My concern for the Wii

[Fritzo]

I disagree. Nintendo beleives that people would rather have games that are fun to play than look good. Essentially, they're saying "graphics are good enough, lets get the games fun to play." Remember old DOS games like Ultima or Wolfenstein? They looked awful, but we played them for hours!

From their initial offerings on the Wii...I say their strategy is working. Really, the only people that care about "bilinear sub composite super shadow shading" are the geek community.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: inspire
May have been said already, but w/e.

The 360 did not have 1080p support at launch, that was added into an update. The same could be done to add 720p support to the Wii (especially seeing as how the PS2 and XBOX both supported 720p - no reason the Wii's hardware can't handle it).

Comparing the gfx co-proc in a console to a PC video card is kind of irresponsible. We all know that consoles operate at a much higher efficiency than PC. Example: Xbox - an 800 MHz P-III.

I'm half expecting a Wii HD to come out in two years or so. Just up the fillrate and texture memory. Render older and newer games at 720p, and use higher res textures for the new Wii, and downscale them for the older Wii. It wouldnt be as good as a total replacement, but it's like sideways compatibility or something. Programming-wise, it would be a total piece of cake - whether or not theyll bother is another story.

I'm kind of dissapointed that the Wii underclocks when you pop in a cube game. Its the exact same architecture, and a few GC games could use a framerate boost...hopefully some hacker will enable this when mod chips become available.

 

[randay]

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: yowolabi

Originally posted by: randay
I'm waiting for developers to wise up and start releasing thier own wireless golf club, baseball bat, gloves, etc... controllers. After that its all over the Nintendo and the Wii.

"Thanks for proof of concept, Nintendo!" - game devs

Even though konami has been doing it on the ps2 for a while now with thier music games.

It would have to be an awesome game for me to buy a controller just to play it... or two controllers if I wanted a friend to play along.

Yeah, exactly! Nintendo has tried many different non-conventional controllers over the years. All have been pretty unsuccessful. Why? Nobody wants to pay for a special controller to play one game, and no developer wants to develop for a controller that only a minority of the system's users have. It's a catch-22.

But Nintendo figured out the "trick" - they made the non-conventional controller the DEFAULT. Now everyone has one, and every developer will be willing to develop for it. The conventional controller is an add-on, but since they're just reusing the gamecube controller they know that many customers already have one (or four), and they're available pretty cheaply, so developers will be willing to develop for it.

DDR and Guitar Hero are notable exceptions in the long string of unconventional control devices that have failed for every company that has tried it. And there WAS a golf club shaped control device for the PS2 and Xbox, but I believe it failed. It also sucked, so that's probably why.

Just what I was going to say. There has NEVER been a secondary controller that succeeded - if it's doesnt come with the system, most people wont have it, and if most people wont have it, devs wont make games using it, and if devs wont make games using it, most people won't buy it in the first place...

And I wouldnt say DDR and GH succeded where others failed - you can still only use those controllers for DDR and GH - no different than the DK bongos, Samba de Amigo Sambas, etc

Next gen, everyone is going to be copying the Wiimote, just like they copied the rumble and analog stick. Sony and MS might put out a Wiimote type peripheral at some point, but that will only matter to fanboys to argue about it on the internet, most people simply arent going to use them.

Money is no object to me when it comes to playing a fun game. If its fun and they want me to pay a little extra for a purpose built controller, its not a problem. I have a Japanese ps2 and 150 dollar controller just for Beatmania. That plus the 6 games cost me about $800 bucks. Compare that to the $10,000 arcade machine and I have no regrets.

Personally I dont consider the wiimote that great. It has its limits and its obvious that its implementation will suffer in certain applications. The developers are going to have to work hard to get it to work well in thier own particular game. I have a feeling most will come up short. Its also not accurate enough for my taste.

So yeah, the game being awesome is a given, I wouldnt buy a crappy game for $1.00, let alone a crappy game with a crappy controller. Sneak King anyone?

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: BD2003
Just what I was going to say. There has NEVER been a secondary controller that succeeded - if it's doesnt come with the system, most people wont have it, and if most people wont have it, devs wont make games using it, and if devs wont make games using it, most people won't buy it in the first place...

