nintendo

[yoman55]

do you think that the gamecube was not liked by ubi. why is it that ubi like the wii so much. is it because they think they can make a huge prohit from it. could they really of had a grudge on the cube. this is what we need to find out, because they dumped the cube for the ps2, and now the wii maybe in danger of the ps3. all nintendo fans need help.

[Xylaquin]

what ever happened to the GC? Shops just seemed to stop selling their game all of a sudden, started noticing it ages ago...<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/2995/basementanimatedes0.gif (http://www.basementgfx.com)
When TS3.net closed, a lot of members moved to another forum ran by one of the Mods.

[frd_neko]

It always seemed to me that the Cube was a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy from the point of view of many major publishers. They expected it to not sell well, didn't support it particularly well, and so as a result people bought a PS2 rather than a Cube because there were more games on it. It wasn't so much that the console 'wasn't liked', it was just from the extremely conservative point of view that publishers take on these things, the risk involved in supporting the platform comprehensively wasn't matched or exceeded by the potential revenue they could make from doing so. Kinda depressing to look at it in such pure business terms but that is how these things happen.

In retrospect it's easy to point the finger at Nintendo's insistence on marketing it as, and making it look like, a toy, and their inenviable position of having to match the quality of their N64 output whilst simultaneously developing more games and in a shorter time to better support the platform, which resulted in even hardcore fans being a little disappointed.

All of which was a shame, because it had an extremely attractive price point, was an extremely capable machine and was generally very pleasant to work with. At least it's had one definable, long-term benefit, which is in siring the Wii, which to me looks much more capable of captivating the market in a way the Cube never did.

Neko.

[deded999]

That's true, although the Wii has certain weaknesses the GC didn't have - certainly Wii graphics are not poor, but in comparison to the HD quality of the other machines it suffers. More importantly the longer time goes on this may become more of an obstacle to cross-platform/third party development, something which suffered on the GC anyway. I hope the Wii does well, and it has a lot going for it, but it may lack third party software for other reasons this time.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/782/hazesigps3forumiiiau7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[joey_melons]

Originally posted by deded999:
the Wii has certain weaknesses the GC didn't have - certainly Wii graphics are not poor, but in comparison to the HD quality of the other machines it suffers.

For third parties looking for a console to support, this may in fact be the *strength* of the Wii. The shiny graphics on the PS3 and 360 come at a price. To make a game model that takes proper advantage of the PS3/360 hardware probably takes three times as long to create as doing the same thing on the Wii.

That means to develop for PS3/360, the art teams need to be three times the size, or the schedule three times as long. Wages x 3 = *expensive*, and not every games company can afford to gamble the extra money on a title that may or may not be a hit. There's a "do or die" quality to creating competitive games on those consoles which won't be to everyone's liking. This is where the Wii comes in as an budget-conscious alternative.

For example, for those individuals pining for TimeSplitters 4: purely in my opinion, there's *no* chance that title will ever be made for PS3 or Xbox 360 (sorry!). 100 playable characters and a dozen or so graphically diverse levels? There's not a publisher in the world that'd foot the bill for that on PS3/360, given that the previous instalment wasn't the break-out hit hoped for. Is TS4 a prospect on the Wii, then? I have no idea! But strictly from an accountant's perspective it's *more* of a prospect, given that Wii development isn't too much of a jump in price from the PlayStation 2 days.

[cob_shaw]

Originally posted by joey_melons:

For third parties looking for a console to support, this may in fact be the *strength* of the Wii. The shiny graphics on the PS3 and 360 come at a price. To make a game model that takes proper advantage of the PS3/360 hardware probably takes three times as long to create as doing the same thing on the Wii.

That means to develop for PS3/360, the art teams need to be three times the size, or the schedule three times as long. Wages x 3 = *expensive*, and not every games company can afford to gamble the extra money on a title that may or may not be a hit. There's a "do or die" quality to creating competitive games on those consoles which won't be to everyone's liking. This is where the Wii comes in as an budget-conscious alternative.

For example, for those individuals pining for TimeSplitters 4: purely in my opinion, there's *no* chance that title will ever be made for PS3 or Xbox 360 (sorry!). 100 playable characters and a dozen or so graphically diverse levels? There's not a publisher in the world that'd foot the bill for that on PS3/360, given that the previous instalment wasn't the break-out hit hoped for. Is TS4 a prospect on the Wii, then? I have no idea! But strictly from an accountant's perspective it's *more* of a prospect, given that Wii development isn't too much of a jump in price from the PlayStation 2 days.

