Topic: Multiple controller options in Wii games

[NWR_pap64]

On IGN's Mario Kart Wii impressions they mentioned that the Wii controls take away from the enjoyment and that a GC or Classic controller is a must.

I read that and started thinking: "Did Nintendo just create a double edged sword?"

On one hand, I welcome the fact that Nintendo and developers in general are smart enough to include multiple controller options for more accesibility (sp?) and customization. That way, you can find a control setup you like and be happy with it.

On the other, this creates a clutch for people to lean on when they fail to grasp motion controls. The point of Wii games is that we use the innovative controls to play them and experiment around with motion sensing technology. So what's the point of making a Wii game if the first thing people are going to do is grab a classic or GC controller the minute the game loads?

Not saying that this is a bad thing as some games work much better with the traditional controller setup (Brawl being the best example), but developers should work to fine tune their controls rather than to slap the GC controller options when they fail to do so.

Instead, they should find ways of making games that are both fun and prove that the game works great with the controllers. Mario Galaxy did an excellent job of this. Technically, the game can be pulled off using the GC controller. But the development team were ingenious enough that they created challenges that could only be done with the controller (like guiding Mario through the blue stars using the pointer) and made the game feel natural at the same time.

Also, its been a year since the Wii's release. People should be getting used to how Wii games control, none of this "Its feels weird playing with the Wiimote" nonsense. This was understandable back at launch, but now its feel like people are making excuses.

I know people will say "Well, some games don't control well", and I'll agree with them. However, many games with "control" issues are actually quite solid and its just the whiners making a big deal over nothing.

So to sum it all up:
- Yes, I agree with the idea of including multiple controller options, especially for those games that might not work so well with the Wiimote

- However, if developers intend people to play their games using the Wiimote they should just refine the controls, rather than to leave it unfinished and toss in the controller options as an alternate solution.

- Fans should be getting used to the controller by now. Again, I know some games feel weird and not that polished, but the "shock" should have worn off by now.

Now, what do YOU think? I am certain this issue will open a massive can of worms and the thread will go to hell, so go crazy go nuts...

[Smoke39]

Considering how well Excite Truck controls, either IGN sucks or Nintendo really dropped the ball with Mario Kart.

[DAaaMan64]

Considering how well Excite Truck controls, either IGN sucks or Nintendo really dropped the ball with Mario Kart.

Excite truck could be controlled well once you get the controls down.  The problem is the learning curve, and even if you get the learning curve down, are you even any better than someone who used the joystick?

[NWR_pap64]

Considering how well Excite Truck controls, either IGN sucks or Nintendo really dropped the ball with Mario Kart.

I think what Matt said was that he had more fun with the GC controller than the Wiimote. I know its all about personal preferences, but if the Wiimote works fine why is the GC controller a must?

I have to read more impressions and reviews before I pin down an opinion, but MK Wii might be the first game in which having GC controls could actually alienate the experience.

[UltimatePartyBear]

I don't think I would have been happy with a Mario Kart with only motion controls, anyway.  Steering with the remote doesn't appeal much to me.

[Smoke39]

Considering how well Excite Truck controls, either IGN sucks or Nintendo really dropped the ball with Mario Kart.

Excite truck could be controlled well once you get the controls down.  The problem is the learning curve, and even if you get the learning curve down, are you even any better than someone who used the joystick?

edit: nevermind, I missread.

[NWR_pap64]

GoNintendo's reading my posts! Just a few days after I posted this RawMeat does an 'End of day' entry about multiple control options.

Our take on the subject is different, though. He believes that multiple control options is ruining the idea of Wii gaming and that if developers just make games using the old controls why bother making Wii games?

I do agree that developers need to put more thought into the controls and make Wii games, well, Wii games, but not all games work well with the controller and like I said, multiple options are always welcome.

[NWR_insanolord]

Nintendo wouldn't have made the Classic controller if they didn't think there were good reasons for it. There are relatively very few games that use a Cube or Classic controller. There are games that don't work or don't work as well with the Wii controls, and I think it's good that Nintendo realizes this and doesn't force the Wii controls.