And I wouldnt say DDR and GH succeded where others failed - you can still only use those controllers for DDR and GH - no different than the DK bongos, Samba de Amigo Sambas, etc

I would say that the DDR 'controller', at least, has been successful. Heck, it did well enough that a third-party company (RedOctane) put out a knockoff DDR game (In The Groove) and a sequel, in both arcade and console versions. If there's enough demand for the game that requires it, and the 'controller' doesn't cost that much, it can work.

It's worth noting, though, that both DDR and GH started as arcade machines, and only moved to consoles once they had become successful in the arcade scene. It's a lot easier to do a non-standard control scheme on an arcade machine, since you essentially amortize the cost over all the players. I think they both would have been tough sells if the arcade versions hadn't come first and established the popularity of the games.

 

[BD2003]

Money is no object to me when it comes to playing a fun game. If its fun and they want me to pay a little extra for a purpose built controller, its not a problem. I have a Japanese ps2 and 150 dollar controller just for Beatmania. That plus the 6 games cost me about $800 bucks. Compare that to the $10,000 arcade machine and I have no regrets.

Same, but that isn't going to change the fact that unless it comes in the box with the system, the number of games that use the controller is going to extremely limited.

Personally I dont consider the wiimote that great. It has its limits and its obvious that its implementation will suffer in certain applications. The developers are going to have to work hard to get it to work well in thier own particular game. I have a feeling most will come up short. Its also not accurate enough for my taste.

Every controller has its limits. You're still stuck in the mindset of games as they've always been. I had a friend that was the same way - how are you going to make a fighting game with so few buttons, a rts game blah blah blah...he was so hung up on how to emulate a classical controller with the wiimote that he missed the point entirely.

For the launch games, some do come up short. Most of the launch FPSes need tweaking, but I'd take them any day over dual analog. But even still, there is simply no way to do a game like wii sports, rayman or trauma center on any other console. Unless you want to press buttons for everything. I'd rather not.

As far as accuracy, I have no idea what you could possibly find inaccurate about it.

 

[SonnyDaze]

Originally posted by: Ameesh
you still play doom 1 and 2, ohhh you are sooo cool!

i only play commander keen

Hey don't knock it....Commander Keen kicked @ss!! And Duke Nukem was the sh|t!! LOL!

 

[alocurto]

Originally posted by: tweakmm
Good graphics do not a good game make.

 

[LordNoob]

The last console I owned personally was an N64. The last one I played for any serious amount of time was a Gamecube. The next one I buy? Wii. Why would I spend ~$500 or more for an Xbox 360 or a ps3 and all the crap to go with it (don't flame me about what they actually cost, you get the idea) when I won't play but a handful of games?

Part time console gamers like myself will go for the Wii for its ease, new gameplay options, and lower cost. Graphics be damned.

 

[exdeath]

Originally posted by: Fritzo
I disagree. Nintendo beleives that people would rather have games that are fun to play than look good. Essentially, they're saying "graphics are good enough, lets get the games fun to play." Remember old DOS games like Ultima or Wolfenstein? They looked awful, but we played them for hours!

From their initial offerings on the Wii...I say their strategy is working. Really, the only people that care about "bilinear sub composite super shadow shading" are the geek community.

The Gamecube and Xbox were plenty powerful in the graphics department. Sony's PS2 with its 4MB video memory and 8 bit 32x32 and 64x64 textures is really the only last gen system that is currently hurting severely in the graphics department. Hell even first gen Dreamcast games have more vibrant graphics than current bland and blurry grey and green PS2 games.

There was really no need to kill the Gamecube so early.

Given the game lineup, I'm thinking Wii will face the same fate after the novelty of the controller wears off. Yay, anyone want to play Spongebob And Power Rangers with me?! :roll:

 

[Randum]

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: tweakmm
Good graphics do not a good game make.

yeap.

sick of games that push FMV with great graphics but the game itself sucks. most RPG"s are going that way now. though DQ8 was a nice change

god kill me if I see that game..it was horrible...

Graphics do NOT make a game...wow...plenty of systems have proved that....wii is a different system, I don't even put it in the same catagory as the ps3/360, its more of an "in addition to a power system"

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: BD2003

a rts game

<neo>Woah....</neo> I just realized the Wii remote would be perfect for making RTS games not suck on consoles. Unfortuantely RTS is one genre where higher resolution would REALLY come in handy.

As far as accuracy, I have no idea what you could possibly find inaccurate about it.