Then why is Haze being made for the PS3 and Xbox 360 but not the Wii?

[AvianAbsolute]

Originally posted by joey_melons:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by deded999:
the Wii has certain weaknesses the GC didn't have - certainly Wii graphics are not poor, but in comparison to the HD quality of the other machines it suffers.

For third parties looking for a console to support, this may in fact be the *strength* of the Wii. The shiny graphics on the PS3 and 360 come at a price. To make a game model that takes proper advantage of the PS3/360 hardware probably takes three times as long to create as doing the same thing on the Wii.

That means to develop for PS3/360, the art teams need to be three times the size, or the schedule three times as long. Wages x 3 = *expensive*, and not every games company can afford to gamble the extra money on a title that may or may not be a hit. There's a "do or die" quality to creating competitive games on those consoles which won't be to everyone's liking. This is where the Wii comes in as an budget-conscious alternative.

For example, for those individuals pining for TimeSplitters 4: purely in my opinion, there's *no* chance that title will ever be made for PS3 or Xbox 360 (sorry!). 100 playable characters and a dozen or so graphically diverse levels? There's not a publisher in the world that'd foot the bill for that on PS3/360, given that the previous instalment wasn't the break-out hit hoped for. Is TS4 a prospect on the Wii, then? I have no idea! But strictly from an accountant's perspective it's *more* of a prospect, given that Wii development isn't too much of a jump in price from the PlayStation 2 days. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Having simpler graphics is a double edged sword. On one hand it may entice developers to make games for it, on the other hand it's nature means it won't get many next-gen ports ( like Haze ).

Anyway, the Wii is certinately better off then the cube (even though I love my black lunchbox).

[joey_melons]

Originally posted by cob_shaw:
Then why is Haze being made for the PS3 and Xbox 360 but not the Wii?

Because work began on Haze before Nintendo had even announced what the Wii was going to be.

[joey_melons]

Originally posted by AvianAbsolute:
[The Wii] having simpler graphics is a double edged sword. On one hand it may entice developers to make games for it, on the other hand its nature means it won't get many next-gen ports ( like Haze ).


True enough... although the unique nature of the Wii Remote makes that a two-way street. A smash hit that makes good use of the controller is exclusive to the Wii by default.

It's like the PSP vs the DS. I'm sure Sony would've loved a Brain Training or Nintendogs clone on the PSP... but with only a D-pad and buttons to work with, it just ain't happening.

[deded999]

Originally posted by joey_melons:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by deded999:
the Wii has certain weaknesses the GC didn't have - certainly Wii graphics are not poor, but in comparison to the HD quality of the other machines it suffers.

For third parties looking for a console to support, this may in fact be the *strength* of the Wii. The shiny graphics on the PS3 and 360 come at a price. To make a game model that takes proper advantage of the PS3/360 hardware probably takes three times as long to create as doing the same thing on the Wii.

That means to develop for PS3/360, the art teams need to be three times the size, or the schedule three times as long. Wages x 3 = *expensive*, and not every games company can afford to gamble the extra money on a title that may or may not be a hit. There's a "do or die" quality to creating competitive games on those consoles which won't be to everyone's liking. This is where the Wii comes in as an budget-conscious alternative.

For example, for those individuals pining for TimeSplitters 4: purely in my opinion, there's *no* chance that title will ever be made for PS3 or Xbox 360 (sorry!). 100 playable characters and a dozen or so graphically diverse levels? There's not a publisher in the world that'd foot the bill for that on PS3/360, given that the previous instalment wasn't the break-out hit hoped for. Is TS4 a prospect on the Wii, then? I have no idea! But strictly from an accountant's perspective it's *more* of a prospect, given that Wii development isn't too much of a jump in price from the PlayStation 2 days. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good points from everyone here. Personally, although Dave Doak seemed quite into the Wii, and I'm pretty sure we will see some Wii games from FRD in the future, you simply can't ignore the installed bases of both the 360 and PS3, not now maybe, but in the future. Despite what Nintendo would have you think, I don't see the Wii competing with both NG machines combined when it comes to total users, and that's when even the apparently prohibitive costs of NG development matter - if the owners aren't there to buy the games, you don't sell them. On top of which, this gen certainly seems to be producing a definite split between casual and hardcore gamers - think that those who'll buy Nintendogs and Brain Training will buy Timesplitters 4? Or COD4? Sure, some of them will, but it's no grandma and little Jimmy game for Christmas japes I'm afraid.