No one complained when Nintendo allowed the Cube controller in Brawl, and most people wouldn't have had it any other way. What's so different about Mario Kart? It's a long running series that isn't really changing that much with this installment, some people will be more comfortable with what they're used to. Unlike in Brawl, where the Cube controller is the standard (which is annoying for someone like me who prefers Remote & Nunchuk controls but keeps his Wavebird receiver in the machine) Nintendo is really playing up the motion steering with the inclusion of the wheel.

Where were all these complaints when virtually every DS game used D-pad and buttons instead of the touch screen? I think if a game could be controlled well with a Classic or Cube controller the option should be there, and no one should be complaining because we have more options for controls.

[Nick DiMola]

Considering how well Excite Truck controls, either IGN sucks or Nintendo really dropped the ball with Mario Kart.

Excite truck could be controlled well once you get the controls down.  The problem is the learning curve, and even if you get the learning curve down, are you even any better than someone who used the joystick?

Probably not, but it is a whole hell of a lot more fun with the Wii Remote.

[Ceric]

You know I was going to start a topic like this but my question was everyone take on the different controllers.  I think I'll add part so its not wasted.

Pretty much it boiled down to that the GCN Controller is vastly superior to the Classic Controller in everyway except the d-pad.  That not every game plays well with the Wiimote.  It seems things have been slowed down in general to compensate.  Though there are other games I never want to play with analog stick again, RE4, Super Monkey Ball, Trauma Center, etc.

On topic, I think Nintendo was so enamored with the idea of the Steering wheel encasement that they didn't really considered what played best to the technology.  I find the Wiimote has a serious problem when you have to put it towards the TV or Away From the TV to do something.  I also find it has more of a problem doing the turning thing with buttons towards you then doing like Dewy, Excite Truck, SSR, etc.

I would love to play with the Wheel type controls but I still have my reserves especially with the vibe this Mario Kart is giving me.  It seems to be trying to be a lot less whimisical then normal.

On another Side note I do believe they should make a Classic Controller plugin Style GCN controller, to fill the void that the lack of Wavebirds have, it is still the superior general gaming design.  Though to be honest I haven't logged much time with the 360 controller.

[UncleBob]

I still want my Bongo controlled racing game...

[animecyberrat]

Well I was happy they included GC pad support for DBZ BT2, and apparently most people are happy with the support for Brawl so it makes sense to me that certain games would just work better with the old style controllers.

This all goes back to our debates we had pre-launch back when everyone was nervous about the Wii-remote in the first place. It would seam as though Nintendo actually addressed the issue by admitting they were wrong. If the remote *was* the future of gaming then it would by default be superior in every aspect. By admitting that the old style controls work better for "classic" style gameplay they are showing hard core gamers at least that they were wrong in assuming the remote would be the next standard controller.

It is nice that they offer the support to some extent but it counteracts their own philosophy regarding the Wii. Personally I try and force myself to adjust to games that use remote controls even if the GC pad is optional because if I am going to buy into the remote being the future I feel a need to adjust now rather than latter. Giving gamers a clutch to hold onto was a mistake in my opinion. But they kept the D-Pad around all these years after creating newer and "better" technology in the Analog Sticks.

It makes me wonder about the next round of consoles. If 360 is doing well using the old style controls and PS3 is sorta halfway copying the motion controls but not the remote idea, and Nintendo themselves even only half way support the new technology, what will happen next gen, will the new Nintendo console revert back to "traditional" style controls while keeping the motion sensing technology, or will they move forward and force gamers to make the adjustment to the new style? It also makes me wonder about the Next Playstation and Xbox consoles, will they continue to use traditional controls or will they follow Nintendo's example? Especially if Nintendo themselves doesn't fully embrace the remote why would Sony or MS attempt to embrace it next time around?

[vudu]

GoNintendo's reading my posts! Just a few days after I posted this RawMeat does an 'End of day' entry about multiple control options.

