestures have trained us to expect to be able to "cheat" the system, but if you follow the motions properly, it will work consistently.  I remember having this feeling in one game that I played that where controls were generally panned, though I don't recall now which one.

[Mop it up]

I don't expect the controls to be as precise as button presses, but this in itself creates a problem for this specific game. Mario Power Tennis was designed for buttons, and replacing them with motions does create a game which seems sloppy at first play.

The controls do work, but I don't feel they work as well as they could. In order to perform a straight shot, you have to swing the Wiimote perfectly horizontally. If you even so much as slightly tilt it up or down, it results in a topspin or slice shot. If the motion had some "wiggle room" where you could move it slightly up or down and still get a straight shot, it would be a lot easier to consistently hit the same type of shot.

There's nothing wrong with a learning curve, but in this game someone is unlikely to ever reach a point where one no longer make mistakes. This means that one will always feel like they could improve, yet it won't be possible.

Don't misunderstand me, I still think the game is good, but the controls could have been implemented better.

[Kairon]

Well it took several hours to get me to stop expecting the same level of precision I had in the n64 game.

Maybe I didn't articulate this well enough in the review, but the reason I was so taken by the game is that I did not feel the game wasn't functioning as it should.  I instead felt that I wasn't doing the motion's perfect every time.

There have been plenty of Wii games where I honestly think that the motion control is garbage and impossible. Banana Blitz comes to mind.

I think the difference is that in Power Tennis, when my character does the wrong thing, I can actually contemplate some ideas for how I could perform the swing better next time. In games where the controls suck, I would be at a loss.

As an example, there are moments in the game where I do not give the ball any top spin when I try.  I realized that part of the reason for this is that instead of consantly bringing the swing up, i often do a horizontal swing with an up loop at the end...

It's the fact that I had thought processes like this that amazed me about the game.

Yeah, this is basically the exact same thought process I went through with We Cheer.

[Nick DiMola]

Just played a bit of this last night, and I'm not sure I'm feeling it just yet. Chessa, myself and my brother will probably play a bit more tonight and see if we like it any better.

[NWR_pap64]

Well it took several hours to get me to stop expecting the same level of precision I had in the n64 game.

Maybe I didn't articulate this well enough in the review, but the reason I was so taken by the game is that I did not feel the game wasn't functioning as it should.  I instead felt that I wasn't doing the motion's perfect every time.

There have been plenty of Wii games where I honestly think that the motion control is garbage and impossible. Banana Blitz comes to mind.

I think the difference is that in Power Tennis, when my character does the wrong thing, I can actually contemplate some ideas for how I could perform the swing better next time. In games where the controls suck, I would be at a loss.

As an example, there are moments in the game where I do not give the ball any top spin when I try.  I realized that part of the reason for this is that instead of consantly bringing the swing up, i often do a horizontal swing with an up loop at the end...

It's the fact that I had thought processes like this that amazed me about the game.

Yeah, this is basically the exact same thought process I went through with We Cheer.

The same can also be said about "Samba de Amigo" on Wii. Reviewers have bashed this game to hell and back, claiming it has horrible controls. But the thing is that many are playing it as if they were playing the original Samba on the DC when both games use vastly different methods of motion recognition. The original DC version had sensors in the maracas and the pad so it registered how high and low you were shaking the maracas. The Wii version recognizes how high and low you are tilting the Wii remote.

It feels weird playing at first, but once you understand what the game wants you to do its a piece of cake, even on the very hard levels. Speaking of which, the harder levels in "Samba de Amigo" is a test of hand/eye co-ordination since dots are flying everywhere and you need to hit them in the order and at the right height. I am 100% sure reviewers jumped right into this difficulty setting, expecting it to play exactly as in the original game and failed miserably, claiming the game had issues when it was really about the player.

I think this might be the issue with Power Tennis and why reviewers have been confused about it.

[Mop it up]

Pap64, I think that's why IGN gave Mario Power Tennis a low score. The reviewer had played the original game and was probably expecting it to still play like the original but with motion control, and since it doesn't he ragged on it. I suppose having to relearn how to play the game in a different way doesn't sound so exciting to him like it does for the rest of us.

That said, people seem unanimous in stating that the minigames are practically unplayable. As such, it does seem like a valid complaint that the controls present some problems, though I don't think it's enough to dock the score down to 5.8. However, I have yet to play the minigames, and I'm wondering if even they can be adjusted to after extensive practice. I really need to put some more playtime into this game...

This game obviously isn't targeting the people who played the original, and that's why I think Pale's review is the most accurate and informative one so far.

[NWR_pap64]

Pap64, I think that's why IGN gave Mario Power Tennis a low score. The reviewer had played the original game and was probably expecting it to still play like the original but with motion control, and since it doesn't he ragged on it. I suppose having to relearn how to play the game in a different way doesn't sound so exciting to him like it does for the rest of us.

That said, people seem unanimous in stating that the minigames are practically unplayable. As such, it does seem like a valid complaint that the controls present some problems, though I don't think it's enough to dock the score down to 5.8. However, I have yet to play the minigames, and I'm wondering if even they can be adjusted to after extensive practice. I really need to put some more playtime into this game...

This game obviously isn't targeting the people who played the original, and that's why I think Pale's review is the most accurate and informative one so far.

Way back when the Wii was first shown at E3 2006 Red Steel, Twilight Princess and even Wii Sports impressions were all over the map. Fans either loved other or completely hated them. The opinion on controls varied greatly, with some saying that it worked great, others said that they were bad.

From that moment on, I realized that Wii reviews would always be mixed because people would have different opinions on controls. Even if the game has a slight learning curve some reviewers would be annoyed and say it controls badly, when the real problem is that the reviewer has yet to truly understand and master the game.