The whole Wii thing is getting a little blown out of proportion for me so far - screw the inclusive controller, where are the games? As with the Gamecube, I'm sure there be several worthy games for the machine, but as a GC owner I was bitterly disappointed with the lack of quality games on the system - yes, of course there were quality games, but how many? One every six months? That might be alright for the average 'non-gamer' who Nintendo are targetting, but for gamers who like to play games as a general past-time that isn't good enough. Even the DS, which is by all accounts the dogs testicles, just doesn't do it for me, and the comparisons that are often made between a hand-held (DS) and a home-console (the Wii) just don't add up IMO - they aren't the same at all. It's an isolated example, but take Wii Trauma Center - that's a good game for the DS, but waving a 'wand' in the air does not equate to the feel of surgery anywhere close to the way it works on the DS, with real contact with the game space, as should be obvious.

If Nintendo and their third-parties get their finger out, sure there are real possibilities with the Wii, and it could make a real space for itself, but I fear that, although it won't tank like the GC did, it's novelty will wear off quicker than we imagine.

The importance of graphics can be wholly exaggerated, and as we get closer to 'real-life' images the difference between systems will get less important, but it still matters to an extent. More important perhaps is the influence of AI and physics, which the Wii may struggle to replicate, but if all it aims to do is simple/puzzle games and party games it won't have this problem. My personal view is that as time goes on and more people get HD TV's, the 'failings' of the Wii will become more obvious - although it's very early yet and we have yet to see a game that stretches the Wii in any way, my experiences with Zelda's muddy and blurred (GC) textures on my Bravia leave plenty to be desired, despite the game's undoubted quality. As time goes on this difference will become more noticeable, although again to the more discerning - I'm sure Granny will have not the slightest clue!

In brief reply to some of the other posters, I'd agree with Avian that it's ongoing difficulty in supporting ports from other machines will count against it to some extent, although this may mean it's particular talents may be better exploited.

@Joey_melons, you're right to emphasise the Wiimote's motion sensors as a bonus, but IMO if this proves to be a great advantage you will see it appearing on the other consoles sooner rather than later; the PS3 already has some semblance of motion control which could be adapted to a Wii-style game if necessary, and if it proves popular I don't see MS being far behind.

Time will tell, and it's certainly turning out to be not your average next-gen battle. Certainly Nintendo seems to be revitalised by the DS and now the Wii, but how long this can be sustained against the competition and as the novelty wears off I'm not so sure. Best of luck to 'em anyway, but they need to pull some stops out if they're to alleviate my disappointment with the bloody GC. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/782/hazesigps3forumiiiau7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[Tesseract]

On the subject of game cost, there's one major thing to consider.

Each of the new generation of consoles has a method for distributing low-cost games. The 360 has XBox Live, the PS3 will have the PS Network, and the Wii has its Retro Channel.

Sure, the really shiny games will cost a lot, but when a couple of college students can put together something like flOw and have it distributed for free over the PS Network... It actually ends up having the opposite effect. Suddenly, anyone who can do some decent programming can potentially have their work distributed to millions.

[joey_melons]

Originally posted by deded999:
Think that those who'll buy Nintendogs and Brain Training will buy Timesplitters 4?:

Except hardcore games *have* been successful on the DS. Think Mario Bros., Metroid and Final Fantasy. Dragon Quest is about as hardcore as they come, and is due to appear next on the DS... a big vote of confidence. Games consoles don't *have* to be the exclusive territory of lonely young men http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif - often people in a household share their use, and buy titles to suit each person. I've got my Elite Beat Agents cart for the DS, the missus has her Tetris.


The whole Wii thing is getting a little blown out of proportion for me so far - screw the inclusive controller, where are the games??

Give them a chance, the thing's only been out a few weeks http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif! If you'd bought a PS2, a 360 or a DS at launch, would you have been luxuriating in the number and breadth of titles available? No. Were they teh d00med? No.