This is the second time GoNintendo has done this.

[Ceric]

Well I was happy they included GC pad support for DBZ BT2, and apparently most people are happy with the support for Brawl so it makes sense to me that certain games would just work better with the old style controllers.

This all goes back to our debates we had pre-launch back when everyone was nervous about the Wii-remote in the first place. It would seam as though Nintendo actually addressed the issue by admitting they were wrong. If the remote *was* the future of gaming then it would by default be superior in every aspect. By admitting that the old style controls work better for "classic" style gameplay they are showing hard core gamers at least that they were wrong in assuming the remote would be the next standard controller.

It is nice that they offer the support to some extent but it counteracts their own philosophy regarding the Wii. Personally I try and force myself to adjust to games that use remote controls even if the GC pad is optional because if I am going to buy into the remote being the future I feel a need to adjust now rather than latter. Giving gamers a clutch to hold onto was a mistake in my opinion. But they kept the D-Pad around all these years after creating newer and "better" technology in the Analog Sticks.

It makes me wonder about the next round of consoles. If 360 is doing well using the old style controls and PS3 is sorta halfway copying the motion controls but not the remote idea, and Nintendo themselves even only half way support the new technology, what will happen next gen, will the new Nintendo console revert back to "traditional" style controls while keeping the motion sensing technology, or will they move forward and force gamers to make the adjustment to the new style? It also makes me wonder about the Next Playstation and Xbox consoles, will they continue to use traditional controls or will they follow Nintendo's example? Especially if Nintendo themselves doesn't fully embrace the remote why would Sony or MS attempt to embrace it next time around?

*and he lands the dismount*
Anyways...

I agree.  I really do try to get into the Wiimote scheme of playing a game.  Though on some, Brawl really, it just doesn't work out.  Also I don't think we'll need to wait for a new console for the next controller to come out in the Playstation and XBox arena.  I could see them releasing it before because lets face it they both will probably have a long life by virtue of slow adoption.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Brawl (w/ Chuck the Nun) works.  Really, it does.  After customizing.  And cheeseburgers.

[Adrock]

It depends on the game. Some games you really can't add motion controls and make it better and in those cases, I like having options.

[NWR_pap64]

GoNintendo's reading my posts! Just a few days after I posted this RawMeat does an 'End of day' entry about multiple control options.

This is the second time GoNintendo has done this.

Yeah, I remember that. At first I thought it was a mere coincidence not worth mentioning, but its VERY weird that as soon as I post about this he makes an editorial about the issue.

[matt oz]

I think it's just a matter of Nintendo pretending to be innovative by introducing a new control scheme, but in the end, they design all their major franchises around traditional control schemes.

Twilight Princess was developed for and survived on the Gamecube without motion control.  Galaxy didn't need that stupid star pointer on the screen.  Brawl sure as hell doesn't need any motion controls.  I've never played Metroid Prime 3, but I'll just assume that it doesn't require motion controls, because that makes my argument better.

So there's four of Nintendo's big franchises (Mario Kart makes five) that were not designed around motion control in any way whatsoever.  Motion control is only for their second-tier games or casual games.

[Ceric]

I think it's just a matter of Nintendo pretending to be innovative by introducing a new control scheme, but in the end, they design all their major franchises around traditional control schemes.

Twilight Princess was developed for and survived on the Gamecube without motion control.  Galaxy didn't need that stupid star pointer on the screen.  Brawl sure as hell doesn't need any motion controls.  I've never played Metroid Prime 3, but I'll just assume that it doesn't require motion controls, because that makes my argument better.

So there's four of Nintendo's big franchises (Mario Kart makes five) that were not designed around motion control in any way whatsoever.  Motion control is only for their second-tier games or casual games.

I'm playing MP3 right now and it could be done without the motion controls but not the same.  (Though I can't strafe to save my soul.)

[Maverick]

Matt, I agree for the most part that none of these games *needed* motion controls.  I have the GC version of Twilight Princess (the REAL version! neener neener), so I can't comment on the Wii one, but I thought the "waggle" moves in Galaxy were unecessary. 

