Topic: Full List of GameCube Remakes Announced

[Nick DiMola]

I don't know why they would deliberately stop you from using the controllers you already have. Nintendo may be intolerant at times, but not when it comes to selling old games. They don't care how you play; they just want you to buy it.

I thought the same thing until I rented Mario Super Sluggers.  No option to use a standard control scheme, its a complete waggle fest.

I'm fairly certain there is a control option where you hold the remote sideways and it is completely devoid of waggle. I've only played the game once and I was slightly drunk so I can't make a certain judgment but I'm pretty sure of it...

[GoldenPhoenix]

I don't know why they would deliberately stop you from using the controllers you already have. Nintendo may be intolerant at times, but not when it comes to selling old games. They don't care how you play; they just want you to buy it.

I thought the same thing until I rented Mario Super Sluggers.  No option to use a standard control scheme, its a complete waggle fest.

Are you sure you played the same game I did? Waggle was quite minor relegating mostly to sprinting, batting and throwing all of which (well maybe excluding sprinting) were natural feeling.

[NWR_Lindy]

It's a "new" Wii game (that is remarkably similar to its GameCube predecessor, aside from the aforementioned lack of a standard control scheme).

Also, the phrase "waggle fest" made me laugh out loud.

The Wii Remote/Nunchuk control scheme is very overrated.  It's extremely good for certain types of games, but very mediocre (bordering on unnecessary or even annoying) for others.  On a straight player-to-game interaction level, mapping some gestures to waggle actually makes them more, not less, complex, defeating its entire purpose of non-complexity.

[NWR_insanolord]

It's not "very overrated" because nobody overrates it that way. The only time I've ever seen anyone claim that the Wii control scheme is supposed to be the best control scheme for everything is in Ian's posts. Everybody else realizes that, like every control scheme ever made, it has advantages and disadvantages.

[Ian Sane]

The only time I've ever seen anyone claim that the Wii control scheme is supposed to be the best control scheme for everything is in Ian's posts.

Well, hey, Nintendo claimed that's what it was supposed to be.

[GoldenPhoenix]

The only time I've ever seen anyone claim that the Wii control scheme is supposed to be the best control scheme for everything is in Ian's posts.

Well, hey, Nintendo claimed that's what it was supposed to be.

Because we all know there is one control method out there that is perfect for everything.

[D_Average]

I thought the same thing until I rented Mario Super Sluggers.  No option to use a standard control scheme, its a complete waggle fest.

I'm fairly certain there is a control option where you hold the remote sideways and it is completely devoid of waggle. I've only played the game once and I was slightly drunk so I can't make a certain judgment but I'm pretty sure of it...

This option is there, but its even worse, as you're relegated to a few responsibilities while the computer does the rest.  Why they didn't just copy what Power Pro's did w/ the Classic Controller I'll never know.

The only time I've ever seen anyone claim that the Wii control scheme is supposed to be the best control scheme for everything is in Ian's posts.

Well, hey, Nintendo claimed that's what it was supposed to be.

It will, just give it time, after the motion plus comes out.  Now, for the low price of $70+, we may soon have that controller!

[Nick DiMola]

I thought the same thing until I rented Mario Super Sluggers.  No option to use a standard control scheme, its a complete waggle fest.

I'm fairly certain there is a control option where you hold the remote sideways and it is completely devoid of waggle. I've only played the game once and I was slightly drunk so I can't make a certain judgment but I'm pretty sure of it...

This option is there, but its even worse, as you're relegated to a few responsibilities while the computer does the rest.  Why they didn't just copy what Power Pro's did w/ the Classic Controller I'll never know.

That still sounds wrong to me. I remember it playing EXACTLY like the Gamecube version at that point. I don't remember the computer doing anything for me. Can you specify what functions the computer was performing?

[NWR_insanolord]

The only time I've ever seen anyone claim that the Wii control scheme is supposed to be the best control scheme for everything is in Ian's posts.

Well, hey, Nintendo claimed that's what it was supposed to be.

I've never seen anyone from Nintendo claiming that. Even if they did, they made it, of course they're going to talk it up. It's like Microsoft resorting to claiming that they're the number 1 "HD console", companies that are trying to sell something always try to put the best face on it.

[D_Average]

I thought the same thing until I rented Mario Super Sluggers.  No option to use a standard control scheme, its a complete waggle fest.

I'm fairly certain there is a control option where you hold the remote sideways and it is completely devoid of waggle. I've only played the game once and I was slightly drunk so I can't make a certain judgment but I'm pretty sure of it...

This option is there, but its even worse, as you're relegated to a few responsibilities while the computer does the rest.  Why they didn't just copy what Power Pro's did w/ the Classic Controller I'll never know.

That still sounds wrong to me. I remember it playing EXACTLY like the Gamecube version at that point. I don't remember the computer doing anything for me. Can you specify what functions the computer was performing?