Nintendo have acknowledged that the "games drought" on the GameCube was a problem, and have vowed to address it on the Wii. (The management team has also *changed* since the GC days. The first hardware launch the current bunch handled was the DS.)

Take a look at this list:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wii_games


A proportion of it may just be vapourware, of course, but I'd happily bet that the Wii has as many titles out in 2007 as the PS3, or the 360's first year.


You're right to emphasise the Wiimote's motion sensors as a bonus, but IMO if this proves to be a great advantage you will see it appearing on the other consoles sooner rather than later

Nintendo have patents on the Wii remote's functionality. In fact, they've been patenting their controllers for years. Want to know why you never see the "+" shaped D-pad on other consoles? Because Nintendo patented it. They're not fools.

Also, games companies know they can develop with the Wii remote in mind, confident that every Wii owner possesses the controller by default. That's not true of some optional-extra peripheral to be bought for an additional cost. How many PS2 titles supported EyeToy?


the PS3 already has some semblance of motion control which could be adapted to a Wii-style game

Errrr, a little bit, but not really. The PS3 controller recognises tilt, which means it's good for Super Monkey Ball/ glider sim type stuff. The FPS-pointing and sword/racquet-swinging motions that the Wii recognises are completely unsupported on the PS3. Not that the controller is a sensible shape for that kind of thing anyway... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


Certainly Nintendo seems to be revitalised by the DS and now the Wii, but how long this can be sustained against the competition and as the novelty wears off I'm not so sure.

I don't think you can dismiss the Wii remote as a passing fad - I think it's already changed the way people think about how games should be controlled. For example, the PS3 and Xbox 360 could have the most gorgeous, photorealistic, motion-captured tennis, golf, or bowling games ever - they *still* wouldn't be as authentic an experience as Wii Sports, which features little bobble-headed stick men running around. That's a pretty profound shift in the perception of what makes a videogame realistic, and its impact will be felt for years to come. For many genres, the traditional button-pressing style of control just isn't where it's at anymore.

More on topic, I have to say in my opinion that that the PS2-style dual-analogue FPS shooter controls feel horribly clumsy and archaic after playing the Wii. Red Steel is OK rather than stellar - there's one standout level, the rest is entertaining enough for a single playthrough but nothing special. But I can snipe and headshot on that sucker in a high style that completely eludes me on regular console controllers.

[AvianAbsolute]

Red Steel (I want diss the game here since I'm on a Ubi Forum ) sold quite well if I'm not mistaken. So there certinately is potential for fps games on the Wii.

Anyway, I don't think a Timesplitters game is coming anytime soon. Since there will probably be a sequal to Haze (especially if it's successful), and who knows what sort of deal FR has with Lucasarts. So these arguments are sort of pointless.

[deded999]

Originally posted by joey_melons:
Nintendo have patents on the Wii remote's functionality. In fact, they've been patenting their controllers for years. Want to know why you never see the "+" shaped D-pad on other consoles? Because Nintendo patented it. They're not fools.

Granted, but I think you've just answered yourself to a point - don't all the other machines have D-pads? The same could happen here. I'd also bring up the analog dualshock, which if memory serves appeared after launch and then became a de facto standard over time.


I don't think you can dismiss the Wii remote as a passing fad - I think it's already changed the way people think about how games should be controlled.

You could say the same about the Eyetoy, but as you pointed out, how many games use the system? Of course the Wiimote is a standard, but how many DS games use it's Dual-screens and Stylus to their full extent? The only bonus I've found using the Wiimote on Zelda is the speaker - the rest is completely interchangeable with a normal pad, and this is Nintendo's premiere franchise. It may have been designed around the GC, but that's half the point - certain games will require certain control systems, and the Wiimote will not be inherently better for every game that appears on the Wii.


For example, the PS3 and Xbox 360 could have the most gorgeous, photo-realistic, motion-captured tennis, golf, or bowling games ever - they *still* wouldn't be as authentic an experience as Wii Sports, which features little bobble-headed stick men running around. That's a pretty profound shift in the perception of what makes a videogame realistic, and its impact will be felt for years to come. For many genres, the traditional button-pressing style of control just isn't where it's at anymore.