The motion controls worked best for me in Metroid Prime 3.  It certainly wasn't necessary, as evidenced by MP 1 and 2, but there was a whole extra layer of immersion granted by the motion controls.  Things as mundane as manipulating controls and levers became fun simply by using the Wiimote to do it.  And of course the superior control and aiming for the combat was a blast.  MP3 is still probably the only game that has "sold" me on motion controls.  (Barring Wii Sports of course.)

[Adrock]

Of the games I own (yeah, I know, I don't own that many games), I feel that only No More Heroes would be far worse without motion controls. For a game originally planned for 360, I can't even imagine the game being as fun on that platform. NMH's less is more approach with motion controls is what made it work.

I find that extremes on both sides of the spectrum don't work very well. Take Assassin's Creed, for example. It uses every single button on the controller and one of the buttons changes the input of the other buttons. Why? Seriously, that's just way too complicated and why I couldn't get into the game. On the other hand, a game that overuses motion controls and/or uses it poorly doesn't really work either.

I don't think there's a real way to remove the need for multiple control options outside of the developer flat-out choosing to implement 1 option. Gamers will always desire and appreciate options. With Mario Kart Wii, I'm looking forward to using the free Wheel accessory, though I have a feeling I'll settle for the Gamecube or Classic controllers. At the same time, since my girlfriend liked Excite Truck, she'll probably play MKW with the Wheel when she'd never touch Double Dash.

Ultimately, I hope for a controller that does both motion controls and traditional controls equally well (or at least close to it) which, I suppose, would basically be a Wii remote and nunchuck with a few more buttons. That might make things easier for both developers and gamers (casual or otherwise). One controller that can do multiple control options by itself is easier to handle than 3 different controllers. Still, where do you draw the line? Having too many buttons sucks and too few sucks too. What constitutes too many/few? I've played games on the Wii where I didn't feel like I needed more buttons (i.e. Super Mario Galaxy) while other games (i.e. Metroid Prime 3) made me wish there was at least one extra button because mapping anything to the D-pad didn't work very well for a number of reasons.

[animecyberrat]

I guess if you look at the games I have for the Wii, Wii Sports, Wii Play, Dragon Blade, Zelda, MP3, Super Paper Mario, Rampage, then you will see why I don't exactly have a problem with the controls. Although the sucky controls is why I got rid of Marvel Ultimate Alliance, and Red Steel. I did rather enjoy Dragon Ball Z BT2, and RE4 but I traded both of those in to get Metroid Prime 3. I am still waiting for someone to figure out how to make good fighting game controls, not Smash Bros, I am one of those who doesn't not count that as a fighting game, but I want to see real fighting games done right on the Wii. Or maybe I am thinking of Peter Jackson, yeah that's it nevermind then.

[IceCold]

Don't you like Mortal Kombat? Did you try Armageddon?

[Ceric]

...
Although the sucky controls is why I got rid of Marvel Ultimate Alliance
...

You want to know what the sad part of that statement is?  I rented for the PS3 because I really enjoyed my play-through on the Wii and I wanted to do it with a more traditional control scheme and Hi-Def.  Ironically enough instead of making it easier to do the more common useful moves teh developer made it harder.  I was like dang.  You could have just assigned some buttons...  So in the end a great concept, good execution, but whoever decided those controls where good should be taken out back.

[Chozo Ghost]

...
Although the sucky controls is why I got rid of Marvel Ultimate Alliance
...

You want to know what the sad part of that statement is?  I rented for the PS3 because I really enjoyed my play-through on the Wii and I wanted to do it with a more traditional control scheme and Hi-Def.  Ironically enough instead of making it easier to do the more common useful moves teh developer made it harder.  I was like dang.  You could have just assigned some buttons...  So in the end a great concept, good execution, but whoever decided those controls where good should be taken out back.

Are you saying the PS3 controls were bad or the Wii controls were? I've never played either version, and it's hard to tell which you're complaining about in this post.