Here's the most detailed description I could find:
Super Sluggers gives you three different control schemes to choose from. Unlike the old fairy tale, none of these options feels just right. Players can utilize just a Wii-mote, having the Wii control everything besides batting and pitching, not unlike a lamer version of Wii Sports Baseball. By attaching a Nunchuk, players can control their fielders, choose which base to throw to, and even control their base runners. Last but not least, my favorite control scheme, you can use the Wii-mote turned on its side like a classic NES pad.
When using just a Wii-mote, players will still need to bat, pitch, and waggle to throw to bases and speed up their base runners. Everything else is completely controlled by the Wii. Not being able to control your base runners is a major pain, especially when hitting pop flies to the outfield.
http://cheatcc.com/wii/rev/mariosupersluggersreview.html

[Nick DiMola]

Hmm, I'll have to look into that. My brother is coming home Thursday morning so I'll have him bring that along and I'll test it out again ... or I can just ask Neal and see that way. Either way I should be able to confirm/deny this soon.

[D_Average]

Hmm, I'll have to look into that. My brother is coming home Thursday morning so I'll have him bring that along and I'll test it out again ... or I can just ask Neal and see that way. Either way I should be able to confirm/deny this soon.

1up and IGN said the same thing, they just didn't explain it as well. 

[Ian Sane]

Even if they did, they made it, of course they're going to talk it up.

They didn't just talk the talk.  By releasing it as the standard Wii controller and offering the Classic Controller as a seperately sold accessory they walked they walk.  They took a general controller design that had worked for over 20 years and was compatible with easily over 90% of console games ever made and replaced it with an NES controller turned vertically with motion control.  Aside from the fact that they talked it up by merely doing that they were trying to pass it off as a new standard.  "We don't need this old controller standard that has worked for decades to come with our system.  This remote and nunchuk is good enough."  What controller you include with the console is what you expect developers to design for.  You are saying that controller is the standard.

[KDR_11k]

If they had gone with the classic controller as the default the Wii would have failed.

[NWR_Neal]

Hmm, I'll have to look into that. My brother is coming home Thursday morning so I'll have him bring that along and I'll test it out again ... or I can just ask Neal and see that way. Either way I should be able to confirm/deny this soon.

There's also the Wii Remote on its side which takes out the waggle. Still not a great control method the Wii Remote becomes cramped in a Brawl sort of way, but it ain't no waggle fest.
There's nothing wrong with using the Wii Remote and Nunchuk in that game though.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Can someone explain to me how offering a different control method (classic controller) "walking the talk?".  Did MS or Sony ever release an alternative control method you could buy? Yeah I thought so.

[Ian Sane]

If they had gone with the classic controller as the default the Wii would have failed.

Well yeah.  Without the remote the Wii would have been like throwing the Gamecube in a new box and hoping no one notices.  Nintendo would have had to have done a lot of things differently.  Unless you mean the remote still exists but it just an accessory like a lightgun.  In that case if they sold Wii Sports seperately from the console but bundled with the remote they might have still done okay.

Wii Sports sold the Wii and if people were willing to go nuts over Guitar Hero and Rock Band despite the fact that they require a special controller they could have likely done the same for Wii Sports.  The Wii is kind of like a console that ships with Guitar Hero and a guitar controller and you have to buy the normal controller seperately and everyone tries to make normal games that use the guitar controller, even though it makes no sense to.

They could however have packaged the remote, nunchuk and classic controller with each console and it wouldn't have changed a thing except with developers knowing that every Wii owner had a classic controller they could always aim to use the controls that work the best and not shoehorn everything in the remote with dumb waggle because they can't rely on the customer to own the classic controller.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Funny thing is that I could SWEAR Ian said Nintendo was not confident in the Wiimote BECAUSE they were releasing the classic controller as an alternative.

Oh lookie what I found

Well that's the point.  Nintendo doesn't trust in the new controller.  Therefore it's a lousy design that they never should have gone with in the first place.  They can't suddenly get confident in their design and it will all be cool.  There's a reason they aren't and that can't go away if they get rid of the shell.  I'm not confident in it, I already know they're not confident in it either, and that means it's not a new standard and it should be and it won't become one just because Nintendo forces it to be.

[Ian Sane]

Funny thing is that I could SWEAR Ian said Nintendo was not confident in the Wiimote BECAUSE they were releasing the classic controller as an alternative.

Nintendo put themselves in a can't win situation when they talked about the remote being a new controller standard.  If it was just "look at this cool new accessory we've made" no problem.  But because it's the default controller it's subject to more scrutiny.  Do they need to offer a classic controller?  Yes.  Would a true new controller standard need such a thing to exist?  No, it would be fully compatible with past designs similar to how the N64 controller, despite a new analog stick, would still work correctly with NES and SNES games.  The existence of the classic controller proves that the remote is not a good standard at all.  It shows they don't have full confidence in the remote.  But they're right in doing so because the remote ISN'T good enough.  The alternative has to be there.

The problem is essentially Nintendo CAN'T prove the remote is a good standard because it isn't.  They can't prove it's a good standard if they have to provide an alternative but if they don't all sorts of games will control like crap which equally proves the remote isn't a good standard.  They're seemingly damned if they do, damned if the don't.  The only way to not look like chumps was to never position the remote as a standard in the first place but just a cool novelty controller like a flightstick or a lightgun or an instrument controller.