Okay, I'm to an extent playing devil's advocate in this thread, but taking your example, Wii Tennis is good, but it does not offer more than a highly simplified if doubtless enjoyable version of tennis. You might as well say that Mario Soccer, (or whatever), is better than Fifa or Pro Evo - for some people, sure, they'll love it, and with an innovative control system it may be a much more intuitive game than the more sim-style, 'realistic' games, but I don't see masses of gamers abandoning Pro Evo et al for Wii Soccer.


More on topic, I have to say in my opinion that that the PS2-style dual-analogue FPS shooter controls feel horribly clumsy and archaic after playing the Wii. Red Steel is OK rather than stellar - there's one standout level, the rest is entertaining enough for a single playthrough but nothing special. But I can snipe and headshot on that sucker in a high style that completely eludes me on regular console controllers.

We could get bogged down in FPS controls, which are a highly specialised control system in themselves, and I haven't sampled either FPS on the Wii yet, but I'm looking forward to Metroid at least. This should be one style of game where the Wiimote excels, if there's any justice. It's also a genre where graphical power is king however. It will be interesting.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/782/hazesigps3forumiiiau7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[joey_melons]

Originally posted by deded999:

[QUOTE] I'd also bring up the analog dualshock, which if memory serves appeared after launch and then became a de facto standard over time.

...and which Sony recently took a big expensive beating on for patent infringement, courtesy of Immersion. Their shareholders won't be egging them on to rush into copying a competitor's controller anytime soon, I'm sure. Meanwhile, both Sony and Microsoft bigwigs decried the Wii remote when it was first unveiled. It'd take a big swallowing of corporate pride to go back on that. We'll see. There's a lot to be said for being first to mass market with a good idea, which goes in Nintendo's favour. There are loads of MP3 players on the market, but the iPod is still king.


how many DS games use it's Dual-screens and Stylus to their full extent?

Are you serious?! Name a hit game on the DS and the chances are it uses either the two screens, the touchscreen, the wireless connection or microphone in a way that would rule out or cheapen an imitation on a rival console. If you want a list, start with Animal Crossing, Metroid Prime Hunters, Nintendogs, Brain Training, Meteos, 42 All-Time Classics, Starfox DS, Phoenix Wright, Viewtiful Joe, Mario Kart DS, Kirby Canvas Curse, Tetris DS (and on and on and on). It'd be more to the point for me to ask *you* what multi-million selling DS games *don't* use its unique features... and then wait for the hesitant silence. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


[Twilight Princess] may have been designed around the GC

Yup. Think the Wii remote controls seem kind of bolted onto that game? That's because *they were*. But there's also a new Zelda game built from the ground up for the DS... which controls pretty much entirely from the touchscreen.


Taking your example, Wii Tennis is good, but it does not offer more than a highly simplified if doubtless enjoyable version of tennis. You might as well say that Mario Soccer, (or whatever), is better than Fifa or Pro Evo

No, you're missing my point, and getting hung up on visuals and presentation. I'm saying that a sports game where you swing the controller the way you would swing a tennis racquet or a golf club is a much more faithful and sophisticated simulation of the real thing than a game where you just press a button - completely regardless of graphics.

And Pro Evolution/Winning Eleven and the EA Sports titles will be on the Wii anyway. Who knows, maybe with the extra content that was missing from the 360 versions due the next-gen growing pains. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[joey_melons]

Sorry folks, some garbled left-over quotes on the end of that last post. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif [Edit: hey, you can edit! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif]

[cob_shaw]

OK. I played the Wii at my friends house the other day. It's good, I'll give it that. BUT we didn't actually swing the controller as I would a tennis racket or a golf stick. We didn't do an over or under arm throw or swing the bat like we would in real life in baseball. Instead we flicked the controller in the desired direction and it was so much more easier. Swinging the controller like you would a tennis racket was slow and stupid when you could just flick the controller; resulting in a shot that was more accurate and more powerful. Don't get me wrong, I'm not some ****** at tennis... hell I'm one of the best in my class and my class wins ALL of the sports competitions.
Granted, I didn't play Red Steel or Zelda, I only played Wii Sports but the WiiMote just didn't seem as "natural" as I thought it was going to be. Although it's more natural than a PS3 or Xbox controller.
Oh... and the graphics suck eggs... badly.