I think people confuse poor programming with a fault in the Wii remote. The Wii remote can report is position and acceleration as accurately as you want, but it's all for nought if the programmer doesn't interpret the movements correctly. They have to set the right thresholds to distinguish between incidental movements and game movements. If you want to see an example of how accurate the Wii remote is, look at Wii Sports baseball - hold the remote up when you're batting and wave it around behind your head. It's remarkable how accurately it matches your movements. For an example of bad programming, look at Wii Sports Boxing. Once you learn how to throw the punches properly it's pretty good, but it doesn't mimic your natural motions as well as some people would like. It had a hard time distinguishing between a hook and a jab.

 

[randay]

Originally posted by: mugs

As far as accuracy, I have no idea what you could possibly find inaccurate about it.

I think people confuse poor programming with a fault in the Wii remote. The Wii remote can report is position and acceleration as accurately as you want, but it's all for nought if the programmer doesn't interpret the movements correctly. They have to set the right thresholds to distinguish between incidental movements and game movements. If you want to see an example of how accurate the Wii remote is, look at Wii Sports baseball - hold the remote up when you're batting and wave it around behind your head. It's remarkable how accurately it matches your movements. For an example of bad programming, look at Wii Sports Boxing. Once you learn how to throw the punches properly it's pretty good, but it doesn't mimic your natural motions as well as some people would like. It had a hard time distinguishing between a hook and a jab.

Its not all on the programming. Its a mix between what the developer does and the limits of the wiimote. Sure the baseball bat is accurate when you hold it up and wave it in the air before the swing. But what about the level of the swing? you have to twist the controller for it to be able to recognize the level change, and thats not normal. Also the example with the boxing, I couldnt play that game for that reason, it felt totally unnatural and dumb to try and hook or even combo. Theres also consistancy, when golfing, its incredibly hard to hit the same spot on the guage every time, even with practice swings. Dont even get me started with putting, you could make a smooth putt, but then it translates to some jerky thing on screen where the guy ends up not even hitting the ball. then you try and correct by going faster, and you totally overshoot or something. It was freaking hilarious some times, but also really fustrating when you were actually trying to golf. Tennis, when switching from forehand to backhand you might trigger a swing. In zelda, you swing the nunchuk to trigger his 360 degree slash move, shouldnt you swing the wiimote? the fishing was great, but then the rapala game got a horrible review so i didnt even try it and sold my wii. but if they come out some day with a good fishing game, i will buy it again because i love fishing and the fishing in zelda was awesome.

 

[blckgrffn]

Ok, I am not reading the whole thread at this point, but my $.02:

Would it have killed them to make the current CPU dual core (IBM could have probably done this pretty cheaply) raising the cost rather negligibly if it had shared the L2 cache, and put another 64 to 128 megs of DDR3 in there for another $10? This thing has to last for 5 years, and games could have really looked better/been more CPU intensive (complex) if Nintendo had spent another $30 and been willing to narrow their profit margin. Supposedly Far Cry looks like crap, and it makes you wonder if 128 megs of dedicated memory and the extra textures to go with it would have stopped the graphics from being so bad its distracting . Not to mention how nice it would be if the GPU/memory combo could do something like 8xaf/4xaa all the time on GC quality titles. 480p looks darn aliased in a lot of games right now...

I know, I know, it's about gameplay. But Nintendo could have done us the favor of pushing 480p to its fullest.

Far Cry: Vengance Review

 

[purbeast0]

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: mugs

As far as accuracy, I have no idea what you could possibly find inaccurate about it.

I think people confuse poor programming with a fault in the Wii remote. The Wii remote can report is position and acceleration as accurately as you want, but it's all for nought if the programmer doesn't interpret the movements correctly. They have to set the right thresholds to distinguish between incidental movements and game movements. If you want to see an example of how accurate the Wii remote is, look at Wii Sports baseball - hold the remote up when you're batting and wave it around behind your head. It's remarkable how accurately it matches your movements. For an example of bad programming, look at Wii Sports Boxing. Once you learn how to throw the punches properly it's pretty good, but it doesn't mimic your natural motions as well as some people would like. It had a hard time distinguishing between a hook and a jab.