The reason why is because reviewers have a very limited time to review a game. They have a deadline to meet and its likely they have 2 to 3 hours worth of game time. This might be enough for some games, but for others they do require more time. It gets worse when the reviewers actually try to publish a review before the game ships.

Once more, I think this is why Mario Power Tennis reviews are everywhere right now. It seems that Pale was lucky enough to spend a lot of time with the game, as well as play with other people and was able to create a concise opinion of the game, while everyone else just seems to rush to it.

Not saying the game doesn't have issues, but it seems that the low scores are the results of rushed game time and not enough information.

[Stratos]

Pap64, I think that's why IGN gave Mario Power Tennis a low score. The reviewer had played the original game and was probably expecting it to still play like the original but with motion control, and since it doesn't he ragged on it. I suppose having to relearn how to play the game in a different way doesn't sound so exciting to him like it does for the rest of us.

That said, people seem unanimous in stating that the minigames are practically unplayable. As such, it does seem like a valid complaint that the controls present some problems, though I don't think it's enough to dock the score down to 5.8. However, I have yet to play the minigames, and I'm wondering if even they can be adjusted to after extensive practice. I really need to put some more playtime into this game...

This game obviously isn't targeting the people who played the original, and that's why I think Pale's review is the most accurate and informative one so far.

Way back when the Wii was first shown at E3 2006 Red Steel, Twilight Princess and even Wii Sports impressions were all over the map. Fans either loved other or completely hated them. The opinion on controls varied greatly, with some saying that it worked great, others said that they were bad.

From that moment on, I realized that Wii reviews would always be mixed because people would have different opinions on controls. Even if the game has a slight learning curve some reviewers would be annoyed and say it controls badly, when the real problem is that the reviewer has yet to truly understand and master the game.

The reason why is because reviewers have a very limited time to review a game. They have a deadline to meet and its likely they have 2 to 3 hours worth of game time. This might be enough for some games, but for others they do require more time. It gets worse when the reviewers actually try to publish a review before the game ships.

Once more, I think this is why Mario Power Tennis reviews are everywhere right now. It seems that Pale was lucky enough to spend a lot of time with the game, as well as play with other people and was able to create a concise opinion of the game, while everyone else just seems to rush to it.

Not saying the game doesn't have issues, but it seems that the low scores are the results of rushed game time and not enough information.

But then how much time is enough time. If it can vary from game to game as you say, where is the line reasonably drawn? I know that in writing you need to grab readers by the initial hook lest you lose your them. How long is enough time to determine if a game is good or not? Five hours? Ten? Can we hope to ever try and come up with a good amount of time?

[NWR_pap64]

A year.

But all kidding aside, a week should be enough for a reviewer to play through most of the game. I think it can be accomplished in less time. In my case, I was able to understand "Samba de Amigo" in an evening of play, and what I learned was re-inforced through multiple plays.

[Stratos]

A year.

But all kidding aside, a week should be enough for a reviewer to play through most of the game. I think it can be accomplished in less time. In my case, I was able to understand "Samba de Amigo" in an evening of play, and what I learned was re-inforced through multiple plays.

So it is probably more of a fault on most game journalism sites where they feel the need to speed out reviews sooner than the competition and even get the reviews out before game launch (at the expense of poor spelling and grammar, they are in such a hurry that I swear some sites don't even click the spellchecker button before they submit it to the site for publishing). It's a pity games like Power Tennis suffer from it though.

[NWR_pap64]

A year.

But all kidding aside, a week should be enough for a reviewer to play through most of the game. I think it can be accomplished in less time. In my case, I was able to understand "Samba de Amigo" in an evening of play, and what I learned was re-inforced through multiple plays.

So it is probably more of a fault on most game journalism sites where they feel the need to speed out reviews sooner than the competition and even get the reviews out before game launch (at the expense of poor spelling and grammar, they are in such a hurry that I swear some sites don't even click the spellchecker button before they submit it to the site for publishing). It's a pity games like Power Tennis suffer from it though.

Don't forget that certain companies WANT a game to be reviewed as soon as possible, because if the review is positive it might push game sales up.

Games are not like movies in which you just watch them for a couple of hours, then jolt down opinions and write a review based on that. There are some games that simply can't be enjoyed in just a few hours of gameplay.

[Stratos]

A year.

But all kidding aside, a week should be enough for a reviewer to play through most of the game. I think it can be accomplished in less time. In my case, I was able to understand "Samba de Amigo" in an evening of play, and what I learned was re-inforced through multiple plays.

So it is probably more of a fault on most game journalism sites where they feel the need to speed out reviews sooner than the competition and even get the reviews out before game launch (at the expense of poor spelling and grammar, they are in such a hurry that I swear some sites don't even click the spellchecker button before they submit it to the site for publishing). It's a pity games like Power Tennis suffer from it though.

Don't forget that certain companies WANT a game to be reviewed as soon as possible, because if the review is positive it might push game sales up.

Games are not like movies in which you just watch them for a couple of hours, then jolt down opinions and write a review based on that. There are some games that simply can't be enjoyed in just a few hours of gameplay.

I also notice the opposite for games that are quite poor. Publishers either send review copies late or not at all if they know it will get a bad score.

[MegaByte]

Way back when the Wii was first shown at E3 2006 Red Steel, Twilight Princess and even Wii Sports impressions were all over the map. Fans either loved other or completely hated them. The opinion on controls varied greatly, with some saying that it worked great, others said that they were bad.

There was a different reason for this, though.  At E3 2006, Nintendo hadn't finalized the Remote sensitivity yet, making it hard to play some games well (which is really bad for these time-limited impressions).