[deded999]

Originally posted by joey_melons:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by deded999:
I'd also bring up the analog dualshock, which if memory serves appeared after launch and then became a de facto standard over time.

...and which Sony recently took a big expensive beating on for patent infringement, courtesy of Immersion. Their shareholders won't be egging them on to rush into copying a competitor's controller anytime soon, I'm sure. Meanwhile, both Sony and Microsoft bigwigs decried the Wii remote when it was first unveiled. It'd take a big swallowing of corporate pride to go back on that. We'll see. There's a lot to be said for being first to mass market with a good idea, which goes in Nintendo's favour. There are loads of MP3 players on the market, but the iPod is still king. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Immersion debacle is perhaps not the best example, as as far as I am aware, Sony did not break Immersions patents as they didn't have them when the Dual Shock came out. Certainly the case is more that Sony cut off their nose to spite their face, as MS simply settled and still have Rumble in their kit. However, that aside, why aren't Nintendo suing Sony, MS, et al over the D-pad and Sony's motion controller? Or for that matter why aren't MS suing Nintendo for copying their Sidewinder? My point is simply that some version of the Wiimotes abilities could be used by both systems, or even created by third-parties, which already seems to be happening.



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">how many DS games use it's Dual-screens and Stylus to their full extent?

Are you serious?! Name a hit game on the DS and the chances are it uses either the two screens, the touchscreen, the wireless connection or microphone in a way that would rule out or cheapen an imitation on a rival console. If you want a list, start with Animal Crossing, Metroid Prime Hunters, Nintendogs, Brain Training, Meteos, 42 All-Time Classics, Starfox DS, Phoenix Wright, Viewtiful Joe, Mario Kart DS, Kirby Canvas Curse, Tetris DS (and on and on and on). It'd be more to the point for me to ask *you* what multi-million selling DS games *don't* use its unique features... and then wait for the hesitant silence. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Perhaps I expressed myself poorly - I did not mean there were few games that used the DS' unique elements, only that there were few which exploited them to the full and in ways which could not easily be transferred to another system. Of the games you list, (of which I have played some, but not all), I would probably point to Brain Training, with it's book and pencil styling as the best example; having a map screen available at all times, as opposed to a map screen that you can view via pause mode does not make for a unique and brilliant use of the Dual screens in my view.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">[Twilight Princess] may have been designed around the GC

Yup. Think the Wii remote controls seem kind of bolted onto that game? That's because *they were*. But there's also a new Zelda game built from the ground up for the DS... which controls pretty much entirely from the touchscreen.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know that, in fact I thought it was obvious from what I was saying! They may have been bolted on, but that doesn't mean Nintendo shouldn't have worked harder to show off the strengths of the Wiimote, (the flying sections for instance - why use the analog stick just as you would on any other system when you have the Wiimote to use?). As for any future games from Nintendo, I'll reserve judgement on their Wiimote implementation until I sees 'em.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Taking your example, Wii Tennis is good, but it does not offer more than a highly simplified if doubtless enjoyable version of tennis. You might as well say that Mario Soccer, (or whatever), is better than Fifa or Pro Evo

No, you're missing my point, and getting hung up on visuals and presentation. I'm saying that a sports game where you swing the controller the way you would swing a tennis racquet or a golf club is a much more faithful and sophisticated simulation of the real thing than a game where you just press a button - completely regardless of graphics. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, I'm saying that part of Tennis is being able to put yourself into the correct position on court, selecting from different shots, (maybe it's me, but I don't find it simple at all to select where you place a shot, or to do things like drop-shots - maybe I'm just rubbish with the Wiimote, but if so then so will all the Grannies be), playing long and tiring matches and playing on different surfaces, none of which are available in Wii Tennis, or at least not to the extent many people would like in a Tennis game.

You can't claim that the Wiimote is more sophisticated a tool for playing if I can't be both more able to act instinctively and more accurate with that controller than say a PS pad.

This is a dumb argument in some ways though, I'll admit - it's like complaining that Advance Wars doesn't have the tactical depth of Rome: Total War. It isn't necessarily a flaw of the Wiimote either, so I'll cede the argument on that one - I still think though that the argument that Wii Tennis is inherently better than any other version of Tennis because of the controller is a false one; a better game at a later date may change my mind.