Its not all on the programming. Its a mix between what the developer does and the limits of the wiimote. Sure the baseball bat is accurate when you hold it up and wave it in the air before the swing. But what about the level of the swing? you have to twist the controller for it to be able to recognize the level change, and thats not normal. Also the example with the boxing, I couldnt play that game for that reason, it felt totally unnatural and dumb to try and hook or even combo. Theres also consistancy, when golfing, its incredibly hard to hit the same spot on the guage every time, even with practice swings. Dont even get me started with putting, you could make a smooth putt, but then it translates to some jerky thing on screen where the guy ends up not even hitting the ball. then you try and correct by going faster, and you totally overshoot or something. It was freaking hilarious some times, but also really fustrating when you were actually trying to golf. Tennis, when switching from forehand to backhand you might trigger a swing. In zelda, you swing the nunchuk to trigger his 360 degree slash move, shouldnt you swing the wiimote? the fishing was great, but then the rapala game got a horrible review so i didnt even try it and sold my wii. but if they come out some day with a good fishing game, i will buy it again because i love fishing and the fishing in zelda was awesome.

not to sound like a dick, but have you ever played real golf?

one thing that my friend and I both thought was pretty funny and comical, yet at the same time it was realistic, was how in the golf game, our practice swings we could do perfectly, but when we actually swung the club, it would be too hard or would go to the side, and would generally be worse than our practice swing.

that's how real golf is. your practice swing always feels "perfect". but go line up to the ball, and try to hit it, and you will slice the hell out of the ball or have a poor shot. same goes for putting in real life (although I will agree that the putting is kind of whack in wii sports golf).

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: purbeast0

not to sound like a dick, but have you ever played real golf?

one thing that my friend and I both thought was pretty funny and comical, yet at the same time it was realistic, was how in the golf game, our practice swings we could do perfectly, but when we actually swung the club, it would be too hard or would go to the side, and would generally be worse than our practice swing.

that's how real golf is. your practice swing always feels "perfect". but go line up to the ball, and try to hit it, and you will slice the hell out of the ball or have a poor shot. same goes for putting in real life (although I will agree that the putting is kind of whack in wii sports golf).

Hey! You golf just like me!

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: purbeast0

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: mugs

As far as accuracy, I have no idea what you could possibly find inaccurate about it.

I think people confuse poor programming with a fault in the Wii remote. The Wii remote can report is position and acceleration as accurately as you want, but it's all for nought if the programmer doesn't interpret the movements correctly. They have to set the right thresholds to distinguish between incidental movements and game movements. If you want to see an example of how accurate the Wii remote is, look at Wii Sports baseball - hold the remote up when you're batting and wave it around behind your head. It's remarkable how accurately it matches your movements. For an example of bad programming, look at Wii Sports Boxing. Once you learn how to throw the punches properly it's pretty good, but it doesn't mimic your natural motions as well as some people would like. It had a hard time distinguishing between a hook and a jab.

Its not all on the programming. Its a mix between what the developer does and the limits of the wiimote. Sure the baseball bat is accurate when you hold it up and wave it in the air before the swing. But what about the level of the swing? you have to twist the controller for it to be able to recognize the level change, and thats not normal. Also the example with the boxing, I couldnt play that game for that reason, it felt totally unnatural and dumb to try and hook or even combo. Theres also consistancy, when golfing, its incredibly hard to hit the same spot on the guage every time, even with practice swings. Dont even get me started with putting, you could make a smooth putt, but then it translates to some jerky thing on screen where the guy ends up not even hitting the ball. then you try and correct by going faster, and you totally overshoot or something. It was freaking hilarious some times, but also really fustrating when you were actually trying to golf. Tennis, when switching from forehand to backhand you might trigger a swing. In zelda, you swing the nunchuk to trigger his 360 degree slash move, shouldnt you swing the wiimote? the fishing was great, but then the rapala game got a horrible review so i didnt even try it and sold my wii. but if they come out some day with a good fishing game, i will buy it again because i love fishing and the fishing in zelda was awesome.

not to sound like a dick, but have you ever played real golf?

one thing that my friend and I both thought was pretty funny and comical, yet at the same time it was realistic, was how in the golf game, our practice swings we could do perfectly, but when we actually swung the club, it would be too hard or would go to the side, and would generally be worse than our practice swing.

that's how real golf is. your practice swing always feels "perfect". but go line up to the ball, and try to hit it, and you will slice the hell out of the ball or have a poor shot. same goes for putting in real life (although I will agree that the putting is kind of whack in wii sports golf).

super swing golf is a little better. the graphics are a little cartoony and the guy in it is a little gay.

but o ther then that its pretty good. i rented it from blockbuster but not sure i will buy it