But Nintendo did find a way out of the trap they created for themselves - they targetted a group that doesn't pay enough attention to notice.  This rather brilliant strategy is why Nintendo suceeded when I figured for sure they would fail.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

On the flip side, there really isn't a problem -- you're putting way too much weight on a single device as if video game control itself was a rigid standard based on a single means of input.

The Wii platform (the concept, not the hardware) is all about "alternatives."  The breadth of the experience isn't confined to one way of touching the controller, and is illustrated in the numerous SUCCESSFUL supplements and approaches applied to the controller.  It IS a cool novelty controller and makes good standard if it's able to provide the versatility of being that flightstick or lightgun or instrument.  Beyond those I can move from Mario Kart (Team Reggie defeating non-Wii Wheel users) to Mega Man (retro mega classical platforming), from Resident Evil (gliding through Professional Mode with glee) to Smash Bros. (upsetting Caterkiller's Donkey Kong).

Wii is an alternative direction in the industry, bringing together modern with classic, downloads with retail, physical with fun, new gamers with old.  The DS already demonstrated its approach to "control standards" on numerous occasions, being a preceding example of alternative concepts in gameplay.

A lackluster waggle controller isn't the only thing to blame -- there's a developer who made the decision to use waggle in the first place.

"true control standard" is just a rosy way to describe stagnation -- the same stagnation that helped a cheap waggle console ruin your world.  I can't wait for the day you become part of the next generation of "lapsed gamers", geez.

[NWR_Lindy]

It's not "very overrated" because nobody overrates it that way. The only time I've ever seen anyone claim that the Wii control scheme is supposed to be the best control scheme for everything is in Ian's posts. Everybody else realizes that, like every control scheme ever made, it has advantages and disadvantages.

Nintendo had the cajones to code name their console the "Revolution".  That name didn't come across as Nintendo saying, "Our control scheme is going to have its advantages and disadvantages".  It was hyperbole for sure, but it was Nintendo's hyperbole and nobody else's.  So Nintendo overrated what they delivered - no surprise there.

I really like the Wii Remote, but it certainly hasn't changed the face of game control.  It's proven to be a very viable, and even preferable, alternative for certain types of games (specifically, games that lend themselves to mimicking certain key motions, like the swinging of a bat or tossing of a bowling ball).  However, it hasn't made everybody throw their joysticks in the ocean, which Nintendo seemed to infer leading up to Wii's release.

The Wii Remote/Nunchuk combo has always reminded me of one of those arcade games like DDR or Time Crisis.  They have very specific hardware with very specific input mechanisms, meaning they're excellent for certain types of games.  You could technically play any type of game on them by mapping normal controls to their proprietary input schemes, but you wouldn't necessarily want to.

I feel like the Wii Remote/Nunchuk is a good 1.0 version of the controller.  I like where Nintendo's going with the idea, but the Wii controls just aren't mature enough yet to truly be considered revolutionary.  And by revolutionary, I mean the "new standard" that's so good that joysticks go away entirely.

[Stogi]

I feel like the Wii Remote/Nunchuk is a good 1.0 version of the controller

I agree. That's why I can't wait for two things to happen: One, more games that do a better job of taking advantage of the controller in a meaningful way; and two, to get my hands on Wiimotion +.

Oh and three: I can't wait to see what Aunama, Miyamoto, and EAD do with the next Zelda; the pinnacle in gaming.

[Caliban]

Aonuma

[GoldenPhoenix]

I can't wait until Sony innovates with not one but TWO motion controllers. Seriously I think most here who hate on the Wii controls will be eating their words (Like usual) when the next generation moves towards them.

[KDR_11k]

A regular controller would have meant the death of Nintendo even if they had made the console's power equivalent to the PS3 and 360. Nintendo was dying by using that strategy and they had to change the rules to avoid oblivion. If you want a console like the PS3 and 360 then buy one, there's two on the market after all.

The wiimote as a secondary input would have failed too, noone would make games for it. The wiimote was a critical part of Nintendo's disruption by changing the input to be more user firendly and direct, it allowed them to make games that anyone can understand and play since there's no need to worry about menu navigation (just point and click) and the controls worked just by swinging the thing. Without that the Wii would lose most of its appeal to the new market and fail to sell.

Making the Wiimote a superset of old controllers would have failed, the joypad shapes don't work with motion controls as Sony found out the hard way.

By avoiding conventional wisdom and abandoning the old principles of console design Nintendo went from a distand also-ran to the #1 gaming company. This required the hardware and software to be matched to each other (no Wii Sports without Wiimote, no Wiimote without Wii X games), something MS and Sony aren't really capable of. MS and Sony used third parties to drive their consoles and thus had to go with the demands of third parties which want the same system with more power so they can reuse old, proven ideas with little risk but pump up the non-essentials for better marketting.

You can chalk it up to market ignorance but I say MS and Sony are the ignorant ones, not the buyers. The buyers WANT games that challenge them in a short period of time with easy controls. They DON'T WANT big timewasters with controls like an airplane simulator! Flash games are a gigantic market because they provide what people really want, a short, intense challenge that they can keep at for as long as they wish and then put down with no loss.