And Pro Evolution/Winning Eleven and the EA Sports titles will be on the Wii anyway. Who knows, maybe with the extra content that was missing from the 360 versions due the next-gen growing pains. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


True, that is garbage, but the PS2 versions were far better supplied than the next-gen versions with teams, stadia and game options - now who's getting hung up on graphics? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Let's take a little heat out of this though - I'm not spoiling for an argument and I'm not dissing the Wii, which I'm very much enjoying thank you very much, I just feel that it has been getting off a little easy when it comes to criticism lately and I wanted to point out the Emperor's rude bits, if you understand what I mean! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Oh, and don't get me started on the battery situation... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/782/hazesigps3forumiiiau7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[joey_melons]

Originally posted by cob_shaw:
OK. I played the Wii at my friends house the other day. It's good, I'll give it that. BUT we didn't actually swing the controller as I would a tennis racket or a golf stick. We didn't do an over or under arm throw or swing the bat like we would in real life in baseball.

Sure, you can play that way. But the whole idea of Wii Sports is that you can give the remote to someone who isn't perhaps familiar with videogames, tell them, "just swing it the way you would a real tennis racquet" - and bingo, they understand how to play. And it works!



I'm one of the best in my class and my class wins ALL of the sports competitions.

And I'm proud of ya, champ.


Oh... and the graphics suck eggs... badly.

You judged the Wii's graphics from Wii Sports? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Complaining about the graphics there is like complaining that the animation in South Park is a bit primitive - you're slightly missing the appeal of it! The player models in Wii Sports are intentionally simple and goofy-looking, largely so you can stick quick caricatures of your mates' faces on them for comedy effect. If you want t3h graff1x, seek out the videos for the boss fights in Super Mario Galaxy. Not a sucked egg in sight.

[joey_melons]

My point is simply that some version of the Wiimotes abilities could be used by both systems, or even created by third-parties, which already seems to be happening.

OK, let's say for the sake of argument, Sony and Microsoft suddenly rush out their own Wii-type controller. Who's developing games for it? Nobody - the devkits for those machines go out with the traditional controller. So it'd end it being just another EyeToy-style white elephant that the majority of games ignore. Wiimote style controllers may well come as standard with the PS4 and Xbox360 mk.II... but still, coming in years behind Nintendo, who'll have a whole generation's worth of R&D into that kind of thing, isn't a good place for them to be.


Perhaps I expressed myself poorly - I did not mean there were few games that used the DS' unique elements, only that there were few which exploited them to the full and in ways which could not easily be transferred to another system

No disrespect, but I consider you to be flat-out wrong on that point, to the degree that I half-suspect you're not that familiar with the titles I listed. Games that you interact with via the touchscreen are *not* a good match for any other console - fact. Think you could port Zoo Keeper to the PSP without it being a unholy mess to control? Good luck! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


You can't claim that the Wiimote is more sophisticated a tool for playing if I can't be both more able to act instinctively and more accurate with that controller than say a PS pad.

That's definitely you! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I've got friends who can play Wii Sports with ease who would spend the whole time looking at their fingers with a frown on their face if you made them play something with a PS2 pad instead. Thing is, deded, it's clear that you're the hardcore of hardcore: you've played quite happily for years with the traditional pad, and no knock on you for that. But perhaps discussing the Wii remote with you is a bit like discussing the Compact Disc format with the Vinyl Collector Of The Year - "hey, there was nothing wrong with the old way of doing things!" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">And Pro Evolution/Winning Eleven and the EA Sports titles will be on the Wii anyway. Who knows, maybe with the extra content that was missing from the 360 versions due the next-gen growing pains. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


True, that is garbage, but the PS2 versions were far better supplied than the next-gen versions with teams, stadia and game options - now who's getting hung up on graphics? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I *think* we actually agree on this point, we just don't realise it yet! I was saying that having a machine with simpler graphics (be it the PS2 or Wii) can actually be an advantage when it comes to the games that have yearly updates. How to get all those time-consuming 360 graphics done in time? Chop content out, so there's less to do!


Oh, and don't get me started on the battery situation... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

True enough. Rechargeables are your friend. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[deded999]

Originally posted by joey_melons:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">My point is simply that some version of the Wiimotes abilities could be used by both systems, or even created by third-parties, which already seems to be happening.

OK, let's say for the sake of argument, Sony and Microsoft suddenly rush out their own Wii-type controller. Who's developing games for it? Nobody - the devkits for those machines go out with the traditional controller. So it'd end it being just another EyeToy-style white elephant that the majority of games ignore. Wiimote style controllers may well come as standard with the PS4 and Xbox360 mk.II... but still, coming in years behind Nintendo, who'll have a whole generation's worth of R&D into that kind of thing, isn't a good place for them to be. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good point, although as I was trying to say with my 'DS elements not used' argument, there are many games which would not or could not use the more exotic abilities of any controller. Take Loco Roco, which only uses three buttons in the entire game! I think if such Wiimote-like controllers were pushed by first-party developers as the analog Dualshock was with GT, then they could achieve a reasonable density this gen, but the general point that non-launch add-ons don't succeed is a true one.


No disrespect, but I consider you to be flat-out wrong on that point, to the degree that I half-suspect you're not that familiar with the titles I listed. Games that you interact with via the touchscreen are *not* a good match for any other console - fact. Think you could port Zoo Keeper to the PSP without it being a unholy mess to control? Good luck! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

As I said in the above post, I haven't played all of the games you mention, (there were quite a few there, Zookeeper being one), but I've played several and read reviews on most of them. I'll moderate my opinion to only encompass the games I've played at least. It doesn't matter all that much anyway - I'm not saying the DS is poor or wasteful, simply that there's plenty of potential remaining untapped (you could say the same about the PSP) and it frustrates me that Nintendo don't do more to release it.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You can't claim that the Wiimote is more sophisticated a tool for playing if I can't be both more able to act instinctively and more accurate with that controller than say a PS pad.

That's definitely you! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I've got friends who can play Wii Sports with ease who would spend the whole time looking at their fingers with a frown on their face if you made them play something with a PS2 pad instead. Thing is, deded, it's clear that you're the hardcore of hardcore: you've played quite happily for years with the traditional pad, and no knock on you for that. But perhaps discussing the Wii remote with you is a bit like discussing the Compact Disc format with the Vinyl Collector Of The Year - "hey, there was nothing wrong with the old way of doing things!" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Blimey, I'm not that much of a luddite! (I wouldn't claim to be that hardcore either!) Nope, I appreciate the Wii, I just prefer to reserve judgement until and unless the Wii shows it's true potential, something I think we could both agree it hasn't done yet. Maybe it's my natural cynical side that's coming to the fore when the Wii is repeatedly referred to as though it's the second coming of gaming.


I *think* we actually agree on this point, we just don't realise it yet! I was saying that having a machine with simpler graphics (be it the PS2 or Wii) can actually be an advantage when it comes to the games that have yearly updates. How to get all those time-consuming 360 graphics done in time? Chop content out, so there's less to do!

Up to a point yes, although I would point out that if you take the PS2 version and give it better graphics, physics, animation and AI it must therefore be a better game, but I've always agreed that better graphics by themselves do not a better game make. In the case of the footie games mentioned though, the difference isn't just a positive one of graphics, but a negative one of missing features, automatically making the old-gen version better by default. Good enough?


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Oh, and don't get me started on the battery situation... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

True enough. Rechargeables are your friend. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmph - not according to Nintendo - check your Wii manual and you'll find that they tell you not to use rechargeables! Sure Nintendo, whatever you say...

Having checked up a little, the voltage of my rechargeables is lower than the supplied alkalines (1.2V vs 1.5V), but so far they've worked fine. So why the big no-no then? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Good discussion though Joey(?) - Ed will do for me - just remind me not to play against you at Wii Tennis anytime soon eh? I'm a sore loser too. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/782/hazesigps3forumiiiau7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[joey_melons]

Yeah, good discussion! It's my first day back at work next week, so no more mooching on the Internet for me. But cheers for indulging me this week, it's been fun! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[zythros666]

This was talked about like the first page.. out of 2. And i'm like 5 months late but o well someone like me will read them anyways(Wii part)
Anyways i'm not really the kind of guy who gets to standing up in a game unless its like the last lvl. Second i'm lazy+. And would you rather have a fishing pole or a nice fishing game.. the fishing game wins for me.. Or for me i say Do you want to 'feel' the game or be part of it.So for me the PS3wins over the Wii since it kinda has both That axis thing is sweet.